BETA


2014/2210(INI) Family businesses in Europe

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead ITRE NIEBLER Angelika (icon: PPE PPE) KAILI Eva (icon: S&D S&D), FOX Ashley (icon: ECR ECR), GIRAUTA VIDAL Juan Carlos (icon: ALDE ALDE), TURMES Claude (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), BORRELLI David (icon: EFDD EFDD)
Committee Opinion EMPL ULVSKOG Marita (icon: S&D S&D) Laura AGEA (icon: EFDD EFDD), Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA (icon: PPE PPE), Neoklis SYLIKIOTIS (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL), Renate WEBER (icon: ALDE ALDE)
Committee Opinion FEMM AIUTO Daniela (icon: EFDD EFDD) Arne GERICKE (icon: ECR ECR), Angelika MLINAR (icon: ALDE ALDE), Ángela VALLINA (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2016/02/24
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2015/09/08
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2015/09/08
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 590 votes to 49, with 69 abstentions, a resolution on family businesses in Europe.

It recalled that 85% of all European companies are family businesses and these account for 60% of jobs in the private sector.

It noted that while most family businesses are SMEs, family businesses can be small, medium-sized or large, listed or unlisted but that there are also very large multinational corporations that are family businesses.

Characteristics : because of their history, family businesses are strongly rooted in a particular location and thus also create and maintain jobs in rural and less-favoured areas, contributing to the fight against the process of ageing and depopulation by which many areas in the EU are affected. The Commission and the Member States are called upon, therefore, to provide the necessary cost-efficient infrastructure in order to ensure the competitiveness, renewal, growth and sustainability of such businesses, in particular micro-entities and start-ups.

Parliament also stated that highly specialised family businesses in particular play an important role as suppliers to, and innovators for, larger companies and that, given their long-term and intergenerational approach to business, they provide the companies they supply with material security and thereby make a significant contribution to economic growth. Family businesses excel in identifying new opportunities and innovation.

Funding : Parliament noted that family businesses often have a significantly higher equity ratio than nonfamily businesses and that this high equity ratio results in the economic stability of such businesses and of the economy as a whole. It invited the Commission and the Member States to examine any tax-driven discrimination vis-à-vis equity financing against the background of fair competition.

Members also underscored that because of the financial crisis and the adverse economic cycle many of the functions of family businesses are underfinanced and that it is important for family business to have open and easy access to alternative sources of financing. They noted, in this context, the importance of promoting alternative forms of lending to family businesses, such as credit unions.

Parliament called on the Commission to consider extending the beneficiaries of all existing instruments for SMEs and/or entrepreneurs, particularly COSME, to mid-cap family businesses.

Challenges : Parliament noted that 35% of those companies that do not invest in foreign markets fail to do so because of their lack of knowledge of those markets and lack of experience with internationalisation. It called on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to provide smaller family businesses in particular with information about opportunities for internationalisation via the SME Internationalisation portal.

Parliament also noted that small and medium family businesses are continuously challenged by a need for innovation and for attracting the right skills and talent. Therefore, the Commission and the Member States are called upon to provide smaller family businesses with incentives to take risks for growth and incentives to implement staff training and to access external knowledge.

Other measures are suggested such as:

simplifying administrative procedures and taxation systems; improving the legal framework for the transfer of family businesses and create special financing instruments for transfers and thus prevent liquidity shortages so as to ensure the survival of family businesses and prevent distress sales; promoting family business-specific education in business transfers, governance structures, owner strategies and innovation strategy; promoting vocational-training systems so as to combat the skilled-worker shortage and youth unemployment.

Members also stated that it was primordial to promote entrepreneurship in schools and other educational settings is of key importance to developing more entrepreneurial mindsets . They noted further that education should include specific family-business issues such as ownership, succession and family governance, together with more general information such as the importance of innovation as a means of reinventing businesses.

Parliament urged Member States to take into account the formal and informal occasional and invisible work carried out by family members, including in family businesses, and encouraged Member States to provide a clear legal framework.

Outlook : overall, Parliament called on the Commission to undertake an analysis of existing legislation which impacts on family businesses in order to identify problems and barriers to growth and to propose to the European Parliament and the Member States a statistically workable Europe-wide definition of ‘family business’ – developed together with Eurostat –, taking into account the different circumstances in the Member States. It called on the Commission to commission regular and adequately financed studies that analyse the importance of ownership for the success and survival of a business and highlight the specific challenges facing family businesses.

