Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | IMCO | COMI Lara ( PPE) | GRAPINI Maria ( S&D), SULÍK Richard ( ECR), SELIMOVIC Jasenko ( ALDE), ŠOLTES Igor ( Verts/ALE), ZULLO Marco ( EFDD) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Events
The European Parliament adopted by 570 votes to 23, with 26 abstentions, a resolution on the implementation of Directive 2011/7/EU on combating late payment in commercial transactions.
Making late payments is a persistent harmful practice that has a negative effect on the development of European companies, in particular SMEs, negatively influencing their liquidity, complicating their financial management and affecting their competitiveness and profitability. Late payment still accounts for 1 in 4 bankruptcies in the EU.
According to the Atradius Payment Practices Barometer, 95 % of SMEs report being paid late in Europe, which is a higher proportion than large companies. Late payment is particularly pervasive in those with a prevalence of SMEs in the relevant value chain (e.g. construction, utilities and transport, professional services, manufacturing, food and drink, and IT/telecommunications).
Improving payment behaviour in the EU
Under Directive 2011//7/EU (Late Payment Directive), public authorities bear a ‘special responsibility in fostering a business environment supportive of timely payments. B oth the Late Payment Directive and national legislation on late payment should be better enforced, promptly and effectively, through compliance with the maximum time limits established for the payment of invoices and measures aimed at improving rules on payment terms and discouraging unfair practices.
Preventive measures
Members considered that legislation setting out stricter payment terms would be effective in reducing the length of delays to some extent and, provided that this is enforced, would create a level playing field between large and small companies. They noted that some Member States have limited the standard payment term to 30 days, while only a few Member States have introduced maximum payment terms that the parties cannot deviate from.
With a view to enhancing transparency , Parliament encouraged Member States to i) consider different possible forms of mandatory publication of information on payment behaviour, such as databases or registers, for both the private and public sectors (ii) consider the setting up of mandatory systems providing information on good payment behaviour (‘name and fame’); (iii) foster a culture of prompt payment in business relations, (iii) encourage a culture of prompt payment in business relationships; and (iv) improve their training provision for SMEs in credit management.
Members asked the Commission to carry out a study on existing national systems providing information on good payment behaviour (‘name and fame’) of both businesses and public authorities, and explore the feasibility of establishing common criteria for these systems at EU level.
Remedial measures
Member States were called upon to:
- consider the setting up of national and regional free and confidential mediation services accessible to all companies, as an alternative to court proceedings, to resolve payment disputes and maintain business relations, but also to educate the companies about their rights and remedies against late payment;
- ensure effective access to justice in matters relating to the recovery of debts in cross-border transactions;
- enforce national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, for example among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive, thereby contributing to the improvement of payment behaviour;
- take the necessary steps to ensure that public authorities pay their suppliers on time and that creditors receive the automatic payment of statutory interest on late payments and compensation when payments are late without the need for overdue payment proceedings;
- set up guarantee funds for SMEs that guarantee the bank debts of SMEs that are owed outstanding amounts by the public authorities.
Parliament called for consideration of enhanced synergies between the Late Payment Directive and public procurement rules, in particular the possibility for contracting authorities to take action to enable the exclusion of non-performing contractors from future procurements if the main contractor does not pay subcontractors in time when it is required to do so.
Conclusions and recommendations
Members reminded Member States and the Commission that prompt payment is an overarching requirement for viable business environments and that, as such, it should be mainstreamed into all policy and legislative initiatives affecting businesses (e.g. CSR, start-ups and platform-to-businesses relationships).
Member States and the Commission were called upon to:
- take full responsibility in the exercise of payment on the part of the public administration and to improve their legislation ensuring proper implementation of the Late Payment Directive in all its parts. In parallel, the Commission should do its utmost to try to ensure the full and adequate implementation of existing obligations;
- foster ‘a decisive shift towards a culture of prompt payment’ by taking the most suitable measures, including issuing guidelines on best practices and, where necessary and appropriate, legislative initiatives, with the aim of creating a reliable business environment for companies;
- make payment procedures more efficient, underlining in particular that verification procedures for checking invoices or the conformity of goods and services with the contractual specifications should not be used to extend payment periods artificially beyond the limits imposed by the Directive;
- use professional publications, promotion campaigns and any other instruments to increase awareness of the remedies against late payment among undertakings.
The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection adopted the own-initiative report by Lara COMI (EPP, IT) on the implementation of Directive 2011/7/EU on combating late payment in commercial transactions.
Making late payments is a persistent harmful practice that has a negative effect on the development of European companies, in particular SMEs, negatively influencing their liquidity, complicating their financial management and affecting their competitiveness and profitability.
According to the Atradius Payment Practices Barometer, 95 % of SMEs report being paid late in Europe, which is a higher proportion than large companies. Late payment is particularly pervasive in those with a prevalence of SMEs in the relevant value chain (e.g. construction, utilities and transport, professional services, manufacturing, food and drink, and IT/telecommunications).
Under Directive 2011//7/EU (Late Payment Directive), public authorities bear a ‘special responsibility in fostering a business environment supportive of timely payments.
Improving payment behaviour in the EU
Members believed that both the Late Payment Directive and national legislation on late payment should be better enforced , promptly and effectively, through compliance with the maximum time limits established for the payment of invoices and measures aimed at improving rules on payment terms and discouraging unfair practices. These measures can be categorised according to their nature (legal or voluntary), scope (horizontal or sector-specific) and objective (preventive, remedial or change in business culture).
Preventive measures
Members considered that legislation setting out stricter payment terms would be effective in reducing the length of delays to some extent and, provided that this is enforced, would create a level playing field between large and small companies. They noted that some Member States have limited the standard payment term to 30 days, while only a few Member States have introduced maximum payment terms that the parties cannot deviate from.
