2023/2077(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls for mandatory consultation and participation rights for workers in merger and acquisition decisions;

Amendment 101 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Supports the introduction of a rebuttable presumption that effective competition is significantly impeded by any concentration leading to a business holding a dominant position in a relevant market or any concentration involving a dominant market player or a gatekeeper as defined in the Digital Markets Act; notes that there is scope for Member States to intervene on ‘non-competitive grounds’, and asks for the Commission to be given the same possibility when examining the impact of concentration on the internal market; calls on the Commission to revise the merger guidelines to adopt a more comprehensive assessment of efficiencies in merger control and cooperation; notes that the assessment of horizontal cooperation should also recognise the importance of collaboration in markets dominated by digital gatekeepers; recognises the need to foster cooperation among players in traditional as well as digital markets, by giving the right relevance to the positive effects, such as efficiencies and benefits, in the relevant antitrust analysis; calls for the inclusion of review clauses in decisions approving a concentration with a view to introducing more appropriate conditions, without affecting the decision as such; urges the European Commission to take a broader view when evaluating digital mergers and assess the damaging effects of data concentration;

Amendment 102 #

Martin SCHIRDEWAN, Marina MESURE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Considers that the jurisdictional thresholds setting the starting point for an EU merger review, which are based on the turnovers of the target and acquiring entities, are not appropriate for the digital economy, in which value is often, for advertising purposes, represented by the number of visitors to a website; suggests that these thresholds be revised and adapted to the number of consumers impacted by mergers and the value of the related transactions;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Calls on the Commission to ban any merger or acquisition for companies that are currently defined as gatekeepers according to Article 3 of the Digital Markets Act;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10c. Calls on the European Commission, when assessing whether mergers lead to a significant impediment of effective competition (SIEC) to refrain from employing a narrowly designed substantive test that merely focuses on the effects of a merger on prices, output and innovation; supports instead that the Commission should consider the full social costs of such transactions, taking into account the broader impact of these mergers on environmental protection, as it is obliged to do by virtue of Article 11 TFEU, and the international obligations on biodiversity to which EU Member States and the EU should abide to;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 d (new)

10d. Asks the Commission to come forward with a revision of the EC Merger Regulation, so that it may be vested with the powers, as much as a number of Member States are at present, to adopt measures to protect the European public order and the rights and principles of the TFEU and EU Charter of Fundamental Rights, including environmental protection;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to ~~adopt further~~make better use of the instrument of interim measures to stop any practice which would seriously harm competition, particularly in relation to dynamic and rapidly developing markets such as digital markets;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to ~~adopt further~~make a more extensive use of interim measures to stop any practice which would seriously harm competition, particularly in relation to dynamic and rapidly developing markets such as digital markets;

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Welcomes the new approach in the latest antitrust cases, where the Commission for the first time and under certain conditions foresees the imposition of structural remedies to stop anti- competitive conducts, especially when the anti-competitive practice in question has been reiterated in other market segments by the same company over the years; in this regard encourages the Commission to continue on this direction for an effective ex-post antitrust enforcement;

Amendment 109 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to speed up antitrust procedures ~~and introduce a~~, set appropriate time limits for ~~antitrust cases in order to~~the procedures and ensure ~~the~~an effectiveness of EU rules; underlines that Spotify filed a complaint against Apple in 2019 and that, in spite of the Commission having issued a statement of objections, no concrete actions have been taken thus far to address Apple’s restrictions, preventing app developers from freely communicating with their own users follow-through of decisions taken;

Amendment 11 #

Lídia PEREIRA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas competition policy could contribute to bolstering the resilience, integrity and competitiveness of the internal market, as well as achieving the goals of the European Green Deal and the Digital Compass, among other EU political goals;

Amendment 110 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to speed up antitrust procedures and introduce a time limit for antitrust cases in order to ensure the effectiveness of EU rules; underlines that Spotify filed a complaint against Apple in 2019 and that, in spite of the Commission having issued a statement of objections, no concrete actions have been taken thus far to address Apple’s restrictions, preventing app developers from freely communicating with their own users;

Amendment 111 #

Billy KELLEHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 112 #

Frances FITZGERALD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 113 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to speed up antitrust procedures and introduce a time limit for antitrust cases in order to ensure the effectiveness of EU rules; in particular in view of the upcoming end of the Commission’s mandate in 2024; stresses that further delays to ongoing digital antitrust procedures risk perpetuating the harm caused by anti- competitive practices in those fast moving markets; emphasises that the European Commission opened the Shopping case in 2009 and issued Google with a €2.42 billion fine in 2017 for abusing its dominance; underlines that Spotify filed a complaint against Apple in 2019 and that, in spite of the Commission having issued a statement of objections, no concrete actions have been taken thus far to address Apple’s restrictions, preventing app developers from freely communicating with their own users;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Calls on the Commission to speed up antitrust procedures ~~and introduce a time limit for antitrust cases~~ in order to ensure the effectiveness of EU rules; underlines that ~~Spotify filed a complaint against Apple in 2019 and~~there are still some cases that, in spite of the Commission having issued a statement of objections a while ago, no concrete actions have been taken thus far to address ~~Apple’s restrictions, preventing app developers from freely communicating with their own user~~the antitrust concerns;