In particular, the Commission is called upon to:

promote and to disseminate information on the family business model throughout the EU; conduct an impact assessment of the extent to which a broadening of the European SME definition from 2003 would be possible, to include, in addition to purely quantitative criteria, qualitative criteria that also take into account ownership of a company, bearing in mind the interdependence of ownership, control and management, the fact that risk and liability are borne solely by the family itself, the social responsibility of a company and, generally, the personal aspect of running a business, also in relation to the participation of employees in the management of business activities, and the consequences this could have for family businesses, for example with regard to state aid and the eligibility of such businesses; carry out a feasibility study of a ‘family business test’ modelled on the SME test, and to introduce it as soon as possible, should the study prove its feasibility, in order to be able to determine the effect of certain legal acts on family businesses; set up, and define the remit of, an internal permanent working group that specifically addresses the needs and characteristics of family businesses, regularly reports to Parliament and the Member States, encourages exchanges of best practices between Member States’ family business organisations and disseminates guidelines and standard texts and solutions for family businesses on overcoming their specific problems; create a one-stop shop for businesses which can act as a contact at European level for family businesses and family business interest groups and to assist in specific issues relating in particular to European legislation and access to EU funding.

Measures have also been called for as regards the presence of women in family businesses and female entrepreneurship.

Lastly, the Commission is called upon to draw up a communication as a matter of urgency analysing the role of family businesses with a view to boosting the competitiveness and growth of the EU economy by 2020.

Documents
2015/09/08
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2015/09/07
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2015/07/01
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy adopted the own-initiative report by Angelika NIEBLER (EPP, DE) on family businesses in Europe.

Members recalled that 85% of all European companies are family businesses and these account for 60% of jobs in the private sector.

The report noted that while most family businesses are SMEs, family businesses can be small, medium-sized or large, listed or unlisted but that there are also very large multinational corporations that are family businesses.

Characteristics : because of their history, family businesses are strongly rooted in a particular location and thus also create and maintain jobs in rural and less-favoured areas, contributing to the fight against the process of ageing and depopulation by which many areas in the EU are affected. The Commission and the Member States are called upon, therefore, to provide the necessary cost-efficient infrastructure in order to ensure the competitiveness, renewal, growth and sustainability of such businesses, in particular micro-entities and start-ups.

Members stated that highly specialised family businesses in particular play an important role as suppliers to, and innovators for, larger companies and that, given their long-term and intergenerational approach to business, they provide the companies they supply with material security and thereby make a significant contribution to economic growth. Family businesses excel in identifying new opportunities and innovation.

Funding : Members noted that family businesses often have a significantly higher equity ratio than nonfamily businesses and that this high equity ratio results in the economic stability of such businesses and of the economy as a whole. They invited the Commission and the Member States to examine any tax-driven discrimination vis-à-vis equity financing against the background of fair competition.

They underscored that because of the financial crisis and the adverse economic cycle many of the functions of family businesses are underfinanced and that it is important for family business to have open and easy access to alternative sources of financing. They noted, in this context, the importance of promoting alternative forms of lending to family businesses, such as credit unions.

Challenges : Members noted that 35% of those companies that do not invest in foreign markets fail to do so because of their lack of knowledge of those markets and lack of experience with internationalisation. They called on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to provide smaller family businesses in particular with information about opportunities for internationalisation via the SME Internationalisation portal.

Members also noted that small and medium family businesses are continuously challenged by a need for innovation and for attracting the right skills and talent. Therefore, the Commission and the Member States are called upon to provide smaller family businesses with incentives to take risks for growth and incentives to implement staff training and to access external knowledge.

Other measures are suggested such as:

simplifying administrative procedures and taxation systems; improving the legal framework for the transfer of family businesses and create special financing instruments for transfers and thus prevent liquidity shortages so as to ensure the survival of family businesses and prevent distress sales; promoting family business-specific education in business transfers, governance structures, owner strategies and innovation strategy; promoting vocational-training systems so as to combat the skilled-worker shortage and youth unemployment.

Members also stated that it was primordial to promote entrepreneurship in schools and other educational settings is of key importance to developing more entrepreneurial mindsets . They urged Member States to take into account the formal and informal occasional and invisible work carried out by family members, including in family businesses, and encouraged Member States to provide a clear legal framework.

Outlook : Members called on the Commission, in the context of better regulation, to undertake an analysis of existing legislation which impacts on family businesses in order to identify problems and barriers to growth and to propose to the European Parliament and the Member States a statistically workable Europe-wide definition of ‘family business’ .

