2015/2346(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)

– having regard to the European Parliamentary Research Service study of September 2014 entitled "The Cost of Non-Europe in the Single Market",

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, more than 20 years after the launch of the single market, bureaucracy, legal regulation that is very often disproportionate to its purpose and non- tariff barriers (NTBs), often motivated by protectionism, continue to bedevil trade between Member States;

Amendment 100 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes the persistence of national-level differences in product market regulation with which businesses operating across borders still have to contend both in terms of level of restriction and differences between Member States; considers that this unnecessarily forces businesses to adapt their products and services to comply with multiple standards or repeated testing, thus limiting intra-EU trade, reducing growth and hampering job creation;

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Notes the persistence of national-level differences in product market regulation with which businesses operating across borders still have to contend; considers that this unnecessarily forces businesses to adapt their products and services to comply with multiple standards or, re-labelling of products, and repeated testing;

Amendment 102 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Believes that sin~~ce economies of scale are reduced by the need to run different product lines, the burden falls disproportionately on SMEs~~ many ways, whether legal, financial or other, SMEs bear a disproportionate share of the burden in comparison with companies operating on a different scale;

Amendment 103 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Believes that ~~since economies of scale are reduced by the need to run different product lines, the burden falls disproportionately on SMEs~~the SMEs concerned are obliged to run different product lines, which can reduce economies of scale;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Believes that since economies of scale are reduced by the need to run different product lines, the burden falls disproportionately on SMEs and micro enterprises;

Amendment 105 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Calls on Member States to fully implement the EU legislation on public procurement and to end artificial barriers and irrational requirements towards cross-border participants;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

~~15. Draws attention to the low levels of cross-border public procurement, with less than 20 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms;~~deleted

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Draws attention to the low levels of cross-border public procurement~~, with less than 20 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms~~;

Amendment 108 #

Antanas GUOGA, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Draws attention to the low levels of cross-border public procurement, with less than 20only 3,5 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms being awarded to companies from other Member States; underlines the need for fully electronic public procurement system; highlights the need for fast and comprehensive implementation of the Public Procurement Directive in its whole; calls for wider use of e-procurement to open the markets for SMEs;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

~~15.~~ Draws attention to the low levels of cross- border public procurement to date, with less than 20 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms; stresses in this context the importance of the new EU directives on public procurement and the award of concession contracts, which the Member States are required to transpose by April 2016;

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the single market for services is estimated to constitute about 70% of the European economy, they account for only about 20% of intra-EU trade;

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Draws attention to the low levels of cross-border public procurement, with less than 20 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms, and highlights the difficulties experienced - especially by SMEs - in participating in cross-border public procurement procedures;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Draws attention to the low levels of cross-border public procurement, with less than 20 % of all public procurement in the Union publicised on pan-European platforms; calls on the Commission to make it easier for SMEs to participate in public procurement;

Amendment 112 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Believes that many national administrative practices also give rise to NTBs, including requirements for formalising of documents by national bodies or offices; considers that Member States should concentrate on e-governance as a way to reduce barriers,; b~~uilding on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, where a transition to digital services has simplified administration for businesses and citizen~~elieves that the use of e-governance is an important tool for companies however this should not lead to further burdens for citizens especially those who do not possess the necessary skill to use the digital services;

Amendment 113 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Believes that many national administrative practices also give rise to NTBs, including requirements for formalising of documents by national bodies or offices; ~~considers that~~urges Members States should concentrate on e-governance as a way to reduce barriers, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, where a transition to digital services has simplified administration for businesses and citizeto use e-governance solutions and modernise their public administrations, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, by providing more and better accessible, digital services for citizens and businesses, and to facilitate cross border cooperation and interoperability of public administrations;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Believes that many national administrative practices also give rise to unjustified NTBs, including requirements for formalising of documents by national bodies or offices; considers that Member States should concentrate on e-governance as a way to reduce barriers, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, where a transition to digital services has simplified administration for businesses and citizens; believes that the use of e-governance is an important tool for companies however this should not lead to further burdens for citizens especially those who do not possess the necessary skill to use the digital services;

Amendment 115 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Believes that many national administrative practices also give rise to unjustified NTBs, including requirements for formalising of documents by national bodies or offices; considers that Member States should concentrate on e-governance, which includes prioritising interoperability, and EU-wide e-ID and digital signatures, as a way to reduce barriers, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, where a transition to digital services has simplified administration for businesses and citizens;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Believes that many national administrative practices also give rise to NTBs, including requirements for formalising of documents by national bodies or offices; considers that Member States should concentrate on e-governance as a way to reduce barriers, building on examples such as those in Estonia and Denmark, where a transition to digital services has simplified administration for businesses and citizens, without affecting the protection of personal data;

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

~~17. Calls on the Commission to focus on ground-level enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the Member States;~~deleted

Amendment 118 #

Catherine STIHLER, Marlene MIZZI, Marc TARABELLA, Nicola DANTI, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Commission to ~~focus on ground-level enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the~~take a strong approach to enforcement and use all available evidence and instruments at its disposal to ensure that single market rules are duly applied and implemented by Member States;

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Commission to ~~focus on ground-level enforcement, making~~make sure that rules are followed in the Member States;

Amendment 12 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

~~C. whereas 25 % of regulated professions are regulated in only one Member State;~~deleted

