Activities of Monika HOHLMEIER related to 2020/2246(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the protection of the EU’s financial interests – combating fraud – annual report 2019
Amendments (45)
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Emphasises that respect for the rule of law is a precondition for sound financial management including the efficient and effective allocation and management of European funds as well as the fight against corruption and mismanagement; strongly welcomes in that regard the adoption of Regulation 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2020 on a general regime of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Welcomes that the Commission has immediately started its work on a clear methodology and the analysis of potential cases; acknowledges that the Commission has clearly stated on several occasions that it will fulfil its role as “Guardian of the Treaties" and apply the regulation from the date it entered into force without undue delay, so that no case is lost during the necessary preparation work in the first half of 2021; recalls that Regulation 2020/2092 is applicable to all commitments and payments from 1 January 2021, while providing safeguards for final beneficiaries and recipients;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Emphasises that the change of detected fraudulent or non-fraudulent irregularities represents a momentary snapshot that has to be seen in the context of other relevant factors; reported decreases in the total number of cases of both fraudulent and non-fraudulent irregularities can either be indicative of a positive development of an overall decrease in fraudulent activity or a negative development of a reduction in the level of detection of fraudulent activity;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges Member States together with the Commission to cooperate more closely with regard to exchanges of information, improving data collection, and enhancing the effectiveness of controls; strongly calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough analysis of the underlying reasons and potential structural problems causing the persisting systemic weaknesses in the reliability of the work of some national authorities and pay special attention to any potential country-specific differences; calls on the Commission to address clear country-specific recommendations to the national authorities; asks the Commission to establish a structured dialogue with the national authorities and the ECA to continuously work on capacity building and exchange of best practice to improve the reliability of national authorities’ work and keep Parliament informed about the progress made; calls on the Commission to offer further support to improve the cooperation under EUROFISC;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Is deeply concerned by the extensive impact of VAT fraud on the EU budget as well as national budgets; finds it very important to step up the fight against the biggest kind of VAT fraud, the missing trader intra-community fraud (MTIC fraud), with an estimated annual cost of 40-60billion EUR; calls on the Commission to assess the strengths and weaknesses of different potential solutions to tackle MTIC fraud, notably the introduction of a real-time digital transaction-based reporting system as developed by researchers (TX++), or a combination of the definitive VAT system with a digital, real-time transaction-based reporting;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that serious doubts exist about the accuracy of the traditional own resources (custom duties) amounts transferred to the Union budget by the United Kingdom as a consequence of investigations carried out by OLAF on undervaluation fraud concerning textiles and shoes imported from China via the United Kingdom, and those conducted by the Commission within the framework of own resources management; notstrongly criticises that UK still refuses to make available to the EU budget the TOR amounts lost during the period 2011 - 2017 amounting to EUR 2.679bn (gross); welcomes that in March 2019, the Commission referred to the CJEU its infringement case against the UK concerning the TOR losses due to undervalued imports; asks the Commission to report on any developments in this regard;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Is deeply concerned by the non- quantifiable reservation maintained for2019 by DG BUDG, stating that the undervaluation fraud partly moved to other Member States, affecting the collection of TOR to an extent pending final quantification; notes that the Commission has carried out inspections on undervaluation in all Member States and checked how Member States are organised to address issues of undervaluation, particularly concerning textiles and shoes from China; notes that the Commission will follow up and hold Member States financially responsible for any potential losses incurred; is concerned that provisional calculations indicate that the TOR losses in 2019 would reach 1% of the 2019 total TOR; asks the Commission to promptly inform Parliament about the findings and consequences of its inspections and quantification calculations once finalised;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Reiterates its call for the introduction of maximum amounts of payments that one natural person can receive from the first and second pillar of the CAP as well as for cohesion funds; is of the opinion that maximum amounts defined per natural person are much harder to circumvent; reminds that beneficiaries can artificially split up their companies or create additional companies that all can receive the maximum amount of funding to circumvent a cap defined per legal person; welcomes the intentions of the proposal for the CAP to count all companies belonging to the same group as one beneficiary, but is of the opinion that this is insufficient: opaque and highly complex company structures often involving entities in several Member States and/or third countries make it very difficult to ensure that all companies belonging to the same group are identified as such and in fact treated as one beneficiary and open other opportunities to circumvent these restrictions; calls on the Commission to include proposals for caps per natural person for CAP and cohesions funds in its proposal for the revision of the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18 b. Repeats its concern that CAP subsidies continue to incentivise land- grabbing by criminal and oligarchic structures; reiterates its urgent call on the Commission to establish a complaint mechanism for farmers and SMEs faced with land-grabbing, severe misconduct by national authorities, irregular or biased treatment intenders or the distribution of subsidies, pressure or intimidation from criminal structures, organised crime or oligarchic structures, or another severe infringement of their fundamental rights to lodge a complaint directly with the Commission; welcomes that such a complaint mechanism has been proposed for the new CAP regulation;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19 a. Is very concerned by media reports about European co-financed infrastructure investments which were repurposed after the minimum required period of three or five years; regrets allegations of fraud and personal enrichment from this repurposing; regrets that the Commission has not been able to provide additional information to dispel remaining doubts; welcomes the intention of the Commission to properly follow-up on these allegations and calls on the Commission to report its findings to Parliament; further calls on the Commission to analyse in which Member States severe problems exist regarding the repurposing of EU-co-financed infrastructure projects;