Amendment 115 #

Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on the Commission to concretely confirm the effect-based enforcement of antitrust and, in particular, the relevance of the economic evidence in the guidelines on exclusionary abuses which are planned for adoption in 2025 (draft in 2024);

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the opening of a formal investigation into possible anti- competitive practices by Microsoft regarding Teams; calls on the Commission to carefully assess the concessions, unilaterally offered by Microsoft, with the undertakings involved, in order to ensure that they address the concerns of existing consumers, as well as interoperability and pricing issues;deleted

Amendment 117 #

Billy KELLEHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 118 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. ~~Welcom~~Notes the opening of a formal investigation into possible anti-competitive practices by Microsoft regarding Teams; calls on the Commission to carefully assess the concessions, unilaterally offered by Microsoft, with the undertakings involved, in order to ensure that they address the concerns of existing consumers, as well as interoperability and pricing issues;

Amendment 12 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas competition policy cshould ~~contribute to bolstering the resilience of the internal market, as well as achiev~~be neutral ing t~~he goals of the European Green Deal and the Digital Compas~~erms of secondary policy objectives;

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the opening of a formal investigation into possible anti-competitive practices by Microsoft regarding Teams; calls on the Commission to carefully assess the concessions, unilaterally offered by Microsoft, with the undertakings involved, in order to ensure that they address the concerns of market players with regard to new and existing ~~consum~~users , as well as interoperability and pricing issues;

Amendment 121 #

Martin SCHIRDEWAN, Marina MESURE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Welcomes the opening of a formal investigation into possible anti-competitive practices by Microsoft regarding Teams; calls on the Commission to ~~carefully~~ assess the concessions, unilaterally offered by Microsoft, with the undertakings involved, in order to ensure that they address the concerns of existing consumers, as well as interoperability and pricing issues;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Welcomes the European Commission's decision to block the acquisition of Etraveli by Booking Holdings1a; notes that when an online platform is already the largest and most influential in Europe, affecting the daily operations of tens of thousands of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the hotel sector, an acquisition such as this one would further strengthen the dominant position of the company in the hotel market by allowing it to cross-sell its various services; in addition, hoteliers would feel pressure from online hotel agencies ('OTAs') to accept the terms and conditions of these platforms (e.g. regarding cancellation policy, special discounts, etc.) that hotels would otherwise not voluntarily offer; recall that in July 2023 Booking declared that it still did not qualify as a gatekeeper under the DMA thresholds mainly due to the various lockdowns related to Covid19; therefore, it calls on the Commission to be vigilant and to carefully assess whether any future remedies offered would safeguard fair competition and not lead to an abuse of power by such platform; _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscor ner/detail/en/ip_23_4573

Amendment 123 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Insists on effective remedies which require greater coordination between enforcers and further dialogue with third parties; recalls that undertakings designated as gatekeepers have been subject to previous antitrust rulings, which have not led to effective behavioural changes; ~~regrets the reluctance of the Commission to address market dominance through structural separation;~~

Amendment 124 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Insists on effective remedies, which may require greater coordination between enforcers and further dialogue with third parties, as well as an appropriate enforcement; recalls that undertakings designated as gatekeepers have been subject to previous antitrust rulings, which have not led to effective behavioural changes; ~~regrets the reluctance of the Commission to address market dominance through structural separation~~invites the Commission to make better use of behavioural and structural remedies as a matter of last resort;

Amendment 125 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Insists on effective remedies which require greater coordination between enforcers and further dialogue with third parties; recalls that undertakings designated as gatekeepers have been subject to previous antitrust rulings, which have not led to effective behavioural changes; regrets the reluctance of the Commission to address market dominance through structural separation; calls for the Commission to end the primacy of behavioural remedies in EU law.