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Commission to focus on ~~ground-level~~ enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the Member States;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Commission to focus on ground-level in practice enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the Member States; considers, in this regard, that transposition workshops should be undertaken to minimize differences between Member States at an early stage;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls on the Commission to focus on ground-level enforcement, making sure that rules are followed in the Member States and that no new rules contradicting the existing EU legal framework are introduced;

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Believes that the lack of tax coordination between the Member States, particularly in the area of corporate taxation, prevents businesses from competing on an equal footing and thus constitutes a non-tariff barrier to the proper functioning of the single market;

Amendment 124 #

Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Calls on the Commission to take action as soon as possible against the discriminatory laws in force in Hungary, which run counter to the values of the European Union and the principle of the internal market;

Amendment 125 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Underlines the importance of ~~the principle of mutual recognition for ensuring mark~~upward harmonisation for ensuring a high level of product safety a~~ccess to the single market for~~nd consumer protection, so that the principle of mutual recognition is only applied to goods which are not harmonised at Union level, and in cases where Member States have national, very often different, rules on products, but with the same underlying objective;

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Underlines the importance of the principle of mutual recognition for ensuring market access to the single market for goods which are not harmonised at Union level, and in cases where Member States have national, very often different, rules on products, but with the same underlying objective; believes increased harmonization is a more effective tool to ensure equal access for goods and services on the single market;

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. ~~Highlight~~Stresses that many businesses are not aware of ~~mutual recognition and believe that they have to comply with national requirements in the Member State of destination when trading in the single market~~the harmonised rules with which they are required to comply, nor of the principle of mutual recognition for goods which are not harmonised;

Amendment 128 #

19. Highlights that many businesses are not aware of mutual recognition principle and believe that they have to comply with national requirements in the Member State of destination when trading in the single market; underlines that if the principle was applied properly by competent authorities, businesses would be able to focus on doing business and boosting the EU's growth and not on striving with overcoming the hurdles imposed by not respecting mutual recognition by Member States;

Amendment 129 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Highlights that many businesses are not aware of mutual recognition and believe that they have to comply with national requirements in the Member State of destination when trading in the single market; calls for Member States to ensure that mutual recognition principle is applied by their competent authorities;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

~~C. whereas 25 % of regulated professions are regulated in only one Member State;~~deleted

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Highlights that many businesses are not aware of mutual recognition and believe that they have to comply with national requirements in the Member State of destination when trading in the single market; calls on the Commission to prioritise awareness-raising in this area;

Amendment 131 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Stresses the need for a common standardisation system that can swiftly be implemented in all Member States in order to keep pace with new innovative technologies so that SMEs can access the whole of the EU market with these innovative products, to the benefit of European consumers;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission to act decisively to improve the application of mutual recognition; anticipates, in that context, the Commission’s plans to increase awareness among competent authorities and revise the Mutual Recognition Regulation;

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission to act decisively to improve the application of mutual recognition; anticipates, in that context, the Commission’s plans to increase awareness ~~and revise~~of the Mutual Recognition Regulation with a view to revising, where appropriate, the existing guidance documents;

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on the Commission to act decisively to improve the application of mutual recognition; anticipates, in that context, the Commission’s plans to increase awareness and revise the Mutual Recognition Regulation, with a view, among other things, to improving instruments for resolving disputes in connection with inadequate implementation or application of the mutual recognition principle;

Amendment 136 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Recognizing that different VAT regimes across the European Union might be perceived as a NTB, underlines that the VATMOSS is a good way to support overcoming this barrier and support especially SMEs in their cross-border activity; acknowledging that still some minor problematic issues concerning the VATMOSS remain, calls on the Commission to further facilitate paying VAT obligations by companies across the EU;

Amendment 137 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Draws attention to the problems for service providers, especially in business services and construction, stemming from multiple authorisations, registration or, prior notification requirements or de facto establishment requirements; underlines that this might lead to discrimination against foreign service providers which would contradict the principle of free movement of services; calls in this context for a more developed e-administration and electronic registration in order to simplify the process for the service providers;

Amendment 138 #

Ulla TØRNÆS, Antanas GUOGA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Draws attention to the problems for service providers, especially in business services and construction, stemming from multiple unjustified or disproportionate requirements concerning authorisations, registration or prior notification ~~requirements~~;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Draws attention to the problems for service providers, especially in business services, the transport sector and construction, stemming from multiple and diverse authorisations, registration or prior notification requirements;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas labour mobility is restricted by the fact that 25 % of regulated professions are regulated in only one Member State;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses the need for a clear and uniform regulatory environment which enables services to develop in a market that protects workers and consumers and ensures that existing and new operators on the EU single market do not face meaningless regulatory obstacles, whatever kind of business they are conducting;

Amendment 141 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 142 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 143 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 144 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Draws attention also to the restrictions in Member States as regards the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession; ~~consider~~stresses that these restrictions are serious obstacles to cross-border service provision; emphasizes the need to ensure consistent proportionality assessment of regulatory requirements and restrictions applicable to services;

Amendment 145 #

Othmar KARAS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Draws attention also to the restrictions in Member States as regards the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession – restrictions whose purpose is to protect the public interest; considers that some of these restrictions ~~are serious~~may be disproportionate obstacles to cross-border service provision;

Amendment 146 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Draws attention also to the restrictions in Member States as regards the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession; considers that these restrictions ~~are serious~~may be obstacles to cross-border service provision in individual cases;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Draws attention also to the various restrictions in Member States as regards, among other things, the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession; considers that corporate regulations are just as detrimental to the single market as national regulations; considers that these restrictions are serious obstacles to cross-border service provision;