In particular, the Commission is called upon to:

promote and to disseminate information on the family business model throughout the EU; conduct an impact assessment of the extent to which a broadening of the European SME definition from 2003 would be possible, to include, in addition to purely quantitative criteria, qualitative criteria that also take into account ownership of a company, bearing in mind the interdependence of ownership, control and management, the fact that risk and liability are borne solely by the family itself, the social responsibility of a company and, generally, the personal aspect of running a business, also in relation to the participation of employees in the management of business activities, and the consequences this could have for family businesses, for example with regard to state aid and the eligibility of such businesses; carry out a feasibility study of a ‘family business test’ modelled on the SME test, and to introduce it as soon as possible, should the study prove its feasibility, in order to be able to determine the effect of certain legal acts on family businesses; set up, and define the remit of, an internal permanent working group that specifically addresses the needs and characteristics of family businesses, regularly reports to Parliament and the Member States, encourages exchanges of best practices between Member States’ family business organisations and disseminates guidelines and standard texts and solutions for family businesses on overcoming their specific problems; create a one-stop shop for businesses which can act as a contact at European level for family businesses and family business interest groups and to assist in specific issues relating in particular to European legislation and access to EU funding.

Measures have also been called for as regards the presence of women in family businesses and female entrepreneurship.

Lastly, the Commission is called upon to draw up a communication as a matter of urgency analysing the role of family businesses with a view to boosting the competitiveness and growth of the EU economy by 2020.

Documents
2015/06/16
   EP - Vote in committee
2015/05/11
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2015/05/07
   EP - ULVSKOG Marita (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in EMPL
2015/04/29
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2015/03/18
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2015/03/03
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2014/12/17
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2014/11/11
   EP - AIUTO Daniela (EFDD) appointed as rapporteur in FEMM
2014/10/22
   EP - NIEBLER Angelika (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in ITRE

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0223/2015 - Angelika Niebler - § 11 #

2015/09/08 Outcome: +: 545, -: 145, 0: 13
PL FR DE RO IT ES GB HU BG BE CZ PT SK NL LT HR DK FI LV MT EE SI LU SE IE CY AT EL
Total
49
69
91
31
69
50
64
20
14
18
21
19
13
26
9
11
13
11
8
6
5
7
6
20
10
6
18
18
icon: PPE PPE
205
2

Denmark PPE

Abstain (1)

1

Finland PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3
icon: S&D S&D
182

Belgium S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3

Croatia S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
68

Romania ALDE

3

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Croatia ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
64

Italy ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
38
2

Romania ENF

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3
icon: NI NI
11

Poland NI

1

France NI

2

Germany NI

For (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

Netherlands NI

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
39

Poland EFDD

1

France EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
47

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
4

Austria Verts/ALE

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
48
3

Italy GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

A8-0223/2015 - Angelika Niebler - § 31 #

2015/09/08 Outcome: +: 584, -: 92, 0: 29
IT DE FR PL ES RO CZ PT GB EL HU BE BG SK NL IE FI HR LT LV MT DK SI LU EE CY AT SE
Total
69
91
70
49
50
31
21
19
63
18
20
19
13
13
26
10
12
11
10
8
6
13
7
6
6
6
18
19
icon: PPE PPE
207
2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
181

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
67

Romania ALDE

3

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Bulgaria ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Latvia ALDE

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
64

Italy ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

2

Finland ECR

For (1)

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Against (1)

3

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
38

Poland ENF

2

Romania ENF

1

United Kingdom ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Belgium ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3
icon: NI NI
11

Germany NI

Abstain (1)

1

France NI

2

Poland NI

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
38

France EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3
4

A8-0223/2015 - Angelika Niebler - Considérant E/1 #

2015/09/08 Outcome: +: 683, 0: 21
DE FR IT ES PL GB RO NL CZ HU BE PT AT EL SE BG DK SK FI LT HR IE LV SI LU EE CY MT
Total
90
72
69
50
48
63
31
26
21
20
19
18
18
18
19
13
13
13
12
11
11
10
8
7
6
6
6
6
icon: PPE PPE
205

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1
2

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
180

Netherlands S&D

3
3

Croatia S&D

2

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Malta S&D

3
icon: ALDE ALDE
68

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Romania ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Denmark ALDE

3

Croatia ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3
icon: ECR ECR
64

Italy ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

For (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: ENF ENF
38
2

United Kingdom ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Netherlands ENF

3

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
40

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
11

Germany NI

For (1)

1

France NI

2

Poland NI

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

Netherlands NI

For (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

A8-0223/2015 - Angelika Niebler - Considérant E/2 #

2015/09/08 Outcome: +: 545, -: 127, 0: 25
FR DE PL GB RO IT ES HU BE BG CZ SK PT LT SE HR DK NL FI LV MT SI LU EE EL CY IE AT
Total
66
91
46
64
31
68
50
20
19
13
20
13
18
11
20
11
13
26
12
8
6
7
6
6
18
5
10
18
icon: PPE PPE
204
2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
179
3

Czechia S&D

3

Croatia S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

3

Latvia S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
68

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Romania ALDE

3

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Croatia ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
62

Italy ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

2

Finland ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
36
2

United Kingdom ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Belgium ENF

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3

Austria ENF

For (1)

4
icon: NI NI
11

France NI

2

Germany NI

For (1)