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Insists on effective remedies which require greater coordination between enforcers and further dialogue with third parties; recalls that undertakings designated as gatekeepers have been subject to previous antitrust rulings, which have not led to effective behavioural changes, especially regarding self- preferencing in digital markets; regrets the reluctance of the Commission to address market dominance through structural separation;

Amendment 127 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Insists that the current EU framework for competition policy failed to protect consumers from unjustified price hikes driven by market power of companies; calls for unbundling to also be a structural remedy in situations where abuse of a dominant position on a relevant market cannot be ascertained, but conditions for competition, or other key objectives as the fundamental right to affordable food, would improve significantly if unbundling measures were applied;

Amendment 128 #

René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Underlines the importance of damages for infringements of competition law; considers it necessary to alleviate the burden on injured parties to successfully claim damages by introducing an obligation of the competent competition authority to state on the extent of the damages in the public enforcement decision or by introducing a presumption of a minimum amount of damages calculated in relation to the infringement of competition law;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Welcomes the designation of six gatekeepers for 22 core platform services under the Digital Markets Act, the four market investigations for the rebuttal as well as the f~~our~~irst market investigations under article 3(8) of the Digital Markets Act; encourages the Commission to adopt delegated acts soon in order to extend the modalities of application or to specify the modalities of implementation of the obligations laid down in Articles 5, 6 and 7 as set out in Article 12 DMA;

Amendment 13 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas competition policy ~~could contribute to bolstering the resilience of the internal market, as well as achieving the goals of the European Green Deal and the Digital Compas~~is essential to the proper functioning of the internal market, as well as to the competitiveness of the EU economy, especially in the field of green and digital technologies;

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Welcomes the designation of six gatekeepers for 22 core platform services under the Digital Markets Act 3a, as well as the four market investigations under the Digital Markets Act; calls on the Commission to assess rigorously whether gatekeepers comply with the DMA obligations before 6 March 2024 and to seek feedback from third parties as to whether compliance solutions offered by gatekeepers lead to fairer and more contestable digital markets; calls on the Commission to ensure that measures by the gatekeepers on security and integrity of their platforms which could impact compliance with the DMA be vetted by independent third parties, and not be solely based on the gatekeepers' own assessment; _________________ 3a https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscor ner/detail/en/IP_23_4328

Amendment 131 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Acknowledges the existence of a legal basis for structural separation; regrets the reluctance of the Commission to address market dominance through structural separation; calls for the introduction of an explicit legal base for the unbundling of undertakings as a structural remedy for antitrust violations; considers unbundling to also be a structural remedy in situations where abuse of a dominant position on a relevant market cannot be ascertained, but conditions for competition would improve significantly if unbundling measures were applied;

Amendment 132 #

Martin SCHIRDEWAN, Marina MESURE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Points out that even when products or services are supplied for free, consumers may still have to endure unjust behaviour, such as a degradation in quality or extortive practices; calls therefore for the formulation of a 'theory of harm', which should transcend price- centric approaches and account for broader considerations such as the impact on citizens’ privacy;

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Regrets the absence of booking.com from the gatekeepers list; calls on the Commission to open a market investigation on short time rental platforms to ensure that all eligible services are designated in order to restore fair and equal competition in the short term rental market;

Amendment 134 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Points out that the study, commissioned by the European Commission, on 'the impact of recent developments in digital advertising on privacy, publishers and advertisers' concludes that the large scale collection and processing of personal data for advertising purposes makes the digital advertisement market incredibly opaque and prone to fraud.

Amendment 135 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)

15c. Reiterates evidence presented by the UK Competition and Market Authority and the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission pointing out the opaqueness of this system allows dominant players to charge excessive profit margins, up to 70 cents of every Euro spent;

Amendment 136 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 d (new)

15d. Deplores that the aforementioned developments caused a fall of 70 percent of advertising revenue of traditional media between 2005 and 2018 to the benefit of Big Tech, eroding the public media landscape, forcing local outlets to stop and putting our democracy in danger;

Amendment 137 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 e (new)

15e. Agrees with the Commission study's conclusion that the digital advertising market needs urgent reform and calls upon the Commission to present a legislative proposal to reform of the online advertising market that reduces market dominance and significantly reduce profit margins;

Amendment 138 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 f (new)

15f. Points out that fair digital advertising competition is promoted through the independence of platforms in digital ad ecosystem, meaning ownership separation between large supply, demand and exchange platforms in the digital advertisement ecosystem; condemns owning more than one part of the digital advertisement ecosystem; advises the Commission to look at the US digital advertisement bill proposed in the US Senate as an example;

Amendment 139 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. ~~Welcomes th~~Underlines that there mar~~ket investigation into Apple’s iMessage in order to asses~~e some services offered by designated gatekeepers wits role as a gateway; highlights the inclusion by default of iMessage on all iOS devices for more than 144 million users; stresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights that today’s market is dominated by two operating systems, with their own non-interoperable messaging services, which limits the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the otherh a hybrid nature which may make it difficult to identify them in a certain category of CPS under Article 2(2): the Commission is therefore invited to assess these services by highlighting rather the purposes of these services in line with the definitions provided in Article 2 instead of the differences they may present compared to other services that fall into the same category;