With a view to enhancing transparency , the report encourages Member States to i) consider different possible forms of mandatory publication of information on payment behaviour, such as databases or registers, for both the private and public sectors (ii) consider the setting up of mandatory systems providing information on good payment behaviour (‘name and fame’); (iii) foster a culture of prompt payment in business relations, (iii) encourage a culture of prompt payment in business relationships; and (iv) improve their training provision for SMEs in credit management.
Remedial measures
Member States were called upon to:
- consider the setting up of national and regional free and confidential mediation services accessible to all companies, as an alternative to court proceedings, to resolve payment disputes and maintain business relations, but also to educate the companies about their rights and remedies against late payment;
- ensure effective access to justice in matters relating to the recovery of debts in cross-border transactions;
- enforce national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, for example among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive, thereby contributing to the improvement of payment behaviour;
- take the necessary steps to ensure that public authorities pay their suppliers on time and that creditors receive the automatic payment of statutory interest on late payments and compensation when payments are late without the need for overdue payment proceedings;
The report called for consideration of enhanced synergies between the Late Payment Directive and public procurement rules , in particular the possibility for contracting authorities to take action to enable the exclusion of non-performing contractors from future procurements if the main contractor does not pay subcontractors in time when it is required to do so.
Conclusions and recommendations
Members reminded Member States and the Commission that prompt payment is an overarching requirement for viable business environments and that, as such, it should be mainstreamed into all policy and legislative initiatives affecting businesses (e.g. CSR, start-ups and platform-to-businesses relationships).
Member States and the Commission were called upon to:
- take full responsibility in the exercise of payment on the part of the public administration and to improve their legislation ensuring proper implementation of the Late Payment Directive in all its parts. In parallel, the Commission should do its utmost to try to ensure the full and adequate implementation of existing obligations;
- foster ‘a decisive shift towards a culture of prompt payment’ by taking the most suitable measures, including issuing guidelines on best practices and, where necessary and appropriate, legislative initiatives, with the aim of creating a reliable business environment for companies;
- make payment procedures more efficient , underlining in particular that verification procedures for checking invoices or the conformity of goods and services with the contractual specifications should not be used to extend payment periods artificially beyond the limits imposed by the Directive;
- use professional publications, promotion campaigns and any other instruments to increase awareness of the remedies against late payment among undertakings.
Documents
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2019)355
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0042/2019
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A8-0456/2018
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE629.463
- Committee draft report: PE625.375
- Committee draft report: PE625.375
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE629.463
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2019)355
Activities
- Lucy ANDERSON
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Lidia Joanna GERINGER DE OEDENBERG
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jiří MAŠTÁLKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Cristian Dan PREDA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Paul RÜBIG
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Jasenko SELIMOVIC
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Igor ŠOLTES
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Richard SULÍK
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Anneleen VAN BOSSUYT
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A8-0456/2018 - Lara Comi - Am 1 #
IT | FR | ES | DE | RO | EL | AT | PT | MT | HU | LT | IE | CY | LU | ?? | SK | SI | HR | SE | LV | FI | EE | BG | GB | DK | BE | CZ | NL | PL | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
53
|
65
|
45
|
81
|
22
|
14
|
17
|
13
|
5
|
14
|
9
|
9
|
4
|
6
|
1
|
13
|
8
|
10
|
19
|
7
|
8
|
6
|
15
|
59
|
10
|
20
|
18
|
22
|
46
|
|
S&D |
162
|
Italy S&DFor (26)Andrea COZZOLINO, Brando BENIFEI, Caterina CHINNICI, Cécile Kashetu KYENGE, Damiano ZOFFOLI, Daniele VIOTTI, David Maria SASSOLI, Elena GENTILE, Elly SCHLEIN, Enrico GASBARRA, Flavio ZANONATO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Goffredo Maria BETTINI, Isabella DE MONTE, Luigi MORGANO, Massimo PAOLUCCI, Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Nicola CAPUTO, Nicola DANTI, Paolo DE CASTRO, Patrizia TOIA, Renata BRIANO, Roberto GUALTIERI, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Silvia COSTA
Against (1) |
Germany S&DFor (23)Arndt KOHN, Arne LIETZ, Babette WINTER, Bernd LANGE, Birgit SIPPEL, Constanze KREHL, Dietmar KÖSTER, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Gabriele PREUSS, Ismail ERTUG, Jens GEIER, Jo LEINEN, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Knut FLECKENSTEIN, Martina WERNER, Michael DETJEN, Norbert NEUSER, Peter SIMON, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Susanne MELIOR, Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Tiemo WÖLKEN, Ulrike RODUST
|
11
|
2
|
4
|
Portugal S&DFor (7) |
2
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
Sweden S&D |
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
United Kingdom S&DFor (15)Against (2) |
2
|
4
|
3
|
3
|
4
|
|||
Verts/ALE |
46
|
1
|
France Verts/ALEFor (6) |
4
|
Germany Verts/ALEFor (13) |
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
||||||||||||
EFDD |
32
|
Italy EFDDFor (9)Abstain (1) |
France EFDDAbstain (1) |
1
|
1
|
United Kingdom EFDD |
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
ENF |
33
|
Italy ENF |
1
|
4
|
United Kingdom ENFAgainst (1)Abstain (3) |
1
|
3
|
2
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
GUE/NGL |
38
|
2
|
3
|
8
|
Germany GUE/NGLAbstain (5) |
Greece GUE/NGLFor (1)Abstain (3) |
1
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
|||||||||||||||
NI |
14
|
2
|
2
|
Greece NIAbstain (1) |
1
|
2
|
Poland NIAgainst (2)Abstain (1) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PPE |
177
|
Italy PPEFor (2)Abstain (4) |
France PPEAbstain (17) |
Spain PPEAbstain (13)
Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA,
Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE,
Carlos ITURGAIZ,
Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS,
Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA,
Francisco José MILLÁN MON,
Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET,
Gabriel MATO,
Luis de GRANDES PASCUAL,
Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO,
Rosa ESTARÀS FERRAGUT,
Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ,
Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ
|
Germany PPEAgainst (20)
Albert DESS,
Andreas SCHWAB,
Axel VOSS,
Daniel CASPARY,
Dennis RADTKE,
Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH,
Ingeborg GRÄSSLE,
Jens GIESEKE,
Markus FERBER,
Markus PIEPER,
Monika HOHLMEIER,
Norbert LINS,
Peter LIESE,
Rainer WIELAND,
Renate SOMMER,
Sabine VERHEYEN,
Stefan GEHROLD,
Thomas MANN,
Werner KUHN,
Werner LANGEN
|
Romania PPEAgainst (1) |
3
|
5
|
4
|
3
|
Hungary PPE |
3
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Slovakia PPEAbstain (6) |
5
|
4
|
Sweden PPE |
3
|
1
|
1
|
Bulgaria PPE |
2
|
3
|
Czechia PPEAgainst (4)Abstain (3) |
3
|
Poland PPEAgainst (11) |
||
ALDE |
56
|
France ALDEAgainst (6) |
Spain ALDEFor (1)Against (6) |
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
4
|
3
|
Belgium ALDEAgainst (6) |
3
|
Netherlands ALDEAgainst (7) |
||||||||||
ECR |
61
|
2
|
Germany ECRAgainst (6) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
United Kingdom ECRAgainst (16)Abstain (1) |
3
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
A8-0456/2018 - Lara Comi - Am 2 #
IT | ?? | CY | EL | IE | LU | EE | MT | LT | SK | LV | FI | HR | SI | AT | DK | PT | BG | CZ | HU | SE | FR | RO | NL | BE | ES | GB | PL | DE | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
54
|
1
|
4
|
14
|
8
|
6
|
6
|
6
|
9
|
13
|
7
|
8
|
10
|
8
|
17
|
10
|
13
|
14
|
18
|
14
|
19
|
65
|
22
|
22
|
20
|
46
|
59
|
46
|
77
|
|
ENF |
33
|
Italy ENF |
4
|
3
|
1
|
United Kingdom ENFAgainst (1)Abstain (3) |
2
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
EFDD |
33
|
Italy EFDDFor (10)Abstain (1) |
1
|
1
|
France EFDDAbstain (1) |
United Kingdom EFDD |
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
GUE/NGL |
38
|
2
|
2
|
Greece GUE/NGLFor (1)Abstain (3) |
4
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
8
|
1
|
Germany GUE/NGLFor (1)Abstain (4) |
|||||||||||||||
NI |
14
|
1
|
Greece NIAgainst (1) |
2
|
2
|
3
|
2
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Verts/ALE |
46
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
France Verts/ALEAgainst (6) |
2
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
Germany Verts/ALEAgainst (13) |
||||||||||||
ECR |
60
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
United Kingdom ECRAgainst (17) |
Germany ECRAgainst (6) |
||||||||||||||
ALDE |
57
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
4
|
4
|
3
|
France ALDEAgainst (6) |
1
|
Netherlands ALDEAgainst (7) |
Belgium ALDEAgainst (6) |
Spain ALDEFor (1)Against (6) |
3
|
|||||||||||
S&D |
161
|
Italy S&DFor (14)Against (12)Abstain (1) |
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
4
|
2
|
Portugal S&DAgainst (7) |
2
|
3
|
4
|
Sweden S&DAgainst (6) |
12
|
Romania S&DFor (1)Against (10) |
3
|
4
|
United Kingdom S&DFor (3)Against (14) |
Poland S&D |
Germany S&DFor (1)Against (21)
Arndt KOHN,
Arne LIETZ,
Babette WINTER,
Bernd LANGE,
Birgit SIPPEL,
Dietmar KÖSTER,
Evelyne GEBHARDT,
Gabriele PREUSS,
Ismail ERTUG,
Jens GEIER,
Kerstin WESTPHAL,
Knut FLECKENSTEIN,
Martina WERNER,
Michael DETJEN,
Norbert NEUSER,
Peter SIMON,
Petra KAMMEREVERT,
Susanne MELIOR,
Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN,
Tiemo WÖLKEN,
Ulrike RODUST
|
||
PPE |
174
|
Italy PPEAgainst (3) |
1
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
Slovakia PPEAgainst (6) |
3
|
1
|
4
|
5
|
5
|
Portugal PPEFor (1)Against (4) |
Bulgaria PPEFor (1)Against (6) |
Czechia PPEAgainst (5)Abstain (1) |
Hungary PPEAgainst (10) |
Sweden PPE |
France PPEAgainst (17) |
Romania PPEAgainst (9) |
3
|
3
|
Spain PPEAgainst (15)
Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA,
Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE,
Carlos ITURGAIZ,
Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS,
Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA,
Francisco José MILLÁN MON,
Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET,
Gabriel MATO,
José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA,
Luis de GRANDES PASCUAL,
Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA,
Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO,
Rosa ESTARÀS FERRAGUT,
Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ,
Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ
|
2
|
Poland PPEAgainst (22)
Adam SZEJNFELD,
Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA,
Andrzej GRZYB,
Barbara KUDRYCKA,
Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI,
Bogusław SONIK,
Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI,
Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA,
Danuta Maria HÜBNER,
Dariusz ROSATI,
Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA,
Jan OLBRYCHT,
Janusz LEWANDOWSKI,
Jarosław KALINOWSKI,
Jarosław WAŁĘSA,
Jerzy BUZEK,
Julia PITERA,
Krzysztof HETMAN,
Marek PLURA,
Michał BONI,
Róża THUN UND HOHENSTEIN,
Tadeusz ZWIEFKA
|
Germany PPEAgainst (23)
Albert DESS,
Christian EHLER,
Daniel CASPARY,
Dennis RADTKE,
Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH,
Hermann WINKLER,
Ingeborg GRÄSSLE,
Jens GIESEKE,
Joachim ZELLER,
Markus FERBER,
Markus PIEPER,
Michael GAHLER,
Monika HOHLMEIER,
Norbert LINS,
Peter JAHR,
Rainer WIELAND,
Reimer BÖGE,
Renate SOMMER,
Sabine VERHEYEN,
Stefan GEHROLD,
Thomas MANN,
Werner KUHN,
Werner LANGEN
Abstain (1) |
A8-0456/2018 - Lara Comi - Am 3 #
IT | FR | DE | ES | RO | EL | PT | MT | IE | CY | HU | AT | LT | GB | LU | ?? | SI | FI | HR | SE | LV | EE | BG | SK | DK | CZ | BE | NL | PL | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Total |
53
|
66
|
82
|
45
|
21
|
14
|
13
|
6
|
9
|
4
|
14
|
17
|
9
|
59
|
6
|
1
|
8
|
8
|
10
|
19
|
7
|
5
|
15
|
12
|
10
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
47
|
|
S&D |
160
|
Italy S&DFor (27)Andrea COZZOLINO, Brando BENIFEI, Caterina CHINNICI, Cécile Kashetu KYENGE, Damiano ZOFFOLI, Daniele VIOTTI, David Maria SASSOLI, Elena GENTILE, Elly SCHLEIN, Enrico GASBARRA, Flavio ZANONATO, Giuseppe FERRANDINO, Goffredo Maria BETTINI, Isabella DE MONTE, Luigi MORGANO, Massimo PAOLUCCI, Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Nicola CAPUTO, Nicola DANTI, Paolo DE CASTRO, Patrizia TOIA, Pier Antonio PANZERI, Renata BRIANO, Roberto GUALTIERI, Sergio Gaetano COFFERATI, Silvia COSTA
|
Germany S&DFor (23)Arndt KOHN, Arne LIETZ, Babette WINTER, Bernd LANGE, Birgit SIPPEL, Constanze KREHL, Dietmar KÖSTER, Evelyne GEBHARDT, Gabriele PREUSS, Ismail ERTUG, Jens GEIER, Jo LEINEN, Kerstin WESTPHAL, Knut FLECKENSTEIN, Martina WERNER, Michael DETJEN, Norbert NEUSER, Peter SIMON, Petra KAMMEREVERT, Susanne MELIOR, Sylvia-Yvonne KAUFMANN, Tiemo WÖLKEN, Ulrike RODUST
|
10
|
2
|
Portugal S&DFor (7) |
3
|
1
|
1
|
4
|
4
|
2
|
United Kingdom S&DFor (17) |
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
Sweden S&D |
1
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
|||
Verts/ALE |
46
|
1
|
France Verts/ALEFor (6) |
Germany Verts/ALEFor (13) |
4
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
||||||||||||
GUE/NGL |
38
|
2
|
3
|
Germany GUE/NGL |
Greece GUE/NGLAbstain (1) |
1
|
4
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
||||||||||||||||
EFDD |
32
|
Italy EFDDFor (9)Abstain (1) |
France EFDDAbstain (1) |
1
|
1
|
United Kingdom EFDD |
1
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
ENF |
33
|
Italy ENF |
1
|
4
|
United Kingdom ENFAgainst (1)Abstain (3) |
1
|
3
|
2
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
NI |
14
|
2
|
2
|
Greece NIAgainst (1) |
2
|
1
|
3
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PPE |
180
|
Italy PPEAbstain (2) |
France PPEAbstain (18)
Alain CADEC,
Alain LAMASSOURE,
Angélique DELAHAYE,
Anne SANDER,
Arnaud DANJEAN,
Brice HORTEFEUX,
Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER,
Franck PROUST,
Françoise GROSSETÊTE,
Geoffroy DIDIER,
Jérôme LAVRILLEUX,
Marc JOULAUD,
Michel DANTIN,
