Next event: Commission response to text adopted in plenary 2018/09/10 more...
- Results of vote in Parliament 2018/04/19
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading 2018/04/19
- End of procedure in Parliament 2018/04/19
- Debate in Parliament 2018/04/18
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading 2018/03/01
- Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading 2018/02/21
- Committee opinion 2017/12/06
- Amendments tabled in committee 2017/11/28
- Committee opinion 2017/11/27
- Committee opinion 2017/11/21
- Committee draft report 2017/10/23
Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | ECON | TREMOSA I BALCELLS Ramon ( ALDE) | STOLOJAN Theodor Dumitru ( PPE), SANT Alfred ( S&D), LOONES Sander ( ECR), LÓPEZ BERMEJO Paloma ( GUE/NGL), REIMON Michel ( Verts/ALE), KAPPEL Barbara ( ENF) |
Committee Opinion | AGRI | SZANYI Tibor ( S&D) | Bas BELDER ( ECR), Michel DANTIN ( PPE), Miguel VIEGAS ( GUE/NGL) |
Committee Opinion | IMCO | SCHALDEMOSE Christel ( S&D) | Jan Philipp ALBRECHT ( Verts/ALE), Dennis de JONG ( GUE/NGL) |
Committee Opinion | INTA | SAÏFI Tokia ( PPE) | Sander LOONES ( ECR), Anne-Marie MINEUR ( GUE/NGL), Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS ( ALDE) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The European Parliament adopted by 445 votes to 104, with 38 abstentions, a resolution on the annual report on competition policy.
Members welcomed the report on competition policy 2016 of 31 May 2017, which shows that, in a fair competitive environment, investment and innovation are key for the future of Europe.
While strongly supporting the independence of the Commission and national competition authorities in their mission to shape and enforce effectively EU competition rules, Members called on the Commission to ensure regular information and exchanges with Parliament on competition policy, as provided for by the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) between the Commission and Parliament.
Improving the application of competition rules : Parliament called on the Commission to monitor the implementation of legislation linked to the completion of the single market, such as in the energy (including self-consumption) and transport sectors, the digital market, and retail financial services (including insurances), in order to improve the enforcement of EU competition rules and achieve a consistent application in Member States.
Members noted, however, that state aid can be an indispensable tool to secure the necessary infrastructure and supply for both the energy and transport sectors, and can be necessary to ensure the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI). They stressed that accessing cash from ATMs is an essential public service that must be provided without any discriminatory, anti-competitive or unfair practices.
The Commission was asked to:
reallocate adequate financial and human resources to DG Competition; continue its efforts to prevent the misuse of EU funds and in public procurement which is one of the government activities most vulnerable to corruption; adopt indicative guidelines to shorten the duration of antitrust investigations and proceedings for abuse of a dominant market position; examine carefully, in connection with a possible reform of the Merger Regulation, whether current assessment procedures take sufficient account of circumstances on digital markets.
Tax competition : Parliament reiterated that fair tax competition is important for the integrity of the internal market and that all market players, including digital companies , should pay their fair share of taxes where their profit is generated and compete on equal terms. It stressed the need to tax companies on the basis of their genuine activity in Member States.
Distortive anti-competitive practices, such as selective tax advantages, should be eliminated. Furthermore, the Commission should have access to all the relevant information exchanged between the national tax authorities, in order to assess the compatibility of their tax rulings and arrangements with EU competition rules.
Digital market : Members welcomed the Commission's decision against illegal tax benefits granted to Amazon and stressed that timely recovery of illegal aid is essential. They noted the Commission's statement of objections and its preliminary findings that Google has abused its dominant market position as a search engine by giving illegal advantages to another of its products, this being its price comparison shopping service. The Commission is called on to ensure that this company effectively implements corrective measures as soon as possible.
In general, Parliament stressed the specific challenge that digital businesses represented for competition and tax authorities, in particular as regards algorithms, artificial intelligence or the value of data. They encouraged the Commission to develop policy and enforcement instruments dealing with the emergence of digital economies.