Amendment 148 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Draws attention also to the unjustified or disproportionate restrictions in some Member States as regards the legal form of service providers and their shareholding or management structure, and as regards unjustified or disproportionate restrictions on the joint exercise of the profession; considers that these restrictions are serious obstacles to cross-border service provision;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Emphasises that the notification obligation contained in the Services Directive could have been effective in reducing or eliminating unjustified NTBs, but has been neglected by Member States and the Commission; welcomes, therefore, the renewed focus on the notification procedure in the Single Market Strategy, as through early engagement as regards proposed regulatory measures, disproportionate or unjustified national measures can be revised to resolve issues before they occur; believes further that more detailed justifications should be asked from the Member States when introducing new regulatory measures;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas 25 % of regulated professions are regulated in only one Member State, and whereas the regulation of these professions is very often unnecessary or, even if justifiable, excessive;

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Emphasises that the notification obligation contained in the Services Directive could have been effective in reducing or eliminating NTBs, but has been neglected by Member States and the Commission; welcomes, therefore, the renewed focus on the notification procedure in the Single Market Strategy, as through early engagement as regards proposed regulatory measures, disproportionate national measures can be revised to resolve issues before they occur; welcomes the introduction of a services passport; highlights that it should not lead to additional administrative burdens, but tackle non-tariff barriers and advance mutual recognition;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Emphasises that the notification obligation contained in the Services Directive could have been effective in reducing or eliminating NTBs, but has been neglected in many cases by Member States and the Commission; welcomes, therefore, the renewed focus on the notification procedure in the Single Market Strategy, as through early engagement as regards proposed regulatory measures, disproportionate national measures can be revised to resolve issues before they occur; emphasizes the positive experience with the notification procedure for products and suggests this should be used as an example for improving the procedure for services;

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Emphasises that the notification obligation contained in the Services Directive could have been effective in reducing or eliminating NTBs, but has been neglected by Member States and the Commission; welcomes, therefore, the renewed focus on the notification procedure in the Single Market Strategy, as through early engagement as regards proposed regulatory measures, ~~disproportionate~~ national measures can be revised to resolve issues before they occur;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Points out that public services benefit from special protection in relation to internal market rules because of the general interest tasks they fulfil, and that therefore the rules set by the public authorities for their proper operation do not constitute non-tariff barriers; points out, in this regard, that social services and health services are not subject to the Services Directive;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Points out that construction service providers are often confronted with certain requirements relating to their organisation in their home state, including with regard to organisational certification schemes, that make offering their services cross-border too complex, thereby discouraging the free movement of construction services and professionals;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Commission to address these barriers, including through improved mutual recognition and, if appropriate, legislative action, such as the Commission’s recently announced Services Passport initiative;deleted

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Commission to address these barriers, including, where worthwhile, through improved mutual recognition and, if appropriate, legislative action~~, such as the Commission’s recently announced Services Passport initiative~~;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

~~25.~~ Calls on the Commission to address these barriers, including through improved mutual recognition ~~and, if appropriate, legislative action, such as~~, as in the case of the Commission’s recently announced Services Passport initiative;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Commission to address these barriers, ~~including through improved mutual recognition and,~~ if appropriate, by taking legislative action, such as the Commission’s recently announced Services Passport initiative; stresses that it is important to ensure that the Services Passport is coordinated with the European professional card;

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Calls on the Commission to address these barriers, including through improved mutual recognition, in compliance with the rules laid down by the destination country on the performance of service activities in conformity with the Services Directive, and, if appropriate, legislative action, such as the Commission’s recently announced Services Passport initiative;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the potential gains from functioning digital single market are estimated to be around €415 billion per year and the GDP increase by around 0.4% in 2020, and whereas there are many gaps in the EU legislation hampering its proper functioning;

Amendment 160 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls on the Commission to address the burdens related to the fractured banking sector in Europe which creates difficulties for non-residents, especially SMEs to open a bank account in another Member State;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Fears that the European Commission plans to introduce the principle of "equal pay for equal work in the same place" in the case of posting could further disintegrate the Internal Market for Services and constitute an additional NTB for foreign service providers;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6

~~Single market for professional services~~deleted

Amendment 163 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that many of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions are disproportionate and create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals;deleted

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

Amendment 165 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that ~~many of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions are~~the existence of unjustified or disproportionate ~~and create~~rules maintains unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals;

Amendment 166 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that ~~many~~some of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions are ~~disproportionate and create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professional~~important guarantors of the quality of the requisite training and thus an important element in successful qualification systems;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that many of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions are disproportionate and ~~create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professional~~protectionist, as they create unjustified regulatory obstacles hindering access to many professions and the mobility of service providers in regulated professions and their workers;

Amendment 168 #

Othmar KARAS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Points out~~Does not exclude the possibility that ~~many~~some of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of certain regulated professions armay be disproportionate and create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals in some cases;

Amendment 169 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Points out~~Does not exclude the possibility that ~~many~~a few of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions armay be disproportionate and thus create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals in individual cases;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas only 2 % of young SMEs and micro enterprises have undertaken cross- border expansion through foreign direct investment;

Amendment 170 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that ~~many~~some of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions are disproportionate and may sometimes create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals but believes at the same time that an unrestrained underbidding competition which will lead to ruthless exploitation has to be avoided at all costs;

Amendment 171 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that ~~many~~some of the Member States’' regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions armight be disproportionate and therefore can create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals;

