2016/2100(INI) Annual report on EU competition policy
Next event: Commission response to text adopted in plenary 2017/08/31 more...
Lead committee dossier:
Next event: Commission response to text adopted in plenary 2017/08/31 more...
- Results of vote in Parliament 2017/02/14
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading 2017/02/14
- End of procedure in Parliament 2017/02/14
- Debate in Parliament 2017/02/13
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading 2017/01/12
- Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading 2016/12/08
- Committee opinion 2016/11/29
- Committee opinion 2016/11/29
Progress: Procedure completed
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | ECON |
SZANYI Tibor ( S&D)
|
MARTUSCIELLO Fulvio ( PPE),
LOONES Sander ( ECR),
TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon ( ALDE),
LÓPEZ BERMEJO Paloma ( GUE/NGL),
REIMON Michel ( Verts/ALE),
VON STORCH Beatrix ( EFDD),
KAPPEL Barbara ( ENF)
|
| Committee Opinion | AGRI |
DANTIN Michel ( PPE)
|
Bas BELDER ( ECR),
José BOVÉ ( Verts/ALE)
|
| Committee Opinion | TRAN |
FOSTER Jacqueline ( ECR)
|
Marie-Christine ARNAUTU ( ENF),
Merja KYLLÖNEN ( GUE/NGL),
Rolandas PAKSAS ( EFDD),
Keith TAYLOR ( Verts/ALE),
Claudia ȚAPARDEL ( S&D),
Pavel TELIČKA ( ALDE)
|
| Committee Opinion | IMCO |
SCHWAB Andreas ( PPE)
|
Dennis de JONG ( GUE/NGL),
Richard SULÍK ( ECR)
|
| Committee Opinion | INTA |
SZEJNFELD Adam ( PPE)
|
Sander LOONES ( ECR),
Sorin MOISĂ ( S&D),
Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS ( ALDE)
|
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
2017/08/31
EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2017/02/14
EP - Results of vote in Parliament
Documents
2017/02/14
EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details
The European Parliament adopted by 467 votes to 156 with 68 abstentions, a resolution on the annual report on EU competition policy.
Members welcomed the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which demonstrates that proper EU competition policy can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment.
Single market integration : stressing that without an effective EU competition policy the internal market cannot attain its full potential, Parliament welcomed the Commission’s use of the various instruments at its disposal, including control of mergers, combating abuse of a dominant position and anti-competitive practices, combating cartels, control of State aid, coordination with national and, where applicable, regional competition authorities, and sectoral inquiries.
Members stressed that an effective competition policy has to allow for the specific market conditions applying to SMEs, micro-enterprises and start-ups, and must protect workers’ rights and make for fair taxation.
The resolution insisted, inter alia , on the need to:
prioritise the strengthening of the post-Brexit Single Market by ensuring full compliance with EU competition laws and by further increasing cooperation between Member States on tax issues; put an end to unfair tax competition (including illegal tax benefits granted) by Member States, and to investigate thoroughly all the cases where it is suspected that the aim is illegal tax optimisation by multinationals; establish a common consolidated corporate tax base (full CCCTB), which will help to eliminate distortions of competition and provide a guarantee that no profit leaves the EU untaxed; prevent the misuse of EU funds and stimulate accountability in public procurement; Members urged the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office; enforce single market rules also at Member State level and for infringements to be dealt with in order to tackle fragmentation of the single market; further reinforce the single market by removing the remaining barriers and obstacles; fight against fiscal and social dumping , abusive tax planning and tax evasion; complete the implementation of the Single European Railway Area .
Single market : given that the digital single market could create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and contribute EUR 415 billion per year to the EU economy, Parliament called for greater attention to be focused on the new business models used by digital companies.
Members recommended:
speeding up investigations on areas of search bias (hotels, local searches, flights), and conduct investigations on the dominant hotel booking platforms; taking ambitious steps to eliminate illegitimate obstacles to online competition , in particular by ending unjustified geo-blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location or nationality, which often have the effect of building monopolies and of some consumers resorting to illegal content; assessing the potential impact of every initiative on the ability of SMEs to benefit from the digital single market; granting the utmost importance to net neutrality ‘to ensure that there is no discrimination between internet services and competition is fully guaranteed; creating a toolkit, which is indispensable in order for the numerous forms and variants of the sharing economy to receive support at EU level; speeding up all procedures against anti-competitive behaviour which infringes EU antitrust rules by a number of companies, in particular by internet and telecom giants and other media companies, film studios and TV distributors; bringing forward a regulatory strategy taking into account technology convergence and, in particular, the multiplication of platforms; safeguarding competition in the internet search and telecommunications sectors , including with regard to internet services and spectrum allocation; bringing down charges for intra-EU calls to the level of local calls in the most efficient way.
State aid : Parliament welcomed the overhaul of the State aid rules and suggested that a specific annual report be sent to Parliament. It reminded the Member States that the aim was to better target aid measures towards long-term, sustainable economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion, while ensuring an equal level playing field and the free functioning of the social market economy.
The Commission is called upon to launch a road map for less but better-targeted State aid, aiming to open up the possibility of reducing State aid by lowering taxes, therefore stimulating new businesses and fair competition. It should closely monitor the renationalisation of public utilities in EU Member States and prevent illegal State aid granted in the form of public service compensation.
Furthermore, all State aid cases and public procurement irregularities connected to energy and environmental investments must be strictly monitored and investigated in depth .
Parliament called on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and effective in all cases where it has sufficient evidence of infringement. The existing rules relating to fines for infringements could be supplemented by ongoing penalties against those responsible.
Lastly, Members wanted to see more effective national competition authorities in the EU: it was essential that the national competition authorities have the means and instruments they need to be effective enforcers of EU competition rules, including the tools to detect, tackle and sanction infringements.
Documents
2017/02/14
EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2017/02/13
EP - Debate in Parliament
Documents
2017/01/12
EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Details
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted an own-initiative report by Tibor SZANYI (S&D, HU) on the annual report on EU competition policy.
Members welcomed the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which demonstrates that proper EU competition policy can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment.
Single market integration : stressing that without an effective EU competition policy the internal market cannot attain its full potential, Members stressed that an effective competition policy has to allow for the specific market conditions applying to SMEs, micro-enterprises and start-ups, and must protect workers’ rights and make for fair taxation.
The report insisted, inter alia , on the need to:
prioritise the strengthening of the post-Brexit Single Market by ensuring full compliance with EU competition laws and by further increasing cooperation between Member States on tax issues; investigate thoroughly all the cases where it is suspected that the aim is illegal tax optimisation by multinationals in order to put an end to unfair tax competition (including illegal tax benefits granted) by Member State; establish a common consolidated corporate tax base (full CCCTB), which will help to eliminate distortions of competition and provide a guarantee that no profit leaves the EU untaxed; prevent the misuse of EU funds and stimulate accountability in public procurement; Members urged the establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office; enforce single market rules also at Member State level and for infringements to be dealt with in order to tackle fragmentation of the single market; further reinforce the single market by removing the remaining barriers and obstacles: a robust framework for budgetary and fiscal convergence would reinforce the EU’s economic cohesion and competitiveness and improve its capacity to face global competition, fight against fiscal and social dumping , abusive tax planning and tax evasion to ensure fair competition across the single market; complete the implementation of the Single European Railway Area .
Single market : given that the digital single market could create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and contribute EUR 415 billion per year to the EU economy, Members called for greater attention to be focused on the new business models used by digital companies.
Members recommended:
taking ambitious steps to eliminate illegitimate obstacles to online competition , in order to ensure barrier-free online shopping for EU consumers purchasing from sellers who are based in another Member State; assessing the potential impact of every initiative, notably those aiming to promote e-commerce and clarify the permanent establishment status for the digital sector, on the ability of SMEs to benefit from the digital single market; creating a toolkit, which is indispensable in order for the numerous forms and variants of the sharing economy to receive support at EU level; speeding up all procedures against anti-competitive behaviour which infringes EU antitrust rules by a number of companies, in particular by internet and telecom giants and other media companies, film studios and TV distributors; bringing forward a regulatory strategy taking into account technology convergence and, in particular, the multiplication of platforms; safeguarding competition in the internet search and telecommunications sectors , including with regard to internet services and spectrum allocation; conducting in-depth consultations with network operators and relevant stakeholders on how to bring down charges for intra-EU calls to the level of local calls in the most efficient way.
State aid : Members welcomed the overhaul of the State aid rules and suggests that a specific annual report be sent to Parliament. They reminded the Member States that the aim was to better target aid measures towards long-term, sustainable economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion, while ensuring an equal level playing field and the free functioning of the social market economy.
The Commission is called upon to launch a road map for less but better-targeted State aid, aiming to open up the possibility of reducing State aid by lowering taxes, therefore stimulating new businesses and fair competition.
The report noted that in order to achieve a properly functioning Energy Union and to avoid non-compliance with State aid rules and also misuse of EU funds, all State aid cases and public procurement irregularities connected to energy and environmental investments must be strictly monitored and investigated in depth , such as the controversial project to enlarge Hungary’s Paks nuclear power plant.
The Commission is called upon to consider the introduction of sanctions in cases where illegal State aid has been granted, in addition to repayment of the original State aid.
Documents
2016/12/08
EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2016/11/29
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/11/29
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/11/14
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/11/11
EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/10/24
EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/10/24
EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/09/15
EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2016/07/14
EP - DANTIN Michel (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in AGRI
2016/07/13
EP - SCHWAB Andreas (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in IMCO
2016/06/17
EP - FOSTER Jacqueline (ECR) appointed as rapporteur in TRAN
2016/06/15
EP - SZEJNFELD Adam (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in INTA
2016/06/09
EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2016/02/04
EP - SZANYI Tibor (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ECON
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2017)358
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0027/2017
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0001/2017
- Committee opinion: PE589.273
- Committee opinion: PE589.301
- Committee opinion: PE585.808
- Committee opinion: PE589.318
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE592.327
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE592.329
- Committee draft report: PE589.234
- Committee draft report: PE589.234
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE592.327
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE592.329
- Committee opinion: PE589.318
- Committee opinion: PE585.808
- Committee opinion: PE589.273
- Committee opinion: PE589.301
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2017)358
Activities
- Tibor SZANYI
Plenary Speeches (2)
- Nicola CAPUTO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Michel DANTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Angélique DELAHAYE
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Michela GIUFFRIDA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Sander LOONES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Paloma LÓPEZ BERMEJO
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Krisztina MORVAI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Olga SEHNALOVÁ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Igor ŠOLTES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Eleftherios SYNADINOS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Adam SZEJNFELD
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS
Plenary Speeches (1)
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 744 |
2016/2100(INI)
2016/10/17
TRAN
84 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show greater political will towards
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Notes the challenges faced by postal operators as a result of the creation of the Digital Single Market; stresses that the success of this ambitious project, in particular in the area of online trade, depends largely on the form taken by the postal parcel delivery service market; stresses the need to guarantee fair and equal cross-border competition conditions for private entities and public operators providing commercial services;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. Stresses that the principle of free movement of goods and services can in no way limit the ability of Member States to introduce a minimum wage and/or ensure compliance with collective agreements in force in the different modes of transport;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Hopes, therefore, that the global TEN-T network will be completed;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation would bring additional benefits to business
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation, which the Commission should be enforcing more strictly, would bring additional benefits to business
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation would bring additional benefits to business and industry
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show greater political will towards completing the single market for transport
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States, particularly where transport is managed as a monopoly by central government; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation would bring additional benefits to business and industry;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation would bring additional benefits to business and industry and would improve the situation of workers;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented and treaty principles are not respected by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation would bring additional benefits to business and industry;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Highlights the fact that EU transport legislation is often poorly implemented by Member States; believes that proper implementation of existing EU legislation would bring additional benefits to business
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises that any competition policy should at the same time encourage and respect the social rights of all workers in the concerned sectors.
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses that any competition policy should respect the social rights of all operators in the sectors concerned;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Expresses concern at the impact the Commission’s proposed changes to Directive 96/71/EC could have on the transport sector; stresses that attempts to harmonise minimum wage laws are at odds with the principle of subsidiarity, would lead to discrimination against entities in certain Member States and could seriously undermine the freedom to provide services within the EU;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses th
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses the importance of removing physical, technical and regulatory barriers between Member States in order to prevent fragmentation in the single market and thereby stimulate competition; draws the Commission's attention to the indirect obstacles to competition arising from disparity in rules on taxation, safety, disparity of driving and rest times, type-approval and passenger rights;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses the importance of removing physical, technical and regulatory barriers between Member States
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show greater political will towards
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses the importance of removing physical, technical and regulatory barriers between Member States in order to prevent fragmentation in the single market and thereby stimulate competition and cross-border territorial cooperation;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses the importance of removing physical, technical and regulatory barriers between Member States in order to prevent fragmentation in the single market and thereby stimulate development through fair competition;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Regrets the Commission’s failure to react quickly and decisively to attempts by some Member States to restrict free competition in the transport sector; calls for these practices to be abolished and for all possible measures to be taken to guarantee equal access to the single market under the same conditions for entities operating in that sector from all Member States;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Commission to study the impact of the obligatory and unlimited charges for rail infrastructure use in comparison to the non-obligatory and limited charges for the use of road infrastructure as well as the aviation's exemptions from kerosene taxation and VAT on certain flight tickets in comparison to other competing transport modes;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the importance of tourism, the third economic activity in Europe after trade and the building sector, to boost competition and growth in the EU;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recognises the advances in digital technologies in the transport and tourism sectors, which promote competition, trade, and short-term travel, encourage the use of best practice, create jobs and bring tangible benefits to the consumer; maintains that a proper legislative framework is needed for the new economic activities being engendered by the latest technological state of the art;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recognises the advances in digital technologies in the transport and tourism sectors, which promote competition, create jobs and facilitate the access of SMEs to larger markets, ultimately benefiting the consumer; at the same time, it calls on the Commission to provide a clear regulatory framework that would allow for further innovation while protecting incumbent players.
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Recognises the advances in digital technologies in the transport and tourism sectors, which promote competition, create jobs, facilitate access to research among the proposals on offer and benefit the consumer;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show greater political will towards completing the single market for transport, in order to ensure open and fair competition between public and private operators in the transport, postal and tourism sectors; stresses the importance of connectivity and transport infrastructure for the survival, economic development and provision of public and private services in regional and remote areas;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that entities operating on the basis of new business models influence the EU’s transport and tourism market in a positive way, in particular by making services more accessible and improving their quality; notes, however, the many potential risks connected with the functioning of those entities, in particular in relation to the fulfilment of their tax obligations and compliance with labour law;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to negotiate external aviation agreements with several key countries and regions in the world; believes that these will not only improve market access, but will also provide new business opportunities for a world-beating European aviation sector, creating jobs and benefiting consumers; whilst always taking into consideration the social rights if the workers in the sector and working against social dumping in the aviation sector.
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s intention to negotiate external aviation agreements with several key countries and regions in the world; believes that these will not only improve market access, but will also provide new business opportunities for a world-beating European aviation sector, creating jobs and benefiting consumers
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission to treat with due attention the profile of state aid in infrastructure, to strike a fair balance between the protection of competition, the specific nature of the infrastructure and the competence of the Member States;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to show greater political will towards completing the single market for transport, in order to ensure open and fair competition between public and private operators in the transport, postal (including cross-border parcel delivery) and tourism sectors;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Encourages the Commission to foster coherence, including on EU subsidies, between those airports that are geographically located close to each other but on different sides of national borders;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the conclusion of the Port Services Regulation should create a more open, competitive and transparent regulatory framework for public ports in Europe,
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the conclusion of the Port Services Regulation should create a more open, competitive and transparent regulatory framework for public ports in Europe, whilst creating additional job opportunities; recalls that any liberalisation of the sector must not be at the expense of public service obligations and of safety rules, in particular as regards towing, mooring and pilotage operations; takes the view that Member States should be authorised to require such operations to be performed by vessels flying their national flag; demands that, in those sectors, the Member States which so wish should be allowed to put in place policies to ensure that priority is given to their nationals;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that increased competition brought about by the gradual opening up of the EU road haulage market can bring benefits to consumers
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. EU policy needs to balance different objectives of equal concern such as competition, sustainability, social standards and safety;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that increased competition brought about by the gradual opening up of the EU road haulage market can bring benefits to consumers, but expresses concern that certain measures being applied by some Member States - for instance the poor controls on the provisions governing road cabotage, the rigidity of the driving and rest times which creates unequal conditions of competition for peripheral Member States and the disparities in Member States' economies which encourage social dumping practices in the transport sector - are undermining the integrity of the single market in this field;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that increased competition brought about by the gradual opening up of the EU road haulage market can bring benefits to consumers
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that increased competition brought about by the gradual opening up of the EU road haulage market can bring benefits to consumers, but expresses concern that certain measures being applied by some Member States are undermining the integrity of the single market in this field; furthermore deplores that smaller vans are not appropriately addressed in EU policy despite the fact that they are increasingly used to circumvent the correct application of legislation on employment, safety and environmental protection;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that increased competition brought about by the gradual opening up of the EU road haulage market can bring benefits to consumers, but expresses concern that certain measures being applied by some Member States are undermining the integrity of the single market in this field; believes such measures can be avoided through a better coordination between Member States and calls on the Commission to establish a European Road Agency.