Michèle ALLIOT-MARIE,
Nadine MORANO,
Philippe JUVIN,
Rachida DATI,
Tokia SAÏFI
|
Germany PPEAgainst (9)Abstain (19) |
Spain PPEAgainst (1)Abstain (14)
Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA,
Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE,
Carlos ITURGAIZ,
Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS,
Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA,
Francisco José MILLÁN MON,
Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET,
Gabriel MATO,
José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA,
Luis de GRANDES PASCUAL,
Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA,
Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO,
Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ,
Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ
|
Romania PPEAgainst (1) |
3
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
Hungary PPE |
Austria PPEAgainst (1)Abstain (4) |
3
|
2
|
3
|
5
|
1
|
4
|
Sweden PPE |
3
|
1
|
Bulgaria PPEFor (1) |
Slovakia PPEAgainst (1)Abstain (5) |
Czechia PPEAgainst (2)Abstain (5) |
3
|
3
|
Poland PPEFor (1)Against (13) |
||
ALDE |
56
|
France ALDEAgainst (6) |
3
|
Spain ALDEFor (1)Against (6) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
3
|
4
|
Belgium ALDEAgainst (6) |
Netherlands ALDEAgainst (6) |
||||||||||
ECR |
61
|
2
|
Germany ECRAgainst (6) |
1
|
1
|
1
|
United Kingdom ECRAgainst (17) |
1
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
A8-0456/2018 - Lara Comi - Résolution #
Amendments | Dossier |
114 |
2018/2056(INI)
2018/10/17
IMCO
114 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas payments are the bloodstream of businesses, and viable and efficient business environments depend on prompt payments to enable businesses to repay their liabilities in a timely manner, expand, invest, create employment, generate broader economic growth and benefit the European economy in general;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas the Late Payment Directive provides inter alia for payment periods for business-to-business (B2B) and public authority-to-business (PA2B) transactions, automatic entitlement to interest for late payment, a minimum of EUR 40 in compensation for recovery costs, and statutory interest of at least 8 % above the European Central Bank’s reference rate; whereas EUR 40 is not sufficient and should be increased;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Asks the Commission to ensure the full and adequate implementation of existing obligations before introducing any new legislation;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to foster ‘a decisive shift towards a culture of prompt payment’12 by taking the most appropriate measures,
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to foster ‘a decisive shift towards a culture of prompt payment’12 where appropriate by taking the most
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Urges the Member States to make payment procedures more efficient, underlining in particular that verification procedures to check invoices or the conformity of goods and services with the contractual specifications should not be used to extend payment periods artificially beyond the limits imposed by the Directive;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Asks the Commission to consider simplifying the Late Payment Directive to improve the level of its implementation as the last resort when all the softer measures failed to bring effective results. In this regard reminds the Commission of its commitment to “do less, more efficiently”;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Asks Member States and the Commission to not further limit the contractual freedom;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Asks the Commission to concentrate its efforts on the payment culture of public authorities which should be an example of a payment culture. Improving their payment culture would automatically improve the payment culture of the private sector, since a lot of private companies have problems with late payment as a direct or indirect consequence of payment delays of public authorities; in some instances, Member States themselves obstruct the correct application of the Late Payment Directive, as they get unfair advantages;
Amendment 109 #
22b. Recommends to Member States and the Commission publishing a list of public authorities with most payment delays;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E a (new) Ea. whereas the 2011 Late Payment Directive does not require a creditor to charge interest for late payment; whereas many enterprises have indicated that the interest collection option is frequently discarded for the sake of maintaining business relations with the debtor;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls on the Member States
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Asks the Commission to comprehensively assess also practical barriers in claiming creditors´ rights including lengthy judicial procedures, administrative, financial and other barriers which prevent a practical implementation of the Late Payment Directive. Otherwise, any new legislation may only exacerbate the existing problems;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Asks Member States and the Commission to support sharing of the best practices concerning late payment and issue non-binding guidelines based on available information;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas the term 'grossly unfair' is vague and subject to interpretation by the courts when ruling on commercial disputes;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas across company sizes, SMEs are the most likely to accept
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas across company sizes, SMEs are the most likely to accept unfair payment terms or have them imposed on
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) Ga. whereas automatic interest rate computation is a way of sparing micro- enterprises and small and medium-sized enterprises the need to calculate the expediency of seeking interest on late payment from a contractor in a stronger market position;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) Ga. whereas, according to the Atradius Barometer, 95% of SMEs say that they are paid late in Europe, which is a higher proportion than large companies, thus allowing to conclude that SMEs tend to pay quicker than large companies but get paid later;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) Ga. whereas in some Member States the circulation of public sector receivables, which could balance the powers of the parties and lead to fairer business practices, is prevented by assignment and enforcement bans, either introduced by law or by contract;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I I. whereas late payment
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital I a (new) Ia. whereas late payments create additional costs for companies as they have to invest resources into chasing late payers or they have to pay interest on the credit contracted in order to continue business operations;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas payments are the bloodstream of businesses, and viable and efficient business environments
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Recital J a (new) Ja. whereas suppliers to the public sector are generally not paid on time; whereas governments and local authorities should set the example when it comes to timely payment;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Recital K Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Recital N Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O O. whereas