1

Poland NI

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
40

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
47

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Italy GUE/NGL

3

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

4

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

A8-0223/2015 - Angelika Niebler - Résolution #

2015/09/08 Outcome: +: 590, 0: 69, -: 49
DE FR PL ES IT RO GB CZ HU BE PT BG NL AT FI EL SK LT IE HR DK SE LV SI MT LU EE CY
Total
91
72
49
50
69
31
63
21
20
19
19
14
26
18
12
18
13
11
10
11
12
20
8
7
6
6
5
6
icon: PPE PPE
208
2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
182

Netherlands S&D

3

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

2

Latvia S&D

1

Malta S&D

3

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
67

Romania ALDE

3

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Bulgaria ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Denmark ALDE

3

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

2
icon: ECR ECR
63

Italy ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Finland ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

3

Lithuania ECR

1

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1
icon: ENF ENF
38
2

Romania ENF

1

United Kingdom ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Italy GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

3

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Against (1)

3

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
icon: NI NI
11

Germany NI

For (1)

1

France NI

2

Poland NI

1

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1

Hungary NI

2

Netherlands NI

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
49

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1
4

Latvia Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
40

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
AmendmentsDossier
387 2014/2210(INI)
2015/01/29 FEMM 62 amendments...
source: 546.839
2015/04/29 ITRE 210 amendments...
source: 552.105
2015/05/06 EMPL 107 amendments...
source: 554.825
2015/05/07 EMPL 8 amendments...
source: 557.121