Amendment 172 #

Sabine VERHEYEN, Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Points out that ~~many~~some of the Member States’ regulations on the access and exercise of regulated professions are disproportionate and create unnecessary regulatory obstacles to the mobility of professionals;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Concurs with the Commission's view that dual learning systems are to be recommended as examples of best practice within the European Union;

Amendment 174 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Welcomes the mutual evaluation exercise carried out in the last two years; believes that peer review processes which are well-designed and encourage frank debate amongst Member States can be effective in encouraging change; encourages the Member States and the Commission to extend this practice, in particular to other areas of single market regulation;deleted

Amendment 175 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to address the reform priorities of Member States in the area of professional services in the context of the European Semester and country-specific recommendations on deregulating certain professions in the Member States;deleted

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

Amendment 177 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to address the reform priorities of Member States in the area of professional services in the context of the European Semester and country- specific recommendations ~~on deregulating certain professions~~ in the Member States;

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to address the reform priorities of Member States in the area of professional services in the context of the European Semester and country- specific recommendations ~~on deregulating certain professions in the Member States~~;

Amendment 179 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Commission to ~~address the~~set out reform priorities ~~of Member States~~and address them accordingly in the area of professional services in the context of the European Semester and country-specific recommendations on deregulating certain professions in the Member States;

Amendment 18 #

Catherine STIHLER, Marlene MIZZI, Marc TARABELLA, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas only 2 % of ~~young SME~~new SMEs and start-ups have undertaken cross-border expansion through foreign direct investment;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)

28a. Calls on the Commission to review the legislation on the exercise of regulated professions in the Member States and to start a process of derogation and deregulation of laws in this area and of liberalisation of access to regulated professions, including the liberal professions in the Union;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 7 a (new)

Single market for e-commerce

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Highlights the peer review on retail establishment carried out by the Commission in 2014-2015, which showed that retailers often face disproportionate and inappropriate establishment and operating conditions and procedures in the single market;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Calls on the European Commission and the Member States to speed up unlocking the potential for a complete Digital Single Market and the implementation of the EU Digital Agenda;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)

29a. Points out that Member State laws often treat retail and wholesale business as a lesser form of business, denying the sector, including SMEs, the type of support for economic activity available in other sectors;

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)

29b. Points out that some Member States are introducing rules discriminating against economic activity in the retail or wholesale sector on the basis of the surface area on which the activity is carried out, the size of the undertaking or the origin of the capital, which is inconsistent with the idea of the single market and the principles of free competition and restricts the development of the labour market;

Amendment 186 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Points out that restrictive regulations on retail and wholesale activities create significant barriers to entry, leading to fewer new outlet openings, hampering competition and leading to higher prices for consumers; underlines in this regard that fees, inspection charges and other measures may prima facie serve legitimate public policy objectives, but through the use of thresholds or other criteria function as NTBs; believes that all operational restrictions placed on retail or wholesale activities should not unduly or disproportionately restrict these activities, and must not lead to de facto discrimination between market operators;deleted

Amendment 187 #

Elisabetta GARDINI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Points out that re~~strictive regula~~gulations that impose restrictions on retail and wholesale activities ~~create significant barri~~which run counters to entry, leading to fewer new outlet openings, hampering competition and leading to higher prices for consumers; underlines in this regard that fees, inspection charges and other measures may prima facie serve legitimate public policy objectives, but through the use of thresholds or other criteria function as NTBEU law and are disproportionate, can create significant barriers to entry, potentially leading to discrimination between domestic firms and non-national firms; believes that all operational restrictions placed on retail or wholesale activities should not unduly or disproportionately restrict these activities, and must not lead to de facto discrimination between market operators;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30

30. Points out that restrictive regulations on retail and wholesale activities create significant barriers to entry, leading to fewer new outlet openings, hampering competition and leading to higher prices for consumers; underlines in this regard that some fees, inspection charges and other measures may ~~prima facie serve legitimate public policy objectives, but through the use of thresholds or other criteria function as NTB~~function as NTBs if they are not justified by legitimate public policy objectives; believes that all operational restrictions placed on retail or wholesale activities should not unduly or disproportionately restrict these activities, and must not lead to de facto discrimination between market operators;

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)

30a. Stresses that the online retail market is not functioning correctly. Consumers often cannot purchase products online from other EU Member States. Rules need to be devised in respect of online retail trading in order to eliminate this discrimination, which affects a great many consumers;

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas for consumers, ~~gaps in~~ the single market leads to less product choice and to goods and services being more expensive;

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Commission to set out best practices on retail establishment ~~and operational restrictions in the single market~~, whilst respecting Member State subsidiarity in areas such as worker's rights;

Amendment 191 #

Elisabetta GARDINI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Commission to set out best practices on retail establishment and operational restrictions in the single market, while fully respecting the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality;

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Calls on the Commission to set out best practices on retail establishment and the conditions for introducing operational restrictions in the single market;

Amendment 193 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Calls on the Commission to analyse operational restrictions to retail and wholesale in the single market, bringing forward reform proposals where necessary, and report on that in Spring 2017;

Amendment 194 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31 a (new)

31a. Emphasizes that especially the lack of implementation and diverging application of the Services Directive is hampering the single market;

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Calls on the Commission to present in 2016 a comprehensive overview of NTBs in the single market, taking into consideration the difference between an NTB and ameasures reflecting the legitimate public policy objective of a Member States, including an ambitious proposal to eliminate these NTBs as soon as possible in order to unleash the still untapped potential of the single market;