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas full coherence between the Union’s policy goals in the framework of the Green Deal, the Paris Agreement and the UN Sustainable Development Goals on the one hand and competition rules on the other is necessary;

Amendment 140 #

Frances FITZGERALD

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the market investigation into Apple’s iMessage in order to assess its role as a gateway; highlights the inclusion by default of iMessage on all iOS devices for more than 144 million users; sStresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights that today’s market is dominated by two operating systems, with their own non-interoperable messaging services, which limits the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the other;

Amendment 141 #

Billy KELLEHER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

Amendment 142 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the market investigation into Apple’s iMessage in order to assess its role as a gateway; highlights the inclusion by default of iMessage on all iOS devices for more than 144 million users; stresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights that today’s market is dominated by two operating systems, with their own non-interoperable messaging services, which limits the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the otherlaunched by the European Commission to assess whether certain core platform services should be designated as gatekeepers under the DMA;

Amendment 143 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the market investigation into Apple’s iMessage in order to assess its role as a gateway; highlights the inclusion by default of iMessage on all iOS devices for more than 144 million users; stresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights that today’s market is dominated by two operating systems, with their own non-interoperable messaging services, which limits the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the other;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the market investigation into Apple’s iMessage in order to fully assess its role as a gateway and its entrenched position in the market as per Apple designation decision under DMA 4a; highlights the inclusion by default of iMessage on all iOS devices for more than 144235a million users; ~~stresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights that today’s market is dominated by two~~underlines the central role of iMessage to the closed ecosystem strategy which locks-in users and prevent free choice; stresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights the importance to ensure the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the other and to seamlessly communicate with each other regardless of the operating systems, ~~with their own non-interoperable messaging services, which limits the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the other;~~ therefore calls on the European Commission to proceed expeditiously in its investigation and its effective implementation to bring the benefits of messaging interoperability to all in a timely manner; _________________ 4a https://digital-markets-act- cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/DMA.100013 5a https://www.apple.com/ie/legal/more- resources/dsa/ie/

Amendment 145 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Welcomes the market investigation into Apple’s iMessage in order to assess its role as a gateway and its entrenched position in the market as per Apple designation decision as gatekeeper under DMA; highlights the inclusion by default of iMessage on all iOS devices for more than 144 million users; stresses the importance of smartphones as an essential personal and professional tool; highlights that today’s market is dominated by two operating systems, with their own non- interoperable messaging services, which limits the possibility for users and businesses to freely move from one ecosystem to the other; and to seamlessly communicate with each other regardless of the operating system, which is fundamentally against the spirit and the letter of the DMA; therefore calls on the European Commission to proceed expeditiously in its investigation and its effective implementation to bring the benefits of messaging interoperability to all in a timely manner;

Amendment 146 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI, Alfred SANT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Welcomes the Court of Justice of the European Union decision in the Meta vs Bundeskartellamt case that affirms the competence of national competition authorities to enforce data protection rules under antitrust laws; points out that the court affirms that the protection of personal data is an important consideration when examining an abuse of a dominant position and that it imposes requirements on the use of individuals’ personal data for targeted advertising; encourages competition authorities to investigate and sanction infringements of the GDPR;

Amendment 147 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Welcomes the Commission’s ongoing market investigations into Microsoft’s Edge and Bing6a; recognises the importance of ensuring a level playing field in the digital ecosystem, where all market participants have fair and equal opportunities to compete, innovate, and provide consumers with quality services; highlights that Edge and Bing meet the quantitative thresholds as set out in Article 3 of the DMA; _________________ 6a https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscor ner/detail/en/IP_23_4328

Amendment 148 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI, Alfred SANT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16b. Welcomes the conclusions of the proceedings of the Bundeskartellamt and Alphabet Inc. that gives Google users better choices as to how Google processes their data; asserts that EU consumers must have the choice whether they allow agglomeration and cross-service data processing of their personal data. Encourages the European Commission to pursue the coordination of enforcement activities and cooperate with national competition authorities in order to facilitate an effective interplay between competition law and the DMA; especially in the context of the DMA’s “further obligations”;

Amendment 149 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI, Alfred SANT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)