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O a (new) Oa. whereas the time and money absorbed by legal proceedings, coupled with the 'fear factor', deter companies, especially SMEs, from initiating late payment proceedings, especially where small amounts are involved and they risk spending more than they could actually recover;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital O b (new) Ob. whereas the Directive on unfair commercial practices in the food supply chain includes provisions regarding late payment for perishable goods and the designation by Member States of an enforcement authority to monitor compliance with the rules;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P P. whereas problems leading to late payment must be addressed through a combination of legal and voluntary measures, with targeted interventions involving the Commission, Member States and business associations; whereas it must legally define which is a blatantly abusive situation; whereas such a
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P P. whereas problems leading to late payment
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital P a (new) Pa. whereas the Commission implementation report 2016 was concluded with a number of recommendations for actions that could accelerate the positive impact of the Late Payment Directive, without suggesting any legislative modifications;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas most of the goods and services are supplied and provided in the internal market between economic agents or between economic agents and public authorities through deferred payments, in a way that the supplier grants its client a payment term of the invoice, according to what is agreed between parties, what is established in the supplier's invoice or in the legal provisions;
Amendment 30 #
1. Believes that both the Late Payment Directive and national legislation on late payment should be
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Believes that both the Late Payment Directive and national legislation on late payment should be better enforced through measures aimed at improving rules on payment terms and deadlines and discouraging unfair practices; notes that these measures can be categorised according to their nature (legal or voluntary), scope (horizontal or sector- specific) and objective (preventive, remedial or change in business culture);
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Maintains that
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Maintains that there is no one-size- fits-all approach to tackling the issue of late payments, as in some sectors longer payment deadlines, beyond 30 or 60 days, are in line with the needs of businesses and an accepted practice, taking into account the specificities of each sector;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Maintains that there is no one-size- fits-all approach to tackling the issue of late payments, as in some sectors longer payment deadlines,
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Maintains that there is no one-size- fits-all approach to tackling the issue of late payments, as in some business to business sectors longer payment deadlines, beyond 30 or 60 days, are in line with the needs of businesses and an accepted practice, taking into account the specificities of each sector; considers that it is also important to respect the freedom of contract between undertakings on the market, whilst preventing the public sector to derogate from the payment deadlines rules set in the directive;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that in sectors particularly vulnerable to long payment terms, Member States could consider establishing stricter payment terms; notes that some Member States have limited the standard payment term to 30 days (instead of the 60 days set out in the Late Payment Directive), while only a few Member States have introduced maximum payment terms (from which the parties cannot derogate); notes furthermore that at sector level the introduction of maximum payment terms is more common; considers that legislation setting out stricter payment terms would be effective in reducing payment terms to some extent
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that in sectors particularly vulnerable to long payment terms, Member States could consider establishing stricter payment terms; notes that some Member States have limited the standard payment term to 30 days (instead of the 60 days set out in the Late Payment Directive), while only a few Member States have introduced maximum payment terms (from which the parties cannot derogate)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Believes that
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Points out that the introduction of the mandatory publication of information in specific databases and public registries concerning payment behaviour can discourage late payment and help businesses choose reliable commercial partners; believes that large companies should be obliged to publish this information on payment practices and include it in their annual reports; considers that the ‘name and shame’ factor and public access to information can be an incentive for
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Points out that the introduction of the mandatory publication of information in specific databases and registries concerning payment behaviour can discourage late payment and help businesses choose reliable commercial partners; considers that the ‘name and shame’ factor and public access to information can be an incentive for companies and for the public administration to improve their payment practices and uphold their monetary obligations; encourages companies and public bodies to publish composite quarterly reports which also cover the behaviour of their subsidiaries;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Points out that the introduction of the mandatory publication of information in specific databases and registries concerning payment behaviour can discourage late payment and help businesses choose reliable commercial partners; considers that the ‘name and shame’ factor and public access to information can be an incentive for
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Points out that the introduction of the mandatory publication of information in specific databases and registries concerning payment behaviour can discourage late payment and help businesses choose reliable commercial partners; considers that the ‘name and shame’ factor, peer-pressure provisions and public access to information can be an incentive for companies to improve their payment practices and uphold their monetary obligations;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Points out that the introduction of the mandatory publication of information in specific databases and registries concerning payment behaviour can discourage late payment and help businesses choose reliable commercial partners; considers that the ‘name and shame’ factor and public access to information can be an incentive for companies and public entities to improve their payment practices and uphold their monetary obligations;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Encourages the Member States to reward good payment behaviour (‘name and fame’) and foster a culture of prompt payment in business relations, for example, prompt payment codes for larger businesses, since it has been demonstrated that paying on time is a smart business strategy as responsible payers can negotiate better deals and rely on trustworthy suppliers;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Encourages the Member States to reward good payment behaviour (‘name and fame’) and foster a culture of prompt payment in business relations,