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Considers that increased competition brought about by the gradual opening up of the EU road haulage market can bring benefits to consumers, but expresses concern that certain measures being applied by some Member States are undermining the integrity of the single market in this field; welcomes the readiness of the Commission to confront such protectionist measures;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Hopes that this opening up of the road haulage market will not be a further cause of social dumping and deplores, in addition, the 'letterbox company' phenomenon;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Invites the Commission to closely monitor oligopolistic price dumping tendencies in particular in the aviation as well as the long-distance / line-bus sectors and insists on the correct application of EU law and a fair competitive intermodal playing field;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that strengthening the social dimension is a sine qua non for the smooth functioning of the internal market for transport;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes a
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes a speedy conclusion to the negotiations on the Fourth Railway Package and believes th
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes a speedy conclusion to the negotiations on the market pillar of the Fourth Railway Package and believes this should further open up
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Strongly opposes the exploitation of environmental and safety laws, in particular in the rail transport sector, to restrict competition in the EU; highlights the need for rational law-making and for administrative pressure on SMEs in the transport sector to be reduced;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Recalls that tourism is an important driver of economic and social development, and pursuant to Article 195 of the TFEU, which gives the EU the responsibility to promote the competitiveness of the European tourism sector, calls on the Commission to create a holistic and favourable environment for its growth and development.
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses that postal services and especially cross-border parcel delivery are of fundamental importance for the development of the e-commerce sector across the EU; welcomes the Commission antitrust inquiry into the e-commerce sector and encourages it to continue monitoring the development of the parcel and postal markets;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls for the use of EU funds such as the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), the Cohesion Fund, the European Fund for Regional Development (ERDF) and Horizon 2020 to develop European transport infrastructure and increase the quantity and quality of services;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Encourages the Commission to further strengthen tourists' rights, for instance through the promotion of a charter and/or standards and to make efforts to harmonise a European accommodation classification system;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that the need to guarantee more effective protection of transport workers’ rights from abuse should not be used as a pretext to restrict free competition between entities from different Member States; calls on the Commission to respect the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity when drawing up laws that will have a significant impact on the functioning of the single transport market;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Calls on the Member States to devote sufficient attention to completing cross-border infrastructural projects and to coordinate their most important transport plans with neighbouring Member States
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Considers it important to use in full innovative financial instruments such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments, which are suitable for financing transport sector projects to support growth and competitiveness; stresses, however, that the resources earmarked for the EFSI Guarantee Fund cannot be at the expense of the CEF or Horizon 2020, which are vital instruments for the development of a common market in the transport sector.
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Stresses that the full opening-up of the rail transport market could bring a number of benefits to operators and passengers from all Member States; notes, however, the need to take account of the differing degrees of development of rail infrastructure in the Member States in that process; stresses the need to maintain, in the next multiannual financial framework, current levels of investment in evening out differences in rail infrastructure;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Reiterates the calls on the Commission to guarantee fair and equal compensation schemes for cancellation and delays across all transport modes, and to insist on the setting-up of independent bodies to arbitrate between operators and clients;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Stresses the need to finance sustainable, accessible, safe transport projects that could help to improve the functioning of the whole European transport system ;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Stresses that the deepening of the internal market in transport must necessarily be accompanied an upward harmonisation of the different social systems;
source: 589.285
2016/10/18
INTA
93 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that fair competition in the area of trade, services and investment has a positive impact on the social and economic development
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that competition policy is a vital part of the internal market, as provided for in the Treaty; reiterates that a competitive single market is needed to boost growth in the EU Member States and that efforts to preserve fair competition in the EU as a whole
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Welcomes the Commission’s active participation in multilateral competition organisations such as the International Competition Network, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, the UN Conference for Trade and Development, and the World Trade Organization; stresses that global cooperation on the enforcement of competition rules helps resolve inconsistencies and improve the outcomes of enforcement, and helps businesses to reduce their compliance costs;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field for businesses and a real choice for consumers in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to launch an in-depth debate on how far the traditional reasoning underlying competition law is suited to the specific conditions of the digital world and its new challenges, and asks it to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to remove barriers to innovation and to enable EU consumers to seize all the opportunities that a genuine digital single market can offer;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Welcomes the fact that the WTO Ministerial Conference in Nairobi brought progress in the efforts to reduce export subsidies in order to guarantee undistorted competition on international agricultural markets; takes the view, nonetheless, that the European Union should make fewer unilateral concessions in multilateral negotiations in order to safeguard its competitiveness on international markets;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to remove barriers to innovation and to enable EU consumers to seize all the opportunities that a genuine
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Points out that the most recent common agricultural policy reforms represented the EU’s contribution to the overhaul of the international trading system; takes the view that the EU, unlike its international competitors, does not exploit the full margin for manoeuvre available to it to support its domestic farming industry, in particular the blue box or the ‘de minimis’ clause in the amber box provided for under the WTO agreements;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to combat the abuse of dominant positions and thereby remove barriers to innovation and to enable EU consumers to seize all the opportunities that a genuine digital single market can offer; calls for the closure of lengthy key proceedings in this area before the end of this year;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the Commission to support efforts to set up a comprehensive, user- friendly database containing provisions on competition
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Reiterates that equal access to natural resources, including energy sources, has a fundamental impact on fair and equal competition on the global market and calls upon the Commission to include in trade agreements provisions that improve access to such resources, including provisions on anti-competitive practices of state-owned enterprises and on non-discrimination and transit.
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to remove barriers to innovation
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Reiterates that equal access to natural resources, including energy sources, has a fundamental impact on fair and equal competition on the global market and the economy of EU Member States.
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to be improved and to guarantee a level playing field in the digital single market; calls on the Commission to pursue a policy of active, effective and accelerated enforcement of the competition rules, in particular in the online search and mobile internet sector, in order to remove barriers to innovation and to enable EU consumers to seize all the opportunities that a genuine digital single market can offer;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that EU competition law and authorities need to guarantee
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that fair competition in the area of trade, services and investment has a positive impact on the social and economic development of Member States and of the EU’s trade partners; emphasises, however, the sensitive nature of the agricultural sectors and the need to take clear, effective steps to help producers stay competitive on the international markets and safeguard a European production model based on respect for the environment and animals, food safety and quality and maintaining a balance between regions;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses that competition policy is a vital part of the internal market, as provided for in the Treaty; reiterates that a competitive and fully-functioning single market is needed to boost sustainable growth in the EU and that efforts to preserve fair competition in the EU as a whole are in the interest of consumers, Start-ups and SMEs;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that, in their answers to the consultation on digital platforms, many economic operators say they regret the absence of a level playing field; takes the view that, in order to create fair conditions of competition, it is necessary to guarantee comparable rules for comparable digital services; also believes that the new economic models should be subject to the same rules as the traditional services they replace;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that the Commission runs in-depth investigations of selective tax advantages granted in Luxembourg and Netherlands which are potentially illegal under EU State aid rules; stresses that not the companies but the Member States broke EU State aid rules; suggests that it should be the Member states who should bear the consequences of breaking the State aid rules, as companies only met the conditions negotiated with the governments;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Believes that the independence of the Commission to rule on competition in the Single Market and the separation of powers between the European institutions must be fully respected; underlines that decisions should be based on the facts of a case and directed by the policy objectives of the EU competition policy;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Urges the Commission to create a political toolkit, which is indispensable in order for the numerous forms and modalities of the digital economy, and particular the sharing economy, to receive support at EU level and in the individual Member States, to be applied, to become credible and to win trust;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses that time is the key element of competition in the digital single market and quicker interventions and decisions are vital for the uniform enforcement and effectiveness of European competition policy;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasizes that market power of an enterprise resulting from information and data as well as the handling of such information and data by the enterprise has to be taken into account as a test criterion;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Notes that, while platforms permit millions of undertakings, including many European SMEs, to exploit the advantages of e-commerce in terms of distribution, advertising and access to consumers, certain practices are increasingly being condemned and many questions are currently being raised in connection with B2B relations; stresses in this context that more than 80% of the replies to the public consultation on digital platforms called for EU action to ensure fairness in B2B relations; takes the view that regulatory and non- regulatory action could be necessary, as the market does not seem capable of remedying these situations by itself; calls on the Commission to take prompt action to halt certain practices which could endanger numerous European SMEs;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Welcomes the Commission SO on Android, a thorough investigation into the Google practice is needed whereby the 'Android' operating system is offered only in conjunction with other Google services, and whereby manufacturers may not pre- install rival products; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to examine in detail Google's dominant market position in the area of direct hotel bookings and local searches, and to seek an appropriate solution to this problem; supports the Commission measures designed to bring about a greater degree of interoperability and portability across all digital sectors and, thereby, avoid a winner-takes-all scenario; stresses the importance of equipping the Commission with the right tools to maintain an up-to-date overview of swift developments on the digital market;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Takes the view that the new commercial models represented by platforms raise urgent questions relating inter alia to the application of national law and to ensuring payment of the relevant taxes; therefore calls on the Commission to address these concerns so that the benefits to society of these business models can become tangible in reality;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Calls for considering whether data and information on customers is merged as well during a merger that results in a distortion of competition and in a weakening of data protection;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Views competition as the key to a functioning single market and believes that European legislation should seek to ensure that competition;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Reiterates that the number of users of an offer and the purchasing price have to be established as test criteria for mergers for the rating of market power;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 d (new) 2d. Calls on antitrust authorities to take into account an enterprise's access to exclusive analytical methods and patents. Considers that ignoring this might lead to the complete exclusion of competitors from markets for many years to the detriment of the consumers and competition;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls for active monitoring of all possible competition issues
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls for active monitoring of all possible competition issues related to unjustified geo-
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls for active monitoring of all possible competition issues related to geo- blocking and other restrictions on online sales; welcomes the ongoing e-commerce sector enquiry, which should be conducted thoroughly and brought to an expeditious close and which may provide useful input for other actions within the digital single market strategy; encourages the Commission to create a business environment ensuring the development of innovative ideas;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls for active monitoring of all possible competition issues related to geo- blocking and other restrictions on online sales, taking due account of data protection; welcomes the ongoing e- commerce sector enquiry, which should be conducted thoroughly and brought to an expeditious close and which may provide useful input for other actions within the digital single market strategy;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls for active monitoring of all possible competition issues related to geo- blocking and other restrictions on online sales; welcomes the ongoing e-commerce sector enquiry, which should be conducted thoroughly and brought to an expeditious close and which may provide useful input for other actions within the digital single market strategy and for cross-border trade;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the risk of quality deterioration for consumers and the risk of a deterioration of the terms of competition during a merger of enterprises in a dominant market position. Considers that these risks should be placed more into the focus of cartel authorities;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Calls on the Commission to work together with trade partners with a view to ensuring that their markets are more open to EU firms, particularly as regards energy, transport, telecommunications, public procurement and services, including services provided in the context of exercising regulated professions; points out, however, that the agricultural sector should not be used as a bargaining chip in the EU’s trade negotiations;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Expresses its concern with the level of concentration in some sectors, such as in the chemical sector, in light of the recent mergers between, for example, Dow Chemical and Dupont, and between Bayer and Monsanto; requests the Commission to explain how it defines the minimum of market players necessary for fair competition in the EU, how it retains the possibility for new companies, in particular start-ups, to enter highly concentrated markets and how it avoids the emergence of companies that are 'too big to fail' and would require State support, in order to avoid major employment losses in the case of their closing down;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Asks the Commission to respect the freedom to contract with products and services sold across borders both offline and online; requests the Commission to introduce measures that encourage but not oblige enterprises to compete beyond national borders;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Supports the Commission action on anti-cartel enforcement, such as recent actions in retail food and optical disc drive sectors, to guarantee fair prices to consumers;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Calls for the strengthening of the freedom of choice for consumers. Considers that enshrined right to data portability in the GDPR is a good approach to strengthening the rights of consumers and competition. Underlines the need to examine how interoperability between digital networks by open standards and interfaces can be ensured;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Considers that ending roaming charges in the EU is not sufficient and that intra-EU calls must be also regulated on the same level as local calls; calls on the Commission to submit a legislative proposal for regulating intra-EU calls;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reiterates the need for the timely and proper implementation of Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reiterates the need for the timely and proper implementation of Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions, and encourages the Commission in the strongest possible terms to monitor its implementation closely and to pursue this issue with the Member States and to present annual reports concerning specific action taken regarding infringements of antitrust rules;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Reiterates the need for the timely and proper implementation of Directive 2014/104/EU on antitrust damages actions under national law for infringements of competition rules in the EU Member States, and encourages the Commission in the strongest possible terms to monitor its implementation closely and to pursue this issue with the Member States;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes that Parliament, in its report on unfair trading practices in the food supply chain, drew the Commission’s attention to the difficulty of ensuring fair competition given the dual role of distributors which make their own products; welcomes the Commission’s ongoing analysis aimed at determining whether distributors’ brands can create anti-competitive advantages on the market, and calls on the Commission to inform Parliament of the results of this inquiry;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Refers to the European Court of Auditors' most recent report on non- compliance in state aid rules in cohesion policy in which they note a significant level of non-compliance and call for a number of recommendations to be implemented. It is to the detriment of a well-functioning internal market, therefore, urges the Commission to adopt the recommendations and ensure correct enforcement of the EU 65/2014 Regulation which entered into force July 2014;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Commission to include, in all trade agreements, ambitious provisions on competition
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Welcomes the Commission's investigations into certain anti- competitive practices by a number of companies, in particularly Google, Amazon, Qualcomm and other media companies, film studios and TV distributors; calls on the Commission to speed up all procedures against behaviour which infringes EU antitrust rules; calls on the Commission to address Google's widespread abuse of its dominant position across key vertical search markets, including local search;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that many monopolies and cartels, which limit the development of effective competition and discourages investments and the emergence of new market players, exist as a result of state licencing and regulation of particular sectors; asks the Commission to support Member States to time-effective deregulation and privatisation which is the best way to eliminate existing monopolies and cartels on the Single Market;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for criteria for market delineation in mergers to be modified so that antitrust authorities can also take into account the merging of data, the impact of network effects and the restrictions on competition on upstream and downstream markets;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Notes that, in its resolution on the annual report on competition policy for 2014, the European Parliament called on the Commission to closely monitor alliances between major distributors in Europe, and welcomes the Commission’s willingness to discuss the impact of such alliances on producers and consumers within the European Competition Network;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Encourages the Commission to not only focus its efforts for fair competition on the high profile cases against large well-known companies, reminds the Commission that the enforcement of fair competition is also of importance towards SMEs;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Stresses that as a last resort a possibility of unbundling should be embedded in the antitrust law and enforcement;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. The emission scandal, which began in the US with Volkswagen, has made it clear that American consumers are better off in case of fraud and abuse of e.g. the competition rules compared to European consumers; Encourages the Commission to look into the possibility of ensuring individual compensation to affected consumers, since this may act as a deterrent to fraud and abuse thereby ensuring a fair Single Market;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 d (new) 4d. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax; Welcomes the Commission's in-depth investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Looks forward to the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+, and calls for the full involvement of the European Parliament under the ordinary legislative procedure; considers that effective tools to tackle distortions of competition are crucial for the functioning of the single market, and that it is imperative to ensure that consumers and businesses can rely on the consistent application of EU competition rules throughout the EU
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Looks forward to the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+, and calls for the full involvement of the European Parliament under the ordinary legislative procedure; considers that effective tools to tackle distortions of competition are crucial
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises the importance of lively city centres and expresses its concern with the number of shops that have recently had to close down; invites the Commission to examine how it intends to apply certain, less restrictive, competition rules in order to make it possible for municipalities, real estate owners, electricity and gas suppliers, as well as retailers to work together in order to revitalise the 'high street'; emphasises in this respect that national, regional and local authorities should be free to introduce restrictions for the establishment of outlet centres, shopping malls etc., outside the city centres, if this is needed for the revitalisation of city centres.