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0/shadows/3
name
SAKORAFA Sofia
group
European United Left - Nordic Green Left
abbr
GUE/NGL
docs/0/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE544.312&secondRef=02
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/FEMM-AD-544312_EN.html
docs/1/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE544.219
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ITRE-PR-544219_EN.html
docs/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE552.105
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ITRE-AM-552105_EN.html
docs/3/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE546.701&secondRef=03
New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-AD-546701_EN.html
events/0/type
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
New
Committee referral announced in Parliament
events/1/type
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee
events/2
date
2015-07-01T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2015-0223_EN.html title: A8-0223/2015
summary
events/2
date
2015-07-01T00:00:00
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2015-0223_EN.html title: A8-0223/2015
summary
events/3/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20150907&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
events/5
date
2015-09-08T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament
body
EP
docs
url: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2015-0290_EN.html title: T8-0290/2015
summary
events/5
date
2015-09-08T00:00:00
type
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
body
EP
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2015-0290_EN.html title: T8-0290/2015
summary
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/Other legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 159
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
rapporteur
name: NIEBLER Angelika date: 2014-10-22T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2014-10-22T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NIEBLER Professor Doktor Angelika group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
rapporteur
name: ULVSKOG Marita date: 2015-05-07T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2015-05-07T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: ULVSKOG Marita group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
rapporteur
name: AIUTO Daniela date: 2014-11-11T00:00:00 group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
date
2014-11-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: AIUTO Daniela group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
docs/4/body
EC
events/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0223&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2015-0223_EN.html
events/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2015-0290
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2015-0290_EN.html
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2014-10-22T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NIEBLER Professor Doktor Angelika group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2014-10-22T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NIEBLER Professor Doktor Angelika group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP
shadows
activities
  • date: 2014-12-17T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2015-05-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2014-11-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: EFD name: AIUTO Daniela body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: KAILI Eva group: ECR name: FOX Ashley group: ALDE name: GIRAUTA VIDAL Juan Carlos group: GUE/NGL name: SAKORAFA Sofia group: Verts/ALE name: TURMES Claude group: EFD name: BORRELLI David responsible: True committee: ITRE date: 2014-10-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: EPP name: NIEBLER Angelika
  • date: 2015-06-16T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2015-05-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2014-11-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: EFD name: AIUTO Daniela body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: KAILI Eva group: ECR name: FOX Ashley group: ALDE name: GIRAUTA VIDAL Juan Carlos group: GUE/NGL name: SAKORAFA Sofia group: Verts/ALE name: TURMES Claude group: EFD name: BORRELLI David responsible: True committee: ITRE date: 2014-10-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: EPP name: NIEBLER Angelika
  • date: 2015-07-01T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0223&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0223/2015 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2015-09-07T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20150907&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2015-09-08T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2015-0290 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0290/2015 body: EP type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
commission
  • body: EC dg: Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union commissioner: BIEŃKOWSKA Elżbieta
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
committee
ITRE
date
2014-10-22T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NIEBLER Professor Doktor Angelika group: Group of European People's Party abbr: EPP
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
EMPL
date
2015-05-07T00:00:00
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
rapporteur
group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2015-05-07T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: ULVSKOG Marita group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
FEMM
date
2014-11-11T00:00:00
committee_full
Women’s Rights and Gender Equality
rapporteur
group: EFD name: AIUTO Daniela
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Womens Rights and Gender Equality
committee
FEMM
date
2014-11-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: AIUTO Daniela group: Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy abbr: EFDD
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
ITRE
date
2014-10-22T00:00:00
committee_full
Industry, Research and Energy
rapporteur
group: EPP name: NIEBLER Angelika
docs
  • date: 2015-03-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE544.312&secondRef=02 title: PE544.312 committee: FEMM type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2015-03-18T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE544.219 title: PE544.219 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2015-04-29T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE552.105 title: PE552.105 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2015-05-11T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE546.701&secondRef=03 title: PE546.701 committee: EMPL type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-02-24T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=25951&j=0&l=en title: SP(2015)748 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2014-12-17T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2015-06-16T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2015-07-01T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0223&language=EN title: A8-0223/2015 summary: The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy adopted the own-initiative report by Angelika NIEBLER (EPP, DE) on family businesses in Europe. Members recalled that 85% of all European companies are family businesses and these account for 60% of jobs in the private sector. The report noted that while most family businesses are SMEs, family businesses can be small, medium-sized or large, listed or unlisted but that there are also very large multinational corporations that are family businesses. Characteristics : because of their history, family businesses are strongly rooted in a particular location and thus also create and maintain jobs in rural and less-favoured areas, contributing to the fight against the process of ageing and depopulation by which many areas in the EU are affected. The Commission and the Member States are called upon, therefore, to provide the necessary cost-efficient infrastructure in order to ensure the competitiveness, renewal, growth and sustainability of such businesses, in particular micro-entities and start-ups. Members stated that highly specialised family businesses in particular play an important role as suppliers to, and innovators for, larger companies and that, given their long-term and intergenerational approach to business, they provide the companies they supply with material security and thereby make a significant contribution to economic growth. Family businesses excel in identifying new opportunities and innovation. Funding : Members noted that family businesses often have a significantly higher equity ratio than nonfamily businesses and that this high equity ratio results in the economic stability of such businesses and of the economy as a whole. They invited the Commission and the Member States to examine any tax-driven discrimination vis-à-vis equity financing against the background of fair competition. They underscored that because of the financial crisis and the adverse economic cycle many of the functions of family businesses are underfinanced and that it is important for family business to have open and easy access to alternative sources of financing. They noted, in this context, the importance of promoting alternative forms of lending to family businesses, such as credit unions. Challenges : Members noted that 35% of those companies that do not invest in foreign markets fail to do so because of their lack of knowledge of those markets and lack of experience with internationalisation. They called on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to provide smaller family businesses in particular with information about opportunities for internationalisation via the SME Internationalisation portal. Members also noted that small and medium family businesses are continuously challenged by a need for innovation and for attracting the right skills and talent. Therefore, the Commission and the Member States are called upon to provide smaller family businesses with incentives to take risks for growth and incentives to implement staff training and to access external knowledge. Other measures are suggested such as: simplifying administrative procedures and taxation systems; improving the legal framework for the transfer of family businesses and create special financing instruments for transfers and thus prevent liquidity shortages so as to ensure the survival of family businesses and prevent distress sales; promoting family business-specific education in business transfers, governance structures, owner strategies and innovation strategy; promoting vocational-training systems so as to combat the skilled-worker shortage and youth unemployment. Members also stated that it was primordial to promote entrepreneurship in schools and other educational settings is of key