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Urges the Member State authorities to set a good example and to meet the 30-day payment deadline in transactions with private companies;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Stresses the importance of providing entrepreneurs, in particular SMEs, with more information and education on credit and invoice management; recalls that effective credit management shortens the average collection period and maintains an optimal cash flow, thus reducing the risk of default and increasing the potential for growth; believes that training and support may also make SMEs more likely to take advantage of Late Payment Directive remedies; notes that SMEs unfortunately often lack the capacity to invest in training and that there are currently no programmes at EU or national level focusing on enhancing businesses’ knowledge of credit and invoice management; believes that more EU funds should possibly be directed towards the financial education of SMEs; considers that training and support should also include guidelines for overdue payment recovery in cross-border and other transactions; therefore calls on the Commission to provide SMEs with specific tools, advice and training in relations management, negotiation, contracting and billing, as well as updating and redesigning the Your Europe Information Portal containing information on the Late Payment Directive;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Stresses the importance of providing entrepreneurs, in particular SMEs, with more information and education
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Stresses the importance of providing entrepreneurs, in particular SMEs, with more information and education on credit and invoice management; recalls that effective credit management shortens the average collection period and maintains an optimal cash flow, thus reducing the risk of default and increasing the potential for growth; believes that training and support
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Stresses the importance of providing entrepreneurs, in particular SMEs, with more information and education on credit and invoice management; recalls that effective credit management on one side shortens the average collection period
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Stresses the importance of providing entrepreneurs, in particular SMEs, with more information and education on credit and invoice management; recalls that effective credit management shortens the average collection period and maintains an optimal cash flow, thus reducing the risk of default
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the Member States and business associations to set up national and regional free and confidential mediation services (mediation, conciliation, arbitration and adjudication) accessible to all companies, as an alternative to court proceedings, to resolve payment disputes and maintain business relations, but also to educate the companies about their rights and remedies against late payment; stresses that such mediation services would be particularly useful for SMEs, which often do not have adequate financial means to engage in legal disputes and for this reason renounce their rights; considers it, moreover, appropriate that the costs relating to court proceedings and default interest imposed by credit institutions accrued due to late payment should be borne by the debtors;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the Member States and business associations to
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls to make the verification of the offences more effective, in particular among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions (reinforced through a ‘name and shame’ provision that generates peer pressure), that are effective, proportionate and dissuasive and take into account any recurrence of unfair and vexatious behaviour, thus contributing to the improvement of payment behaviour; maintains that direct intervention from the public authorities, since it is they who enforce administrative sanctions, could help to overcome the ‘fear factor’ and relieve creditors of the responsibility to take action against debtors, as the authorities would directly enforce the law and take discretionary action against enterprises engaged in bad payment
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas large businesses have more resources at their disposal than SMEs to protect themselves against late payments, e.g. via pre-payment, credit checks, debt collection, bank guarantees or credit insurance, and are also better placed to take advantage of the global low interest rate environment to increase their investments and negotiating leverage;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, in particular among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions (reinforced through a ‘name and shame’ provision that generates peer pressure), thus contributing to the improvement of payment behavior; maintains that direct intervention from the public authorities, since it is they who enforce administrative sanctions, could help to overcome the ‘fear factor’ and relieve creditors of the responsibility to take action against debtors, as the authorities would directly enforce the law and take discretionary action against enterprises engaged in bad payment practices; believes that the value of sanctions and their cumulative nature could
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, in particular among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, in particular among large companies, and the use of administrative sanctions
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls, in
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls on the Member States to enforce their national legislation and to encourage and improve stricter controls
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Notes that a number of Member States have provided public but independent funding for ombudsmen responsible for investigating disputes and recommending solutions; takes the view that such stalwart public institutions should be tasked with assisting small businesses in resolving late payment or non-payment disputes and empowered to advise on action in the event of payment arrears, for example, and to investigate potential breaches of statutory late payment provisions and to impose penalties for non-compliance; calls on the Member States to give due consideration to such initiatives;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Points out that, despite the fact that the Late Payment Directive was adopted in February 2011, thousands of SMEs and start-ups across Europe go bankrupt every year while waiting for their invoices to be paid, including by national public authorities; calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider mandatory forms of adequate compensation or offsetting for companies owed money by a public authority, so that they are not forced to go bankrupt because of it; In particular, the tax, fiscal and social security debts of companies should be offset against amounts outstanding from the public administration; offsetting can also be promoted through the securitisation