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Commission to include ambitious provisions on competition and state aid in all trade agreements and to carry out effective monitoring to ascertain whether those provisions are properly respected by the parties; stresses that state aid should be permitted only in exceptional, justified cases that are regulated by law in order to prevent distortion of competition on the market;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Notes that unlike funding from European structural and investment funds, EFSI-supported project funding provided by the EIB does not fall under State aid rules; stresses that in principle there is no difference between public support whether it is in the form of public subsidies, public loans or public guarantees; suggests that EFSI-supported projects should fall under State aid rules to ensure competitive and well- functioning Single Market;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Welcomes the current revision of the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER); recalls that there is legal uncertainty regarding the issue of whether the allocation of public funding to tourism organisations in its current form is in line with EU state aid rules; calls on the Commission to provide an adequate legal state aid basis for the Member States to support tourism as an important economic factor in the internal market; therefore, stresses the need to take up a new GBER exemption.
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses that tax competition is an important element of competiveness in the public sector together with other ones such as for example law enforcement, stability of legislative environment and quality of public services; reminds that reduced tax competition would lead to reduced competiveness in the Single Market; recommends to help improving other elements mentioned above instead.
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Welcomes the Commission's reflections on the need for more tools to strengthen efforts for fair competition. Refers to the possibility of setting up a travelling unit in the European Commission, which independently of Member States' efforts must be able to investigate suspected breech of competition law and unfair competition.
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the EU public procurement rules are implemented in a timely manner, in particular the deployment of e- procurement and the new provisions encouraging the division of contracts into lots, which is essential to foster innovation and competition and to support SMEs in procurement markets.
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls on the Commission to avoid creating monopolies or closed value chains through standardisation; believes an appeals process should be introduced to review standards where they may carry a risk of impacting competitiveness.
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Reaffirms the need to review the rules regarding market dominance and monopoly declarations so as to ensure fairer internal market competition, thereby promoting SME development;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Regards competition in the telecommunication sector as crucial to drive innovation and investment in networks, as well as for choice in services for consumers; regards the rapid broadband expansion as key to the completion of the digital single market; welcomes in this context that the Commission will consider the strategic connectivity objectives, as set out in the Telecommunication Package, when applying the Broadband State Aid Guidelines.
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Believes the Commission should investigate anti-competitive practices by Member States and regional and local authorities towards sharing economy intermediaries; underlines that special attention should be given to excessive regulatory burdens, disproportionate application of existing rules to non- comparable business models, and the legality of outright bans.
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Calls on the Commission to examine and correct the situation of independent retailers who are allowed under competition law to work together through their brick-and-mortar shops, but are accused of unfair competition if they provide joint e-commerce offerings.
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Notes the Commission's increased use of EU pilot instead of resorting to infringement proceedings. Welcomes this approach however reminds the Commission that this should not lead to weaken enforcement of EU legislation or less transparency.
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Points out that consumers on the single market are being sold products containing ingredients that differ from one consignment to another even though the brand name and the packaging is the same; calls on the Commission to determine whether this practice has negative repercussions for local producers, especially SMEs, and does it result in discrimination of consumers by placing products of lower quality;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Points out that competition policy can help to establish a sustainable economic base and to increase the number of high-quality jobs by creating an environment conducive to innovation and investment in the EU.
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Underlines that EU law should be equally enforced in all Member States.
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Stresses, that EU should avoid tax harmonisation which would harm the competitiveness of the Single Market and would be contrary to the principle of subsidiarity; Acknowledges that competition among tax systems is one of the crucial elements of the competition within the Single Market, strengthens the Single Market and enables to share and compare the best practices among the European tax systems.
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Welcomes the steps taken to date by the Commission to combat Unfair Trading Practices in the food supply chain; reiterates that the way forward is sharing of best practices and voluntary schemes, such as the Supply Chain Initiative, not EU legislation.
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Invites the Commission to allow in its competition policies for certain forms of co-operation between independent food suppliers, in order to avoid and counter any unfair trading practices on the part of supermarkets.
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 d (new) 5d. Requests the Commission to explain how it applies the rules on state support in respect of social housing schemes, and, in particular, in regard of the definition of social housing; points in this regard to the differences between rental prices in big cities as opposed to the general level of housing rental prices and asks the Commission to allow for raising the income ceilings in order to qualify for social housing in areas where the general level of rental prices is relatively high.
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 d (new) 5d. Supports competition related recommendations of the European courts of Auditors mentioned in Special Report No 24/2016 titled More efforts needed to raise awareness of and enforce compliance with State aid rules in cohesion policy and recommends the Commission to take them into consideration.
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 e (new) 5e. Expresses deep concerns about findings of the Court of auditors as to number of State aid errors in the European structural and investment funds; asks the Commission to increase its efforts to eliminate further defects not only by granting more EU state aid related exceptions but also by means of running more profound investigations.
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Reminds the Commission and Member States that competitiveness is a measure of economic ability to provide the European citizens with high and rising standards of living and high rates of employment on a sustainable basis1a ; __________________ 1ahttp://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52002DC071 4
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Encourages the Commission to conclude bilateral cooperation agreements with third countries on the enforcement of competition rules, along the lines of the second-generation cooperation agreement of 2013 between the EU and Switzerland;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Welcomes the recent decision by the Commission which condemns undue fiscal advantages to businesses as anti- competition practices; calls on the Commission to pursue in the same direction for similar cases;
source: 592.262
2016/10/20
AGRI
128 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital -A (new) -A. having regard to Articles 39 and 42 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)1 a; _________________ 1a This suggestion should be included in the motion for a resolution as a citation should the motion be adopted by the committee responsible.
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Recital Б a (new) Ba. whereas close to 80% of farms in the EU are smaller than 10 ha; whereas family farms account for more than 95% of all holdings in the EU and for more than 85% jobs in the sector; whereas those farms are less competitive and less able to adjust to market shocks and changes;
Amendment 100 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’ should continue to apply beyond mid-2020 and to examine whether its rules could be extended to other sectors of agriculture; considers in addition that competition and antitrust rules must prohibit the unilateral termination of contracts and the imposition of any kind of listing fee in the retail sector;
Amendment 101 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector, putting in place adequate measures in order to preserve the production and consumption of homegrown milk; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’ should continue to apply beyond mid-2020 and to examine whether its rules could be extended to other sectors of agriculture;
Amendment 102 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’1 a is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’ should continue to apply beyond mid-2020 and to examine whether its rules could be extended to other sectors of agriculture; _________________ 1a Regulation (EU) No 261/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards contractual relations in the milk and milk products sector
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Considers that the implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ demonstrates the ineffectiveness of public intervention when it focuses solely on disincentives to production in a deregulated market; points out that structural overproduction in the milk sector calls for the rapid establishment of binding public rules governing the management of milk production in the single market;
Amendment 104 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9 a. Is particularly concerned by the situation in the dairy sector, where retailers have been imposing prices well below costs following the end of the quota system;
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Welcomes, in the context of the abolition of quotas in the sugar sector, the retention of a contractual framework1 b between beet growers, their organisations and sugar companies in order, among other things, to establish the terms for sharing value on the basis of developments in the markets for sugar or other raw materials; _________________ 1b Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1166 of 17 May 2016 amending Annex X to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards purchase terms for beet in the sugar sector as from 1 October 2017
Amendment 106 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Stresses the importance of maintaining a contractual framework between the beet growers' organisations and their sugar companies so that negotiations can take place on the sharing of value, particularly in the context of the abolition of quotas in the sugar sector; calls on the Member States to ensure that this value-sharing principle is applied in all sugar beet-producing countries and maintains the balance between the parties so that the objective set in the CMO Regulation of achieving a fair balance of rights and obligations between sugar companies and sugar beet growers can be met; calls on the Commission to propose extending the contractual framework for sugar beyond 2020;
Amendment 107 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Sees a need to introduce a maximum payment deadline of 30 days for all food retailers from which individual contracts would not be permitted to deviate; in addition, farmers' supply contracts must be for a minimum of 12 months, and the price setting included therein must not cover a period greater than 6 months;
Amendment 108 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Believes that farmers in all sectors of production should be guaranteed the right to collective bargaining, including the right to agree minimum prices;
Amendment 109 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that buyers are not able to recoup from farmers, through farm-gate prices, the cost of any sanctions imposed on them;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Recital Б b (new) Bb. whereas about 75% of holdings in the EU specialise in a particular crop or livestock species and only 25% are mixed- crop (4.8%) or mixed-livestock farms (4.4%) or a combination of the two (13.8%), which also results in less flexibility as regards production and supply;
Amendment 110 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact
Amendment 111 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the national
Amendment 112 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact – particularly at the upper end of the food supply chain – of, on the one hand, national-level concentration in the distribution sector and, on the other, the development of European-level alliances of major distributors, and in particular to note the asymmetric ability of retailers to manipulate supply chain structures in order to avoid national legislation controlling supplier relationships.
Amendment 113 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to take action to establish effective mechanisms aimed at addressing the concerns raised by the cumulative impact – particularly at the upper end of the food supply chain – of, on the one hand, national-level concentration in the distribution sector and, on the other, the development of European-level alliances of major distributors.
Amendment 114 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact – particularly at the upper end of the food supply chain – of, on the one hand, national-level concentration in the distribution sector and, on the other, the development of European- and international-level alliances of major distributors.
Amendment 115 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact – particularly at the upper end of the food supply chain – of, on the one hand, national-level concentration in the distribution sector and, on the other, the development of European-level alliances of major distributors
Amendment 116 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Deplores the fact that initiatives taken by food supply-chain actors to lend collective support to a link in the chain which is experiencing difficulties are giving rise to problems connected with the differing interpretations of competition law by European and national authorities;
Amendment 117 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Emphasizes that the Agricultural Markets Task Force (AMTF) currently examines the possibilities within the legislative framework to strengthen the position of farmers in the food chain such as options for setting up contractual relations within the chain and legal possibilities for collective actions; Therefore finds it appropriate that the conclusions of the AMTF have to be taken into account, if applicable, together with the suggestions from this opinion concerning future discussions and measures to be taken;
Amendment 118 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Expresses concern at the negative impact that different levels of direct farm payments in the various Member States, fluctuating between EUR 159 (in Latvia) and EUR 418 (in the Netherlands), have on the competitiveness of the agricultural sectors of the Member States, and calls on the Commission and the Council to take immediate steps to reduce this disparity and to guarantee fair competition;
Amendment 119 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Notes the conclusions of the study entitled 'Economic impact of modern retail on choice and innovation in the EU food sector' drawn up by the Commission's DG Competition, in particular that which suggests that there is a negative correlation between innovation and market penetration for retailers' own-brand products;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Recital Б c (new) Bc. whereas the aim of quality schemes for EU agricultural products and foodstuffs, in particular schemes covering geographical indications and organic farming products, is to make EU producers more competitive, raise their profile and protect them more effectively; whereas some Member States have laid down mechanisms to promote and support geographical indication schemes as part of their rural development programmes;
Amendment 120 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the Commission to take immediate action to combat the rationale behind the discontinuance of designations of origin, the introduction of genetically modified foodstuffs and subsidised monoculture.
Amendment 121 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10 a. Believes that the cumulative effect of trade deals such as TTIP, CETA and Mercosur will further undermine the position of the EU primary producer and will encourage additional uncompetitive practices by providing the retail sector with the tool of cheaper imports.
Amendment 122 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls for the Member States' margin for manoeuvre to implement national aid measures in the agricultural sector, in particular in the event of a crisis, to be restored.
Amendment 123 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to penalise the use of unfair trading practices which affect farmers;
Amendment 124 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 b (new) 10b. Takes the view that it is for the Commission to establish a framework which guarantees legal security for farmers, since the latter cannot be expected to acquire expertise in the area of competition law.
Amendment 125 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 b (new) 10b. Calls on the Commission to inform Parliament of the scope of the work currently being carried out to determine whether greater concentration and the more aggressive marketing of retailers' own-brand products is likely to restrict choice and reduce the number of innovative products available to consumers and identify the long-term implications of these trends for the food supply chain and the situation of farmers in that chain;
Amendment 126 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 b (new) 10b. Calls for the harmonisation of direct farm payments, based on transparent, public and measurable indicators of agricultural production costs, to be the cornerstone of the upcoming revision of the common agricultural policy;
Amendment 127 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 c (new) 10c. Stresses that the common agricultural policy cannot remain outside the scope of the principle of fair competition, and therefore aims to ensure that the new post-2020 multiannual financial framework will provide for uniform direct payments for all Member States' farmers.
Amendment 128 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 c (new) 10c. Calls on the Commission to assess the influence exerted by retailers on the firms which manufacture their own-brand products;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Recital Б d (new) Bd. whereas following the entry into force of the Paris Agreement concluded under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, and the emissions reduction proposal, it is expected in most EU Member States that requirements within agriculture will be more stringent, putting EU producers at risk of losing competitiveness;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests,
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets; points out that coherent, unitary competition legislation at EU level would remove regulatory uncertainties and consolidate the position of agricultural producers in the supply chain;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets; emphasises that, with that aim in view, fixing a floor price which effectively bans below-cost selling by farmers is one of the options which shoud be considered and implemented;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets, whilst noting that the EU's prescriptive and interventionist approach to market regulation creates substantial barriers to entry and innovation;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers, including small and medium- sized farms and family farms, as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets, delivering a more equitable and targeted support towards small farmers and active farmers;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital -A a (new) -A a. - having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/20071 a; _________________ 1a This suggestion should be included in the motion for a resolution as a citation should the motion be adopted by the committee responsible.
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets; highlights, that European farmers should be able to access as well as compete throughout the internal market;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy defends consumers' interests but not agricultural producers' interests; stresses that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers, especially in EU Member States adversly affected by Trika austerity policies, as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets and the viability of agricultural undertakings;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests and well-being of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so as to foster investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Emphasises that the concept of 'fair price' must not be understood solely as the lowest possible price for the consumer, but that such a price must be reasonable and make for fair remuneration of those involved at every stage in the production process;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Stresses the need to tackle power imbalances between operators in the food supply chain; emphasises that purely voluntary initiatives are very important but inadequate to increase the bargaining power of farmers; believes that EU framework legislation eliminates imbalances and ensures a level playing field within the single market while strengthening the position of farmers in the food supply chain;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Calls to maintain a market- oriented CAP that respects the single market and open competition while ensuring support in case of crisis or unforeseen events in order to help producers to respond to significant market fluctuations;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Considers it essential that oligopolistic behaviour in mature markets is tackled as part of competition policy, including the negative impacts of price transparency amongst interdependent market actors;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Calls for binding action in the food supply chain against retailers harming farmers and consumers;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Recital -A b (new) Ab. - having regard to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1218/2010 of 14 December 2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to certain categories of specialisation agreements1 a; _________________ 1a This suggestion should be included in the motion for a resolution as a citation should the motion be adopted by the committee responsible.