Amendment 45 #
19 b. Considers the legal minimum durability requirement of three to five years too short given the significant amounts of co-financing and the longevity of such projects; regrets that the co- legislators did not decide to introduce longer durability requirements during the revision of the Common Provisions Regulation; notes that significant differences exist across Member States in the national rules on durability of infrastructure investments and premature repurposing;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19 c. Calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough analysis on the different national rules on the durability of appropriation requirements of co- financed investments and premature repurposing both for infrastructure and equipment with a particular focus on whether national rules go beyond the European minimum requirements; calls on the Commission to report its findings to Parliament;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21 a. Is concerned about continued reports by ECA and the Commission about persisting weaknesses in public procurement in several Member States; calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough analysis of the Member States with noticeable weaknesses about the underlying reasons and specify precisely to what extend these weaknesses are due to formal errors or systemic fraud and corruption; is of the opinion that minor formal errors need to be treated differently and that the Commission should focus more on the more severe issues, such as intentional manipulations in the tender criteria to favour the application of certain or single bidders, corruption in relation to bidder selection, conflicts of interest and other fraudulent misuse;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 4 a (new)
Subheading 4 a (new)
Digitalisation as a means to protect the EU financial interests
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Paragraph 21 b (new)
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21 c. Reiterates Parliament’s urgent call on the Commission to propose a legal base in the Financial Regulation for the creation of an interoperable digital reporting and monitoring system to allow timely, uniform and standardised reporting by Member State’s authorities in the area of shared management; encourages a mandatory use of existing data-mining and risk-scoring tools, such as ARACHNE, as one element of the envisaged reporting and monitoring system; underlines that the envisaged interoperable reporting and monitoring system should not only allow for an earlier and more efficient detection of misuse, fraud, misappropriations, conflicts of interest, double-funding and other systemic problems but would also allow for a comprehensive overview of the true distribution of EU funds and potentially unintended concentrations in the hands of few oligarchic or even criminal ultimate beneficiaries;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)
Paragraph 21 d (new)
21 d. Recalls that this system should not result in a bureaucratic overburdening of the national authorities and avoid creating a data congestion; calls on the Commission to determine which indicators and data are truly relevant, necessary and proportionate for audit and control purposes as well as for reaching the intended programming goals and to decrease the number of indicators and milestones that need to be entered into the system;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 e (new)
Paragraph 21 e (new)
21 e. Notes that the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES),established by Art 135 Financial Regulation should ensure effective sanctions on unreliable persons or entities, through an exclusion from award and procurement procedures funded under the EU budget and the imposition of financial penalties; regrets that the database only lists very few economic operators (six as per May 2021); calls on the Commission to review the criteria with a view to decreasing complexity and increase applicability of EDES in practice;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 f (new)
Paragraph 21 f (new)
21 f. Asks the Commission to consider the extension of EDES to application on funds under shared management with respect for the principles of proportionality and appropriateness when proposing the revision of the Financial Regulation; urges Member States and the Commission to guarantee an increased interoperability of the existing European and national databases and data-mining tools; acknowledges that the EDPS sees no general data protection issues on establishing such interoperability as long as they are established on a clear legal basis;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 g (new)
Paragraph 21 g (new)
21 g. Welcomes existing rules on e- procurement, which stipulate that tender opportunities must be published on Tenders Electronic Daily (TED), procurement documents must be accessible electronically and a link must be included in the TED notices, economic operators must submit tenders electronically and contracting authorities must accept electronic invoices;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 h (new)
Paragraph 21 h (new)
21 h. Observes that public procurement is undergoing a digital transformation; welcomes the process of rethinking public procurement with digital technologies in mind; is of the opinion that this reform should go beyond simply moving to electronic tools and should include various pre-award and post-award phases; insists, that the reform should also allow for the integration of data- based approaches at various stages of the procurement process; calls on the Commission to pay particular attention to framework agreements awarded through public procurement procedures, as fraud and corruption related to them represent an increased risk for the financial interests of the Union;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 i (new)
