Activities of Matt CARTHY
Plenary speeches (9)
Withdrawal Agreement of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (debate)
Appointment of members of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank (debate)
Fair taxation in a digitalised and globalised economy - BEPS 2.0 (debate)
Children rights in occasion of the 30th anniversary of the Convention of the Rights of the Child (B9-0178/2019, B9-0179/2019, B9-0180/2019) GA
General budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections (A9-0017/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial) GA
Conclusions of the European Council meeting of 17 and 18 October 2019 (debate)
Order of business
The situation of EU forests (debate)
Election of the President and Vice-Presidents (appointment of tellers)
Shadow opinions (3)
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Banking Authority for the financial year 2018
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Securities and Markets Authority for the financial year 2018
OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the budget of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority for the financial year 2018
Institutional motions (1)
MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the state of implementation of the Union’s anti-money laundering legislation PDF (152 KB) DOC (53 KB)
Written explanations (68)
Macro-financial assistance to Jordan (A9-0045/2019 - Luisa Regimenti)
. – I voted to abstain on this file because it is a structural adjustment programme not humanitarian support. Despite my groups attempts to amend the agreement, the EUR 500 million is entirely in the form of loans not grants. In order to receive these loans the Jordanian government had to agree to adhere to IMF structural reforms that have damaged so many economies since they began being imposed on the global south since the 1980s. I abstained because I disagree with the terms on which the money is being made available to Jordan. I support supporting Jordan, particularly as a country that hosts 1.3 million refugees but completely oppose the use of crises to impose structural adjustment programmes on third countries.
EU-Switzerland Agreement on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (A9-0043/2019 - Roberta Metsola)
. – I abstained on this report. On the island of Ireland, cross-border cooperation is vitally important, particularly in terms of encouraging cross-border cooperation between the Gardaí and PSNI. Significantly however, this report relates directly to the so-called ‘Prum’ decision, and is a marker of particular concern for Sinn Féin. Sinn Féin does not support the ‘Prum’ decision as the unilateral collection of data is a disproportional mechanism and disregards a person’s right to protection of personal data and privacy. I therefore opted to abstain.
EU-Liechtenstein Agreement on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (A9-0044/2019 - Roberta Metsola)
. – I abstained on this report. On the island of Ireland, cross-border cooperation is vitally important, particularly in terms of encouraging cross-border cooperation between the Gardaí and PSNI. Significantly however, this report relates directly to the so-called ‘Prum’ decision, and is a marker of particular concern for Sinn Féin. Sinn Féin does not support the ‘Prum’ decision as the unilateral collection of data is a disproportional mechanism and disregards a person’s right to protection of personal data and privacy. I therefore opted to abstain.
Protocol to EU-Switzerland Agreement concerning the criteria and mechanisms for establishing the State responsible for examining a request for asylum lodged in a Member State or in Switzerland regarding the access to Eurodac for law enforcement purposes (A9-0025/2019 - Jadwiga Wiśniewska)
. – I voted against this report. Sinn Féin was opposed to the recast of the Eurodac Regulation in 2013 due to our significant concerns that law enforcement agencies would have unparalleled access to the Eurodac database and would be able to utilise this data to combat so-called ‘irregular asylum’. This regulation is another facet of the cruel Fortress Europe approach to prevent vulnerable refugees and asylum seekers from seeking sanctuary in the EU. It is for this reason that I voted against.
Accession of Solomon Islands to the EU-Pacific States Interim Partnership Agreement (A9-0050/2019 - Bernd Lange)
. – I voted against the Solomon joining The interim Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) in June 2018.The Solomon Island will soon cease to be Least Developed Country meaning they lose their preferential non-reciprocal tariff and quota free market access to the EU. In order to maintain its free market access, Solomon Island have to join the regional Interim Economic Partnership Agreement between the EU and the Pacific states (Papua New Guinea, Fiji and Samoa). However, since the EPAs are essentially free trade agreements, Solomon Island will be required to gradually liberalise its trade with the EU in return for its market access to the EU. Not only will the EPA pit local fledgling industries in direct competition with the EU export economy, the liberalisation of financial tariffs on imports (EU goods) and exports (raw materials for European companies) will result in revenue. For these reasons I voted against.
Requirements for payment service providers (A9-0048/2019 - Lídia Pereira)
. – I voted in favour of this report. It relates to the mandatory transmission of information between Member States’ tax authorities in order to combat VAT fraud in the area of e-commerce. This proposal relates to the intermediaries (banks, PayPal, etc.) used to purchase goods online from another member state, and sets down rules for the standardised collection of information. This parliament report endorse the Commission proposals and adds more background information, emphasises the role of organised crime in VAT fraud, including carousel fraud, and aims to strengthen some of the measures (e.g. inserting additional requirements for information to be included in annual reports of the authorities), as well as stating that the Data Supervisor must be consulted on the future regulations stemming from this legislation.
Measures to strengthen administrative cooperation in order to combat VAT fraud (A9-0047/2019 - Lídia Pereira)
. – I voted in favour of this report. It relates to the mandatory transmission of information between member states' tax authorities in order to combat VAT fraud in the area of e-commerce. This report sets down rules on the collection, transmission and retention of information on e-commerce by VAT authorities in the member states. This parliament report endorse the Commission proposals and adds more background information, emphasises the role of organised crime in VAT fraud, including carousel fraud, and aims to strengthen some of the measures (eg, inserting additional requirements for information to be included in annual reports of the authorities), as well as stating that the Data Supervisor must be consulted on the future regulations stemming from this legislation.
Association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union ('Overseas Association Decision') (A9-0033/2019 - Tomas Tobé)
. – I voted in favour of this is a technical decision, already foreseen by the association agreement with the Overseas Territories.The objective of the proposal is to amend a Council Decision on the association of the overseas countries and territories (OCTs) with the European Union - the Overseas Association Decision (OAD). The amendment is required for the application of the registered exporters (REX) system for origin certification. The OCTs were not ready as of 1 January 2017 to apply the REX system as provided for in Annex VI of the OAD. Therefore, all OCTs requested a derogation of three years. On 29 November 2016, the Commission adopted Implementing Decision (EU) 2016/2093 postponing the date to establish the REX system for the OCTs to 1 January 2020.
EU/USA Agreement on the allocation of a share in the tariff rate quota for imports of high-quality beef (recommendation) (A9-0038/2019 - Bernd Lange)
. – I abstained on this agreement and resolution because I believe it must be renegotiated. The present agreement has not had the desired effect of reducing tensions, evidenced by the existing airbus dispute. It also fails to include any ban on the importation of beef produced using antibiotics as a growth promoter.I do not have an issue with the USA receiving the designated portion of the tariff for hormone free beef, as this will not lead to any increase of beef imported into the EU but the aforementioned failures of the agreement must be addressed to make the agreement fit for purpose. As AMR prevalence increases, it is not appropriate to wait until 2022 to being to insert such bans into new legislation.
EU/USA Agreement on the allocation of a share in the tariff rate quota for imports of high-quality beef (resolution) (A9-0037/2019 - Bernd Lange)
. – I abstained on this agreement and resolution because I believe it must be renegotiated. The present agreement has not had the desired effect of reducing tensions, evidenced by the existing airbus dispute. It also fails to include any ban on the importation of beef produced using antibiotics as a growth promoter.I do not have an issue with the USA receiving the designated portion of the tariff for hormone-free beef, as this will not lead to any increase of beef imported into the EU, but the aforementioned failures of the agreement must be addressed to make the agreement fit for purpose. As AMR prevalence increases, it is not appropriate to wait until 2022 to insert such bans into new legislation.
Situation in Bolivia (RC-B9-0187/2019, B9-0187/2019, B9-0188/2019, B9-0189/2019, B9-0190/2019, B9-0191/2019, B9-0192/2019)
. – This resolution is an inaccurate misrepresentation of the political situation in Bolivia, where a racist, fascistic military coup toppled the government of president Evo Morales shortly after he won re-election on October 20. The official tally showed that Morales obtained 47.08%, and his main opponent, Carlos Mesa, 36.51%, but the right-wing opposition refused to accept these results. Morales called fresh elections to defuse the violence, but the military and police forced him from power in a US-backed coup d’état. Since then, security forces have attacked pro-democracy protests, killing dozens.The resolution repeats the arguments of the coup-mongers, providing cover for an attack on democratic norms in Bolivia, and the violent repression and murders of pro-Morales, indigenous and pro-democracy demonstrators. It also repeats unproven claims of electoral fraud, insinuates blame on pro-Morales protesters for the social turmoil and deaths, ignores the role of the military and police in carrying out a violent coup, recognises the unconstitutionally self-declared far-right ‘president’ Añez, and welcomes new elections that would exclude Morales from running.I therefore voted against.
Climate and environmental emergency (RC-B9-0209/2019, B9-0209/2019, B9-0211/2019, B9-0212/2019, B9-0215/2019, B9-0216/2019, B9-0218/2019, B9-0220/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution as it is obvious that we are facing a climate and environmental emergency.This is corroborated by verifiable scientific evidence, such as the recent findings by the World Meteorological Organization which has predicated a temperature increase of up to 5 degrees Celsius within the next 80 years. As long as the signatories to the Paris Agreement who pledged to implement measures to curb greenhouse gas emissions continue with empty promises and pledges, then this will become a reality.Global emissions have shown no signs of slowing, which is demonstrated by record—breaking temperatures year after year, at great human and ecological cost. For these reasons I supported this resolution.
2019 UN Climate Change Conference (COP25) (B9-0174/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution as it essential to create a just transition to tackle climate change. I also believe that combatting climate change along with social inequality and poverty all need to be at the forefront of the UN’s agenda.It is important that people are not left behind in the fight against climate change, and in establishing an economy that no longer relies on fossil fuels. Ordinary people must not bear the brunt of the fight to tackle climate change, when multinational corporations and the fossil fuel industry are ultimately responsible for the destruction of our planet. I note that this resolution encourages the use of nuclear power as an alternative fuel, however I strongly oppose the advancement of nuclear energy.Not enough is being done by the Irish government, or internationally by the signatories of the Paris Agreement, which is why I supported this resolution calling for further action.
EU accession to the Istanbul Convention and other measures to combat gender-based violence (B9-0224/2019, B9-0225/2019, B9-0226/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution as it called on the Council to urgently conclude the EU ratification of the Istanbul Convention and calls on the seven Member States that have signed up to the convention, but have not yet ratified it, to do so without delay. The resolution highlights that the convention remains the key international tool to eradicate gender-based violence.