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture, through the use of fast- working, tailored and effective risk- and crisis-management tools;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture, putting in place policies that promote easier access to the market for young farmers;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture, and recommends also that temporary exemptions from certain competition rules be introduced for those worst affected in periods of serious market imbalances caused by the current crisis, subject to guarantees;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture; stresses that establishing a level playing field is a precondition for the development of rural economies;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture so as to support the primary sector in EU Member States such as Greece, where agriculture has suffered particularly as a result of Troika intervention;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives and/or improvements to current instruments so as to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas Article 39(1)(b) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) sets as one of the objectives of the common agricultural policy (CAP) that of ensuring a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, in particular by increasing the individual earnings of persons engaged in agriculture;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Points out that, when the CAP reform was being considered, the European Parliament put forward innovative and ambitious proposals for measures to adapt competition law to agricultural markets;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Recalls that the Agricultural Markets Task Force has been established with a view to improving the position of farmers in the food chain and calls on the Commission to follow its anticipated concrete recommendations for improvement including those relating to legal possibilities for organising farmers' collective actions;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Calls for the establishment of a European observatory for food and agricultural prices at origin and at destination; draws attention to the Spanish origin-destination price index IPOD as a possible model for monitoring potential abuses by retailers of farmers and consumers;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Finds it regrettable that the scope of the current derogations
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Finds it regrettable that the scope of the current derogations is unclear, that implementation problems have arisen and that national competition authorities do not apply the
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Deplores the major differences arising on the market between producer prices and final prices, which are penalising both farmers and producers;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Calls on the Commission to further clarify the scope of both the derogations under the CAP as well as individual exemptions from competition rules under Article 101(3) TFEU and to clarify in particular that agreements relating to sustainability measures beyond statutory requirements contribute to improving the production or promoting progress while benefiting consumers;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’,
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’,
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’ or 'abusing a dominant position', taking into consideration the degree of concentration in sectors downstream;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) A a. Whereas article 102 of the TFEU indicates clearly, that directly or indirectly imposing unfair trading practices on other sectors of the food chain constitutes a breach of this regulation;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’ in relation to competition, taking into consideration the degree of concentration in sectors downstream, and recommends sanctioning abuses of a 'dominant position';
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’, taking into consideration the degree of concentration in sectors downstream; calls for this approach also to contain specific proposals such as an assurance that a retailer's share of the market in the Member States may not exceed 10%, or 30% in the case of regional markets;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’, taking into consideration the degree of concentration in sectors downstream and noting that geographical limitations on producers of fresh and perishable products allow de facto monopolies and oligopolies to operate at local level;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’, taking into consideration the degree of concentration in sectors downstream and on world markets;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that the concept of the ‘relevant market’ needs to evolve and
Amendment 56 #
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that, in a single agricultural market, the concept of the ‘relevant market’ needs to evolve and to be understood primarily from an EU-wide perspective, before lower levels are taken into account, so as not to jeopardise efforts to concentrate agricultural supply by narrowly compartmentalising the activities that agricultural undertakings may engage in;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that the concept of the ‘relevant market’ needs to evolve and to be understood primarily from an EU-wide perspective so as not to jeopardise efforts to concentrate agricultural supply by
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Considers that the concept of the ‘relevant market’ needs to evolve and to be understood primarily from an EU-wide perspective so as not to jeopardise efforts to concentrate agricultural supply by narrowly compartmentalising the activities that agricultural undertakings may engage in; stresses the need to implement monitoring and early warning measures in relation to flows of agricultural products that could create bottlenecks on certain agricultural markets;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the most recent reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) sought to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain through a series of derogations and exemptions from the provisions of Article 101 TFEU, but whereas that reform does not provide the Member States with the tools they need to implement it effectively;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Recalls that since the incomes of primary producers is increasingly determined by their position in the food supply chain, there is a need to promote reinforcement of the capacity for resilience specific to the various supply chains through continued strengthening and improvement of their functioning, in particular, contractualisation and fairer distribution of negotiating powers along the food chain; underlines that it is necessary to foster improvement in supply chain structure and collective approaches as well as to ensure greater powers for inter-branch bodies and producer organisations;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses that producer organisations, in all their various forms, and European quality certification schemes are of key importance in giving farmers the wherewithal to face up to competition; calls on the Commission to improve the support arrangements for producer organisations and to ensure the continued recognition of quality certification schemes;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales negotiation
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales negotiation, are necessary for achieving the aims of the CAP and that they should benefit from a presumption of compatibility with Articles 39 and 101 TFEU
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales negotiation, are necessary for achieving the aims of the CAP and, in particular sustainable food production and natural resource management and the balanced development of rural areas in the EU Member States, and that they should benefit from a presumption of compatibility with Articles 39 and 101 TFEU;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales negotiation, are necessary for achieving the aims of the CAP and that they should benefit from a presumption of compatibility with Articles 39 and 101 TFEU; calls on the Commission to establish mechanisms to forecast consumption, correlated with agricultural production;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales contract negotiation, are necessary for achieving the aims of the CAP and that they should benefit from a presumption of compatibility with Articles 39 and 101 TFEU;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales negotiation of products obtained mainly from the cultivation of the soil, are necessary for achieving the aims of the CAP and that they should benefit from a presumption of compatibility with Articles 39 and 101 TFEU;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Believes that the unique nature of the olive oil sector calls for measures to strengthen the bargaining power of producers so as it results in a fairer distribution of the added value along the supply chain.
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. Underlines the opportunities deriving from the provisions of the CMO Regulation concerning the contractual negotiations in the olive oil sector;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the most recent reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) sought to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain through a series of derogations and exemptions from the provisions of Article 101 TFEU, not withstanding this, the reform failed to address the anti competitive elements of the Common Agricultural Policy inherent in itself where farmers receive vastly differing levels of payments based on historic criteria which are no longer justified;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 c (new) 6 c. Calls on the Commission to identify new means aimed at increasing the dimension of producer organisations and encouraging the creation of APOs in the olive oil sector, as preconditions to strengthen their bargaining power;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 d (new) 6 d. Believes that the market of olive oil for consumers should be considered as a single market, and that a relevant- market categorisation based on the geographical origin, commercial use and type of the product, does not suit the current situation of the sector.
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 e (new) 6 e. Believes that, given the variations in the olive oil production due mostly to weather conditions, and in order to guarantee the objectives of the PO or APO's members, cases where POs are forced to purchase olive oil from non- members should be taken into consideration, while guaranteeing the ancillary nature of this activity to the marketing of the products of their own members.
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for simplification of the rules on farmers’ organising collectively,
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for simplification of the rules on farmers’ organising collectively, so as to strengthen their negotiating capacity while safeguarding the principles set out in Article 39 TFEU; recalls that producer organizations and producer cooperatives are a fundamental business tool which enables farmers to get better market position as well as to get better incomes;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for simplification of the rules on farmers’ organising collectively, with a view to identifying instruments geared to the specific nature of the market that will encourage forms of collective organisation, so as to strengthen their negotiating capacity while safeguarding the principles set out in Article 39 TFEU;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for simplification of the rules on farmers’ organising collectively, with a view to identifying instruments geared to the specific nature of the market, so as to strengthen their negotiating capacity while safeguarding the principles set out in Article 39 TFEU;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls for simplification of the rules on farmers’ organising collectively, so as to strengthen their negotiating capacity, in particular vis-à-vis large-scale retailers, while safeguarding the principles set out in Article 39 TFEU;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the situation on the agricultural markets is characterised by the increased volatility of agricultural prices, and whereas these markets, and in particular on the dairy market, are facing an unprecedented crisis which is further weakening the position of farmers in the food supply chain;
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses that, in connection with the dairy crisis, the Commission has for the first time triggered Article 222 of the CMO Regulation, with a view to authorising recognised producer organisations, associations of such organisations and recognised interbranch organisations to derogate from competition law by planning their milk production collectively; calls on the Commission to assess the effectiveness of this measure and to propose more significant adjustments to competition law and its procedures in times of crisis;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that the possibility of so-called 'crisis cartel' agreements under Article 222 of the CMO regulation is opened without delay in periods of severe imbalance in markets; and to consider further streamlining of the provisions in the Article to improve the efficiency of the measure;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls for further simplification of rules affecting the competitiveness of the farming industry, in keeping with the Horizon 2020 approach, with a view to fostering the emergence of innovative projects establishing links between the various stakeholders - from farmers to high-calibre researchers - in the process of modernising the industry as a whole;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Underlines that the vast majority of the 22 000 EU agri-cooperatives are small or medium sized; highlights that since the countries least affected by the agriculture crisis are also countries where farming is better organised, EU policies should be aimed at allowing producer organizations to grow in size and scale in order to be more efficient as well as cost- effective;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission urgently to investigate the level of retailer concentration and the commercial practices in the food supply chain throughout Europe; calls on the Commission to put forward a new EU text as soon as possible which will prevent unfair commercial practices;
Amendment 85 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls for new Member States facing difficulties in setting up producers' organisations to be given more support for the launching and subsequent management of such organisations;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the recent publication of guidelines on the application of the specific rules set out in Articles 169, 170 and 171 of the CMO Regulation concerning the olive oil, beef and arable sectors;
Amendment 87 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the recent publication of guidelines on the application of the specific rules set out in Articles 169, 170 and 171 of the CMO Regulation and calls for competition law to be adapted on the basis of an overview which takes the specific features of each sector into account;
Amendment 88 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the recent publication of guidelines on the application of the specific rules set out in Articles 169, 170 and 171 of the CMO Regulation and calls on the Commission to examine whether the same approach could be extended to other agricultural sectors;
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the different levels of direct farm payments in the various Member States, fluctuating between EUR 159 (in Latvia) and EUR 418 (in the Netherlands), even when allowing for different price levels, create unequal conditions of competition and thus distort competition on the agricultural market;
Amendment 90 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Considers that the legal scope of these guidelines is too limited to provide sufficient legal certainty for operators wishing to take advantage of the derogations laid down in Articles 169, 170 and 171 of the CMO Regulation; considers, further, that the criteria to be met are still too strict and vary too much from one sector to another;
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Believes rules on the traceability and origin of raw materials and on food labelling to be of the utmost importance with a view to establishing a system that can ensure there is no unfair competition;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Proposes extending the scope of the rules in Article 170 on beef production, in the fattening sector, to ensure more effective implementation;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 Amendment 95 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that
Amendment 96 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’ should continue to apply beyond mid-2020, a
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’ should continue to apply beyond mid-2020
Amendment 99 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’
source: 592.289
2016/10/24
ECON
439 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 – having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 39, 42 and 101 to 109 thereof,
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 a (new) – having regard to Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17.06.2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU,
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 e (new) 3e. Stresses the need for single market rules to be enforced also at the Member States level and for infringements to be dealt to tackle fragmentation of the single market;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 f (new) 3f. Calls for improving the one-stop shop based on the current experience of the Mini One Stop Shops for digital products; notes that even with the Mini One Stop Shop, small and micro- businesses can face a significant administrative burden;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 b (new) – having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20.1.2004 on the control of company amalgamations,
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the need to reinforce the single market
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the need to reinforce the single market through a fiscal union, a
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the need to further reinforce the single market
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the need to reinforce the single market
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the need to
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Believes that the Commission should further strengthen the links between competition policy and transport policy to improve the competitiveness of the European transport sector; Calls on the Commission to open up competition in the transport sector in order to complete the Single Market; in particular in those Member States that have port and airport public networks managed and monopolised by the central government or if they persistently generate public deficits; Encourages the Commission to investigate whether certain practices with regard to the imposition of specific hub airports – based on the terms of the over 1000 existing bilateral air services agreements signed by Member States with non-EU countries – are detrimental to fair competition between carriers and airports, and are against European consumers' interests;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses the need to deepen the single market, opening up for new completion and freedom of establishment in all sectors, underlines the need for structural reforms and fiscal consolidation in the framework of the Stability and Growth Pact, calls upon Commission that the credibility of the SGP is restored by securing that all Member States follow the rules instead of calling for new rules and new institutions;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Commission to further tackle any abuse of tax rulings; believes, to this regard, that the Commission decisions which have set out a clear methodology for calculating the value and the undue competitive advantages enjoyed by companies involved in incorrect rulings provide a good legal basis for further harmonisation in the area;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Reminds the Commission that for the EU's single market to function smoothly, it is imperative to allow national and regional authorities to intervene in situations which emanate from geographical handicaps that impede on the market's ability to flourish in both its economic and social dimension;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 c (new) – having regard to the White Paper 'Towards more effective EU merger control' of 9.7.2014,
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Points out that the harmonisation of the common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) is vital in order to eliminate distortions of competition and reduce the appeal of concluding opaque tax agreements between certain multinationals and Member States;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls for the establishment at European level of a minimum corporation tax level and for the harmonisation of tax bases to stop tax competition between states, which mainly benefits transnational groups;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Insists on the need to fight against fiscal dumping, abusive tax planning and tax evasion to ensure fair competition across the single market;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes that economic integration cannot proceed without tackling anti- competitive practices such as social and tax dumping in the EU;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Repeats its calls that one size fits all calculations do not define competition policies, since these undermine social cohesion across the Union, promote policy options that potentially are economically flawed, and in the medium term, inhibit the union's competitiveness vis-à-vis other continental trading and investment blocs;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Urges the Commission to complete the implementation of the Single European Railway Area, ensure full transparency in the flows of money between infrastructures managers and railway undertakings, and verify that each Member State has a strong and independent national regulator;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Urges the Council to take swift action to adopt the Commission proposal on the harmonisation of the consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB);
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 c (new) Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 d (new) 4d. Takes the view that the adoption of the euro by those Member States that have not yet joined the single currency would strengthen free competition within the internal market;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 d (new) – having regard to the European Commission's E-000344/2016, E- 002666/2016 and E-002112/2016 answers to written parliamentary questions,
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s Digital Single Market Strategy; supports the Commission’s efforts to ensure that EU competition policy applies fully to the digital single market, as competition not only gives consumers more choice but will also provide a level playing field, and regrets that the current lack of a European digital framework has highlighted the failure to reconcile the interests of large and small service providers; reiterates that a unified digital single market could create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and could contribute EUR 415 billion per year to the EU economy;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s Digital Single Market Strategy; reiterates that a unified digital single market could create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and could contribute EUR 415 billion per year to the EU economy; observes at the same time that traditional market models of competition policy are often not sufficiently relevant to the digital internal market; calls, therefore, for greater attention to be focused on the new business models used by digital companies and for new assessment criteria to be applied to those companies; calls also for the specific market structures in the digital economy to be taken more fully into account;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s Digital Single Market Strategy;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Welcomes the Commission’s Digital Single Market Strategy;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Reiterates that in the context of a digital single market, the Commission must be equipped with the right tools to strengthen its surveillance and avoid abuses stemming from dominant positions at the detriment of end consumers in the digital economy;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to take more ambitious steps to eliminate obstacles to online competition, in order to ensure barrier-free online shopping for EU consumers purchasing from sellers who are based in another Member State; considers, therefore, that targeted actions are needed to improve access to goods and services, in particular by ending unjustified geo- blocking practices and unfair price discrimination based on geographical location or nationality which often have the effect of building monopolies and of some consumers resorting to illegal content;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 10 a (new) Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to take more ambitious steps to eliminate obstacles to online competition, in order to ensure
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to take more ambitious steps to eliminate obstacles to online competition, in order to ensure barrier-free online shopping for EU consumers purchasing from sellers who are based in another Member State; notes that, to eliminate these obstacles, long-term investments in the necessary infrastructure are needed and should be made in accordance with the requirements of the market and of competition;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to take more ambitious steps to eliminate obstacles to online competition, in order to ensure barrier-free online shopping for EU consumers purchasing from sellers who are based in another Member State; calls for EU-level website labelling to guarantee the existence and quality of the services or products offered;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to take
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to take