16c. Welcomes the European Commission to block Booking Holdings acquisition of eTraveli; notes that Booking is a dominant online travel platform in Europe, which affects the daily operations of tens of thousands of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the hotel sector; stresses that with this acquisition, Booking could cross-sell its different services and further strengthen its dominance in the hotel market; underlines that given Booking.com’s market power, hoteliers are under pressure to accept the platforms terms and conditions (e.g., regarding cancellation policy, special discounts) that hotels would otherwise voluntarily not offer; Reminds that's in July 2023, Booking declared that it did not yet qualify as a gatekeeper under the DMA thresholds mainly because of the various Covid19 lockdowns; calls on the European Commission to be vigilant and carefully assess if any future remedies offered safeguard fair competition and stop abuse of powers by such platform;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas public aid rules in the EU are of crucial importance for competition policy, for the proper functioning of the Single Market and for the development of the EU economy;

Amendment 150 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 d (new)

16d. Points out that the 'Internet of Things' (IoT) is a growing market; further points out that smart home devices, such as robot vacuum cleaners, are a major source of consumer data; notes that mergers and acquisitions in this sector can provide major competitive damage; calls upon the Commission to include data as source of market power in the evaluation of merger and acquisition cases in this sector; specifically when these cases involve established big tech companies; furthermore calls to impose conditions on the use of data if needed;

Amendment 151 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. ~~Regrets~~Takes note of the absence of cloud services providers from the gatekeepers list, despite the ~~damaging anti-competitive practices underlined by national competition authorities; highlights that the European cloud market is dominated by a few very large play~~concentrated market structure and the substantial impact cloud services providers can have on their customers; calls on the Commission to ensure that all eligible services are designated in order to restore fair and equal competition in the European cloud market;

Amendment 152 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. ~~Regret~~Notes the absence of cloud services providers from the gatekeepers list~~, despite~~; calls on the Commission to consider opening market investigations under Article 3(8) DMA (qualitative assessment) in this sector, given in particular all the damaging anti-competitive practices underlined by national competition authorities; highlights that the European cloud market is dominated by a few very large players; calls on the Commission to ensure that all eligible services are designated in order to restore fair and equal competition in the European cloud market;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Regrets the absence of cloud services providers from the gatekeepers list, despite the damaging anti-competitive practices underlined by national competition authorities; highlights that the European cloud market is dominated by a few very large players; calls on the Commission to urgently open a formal investigation into the allegedly anticompetitive behaviours by legacy software providers that are causing irreparable damages to the European cloud vendors and users as well as taxpayers 7a and to ensure that all eligible services are designated in order to restore fair and equal competition in the European cloud market; _________________ 7a https://cispe.cloud/the-billion-euro- unfair-software-licence-tax-on-eu- customers/

Amendment 154 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Welcomes the adoption of the Data Act that allow customers to switch between various cloud data-processing service providers; calls on the Commission to ensure its implementation; highlights that the Data Act will contribute to restore fair and equal competition in the European cloud market but that additional rules and remedies are also needed to this end; stresses the role of the Digital Markets Act in this context, in particular to tackle issues that do not fall under the Data Act’s scope and prevent fair competition in the European cloud market;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission to ~~look at emerging gatekeepers in generative Artif~~assess the need of launching a market investigation under article 19 adding new categories of CPSs under article 2(2) in light of the latest technologicial ~~Intelligence under the Digital Markets Act~~developments that may lead to new types of services that do not fall within the existing categories such as generative Artificial Intelligence;

Amendment 156 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Calls on the Commission to monitor emerging technological trends and to look at emerging gatekeepers in ~~generative~~new fields such as Artificial Intelligence under the Digital Markets Act;

Amendment 157 #

Lídia PEREIRA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. ~~Calls on the Commission to look at~~Emphasises the special relevance of emerging gatekeepers in generative Artificial Intelligence under the Digital Markets Act;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Stresses the need for the effective coexistence of ~~competition law and the Digital Markets Act; calls on the Commission to ensure sufficient resources and synergi~~the ex-post enforcement of competition law and the ex-ante enforcement of the Digital Markets Act given their complementary nature; stress the need to ensure sufficient resources and synergies for an effective implementation of the rules, and to avoid overlaps or duplications of existing structures and measures;

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Stresses the need for the effective coexistence of competition law and the Digital Markets Act; calls on the Commission to ~~ensure~~deploy sufficient ~~resources and~~staffing resources, make the best use of possible synergies, and to avoid overlaps or duplications of existing structures and measures;

Amendment 16 #

Lídia PEREIRA

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the global geopolitical circumstances also require responsible, competitive solutions in the field of competition policy; whereas the European Union should use all the political and legislative tools at its disposal to defend the integrity, resilience and competitiveness of its internal market in view of the challenges posed by the increasing number of conflicts in the world, trade tensions among competing countries and the pressure of inflation and low levels of economic growth;