Paragraph 21 i (new)
21 i. Observes that the increasing digitalisation of public services and enhanced transparency rules result in additional information related to EU public finances being available in electronic formats; notes furthermore, that the computing capacity and the software availability allows for complex processing of large amount of data in relatively short time, which creates new potential for the detection of fraud using specialized data analytics techniques such as big data, data mining, and AI technologies on open data; believes that the abundance of open data represents an opportunity to support the creation of reliable "reputation systems", which can help to prevent criminal activities; asks the Commission to carry out a systemic analysis to investigate how the new technologies are being used in the field of fraud detection and prevention, assess their limitations, and make proposals on how to improve their use;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Stresses the importance of prioritising the development and establishment of National Anti-Fraud Strategies (NAFSs) by all Member States, also in the light of the new challenges of the COVID-19 crisis and the Recovery and Resilience Plans; regrets that the follow- up for 2018 showed that only 10 Member States reported that they have adopted or updated a NAFS and communicated it to OLAF, whereas 17 Member States have still not adopted a NAFS1a; calls on those Member States who have not yet adopted a NAFS to do so without delay;any further undue delay; _________________ 1aBelgium, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Spain, Croatia, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Lithuania, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24 a. Welcomes the entry into force of the revised regulation (2020/2223), which significantly strengthens the role of OLAF and paves the way for smooth collaboration with EPPO; notes that the new rules include a clear definition of the complementary roles of the two offices, clear rules on reporting of cases and improve the way OLAF can conduct its own investigations; acknowledges that the amended legal framework makes OLAF more effective by streamlining the rules for on-the-spot checks and inspections, allowing OLAF’s access to bank account information via the national competent authorities, reinforcing the rules governing the work of the anti-fraud coordination services in the Member States and by providing stronger guarantees for persons concerned by OLAF investigations through the creation of a controller;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 b (new)
Paragraph 24 b (new)
24 b. Considers that the reinforced powers for the OLAF, the arrival of the EPPO and the coordination of work across the entire EU-anti fraud architecture to identify, investigate and prosecute fraudsters are a major step forward in protecting the EU's financial interests; welcomes in this regard the conclusion of working arrangements between EPPO and Eurojust and Europol, which establish the rules of cooperation and implement the modalities of their collaboration in the fight against crimes affecting the financial interests of the European Union;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 c (new)
Paragraph 24 c (new)
24 c. Recalls that OLAF was created not only for internal investigations but also for supporting Member States in external investigations; recalls that the subsidiarity principle prevents OLAF from launching investigations where Member States are in a better position to act, but this does not exclude OLAF from conducting analyses of recurring cases, trends and patterns and on how its ability to detect these phenomena has resulted in enhanced cooperation and successful actions;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 d (new)
Paragraph 24 d (new)
24 d. Reminds that OLAF’s remit is to contribute to the design and development of methods of preventing and combating fraud, corruption and any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the Union; recalls that one of the key element of OLAF’s mandate is to promote and coordinate, with and among the Member States, the sharing of operational experience and best procedural practices in the field of the protection of the financial interests of the Union; regrets therefore, that no assessment of OLAF’s investigative results on expenditure is explicitly incorporated in the PIF Report; invites OLAF to provide tangible guidance and advice to Member states and to the Commission, as input built on the analysis of its investigative experience;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27 a. Notes that the European Chief Prosecutor and 22 European Prosecutors took their oath before Court of Justice of the European Union on 28 September 2020;welcomes that EPPO will become fully operational in June 2021 and start launching investigations;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Paragraph 27 b (new)
27 b. Regrets that the date for EPPO to become operational had to be postponed several times due to lack of financial and human resources and severe delays in the appointment of European and delegated prosecutors in a few Member States;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
27 c. Recalls that according to Council implementing decision 2018/1696, the European selection panel evaluates the candidates and provides Council with a ranking which Council shall take into consideration; recalls that regarding the candidates nominated by Belgium, Bulgaria and Portugal, the Council did not follow the order of preference of the selection panel; recalls that on 27 July2020, Austria, Estonia, Luxembourg and the Netherlands published a statement that “a competition between rankings of national selection panels and the ranking of the European selection panel must be avoided, at the risk of eroding the European component of the appointment procedure.”;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 d (new)
Paragraph 27 d (new)
27 d. Highlights with great concern Malta’s failure to nominate three suitable candidates for the College of European Prosecutors thereby causing a delay in the completion of the College of European prosecutors; is also very concerned about media reports that the Portuguese government provided Council with wrongful information about the title and experience of the candidate ranked second by the European selection panel leading to his appointment as Portuguese European prosecutor; is also concerned by the fact that one of the unsuccessful Belgian candidates filed a complaint about the selection procedure before the CJEU; regrets that these issues overshadowed the formation of the College of European prosecutors and calls on the Member States involved to provide Parliament with all necessary information and documentation to fully assess the rightfulness of the selection process;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 e (new)