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Welcomes the Commission's commitment towards a European digital single market and its proposal on geo- blocking and other forms of discrimination based on customers' nationality and place of residence; notes that the proposal only covers online purchases of goods and services therefore calls on the Commission to also address the geo-blocking of audiovisual services;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to take more ambitious steps to eliminate illegitimate obstacles to online competition, in order to ensure barrier- free online shopping for EU consumers purchasing from sellers who are based in another Member State, while at the same time not creating new barriers caused by existing variations in consumer law;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to enhance consumer trust in online payment by making it more secure, including by establishing a ‘legal offer’ label in order to help consumers clearly identify the legality of online offers for works and objects protected by intellectual property rights;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 10 a (new) – having regard to the European Parliament Resolution of 4 February 2016 on the special situation of islands (2015/3014(RSP)),
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to take the necessary steps towards establishing an EU-wide VAT system for cross-border transactions;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Considers that enhancing the participation of SMEs should play an essential role in the efforts to promote an unified digital single market and stresses the need to assess the potential impact of every initiative, notably those aiming to promote e-commerce and clarify the permanent establishment status for digital sector, on the ability of SMEs to benefit from the digital single market;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Underlines that collaborative economy platforms have brought into play the idea of challenging existing incumbent, dominant players to create a more competitive environment for consumers and businesses alike;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Highlights, the increasing presence of new digitally enabled businesses, in particular internet and mobile phone applications, alongside existing operators has opened up new channels for consumers to find, compare, and select goods and services across the single market. This results in an empowered consumer who seeks to make informed choices based on their personal needs and goals;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Calls on the Commission to use its policy and financial instruments and promote exchanges of best practices between Member States to foster investments in various traditional sectors and small and medium enterprises (SMEs) that are lagging behind the digital industrial revolution;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 d (new) 6d. Underlines that the European Union should encourage all businesses (like ones with dominant market share and also start-ups) to innovate;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous innovative products and services; calls on the Commission to ensure that firms operating in the collaborative economy, such as Uber, abide by competition law and do not seek to undermine the level playing field by, for example, circumventing employment or taxation rules in order to gain an unfair competitive advantage; reiterates that beside the taxation and security aspects, the Commission should also examine its competition aspects; underlines that national or EU rules must not impose the same conditions for different kinds of services;
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the for-profit sharing economy is
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous innovative products and services; reiterates that beside the taxation and security aspects, the Commission should also examine its competition aspects; underlines that national or EU rules must not impose the same conditions for different kinds of services; stresses the need to guarantee a high level of consumer and personal data protection in connection with the digital single market;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous innovative products and services; reiterates that beside the taxation and security aspects, the Commission should also examine its competition aspects;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous innovative products and services; reiterates that beside the taxation, administrative framework and security aspects, the Commission should also examine its competition aspects; underlines that national or EU rules must not impose the same conditions for different kinds of services;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy is offering EU consumers numerous innovative products and services
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses that the sharing economy
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Urges the Commission therefore to create a political toolkit, which is indispensable in order for the numerous forms and variants of the sharing economy to receive support at EU level and in the individual Member States, to be applied, to become credible and to win trust;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Underlines that the Commission should also ensure that Member States have permissive and supportive regulatory frameworks on collaborative economy that do not lead to competitive distortions;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission to conduct a wide-ranging review of the effectiveness of existing competition law instruments in the digital age, and where appropriate to develop them further;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. There is clearly a need for further deregulation of the taxi and private hire vehicle market in Europe. The present rigid regulation of the number of taxis and private hire vehicles results in poor competition, detrimental to consumers and businesses alike. Therefore the present system should be reformed as quickly as possible across Europe;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Calls on the Commission to address these concerns again so that the benefits to society of these business models can become tangible in reality within legal frameworks;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas a strong and effective EU competition policy has always been a cornerstone of the
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Calls on the Commission, when assessing digital economy transactions with competition law relevance, to place greater emphasis on the role of data and of network effects;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. For decades, national authorities have conferred special rights to taxi operators by granting them exclusive rights, resulting in artificial and unnecessary barriers to competition in the provision of services. Conversely, Member State measures have prevented other sector participants, such as Private Hire Vehicle (PHV) drivers, from operating under equivalent conditions as taxi operators. They have created a dramatic imbalance between supply and demand as evidenced by the difficulties that consumers often face when trying to find an available taxi or PHV. These entry barriers have a negative economical and societal impacts as consumers are facing reduced choice and availability of taxis and PHVs, higher prices, lower quality of service, and longer waiting periods;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Stresses that, particularly in a dynamic sector such as the digital economy, it is absolutely crucial for competition proceedings to be swiftly concluded, so that the abuse of a dominant position on the market cannot lead to a market shakeout;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes, furthermore, the current Commission practice whereby instant messaging (IM) applications are not compared with services of a different nature provided by the general telecommunications sector; notes, however, that these services use, free of charge, infrastructure provided and financed by the telecommunications sector;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses Google's widespread abuse of its dominant position across key vertical search markets, notably in the area of local search; calls on the European Commission to order Google to refrain from abusing its dominant general search engine to give advantages to its own specialised search products and to explore additional remedies that would seek to undo the harms that Google has already inflicted on competition, consumers and innovation in all verticals;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the Commission’s investigations into certain anti-competitive practices by a number of companies, in particularly Google, Amazon, Qualcomm and other media companies, film studios and TV distributors; calls on the Commission to speed up all procedures against behaviour which infringes EU antitrust rules; calls on the Commission to address Google's widespread abuse of its dominant position across key vertical search markets, including local search;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the Commission
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the Commission’s investigations into certain anti-competitive practices by a number of companies, in particularly Google, Amazon, Qualcomm and other media companies, film studios and TV distributors; calls on the Commission to speed up all procedures against behaviour which infringes EU antitrust rules and to ensure that the fines imposed are actually paid in full;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the Commission’s investigations into certain anti-competitive practices by a number of
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas a strong and effective EU competition policy has always been a cornerstone
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Welcomes the Commission’s investigations into certain anti-competitive practices by a number of companies, in particular
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1 (new) welcomes the fact that the Commission has been involved in the Apple case concerning unlawful tax rulings, but considers it disappointing that the one action taken by the Commission has been to require Ireland to recover debt; points out that the EU needs to have more stringent legislation on tax rulings, providing also for an effective system of penalties and a debt recovery procedure for Member States which have been harmed;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the Commission to bring forward a regulatory strategy taking into account technology convergence and, in particular, the multiplication of platforms; recalls that for this purpose ex ante sectoral regulations must balance defence of pluralism, freedom of expression, protection of personal data, protection of the consumer’s autonomy and freedom of choice and equal promotion of competing offers in Europe and of convergent offers for European champions in international competition; calls for inequalities in the balance of power to be corrected and for situations of dependency between economic operators to be alleviated with a view to achieving a fair sharing of value;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Regrets the long duration of the investigations into Google's practices, the shopping search probe was opened in November 2010 1a and the fact that these investigations have already dragged on for several years without any final results; welcomes the Supplementary Statement of Objections sent by the Commission to Google on comparison shopping service1b; asks the EC to decide its next steps before the end of 2016; calls on the Commission to continue to examine determinedly all concerns identified in its investigations, including other areas of local search bias, as it is ultimately part of ensuring a level playing field for all market players in the digital market; __________________ 1a http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 10-1624_en.htm 1bhttp://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP- 16-2532_en.htm
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Welcomes the greater attention being paid to network effects and to data accumulation and analysis in identifying market power on digital markets; takes the view that data play a major role in the digital economy and should therefore be taken into account in assessment under competition rules;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the Commission to investigate in a number of dominant hotel online booking platforms, in particularly Booking.com;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Welcomes the Commission Statement of Objection (SO) on Android, a thorough investigation into the Google practice is needed whereby the 'Android' operating system is offered only in conjunction with other Google services, and whereby manufacturers may not pre- install rival products; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to examine in detail Google's dominant market position in the area of direct hotel bookings and local searches, and to seek an appropriate solution to this problem; supports the Commission measures designed to bring about a greater degree of interoperability and portability across all digital sectors and, thereby, avoid a winner-takes-all scenario; stresses the importance of equipping the Commission with the right tools to maintain an up-to-date overview of swift developments on the digital market;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 c (new) 9c. Calls on the Commission to conduct and complete all other pending cartel investigations carefully, and to do away with any market restrictions; calls for the proceedings to be speeded up so that results can be achieved within the next year; welcomes, therefore, the supplementary statement of objections sent by the Commission on the comparison shopping service; calls on the Commission to continue to examine determinedly all concerns identified in its investigations, including other areas of search bias, in order to guarantee a level playing field for all market players in the digital market;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas competition policy is in itself a means of safeguarding European democracy, in that it prevents the over- concentration of economic and financial power in the hands of a few, which would undermine the ability of Europe’s political authorities to act independently of major industrial and banking groups;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the telecommunications sector is essential, not only to drive innovation and investment in networks but also to encourage affordable prices and choice of services for consumers; calls on the Commission, therefore, to safeguard competition in this sector, including with regard to spectrum allocation; stresses, however, that in order to maintain competition in this sector it is not only necessary to focus on Europe as a whole but also to guarantee competition among telecoms providers within the Member States;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the telecommunications sector is essential, not only to drive innovation and investment in networks but also to encourage affordable prices and choice of services for consumers; calls on the Commission, therefore, to safeguard competition in this sector, including with regard to spectrum allocation; welcomes the Commission decision to stop the merger of the mobile phone service providers O2 and Three in the UK, to the benefit of European consumers;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the telecommunications sector is essential, not only to drive innovation and investment in networks but also to encourage affordable prices and choice of services for consumers; calls on the Commission, therefore, to safeguard competition in this sector, including with regard to spectrum allocation; reiterates the importance of the application of the European Electronic Communications Code and the enhancement of connectivity across the EU;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the telecommunications sector is essential
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the internet search and telecommunications sectors is essential, not only to drive innovation and investment in networks the digital economy but also to encourage affordable prices and choice of services for consumers; calls on the Commission, therefore, to safeguard competition in th
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that competition in the telecommunications sector is essential, not only to drive innovation and investment in networks but also to encourage affordable prices and choice of services for consumers; calls on the Commission, therefore, to
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Stresses that any consideration on the level of investments should nevertheless be made with a strong focus on affordability as investments per se do not benefit the consumers;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 b (new) 10b. Underlines that effective competition in the telecommunication sector delivered by ex-ante regulation, therefore, ex-post rules should not be a substitute to ex-ante regulation but rather a complement to them; while ex-post rules are very important elements and safeguards, still considers that the best way to prevent abuse is through ex-ante regulation as big companies always try to undermine access regulation based on ex- ante assessments in exchange of promises they make on related topics;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 a (new) – having regard to the Protocol (No 1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the role of National Parliaments in the European Union,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas EU competition policy is an essential instrument for
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Considers that
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Considers that
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Considers that the steps towards ending consumer charges for roaming in the EU is, in the long term perspective, not sufficient if the single market is to be further deepened, and that incentives for intra-EU calls to be on the same level as local calls must be created, by ways of facilitating investments in fully European or shared network; calls on the Commission to thoroughly consult network operators and relevant stakeholders on how to bring down charges for intra-EU calls to the level of local calls in the most efficient way, which at the same time encourages investments and secures global competitiveness and innovation;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Welcomes the Commission's investigation into airline distribution, in particular around 'redistribution restrictions,' and calls on the Commission to tackle anti-competitive practices that may undermine European consumers' ability to use a variety of online channels, including metasearch comparison services and online travel agents, for the purposes of finding and comparing available flight ticket options;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Welcomes the decision of the European Commission to endorse a negative decision with recovery on the Apple state aid case; calls on the Commission to sanction any infringement with the view of ensuring fair competition across the single market;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Awaits the outcome of the Commission's investigation into airline distribution, in particular around "redistribution restrictions";
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Calls on the Commission to show the same firmness in the conduct and result of the on-going inquiry against McDonald's;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better target aid measures towards economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion; also reminds the Commission of the need to prevent certain governments from acting in bad faith as they do when misspending EU funds; stresses that the requirement for assessment of aid schemes introduced by the modernisation of state aid policy will serve to gather the information needed to better understand the impacts of notified schemes, improve the implementation of competition policy and inform future policy-making by Member States and the Commission; suggests that a specific annual report be sent to Parliament;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas EU competition policy
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better target aid measures towards long-term economic growth
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better target aid measures towards economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better target aid measures towards economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion; reminds the Member States that they have increased responsibility to grant aid without prior notification to the Commission; also reminds the Commission of the need to prevent certain governments from acting in bad faith as they do when misspending EU funds;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the overhaul of the state aid rules; reminds the Member States, nonetheless, that the aim was to better target aid measures towards sustainable economic growth, quality job creation and social cohesion; also reminds the Commission of the need to prevent certain governments from acting in bad faith as they do when misspending EU funds;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the European Union, under the leadership of the Commission, should promote "a competition culture" in the EU and world-wide;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Stresses that, according to a new European Court of Auditors report, there has been in the past a significant level of non-compliance with state aid rules by Member States; points out that that stems from the fact that, to reduce administrative burden and increase transparency, the Commission has simplified state aid legislation, but that, as a result, Member States have made many mistakes when designing and implementing state aid schemes; calls on the Commission to support Member State audit authorities in carrying out checks, having regard to the scope and quality thereof, on compliance with state aid rules;
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Calls on the Commission to pay attention in particular to the legal uncertainty regarding the funding of public tourism organisations under the current state aid rules; reminds of the negative consequences the reduction or withdrawal of public funding due to this uncertainty could have for the regions across Europe in terms of economic growth and job creation; deems it necessary that therefore the funding of public tourism organisations should fall under a general GBER exemption;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Considers that, in order to grant fair competition among companies, in line with the Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014, companies located in regions experiencing temporary or permanent disadvantages should be supported and increased flexibility should be granted to Regions experiencing severe economic problems, such as the Regions included in the Convergence and in the Competitiveness Objective, and to insular regions;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Welcomes the Commission Notice on the notion of State aid as part of the State Aid Modernization Initiative; acknowledges the benefits of the simplified rules that provides certainty to public authorities and companies as well; calls on the Commission at the same time to closer scrutinize prohibited state aids having great negative impact on the Single Market;
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Asks the Commission, during the on-going revision of the General Block Exemption Regulation, to take fully account of the European Outermost Regions' (ORs) specificities as laid down in Article 349 TFUE, given that it is vital for local SMEs in the ORs and also the least likely to affect competition in the internal market;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Calls on the Commission to put in place a guidance document on the notion of state aid in the light of important changes in case law and enforcement practice as soon as possible in order to ensure legal certainty and predictability;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Calls for commission to launch a road map for less but better targeted state aid, aiming for a reduction of state aid opening up for lower taxes stimulating new businesses and fair competition rather than supporting old structures and incumbents;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Requests the Commission to take a constructive position on the issue of state aid keeping in mind that different Member States must respond to different policy imperatives on the basis of their situation, size, physical and other endowments, as well as their state of economic and social development;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Underlines that when using state aid in order to promote services of general interest it is the consumers and the citizens benefit that is crucial, not individual companies or public entities today;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Calls on the Commission to closely monitor the renationalization of public utilities in EU Member States and prevent illegal state aid granted in form of public service compensation;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Calls on the Commission to push within international competition organisations, such as the International Competition Network, for a harmonised definition of state aid;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 c (new) 12c. Considers that isolated and/or peripheral regions and islands should be allowed wider margins for the implementation of state aid provisions than is currently being done, not least under conditions of double isolation or insularity, especially when such provisions would have limited to minimal effect on the wider European market, and when they are intended to help stimulate economic activity and social cohesion in ways that would not otherwise be feasible in the short to medium term;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 c (new) 12c. In order to grant a properly functioning Energy Union and to avoid not respecting state aid rules and also to avoid misuse of EU funds, stresses to be strictly monitored and investigated in depth all state aid cases and public procurement irregularities connected to energy and environmental investments, such as the controversial enlargement project of Hungary's Paks nuclear power plant;
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 d (new) 12d. Stresses that state aid is sometimes necessary in order to assure the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI) including energy, transport and telecommunication; Emphasises that state intervention is often the best possible policy tool to assure services crucial for the support of economic and social conditions in isolated, remote or peripheral regions and islands in the Union;
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 e (new) 12e. Welcomes the inclusion of social aid for transport residents of remote regions in the GBER where the problem of connectivity is being recognised; Stresses that the connectivity of peripheral island regions is also essential for sustaining and developing acceptable levels of economic and social initiative by maintaining vital business connections;
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13.