Recent actions by the Russian Federation against Lithuanian judges, prosecutors and investigators involved in investigating the tragic events on 13 January 1991 in Vilnius (RC-B9-0182/2019, B9-0182/2019, B9-0183/2019, B9-0184/2019, B9-0185/2019, B9-0186/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution.The issue in this resolution dates back to 13 January 1991, where a confrontation between independence demonstrators and Soviet troops took place at Vilnius’s television tower, during which 14 civilians were killed and 702 were injured.In March 2019, the Vilnius Regional Court qualified the events of January 1991 as an act of aggression by the Soviet Union against Lithuania and found Dmitry Yazov, former Soviet defence minister, as well as more than 60 other former Soviet officers guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity for their involvement on 13 January 1991.In 2018, the Investigation Committee of the Russian Federation opened a criminal case against the Lithuanian prosecutors who investigated the 13th January case. This year, a criminal case has been brought against the Lithuanian judges who conducted the trial of this case. I believe the Soviet authorities behind the events in 1991 should be condemned and that any attempt to interfere in an ongoing judicial procedure should be denounced, and therefore I voted in favour of this resolution.
Measures to address the impact on European agriculture of the WTO ruling on the Airbus dispute (RC-B9-0197/2019, B9-0197/2019, B9-0198/2019, B9-0201/2019, B9-0203/2019, B9-0204/2019, B9-0206/2019, B9-0208/2019)
. – I voted against this joint motion for resolution. The resolution fails to address that this type of dispute is the core problem with an export—driven agriculture policy. As long as this policy is continued, farmers will pay the price for world trade disagreements, even when they are not related to agricultural products.This resolution sees free trade and open markets as a panacea and that this type of issue can be avoided by pouring more money into promotion in other countries. This resolution should have been about the need to boost farm incomes for trade within the EU, giving priority to short supply chains and helping farmers diversify. I am very disappointed this resolution was orientated in such a way that the difficulties created by a dispute of this nature will likely continue for European farmers.
Crisis of the WTO Appellate Body (B9-0181/2019)
. – We voted to abstain on this file on the WTO appellate body because it presented the undemocratic and opaque appellate body, and the WTO in general, in an uncritical manner. The file calls for ending the issue of vacancies on the appellate body of the WTO. In December, terms of two of the three remaining members of the seven-member tribunal will end, causing the Appellate Body to go dormant due to lack of a quorum. We oppose the US approach to the WTO. However, we could not vote in favour of a text that presents the WTO and its dispute settlement body as some kind of guarantee for democratic multilateralism, economic inclusion, and sound rules-based global governance.
On-going negotiations for a new EU-ACP Partnership Agreement (B9-0175/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution that deals with the ongoing cooperation between the EU and its former colonies in Africa, the Caribbean and the Pacific covering development aid, trade and economic inclusion and political cooperation. I supported the resolution because it contained a number of positive aspects particularly from a development perspective.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Greece (A9-0040/2019 - Eva Kaili)
Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument to finance immediate budgetary measures to address the on-going challenges of migration, refugee inflows and security threats (A9-0039/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier)
. – We voted to abstain on the proposal to mobilise the Flexibility Instrument to supplement the financing in the general budget of the Union for the financial year 2020 above the ceiling of heading 3 by the amount of EUR 778 074 489 to finance measures migration, refugee inflows and security threats. The Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund (AMIF) and the Internal Security Fund (ISF) will receive the majority of the funding.While the AMIF is in need of substantial reform it does fund many positive initiatives, including in Ireland. We would support increased funding for such programmes through the AMIF. However, we abstained because we oppose the ISF. Furthermore, we also oppose the ongoing practice of conflating migration and security which is evident here.
Mobilisation of the EU Solidarity Fund to provide for the payment of advances in the general budget of the Union for 2020 (A9-0036/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier)
. – I voted in favour of mobilising the EU Solidarity Fund to provide for the payment of advances in the general budget of the Union for 2020 because this will allow the Fund an amount of up to a maximum of EUR 50 million in both commitment and payment appropriations to be included in the budget for the payment of advances.
2020 budgetary procedure: joint text (A9-0035/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
. – I voted against the agreement reach between the European Parliament and the Council on Monday 18th November in Brussels on the EU budget for 2020. The agreement represents an increase of 1.5% compared to the 2019 budget. I oppose the agreement because of how the money is being spent. Of particular concern, is that for the second year the EU budget has allocated 250 million EUR to the European Defence Industrial Defence Programme (EDIDP).The Frontex budget increased by 115 million (compared to 2019) and Frontex staff increased by 191 posts with respect to 2019. Furthermore, the Internal Security Fund will receive 501 million. For these reasons I voted against the agreement.
EU-Ukraine Agreement amending the trade preferences for poultry meat and poultry meat preparations provided for by the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement (A9-0024/2019 - Enikő Győri)
. – I voted against this agreement. This agreement increased by 50 000 tonnes the allowance of chicken breast Ukraine can import to the EU. It has come about after a dispute between the EU and Ukraine. Ukraine imported more chicken breast than the EU envisaged in the previous agreement by creating a new type of cut, which included breast and which would not fall under the quota limit awarded. I do not believe Ukraine should be rewarded for acting in bad faith by inventing methods to get around quota limits. This is a bad deal for EU chicken farmers and it does nothing to address the animal welfare concerns EU consumers have with Ukrainian poultry meat production.
Amending VAT and excise duty rules as regards defence effort within the Union framework (A9-0034/2019 - Paul Tang)
. – I voted against this report. The proposal aims to align the defence spending of the EU with the rules on collecting VAT, and the excise duties rules applied to NATO spending. The report aims to increase military mobility within the EU by removing VAT for several military goods (e.g. food supplies) when armed forces are training or active in other EU states. The VAT exemption in the EU would also be applied for NATO-countries. This is essentially an indirect subsidy for military forces across the EU. As it is promoting further militarisation, I voted against.
Request for waiver of the immunity of José Manuel Fernandes (A9-0023/2019 - Ibán García Del Blanco)
. – I voted in favour of removing immunity from the EPP Member Jose Manuel Fernandes. Mr Fernandes is under investigation for allegedly putting a company in a more favourable position than its competitors and participating in the prior preparation and completion of documents required for the tender procedure in 2008 in Porto.The Porto Prosecutor has requested the waiver of the immunity of Fernandes with regard to a possible judicial procedure concerning an alleged crime of malfeasance. The alleged misgivings were carried before his election to the European Parliament and under his functions of Mayor of Vila Verde. Therefore, the legal proceeding is not related to his parliamentary activity. Nonetheless, I believe that Mr Fernandes should have his immunity removed to allow the judicial procedure to continue.
Distance sales of goods and certain domestic supplies of goods (A9-0019/2019 - Ondřej Kovařík)
. – I abstained on this report. The proposal is part of the general programme aiming to harmonise aspects of cross-border VAT law in the EU. It makes technical proposals to clarify EU-wide rules on VAT on sales that take place in the electronic sphere (online marketplaces and platforms). It specifies the situations in which it is considered that an interface facilitates the sales of goods and services between users (and are therefore liable for VAT), and lays down some requirements on what information must be gathered. I am opposed to EU harmonisation on VAT, and to the extension of VAT in general as it is a flat, regressive tax. As this is a mainly technical measure, I abstained.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund - EGF/2019/001 BE/Carrefour - Belgium (A9-0021/2019 - José Manuel Fernandes)
. – I voted in favour. This file requests EUR 1.6 million from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) for 400 workers fired by Carrefour in Belgium, supposedly because of competition in online sales.The funds would provide support for vocational training, career guidance, and reskilling for the workers, plus support for 330 unemployed young people not enrolled in education or training (NEETs).The EGF was established to support workers made redundant in EU Member States because of globalisation, and the European Parliament and Commission support the application.The Council is not convinced, however, that it meets the conditions for the EGF, which does not specifically reference digitisation. The Commission insists that globalisation is to blame. Therefore, after this vote, the matter will be referred to trilogue negotiations.I am critical of the EGF, which is a ‘sticking plaster’ for the problems of globalisation, and risks being a fig leaf for corporate restructuring. I therefore supported Amendments from my Group highlighting Carrefour’s large profits in recent years, and calling for public investment and better protections from dismissal. Ultimately, the application will provide more funding for workers to find new jobs and in this context; I believe it must be supported.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified cotton LLCotton25 (ACS-GHØØ1-3) (B9-0170/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this objection. The substance in question (LLCotton25) has been proven to be resistant to glufosinate. Glufosinate toxicity is dangerous to a number of natural biological processes, particularly reproduction.It is not best practice for the Commission to authorise substances which a lack support from both Member States and the European Parliament.Under new proposals, Member States are also not obliged to measure glufosinate residues on any products, including cotton, and therefore it cannot be excluded that LLCotton25 or products derived from it for food and feed will have residues that exceed levels which are harmful to consumers.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified soybean MON 89788 (MON-89788-1) (B9-0169/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this objection. This is the latest objection brought forward by the European Parliament against the Commission’s GMO authorisation, objected on the same grounds of exceeding the implementing powers in the basic act. Sinn Féin opposes the current authorisation procedure due to it being non-democratic. These authorisations are not supported by a qualified majority of Member States in the comitology process. Indeed the standing committee, which represents Member States, offered no opinion.I call on the Commission to propose a new modification to the procedure; further delays to change the procedure will result in delayed or expired authorisations. Until Europe is self-sufficient in maize and soya production, imports are required to ensure farmers have sufficient feed for animals. However, the precautionary principle must be respected, meaning applications must be accompanied by comprehensive EFSA reports, to protect our citizens, and be supported by a weighted majority of Member States. The Biotechnology WG of the French Agency for Food(ANSES) states that, because the literature review conducted by the applicant of scientific studies published since GM soybean MON 89788 was first authorised was too restrictive, it cannot come to a conclusion as to the safety of soybean MON 89788.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 and sub- combinations MON 89034 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9, 1507 × NK603 × DAS-40278-9 and NK603 × DAS-40278-9 (B9-0171/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this objection. This is the latest objection brought forward by Parliament against the Commission’s GMO authorisation, objected to on the same grounds of exceeding the implementing powers in the basic act. Sinn Féin opposes the current authorisation procedure due to it being non-democratic. These authorisations are not supported by a qualified majority of Member States in the comitology process. Indeed the standing committee, which represents Member States, offered no opinion.I call on the Commission to come up with a new modification to the procedure; further delays to change the procedure will result in delayed or expired authorisations. Until Europe is self-sufficient in maize and soya production, imports are required to ensure farmers have sufficient feed for animals. However, the precautionary principle must be respected, meaning applications must be accompanied by comprehensive European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) reports, to protect our citizens, and be supported by a weighted majority of Member States. In this case, concerns have also been raised as to the quality of the assessment carried out by EFSA.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize Bt11 × MIR162 × MIR604 × 1507 × 5307 × GA21 and genetically modified maize combining two, three, four or five of the single events Bt11, MIR162, MIR604, 1507, 5307 and GA21 (B9-0172/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this objection. This is the latest objection brought forward by the European Parliament against the Commission’s GMO authorisation, objected to on the same grounds of exceeding the implementing powers in the basic act. Sinn Féin opposes the current authorisation procedure, due to it being non-democratic. These authorisations are not supported by a qualified majority of Member States in the comitology process. Indeed, the standing committee, which represents Member States, offered no opinion.I call on the Commission to come up with a new modification to the procedure; further delays to change the procedure will result in delayed or expired authorisations. Until Europe is self-sufficient in maize and soya production, imports are required to ensure that farmers have sufficient feed for animals. However, the precautionary principle must be respected, meaning that applications must be accompanied by comprehensive EFSA reports, to protect our citizens, and be supported by a weighted majority of Member States. In this case, concerns have also been raised as to the quality of the assessment carried out by EFSA.