Financial services : Parliament has asked the Commission to closely monitor activities in the retail banking and financial services sectors. It invited the Commission to explain under what conditions it was possible to use public funds to bail out major banks. It considered it a priority to ensure that State aid rules will be strictly respected when dealing with future banking crises, so that the burden of rescuing banks does not fall on taxpayers.
Members also stressed that access to cash via ATMs is an essential public service that must be provided without any anti-competitive practices being applied.
Transport sector : the Commission was asked to ensure fair competition in the transport sector in order to complete the single market, taking account of the public interest and environmental considerations and safeguarding the connectivity of insular and peripheral regions.
Members called on the Commission to:
clarify state aid rules for European and non-European airlines , with a view to establishing a level playing field between their operations targeting European and non-European markets. The same competition rules should be applied to all air carriers when flying to or from the EU and to both national and low-cost carriers; carefully assess all airline merger deals in accordance with the EU’s merger control procedure, including their impact on market competition; complete the implementation of the Single European Railway Area and to verify that every Member State has a strong and independent national antitrust regulator.
International cooperation : Parliament stressed the importance of international cooperation for the effective application of competition law principles in an era of globalisation. It asked the Commission to include a chapter on competition in international trade and investment agreements.
Members called for trade defence instruments to be updated to make them stronger, faster and more effective. They welcomed the new method of calculating anti-dumping duties by assessing market distortions in third countries. They emphasised, furthermore, the particular importance of the anti-subsidy instrument in tackling unfair global competition, and establishing a level playing field with EU state aid rules.
The resolution emphasised that reciprocity must be one of the key principles underpinning Union commercial policy, with a view to ensuring a level playing field for EU firms, in particular in the area of public procurement.
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs adopted the own-initiative report by Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS (ADLE, ES) on the annual report on competition policy. Members welcomed the report on competition policy 2016 of 31 May 2017, which shows that, in a fair competitive environment, investment and innovation are key for the future of Europe.
They strongly supported the independence of the Commission and national competition authorities in their mission to shape and enforce effectively EU competition rules and asked the Commission to ensure regular information and exchanges with Parliament on competition policy, as provided for by the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA) between the Commission and Parliament.
Improving the application of competition rules : the report called on the Commission to monitor the implementation of legislation linked to the completion of the single market, such as in the energy (including self-consumption) and transport sectors, the digital market, and retail financial services, in order to improve the enforcement of EU competition rules and achieve a consistent application in Member States.
Members noted, however, that state aid can be an indispensable tool to secure the necessary infrastructure and supply for both the energy and transport sectors, and can be necessary to ensure the delivery of services of general economic interest (SGEI). They stressed that accessing cash from ATMs is an essential public service that must be provided without any discriminatory, anti-competitive or unfair practices.
The Commission was asked to:
reallocate adequate financial and human resources to DG Competition; continue its efforts to prevent the misuse of EU funds and stimulate accountability in public procurement; adopt indicative guidelines to shorten the duration of antitrust investigations and proceedings for abuse of a dominant market position; examine carefully, in connection with a possible reform of the Merger Regulation, whether current assessment procedures take sufficient account of circumstances on digital markets.
Tax competition : Members reiterated that fair tax competition is important for the integrity of the internal market and that all market players, including digital companies , should pay their fair share of taxes where their profit is generated and compete on equal terms. Distortive anti-competitive practices, such as selective tax advantages , should be eliminated. Furthermore, the Commission should have access to all the relevant information exchanged between the national tax authorities, in order to assess the compatibility of their tax rulings and arrangements with EU competition rules.
Digital market : Members strongly welcomed the Commission’s decision against the illegal tax benefits granted to Amazon and stressed that the timely recovery of illegal aid is essential. They took note of the Commission’s statement of objections and its preliminary conclusion that Google has abused its market dominance as a search engine by giving an illegal advantage to another of its products, this being its comparison shopping service. The Commission was called upon to: (i) ensure that the company implements the remedy effectively and promptly; (ii) diligently conduct all other pending antitrust investigations, such as Android, AdSense, and investigations in the travel and local search sectors, where Google is allegedly abusing its dominance; (iii) develop policy and enforcement instruments dealing with the emergence of digital economies.