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32

32. Calls on the Commission to present a comprehensive overview of NTBs in the single market~~, taking into consideration the difference between an NTB and~~ and an analysis of the means for tackling them, making a clear distinction between an NTB and the regulations for implementing a legitimate public policy objective of a Member State;

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Calls on the Commission to step up its efforts to simplify legislation, devise a reliable legislative framework, streamline administrative formalities in the field of taxation and provide greater information on citizen’s rights in the EU internal market;

Amendment 198 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Calls on the Commission to initiate timely consideration of EU policy and legislative action in emerging areas, with wide stakeholder consultation in particular SMEs and civil-society organisations;

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Calls on the Commission to establish teams of experts who can travel around to the Member States to help Member States to ensure a larger degree of uniform implementation;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas ~~observers of the single market over the years consider that it makes a~~people working in the real economy, who are front-line observers of the single market, consider that it has a disastrous record and is not making the significant contribution to European economies that was claimed for it;

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas for consumers, gaps in the single market lead to less product choice ~~and~~, to goods and services being more expensive or to differences in product choice caused by unjustified reasons;

Amendment 200 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)

32a. Calls on the Commission to, firstly, ensure that Member States respect the already existing rules concerning the single market rather than create new, additional pieces of legislation on matters already covered by the already existing rules;

Amendment 201 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to ~~deepen~~review its work on enforcement and the principles which underpin the single market; believes that early intervention with regard to national measures or implementation procedures which constitute NTBs may be effective and results more readily achieved than through infringement proceedings; underlines, nevertheless, that for serious or persistent failures or misapplication of Union law, particularly in areas of single market and economic interest, the Commission may prioritise infringement actions;

Amendment 202 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to deepen its work on enforcement and the principles which underpin the single market; believes that early intervention with regard to national measures or implementation procedures which constitute NTBs may be effective and results more readily achieved than through infringement proceedings; underlines, nevertheless, that for serious or persistent failures or misapplication of Union law, particularly in areas of single market and economic interest, the Commission m~~ay prioritise infringement action~~ust use all available measures, including infringement procedures, to ensure full implementation of legislation on the Single Market and to ensure structural reforms in Member States;

Amendment 203 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to deepen its work on enforcement and the principles which underpin the single market; believes that early intervention with regard to national measures or implementation procedures which constitute NTBs may be effective and results more readily achieved than through infringement proceedings; underlines, nevertheless, that for serious or persistent failures or misapplication of Union law, particularly in ~~areas of single market and economic interes~~matters of principle affecting the idea, principles and provisions of a single market, the Commission may prioritise infringement actions;

Amendment 204 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls on the Commission to deepen its work on enforcement and the principles which underpin the single market; believes that early intervention with regard to national measures or implementation procedures which constitute unjustified NTBs may be effective and results more readily achieved than through infringement proceedings; underlines, nevertheless, that for serious or persistent failures or misapplication of Union law, ~~particularly in areas of single market and economic interest,~~ the Commission may prioritise infringement actions;

Amendment 205 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Lucy ANDERSON, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33a. Regrets that the Parliament's access to relevant information relating to pre- infringement and infringement procedures is still limited and calls for improved transparency in this regard, with due respect to confidentiality rules;

Amendment 206 #

Antanas GUOGA, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)

33a. Stresses that accessible, affordable, efficient and high-quality parcel delivery is an essential prerequisite for a thriving cross-border e-commerce for the benefit of SMEs and consumers in particular;

Amendment 207 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. ~~Calls on~~Notes that the Member States tono longer view the single market as a joint initiative which requires coordinated and collective maintenance, but as a managed, restrictive and centralised economic model; believes that those who ultimately suffer the consequences of NTBs are domestic consumers, who are denied access to new entrants to domestic markets, and face higher costs and reduced choice; considers that Member States should dedicate further time to horizontal single market concerns and to identifying areas requiring priority action by one or more Member States, in order to maintain and further the single marketthis anachronistic and objectively failed economic and political model are domestic consumers;

Amendment 208 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Calls on the Member States to view the single market as a ~~joint initiative which requires coordinated and collective maintenance~~common good and a condition for making the EU economy competitive, including in the global market; believes that those who ultimately suffer the consequences of NTBs are domestic consumers, who are denied access to new entrants to domestic markets, and face higher costs, inferior quality and reduced choice; considers that Member States should dedicate further time to horizontal single market concerns and to identifying areas requiring priority action by one or more Member States, in order to maintain and further the single market;

Amendment 209 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Calls on the Member States to view the single market as a joint initiative which requires coordinated and collective maintenance; believes that those who ultimately suffer the consequences of ~~NTBs are domestic~~unjustified NTBs are consumers, who are denied access to new entrants to domestic markets, and face higher costs and reduced choice; considers that Member States should dedicate further time to horizontal single market concerns and to identifying areas requiring priority action by one or more Member States, in order to maintain and further the single market;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas for consumers, gaps in the single market can lead to less product choice and to goods and services being more expensive;

Amendment 210 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Calls on the Member States to view the single market as a joint initiative which requires coordinated and collective maintenance; believes that those who ultimately suffer the consequences of unjustified NTBs are domestic consumers, who are denied access to new entrants to domestic markets, and face higher costs and reduced choice; considers that Member States should dedicate further time to horizontal single market concerns and to identifying areas requiring priority action by one or more Member States, in order to maintain and further the single market;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas for consumers, ~~gaps in the single market~~the implementation of EU law in a way that is incomplete or at odds with the objectives of the single market, and also over- regulation or protectionism by Member States or corporations, lead to less product choice and to goods and services being more expensive;