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totally removed and scrutinised, once the Banking Union is completed; recommends a closer scrutiny of the problem of implicit state aid afforded to too-big-to-fail financial institutions during normal times;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas, in theory, competition prevents the over-concentration of economic and financial power in the hands of a few, but whereas in reality the global and European economies are characterised by exactly the opposite result;
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was deemed necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totally removed and scrutinised, once the Banking Union is completed; stresses the importance of a restrictive approach to State aid;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totally removed and scrutinised
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must quickly be reduced, or totally removed and scrutinised
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that – as the Commission has stated for the sixth time in its annual competition report – the temporary state aid granted in the financial sector was necessary for the stabilisation of the global financial system, but must
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Believes it necessary, in order to avoid future bailouts by governments, to embark as quickly as possible on a genuine reform of the European banking sector that will result in a clear and compulsory separation between retail and investment activities; criticises the fact that the negotiations on structural reform of the banking sector were broken off, and calls accordingly on the EU institutions to resume the negotiations; draws attention once again to the need for a central bank that serves as a lender of last resort and provides full and unconditional support for the banking system at times of crisis; deplores, in this connection, the ECB’s behaviour towards the Greek banks in the summer of 2015;
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Considers it regrettable that no action was taken by the Commission to address the abuses committed in the restructuring of private banks, including those affecting small depositors and small owners of financial instruments such as preferred shares, which in many cases had been marketed without full compliance with EU legislation; calls on the Commission to address the widespread effects of mis-selling of financial products uncovered in the restructuring of banks affected by the economic crisis;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Welcomes the strengthened partnership approach between the Commission and Member States in the context of the State aid modernisation (SAM) initiative; calls on the Commission to reinforce cooperation with Member States as regards the design of growth- enhancing aid measures that promote the growth of key sectors for the re- industrialisation of Europe such as energy-intensive industries, in particular steel and aluminium;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Recalls its position as regards the current Commission inquiry regarding Deferred Tax Assets and Credits (DTA/DTCs) to the benefit of the banking sector in several Member States; is of the opinion that DTA/DTCs should be made retroactively authorised under State Aid provisions if they are tied to explicit conditions regarding financing targets for the real economy;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas competition policy should prevent
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Calls for efforts to be maintained regarding the investigations into ‘illegal’ state aid to multinationals;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 b (new) 13b. Recalls its request to the Commission to examine whether the banking sector has benefited since the beginning of the crisis of implicit subsidies and State Aid by means of the provision of unconventional liquidity support;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission to clarify the rules and procedures that apply to
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission to clarify the rules and procedures that apply to state aid in the financial sector by taking into account
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission to
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission to clarify the rules and procedures that apply to state aid in the financial sector by taking account of the difference in timing between the recent rules in the banking sector on burden-sharing and those on the full bail- in; invites the Commission, together with the SRB and the SRM, to conduct a careful assessment of the transition period and to ensure that, in line with the requirements of the legislation, the new rules are implemented with the necessary proportionality and fairness; welcomes the steps undertaken by the Commission to clarify the scope of EU State aid rules, which will facilitate public investment; calls on the Commission and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) to guarantee appropriate investor protection;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission to clarify the rules and procedures that apply to state aid in the financial sector by taking account of the difference in timing between the recent rules in the banking sector on burden-sharing and those on the full bail- in; invites the Commission, together with the SRB and the SRM, to conduct a careful assessment of the transition period and to ensure that, in line with the requirements of the legislation, the new rules are implemented with the necessary proportionality and fairness;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Calls on the Commission to clarify the rules and procedures that apply to state aid in the financial sector by taking account of the difference in timing between the recent rules in the banking sector on burden-sharing and those on the full bail- in; invites the Commission, together with the SRB and the SRM, to conduct a careful assessment of the transition period and to ensure that, in line with the requirements of the legislation, the new rules are implemented with the necessary proportionality and fairness; calls on the Commission and the European Securities
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas competition p
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) Points out that the banking union and the ECB supervision arrangements severely distort competition in the financial sector by favouring some banking business models (which have been shown over the years to be more risky) while penalising others;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Notes that the European Court of Auditors has detected State aid errors in approximately a fifth of the projects co- financed by cohesion programmes and deemed to have state aid relevance over the period 2010-2014 that it audited1a; notes that one third of these errors were assessed to have financial impact and that they are considered to have contributed to the level of error in cohesion policy; considers therefore that there is scope for progress in addressing non-compliance with State aid rules in cohesion policy; considers that it is in particular necessary to improve the knowledge of State aid rules in the recipient countries to avoid errors made in good faith as well as to improve the recording of irregularities in order to have a better view of the issue; __________________ 1aSpecial Report No 24/2016 of the European Court of Auditors: “More efforts needed to raise awareness of and enforce compliance with State aid rules in cohesion policy”http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/EC ADocuments/SR16_24/SR_STATE_AIDS _EN.pdf
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Welcomes the new Guidelines on State Aid to Airlines and Airports in the EU, as part of the Commission's State Aid Modernisation; calls on the Commission to urgently establish a similar set of rules for subsidised airlines operating from third countries to and from the EU in international agreements, in order to ensure fair competition between EU and third country carriers; calls on the Commission to urgently submit a proposal for the revision of EU Regulation 868/2004 for the protection against subsidisation and unfair pricing practices causing injury to Community air carriers in the supply of air services from countries not members of the European Community;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Is of the opinion that a better understanding is needed at local and national level as regards classification of illegal state aid; welcomes the Commission’s recent decisions clarifying which Member State public support measures can be carried out without a state aid assessment by the Commission; regards those decisions as providing helpful guidance for local and municipal projects, reducing administrative burden and at the same time increasing legal certainty;
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Welcomes the fact that the Commission regards the opaque tax rulings awarded by some Member States to certain multinationals as illegal state aid, on the grounds that they distort competition in the internal market, and encourages the Commission to continue its efforts in this direction;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Calls on the Commission to review the interpretation of the relevant competition provisions in connection with the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive (DGSD) so that the early-stabilisation instruments provided for by the EU legislative authority can actually be brought into use;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Underlines the importance of the Commission’s investigations into state aid of a fiscal nature, which provide necessary support for the European and international tax agenda, especially in the fight against aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Insists that any revision of the rules on deposit guarantee scheme would have to comply with state aid rules; insists that future banking crises have to be solved without burdening taxpayers, in order to comply with state aid rules;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Welcomes the Commission's rulings on Apple, Fiat, Starbucks and others, and looks forward to the outcomes of investigations into preferential tax rulings for McDonalds, Amazon and GDF Suez;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Considers that it is a priority to ensure that State aid rules are adhered to when dealing with future banking crises, so that taxpayers are protected against the burden of bank rescues;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas competition prevents the over-concentration of economic and financial power
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) 14b. Welcomes the ongoing revision of the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER); points out that, as regards funding for public tourism amenities, there is considerable legal uncertainty as to the action needed to bring the funding of economic activities into line with competition law and also to deal with ongoing competition complaints; underlines the fact therefore that the Commission must provide a sufficient legal basis in competition law in order to boost tourism as an important economic factor in the EU, and accordingly stresses the need to incorporate a new GBER exemption;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) 14b. Calls on the Commission to allocate greater resources to investigating tax rulings that create State aid concerns and to approach such investigations in a systematic manner, so as to ensure that all cases where illegal state aid has been granted are ultimately investigates, and governments and companies alike can be certain that any such case of illegal state aid will be discovered and overturned;
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) 14b. Takes notes of the decisions issued by the Commission in recent cases where the distortionary effects of tax-related measures have been discussed; welcomes the increased awareness of the interlinkages between tax policies and administrative practices in the field of taxation on one side and competition policy on the other side; calls on the Commission to draw up clear guidelines on tax-related State aid;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) 14b. Recalls that according to the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive, the use of deposit guarantee schemes to prevent the failure of a credit institution should be carried out within a clearly defined framework and should in any event comply with State aid rules;
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 c (new) 14c. Calls on the Commission to open up competition in those Member States that have port and airport public networks, particularly if their management is monopolised by the central government or if they persistently generate public deficits; Encourages the Commission to investigate whether certain practices with regard to the imposition of specific hub airports – based on the terms of the over 1000 existing bilateral air services agreements signed by Member States with non-EU countries – are detrimental to fair competition between carriers and airports, and are against European consumers' interests;
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 c (new) 14c. Underlines that, although approaching the issue of administrative tax practices and mismatches between tax legislations from a State aid perspective has led to useful progress in how taxation, in particular transfer pricing issues, is thought of and dealt with, the first-best option to tackle unfair tax competition is more effective and binding mechanisms for coordination and cooperation between Member States;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 c (new) 14c. Calls on the Commission to consider the introduction of sanctions in cases of illegal State Aid, in addition to the repayment of the original state aide; considers that such sanctions should be applied either against the state or company involved, or both, so as to avoid a situation whereby the member State found guilty of State Aid violation is punished by simply recouping its original payment;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 c (new) 14c. Emphasises that the notion of selectivity in State aid is an essential criterion that needs to be investigated thoroughly; notes that this concept is not free from discussion, especially not in tax cases; believes that an exception from a tax system is not selective if it is a priori open to all tax payers;
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 d (new) 14d. Calls on the Member States to publish information on their tax rulings in order to enhance transparency for citizens; calls on the Commission to publish a summary of the main tax rulings agreed in the previous year, based on information contained in a secure central directory, including at least a description of the issues addressed in the tax ruling, and a description of the criteria used to determine an advance pricing arrangement and identify the Member State(s) most likely to be affected;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the socially responsible implementation of competition rules prevents the over-concentration of economic and financial power in the hands of a few;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 d (new) 14d. Believes that the Commission should consider the possibility for state aid to banks to be linked to conditionality on credit to SMEs;
Amendment 281 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 e (new) 14e. Stresses that State aid proceedings alone cannot put a permanent stop to the unfair tax competition in a number of Member States; believes that, following consecutive leaks from Luxembourg, Panama and the Bahamas, it is clear that further results are required, with progress needing to be made on the implementation of a common consolidated corporate tax base, on the obligation on large companies to report publically their turnover and profits on a 'country-by-country' basis, and on the introduction by Member States of greater transparency in their tax practices and mutual reporting requirements;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 e (new) 14e. Understands that the analysis of State aid for banks must take place on a case-by-case basis, but recalls that Member States and banks must be treated equally when implementing the State aid rules;
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) Underlines the importance to break up cartels in the interest of European citizens and European businesses, in particular SMEs; encourages the Commission to streamline administrative procedures to this regard in order to fast-track proceedings;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15.
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Is of the opinion that the proposed mergers between the world's biggest agro- chemical and seeds companies present the dangers of rising prices for seeds and less choice of adapted varieties to agro- ecological conditions; underlines that should these mergers proceed, 61 percent of the global seeds market and 65 percent of the global pesticides market would be controlled by only three companies;
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Calls on the Commission to strengthen its action at global level in order to ensure that third countries competition rules do not collide with EU provisions at the detriment of European businesses;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Urges the Commission to deliver a clear view on the Commission timing as regards its decision on the Monsanto- Bayer merger as well as carefully consider the context that several mergers would be taking place simultaneously in the sector;
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and effective in all cases where it has sufficient evidence of infringement;
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and effective in all cases where it has sufficient evidence of infringement; welcomes last year’s five decisions relating to a total of EUR 365 million in fines;
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and effective in all cases where it has sufficient evidence of infringement;
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Calls on the Commission to keep its cartel enforcement record strong and effective in all cases where it has sufficient evidence of infringement; welcomes last year’s five decisions
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Considers that the existing rules relating to fines for infringements could be supplemented by on-going penalties against those responsible; Calls the Commission to consider the possibility to complement cartel fines with personal sanctions aimed at company decision makers, as well as individual penalties for those employees responsible for actually leading their company to commit a violation of competition law. The Commission should, thus, be able to impose measures such as director disqualifications or personal pecuniary sanctions when necessary.
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Believes that the use of ever higher fines as the sole antitrust instrument may be too blunt; emphasises that a policy of high fines should not be used as an alternative budget financing mechanism; favours a 'carrot-and-stick' approach with penalties that serves as an effective deterrent, in particular for repeat offenders, while encouraging compliance;
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Notes that the number of notified mergers increased significantly in 2015; asks, therefore, for the relevant services to be provided with the necessary resources (via internal reallocation of staff) enabling them to continue to deal effectively with this situation;
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Notes that the number of notified mergers increased significantly in 2015;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Welcomes the Commission’s recently launched consultation on certain procedural and legal aspects of EU merger control; calls on the Commission, in connection with the planned reform of the Merger Regulation, to examine carefully whether current assessment procedures take sufficient account of circumstances on digital markets and of the internationalisation of markets; considers that, above all within the digital economy, merger assessment criteria must be adapted;
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Shares the European Commission's concerns over the current negotiations regarding the merger between Bayer AG and Monsanto Company Inc.; stresses that this merger would result in a monopoly situation in the seeds and pesticides markets which are important for the agricultural sector; asks therefore the Commission to deliver an ex-ante impact assessment of this merger on this sector;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 a (new) – having regard to Protocol 26 of the TFEU on services of general interest,
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Draws attention to the planned merger between Bayer and Monsanto, which would create an European and global oligopoly if allowed to proceed; stresses the need to send a clear signal by intervening to protect farmers' and consumers' interests;
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Is of the opinion that EU merger control arrangements should take account of purchase price as a criterion, since mergers in digital markets have made it clear that turnover thresholds are not sufficient;
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Calls on the Commission to present a legislative proposal establishing a framework for EU coordination of national competition authorities on merger control;
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Underlines that the application of competition rules to mergers must be evaluated from the perspective of the entire internal market;
Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17b. Expresses its deep concerns over the merger project between of Deutsche Börse AG and the London Stock Exchange Group to merge; underlines that the consolidated group would be the biggest systemic exchange operator in Europe and the largest margin pool in the world; welcomes the in-depth investigation launched by the European Commission to assess whether such a deal is compatible with EU merger regulation; considers that this case should be dealt with in the perspective of the 'Brexit' to avoid any loophole in the application of EU financial regulation;
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 b (new) 17b. Calls again on the Commission to verify carefully Member States’ transposition of Anti-Trust Damages Directive 2014/104/EU; points out that that directive must be properly transposed by 27 December 2016; deplores the fact that progress with transposition has been slow so far and that many Member States have not yet tabled draft legislation; calls on the Commission, as guardian of the Treaties, to remind Member States of their obligation;
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Welcomes the Commission
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas competition policy keeps markets efficient and open, thus leading to lower prices, better-quality products and services and greater choice for consumers, also promoting
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Welcomes the Commission’s Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy, and agrees with its five interrelated policy dimensions;
Amendment 311 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Welcomes the Commission’s Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the different antitrust investigations
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19.