Criminalisation of sexual education in Poland (B9-0166/2019, B9-0167/2019, B9-0168/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution. This resolution deals with draft legislation in Poland which would prevent young people from receiving comprehensive sexual education. The proposal targets sex educators and threatens them with up to three years in prison for teaching sex education. This would also include activists, NGOs, healthcare providers, psychologists, authors and publishers of books and magazines for teenagers where contraception and sex is discussed. I voted in favour of the resolution to condemn this move in Poland to misinform, stigmatise and ban sexuality education.The resolution highlights that access to information about sex and sexuality, family planning, contraceptive methods, safe and legal abortion, is essential to creating a positive and respectful approach to sexuality and sexual relationships. It calls on Member States to introduce comprehensive age-appropriate sexuality and relationship education for young people in schools. The resolution calls on the Polish parliament to refrain from adopting the proposed bill and to ensure that young people have access to comprehensive sexual education.
Financial assistance to Member States to cover serious financial burden inflicted on them following a UK's withdrawal from the EU without an agreement (A9-0020/2019 - Younous Omarjee)
. – We voted in favour of this proposal in order to extend the scope of the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF) to mitigate the impact of a no-deal Brexit. This will allow Member States to use the impact of Brexit on public finances as reason to draw down funding from the EUSF. It is vital that all possible preparations for a hard Brexit are in place.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: partially granting an authorisation for a use of chromium trioxide (Cromomed S.A. and others) (B9-0151/2019)
. – We voted in favour of this objection. Chromium trioxide is mainly used in chrome plating. It is considered a carcinogenic 1A, without a safe threshold, and mutagenic 1B.The Commission’s draft change to the REACH Regulation gives a very broad authorisation for use of chromium trioxide. The current REACH Regulation states that only authorisations can be given for use of this substance if there are no safer alternatives – which the applicants need to demonstrate for each of the uses they are applying for. This was not demonstrated, nonetheless, the Commission granted the authorisation, stating: ‘it’s impossible for a single alternative to comply with all of the requirements’.The objections calls on the Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision and to submit a new draft rejecting the application for authorisation, and to carefully assess whether any authorisations can be granted in full compliance with the REACH Regulation for the specific uses covered by the application submitted by the Applicants. We believe that we must be cognisant of the precautionary principle in such circumstances.
Effects of the bankruptcy of Thomas Cook Group (RC-B9-0118/2019, B9-0118/2019, B9-0119/2019, B9-0120/2019, B9-0121/2019, B9-0122/2019, B9-0124/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution, which highlights the negative implications that the bankruptcy of Thomas Cook has had on its workers and customers. The cessation of the operations of Thomas Cook, which employed 22 000 people and served 19 million people a year, has required an enormous repatriation operation for more than 600 000 holidaymakers from different locations around the world to their places of origin.I support the proposals made in the report, as it highlights the importance of sustained social dialogue at all levels.
State of play of the disclosure of income tax information by certain undertakings and branches - public country-by-country reporting (B9-0117/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this resolution, which was co-signed by my group, GUE/NGL. The resolution calls on EU Member States to stop blocking a crucial proposal for corporate tax transparency in the Council.Public country-by-country reporting (CBCR) will require the largest multinationals to publish their profits and taxes paid in each EU member state as well as aggregated data for the rest of the world. Sinn Féin has strongly supported public CBCR, and the Irish Government is one of several blocking the proposal from proceeding in Council. The legal basis of the proposal is the right of the EU to legislate on accounting standards (as opposed to it being a taxation matter, which some Member States are claiming).The European Parliament adopted its mandate on for entering inter-institutional negotiations on this proposal in 2017; however, the Council has failed to adopt a common position so trilogues have not yet begun.The resolution notes the legal basis of the proposal and calls on Member States to break the deadlock in Council and enter trilogues. It calls on the Finnish Presidency of the Council to prioritise the file and progress it to COREPER level in the Council.
The Turkish military operation in northeast Syria and its consequences (RC-B9-0123/2019, B9-0123/2019, B9-0125/2019, B9-0126/2019, B9-0127/2019, B9-0128/2019, B9-0129/2019, B9-0133/2019)
. – Turkey’s invasion of north-east Syria is illegal under international law, and represents a dangerous escalation of conflict in the region. This Resolution, supported by all the major Groups in the European Parliament, is a strong rebuke to Turkey. It condemns the invasion, demands an immediate withdrawal and end to arms sales to Turkey by EU Member States, and calls for international dialogue in the framework of the UN.Some of the language in the Resolution is unfortunate, calling for the Commission and High Commissioner to act on behalf of the EU in the matter, but foreign affairs remains a national competence. It also refers approvingly to the military ‚Global Coalition‘ in the region. I voted for amendments to change these references.Another paragraph also advocates ‘targeted sanctions’ against Syrian and Turkish government officials. Sinn Féin is generally opposed to sanctions, particularly economic sanctions, as they frequently have a negative impact on the civilian population and can be counterproductive. I voted to remove this sentence.Despite these serious problems with the text, however, I voted in favour of the final resolution, as I felt the seriousness of the situation necessitated sending Turkey the strongest message possible.
Search and rescue in the Mediterranean (B9-0130/2019, B9-0131/2019, B9-0132/2019, B9-0154/2019)
. – I supported this joint motion for resolution on search and rescue operations (SAR) for the following reasons. It calls on Member States to maintain their ports open to NGO vessels. It calls for proactive SAR operations along routes where they can make an effective contribution to the preservation of lives and calls for political and financial support of the Commission to such operations. It reiterates our demand adopted in the former resolution to exempt humanitarian assistance from criminalisation, and calls for a relocation mechanism for persons arriving by sea.More than 1 000 women, men and children have drowned or gone missing in the Mediterranean this year alone, according to Oxfam. Failure to take immediate action, such as called for in this resolution, condemns thousands more to death in the Mediterranean Sea.
Opening accession negotiations with North Macedonia and Albania (B9-0155/2019, RC-B9-0156/2019, B9-0156/2019, B9-0157/2019, B9-0158/2019, B9-0159/2019, B9-0160/2019, B9-0161/2019)
. – Firstly, Sinn Féin is not opposed to the accession process with North Macedonia and Albania. We do not believe it is our role to block these countries joining if it is the will of its population. It must be remembered that when Ireland joined its economy was a fraction of its current size.However, we abstained on the joint resolution due to its wording. The text contains many demands we disagree with. Many of the economic conditions are reforms that push neoliberal economics that will not benefit the people of North Macedonia. Of course, countries need to meet standards of democracy and governance but it should not be used to force a certain economic view on any country. We must ensure the highest standards on issues such as judicial independence and tackling corruption without telling people they have no longer have economic choice.We believe the reform package the EU demands of assent countries should be reformed as soon as possible.
Draft general budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections
. – We voted against the 2020 budget because it continues to prioritise corporate interests and militarisation at the expense of socially beneficial programmes.Of particular concern is that for the second year, the EU budget has allocated EUR 250 million to the European Defence Industrial Defence Programme (EDIDP). This programme is a subsidy to the arms industry and contradicts EU treaties as it is prohibited to charge any spending with ‘military or defence implications’ to the EU budget (Article 41 TEU). Furthermore, the EDIDP is a precursor to the EUR 13 billion European Defence Fund planned for 2021.
General budget of the European Union for 2020 - all sections (A9-0017/2019 - Monika Hohlmeier, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial)
. – We voted against the 2020 budget because it continues to prioritise corporate interests and militarisation at the expense of socially beneficial programmes.Of particular concern is that for the second year, the EU budget has allocated EUR 250 million to the European Defence Industrial Defence Programme (EDIDP). This programme is a subsidy to the arms industry and contradicts EU treaties as it is prohibited to charge any spending with ‘military or defence implications’ to the EU budget (Article 41 TEU). Furthermore, the EDIDP is a precursor to the EUR 13 billion European Defence Fund planned for 2021.
Discharge 2017: European Asylum Support Office (EASO) (A9-0011/2019 - Petri Sarvamaa)
. – I voted in favour of refusing to grant this discharge due to irregularities discovered by OLAF regarding breach of procurement procedures, misappropriation of EU funds, mismanagement, abuse of position in human resources issues, and breaches of data protection rules. I welcome that since then, corrective measures have been put in place to improve the governance, restore transparency and rebuild trust. However, as this discharge concerns the 2017 budget, I voted to refuse the discharge
Discharge 2017: EU general budget - European Council and Council (A9-0010/2019 - Isabel García Muñoz)
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Assessment of the impact of plant protection products on honeybees (B9-0149/2019)
. – I voted in favour of this objection because I believe the approach proposed by the Commission does not represent best practice. In its Draft Regulation, the Commission chooses to retain the sole criterion of acute oral and contact toxicity to assess pesticides’ impact on bees, thereby refusing to base its criteria on the latest scientific knowledge and evidence.The Commission excludes from the current Draft Regulation all important criteria from the Bee Guidance document, including chronic oral toxicity and larval toxicity, which were included in a previous draft of the contested measure. I believe the Commission should redraft the regulation to broaden texting requirements.
European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (2014-2020) (A9-0015/2019 - Vilija Blinkevičiūtė)
. – This file deals with an emergency Brexit contingency amendment to Regulation which sets the current rules for the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF). The proposed change would include a ‘no deal’ Brexit as a basis for Member States to apply for EGF funding.The European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) is a ‘solidarity fund’, financing measures to help workers affected by unexpected and significant dismissals provoked by globalisation or by global economic and financial crisis. It is an emergency fund, and is only mobilised on an ad hoc basis.Sinn Féin’s general approach to the EGF has been critical yet supportive of the EGF. The funds is mostly a ‘sticking plaster’ for the impacts of globalisation and EU market policies. Nevertheless, since this fund advances worker’s interests, their reskilling and their capacity to find new jobs, we have generally supported EGF applications.The impacts of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit are hard to predict, and could affect workers at a range of levels, leading to possibly considerable job losses. A flexible application of the EGF in the case of a ‘no deal’ Brexit could help to shield vulnerable workers from the worst of the potential fall-out. We therefore voted in favour.
Fishing authorisations for Union fishing vessels in United Kingdom waters and fishing operations of United Kingdom fishing vessels in Union waters (A9-0014/2019 - Chris Davies)
. – I voted in favour of this file to continue authorisation of fishing vessels in the case of a no-deal scenario.In the absence of a withdrawal agreement, fishing activities by Member State vessels in waters under British jurisdiction and by British registered vessels in EU waters would no longer be governed by the Common Fisheries Policy Basic Regulation when the British government withdraws from the EU.In case of a no-deal Brexit, EU and British registered vessels risk suddenly not having the possibility to utilise fully the fishing opportunities as established for 2019 or access, which would be catastrophic, especially for the sector in Ireland.It is important to keep open the possibility of arrangements for continued reciprocal fishing access by fishing vessels from the island of Ireland who rely on access to all our waters and beyond after the withdrawal date.