Transport sector : the Commission was asked to ensure fair competition in the transport sector in order to complete the single market, taking account of the public interest and environmental considerations and safeguarding the connectivity of insular and peripheral regions.
Members called on the Commission to clarify state aid rules for European and non-European airlines , with a view to establishing a level playing field between their operations targeting European and non-European markets. The report stated that the same competition rules should be applied to all air carriers when flying to or from the EU and to both national and low-cost carriers.
The Commission was invited to carefully assess all airline merger deals in accordance with the EU’s merger control procedure, including their impact on market competition. Members also asked the Commission to complete the implementation of the Single European Railway Area.
Trade defence instruments: Members called for trade defence instruments to be updated to make them stronger, faster and more effective. They welcomed the new method of calculating anti-dumping duties by assessing market distortions in third countries. They emphasised, furthermore, the particular importance of the anti-subsidy instrument in tackling unfair global competition, and establishing a level playing field with EU state aid rules.
The report emphasised that reciprocity must be one of the key principles underpinning Union commercial policy, with a view to ensuring a level playing field for EU firms, in particular in the area of public procurement. It called on the Commission to take account of the needs of SMEs when conducting negotiations and trade with a view to ensuring better access to markets and making the firms in question more competitive.
Lastly, Members stressed that the Commission must put increased effort into ensuring the consistent application of the EU competition rules in all Member States with regard to e-commerce-related business practices.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)474
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T8-0187/2018
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A8-0049/2018
- Committee opinion: PE610.575
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE615.197
- Committee opinion: PE610.689
- Committee opinion: PE609.616
- Committee draft report: PE612.214
- Committee draft report: PE612.214
- Committee opinion: PE609.616
- Committee opinion: PE610.689
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE615.197
- Committee opinion: PE610.575
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)474
Activities
- Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS
Plenary Speeches (2)
- 2016/11/22 Annual Report on Competition Policy (debate)
- 2016/11/22 Annual Report on Competition Policy (debate)
- Michel DANTIN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Doru-Claudian FRUNZULICĂ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Annual Report on Competition Policy (debate)
- Brian HAYES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Annual Report on Competition Policy (debate)
- Sander LOONES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bernard MONOT
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Stanisław OŻÓG
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Dariusz ROSATI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Theodor Dumitru STOLOJAN
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Annual Report on Competition Policy (debate)
- Tibor SZANYI
Plenary Speeches (1)
- 2016/11/22 Annual Report on Competition Policy (debate)
Amendments | Dossier |
69 |
2017/2191(INI)
2017/10/05
IMCO
69 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that competition policy is closely interlinked with taxation policy; encourages the Commission to strengthen its efforts to tackle illegal state aid and taxation rules that distort competition in the internal market and particularly affect micro-enterprises; notes that it will also be necessary to ensure that precise and efficient competition rules are laid down, maintained and complied with;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Acknowledges the Commission’s efforts to combat unfair competition in high-profile cases against well-known companies, but stresses that the enforcement of fair competition in the case of SMEs is also of the utmost importance in order to boost jobs and ensure fair economic competition;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Acknowledges the Commission’s efforts to combat unfair competition
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Encourages the Commission to strengthen the supervision of national implementation of competition policy; is concerned that uneven enforcement of EU competition law by national authorities can result in varying outcomes, thus distorting competition in the internal market; welcomes in this regard the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+; stresses in this respect that the refusal of requested authority to enforce a decision imposing fines based on the exception under Art.25.5 of the proposal should always be duly justified and a system should be set up whereby potential disputes between authorities in such cases could be solved; furthermore asks the Commission to ensure that the notification of the start of formal investigative measure received from a national competition authority under Article 11.3 of Regulation 1/2003 is made available to the national competition authorities of the other Member States within the ECN;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Encourages the Commission to strengthen the supervision of national implementation of competition policy; is concerned that uneven enforcement of EU competition law by national authorities can result in varying outcomes, thus distorting competition in the internal market; stresses the need for national competition authorities to be independent and have adequate human and financial resources to perform their tasks effectively; welcomes in this regard the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Encourages the Commission to strengthen the supervision of national implementation of competition policy in order to guarantee equal and fair competition conditions for undertakings; is concerned that uneven enforcement of EU competition law by national authorities can result in varying outcomes, thus distorting competition in the internal market; welcomes in this regard the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Encourages the Commission to strengthen