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the different antitrust investigations, in particular those into against Gazprom and Bulgargaz, aimed at ensuring market integration in the Energy Union; regrets, however, the practice on the part of certain Member States of buying gas through offshore companies, as being a typical example of tax avoidance and an act that is contrary to a properly functioning Energy Union; also stresses the importance to prevent the creation of market structures which could impede effective competition on the energy sector;
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the different antitrust investigations,
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Welcomes the different antitrust investigations
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Takes note of the adoption by the Commission in 2014 of the new Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection and energy and its implementation of this as the general block exemption regulation; is of the opinion that any guidelines in the field of state aid and energy, can no longer exclude from their scope the phasing out of nuclear and fossil fuel energy, sectors among the greatest beneficiaries of state subsidies;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas competition policy keeps markets efficient and open, thus leading to lower prices, the emergence of new actors, better-quality products and services and greater choice for consumers, also promoting innovation and growth;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Welcomes the efforts of the Commission to promote the market integration of renewable energy sources in order to avoid distortions of competition; underlines
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 324 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Welcomes the efforts of the Commission to promote the market integration of renewable energy sources
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Highlights that European competition policy has a great potential to promote higher environmental and social standards; notes with regret that the Hungarian government distorts competition in the renewable energy sector by imposing high taxes and preventing the deployment of energy efficient and renewable energy technologies; calls on the Commission to continue to support the use of renewable energies in Europe in order to achieve the environmental goals set in the European Union's ten-year, Europe 2020 growth strategy; asks the Commission to continue to support the integration of environmental, social and labour requirements into public procurement procedures;
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Calls on the Commission to overhaul Commission Regulation (EU) No 267/2010 exempting certain agreements in the insurance sector, given that the exchange of information required for risk calculation purposes and joint risk cover increase legal certainty and competitiveness in the sector, thus facilitating market entry for new firms, enhancing consumer choice and improving economic conditions;
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Recalls that Article 42 TFEU accords the agricultural sector a special status as regards competition law that is specified in the latest reform of the common agricultural policy by strengthening the position of farmers in the food supply chain and allowing for general or specific derogations to Article 101 TFEU;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas a market-friendly competition policy keeps markets efficient and open, thus leading to lower prices, better-quality products and services and greater choice for consumers, also promoting innovation and growth;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Welcomes the Commission's steps to evaluate excessive remuneration of private operators through capacity mechanisms and calls for further investigation of excessive regulated costs, for instance as a compensation for the phase-out of nuclear energy or in the operation of large hydroelectric dams;
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Points out the need to differentiate conceptually and policy-wise between competition rules and social policy of the respective Member state; recognises it is every government's obligation to intervene in order to avoid energy poverty on its citizens;
Amendment 332 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to cut taxes on energy products and take effective measures to counter energy poverty;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Points out that the energy grid is a network-based infrastructure requiring special treatment, to enable and foster self-consumption;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Highlights the fact that each Member State has the right to choose its own energy mix policy;
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Notes that existing government monopolies, such as gambling monopolies, can lead to unfair and anticompetitive practices; Draws attention to the risk that by providing licences without, or through untransparent, questionable concession tenders, Member State governments have the possibility to favour certain companies over others, thus can create an highly anticompetitive environment; Calls on the Commission to strictly monitor existing government monopolies and the lawfulness of concession tenders in order to prevent any excessive distortion of competition;
Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Whereas the most recent reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) sought to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain through a series of derogations and exemptions from the provisions of Article 101 TFEU, notwithstanding this, the reform failed to address the anti-competitive elements of the Common Agricultural Policy inherent in itself where farmers receive vastly differing levels of payments based on historic criteria which are no longer justified;
Amendment 337 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Notes that the increased volatility of agricultural prices and the crises in the agricultural markets, especially in the dairy sector, accentuate the structurally weak position of farmers in the food supply chain;
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Emphasizes that Article 42 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) accords a special status to the agricultural sector with regard to the application of competition law;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas competition policy aims at keep
Amendment 340 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls a better understanding of agricultural markets, acknowledging that the overarching EU policy of "cheap food" coupled with direct income supports resulting in below cost production where farmers are not remunerated from the market place creates a situation unlike other sectors of the economy, which must be taken into consideration by competition policy;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Considers that the lack of clarity as to the scope of these derogations, difficulties in implementation and the lack of uniform application by national competition authorities do not provide sufficient legal certainty for farmers and their organisations wishing to apply the right of derogation;
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Recalls that the most recent reform of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) sought to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain through a series of derogations and exemptions from the provisions of Article 101 TFEU;
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Calls on the Commission to propose changes in the Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 to ensure the same protection for air travellers on flights from third country, regardless the fact that the carrier is EU or non-EU carrier;
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 d (new) 20d. Finds it regrettable that the scope of the current derogations are not maximized by the Member States in order to strength the position of the primary producer, further regrets that the Commission is unwilling to take regulatory action to combat the clearly identified and recognized unfair trading practices in the food chain, calls on the Commission to now act on the parliaments call for binding regulatory action in this area;
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 d (new) 20d. Calls on the European Commission to adopt new initiatives to take better account of the specific nature of agriculture in the application of competition policy and to ensure a complete and satisfactory implementation of the general derogation for agriculture and the specific derogations for the dairy, olive oil, beef and veal, and arable crops sectors;
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming worsens the already weak position of farmers in the food supply chain and calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculture;
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 d (new) 20d. Finds it regrettable that, despite the publication of guidelines on the application of the specific rules set out in Articles 169, 170 and 171 of the Single CMO regulation1b , the scope of the current derogations remains unclear, difficult to implement and unevenly applied by national competition authorities; __________________ 1bRegulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007.
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 e (new) 20e. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact at the upper end of the food supply chain of national-level concentration in the distribution sector and the development of European-level alliances of distributors;
Amendment 349 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 e (new) 20e. Believes that market share at input, processing and retail level must be capped to allow competition to develop, is also of the opinion that the final beneficial ownership of companies operating in the sector must be scrutinized to ensure that there is adequate genuine competition;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas fair competition policy should aim at keep
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 e (new) 20e. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a 'dominant position', taking into consideration the degree of concentration and the constraints resulting from bargaining power from upstream and downstream sectors;
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 f (new) 20f. Believes that the cumulative effect of trade deals such as TTIP, CETA and Mercosur will further undermine the position of the EU primary producer and will encourage additional uncompetitive practices by providing the retail sector with the tool of cheaper imports;
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 f (new) 20f. Considers that the collective activities of producer organisations and their associations, such as production planning and sales negotiation, are necessary for achieving the aims of the CAP and that they should benefit from a presumption of compatibility with Articles 39 and 101 TFEU;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 g (new) 20g. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the 'Milk Package'1a is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector and asks the Commission to propose that the 'Milk Package' should continue to apply beyond mid-2020 and to examine whether its rules could be extended to other sectors of agriculture; __________________ 1aRegulation (EU) No261/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 amending Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards contractual relations in the milk and milk products sector.
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 h (new) 20h. Calls on the Commission and the national competition authorities to address the concerns raised by the cumulative impact – particularly at the upper end of the food supply chain – of, on the one hand, national-level concentration in the retail sector and, on the other, the development of European- level alliances of major distributors;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 i (new) 20i. Takes note of the conclusions of the study "Economic impact of modern retail on choice and innovation in the EU food sector" of the Directorate General Competition, including the existence of a negative relationship that may exists between innovation and penetration of products under private labels on the food market; calls on the Commission to submit to Parliament the extent of the on- going discussions to determine whether this negative relationship does reduce innovation and variety of products available to consumers and what would be their long-term consequences for the supply chain and on the situation of farmers;
Amendment 356 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 357 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 358 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Stresses that excessive taxation of the agri-food industry could easily destroy competition and would be against the interests of consumers; points out, however, that tax policy remains exclusively a Member State matter, so that the Commission should confine itself to issuing recommendations;
Amendment 359 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Stresses that
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas competition policy keeps markets efficient
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Stresses that excessive taxation of the agri-food industry could, just like any inappropriate taxation, easily destroy competition and would be against the interests of consumers;
Amendment 361 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21.
Amendment 362 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Stresses that excessive taxation of
Amendment 363 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Recalls its resolution of 21 November 2013 on the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base which states that an operational Common Security and Defence Policy needs a strong European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB), constituting a key element for Europe's capacity to ensure the security of its citizens, protect its values and promote its interests; points out that the European defence sector is a major source of growth and innovation, key features for stability and security; believes that the establishment and development of a competitive EDTIB should be part of the strategic priorities of the EU; calls on the Commission to examine the impact of competition rules on the establishment of the EDTIB and how they can promote it;
Amendment 364 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Notes that the Commission has not been pursuing retail price maintenance cases for more than a decade. Yet it is quite obvious that, instead of disappearing, this sort of anticompetitive practices is expanding in certain sectors such as fast food: for a given brand a given product is everywhere at the same price, regardless whether the outlet is operated by the brand or by a licensee; Urges the Commission to start investigating retail price maintenance issues again;
Amendment 365 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Stresses that the need to guarantee more effective protection of transport workers’ rights from abuse should not be used as a pretext to restrict free competition between entities from different Member States; calls on the Commission to respect the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity when drawing up laws that will have a significant impact on the functioning of the single transport market;
Amendment 366 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Reiterates the need to develop progressively the EU competition framework to include in the monitoring of the food supply chain in Europe the Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture systems (SAFA) indicators of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), including indicators under the headings of Fair Pricing and Transparent Contracts (S.2.1.1) and Right of Suppliers (S.2.2.1);
Amendment 367 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Calls on the Commission to investigate the nature and substance of distortions in the retail market, to include considering the potential of territorial supply constraints on retailers to lead to market fragmentation and the potential for large supermarkets which dominate the market to distort competition within supply chains; emphasises the importance of all stakeholders disclosing relevant information;
Amendment 368 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Calls on the Commission to launch an encompassing State Aid investigation on the EU car sector and in particular regarding the VW scandal with a view of controlling whether car undertakings have benefited from illegal State Aid as a consequence of product eligibility to tax rebates and credits to the purchasers following fraudulent claims on clean technologies;
Amendment 369 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Encourages the Commission to provide analytical methods for the definition of new relevant markets with the digitalisation of the economy and in particular with the phenomenon of convergence of technologies and the commercial use of personal data on a large scale;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas Article 102 of the TFEU indicates clearly, that directly or indirectly imposing unfair trading practices on other sectors of the food chain constitutes a breach of this regulation;
Amendment 370 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Calls on the Member States, with a view to ensuring genuine competition between EU road haulage firms, to put an end to the granting of any concessions on roads around urban areas that result in the payment of tolls;
Amendment 371 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Asks the Commission to investigate the alleged cases of VAT fraud in the pork industry; regrets that the Commission has not yet launched an inquiry on this issue, despite the complaints it received from farmers associations;
Amendment 372 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Takes the view that current and savings accounts should not incur commission for users unless they are linked to specific services;
Amendment 373 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Reiterates its concern (as expressed in its resolution of 11 June 2013 on social housing in the European Union) about the restrictive definition of social housing given by the Commission within the field of competition policy; calls on the Commission to clarify this definition on the basis of an exchange of best practice and experience between the Member States, taking into account the fact that social housing is conceived of, and managed, in different ways in different Member States, regions and local communities;
Amendment 374 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Regrets the Commission’s failure to react quickly and decisively to attempts by some Member States to restrict free competition in the transport sector; calls for these practices to be abolished and for all possible measures to be taken to guarantee equal access to the single market under the same conditions for entities operating in that sector from all Member States;
Amendment 375 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Calls for further development of the European Food Prices Monitoring Tool to improve the detection of crisis in the agri-food sector in the direction of better and more disaggregated data; highlights, in this respect, the need to engage farmers' organisations in the definition and collection of data;
Amendment 376 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Calls the Commission to investigate more thoroughly the effects of banking consolidation for competition; particularly, believes that it should be analysed taking into account the effects for credit in case of a new economic crisis;
Amendment 377 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Considers it important to guarantee competition in the intra- European market in financial services, including insurance, which entails safeguarding the possibility of cross- border acquiring;
Amendment 378 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Recalls on the Commission to release the findings of current investigations into competitive practices in the food supply, energy, transport and media sectors;
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 c (new) 21c. Expresses concern at the impact the Commission’s proposed changes to Directive 96/71/EC could have on the road transport sector; stresses that attempts to harmonise minimum wage laws are at odds with the principle of subsidiarity, would lead to discrimination against entities from certain Member States on the single market and could seriously undermine the freedom to provide services within the EU;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas competition policy
Amendment 380 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 c (new) 21c. Rejects the requirement for users to be based in the Member State in which the financial institution or insurance company is domiciled for the purposes of service provision, since this is incompatible with the goal of an internal market in retail financial services;
Amendment 381 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 c (new) 21c. Reiterates the call for binding action in the food supply chain against retailers harming farmers and consumers; stresses that the current levels of concentration in this chain are a root cause of the price volatility and falling incomes suffered by farmers;
Amendment 382 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 c (new) 21c. Calls the Commission to propose measures to tear down existing regulatory barriers in the cross-border activities of the banking system and financial markets in order to deepen and make more effective the single market;
Amendment 383 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 c (new) 21c. Calls for an immediate investigation into competition concerns arising from the Formula One Motorsport industry;
Amendment 384 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 d (new) 21d. Calls the Commission to fully take into account the possible market distortions of trade agreements with third countries for the agricultural producers in Europe given their delicate financial situation and their fundamental role in our society; believes that the Commission should pay particular attention to those deals with countries that have notably less agricultural and health regulations than the EU;
Amendment 385 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 d (new) 21d. Calls on the Commission, when developing and implementing competition policy, to take into account the fact that micro, small and medium-sized enterprises constitute the vast majority of companies in the EU; stresses, in that context, the need for user-friendly competition rules for smaller businesses who wish to operate online and cross- border within the single market;
Amendment 386 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 d (new) 21d. Reminds the Commission, likewise, that financial institutions continue to cancel payment cards if the holder moves to another Member State, and calls for action to be taken in this respect, including by alerting national authorities;
Amendment 387 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 d (new) 21d. Stresses the need to ensure access to medicines by fighting the abuses of the pharmaceutical industry; notes the need to encourage the use of generic medicines, where available, in the health systems of Member States;
Amendment 388 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 e (new) 21e. Stresses that access to cash via ATMs is an essential public service that must be provided without any discriminatory, anti-competitive or unfair practices and must not, therefore, incur excessive costs;
Amendment 389 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 f (new) 21f. Takes the view that the continued existence of bank commission for services that have not been provided demonstrates that the level of competition in the financial sector is insufficient, and this needs to be specifically addressed;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas competition policy can and should make a significant contribution to key political priorities such as boosting innovation, quality jobs, growth and investment, particularly in the southern European Member States such as Greece, Italy, Spain, Portugal, etc., protecting consumers and reinforcing the single market, with particular regard to the digital single market and the Energy Union;
Amendment 390 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 g (new) 21g. Expresses its concern since growing concentration in the financial sector may reduce the degree of competition in the sector, and is also concerned at the lack of a genuine internal banking market and continuing fragmentation into national markets;
Amendment 391 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 h (new) 21h. Deplores the discriminatory and anti-competitive practice of rejecting cash payments, since the euro and the national currencies of the Member States that have not yet adopted the single currency are the only payment instruments that are legal tender;
Amendment 392 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the decentralised enforcement of EU competition rules in Europe, but considers that the effectiveness of the protection of citizens and companies from anti-competitive practices should not depend only on the Member State in which they are resident; takes the view that the cartel procedure regulation (Regulation 1/2003) has done much to create a level playing field for businesses throughout the internal market; emphasises, however, that there are still differences between national systems and national competition authorities, in particular as regards independence, the setting of fines and leniency programmes; takes the view that effective, uniform procedural provisions are essential if EU cartel law is to be enforced and legal certainty guaranteed for consumers and businesses;
Amendment 393 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22.
Amendment 394 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the decentralised enforcement of EU competition rules in Europe, but considers that the effectiveness of the protection of citizens and companies from anti-competitive practices should not depend only on the Member State in which they are resident; calls on the competition authorities in the Member States to make full use of the possibilities offered by European cooperation in the context of the European Competition Network (ECN);
Amendment 395 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the decentralised enforcement of EU competition rules in Europe
Amendment 396 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Welcomes the decentralised enforcement of EU competition rules in Europe
Amendment 397 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Considers it essential, therefore, that the national competition authorities in the EU have the
Amendment 398 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Considers it essential, therefore, that the national competition authorities in the EU have the means and instruments they need to be effective enforcers of
Amendment 399 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Reiterates that the independence of national competition authorities is of paramount importance, and that this includes ensuring that they have the resources they need to perform their tasks; stresses, however, that competition authorities should not jeopardize the democratic right to regulate national markets; is concerned, in this respect, by the increasing power of national competition authorities over democratically-elected national bodies;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 b (new) – having regard to Protocol (No 2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas competition policy can and should make a significant contribution to key political priorities such as boosting innovation, quality jobs,
Amendment 400 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 Amendment 401 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 Amendment 402 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Welcomes, in that connection, the consultation procedure launched by the Commission, which is likely to lead to a legislative proposal on strengthening the enforcement and sanctioning tools available to the national competition authorities, the so-called ECN+; Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for EU action to ensure
Amendment 403 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25.