Implementation and financing of the EU general budget in 2020 in relation to the UK's withdrawal from the EU (A9-0018/2019 - Johan Van Overtveldt)
. – I voted in favour to ensure that in the event of Britain leaving the EU without an agreement, the budgetary relations between the EU and the North of Ireland and Britain would not be left without an agreed legal arrangement. Such a scenario would create considerable uncertainty and difficulties for the implementation of the Union’s budgets for 2019 and 2020. The purpose of this proposal is to extend to 2020 the contingency framework approved by Parliament on 17 April 2019. This will allow for beneficiaries of the EU budget in the North of Ireland and Britain to continue to receive funding. Without this, farmers, universities, Erasmus students, etc., would be cut off from EU funds in the event of a no-deal Brexit, an outcome that it is in everyone’s interest to avoid.
Periods of application of Regulation (EU) 2019/501 and Regulation (EU) 2019/502 (Committee on Transport and Tourism)
. – I voted in favour of this legislation to extend the period for Brexit contingency measures in the area of road transport, and air connectivity.In a no-deal scenario, road and air transport will be negatively affected and I therefore fully support extending the validity of these contingency measures for a further seven months.
Periods of application of Regulation (EU) 2019/501 and Regulation (EU) 2019/502 ( - Karima Delli)
. – I voted in favour of this urgent procedure, to put to a vote extending the period for Brexit contingency measures in the area of road transport, and air connectivity.In a No Deal scenario, road and air transport will be negatively affected and I therefore fully support extending the validity of these contingency measures for a further seven months.
Eurojust and Serbia Cooperation Agreement (A9-0009/2019 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
. – This Report concerns cooperation and exchange of personal data between Eurojust and Serbia for criminal matters on a case by case basis. Such co-operation agreements can be adopted via 1) the pre-Lisbon procedure whereby the Council approves them through implementing measures, after consulting the European Parliament, or 2) the new Eurojust Regulation procedure (already adopted, but not operational until December). Under this second procedure, the EP will have a stronger role via a veto.Despite the fact that the Lisbon Treaty provided a stronger role of the European Parliament over such agreements, previous agreements have been adopted pursuant to the pre-Lisbon consultation procedure, where the Parliament’s opinion is not binding. This is possible as the pre-Lisbon instrument hasn’t yet been amended.I have abstained on previously such files on the basis that we support a stronger role for the European Parliament than provided for in the procedure used, in order to strengthen transparency and accountability. It should be noted that such personal data can be already be exchanged with Serbia directly through national prosecutors, and the transfer of personal data with this country does not depend on the approval of this tool. I therefore abstained on this file.
Draft amending budget No 4/2019: reduction of commitment and payment appropriations in line with updated needs of expenditure and update of revenue (own resources) (A9-0012/2019 - John Howarth)
. – We voted in favour of the file on draft amending budget (DAB) No 4/2019 because we agree with the rapporteur’s assessment and oppose the cuts proposed by the Commission and Council. The goal of this DAB n°4 is to update both the expenditure and the revenue sides of the budget to take account of the postponement of the withdrawal of UK to 31 October. The Commission proposes an extra EUR 15 million for the European Parliament to take into account the fact that Britain remained in the EU until now. However, the Commission, together with the Council, seized this opportunity to also make cuts, amounting to EUR 100 million. The vast majority of these cuts come out of the Union Civil Protection Mechanism, the Solidarity Fund, ESMA and EBA.
Adjustments to the amounts mobilised from the Flexibility Instrument for 2019 to be used for migration, refugee inflows and security threats (A9-0013/2019 - John Howarth)
. – I voted against, because I oppose the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument for an amount of EUR 1164 million as it is related to and conditional on the adoption of cuts in DAB4, which I also oppose. Furthermore, a lot of the funding will go to the EU’s failing approach to migration, with very little going to integration of refugees and asylum seekers.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Active substances, including flumioxazine (B9-0103/2019)
. – We voted in favour of this objection because we do not agree this chemical should be automatically renewed for another year. This initial period of approval for this chemical expired a number of years ago, but its use licence was extended while the full renewal process was ongoing. Since its initial approval, concerns have been raised as to its safety. It has been identified as a probable endocrine disruptor. Considering this, I believe we must await the results of more comprehensive testing, which forms part of the full approval process. Until this process is complete and the results indicate the chemical is safe for usage, no further approvals should be permitted. The European Food Safety Agency should work to shorten approval-processing times, without compromising on safety, to ensure farmers have access to the chemicals they need to produce the food we eat.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Active substances, including chlorotoluron (B9-0104/2019)
. – We voted in favour of this objection because we do not agree this chemical should be automatically renewed for another year. This initial period of approval for this chemical expired a number of years ago, but its use licence was extended while the full renewal process was ongoing. Since its initial approval, concerns have been raised as to its safety. It has been identified and classified as toxic for reproduction category 1B and as a probable endocrine disruptor. Considering this, we believe we must await the results of more comprehensive testing, which forms part of the full approval process. Until this process is complete and the results indicate the chemical is safe for usage, no further approvals should be permitted. The European Food Safety Agency should work to shorten approval-processing times, without compromising on safety, to ensure farmers have access to the chemicals they need to produce the food we eat.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MZHG0JG (SYN-ØØØJG-2) (B9-0107/2019)
. – We voted in favour of this objection because we believe a positive opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health should be mandatory before use is authorised in the EU. The European Commission should withdraw proposals for authorisations, which have no accompanying positive opinion from the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health.We also believe that GMO soybean designed to withstand pesticides, which are banned in Europe, should not be permitted to enter the EU. This soybean is clearly modified to an extent that is unnecessary and undesirable. The utmost consideration must be given to human and animal health and the environment in cases such as this.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified soybean A2704-12 (ACS-GMØØ5-3) (B9-0105/2019)
. – We voted in favour of this objection because we believe a positive opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health should be mandatory before use is authorised in the EU. The European Commission should withdraw proposals for authorisations, which have no accompanying positive opinion from the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health.We also believe that GMO soybean designed to withstand pesticides, which are banned in Europe, should not be permitted to enter the EU. This soybean is clearly modified to an extent that is unnecessary and undesirable. The utmost consideration must be given to human and animal health and the environment in cases such as this.
Objection pursuant to Rule 112: Genetically modified maize MON 89034 × 1507 × MON 88017 × 59122 × DAS-40278-9 and genetically modified maize combining two, three or four of the single events MON 89034, 1507, MON 88017, 59122 and DAS-40278-9 (B9-0106/2019)
. – We voted in favour of this objection because we believe a positive opinion of the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health should be mandatory before use is authorised in the EU. The European Commission should withdraw proposals for authorisations, which have no accompanying positive opinion from the Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health.We also believe that GMO soybean designed to withstand pesticides, which are banned in Europe, should not be permitted to enter the EU. This soybean is clearly modified to an extent that is unnecessary and undesirable. The upmost consideration must be given to human and animal health and the environment in cases such as this.
Foreign electoral interference and disinformation in national and European democratic processes (B9-0108/2019, B9-0111/2019)
. – This contentious resolution seeks to accuse various third parties – particularly Russia – of interfering in elections in the EU, and to use this to ‘explain’ the rise of far-right populism in the EU.While outside interference is a genuine issue – just look at the Cambridge Analytica scandal surrounding the Brexit vote – this resolution goes too far and is unbalanced, only referring to online media and only looking outside the EU for sources of interference.It creates a slippery slope around ‘disinformation’ and ‘fake news’ that could harm freedom of political expression, and indeed restrict journalism and the right to inform. The resolution talks openly about supporting and fostering ‘responsible journalism’, which sounds dangerously Orwellian, and calls for legislative action to allow the EU to intervene in social media.Even more problematically, it calls for an upgrade of the EU’s propaganda arm, the EU East StratCom Task Force, into a permanent structure within the European External Action Service, and considers NATO an important tool in combatting ‘disinformation’.I supported several amendments to improve the overall text, but ultimately was unable to support the resolution for the reasons above. I therefore voted against.
Multiannual Financial Framework 2021-2027 and own resources: time to meet citizens' expectations (B9-0110/2019, B9-0112/2019, B9-0113/2019)
. – I voted against this motion for resolution as I do not agree with its overarching vision for the EU. I particularly oppose increasing the EU budget by 30 percent as well as the creation of EU taxes such as: a common consolidated corporate tax base, digital services taxation, a financial transaction tax, income from the emissions trading scheme, a plastics contribution and a carbon border adjustment mechanism. For these reasons I voted against the Motion for resolution.
Employment and social policies of the euro area (A9-0016/2019 - Yana Toom)
. – This report represents a fairly typical response from the European Parliament to the issues of employment and social policies of the euro area and sets out the European Parliament’s position on these matters ahead of the next cycle. However, it is presented entirely within the framework of the European Semester – a regressive and failed economic paradigm that erodes sovereignty and reduces economic independence while failing to acknowledge or address the underlying structural and economic problems in the euro area.The draft report had some good points, in particular concerns about persistently high levels of youth unemployment, in-work poverty, the need to ensure quality job creation, reintegrate the unemployed into the labour force, and tackling inequalities, including the gender inequalities. While the final report is nonetheless an improvement, I could not support it, as it is entirely premised on the European Semester, to which I am opposed, and which would actually help prevent the action necessary to resolve these very issues.
Draft amending budget No 1/2019: surplus from 2018 (A9-0005/2019 - John Howarth)
. – We voted against what should have been a procedural proposal because the rapporteur used it as an opportunity to call for a significant change to the budgetary practice involved. The proposal is for all revenue resulting from fines or linked to late payments to be transferred without a corresponding decrease in the contributions based on gross national income (GNI). Currently, these surpluses are transferred forward to the next calendar year and there is a corresponding deduction from national contributions. Changing this practice would increase the budget and national contributions, which is something Sinn Féin opposes.
Draft amending budget No 2/2019: reinforcement of key programmes for EU competitiveness: Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+ (A9-0004/2019 - John Howarth)
. – We voted in favour of the proposal to allow for a reinforcement of EUR 100 million of commitment appropriations to Horizon 2020 and Erasmus+. We support the ring-fencing of the EUR 80 million for Horizon 2020 for environmental research and the allocation of EUR 20 million for core mobility activities in the field of higher education and vocational education and training.However, one issue of concern is the fact that the Commission intends to use some of the additional money to boost funding for pilot initiatives on European Universities and Centres of Vocational Excellence. Both initiatives are proposed for the next generation of the Erasmus+ programme from 2021 to 2027. They have nevertheless received funding through the 2019 work programme: ‘European Universities’ had received EUR 30 million already before the top-up via the draft amending budget. Supplementary policy choices like this are only supposed to be adopted via delegated acts, with oversight powers for both legislators.We will be following the issue closely.
Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Romania, Italy and Austria (A9-0002/2019 - Siegfried Mureşan)
. – I voted in favour of releasing funds from the European Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Austria, Italy and Romania as they have each suffered from extreme weather conditions that have caused substantial destruction. All three countries applied for support due to extreme weather events, and all three meet the criteria for support.
Draft amending budget No 3/2019: proposal to mobilise the European Union Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Romania, Italy and Austria (A9-0006/2019 - John Howarth)
. – I voted in favour of releasing funds from the European Solidarity Fund to provide assistance to Austria, Italy and Romania as they have each suffered from extreme weather conditions that have caused substantial destruction. All three countries applied for support due to extreme weather events, and all three meet the criteria for support.
Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund - EGF/2019/000 TA 2019 - Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission (A9-0001/2019 - Bogdan Rzońca)
. – The file requests the mobilisation of EUR 610 000 from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) for technical assistance to the Commission in promoting the EGF.The EGF was established to support workers made redundant in EU Member States as a result of the adverse effects of globalisation.The funds requested cover technical assistance including: monitoring and data—gathering for EGF websites; improving ease of access; standardising and simplifying procedures; and awareness-raising about the EGF.This request is larger than last year, due to an important final evaluation of the EGF for the period 2014-2020.While we support this technical assistance and the EGF, it is important also to remain vigilant about the fund’s use. The EGF should not be used as an ‘opt-out’ clause for companies to get away with undermining workers’ rights, compensate for austerity cuts, or facilitate companies moving to countries with cheaper labour.The report itself also highlights the importance of ‘liaising between all those involved in EGF applications, including, in particular, the social partners and stakeholders at regional and local level’, which is welcome. We therefore voted in favour.
The UK’s withdrawal from the EU (B9-0038/2019, B9-0039/2019)
. – This is a positive resolution. It reaffirms the positions that the European Parliament has already taken and goes further than previous resolutions in relation to the EU rights of Irish citizens in the north, and on the right of people in the north to decide their own citizenship as outlined in the Good Friday Agreement.For these reasons, we voted in favour.
Launch of automated data exchange with regard to vehicle registration data in Ireland (A9-0003/2019 - Juan Fernando López Aguilar)
. – I voted against this report as it endorses the automatic flow of data, which includes the automatic exchange of DNA, fingerprint and vehicle registration databases. This automatic data sharing needs to be evaluated in terms of its necessity and proportionality in line with the Charter of Fundamental Rights. In the case of this report, I have immense concerns over data protection, certainly with regard to the vast amount of data that will be collected on individuals without due cause. I therefore voted against.
Written questions (34)
The Tenant Purchase Scheme in Ireland PDF (37 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Impact of the ban on plastic straws for people with disabilities PDF (38 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union on the labelling of Israeli settlement goods PDF (38 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Demolition of EU-funded buildings by Israeli forces PDF (38 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Ballyness Bay PDF (37 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Detections of Cryptosporidium in public water supplies in Ireland PDF (39 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Measures against networks and websites without the need for a court order in Spain PDF (46 KB) DOC (10 KB)
Predatory moneylenders PDF (38 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Dementia in Europe PDF (36 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Updating Directive 2001/85/EC on accessibility requirements on public transport PDF (37 KB) DOC (9 KB)
Adoptees' information rights in Ireland PDF (40 KB) DOC (20 KB)
Representation on behalf of Oughterard anglers concerning the protection of salmonid species, including trout, from predatory pike PDF (47 KB) DOC (20 KB)
Fair Deal scheme PDF (40 KB) DOC (20 KB)
Dual pricing by insurance companies PDF (37 KB) DOC (18 KB)
CETA PDF (38 KB) DOC (17 KB)
VP/HR - Palestine PDF (40 KB) DOC (16 KB)
Conditionality attached to beef fund PDF (38 KB) DOC (18 KB)
Lyme disease PDF (39 KB) DOC (19 KB)
Mercosur: high emissions beef PDF (38 KB) DOC (17 KB)
Mercosur PDF (37 KB) DOC (17 KB)
Financial support for market disturbance caused by the Mercosur deal PDF (39 KB) DOC (19 KB)
Measures to tackle female genital mutilation (FGM) PDF (39 KB) DOC (18 KB)
VP/HR - Moroccan police oppression in Western Sahara PDF (42 KB) DOC (16 KB)
Emergency legislation for the road haulage sector in the event of a no-deal Brexit PDF (39 KB) DOC (17 KB)
Rights of adoptees in Ireland PDF (39 KB) DOC (19 KB)
Mercosur ratification process PDF (38 KB) DOC (17 KB)
Mercosur ratification process PDF (39 KB) DOC (19 KB)
The Commission's failure to investigate Apple's post-2014 tax arrangements in Ireland PDF (40 KB) DOC (18 KB)
Mining PDF (45 KB) DOC (19 KB)
Cyanide mining PDF (44 KB) DOC (19 KB)
Ban on lead shot bullets in wetland areas PDF (37 KB) DOC (17 KB)
The Commission's position on the Rockall dispute PDF (37 KB) DOC (17 KB)
Commission support for Irish fishing vessels operating in the vicinity of Rockall PDF (38 KB) DOC (17 KB)
Irish language derogation PDF (39 KB) DOC (18 KB)
Amendments (2225)
Amendment 10 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to P8_TA- PROV(2018)0475, European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework (2018/2900(RSP))
Amendment 18 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 a (new)
Citation 18 a (new)
- having regard to P8_TA(2016)0453 European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting VAT fraud(2016/2033(INI))
Amendment 42 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that capitalistic globalisation and the free movement of capital created the perfect conditions for the design of base erosion and profit shifting schemes and, at the same time, enshrined a structural bias in policymaking to the benefit of capital owners and multinational enterprises (MNEs), which has served to promote divergences and asymmetries between countries and social classes; emphasises, furthermore, that the free movement of capital, the deregulation and liberalisation of the financial and banking system, and the increasing tax competition among Member States – all promoted by EU institutions and legislation with the support of the European right wing and social democracy –are at the root of the rise of tax evasion and tax avoidance schemes and scandals;
Amendment 46 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Notes that the lowering of wealth taxes, which prioritize the wellbeing of the most privileged casts of the society, can lead to social unrest, as has been the case in the recent episodes in France, as the rest of the society which does not benefit from such tax cuts, but is more and more affected by the reduction of the welfare state, is bound to feel abandoned and neglected by its governing State1a _________________ 1a See comments by Piketty of 9 December 2018; URL: https://www.lemonde.fr/idees/article/2018/ 12/08/thomas-piketty-gilets-jaunes-et- justice-fiscale_5394443_3232.html
Amendment 55 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomNotes the fact that during its current term the Commission has put forward 22 legislative proposals aimed at closing some of the loopholes, improving theallegedly to fight against financial crimes and aggressive tax planning, and enhancing tax collection efficiency and tax fairness; calls for the swift adoption of initiatives that have not yet been finalised andbut which have had in origin sufficient loopholes, or thresholds so high so as not to affect the current level of tax evasion and continue legalising avoidance; calls for careful monitoring of their implementation to ensure efficiency and proper enforcement, in order to keep pace with the versatility of tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 62 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Recalls the observation of the European Parliament in the interim report on MFF noting that effective measures against corruption and tax evasion by multinationals and the wealthiest individuals would make it possible to return to the Member States’ budgets an amount estimated by the Commission at one trillion euros per year, and that in this field there has been a serious lack of action by the European Union1a; _________________ 1a Par. 49 of theInterim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021- 2027 adopted inPlenary
Amendment 79 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Deplores the fact that the Council has not yet made any progress to enter into negotiations with the Parliament on the proposal for CBCR; notes however that Member States have already started implementation of OECD BEPS Action 13 on Country-by-Country Report, and DAC4; calls for the Commission to request information collected from the Member States under CBCR for quantitative impact assessments;
Amendment 95 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1.3
Subheading 1.3
Tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning (ATP)tax avoidance
Amendment 99 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the fight against tax evasion and fraud tackles illegal acts, whereas the fight against tax avoidance addresses situations that are a priori within the limits of the law but against its spirit;– unless deemed illegal by the tax authorities or, ultimately, by the courts1a– but against its spirit. _________________ 1a 1] ‘Member States' capacity to fight tax crimes, Ex-post impact assessment’, Elodie Thirion and Amandine Scherrer, European Parliamentary Research Service, July 2017
Amendment 106 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls that ATP describes the setting of a tax design aimed at reducing tax liability by using the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatchesarbitrating between two or more tax systems that go against the spirit of the law; that such acts, in the same way as tax avoidance, could be deemed illegal by tax authorities or by the courts
Amendment 110 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Understands then that there is no practical difference between tax avoidance, tax planning and aggressive tax planning; and that tax planning can also be considered systemic tax avoidance3a _________________ 3a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 117 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission and the Council to propose and adopt a comprehensive definition of aggressive tax planning indicators, building on both the hallmarks identified in the fifth review of the Directive on administrative cooperation (DAC6)26 after being strengthened in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds1a and the Commission’s relevant studies and recommendations27 ; calls on Member States to use those indicators as a basis to repeal all harmful tax practices deriving from existing tax loopholes; _________________ 1a P8_TA-PROV(2018)0475. European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on thecum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework(2018/2900(RSP)) 26 Council Directive (EU) 2018/822 of 25 May 2018 amending Directive 2011/16/EU as regards mandatory automatic exchange of information in the field of taxation in relation to reportable cross-border arrangements, OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. 27 https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/ taxation/files/resources/documents/taxation /gen_info/economic_analysis/tax_papers/ta xation_paper_61.pdfand https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/ taxation/files/tax_policies_survey_2017.pd f
Amendment 124 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses the similarity between corporate tax payers and high-net-worth individuals in the use of corporate structures and similar structures such as trusts and offshore locations for the purpose of ATPtax evasion and tax avoidance; recalls the role of intermediarieenablers and promoters in setting up such schemes;
Amendment 132 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Regrets that 7 EU Member States have been identified for their tax avoidance by the European Commission in the European Semester, namely, Ireland, The Netherlands, Cyprus, Malta, Belgium, Hungary and Luxembourg, and that little measures have been taken by such Member States to modify their legislation in order to make it less attractive for tax evasion and avoidance;
Amendment 134 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Notes that company restructures can be observed in the macro-economic data of Ireland from 2014-2017, particularly in the first quarter of 2015; notes that major changes occurred in Ireland’s GNP, GDP, exports, imports, investment, external debt and more; regrets that despite the relocation of sales income and intellectual property to Ireland, there was no observable corresponding increase in corporation tax received by Irish Revenue1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 135 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Regrets that even when in Ireland, the capital allowance for depreciation of intangible assets has been lowered from a rate of 100% to 80% from 2017, this reduction was not applied to the intangible assets brought onshore from 2015-2016, which could still benefit from the 100% rate1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 136 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13 b. Calls on the Commission to list the EU jurisdictions identified for providing opportunities for aggressive tax planning as tax havens and prepare a proposal on deterrent actions to be applied against such Member States;
Amendment 137 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13 c. Deplores that the Irish government introduced the 100% rate on capital allowances for intellectual property (IP) following a recommendation made by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland in 20141a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 138 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13 c. Regrets that the Irish government introduced the 100% rate on capital allowances for intellectual property (IP) following a recommendation made by the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland in 20141a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 146 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Notes however, that self-regulation cannot be the answer to tackling tax fraud, tax evasion and avoidance; which can only be fought with adequate legislation, transparency, intra and inter institutional cooperation, inter- jurisdictional cooperation,and sufficient personnel and technical equipment employed by tax administrations
Amendment 172 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Notes however, that any debate concerning minimum taxation should make reference to minimum effective taxation, measured by the total income taxes paid by a corporation over its total profits, including in this measurement tax breaks to the base (that is, the income on which taxes are charged), as effective rates can often be much lower, and in many cases half, of the statutory rate;
Amendment 178 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)
Paragraph 16 c (new)
16 c. Notes that a debate that does not consider effective taxation risks ending in lowering statutory rates even more and increasing tax competition;
Amendment 184 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Notes that taxing all earnings without deduction for interest and license fee payments in and by the source country could and should be at the center of any measures against tax avoidance1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 185 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)
Paragraph 17 b (new)
17 b. Notes that any individual EU country can unilaterally enforce both withholding taxes and conditioned limitations on deductions, as comprehensive taxation at the source, including earnings paid for interest, license fees, and the like, is by no means ruled out by the relevant EU directive1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 186 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)
Paragraph 17 c (new)
17 c. Notes that many countries have introduced withholding taxes, in particular for interest and license fee payments to related parties outside the EU. However, existing tax treaties considerably reduce the withholding tax rate1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) ‘What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS’, Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697; and Hearson M. (2018) ‘The European Union’s Tax Treaties with Developing Countries– Leading By Example?’, September 2018.