of tax receivables, for example through instruments such as small-scale government bonds and by the assessment of the definition of public debt through the appropriate authorities;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Points out that, despite the fact that the Late Payment Directive was adopted in February 2011, thousands of SMEs and start-ups across Europe go bankrupt every year while waiting for their invoices to be paid, including by national public authorities; calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider mandatory forms of adequate compensation or offsetting for companies owed money by a public authority, including the automatic payment of statutory interest for late payment so that they are not forced to go bankrupt because of it;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Points out that, despite the fact that the Late Payment Directive was adopted in February 2011, thousands of SMEs and start-ups across Europe go bankrupt every year while waiting for their invoices to be paid, including by national public authorities; calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider mandatory forms of adequate compensation or offsetting for companies owed money by a
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Welcomes the new mechanism for the protection of entrepreneurs applied in some Member States, such as Italy, to protect those who have matured debts with banks, but also have claims against the public administration, which prevents the distraint of the entrepreneurs' homes; notes that this system protects entrepreneurs from unjustified attacks, as they are linked to debtor positions which could be remedied if the public administration honoured its debts to entrepreneurs; urges the other Member States to put in place similar measures aimed at preventing the expropriation of homes and protecting the private life and dignity of the individual;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas large businesses may have more resources at their disposal than SMEs to protect themselves against late payments, e.g. via pre-payment, credit checks, debt collection, bank guarantees or credit insurance, and
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Urges Member States to set up guarantee funds for SMEs that guarantee the debts with the banks of SMEs that have amounts outstanding from the public administration;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Notes with great concern the situation in some Member States, where public authorities have greatly delayed payments for goods and/or services supplied to them by undertakings, leading those businesses into extreme financial difficulties; believes that in order to support businesses whose financial management is complicated by delayed payments from public authorities, the Member States should put in place faster and more efficient
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Notes with great concern the situation in some Member States, where public authorities have greatly delayed payments for goods and/or services supplied to them by undertakings, leading those businesses into extreme financial difficulties; believes that in order to support businesses whose financial management is complicated by delayed payments from public authorities, the Member States should put in place faster and more efficient VAT refund procedures, especially for SMEs; notes also that prompt payments for services provided to public authorities by contractors and sub- contractors in the context of sustainable social and environmental policies for the benefit of Union citizens should be prioritised;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Notes with great concern the situation in some Member States, where public authorities have greatly delayed payments for goods and/or services supplied to them by undertakings, leading those businesses into extreme financial difficulties or even bankruptcy; believes that in order to support businesses whose financial management is complicated by delayed payments from public authorities, the Member States should put in place faster and more efficient VAT refund procedures, especially for SMEs and, in case of justified delays, make own- initiative penalty payments corresponding to average bank interest rates;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Notes with great concern the situation in some Member States, where public authorities have greatly delayed payments for goods and/or services supplied to them by undertakings, included in supply contracts non-assignment clauses and prevented (through law) suppliers from enforcing their claims in courts, so leading those businesses into extreme financial difficulties; believes that in order to support businesses whose financial management is complicated by delayed payments from public authorities, the Member States should put in place faster and more efficient VAT refund procedures,
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Notes with great concern the situation in some Member States, where public authorities have greatly delayed payments for goods and/or services supplied to them by undertakings with the health sector being one of the most affected sectors, leading those businesses into extreme financial difficulties; believes that in order to support businesses whose financial management is complicated by delayed payments from public authorities, the Member States should put in place faster and more efficient VAT refund procedures, especially for SMEs;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Points out that prompt payment codes and charters and corporate social responsibility (CSR) measures contribute to creating a responsible payment culture and ensuring fair relationships and trust
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Points out that prompt payment codes and charters and corporate social responsibility (CSR) measures contribute to creating a responsible payment culture and ensuring fair relationships and trust among businesses; encourages Member States to introduce rapid payment systems in order to support companies' cash flow and increase trust in public administration;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Notes that a change in corporate culture at board level is necessary to engender a responsible payment climate; calls on the Member States and the Commission to encourage this development through the introduction of supervisory and reporting procedures at board level;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Maintains that certain concepts of the Directive, such as ‘grossly unfair’, and when contractual payment terms begin and end
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas under Directive 2011//7/EU (Late Payment Directive), public authorities bear a ‘special responsibility’10 in fostering a business environment supportive of timely payments;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Maintains that certain concepts of the Directive, such as ‘grossly unfair’, and when contractual payment terms begin and end
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Maintains that certain concepts of the Directive, such as ‘grossly unfair’, and when contractual payment terms begin and end could be clarified
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Calls on the Member States and the Commission, in the light of the recent case law of the Court of Justice (Case C- 555/14), to take the necessary steps to ensure that public authorities pay their suppliers on time