Paragraph 27 e (new)
27 e. Is also concerned by recent public expressions by Chief Prosecutor Kövesi about "manifest lack of sincere cooperation" of Slovenia following delays in the recruitment of delegated prosecutors;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 f (new)
Paragraph 27 f (new)
27 f. Recalls that the European and delegated prosecutors must be independent and any suspicion of an intervention by a national government in favour of a candidate against the recommendation by the European selection panel would have a severe negative impact on the reputation, integrity and independence of the EPPO as an institution;
Amendment 94 #
29 a. Is very concerned by the findings of the 2020 Rule of Law annual report, which notes that there are concerns about the effectiveness of the investigation, prosecution and adjudication of corruption cases, including high-level corruption cases, in several Member States, such as for example in Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta and Slovakia; insists that high-level corruption must be pursued systematically with consistent and determined action to start criminal investigations and prosecute corruption cases involving high-level officials or their immediate circle when serious allegations arise;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29 b. Stresses that the institutions entrusted with enforcement of criminal law must work in an effective and impartial manner, and in order to be able to carry out their tasks, they should be equipped with adequate funding, human resources, technical capacity and specialised expertise;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Notes that the appropriate legal basis for the EU to become a full member of GRECO is Art. 83 TFEU, in conjunction with Art. 218 TFEU; notes that a full EU membership of GRECO would require an invitation from the Council of Europe’s Committee of Ministers and the conclusion of an Agreement between the Council of Europe and the EU on the modalities of membership; notes that the applicable decision-making procedure is laid down in Art. 218 TFEU for the conclusion of international agreements: Council, acting on recommendation of the Commission, would need to authorise the Commission to negotiation the modalities of a membership in GRECO with the Council of Europe and request the consent of the European Parliament; Council may adopt a final decision to conclude the agreement after it has obtained the consent of the European Parliament;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)
Paragraph 30 b (new)
30 b. Notes that following a full EU membership in GRECO, the EU institutions may be monitored and evaluated by GRECO; underlines that the GRECO evaluation system should take into account the specific nature of the EU, as a Union based on the principle of conferred competences, and its institutions, as well as the special features of EU law; emphasises that the EU’s rights and obligations in GRECO and the practical arrangements for its membership as a distinct legal entity, alongside all its Member States, should be clarified in advance in the Agreement on the modalities of membership;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 c (new)
Paragraph 30 c (new)
30 c. Is concerned about the Czech Chief Prosecutor General citing permanent pressure by the Justice Minister as reasons for his recent resignation; asks the commission to look into vulnerabilities of the Czech judicial system and carefully examine whether any other cases involving members of the Czech government have been withdrawn or prematurely closed potentially following pressure or unjustified interference; calls on the Commission to conduct such an analysis for all other Member States as well and keep Parliament informed about its findings and conclusions;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Reiterates its call on the Commission to establish a digital and interoperable uniform system for the collection of comparable data on irregularities and cases of fraud from the Member States in order to standardise the reporting process and ensure the quality and comparability of the data provided and underlines the importance of harmonising definitions to obtain comparative data across the EU;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Stresses the importance of the Early Detection and Exclusion System (EDES); invites the Commission to analyse the impact of a possiblinclude the extension of EDES to shared management in its proposal for the revision of the Financial Regulation;
Amendment 113 #
34. Recalls the need for a more incisive and effective response and coordination at both Union and national level in the fight against corruption and organised crime with particular focus on transnational and cross-border aspects, in order to tackle, also through the use of Artificial Intelligence tools, data-mining and other relevant digitalised tools, fraudsters’ constant ability to adapt to new technologies and scenarios;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Highlights the importance of structured information exchange among competent authorities for the cross- checking of accounting records for transactions between two or more Member States, in order to prevent cross-border fraud in respect of the structural and investment funds; reiterates its request to the Commission for including in its working programme a legislative proposal for an horizontal Regulation on mutual administrative assistance in the area of EU expenditures; emphasises that the exchange of information should occur in a digital format and through interoperable or shared IT systems and tools to facilitate a more timely and efficient cooperation;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Notes that only 13 Member States made use of ARACHNE during their risk analysis; reiterates the importance of this tool, as well as of interoperability of IT systems and databases for fraud risk analysis and fraud detection purposes; reiterates its call on the Commission to considerand particularly, the Member States in the Council, to move towards Parliament’s position of making the use of ARACHNE mandatory;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39 a (new)
Paragraph 39 a (new)
39 a. Regrets that Parliament repeatedly has to address several of its recommendations without receiving any clear response by the Commission; notes that on some observations and recommendations, Commission regrettably has not taken any tangible action or measures; asks the Commission to provide a clear explanation to Parliament whenever it decides to not follow one of its recommendations;