Amendment 187 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 d (new)
Paragraph 17 d (new)
17 d. Regrets, that within the EU, no withholding taxes are levied on payments between related parties even when the other party is not effectively subject to tax on the income deriving from those payments in that other Member State. Notes however, that recital 3 of the interest and royalty directive1a clearly states that “It is necessary to ensure that interest and royalty payments are subject to tax once in a Member State”. Therefore, the EU directive on interest and royalty payments does not forbid source taxation of all earnings produced by an enterprise, whether declared as profit or transferred to another enterprise domestic or abroad as payment for interest or license fees2a _________________ 1a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States 2a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 188 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 e (new)
Paragraph 17 e (new)
17 e. Encourages EU Member States to apply withholding taxes to payments within and outside the EU in order to ensure that interests and royalty payments are subject to tax once in a Member State; and to make the necessary re-negotiations of their tax treaties in order to allow for withholding taxes to be applied at source1a _________________ 1a Jarass, L. and Obermair, G.M. (2015) What an Individual EU Country Can Do Unilaterally to Counteract BEPS. Reprinted from Tax Notes Int’l, August 24, 2015, p. 697
Amendment 194 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that the G20/OECD 15-point BEPS action plan is being implemented and monitored and further discussions are taking place, in a broader context than just the initial participating countries, through the Inclusive Framework; calls on Member States to support a reform of both the mandate and the functioning of the Inclusive Framework to ensure that remaining tax loopholes and unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries are covered by the current international framework to combat BEPS practices;
Amendment 217 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22 a. Calls on the Commission to review ATAD I in order to eliminate the 2 alternatives for implementing CFC rules and leave only the stronger, most efficient one in Article 7(2)(a): to tax interest, royalties and other relevant types of income of all low-tax foreign subsidiaries, as the second option (to tax income of low-tax subsidiaries arising from non- genuine arrangements which have been put in place for the essential purpose of obtaining a tax advantage)is very weak and open to abuse, because it only protects against profit-shifting out of the home country and requires the tax authority to analyse many individual transactions of low-tax subsidiaries;
Amendment 233 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls its concerns relating to the use of transfer prices in ATP and consequently recalls the need for adequate action and improvement of the transfer pricing framework to address the issue; stresses the need to ensure that they reflect the economic reality, provide certainty, clarity and fairness for Member States and for companies operating within the Union, and reduce the risk of misuse of the rules for profit-shifting purposes, taking into account the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administration 2010;to ensure that taxable earnings reflect the economic reality, and reduce the risk of misuse of the rules for profit-shifting purposes.
Amendment 235 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26 a. Notes that as has been highlighted repeatedly by numerous experts and publications, the use of the ‘independent entity concept’ or ‘arm’s length principle’ recommended by the OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations of 1979, 1995, 2010 and 2017, is at the core of the problem of tax evasion, tax avoidance and double non-taxation;
Amendment 238 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Emphasises that the EU actions aimed at addressing BEPS and ATPtax avoidance have equipped tax authorities with an updatedinsufficient toolbox to ensure fair tax collection; stresses that tax authorities should be responsible for making effective use of the tools without imposing an additional burden on responsible taxpayers, particularly SMEs and to tackle tax avoidance from multinational companies; stresses that tax authorities should be cautious not to end up imposing an additional burden on SMEs, when incapable of taxing multinational companies ;
Amendment 248 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2.2
Subheading 2.2
Strengthening EU actions to fight against corporate aggressive tax planning (ATP)tax avoidance and supplementing BEPS action plan
Amendment 251 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2.2.1
Subheading 2.2.1
Scrutinising Member States’ tax systems and overall tax environment – ATPtax avoidance within the EU (European Semester)
Amendment 291 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Notes that CCCTB impact assessments have been carried out on the basis of incomplete data at a time when tax administrations will soon have access to more precise and complete information following the Member States’ implementation of country-by-country reporting, and that going ahead without proper analysis would be deeply irresponsible; calls on the European Commission to conduct a new impact assessment based on high-quality data which would allow for a more informed decision to be made between different possible apportionment formulas;1a _________________ 1a ‘Assessing the impact of the CC(C)TB: European tax base shifts under a range of policy scenarios’; a GUE/NGL Study by Alex Cobham, Petr Janský, Chris Jones and Yama Temouri (Tax Justice Network); November 2017;
Amendment 297 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 c (new)
Paragraph 33 c (new)
33 c. As already stressed by the PANA recommendations, implementing the CCCTB at EU level runs the risk of creating a situation in which current losses from Member States to the rest of world could be locked in, as could the exploitation of the rest of the world by some Member States; notes that an EU- only approach could eliminate the incentives to shift profit within the EU, but open the door to further incentives and opportunities to shift profit out of the EU1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 307 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Notes that digitalisation affects the whole economy with many firms using multi-channel models; thus, instead of creating special regimes for digital businesses, international tax rules should be reformed, based on a principle of neutrality between different business models, both digital and non-digital, and regardless of the extent or form of digitalisation, including multi-channel models, recognising the economic reality businesses operate in today;
Amendment 319 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35 a (new)
Paragraph 35 a (new)
35 a. Notes that changing the definition of permanent establishment to make it more aligned with that of the UN model tax convention in a way that also includes digital significant presence, would be the optimal solution to tackle problems not only affecting the digital market but rather the digitalization of the economy and the earnings created in jurisdictions where companies do not have any physical presence;
Amendment 369 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44 a (new)
Paragraph 44 a (new)
44a. Calls for DAC6 hallmarks to be strengthened in order to require the mandatory disclosure of dividend arbitrage schemes and all information on capital gains, including the granting of dividend and capital gains tax refunds1a _________________ 1a P8_TA-PROV(2018)0475. European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework(2018/2900(RSP))
Amendment 402 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. Stresses that the proposal for public CBCR was submitted to the co-legislators just after the Panama papers scandal on 12 April 2016, and that Parliament adopted its position on it on 4 July 2017; recalls that the latter called for an enlargement of the scope of reporting and protection of commercially sensitive information; deplores the lack of progress and cooperation from the Council since 2016; urges for progress to be made in the Council so that it enters into negotiations with Parliament;
Amendment 404 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45 a (new)
Paragraph 45 a (new)
45a. Recalls the position of the European Parliament in the PANA recommendations when it called for ambitious public country-by-country reporting (CbCR) in order to enhance tax transparency and the public scrutiny of multinational enterprises (MNEs) as this would allow the wider public to have access to information about the profits made, subsidies received and the taxes paid by MNEs in the jurisdictions where they operate; urges the Council to reach a common agreement in order to adopt a public CbCR, one of the key measures for achieving greater transparency in relation to companies’ tax information for all citizens; 1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion(Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 411 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46a. Notes that tax competition, with its detrimental effects, is not only allowed but encouraged by the European Commission, excluding only ‘special deals’ which are treated as State Aid, in an attempt to attract foreign investment even when the effectiveness of this strategy has been greatly questioned1a; _________________ 1a ICRICT, 'Four ways to tackle international tax competition', December 2016
Amendment 426 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49 a (new)
Paragraph 49 a (new)
49a. Is concerned with the fact that the Commission ruled that double-non taxation achieved by McDonald’s stemmed from a mismatch between Luxembourg and US tax laws and the Luxembourg-United States double taxation treaty, a mismatch from which McDonald’s profited by arbitrating between such jurisdictions; and that such tax avoidance is enabled by the current legal framework in the EU to a point that the only means found effective by the European Commission to tackle it is through State Aid rules, something which has proved not to be possible in the case of McDonald’s;
Amendment 432 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
51. Reiterates its calls for guidelines clarifying what constitutes tax-related State aid and ‘appropriate’ transfer pricing, with a view to removing legal uncertainties for both compliant taxpayers and tax administrations, and providing a framework for Member States’ tax practices accordingly;
Amendment 435 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 a (new)
Paragraph 51 a (new)
51a. Regrets the fact that the current framework for tackling profit shifting between related parties through transfer pricing is based on the ‘arm’s length’ principle, a principle that grants a higher regard to the contractual arrangement among related parties than to the economic reality of the transactions taking place between one party and another one subject to it; deplores that the generalization of the ‘arm’s length principle’ has resulted in the ‘legalization’ of tax avoidance through transfer pricing; notes that in this context, the only effective solution within the European Union to tackle the tax evasion and tax avoidance of multinational companies has been through the identification of abuses to State aid rules;
Amendment 438 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 b (new)
Paragraph 51 b (new)
51b. Deplores that Apple’s new European tax structure remains shrouded in secrecy, partially due to a lack of financial transparency in Ireland and Jersey; and that most of its financial information remains secret globally1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 439 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 c (new)
Paragraph 51 c (new)
51c. Deplores that with the assistance of the Irish government, Apple has successfully created a structure that has allowed it to gain a tax write-off against almost all of its non-US sales profits; calls on the Commission to further investigate Apple’s case in the context of State Aid rules;
Amendment 440 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51 d (new)
Paragraph 51 d (new)
51d. Notes that the law governing the use of capital allowances for IP is not subject to Ireland’s transfer pricing legislation, but it includes a prohibition from being used for tax avoidance purposes; deplores that Apple is potentially breaking Irish law by its restructure and it exploitation of the capital allowance regime for tax purposes; notes that if the same legal reasoning used in the European Commission’s state aid ruling on Apple and Ireland is applied, Apple is in breach of Irish tax law, and owes Irish Revenue at least 2.5 billion additional euros in unpaid tax annually from the period 2015-2017;1a _________________ 1a Brehm Christensen, M.; Clancy, E. (2018) ‘Exposed: Apple’s delicious tax deals, Is Ireland Helping Apple Pay less than 1% in the EU?’; GUE/NGL; June 2018.