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses that national competition authorities play a decisive role in the enforcement of EU competition law alongside the European Commission and thus significantly contribute to a properly functioning, competitive, and consumer-oriented internal market, but that they need the necessary financial and human resources and independence in order to function effectively;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Is concerned that uneven enforcement of EU competition law by national authorities can result in varying outcomes, thus distorting competition in the internal market;welcomes in this regard the Commission’s proposal on the ECN+;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Notes the Commission’s final report on the E-commerce sector inquiry1a, which confirms that in the e- commerce sector many existing business practices negatively affect fair competition and limit consumer choice; _________________ 1a http://ec.europa.eu/competition/antitrust/s ector_inquiry_final_report_en.pdf
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4 b. Supports the Commission’s intention to target enforcement of the EU competition rules at widespread business practices that have emerged or evolved as a result of the growth of e-commerce;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4 c. Stresses that the Commission must put increased effort into ensuring consistent application of the EU competition rules in all Member States also with regards to e-commerce-related business practices;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Reiterates th
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Reiterates the possible option of setting up a travelling unit within the Commission which, independently of Member States’ efforts, would need be able to investigate and take decisions in suspected cases of unfair competition and breaches of competition law;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Highlights the importance of access to justice for
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Highlights the importance of
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Highlights the importance of access to justice for consumers and of the availability for collective redress in order to ensure fair competition and equitable treatment for consumers; underlines that the absence of such opportunities weakens competition at the expense of the internal market and consumer rights;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Highlights the importance of access to justice for consumers and of the availability for collective redress in order to ensure fair competition; underlines that the absence of such opportunities on EU level weakens competition
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that fair tax competition
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Stresses that efforts to foster competition through the development of the Digital Single Market must at all times work in the interests of consumers, and that the rights enshrined in the EU Charter for fundamental rights must be fully protected in the digital domain;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. Stresses that competition that is both free and fair is ultimately for the benefit of consumers;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that if anti-competitive practices are to be fought effectively, all aspects of unfair competition must be taken into consideration, including social dumping and fraudulent posting of workers
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that if anti-competitive practices are to be fought effectively, Member States must adopt an economic policy that is consistent with the principles of an open market economy based on fair competition, and all aspects of unfair competition must be taken into consideration, including social dumping
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that if anti-competitive practices are to be fought effectively, all aspects of unfair competition must be
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that if anti-competitive practices are to be fought effectively, all aspects of unfair competition must be taken into consideration, including
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recalls that if anti-competitive practices are to be fought effectively, all aspects of unfair competition must be taken into consideration, including
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Recalls that competition policy is closely interlinked with taxation policy; encourages the Commission to strengthen its efforts to tackle
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Welcomes the continuous review and evaluation of EU competition law by the Commission;considers, for example, the consultation carried out by the Commission on the possible improvement of EU merger control to be very important;believes that steps must be taken to ensure, in particular in the digital sphere, that mergers do not restrict competition in the EU internal market;calls again on the Commission to therefore examine carefully whether current assessment procedures take sufficient account of circumstances on digital markets and of the internationalisation of markets;considers in this connection that, for example, the merger assessment criteria should be adapted;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Takes note of the E-commerce Sector Inquiry and its final report;believes that the inquiry should be part of a greater enforcement effort by the Commission to apply the full competition policy to online retailers;underlines that given the asymmetrical relationship between large online retailers and their suppliers, the Commission and national competition authorities should actively enforce competition rules as suppliers, especially SMEs, do not have the means to challenge such players in the courts;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Calls on Member States to ensure the proper enforcement of EU public procurement rules in order to ensure fair competition including social, environmental and consumer protection criteria where appropriate and promote good practice in public authorities’ processes;proper enforcement will tackle distortions of competition and enable public authorities to choose to organise and provide quality public services so as to ensure effective and efficient public expenditure;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses that unjustified and disproportionate regulations on access to regulated professions and the pursuit of professional activities distort competition in the services market, restrict opportunities for young professionals and adversely affect the interests of consumers, inter alia by increasing the prices of services;calls, therefore, on the Commission to step up its efforts to limit unjustified regulations and open access to regulated professions;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Points out that one form of social dumping can arise through crowdsourcing, the practice in which platforms offer contracts to so-called ´independent contractors´, irrespective of their location globally, at the lowest price;is concerned that this can undermine existing EU legislation, in particular Directive 2008/104/EC, as it can lead to bogus self-employment and may undermine the position of workers in the EU.