Amendment 160 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Reiterates that the Digital Markets Act has a different legal basis in contrast to the competition framework; encourages the Commission to use in parallel its executive powers stemming from the competition policy framework and the Digital Markets Act;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the EU’s future connectivity needs in terms of infrastructure and investments; calls for the establishment of a policy framework whereby large traffic generators contribute fairly to the adequate funding of telecom networks without prejudice to net neutrality;deleted

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 163 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the EU’s future connectivity needs in terms of infrastructure and investments; calls ~~for~~on the ~~establishment of a policy framework whereby large traffic generators contribute fairly to the adequate funding of telecom networks without prejudice to net neutrality~~Commission to consider a revision of the current competition practice for the telecom market, which has prevented the mergers of mobile operators from four to three, in order to facilitate the creation of a fully integrated single market for telecommunication services; notes that market consolidation might be the only way to avoid selling infrastructure piece by piece to foreign non-EU companies; points out that the growth of this sector in Europe has been very low over the last decade and that fragmentation is the main reason for this; in this regards welcomes the new proposal for a Digital Networks Act to address market fragmentation, attracting investment, securing the telecom infrastructures and innovation without extra costs for consumers and without jeopardising fair competition on the market between all the players;

Amendment 164 #

Engin EROGLU

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the EU’s future connectivity needs in terms of infrastructure and investments; ~~calls for the establishment of a policy framework whereby large traffic generators contribute fairly to the adequate funding of telecom networks without prejudice to net neutrality;~~

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

Amendment 166 #

René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the EU’s future connectivity needs in terms of infrastructure and investments; calls for the establishment of a policy framework whereby ~~large traffic generators contribute~~digital content providers contribute based on their annual turnover fairly into ~~the~~a public fund that supports adequate funding of telecom networks infrastructure without prejudice to net neutrality;

Amendment 167 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Points out that Big Tech companies abuse their dominant market position through self-preferencing to create customer lock-ins; notes that these practices increase market dominance and decrease consumer welfare; calls upon the Commission to investigate self- preferences;

Amendment 168 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. Notes with concern that gatekeepers that develop a data advantage over rivals can achieve critical economies of scale, which contribute to the further tilting of competitive balances in digital markets and stifle innovation;

Amendment 169 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)

20c. Calls upon the Commission to review its merger and acquisition rules in addressing personal data; stresses that personal data assets should be considered and assessed as other traditional assets when it decides on digital mergers and acquisitions; further stresses that data consolidation through mergers and acquisitions can strengthen a dominant position;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas European dependencies on third countries and global powers in areas such as energy, medicines, technology or raw materials create vulnerabilities and could reduce the European Union´s ability to act;

Amendment 170 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6 a (new)

Sectoral policies

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Subheading 6 b (new)

Tax policies and competition

Amendment 172 #

Enikő GYŐRI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses that ~~Parliament should play an active role in shaping competition policy and be more invol~~all the EU institutions should act in the remit of their competences, evedn in the ~~activity of working parties and expert group~~field of competition policy, as laid down in the Treaties;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses that Parliament should play an active role in shaping competition policy and be more involved in the activity of working parties and expert groups; calls for the ordinary legislative procedure to be fully extended to cover competition policy legislation;

Amendment 174 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses that Parliament should play an active role in shaping competition policy and be more involved in the activity of working parties and expert groups; considers that more frequent use should be made of Parliament’s right to intervene in judicial proceedings concerning competition law; calls on the Commission to enter into negotiations for an interinstitutional agreement on competition policy;

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses that EU competition rules shall contribute to the Union’s objective as defined in Article 3 TEU; considers that competition rules have a key role in ensuring full employment, social progress and the protection of the environment and biodiversity; stresses that the ‘fair price’ of products is not the lowest price possible for the consumer, but a price that allows for the fair remuneration of all parties along the supply chain, while not resulting in negative externalities;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Calls on the responsible Member of the European Commission in charge of competition policy to stay in close contact with the European Parliament's competent Committee and its working group on competition issues;

Amendment 177 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Calls on the European Council to adopt a decision under Article 48(7)(2) TEU allowing for the adoption of legislative acts in the area of competition policy in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure;

Amendment 178 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 b (new)

21b. Underlines that in the aftermath of the financial crisis (2008 -2009), aid of more than one trillion EUR was granted to the banking sector in the form of credit guarantees and capital injections accounting together with other measures (including impaired asset schemes and liquidity measures) for nearly 12% of the EU GDP; is concerned by the conclusion of the ECA that in the years after the financial crisis, the EU banking sector remained an important beneficiary of State aid, despite the EU’s proclaimed intentions to prevent bank bailouts (in the period from 2010 to 2018 EUR 716 billion and EUR 1,763 trillion aid was approved by the Commission in the form of capital and liquidity aid instruments respectively);