Amendment 23 #

Catherine STIHLER, Marc TARABELLA, Marlene MIZZI, Lucy ANDERSON

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas for businesses the ~~costs are manifest~~single market results in more expensive supply chains, leading to their own products being more expensive, or in reduced access to business services, which harms their competitiveness; whereas innovation is encouraged through a competitive market; whereas, therefore, in its current form, the single market cannot be seen as competitive;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas for businesses the costs are manifest in more expensive supply chains, leading to their own products being more ~~expensive~~costly, or in reduced access to business services, which harms their competitiveness; whereas innovation is encouraged through a competitive market;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the open and non- discriminatory public procurement regime throughout the EU would benefit the EU single market and all its participants, and whereas there are cases when the Member States create artificial obstacles through requirements that are unreasonable for the cross-border participants;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the complexity of the current VAT regime can also be considered a NTB;

Amendment 27 #

Fb. whereas anti-competitive tax deals between Member States and large multinational companies can be considered an unjustified NTB;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the monitoring of barriers and costs is piecemeal and unsystematic, quantification and clear identification of barriers and costs is lacking, which makes prioritisation of policy actions difficult;

Amendment 29 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)

Fb. whereas businesses and individuals are facing major obstacles in cross border activities within the single market due to lack of availability and quality of information, assistance services and online procedures, leading to high administrative burden and significant compliance costs;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas ~~observers of the single market over the years consider that i~~the European single market makes a significant contribution to European economies;

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the ~~free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national~~re are still non-tariff barriers (NTBs) to the free movement of goods and services, such as national regulatory and non-regulatory technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers;

Amendment 31 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers; highlights that strengthening of the single market requires urgent actions at Union and Member States levels to address such NTBs;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers; believes that the frequent unjustified use of bureaucracy is making the situation worse;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national technical rules and requirements governing products ~~and~~, service providers and terms of service provi~~ders~~sion;

Amendment 34 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be ~~hamper~~affected by non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers;

Amendment 35 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Realises that despite the removal of tariff barriers since 1 July 1968, the free movement of goods and services has continued to be hampered by unjustified non-tariff barriers (NTBs) such as national technical rules and requirements governing products and service providers;

Amendment 36 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls on the Commission to further elaborate on a definition of NTBs tailored to the single market and that clarifies the distinction between NTBs and rules and legislations which are in place to protect consumers, environment and workers;

Amendment 37 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Understands an NTB as ~~being a cost introduced by~~unjustified regulatory action which ~~must be borne~~can create a cost by a firm which seeks to enter a market, and which is not borne by firms already in the market, or a cost which accrues to non- national firms which is not borne by domestic firms;

Amendment 38 #

Elisabetta GARDINI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Understands an NTB as being a cost introduced by regulatory action which must be borne by a firm which seeks to enter a market, and which is not borne by firms already in the market, – with the effect of discriminating, even indirectly, against non-national firms as opposed to domestic ones – or a cost which accrues to non- national firms which is not borne by domestic firms;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Understands an NTB as being a burden or cost introduced by regulatory action which must be borne by a firm which seeks to enter a market, and which is not borne by firms already in the market, or a cost which accrues to non-national firms which is not borne by domestic firms, thereby having a discriminatory effect;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas ~~observers of~~ the single market ~~over the years consider that it~~ makes a significant contribution to European economies;

Amendment 40 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Recognises that national-level differences may emerge owing to multi- level governance, leading to internal NTBs within a Member State; believes that the need for measures to be proportionate and in furtherance of legitimate public policy objectives should be well-understood at all levels of regulatory decision-making; notes that decisions taken at municipal, state, national or EU level can all contribute to the creation of NTBs if they are not well- conceived; believes that consistency and coherence of policy and regulatory practice can contribute significantly to lowering NTBs;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Recognises that national-level differences may emerge owing to multi- level governance, leading to internal NTBs within a Member State; believes that the need for measures to be proportionate and in furtherance of legitimate public policy objectives, s~~hould be well-understood at all levels of regulatory decision-mak~~uch as individual and collective entitlements which ensure that EU citizens maintain or achieve a certain material standard of living;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

Amendment 43 #

Antanas GUOGA, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Recognises~~Emphasizes that generally the Member States should respect the rule that there should be no NTBs in the EU's single market; respects however that national- level differences may emerge owing to multi- level governance, leading to internal NTBs within a Member State; believes that the need for measures to be proportionate and in furtherance of legitimate public policy objectives should be well- understood at all levels of regulatory decision-making;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Reiterates that the Digital Single Market Strategy and Single Market Strategy for Europe compose initiatives that should be implemented swiftly and ambitiously in order to reduce single market NTBs; highlights that it is crucial for these initiatives to be based on better regulation principles and on the most efficient tools, such as harmonisation and mutual recognition;

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible; considers that the implementation of the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact~~, i~~ has dbee~~ply unsatisfactory~~n inconsistent across Member States and is overly complex; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible and the related provision of notification information and completion of procedures by businesses rendered as user-friendly as possible; considers that the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact, is deeply unsatisfactory; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment;