Amendment 404 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for EU action to ensure that the national competition authorities are more effective enforcers and act in a coherent and convergent fashion, so that the full potential of the decentralised system of EU competition enforcement can be realised;
Amendment 405 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal for
Amendment 406 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls on the Commission to put forward a proposal
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Emphasises that international cooperation between competition authorities is essential in a globalised world; calls on the Commission, therefore, to examine the scope for concluding with more third countries competition agreements which facilitate exchanges of information between investigating authorities; emphasises that in this regard the competition agreements already concluded with Switzerland and Canada can serve as models for future agreements of this kind;
Amendment 408 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Invites the Commission, without foregoing the independence of national competition authorities, to assess between the Member States the different levels of national sanctions after infringements and to assess the possibility and desirability of streamlining these differences;
Amendment 409 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Highlights the importance of global cooperation on competition enforcement; supports an active participation of the Commission and the national competition authorities in the International Competition Network;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas competition policy can and should make a significant contribution to key political priorities such as boosting innovation, quality jobs, growth and sustainable development, investment, protecting consumers and reinforcing the single market, with particular regard to the digital single market and the Energy Union;
Amendment 410 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Considers it essential for the Commission to continue to promote better cooperation among national competition authorities in the EU;
Amendment 411 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) Amendment 412 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 b (new) 25b. Considers that international trade and investment agreements should have a strong competition section;
Amendment 413 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6 a (new) International dimension of competition policy
Amendment 414 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 b (new) 25b. Emphasises that international cooperation is essential in the age of globalisation; calls on the Commission, therefore, to foster closer international cooperation on competition-related issues; welcomes the agreement on the application of competition law recently concluded with Canada; takes the view the agreements such as these make a significant contribution to international cooperation;
Amendment 415 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 c (new) 25c. Would like to see restraint exercised in the next Commission's overall budget; recognises moreover that resources for the Commission's Directorate General for Competition should be made adequate to its increased workload and range of tasks by shifting away resources from other Directorates with less European added value;
Amendment 416 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 d (new) 25d. Welcomes the Commission's more economic approach in competition law, also in the field of services of general economic interest (SGEI); shares the Commission's view that market failure is an inherent condition for the existence of a service of general economic interest; notes, however, the on-going debate in academic circles on what kind of market failure can justify a qualification as SGEI;
Amendment 417 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 e (new) 25e. Observes that the Treaty rules on competition know different varieties of the notion of 'the common European interest', which are equally vague; calls on the Commission to work on a better understanding and, where appropriate, a better alignment of these concepts;
Amendment 418 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 f (new) 25f. Notes the efforts of the European Commission to clarify the notions of 'undertaking' and 'economic activity'; observes nonetheless that it remains difficult, especially in the field of social affairs, to draw the line between economic and non-economic activities; believes, furthermore, that it is not clear to what extent the Poucet-case law applies to matters other than social security and what the relation is between the general Höfner-rule and the Poucet-line;
Amendment 419 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Believes that the independence of DG Competition is of the uttermost importance to achieve its goals in a successful manner. Calls the Commission to re-allocate sufficient financial and human resources to DG competition from other less priority or overcrowded services in order to cope with the growing number of important cases they have to deal with;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas competition policy can and should make a significant contribution to key political priorities such as boosting innovation,
Amendment 420 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 b (new) Amendment 421 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 c (new) 25c. Notes the growing revolving door problem around the Chief Economist Team (CETs) of EC's Directorate general for competition. Too many economists, including CETs themselves, end up working as consultants for dominant companies. It is concerned that this affects the objectivity of their appraisal of abuses of dominant positions while working for the EC. Ethical rules on CETs and their teams need to brought in line with practices for other EC officials. They also need to be properly monitored, including vis-à-vis CET economists who have already left the EC. Urges the Commission to remedy this situation as a matter of grave urgency.
Amendment 422 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Calls for the continuation of the regular structured dialogue between the Commissioner responsible for competition and the European Parliament, and in particular the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Working Group on Competition Policy; asks the Commission to deliver more comprehensive feedback on the specific requests made in the European Parliament annual competition report; deems that a dedicated structured dialogue could contribute to a more thorough follow-up process of the respective annual competitions reports;
Amendment 423 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Calls for the continuation of the regular structured dialogue between the Commissioner responsible for competition and the European Parliament, and in particular the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Working Group on Competition Policy; calls on the Commission to involve Parliament more closely during investigations, and to that end calls on it to forward the findings at the earliest opportunity, in order to enhance transparency and interinstitutional cooperation;
Amendment 424 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26.
Amendment 425 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Calls on the Commission to publish the antitrust decision of December 2013 imposing an exemplary fine of more than EUR 1.7 billion on eight banks for having infringed competition law by taking part in illegal cartels that manipulated the Euribor rate in interest rate derivative markets; calls, in this connection, for stiffer penalties to be imposed on anyone manipulating financial markets;
Amendment 426 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Welcomes the Commission’s initiatives for public consultation in applying merger control and invites it to discuss the results with the European Parliament;
Amendment 427 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 b (new) 26b. Calls for extension of the dialogue between European institutions and national competition authorities, in particular to include exchanges of views with the parliamentary committees of the European Parliament;
Amendment 428 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 Amendment 429 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas competition policy
Amendment 430 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 Amendment 431 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Stresses that Parliament should also be granted codecision powers in the field of competition policy, and regrets that this area of Union policy has not been strengthened in its democratic dimension in recent treaty amendments; calls, therefore, for the treaties to be amended accordingly and for the ordinary legislative procedure under the Lisbon Treaty to apply to competition law too;
Amendment 432 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Stresses that Parliament should also be granted codecision powers in the field of competition policy, and regrets that this area of Union policy has not been strengthened in its democratic dimension in recent treaty amendments; calls for
Amendment 433 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Stresses that Parliament should
Amendment 434 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Welcomes that the Commission is committed to an open and constructive exchange on competition issues globally; Welcomes the progress was made on competition provisions in some of the FTAs, but also stresses the Commission to continue its work on including competition and State aid provisions in the negotiations on all Free Trade Agreements (FTAs);
Amendment 435 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Calls in particular for a strict separation between the departments that draw up guidelines and those that have the responsibility to apply those guidelines in specific cases avoiding a situation in which the Competition DG acts as the prosecutor, jury, judge and executioner;
Amendment 436 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. For what concerns concerted practices, encourages the Commission to fight against collective boycotts as restrictions of competition by object; this is irrespective of the reasons leading to collective boycotts.
Amendment 437 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Calls for the involvement of relevant stakeholders, including national and local public authorities and the social partners, in the decision-making process of competition authorities;
Amendment 438 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 b (new) 27b. Expresses its concern at the "revolving door" scandals affecting EU competition authorities, and in particular, the case of former Commission of Competition Nellie Kroes, who will not only lobby for Uber but is also affected by the revelations of Bahamas Leaks;
Amendment 439 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) Ea. whereas a successful competition policy must not be directed exclusively towards bringing down prices for consumers, but must also be mindful of the innovativeness and investment activity of European industry and the particular competitive conditions for small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) Ea. whereas EU competition policy is defined by creating level playing field for business in Europe where companies can generate wealth, create jobs, and invest in the future;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas EU competition policy is also defined by the values of
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas EU competition policy is also defined by the values of
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas EU competition policy is interdependent with other major EU policies, including tax, industrial and digital policies, the coordination of which is intended to ensure compliance with the fundamental principles enshrined in the Treaties, in particular transparency and loyalty;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 b (new) – having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect,
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas tax evasion, tax fraud and tax havens are costing the EU taxpayers billions of euros (some estimates put the figure as high as one trillion euros) per year in lost revenue, distorting competition in the single market between those companies who pay their fair share of tax and those who do not;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas the public sector provides, produces and manages goods and services in a more efficient manner than the private sector when social, environmental or other externalities cannot be properly accounted through the market;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas global cooperation on competition enforcement helps to avoid inconsistencies in remedies and outcomes of enforcement actions, and helps businesses to reduce their costs of compliance;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F b (new) Fb. whereas the case law of the ECJ and the decision making practice of the Commission give a different interpretation to the notion of 'economic activity' depending on whether the internal market rules or the competition rules are involved; whereas this confusing practice troubles the already burdensome notion of 'economic activity' even further;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment; also
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment; also reiterates that Europe’s future should be based on innovation
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which demonstrates that proper EU Competition Policy can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment; also reiterates that Europe’s future should be based on innovation;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which can help to restore a sufficient level of investment and innovation by creating a fair competition environment; also reiterates that Europe
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 c (new) – having regard to the universal framework for Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture systems (SAFA) developed by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO),
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the annual report by the Commission on competition policy, which can help to restore a
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Considers that ensuring a level playing field for companies in the internal market also depends on decisively combating social dumping;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the Commission’s goal of opening up new opportunities for citizens and businesses by allowing people, goods, services and capital to move freely within the single market; stresses that European competition policy is a vital element of the internal market and that, without an effective EU competition policy, the internal market cannot attain its full potential;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the Commission’s goal of opening up new opportunities for citizens and businesses by allowing people, goods, services and capital to move freely within the single market; recalls that the free movement of capital, services, goods and people constitute the four freedoms of the single market and that their implementation is key to bring the EU closer to its citizens;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes the Commission’s goal of opening up new opportunities for citizens and small and medium-sized businesses by allowing people, goods, services and capital to move freely within the single market;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 (new) Deplores the fact that Article 3(3) TEU, which refers to the concept of a social market economy, amounts to a dangerous race to the bottom in terms of taxation and wages, the reason being the strong emphasis that it lays on competitiveness;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 a (new) – having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 23 June 2016 on the renewable energy progress report,
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recalls that net neutrality is of the uttermost importance to ensure that there is no discrimination between internet services and competition is fully guaranteed. Where "Net neutrality" means the principle according to which all internet traffic is treated equally, without discrimination, restriction or interference, independently of its sender, recipient, type, content, device, service or application;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Maintains that an effective competition policy has to allow for the specific market conditions applying to SMEs, micro-enterprises, and start-ups, and must protect workers’ rights and make for fair taxation;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax and that taxes must be paid in the place where profits are generated; welcomes the Commission’s in-depth investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems; maintains that greater efforts also need to be brought to bear on aggressive tax practices; stresses that the concept of keen competition implicit in the Treaties is translating into a fiscal race to the bottom;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax; Welcomes the Commission’s in-depth investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems; stresses that the reduction of tax fraud and tax avoidance is fundamental in order to consolidate sound public budgets ; calls the Commission to provide the European Parliament all the requested documentation regarding the tax rulings affaires;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax in the Member State where production takes place; Welcomes the Commission’s in- depth investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems, but expresses its dissatisfaction with the low level of sanctions and the current practice where it is the Member State that facilitates tax evasion that receives the payment of the fine;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax; Welcomes the Commission’s in-depth investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems; reiterates the necessity of implementing the Anti Tax Avoidance Package, the rules on information exchange between EU countries and the quick reaction mechanism to combat VAT fraud in order to ensure fair competition;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 b (new) – having regard to the European Parliament resolution of 14 September 2016 on social dumping in the European Union,
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their fair share of tax;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Re
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates that all market players should pay their
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Underlines that since the Lux Leaks scandal, the EU has acknowledged that it is necessary to put an end to irresponsible tax competition by Member States, which places an intolerable tax burden on honest taxpayers and prevents the development of SMEs. The Commission and the EP have made serious efforts to combat tax evasion and tax fraud. Stresses the need to investigate thoroughly all the cases where suspected that the aim is tax optimisation by multinationals, like for example in the legislation on tax credits for growth in Hungary;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Praises and strongly welcomes in particular the recent Commission decision as regards the Ireland/Apple case which represents a key milestone for addressing the issue of illegal state aid by means of tax advantages; encourages the Commission to investigate similar cases across the single market;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that Brexit could negatively affect EU competition policy as a tool to promote the integration of the single market; is concerned, in particular, of the risk of duplication of proceedings which would increase administrative costs and delay investigation processes;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that healthy tax competition accompanied with appropriate transfer mechanisms set up to compensate for the structural economic divergences between different regions and states of the Union remains a constitutive element of the internal market of the Union;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls Member States to publish information on their tax rulings and to present it in a regional breakdown, to ensure that there is not an excess of tax rulings in some regions creating de facto state aid to them;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Commission to make full use of its powers under competition law to help Member States to tackle harmful tax practices efficiently;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 7 Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Recommends an increased sharing of information between national authorities in order to ensure that taxes are paid in EU when this shall be the case and in the relevant Member State;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Stresses that, within the internal market, new entrants and SMEs doing business only in one country are penalised as compared to MNCs, which can shift profits or implement other forms of aggressive tax planning through a variety of decisions and instruments, available to them only; notes with concern that, everything being equal, the resulting lower tax liabilities leave the latter with a higher post-tax profit and create an uneven playing field with their competitors on the single market, which do not have recourse to aggressive tax planning and keep the connection between where they generate profit and their place of taxation; stresses that promoting harmful tax practices through the creation of a European one-person- entity (SUP) which explicitly allows for having two different residences, a registered office in one place and an administrative headquarter is the wrong approach for the EU;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Emphasises that corruption in public procurement has serious market distorting effects on European competitiveness; reiterates that public procurement is one of the government activities most vulnerable to corruption; highlights that in certain Member States, EU funded procurement carries higher corruption risks than nationally funded procurement; reminds that tailor-made tender invitations are widely used to limit market competition; calls on the Commission to continue its effort to prevent the misuse of EU funds and stimulate accountability in public procurement; urges the establishment of the European Public Prosecutors' Office with the necessary rights in order to better investigate alleged crimes against EU money;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Underlines the need for simple and transparent tax policies and regulations;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Recognises the actions of the Commission against international companies distorting fair competition on the European Single Market; reminds that unfair competition is still one of the main challenges identified by European SMEs; highlights that illegal tax benefits granted by Member State governments to multinational companies generate a highly anti-competitive environment and further degrade the capacity of SMEs for job creation; calls on the Member States to forthwith cease such activities and asks the Commission to actively support the improvement of SMEs' access to markets, the reduction of administrative burdens on SMEs and the promotion of entrepreneurship and skills within the EU;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Underlines however that taxation is a national competence, dependent on the political view and actions of governments and parliaments, based upon fiscal policies and political aspirations regarding public spending;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Calls to revising state aid guidelines on taxation to cover cases of unfair competition going beyond tax rulings and transfer pricing;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 d (new) 3d. Calls for achieving diligent progress as regards an EU legislative framework to prevent distortions of competition by aggressive tax planning and tax evasion; recommends in that perspective the establishment of CCCTB and a guarantee that no profit leaves the EU untaxed, the public disclosure of tax rulings, a review of the VAT Directive in order to prevent fraud, the obligation on large international companies to report publicly their turnover and profits on a 'country-by-country' basis, and a call on the Member States to introduce greater transparency in their tax practices and mutual reporting requirements;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 d (new) 3d. Calls on the Member States and the EU institutions to prioritise the strengthening of the post-Brexit Single Market by ensuring full compliance with European competition laws and by further increasing cooperation between Member States on tax issues;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 e (new) 3e. Considers that fair competition can be hampered by tax planning; welcomes the Commission recommendation to adjust the definition of 'permanent establishment' so that companies cannot artificially avoid having a taxable presence in Member States in which they have an economic activity; stresses that this definition should also address the specific situation of the digital sector, ensuring that companies engaged in fully dematerialised activities are considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State if they maintain a significant digital presence in the economy of that country;
source: 592.327
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2020-01-19Show (13) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| docs/7/body |
EC
|
| events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2017-0001&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2017-0001_EN.html |
| events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2017-0027New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2017-0027_EN.html |
2019-07-12Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
2019-07-06Show (21) Changes | Timetravel
| activities |
|
| commission |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/1 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/2 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| committees/4 |
|
| docs |
|
| events |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
ECON/8/06421New
|
| 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
New
|
2017-02-16Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2/docs |
|
| activities/3/docs |
|
| activities/3/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Debate in Parliament |
| activities/4 |
|
| other/0/dg/url |
Old
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/competition/New
http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/competition_en |
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stageNew
Procedure completed |
2017-01-14Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2 |
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage |
2016-12-10Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
2016-12-07Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
2016-12-03Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/date |
Old
2016-12-05T00:00:00New
2016-12-08T00:00:00 |
2016-11-26Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/1/shadows/6 |
|
| activities/2 |
|
| committees/1/shadows/6 |
|
2016-09-17Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/2/date |
2016-07-13T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
| committees/2/date |
2016-07-13T00:00:00
|
| committees/2/rapporteur |
|
2016-08-31Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/date |
2016-07-14T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur |
|
| committees/0/date |
2016-07-14T00:00:00
|
| committees/0/rapporteur |
|
2016-07-23Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0 |
|
| committees/0 |
|
2016-07-06Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/2/date |
2016-06-15T00:00:00
|
| activities/0/committees/2/rapporteur |
|
| committees/2/date |
2016-06-15T00:00:00
|
| committees/2/rapporteur |
|
2016-07-01Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
| activities/0/committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/4 |
|
| committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
2016-06-25Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/committees/3 |
|
| committees/3 |
|
2016-06-15Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
ECON/8/06421
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2016-06-14Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| other/0 |
|
2016-06-11Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|