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Underlines the essential role of administrative fines in deterring future breaches of competition law;urges all Member States to grant their competition authorities the power to impose such fines;considers it essential that a parent company can be held liable for infringement of EU competition law by its subsidiaries;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Recalls that persistent concerns about the issue of dual product quality distort consumers' trust and competition in the single market;calls on the Commission and Member States to intensify efforts to tackle dual products quality for both food and non-food products;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Feels that the development of interoperability and electronic public procurement procedures will make it easier for SMEs to access public procurement, will increase transparency and will ensure more effective monitoring of the infringement of competition rules in this area:
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Reiterates that protectionist measures harm the functioning of the Single Market and encourages the Commission to enforce the Single Market rules and guide Member States to comply with fundamental freedoms including the free movement of labour.
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Underlines that territorial distribution and selective distribution agreements cannot be used as a justified reason to geoblock consumers, especially in case of passive sales without delivery;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Stresses that monopolies and oligopolies, in particular, violate the principles of fair competition in services, trade and investment, and often harm the legitimate interests of consumers;calls, therefore, on the Commission to step up its efforts against monopolistic practices that distort competition;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Is concerned by the increased use of contractual restrictions by manufacturers on online sales, as confirmed by the e-commerce inquiry, and calls on the Commission to further review such clauses to ensure that they do not create unjustified restrictions of competition;at the same time, asks the Commission to review the Guidelines on Vertical Restraints and the Block Exemption (Regulation 330/2010) in light of these changes;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Reiterates its request to 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 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Believes that criteria to join a selective distribution should be transparent in order to ensure that such criteria do not violate competition policy and the free functioning of the single market;underlines that such criteria must be objective, qualitative, non- discriminatory and not go beyond what is strictly necessary;calls on the Commission to take measures to ensure this transparency;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Calls for the strengthening of the freedom of choice for consumers in the Digital Single Market;considers that the enshrined right to data portability in the GDPR is a good approach to strengthening the rights of consumers and competition;in this context underlines the need to examine how interoperability between digital networks by open standards and interfaces can be ensured;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Recalls that, in light of the Digital Single Market Strategy, there is a need to strengthen consumer and business confidence in e-commerce, which will help strengthen the powers of national competition enforcement authorities as regards compliance with competition rules and ensure the effective cooperation of these authorities with the Commission, in addition to ensuring cyber security;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Calls on the Commission to promote market access opportunities for SMEs through smaller contracts where compatible with key procurement objectives, and for the Commission to carefully monitor the centralisation of purchases in public procurement markets;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Emphasises the relationship between the internal market and competition policy;encourages strong cooperation between Parliament’s Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection and the Commission in order to ensure that the interests of consumers are protected and promoted in any and all efforts to encourage a competitive EU.
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Believes that retailers should be able to set retail prices freely;believes that price parity and conditional parity clauses may undermine free competition, especially in the digital single market;asks the Commission to further analyse such clauses and if needed, to propose restrictions on their use;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Requests the Commission to explain how under the current competition policies, small market-players can work together when they are all facing big market-players, for example in the food supply chain, or in the case of the franchising model.