importance to developing more entrepreneurial mindsets . They urged Member States to take into account the formal and informal occasional and invisible work carried out by family members, including in family businesses, and encouraged Member States to provide a clear legal framework. Outlook : Members called on the Commission, in the context of better regulation, to undertake an analysis of existing legislation which impacts on family businesses in order to identify problems and barriers to growth and to propose to the European Parliament and the Member States a statistically workable Europe-wide definition of ‘family business’ . In particular, the Commission is called upon to: promote and to disseminate information on the family business model throughout the EU; conduct an impact assessment of the extent to which a broadening of the European SME definition from 2003 would be possible, to include, in addition to purely quantitative criteria, qualitative criteria that also take into account ownership of a company, bearing in mind the interdependence of ownership, control and management, the fact that risk and liability are borne solely by the family itself, the social responsibility of a company and, generally, the personal aspect of running a business, also in relation to the participation of employees in the management of business activities, and the consequences this could have for family businesses, for example with regard to state aid and the eligibility of such businesses; carry out a feasibility study of a ‘family business test’ modelled on the SME test, and to introduce it as soon as possible, should the study prove its feasibility, in order to be able to determine the effect of certain legal acts on family businesses; set up, and define the remit of, an internal permanent working group that specifically addresses the needs and characteristics of family businesses, regularly reports to Parliament and the Member States, encourages exchanges of best practices between Member States’ family business organisations and disseminates guidelines and standard texts and solutions for family businesses on overcoming their specific problems; create a one-stop shop for businesses which can act as a contact at European level for family businesses and family business interest groups and to assist in specific issues relating in particular to European legislation and access to EU funding. Measures have also been called for as regards the presence of women in family businesses and female entrepreneurship. Lastly, the Commission is called upon to draw up a communication as a matter of urgency analysing the role of family businesses with a view to boosting the competitiveness and growth of the EU economy by 2020.
  • date: 2015-09-07T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20150907&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2015-09-08T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=25951&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2015-09-08T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2015-0290 title: T8-0290/2015 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 590 votes to 49, with 69 abstentions, a resolution on family businesses in Europe. It recalled that 85% of all European companies are family businesses and these account for 60% of jobs in the private sector. It noted that while most family businesses are SMEs, family businesses can be small, medium-sized or large, listed or unlisted but that there are also very large multinational corporations that are family businesses. Characteristics : because of their history, family businesses are strongly rooted in a particular location and thus also create and maintain jobs in rural and less-favoured areas, contributing to the fight against the process of ageing and depopulation by which many areas in the EU are affected. The Commission and the Member States are called upon, therefore, to provide the necessary cost-efficient infrastructure in order to ensure the competitiveness, renewal, growth and sustainability of such businesses, in particular micro-entities and start-ups. Parliament also stated that highly specialised family businesses in particular play an important role as suppliers to, and innovators for, larger companies and that, given their long-term and intergenerational approach to business, they provide the companies they supply with material security and thereby make a significant contribution to economic growth. Family businesses excel in identifying new opportunities and innovation. Funding : Parliament noted that family businesses often have a significantly higher equity ratio than nonfamily businesses and that this high equity ratio results in the economic stability of such businesses and of the economy as a whole. It invited the Commission and the Member States to examine any tax-driven discrimination vis-à-vis equity financing against the background of fair competition. Members also underscored that because of the financial crisis and the adverse economic cycle many of the functions of family businesses are underfinanced and that it is important for family business to have open and easy access to alternative sources of financing. They noted, in this context, the importance of promoting alternative forms of lending to family businesses, such as credit unions. Parliament called on the Commission to consider extending the beneficiaries of all existing instruments for SMEs and/or entrepreneurs, particularly COSME, to mid-cap family businesses. Challenges : Parliament noted that 35% of those companies that do not invest in foreign markets fail to do so because of their lack of knowledge of those markets and lack of experience with internationalisation. It called on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to provide smaller family businesses in particular with information about opportunities for internationalisation via the SME Internationalisation portal. Parliament also noted that small and medium family businesses are continuously challenged by a need for innovation and for attracting the right skills and talent. Therefore, the Commission and the Member States are called upon to provide smaller family businesses with incentives to take risks for growth and incentives to implement staff training and to access external knowledge. Other measures are suggested such as: simplifying administrative procedures and taxation systems; improving the legal framework for the transfer of family businesses and create special financing instruments for transfers and thus prevent liquidity shortages so as to ensure the survival of family businesses and prevent distress sales; promoting family business-specific education in business transfers, governance structures, owner strategies and innovation strategy; promoting vocational-training systems so as to combat the skilled-worker shortage and youth unemployment. Members also stated that it was primordial to promote entrepreneurship in schools and other educational settings is of key importance to developing more entrepreneurial mindsets . They noted further that education should include specific family-business issues such as ownership, succession and family governance, together with more general information such as the importance of innovation as a means of reinventing businesses. Parliament urged Member States to take into account the formal and informal occasional and invisible work carried out by family members, including in family businesses, and encouraged Member States to provide a clear legal framework. Outlook : overall, Parliament called on the Commission to undertake an analysis of existing legislation which impacts on family businesses in order to identify problems and barriers to growth and to propose to the European Parliament and the Member States a statistically workable Europe-wide definition of ‘family business’ – developed together with Eurostat –, taking into account the different circumstances in the Member States. It called on the Commission to commission regular and adequately financed studies that analyse the importance of ownership for the success and survival of a business and highlight the specific challenges facing family businesses. In particular, the Commission is called upon to: promote and to disseminate information on the family business model throughout the EU; conduct an impact assessment of the extent to which a broadening of the European SME definition from 2003 would be possible, to include, in addition to purely quantitative criteria, qualitative criteria that also take into account ownership of a company, bearing in mind the interdependence of ownership, control and management, the fact that risk and liability are borne solely by the family itself, the social responsibility of a company and, generally, the personal aspect of running a business, also in relation to the participation of employees in the management of business activities, and the consequences this could have for family businesses, for example with regard to state aid and the eligibility of such businesses; carry out a feasibility study of a ‘family business test’ modelled on the SME test, and to introduce it as soon as possible, should the study prove its feasibility, in order to be able to determine the effect of certain legal acts on family businesses; set up, and define the remit of, an internal permanent working group that specifically addresses the needs and characteristics of family businesses, regularly reports to Parliament and the Member States, encourages exchanges of best practices between Member States’ family business organisations and disseminates guidelines and standard texts and solutions for family businesses on overcoming their specific problems; create a one-stop shop for businesses which can act as a contact at European level for family businesses and family business interest groups and to assist in specific issues relating in particular to European legislation and access to EU funding. Measures have also been called for as regards the presence of women in family businesses and female entrepreneurship. Lastly, the Commission is called upon to draw up a communication as a matter of urgency analysing the role of family businesses with a view to boosting the competitiveness and growth of the EU economy by 2020.
  • date: 2015-09-08T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/internal_market/ title: Internal Market and Services commissioner: BIEŃKOWSKA Elżbieta
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
ITRE/8/02151
New
  • ITRE/8/02151
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 54
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
procedure/subject
Old
  • 3.45.02 Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME), craft industries
New
3.45.02
Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME), craft industries
activities/2/docs/0/text
  • The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy adopted the own-initiative report by Angelika NIEBLER (EPP, DE) on family businesses in Europe.