Amendment 47 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible; considers that the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact, is deeply unsatisfactory; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment; recognizes that the Single Digital Gateway initiative announced in the European Commission's Digital Single Market Communication represents a positive step in opening in this regard;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate or due to the protection of consumers, environment or workers’ rights, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible; considers that the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact, is deeply unsatisfactory; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Believes that where such NTBs can be justified as proportionate, information on differing national regulatory requirements should be easily accessible; considers that the present system built around a diverse range of contact points, including Product Contact Points and Single Points of Contact, is deeply unsatisfactory; recalls the importance of strengthening and streamlining existing single market tools for SMEs in order to simplify their cross- border expansion; urges the Commission and the Member States to place greater emphasis on streamlining and improving these systems, in particular the need for rapid improvement of the Points of Single Contact and calls the Commission to report to the European Parliament on the progress and next steps by the end of 2016; highlights that understanding that by being more open and accessible as regards regulatory requirements their Member State becomes more attractive for inward investment;

Amendment 5 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas participants and observers of the single market over the years consider that it makes a significant contribution to European economies;

Amendment 50 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Considers that the Commission and Member States working together to improve the functioning of SOLVIT is important to eliminating NTBs, especially in geographical or industry areas where businesses do not use SOLVIT often, and not all submitted cases are taken up by the competent authority;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Reminds that this debate on NTBs should not be used as a cover-up for a political agenda on deregulation;

Amendment 52 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Welcomes the Single Digital Gateway initiative and urges the Commission to create a single entry point for businesses and consumers to all single market related information, assistance, problem solving and to national and EU-wide procedures needed to operate cross-border in the EU;

Amendment 53 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Believes that national regulatory measures sometimes are the result of missing legislative proposals from the Commission;

Amendment 54 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

~~5. Underlines that for many companies, in particular SMEs, seeking to trade in another Member State, such an expansion will still from their perspective constitute ‘international trade’;~~deleted

Amendment 55 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Underlines that for many companies, in particular SMEs, seeking to trade in another Member State, such an expansion will still from their perspective constitute ‘international trade’; highlights that SMEs, start-ups and innovative businesses, in particular sharing economy businesses, should be fully enabled to grow through cross-border trade;

Amendment 56 #

Daniel DALTON, Antanas GUOGA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. View a high level of consumer protection as a key objective that must inform EU action; stresses that the removal of NTBs will not necessarily result in better consumer protection;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes that the elimination of NTBs does not entail the limitation of workers' rights, where these are not discriminatory, disproportionate or fail to be founded upon a legitimate public policy objective;

Amendment 58 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

~~6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justifi~~deleted;

Amendment 59 #

~~6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justifi~~deleted;

Amendment 6 #

Evelyne GEBHARDT, Lucy ANDERSON, Marc TARABELLA, Nicola DANTI

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas it is estimated that completing the single market of the free movement of goods, services, public procurement, the digital economy and the body of consumer law would entail economic gains ranging from 651 billion to 1.1 trillion euro per year, equivalent to a range of 5 % to 8.63% of EU GDP;

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective ~~of the~~inter alia of the European Union should be the eventual abolition of ~~NTBs where they cannot be justified~~non-justified NTBs but reminds that the Union has not only an economic but also a social purpose, the economic freedoms must be balanced against the objectives pursued by social policy, as is clear from Article 3(3) TEU which states that Europe is based on a "social market economy" and goes on to state that the EU shall "promote social justice and protection";

Amendment 61 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of ~~NTBs that cannot be justified;~~ unjustified barriers to the free movement of persons, goods, services and capital, which are non-tariff barriers, and the curbing of excessive bureaucracy and regulation;

Amendment 62 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. ~~Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual~~Calls for abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justified;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justified or are disproportionate;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justified and that they should only be permitted in exceptional circumstances, and primarily to protect public interests;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective of the Union and its individual Member States should be the eventual abolition of disproportionate NTBs where they cannot be justified;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Believes that the objective of the Union should be the eventual abolition of NTBs where they cannot be justified, as they are i.e. disproportionate, unnecessary or out of date;

Amendment 67 #

Antanas GUOGA, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Points out that rules required in order to meet public policy objectives must not be regarded as NTBs but as a legitimate means of legislating in the public interest, and that the removal of NTBs must not undermine Member States' right to regulate;

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Highlights that compliance costs with VAT requirements is one of the biggest non-tariff barriers; calls for practical VAT simplification proposals;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Considers that in order to avoid the cost of "slow Europe" timely consideration of EU policy and legislative action in new areas is essential to ensure no new unjustified NTBs arise; Or. en (after subheading ‘II. Cross-cutting non-tariff barriers ')

Amendment 7 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, more than 20 years after the launch of the single market, non-tariff barriers (NTBs) continue to ~~bedevil trade between~~affect trade between Member States; whereas those barriers must be viewed as evidence of a strategic reluctance on the part of Member States;

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Believes that differences in the speed of transposition and the exact implementation at national level of existing directives create legal uncertainty for businesses and different competition conditions on the internal market;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Believe~~Highlights that differences in the speed of transposition and the exact implementation at national level of existing directives create legal uncertainty for businesses;

Amendment 72 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

8. ~~Considers that where the Commission has repealed unnecessary EU legislation, Member States should act swiftly to repeal corresponding domestic provisions~~Urges Member States to swiftly repeal outdated domestic provisions where the Commission has repealed unnecessary EU legislation;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that extended non- compliance with Union law by Member States is detrimental for the single market; considers also that the slow compliance process leads to some Member States benefiting from an undue prolongation of the transposition deadlinethe misgivings Member States have about broad swathes of Union law call the entire single market project into question; considers also that the very poor performance of EU economic policies adds further substance to those misgivings, which must now be seen as justified;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that extended non-compliance with Union law by Member States is detrimental for the single market; considers also that the slow compliance process leads to some Member States benefiting from an undue prolongation of the transposition deadline, a compliance culture should be further promoted in co-operation with Member States, as foreseen in the Single Market Strategy;