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Welcomes the adoption of rules on the portability of pre-paid services under the Single Digital Market Strategy that will improve competition on the internal market and ensure greater consumer rights;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Supports the Commission’s investigations into anti-competitive practices such as selective tax advantages or excess profit ruling systems; emphasises that if there is to be a well-functioning internal market all players need to pay their fair share of tax; considers it necessary to have a solid regulatory and supervisory framework with transparent rules that will guarantee access to the market for all companies, including SMEs;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Considers that, where duly justified, competition policy solutions should be given preference to regulatory initiatives in the area of Digital Single Market;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7 d. Underlines that territorial distribution and selective distribution agreements cannot be used as a justified reason to geoblock consumers, especially in case of passive sales without delivery;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7d. Welcomes the gradual liberalisation of sectors such as telecoms, postal services and public transport with a view to creating a competitive environment from which consumers will also benefit.
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7 d. Calls on the Commission to examine the dominant role of certain on- line platforms in relation to SMEs and any unfair terms and conditions imposed by these platforms in respect of SMEs.
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 e (new) 7 e. Believes that criteria to join a selective distribution or franchising network should be transparent in order to ensure that such criteria do not violate competition policy and the free functioning of the single market;underlines that such criteria must be objective, qualitative, non- discriminatory and not go beyond what is strictly necessary;calls on the Commission to take measures to ensure this transparency;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 f (new) 7 f. Takes note of the Advocate General Wahl's 26 July 2017 opinion on Coty Germany GmbH v Parfümerie Akzente GmbH that distribution agreement restrictions on online marketplace sales should not be considered as hardcore restrictions under the VBER;nonetheless, asks the Commission, in order to protect competition, to ensure that such restrictions are limited to what is strictly necessary;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 g (new) 7 g. Notes the increased risk of collusion between competitors due to, among others, price monitoring software;considers that concerted practices may emerge despite contact between competitors being weaker than required under current norms, perhaps even automated, as algorithms interact with each other independent of the direction of one or more market players;asks the Commission to be vigilant to such new challenges to free competition;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 h (new) 7 h. Considers that effective competition policy can complement or, in some cases, replace regulatory initiatives in the area of the Digital Single Market;considers that where the impetus for regulatory action is primarily in response to market actions by some players, it would be wiser to tackle any harms through competition measures;believes this would tackle the real anticompetitive practices without holding back those who seek to compete;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 i (new) 7 i. Welcomes the Commission's efforts to link with their international partners and multilateral fora in the area of competition policy;believes that international cooperation is increasingly essential where companies subject to actions operate across multiple jurisdictions;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 j (new) 7 j. Believes that increasing the network of free trade agreements involving the European Union will benefit the enforcement of competition law globally;encourages the Commission in this regard to seek further trade agreement opportunities and to include strong antitrust and state aid rules in any such future agreements;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Supports the Commission’s investigations into anti-competitive practices; s
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Supports the Commission’s investigations into anti-competitive practices such as
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
source: 612.074
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
ECON/8/09763New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/2/date |
Old
2018-04-16T00:00:00New
2018-03-01T00:00:00 |
activities/2/docs |
|
activities/2/type |
Old
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading |
activities/3 |
|
activities/4 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052New
Rules of Procedure EP 52 |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Procedure completed |
activities/1/committees |
|
activities/1/type |
Old
Vote scheduled in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading |
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150
|
activities/1/date |
Old
2018-02-22T00:00:00New
2018-02-21T00:00:00 |
activities/1/date |
Old
2018-02-21T00:00:00New
2018-02-22T00:00:00 |
activities/2 |
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/0/committees/1/shadows/3 |
|
committees/1/shadows/3 |
|
activities/0/committees/1/shadows/4 |
|
committees/1/shadows/4 |
|
other/0 |
|
activities/0/committees/3/date |
2017-08-30T00:00:00
|
activities/0/committees/3/rapporteur |
|
committees/3/date |
2017-08-30T00:00:00
|
committees/3/rapporteur |
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|