    Members recalled that 85% of all European companies are family businesses and these account for 60% of jobs in the private sector.

    The report noted that while most family businesses are SMEs, family businesses can be small, medium-sized or large, listed or unlisted but that there are also very large multinational corporations that are family businesses.

    Characteristics: because of their history, family businesses are strongly rooted in a particular location and thus also create and maintain jobs in rural and less-favoured areas, contributing to the fight against the process of ageing and depopulation by which many areas in the EU are affected. The Commission and the Member States are called upon, therefore, to provide the necessary cost-efficient infrastructure in order to ensure the competitiveness, renewal, growth and sustainability of such businesses, in particular micro-entities and start-ups.

    Members stated that highly specialised family businesses in particular play an important role as suppliers to, and innovators for, larger companies and that, given their long-term and intergenerational approach to business, they provide the companies they supply with material security and thereby make a significant contribution to economic growth. Family businesses excel in identifying new opportunities and innovation.

    Funding: Members noted that family businesses often have a significantly higher equity ratio than nonfamily businesses and that this high equity ratio results in the economic stability of such businesses and of the economy as a whole. They invited the Commission and the Member States to examine any tax-driven discrimination vis-à-vis equity financing against the background of fair competition.

    They underscored that because of the financial crisis and the adverse economic cycle many of the functions of family businesses are underfinanced and that it is important for family business to have open and easy access to alternative sources of financing. They noted, in this context, the importance of promoting alternative forms of lending to family businesses, such as credit unions.

    Challenges: Members noted that 35% of those companies that do not invest in foreign markets fail to do so because of their lack of knowledge of those markets and lack of experience with internationalisation. They called on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to provide smaller family businesses in particular with information about opportunities for internationalisation via the SME Internationalisation portal.

    Members also noted that small and medium family businesses are continuously challenged by a need for innovation and for attracting the right skills and talent. Therefore, the Commission and the Member States are called upon to provide smaller family businesses with incentives to take risks for growth and incentives to implement staff training and to access external knowledge.

    Other measures are suggested such as:

    • simplifying administrative procedures and taxation systems;
    • improving the legal framework for the transfer of family businesses and create special financing instruments for transfers and thus prevent liquidity shortages so as to ensure the survival of family businesses and prevent distress sales;
    • promoting family business-specific education in business transfers, governance structures, owner strategies and innovation strategy;
    • promoting vocational-training systems so as to combat the skilled-worker shortage and youth unemployment.

    Members also stated that it was primordial to promote entrepreneurship in schools and other educational settings is of key importance to developing more entrepreneurial mindsets. They urged Member States to take into account the formal and informal occasional and invisible work carried out by family members, including in family businesses, and encouraged Member States to provide a clear legal framework.

    Outlook: Members called on the Commission, in the context of better regulation, to undertake an analysis of existing legislation which impacts on family businesses in order to identify problems and barriers to growth and to propose to the European Parliament and the Member States a statistically workable Europe-wide definition of ‘family business’.