Amendment 453 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 a (new)
Paragraph 53 a (new)
53a. Regrets however that the banning of letterbox companies in Latvia cannot be used to ban letterbox companies resident in EU Member States, as that would be considered discriminatory in the current EU legislative framework1a;calls for the European Commission to propose changes in the current legislation that would enable to ban letterbox companies even if resident in EU Member States; _________________ 1a TAX3 Delegation to Riga (Latvia), 30- 31 August 2018, MISSION REPORT
Amendment 462 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Highlights that the high level of inward and outward foreign direct investment as a percentage of GDP in seven Member States (Belgium, Cyprus, Hungary, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, and the Netherlands) can only be partially explained by real economic activities taking place in these Member States;40and therefore is a clear indicator of tax avoidance opportunities granted by such Member States; _________________ 40 Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., An overview of shell companies in the European Union, EPRS, European Parliament, October 2018, p.23.
Amendment 470 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55 a (new)
Paragraph 55 a (new)
55a. Recalls that the European Parliament has called on the Commission to assess the role of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) and Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) revealed by the cum-ex papers and, where appropriate, to propose limiting the use of these instruments1a;calls on the European Commission to assess the role of the special purpose entities holding foreign direct investment in Malta, Luxembourg and the Netherlands; _________________ 1a P8_TA- (2018)0475European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework (2018/2900(RSP))
Amendment 474 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Notes that economic indicators such as an unusually high level of foreign direct investment, as well as foreign direct investment held by special purpose entities are ATPtax avoidance indicators42 ; _________________ 42 IHS, Aggressive tax planning indicators, prepared for the European Commission, DG TAXUD Taxation papers, Working paper No 71, October 2017.
Amendment 481 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Notes that the ATAD anti-abuse rules (artificial arrangements) cover letterbox companies, and that the CCTB and CCCTB would ensure that the income is attributed to where the real economic activity takes place;
Amendment 488 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58a. Deplores that shell companies associated with anonymity, circumvention of the Posting of Workers Directive and treaty abuse, can generate serious risks of tax avoidance, tax evasion, money laundering and abuse of social rights; and that such abuses have an impact in the rise of inequalities and decreased trust in public institutions1a _________________ 1a Kiendl Kristo I. and Thirion E., An overview of shell companies in the European Union, EPRS, European Parliament, October 2018.
Amendment 491 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 a (new)
Paragraph 59 a (new)
59a. Notes that abusive conversions, mergers or divisions constituting artificial arrangements or social dumping, but also reducing fiscal obligations or undercutting social rights of employees are therefore to be avoided in order to respect Treaty principles;1a _________________ 1a OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (COM(2018)0241 – C8 0167/2018 –2018/0114(COD))
Amendment 493 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 b (new)
Paragraph 59 b (new)
59b. Notes that cross-border conversions should be conditioned to the company moving its registered office together with its head office in order to carry out a substantial part of its economic activity in the Member State of destination1a _________________ 1a OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs for the Committee on Legal Affairs on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions (COM(2018)0241 – C8 0167/2018 –2018/0114(COD))
Amendment 494 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 c (new)
Paragraph 59 c (new)
59c. Calls for Member States to request that a set of financial information be published ahead of the execution of cross- border conversions, mergers or divisions; and for that financial information to be accompanied by public country by country reporting;
Amendment 569 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79 a (new)
Paragraph 79 a (new)
79a. Recalls that effective cross checks of the data held by tax authorities with data held by customs authorities are crucial to detect and eliminate VAT fraud linked to imports; and recalls on Member States and on the Commission to act in order to facilitate the flow of information between tax and customs authorities regarding imports under Customs Procedure 42, as recommended by the European Court of Auditors1a ;considering that experience has shown that administrative cooperation between tax authorities is suboptimal;1b _________________ 1a P8_TA(2016)0453European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting VAT fraud (2016/2033(INI))[ 1b Study entitled ‘VAT fraud: Economic impact, challenges and policy issues’, European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, 15 October2018.
Amendment 570 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79 b (new)
Paragraph 79 b (new)
79b. Notes that among the most used crimes in VAT fraud, the one known as "Missing Trader fraud (MTIC fraud) or Carousel fraud" is the most widespread and most used; notes that a particularity of this fraud is that it is carried out, for the most part, by organized crime; notes that in recent years, this fraud has diversified to include online commerce; notes that the extension of this type of fraud to online commerce is partly due to the suboptimal cooperation between tax administrations1a;calls for EU Member States and the European Commission to keep on developing swift cooperation between tax administrations; _________________ 1a Study entitled ‘VAT fraud: Economic impact, challenges and policy issues’, European Parliament, Directorate- General for Internal Policies, Policy Department for Economic, Scientific and Quality of Life Policies, 15 October2018.
Amendment 571 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79 c (new)
Paragraph 79 c (new)
79 c. Notes that the extension of e- commerce is posing an important challenge for the economic and fiscal authorities, to whom, this type of economic transactions, poses enormous difficulties, e.g. absence of registration, VAT declarations well below the real value of the declared transactions, ghost transactions for criminal purposes, fraudulent use of customer data; notes that national legislations continue to present enormous deficiencies in the control of e-commerce; notes that the improvement of cooperation between administrations and a more efficient use of the resources available at European level can help to reduce the impact of this type of crime and its consequences, as well as the improvement of European legislation;
Amendment 572 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 79 d (new)
Paragraph 79 d (new)
79d. Notes that the "reverse charge mechanism" should be used only and exclusively in exceptional cases, and that the Commission and the Council should encourage countries to use existing resources more effectively; notes that at present, a group of bodies and institutions such as Eurofisc, OLAF, Europol or EPPO (European Public Prosecutor Office) provide a panel of options with a very high potential to combat VAT fraud;
Amendment 576 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80 a (new)
Paragraph 80 a (new)
80a. Deplores that VAT fraud in the European Union reaches colossal magnitudes: approximately 150 billion euros in 2017; notes that the figure hide, however, huge differences between countries, from percentages of fraud of minor importance (less than 2%); to countries with fraud indicators of around 30%;1a _________________ 1a European Parliament; VAT Fraud, economic impact, challenges and policy issues. October2018.
Amendment 579 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80 b (new)
Paragraph 80 b (new)
80b. Notes that the preservation of VAT fraud has, in addition to the negative economic effects, perverse consequences for inadequate social commitment with the payment of taxes and with a view to improving tax justice;
Amendment 580 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 80 c (new)
Paragraph 80 c (new)
80c. Regrets that tax fraud has become a crime whose effects are to be managed, rather than a crime to be suppressed; calls on the Commission and the EU Member States to have policy design as a guiding principle, and for such policy design to be driven by efficiency considerations; notes that when efficiency is focused only in the enforcement, but not in the policy design, the credibility of the tax system is undermined, representing a serious risk to the rule of law1a _________________ 1a De la Feria, Rita (2018) ‘Tax Fraud and the Rule of Law’; WP18/02; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation; January 2018.
Amendment 604 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 a (new)
Paragraph 84 a (new)
84a. Notes that corporation and wealth taxes play a crucial role in reducing inequality through redistribution within the tax system and in providing revenues to fund social provisions and social transfers;
Amendment 606 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 b (new)
Paragraph 84 b (new)
84b. Calls on the Member States to eliminate gender gaps in wealth across the EU in terms of financial assets, property ownership, business assets, insurance entitlements, pension savings and stock options1a; notes that the reduction in capital gains and property taxes primarily benefits men, as they are more likely to control such resources1b; _________________ 1a Action Aid. Making tax work for women’s rights 1b Institute of Development Studies (2016). Redistributing Unpaid Care Work – Why Tax Matters for Women’s Rights. Policy Briefing. Issue 109.
Amendment 607 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 c (new)
Paragraph 84 c (new)
84c. Deplores the fact that, overall, the contribution of wealth-based taxes to overall tax revenues has remained rather limited, at 5.8 % of overall tax revenues in the EU-15 and4.3 % in the EU-281a; _________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C, Gender equality and taxation in the European Union, 2017.
Amendment 608 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 84 d (new)
Paragraph 84 d (new)
84d. Deplores the fact that the share of taxes on capital has shown a declining trend since 2002 as a consequence, inter alia, of the general tendency of no longer applying the regular personal income tax schedule to capital incomes, but rather taxing them at relatively moderate flat rates, observable in many Member States1a _________________ 1a European Parliament Policy Department C, Gender equality and taxation in the European Union, 2017.
Amendment 681 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 93
Paragraph 93
93. Urges the Commission to finalise its study on CBI and RBI schemes in the Union; urges the Commission to examine whether, and, if so, which of these schemes posed a threat to EU legislation; in particular AMLD and ATAD;
Amendment 699 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 100 a (new)
Paragraph 100 a (new)
Amendment 713 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103
Paragraph 103
103. RecCalls the need to use amnesties with extreme caution in order not tofor Member States to refrain from using tax amnesties as they encourage tax avoiders to wait for the next amnesty; calls on the Member States which enact tax amnesties to always require the beneficiary to explain the source of funds previously omitted;
Amendment 714 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 a (new)
Paragraph 103 a (new)
103 a. Recalls the European Parliament’s position in the PANA recommendation whereby it called on the Member States to identify and stop all use of any form of tax amnesties that could lead to money laundering and tax evasion or that could prevent national authorities from using the data provided to pursue financial crime investigations1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 717 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 b (new)
Paragraph 103 b (new)
103 b. Regrets the fact that EU Member States have prioritized short-term revenue benefits over the elimination of tax fraud by providing tax amnesties;1a _________________ 1a De la Feria, Rita (2018) ‘Tax Fraud and the Rule of Law’; WP18/02; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation; January 2018.
Amendment 718 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 c (new)
Paragraph 103 c (new)
103 c. Notes that tax amnesties allow tax fraudsters to voluntarily repay all or parts of unpaid taxes without being subject to criminal prosecutions or full penalties; regrets that tax amnesties have become popular in the last few years in the context of the financial crisis1a and the austerity policies; _________________ 1a De la Feria, Rita (2018) ‘Tax Fraud and the Rule of Law’; WP18/02; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation; January 2018.