Amendment 75 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that extended non-compliance with Union law by Member States is detrimental for the single market; considers also that the slow ~~compliance~~transposition process leads to some Member States benefiting from an undue prolongation of the ~~transposition~~compliance deadline;

Amendment 76 #

Catherine STIHLER, Lucy ANDERSON, Marlene MIZZI, Marc TARABELLA, Nicola DANTI, Evelyne GEBHARDT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that extended non-compliance with Union law by Member States is detrimental for the single market and EU citizens; considers also that the slow compliance process leads to some Member States benefiting from an undue prolongation of the transposition deadline; calls on the Commission to swiftly address the subject of non-compliance by Member States;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

~~10. Draws attention to the issue of ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional rules that add to business burdens and costs;~~deleted

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Draws attention to the issue of ~~‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with~~centralisation, i.e. the Commission's tendency to attempt to control and regulate what is ad di~~tional rules that~~verse range of internal markets, constantly adding to ~~business burdens and cost~~the economic constraints experienced by civil society, businesses and individuals;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Draws attention to~~Notes the issue of ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the ~~tendency of~~option for national governments to ~~load transposed directives with additional rules that add to business burdens and costs~~include additional national rules in transposed directives, for legitimate policy goals, which may, however, increase the complexity of the legal environment; considers, therefore, that greater use should be made of regulations instead of directives to ensure more consistent legislation;

Amendment 8 #

Catherine STIHLER, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, more than 20 years after the launch of the single market, unjustified non-tariff barriers (NTBs) continue to ~~bedevil~~affect trade between Member States and slow consideration of legislation may continue to create new unjustified NTBs;

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. ~~Draws attention to the issu~~Urges Member States to address the practice of ‘'gold- plating’', i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional and often unfavourable rules that add to business burdens and costs;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Draws attention to the ~~issue of~~harm caused by over-regulation and ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional rules that are not required under EU law and add to business burdens and costs;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Draws attention to the issue of ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional rules that ~~add to business burdens and costs~~can lead to legal uncertainty;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Draws attention to the issue of ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional rules that add to business burdens and costs, the data analytics tool being developed by the Commission could improve the monitoring of transposition of single market legislation;

Amendment 84 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Draws attention to the issue of ‘gold- plating’, i.e. the tendency of national governments to load transposed directives with additional rules that add to business burdens and costs; invites the Commission to present in 2016 an action plan to limit 'gold-plating' to a bare minimum to prevent fragmentation of the single market;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Draws attention to the fact the intensity and number of controls that have been recently put on foreign service providers is growing; calls on Member States to make sure that these controls are proportionate, justified and non- discriminatory;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Believes that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slow transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation;deleted

Amendment 87 #

Catherine STIHLER, Lucy ANDERSON, Nicola DANTI, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Marc TARABELLA, Marlene MIZZI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Believes that inconsistent enforcement of existing ~~correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slow transposition~~rules by Member States causes harm to the single market; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation by Member States;

Amendment 88 #

Antanas GUOGA, Daniel DALTON, Kaja KALLAS, Ulla TØRNÆS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. ~~Believe~~Highlights that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slow transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation; calls for better regulation principles to be respected in the legislation drafting process;

Amendment 89 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Nicola DANTI, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Believes that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as slow transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions, for example, traceability, placed on the market, are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation;

Amendment 9 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas, more than 20 years after the launch of the single market, unjustified non-tariff barriers (NTBs) continue to ~~bedevil trade~~cause difficulties for the movement of goods and services between Member States;

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Believes that inconsistent enforcement of existing correctly transposed rules causes the same harm as ~~slow~~late transposition; considers that compliance and enforcement are made more challenging when commonly used definitions are given different meanings in different pieces of legislation;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; considers that transposition workshops should be held in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;deleted

Amendment 92 #

Antanas GUOGA, Kaja KALLAS, Dita CHARANZOVÁ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; ~~considers that transposition workshops should be held in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;~~

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; c~~onsiders that transposition workshops should be held in order~~alls on the Commission to take every effort to minimisze divergences at anthe earlyiest stage;

Amendment 94 #

Catherine STIHLER, Lucy ANDERSON, Marlene MIZZI, Marc TARABELLA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; considers that t~~ransposition workshops should be held in order to minimise divergence~~he process of implementing transposed directives should be better coordinated by means, for example, of specialised transposition workshops, in order to minimise divergences in the individual Member States’ legal systems at an early stage;

Amendment 95 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; considers that transposition workshops should be held and best practice shared, in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;

Amendment 96 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Virginie ROZIÈRE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new unjustified NTBs; considers that transposition workshops should be held in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;

Amendment 97 #

Christel SCHALDEMOSE, Liisa JAAKONSAARI, Olga SEHNALOVÁ, Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO, Virginie ROZIÈRE, Marlene MIZZI, Catherine STIHLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Believes that unequal application of the same rules in different Member States has the potential to create new NTBs; considers that the Commission should hold transposition workshops ~~should be held~~ in order to minimise divergences at an early stage;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Believes the Commission should increase their use of guidelines in regards to the implementation of directives since this can be a useful tool to ensure a larger degree of uniform implementation;

Amendment 99 #