    In particular, the Commission is called upon to:

    • promote and to disseminate information on the family business model throughout the EU;
    • conduct an impact assessment of the extent to which a broadening of the European SME definition from 2003 would be possible, to include, in addition to purely quantitative criteria, qualitative criteria that also take into account ownership of a company, bearing in mind the interdependence of ownership, control and management, the fact that risk and liability are borne solely by the family itself, the social responsibility of a company and, generally, the personal aspect of running a business, also in relation to the participation of employees in the management of business activities, and the consequences this could have for family businesses, for example with regard to state aid and the eligibility of such businesses;
    • carry out a feasibility study of a ‘family business test’ modelled on the SME test, and to introduce it as soon as possible, should the study prove its feasibility, in order to be able to determine the effect of certain legal acts on family businesses;
    • set up, and define the remit of, an internal permanent working group that specifically addresses the needs and characteristics of family businesses, regularly reports to Parliament and the Member States, encourages exchanges of best practices between Member States’ family business organisations and disseminates guidelines and standard texts and solutions for family businesses on overcoming their specific problems;
    • create a one-stop shop for businesses which can act as a contact at European level for family businesses and family business interest groups and to assist in specific issues relating in particular to European legislation and access to EU funding.

    Measures have also been called for as regards the presence of women in family businesses and female entrepreneurship.

    Lastly, the Commission is called upon to draw up a communication as a matter of urgency analysing the role of family businesses with a view to boosting the competitiveness and growth of the EU economy by 2020.

activities/3/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20150907&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
activities/3/type
Old
Debate in plenary scheduled
New
Debate in Parliament
activities/4/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2015-0290 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0290/2015
activities/4/type
Old
Vote in plenary scheduled
New
Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
New
Procedure completed
activities/3/type
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
New
Debate in plenary scheduled
activities/4
date
2015-09-08T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Vote in plenary scheduled
activities/2/docs
  • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2015-0223&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0223/2015
activities/2
date
2015-07-01T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Awaiting committee decision
New
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
activities/1/committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2015-05-07T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2014-11-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: EFD name: AIUTO Daniela
  • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: KAILI Eva group: ECR name: FOX Ashley group: ALDE name: GIRAUTA VIDAL Juan Carlos group: GUE/NGL name: SAKORAFA Sofia group: Verts/ALE name: TURMES Claude group: EFD name: BORRELLI David responsible: True committee: ITRE date: 2014-10-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: EPP name: NIEBLER Angelika
activities/1/type
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
New
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
activities/2/date
Old
2015-07-06T00:00:00
New
2015-09-07T00:00:00
activities/1/date
Old
2015-05-28T00:00:00
New
2015-06-16T00:00:00
activities/0/committees/0/date
Old
2015-01-08T00:00:00
New
2015-05-07T00:00:00
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur/0/group
Old
ECR
New
S&D
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref
Old
53b2dc34b819f205b00000a3
New
4f1adc2bb819f207b3000105
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur/0/name
Old
KRASNODĘBSKI Zdzisław
New
ULVSKOG Marita
committees/0/date
Old
2015-01-08T00:00:00
New
2015-05-07T00:00:00
committees/0/rapporteur/0/group
Old
ECR
New
S&D
committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref
Old
53b2dc34b819f205b00000a3
New
4f1adc2bb819f207b3000105
committees/0/rapporteur/0/name
Old
KRASNODĘBSKI Zdzisław
New
ULVSKOG Marita
activities/0/committees/2/shadows/5
group
EFD
name
BORRELLI David
committees/2/shadows/5
group
EFD
name
BORRELLI David
activities/0/committees/0/date
2015-01-08T00:00:00
activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur
  • group: ECR name: KRASNODĘBSKI Zdzisław
activities/1/date
Old
2015-03-24T00:00:00
New
2015-05-28T00:00:00
activities/2/date
Old
2015-04-27T00:00:00
New
2015-07-06T00:00:00
committees/0/date
2015-01-08T00:00:00
committees/0/rapporteur
  • group: ECR name: KRASNODĘBSKI Zdzisław
activities/0
date
2014-12-17T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
ITRE/8/02151
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Preparatory phase in Parliament
New
Awaiting committee decision
activities
  • date: 2015-03-24T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • date: 2015-04-27T00:00:00 body: EP type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
committees
  • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs committee: EMPL
  • body: EP responsible: False committee: FEMM date: 2014-11-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Women’s Rights and Gender Equality rapporteur: group: EFD name: AIUTO Daniela
  • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: KAILI Eva group: ECR name: FOX Ashley group: ALDE name: GIRAUTA VIDAL Juan Carlos group: GUE/NGL name: SAKORAFA Sofia group: Verts/ALE name: TURMES Claude responsible: True committee: ITRE date: 2014-10-22T00:00:00 committee_full: Industry, Research and Energy rapporteur: group: EPP name: NIEBLER Angelika
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/internal_market/ title: Internal Market and Services commissioner: BIEŃKOWSKA Elżbieta
procedure
reference
2014/2210(INI)
title
Family businesses in Europe
legal_basis
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
stage_reached
Preparatory phase in Parliament
subtype
Initiative
type
INI - Own-initiative procedure
subject
3.45.02 Small and medium-sized enterprises (SME), craft industries