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)

21c. Points to the discrepancies and arbitrage opportunities between the rules on State aid and the resolution regime under the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD); urges the Commission, to reconsider its interpretation of the relevant State aid rules in a manner consistent with the BRRD and to revise its long overdue 2013 Banking Communication, including the area of liquidation aid;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the European Commission and national competition authorities need to act in an impartial and objective way in order to preserve the credibility of the EU's competition policy;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 d (new)

21d. Reiterates its request for the Commission to examine whether banking institutions have, since the onset of the crisis, benefited from implicit subsidies and State aid through the provision of liquidity support from central banks; recalls the commitment made by Commissioner Vestager to reflect on possible distortions of competition arising from the ECB’s Corporate Sector Purchase Programme and to report back with a qualitative answer;

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 e (new)

21e. Warns against a harmful, untargeted subsidy race in the European Union benefitting solely large companies and their shareholders; warns more in particular against an accelerated aggressive tax competition through tax credits; calls on the EU to develop rules defining harmful tax credits; emphasises that tax credits should not serve the sole purpose of lowering the tax burden of large companies at the expense of public coffers and undermining the global minimum tax;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 f (new)

21f. Emphasises that tax incentives should not blindly mirror schemes under the US Inflation Reduction Act, but aim at attracting real investments, meaning supporting the expansion or creation of new capacity rather than the subsidisation of existing production; notes with concern that a significant amount of government funding is already channelled through ineffective tax expenditure in the form of exemptions, deductions, credits, deferrals and reduced tax rates; urges Member States to carefully design tax incentives so that the benefits to society outweigh the costs for public coffers; calls on Member States to perform annual, detailed and public cost-benefit analyses of each tax provision;

Amendment 183 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 g (new)

21g. Reiterates that taxation is sometimes used to grant indirect State aid, creating an uneven playing field in the internal market; calls on the Commission to review its tax State aid rules to assess whether tax advantages, such as tax exemptions or tax credits, do distort competition; calls on the Commission to look into the possibility to fine countries found in breach of EU State aid rules; encourages the Commission to pursue its investigations into Member States’ tax ruling practices;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 h (new)

21h. Regrets that some multinationals still adopt aggressive and harmful tax practices, recalls that tax advantages targeted at large companies may stifle innovation and jeopardise the contestability of markets, especially for SMEs;

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 i (new)

21i. Calls for the reinforcement of a conducive framework by phasing out tax exemptions and subsidies for fossil fuels no later than 2025, by preventing investment in new infrastructure incompatible with the Paris agreement and in particular investment in any new fossil fuel infrastructure, and by tightening regulatory framework on GHG emissions via regulatory standards, bans and market mechanisms towards climate neutrality by 2040 at the latest; calls on the Council to finally agree on the needed revision of the Energy Taxation Directive; highlights Member States’ subsidies for fossil fuels amount to over EUR 55 billion per year;

Amendment 19 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. emphasises that the global strength and importance of the EU Single Market derives from its internal competitiveness and equalised level- playing field;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 a (new)

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1119 of the European Parliament and of the Council which sets the target of economy-wide climate neutrality by 2050 and establishes a binding Union reduction commitment of GHG emissions of at least 55 per cent below 1990 levels by 2030,

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas the COVID-19 pandemic, the energy crisis and the Russian aggression against Ukraine have tested the resilience of economies worldwide and exacerbated the relevance of resilience as a critical feature of competitiveness beyond a mere understanding of competitiveness in terms of price and cost;

Amendment 21 #

Cb. whereas the political independence of national competition authorities is of utmost importance to ensure the impartiality and credibility of competition policy;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission to safeguard the integrity of the single market; recalls that the response to the US Inflation Reduction Act must not be solely based on use of State aid, but also on a renewed competition framework, providing speed and flexibility for companies investing and competing fairly in Europe;deleted

Amendment 23 #

France JAMET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission to ~~safeguard the integrity of the single market~~ensure greater respect for the sovereignty of the Member States; recalls that the response to the US Inflation Reduction Act must not be solely based on use of State aid, but also on a ~~renewed competition framework, providing speed and flexibility for companies investing and competing fairly in Europe~~n end to the pro-free trade ideology that prevents nations from protecting their economies;

Amendment 24 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission to safeguard the integrity of the single market; recalls that the response to the US Inflation Reduction Act must not be solely based on the use of State aid, but also on creating a more favourable environment for doing business, a renewed competition framework, providing speed and flexibility for companies investing and competing fairly in Europe;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Commission to safeguard the integrity of the single market; recalls that the response to the US Inflation Reduction Act must not be solely based on ~~use of State aid~~the relaxation of State aid rules, which only favours a few EU Member States, but also on a renewed competition framework, providing speed and flexibility for companies investing and competing fairly in Europe;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