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Calls on the Member States and the Commission, in the light of the recent case law of the Court of Justice (Case C- 555/14), to take the necessary steps to ensure that public authorities pay their suppliers on time and that creditors receive automatic interest and compensation when payments are late without the need for overdue payment proceedings and calls on the Commission to propose automatic interest computation;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Calls on the Member States and the Commission, in the light of the recent case law of the Court of Justice (Case C- 555/14), to take the necessary steps to ensure that
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Stresses that making payments quickly is absolutely essential for the survival and growth of businesses, especially SMEs; notes that fintech and digital technologies are revolutionising the means and speed of payments; expects, therefore, a sharp increase in electronic invoicing and the gradual replacement of traditional types of payment with innovative types (e.g. supply chain financing, factoring, etc.), so that the creditor can be paid in real time as soon as the invoice is issued;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Stresses that making payments quickly is
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes with great interest the procedures put in place in certain Member States in the case of late payment by public authorities, whereby the central government may issue a warning to a local authority if the latter has not paid its suppliers on time and, should late payment persist, may pay the suppliers directly for the goods or services provided, suspending payment allocations to the non-compliant local authority’s budget; considers that such a system, combining reliable monitoring of the public bodies’ payment performances with an effective escalation plan, widely communicated when activated, seems to have produced results which deserve further analysis and should be imparted to Member States as an example of good practice;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas the Late Payment Directive provides inter alia for payment periods for business-to-business (B2B) and public authority-to-business (PA2B) transactions, automatic entitlement to interest for late payment, a minimum of EUR 40 in compensation for recovery costs, and statutory interest of at least 8 % above the European Central Bank’s reference rate;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Applauds certain industry-level initiatives in some Member States under which participating corporations have drawn up a pledge detailing the concrete steps they will take to ensure their smaller suppliers are paid more quickly for the products or services they supply; notes that positive naming and shaming (‘name and fame’) could produce the intended results via self-regulation at industry level and provide substantial support for SMEs;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Applauds certain industry-level initiatives in some Member States under which participating corporations have drawn up a pledge detailing the concrete steps they will take to ensure their smaller suppliers are paid more quickly for the products or services they supply; notes that positive naming and shaming (‘name and fame’) could produce
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Stresses the importance of public procurement as a means of improving the functioning of the single market, combatting social and environmental dumping, and for growing jobs and enterprises throughout the Union;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for consideration of enhanced synergies between the Late Payment Directive and public procurement rules, in particular the possibility for contracting authorities to exclude non-performing contractors from future procurements if subcontractors are not paid in time (Public Procurement Directive)11, more widespread use of the option laid down in Article 71(3) of the Public Procurement Directive of enabling direct payment to subcontractors under certain conditions, and making payment behaviour towards subcontractors one of the criteria on which to evaluate the financial capability of potential contractors in public tenders; calls on the Member States, for public procurement purposes, to assess the track record of large contractors unable to provide evidence of fair and efficient payment practices in dealings with their subcontractors; _________________ 11 Article 57(4)(g) of Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC.
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Believes that public procurement rules should include public procurement systems being easily accessible and understandable to citizens and businesses, full transparency of payments to contractors and sub-contractors by public authorities; calls also for the adoption of a European Code of Ethics for Public Procurement in order to ensure social and environmental standards;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Urges all public administrations of Member States to carry out the appropriate legislative reforms to ensure payment traceability regarding subcontracting carried out by companies that have been awarded public works or services so that the main contractor is obliged to pay the subcontractors the agreed price in a term not superior to thirty calendar days from the partial or total payment on the part of the public administration, being unable to establish greater terms;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Member States to improve their legislation and promote the implementation of the Late Payment Directive in all its parts, also by removing any domestic laws, regulation or contractual practices by the public sector that conflict with the aims of the Directive, such as enforcement and assignment bans for public sector receivables;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Calls on the Member States to improve their legislation
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20.
source: 629.463
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/0/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/IMCO-PR-625375_EN.html
|
docs/1/docs/0/url |
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/IMCO-AM-629463_EN.html
|
events/3/docs |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
docs/0/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE625.375
|
docs/1/docs/0/url |
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE629.463
|
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
docs/2/body |
EC
|
events/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0456&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0456_EN.html |
events/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2019-0042New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2019-0042_EN.html |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
IMCO/8/12773New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Awaiting committee decisionNew
Procedure completed |
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/subtype |
Old
ImplementationNew
|
procedure/summary |
|
activities/0 |
|
activities/1 |
|
committees/0/shadows/0 |
|
committees/0/shadows/1 |
|
committees/0/shadows/5 |
|
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
IMCO/8/12773
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 052New
Rules of Procedure EP 52 |
procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
other/0 |
|
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|