Amendment 27 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Warns the Commission for international subsidy competition and calls upon the Commission to use the tools at its disposal to prevent and sanction unfair subsidy competition; understands the need for additional public investments; considers the introduction of dedicated permanent, if necessary debt- financed, European investment funds to be a better policy response; points out that currently the EU's borrowing costs are relatively high and therefore calls upon the Union to implement new own resources to back EU funds, allay liquidity concerns and thereby lower borrowing costs;

Amendment 28 #

France JAMET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that the aim of competition policies is to guarantee democracy while ensuring that economic activity, dominated by a single actor, does not have the capacity to impose on the people's representatives a policy that runs counter to the national interest and the will of the people; regrets that EU doctrine in this area focused on the belief that the sole aim of competition was to lower prices for consumers, without actually stopping to think about the vital aspect of where production takes place;

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Highlights that the US Inflation Reduction Act attaches social conditionalities to public support schemes promoting, such as good pay, apprenticeship places or unionized jobs; emphasizes that the US Inflation Reduction Act is planned to be financed through fair taxation of the largest corporations and extraordinarily wealthy households; calls on Member States and the Union to apply social conditionalities and fair taxation in their own public support schemes;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 5 b (new)

– having regard to the Commission revised Guidelines on State aid to promote risk finance investments published on 6 December 2021,

Amendment 30 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that the US Inflation Reduction Act uses local content requirements as a condition for allocating additional tax credits; calls on the Commission to closely monitor the effect of these clauses on supply chains and jobs on both sides of the Atlantic; is of the opinion that trade rules should allow for local content requirements when beneficial to the green industrial transition as well as to combat climate change;

Amendment 31 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Considers that the treaty-based competition rules must be interpreted in light of the wider European principles underpinning the Union’s social market economy, notably environmental and social protection, equality considerations, consumer protection and public health, as mandated by Article 7 TFEU; takes the view, therefore, that activities which cause negative social and environmental externalities create market distortions that need to be addressed by means of competition law while, conversely, activities which bring social or environmental benefits should be explicitly taken into account when assessing treaty-based competition provisions;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Stresses that competition policy should not be an obstacle to the implementation of an active industrial strategy; calls on Member States and the Union to pursue an active industrial policy underpinned by strong public investment to fight social and regional inequality, decarbonise industry and bolster autonomy in key economic sectors, while contributing globally to even and sustainable economic development; calls for a coordinated flexibilisation of State aid rules and the introduction of a dedicated permanent European solidarity funds to counterbalance uneven industrial support and development across Member States;

Amendment 33 #

Paul TANG, Jonás FERNÁNDEZ, Aurore LALUCQ, René REPASI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework (TCTF), as well as of the update of the State aid rulebook that allows investments for the green and digital transitions; welcomes the 2023 review of the TCTF to introduce the ‘matching clause’ and avoid a race towards subsidies and tax cuts; stresses that any additional state support should be targeted and temporary; upholds that State aid should be consistent with EU policy objectives such as the Green Deal and the Pillar of Social Rights; calls on the Commission to investigate the lack of harmonisation of clawback mechanisms in Member States;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework (TCTF), as well as of the update of the State aid rulebook that allows investments for the green and digital transitions; welcomes the 2023 review of the TCTF to introduce the ‘matching clause’ and avoid a race towards subsidies; stresses that a very large share of the State aid commitments under the Temporary Crisis Framework originated from a limited number of Member States; warns of the different fiscal capacity of Member States to provide aid and of the very real risk of unfair competition and consequent fragmentation of the single market;

Amendment 35 #

Stéphanie YON-COURTIN, Gilles BOYER, Olivier CHASTEL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Takes note of the Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework (TCTF), as well as of the update of the State aid rulebook that allows investments for the green and digital transitions; ~~welcomes~~takes note of the 2023 ~~review~~adoption of the TCTF ~~to introduce~~including the ‘matching clause’ ~~and avoid a race towards~~; calls on the European Commission to carefully avoid creating the conditions for a subsid~~ies~~y race;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the European Commission to ensure that all temporary State aid instruments are sufficiently targeted to avoid fragmentation of the single market;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Recalls the imperative to ensure that any State aid support is aligned with the European 2030 climate and energy targets and complies with the energy efficiency first principle; stresses that any increased flexibility on State aid rules to support sustainable activities should be accompanied by a tightening of these rules to prevent State aid going to environmentally harmful activities;

Amendment 39 #