Amendment 719 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 103 d (new)
Paragraph 103 d (new)
103 d. Notes that tax amnesties are very negative they affect the most affluent sectors of society and extend the idea that having many resources guarantees impunity and makes it easy to circumvent legality; calls for Member States to stop tax amnesties and that economic and penal sanctions against the fraudsters be increased;
Amendment 731 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107
Paragraph 107
107. Stresses that money laundering can assume various forms, and that the money laundered can have its origin in various illicit activities ranging from terrorismdifferent types of crimes such as corruption, weapon and human trafficking and drug dealing to tax evasion and fraud; notes with concern that the proceeds from criminal activity in the EU are estimated to amount to EUR 110 billion per year64 , corresponding to 1 % of the Union’s total GDP; highlights that the Commission estimates that in some Member States up to 70 % of money laundering cases have a cross-border dimension65 ; further notes that the scale of money laundering is estimated by the UN66 to be the equivalent of between 2 to 5 % of global GDP, or around EUR 715 billion and 1.87 trillion a year; _________________ 64 From illegal markets to legitimate businesses: the portfolio of organised crime in Europe, Final report of Project OCP – Organised Crime Portfolio, March 2015. 65 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/pre ss-room/20171211IPR90024/new-eu-wide- penalties-for-money-laundering; Commission proposal of 21 December 2016 for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on countering money laundering by criminal law (COM(2016)0826. 66 UNODC - https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/money- laundering/globalization.html
Amendment 732 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 107 a (new)
Paragraph 107 a (new)
107 a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to report on the effects money laundering on women’s rights, as money laundering impacts on gender inequality by concealing the origin of assets obtained via human trafficking, in which women and girls amount to 70%of the victims, as reported by FATF1a,UNODC2a,among others; _________________ 1a FATF (2011) Money Laundering Risks Arising from Trafficking in Human Beings and Smuggling of Migrants. Seehttp://www.fatf- gafi.org/media/fatf/documents/reports/Tra fficking%20in%20Human%20Beings%20 and%20Smuggling%20of%20Migrants.pd f 2a See UNODC’s reports on Trafficking in Persons.
Amendment 760 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 112 a (new)
Paragraph 112 a (new)
112 a. Is concerned with the reliance of the AMLD on self-regulation by obliged entities; and notes that this is a matter of concern as all leaks so far have exposed the role of banks, lawyers, traders, insurance companies, and other enablers and promoters, as accomplices in money laundering cases;
Amendment 779 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 116 a (new)
Paragraph 116 a (new)
116 a. Regrets that no action were taken by EU institutions in relation to the ABLV Bank, in advance of those by the US Fin CEN; is concerned by what seems to be acknowledged by experts in this matter which observe that US standards are much stricter than European ones, that even when EU banks manage to apply EU rules, they are not sufficiently capable of applying US rules, and that the EU system seems to be guaranteed by the US one 1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Delegation to Riga (Latvia), 30- 31 August 2018, MISSION REPORT
Amendment 792 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 a (new)
Paragraph 117 a (new)
117 a. Calls on the Commission to take into consideration the recommendations of the EPRS study on ‘Offshore activities and money laundering: recent findings and challenges’ from 20171a,and consider that in order to reach a harmonized anti- money laundering policy in Europe, it needs to be noted that European countries are too different to all comply in the same way, and therefore different groups of countries within the EU should be targeted differently and some be trained and supported by other Member States; _________________ 1a http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/e tudes/STUD/2017/595371/IPOL_STU(201 7)595371_EN.pdf
Amendment 798 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 117 b (new)
Paragraph 117 b (new)
117 b. Calls on the Commission to assess the way in which derivatives can be used for money laundering, as ‘mirror trading’ can allow brokers to create multiple trades where it can conveniently locate washed funds1a; calls on the Commission to investigate whether this has been the case in the exposed cum-ex and cum-cum scandals; _________________ 1a EPRS (2017) ‘Offshore activities and money laundering: recent findings and challenges’. See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/e tudes/STUD/2017/595371/IPOL_STU(201 7)595371_EN.pdf
Amendment 824 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 125 a (new)
Paragraph 125 a (new)
125 a. Recalls the request made by the European Parliament resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal, on ESMA and EBA to assess potential threats to the integrity of financial markets and to national budgets; to establish the nature and magnitude of actors in these schemes; to assess whether there were breaches of either national or Union law; to assess the actions taken by financial supervisors in Member States; and to make appropriate recommendations for reform and for action to the competent authorities concerned;
Amendment 861 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 129 a (new)
Paragraph 129 a (new)
129 a. Calls for the Commission to report on the status quo and improvements in EU Member States FIUs in relation to dissemination, exchange and processing of information, following the PANA Recommendations and the mapping report carried out by the EU FIUs Platform 1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 880 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 133 a (new)
Paragraph 133 a (new)
Amendment 923 #
2018/2121(INI)
141. Recalls that EU AML legislation requires Member States to lay down sanctions for breaches of anti-money laundering rules against banks and intermediaries that are knowingly, wilfully and systematically involved in illegal tax or money laundering schemes; stresses that these sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive;
Amendment 931 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 143 a (new)
Paragraph 143 a (new)
143 a. Recalls the position of the European Parliament in the PANA recommendations regarding the application of sanctions to enablers and promoters involved in illegal, harmful proven to have facilitated illegal, harmful or wrongful corporate tax arrangements; that the sanctions should be targeted towards the companies themselves as well as the management-level employees and board members responsible for the schemes; calling for the stringent application of effective sanctions on banks, providing for the suspension or withdrawal of the banking licence of financial institutions that are proven to be involved in promoting or enabling money laundering, tax evasion or aggressive tax planning; and encouraging Member States to ensure that the fines and pecuniary sanctions imposed on tax evaders and intermediaries are not tax- base deductible; 1a _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 934 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5.7 a (new)
Subheading 5.7 a (new)
An EU anti-money laundering list of high-risk third countries
Amendment 937 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145 a (new)
Paragraph 145 a (new)
145 a. Notes that EU Member States are not treated in the same way as third countries, when they should be according to the Financial Action Task Force, and that this represents a problem when aiming at having common standards in respect of AML; calls for Member States to be peer reviewed in the same way third countries are in FATF; calls the Commission, as a founding member in 1989 of the Financial Action Task Force, to be peer reviewed by FATF as well1a _________________ 1a TAX3 PUBLIC HEARING“RELATIONS WITH SWITZERLAND IN TAX MATTERS AND THE FIGHT AGAINST MONEYLAUNDERING” held on October 1, 2018.
Amendment 938 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 145 b (new)
Paragraph 145 b (new)
Amendment 952 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 149 a (new)
Paragraph 149 a (new)
149 a. Notes that two FATCA Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) were developed to help FATCA fit with international laws: an IGA Model 1 by which foreign financial institutions report relevant information to their home authorities, which then passes this on to the US IRS, and an IGA Model 2 by which foreign financial institutions do not report to their home governments but directly to the IRS; notes that under Model 1 there are 2 versions, one of which is reciprocal and is the most common one; deplores that reciprocity is highly unbalanced with the US getting far more information from overseas than foreign governments; deplores that even in the best scenario of a reciprocal FATCA, the information compiled by the US institutions is full of loopholes, as it allows for senior managers to be registered if there is no person owning more than 25% of the bank's corporate client1a; calls on the EU Member States, to ensure that they are receiving reliable information when they get into a reciprocal FATCA with the US; _________________ 1a https://financialsecrecyindex.com/PDF/U SA.pdf
Amendment 955 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 149 b (new)
Paragraph 149 b (new)
149 b. Calls on the Commission and EU Member States to demand that the US enters into the CRS instead of following with the exchange of information under FATCA;
Amendment 962 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 150 a (new)
Paragraph 150 a (new)
150 a. Considers that tax havens, tax evasion and tax avoidance have been contributing to the rise in inequalities, by depriving countries of the revenue needed to provide public, quality and free education and healthcare services, social security, and affordable housing and transportation, and to build essential infrastructure for achieving social development and economic growth;
Amendment 968 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151
Paragraph 151
151. WelcomNotes the adoption by the Council of the first EU list on 5 December 2017 and the ongoing monitoring of the commitments made by third countries; notes that the list has been updated several times on the basis of the assessment of those commitments; underlines that this assessment is based on criteria deriving from a technical scoreboard and that Parliament had no legal involvement in this process; calls in this context on the Commission and the Council to inform Parliament in detail ahead of any proposed change to the list; calls on the Council to publish a regular progress report regarding black- and grey-listed jurisdictions as part of the regular update from the CoC Group to the Council;
Amendment 969 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 151 a (new)
Paragraph 151 a (new)
151 a. Regrets that given that 2 out of the 3 criteria used by the Council refer to the OECD, the blacklist process seems more an extortive means of getting developing countries to implement standards that they have not participated in setting; than a serious effort to tackle tax evasion and tax avoidance;
Amendment 979 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152 a (new)
Paragraph 152 a (new)
152 a. Calls on the Council to provide clear information on the specific criteria used to clear 20jurisdictions from the 92 that were originally assessed, as at the moment only the names of such jurisdictions1a and the letters of comfort are available, but those do not allow for a clear understanding on why jurisdictions that are such relevant trade partners of the EU, such as the US who was identified to have a lack of transparency and preferential Corporate Income Tax regimes, were so rapidly cleared and not listed; _________________ 1a Council of the EU.2018, June 8. Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation): Report to the Council/Endorsement. 9637/18
Amendment 993 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 a (new)
Paragraph 154 a (new)
154 a. Is concerned with the fact that even when Switzerland does repeal its non-compliant tax regimes, it may create new ones -as noted by some organizations and experts-, and that in that case the Council would still remove Switzerland from the grey list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions1a;calls for the Council to re- consider their assessment on Switzerland and on any other third country that could be having a similar legislative change; _________________ 1a TAX3 PUBLIC HEARING“RELATIONS WITH SWITZERLAND IN TAX MATTERS AND THE FIGHT AGAINST MONEY LAUNDERING” held on October 1, 2018; and TAX3 Exchange of views with Fabrizia Lapecorella, Chair of the Code of Conduct Group on Business Taxation, held on October 10,2018.
Amendment 995 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 b (new)
Paragraph 154 b (new)
154 b. Notes that as of December 2018 there are only 5 countries remaining in the list; is concerned by what seems to soon end up in an empty listing process similar to that of the OECD which resulted in only Trinidad and Tobago remaining in the list; calls for the European Commission and the Council of the European Union to work on a more serious, and objective methodology,which does not rely in commitments but rather on an assessment of the effects of effectively implemented legislation;
Amendment 999 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 c (new)
Paragraph 154 c (new)
154 c. Recalls the European Parliament’s position on the EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions regretting that the EU list of non-cooperative tax jurisdictions approved and published by the Council focuses only on jurisdictions outside the EU, omitting countries within the EU that have played a systematic role in promoting and enabling harmful tax practices and that do not meet the fair taxation criterion1a;and calls for the Commission and the Council to come up with an EU list of EU tax havens; _________________ 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 1003 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154 d (new)
Paragraph 154 d (new)
154 d. Points out that for the EU to hold a leading role in the global fight against tax evasion, aggressive tax planning and money laundering, it would be important for the European Commission to get its own house in order by ensuring that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have a role in guiding or advising the EU’s policy-making on tax avoidance and tax evasion;
Amendment 1013 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156 a (new)
Paragraph 156 a (new)
156 a. Recalls the position of the European Parliament in the interim report on MFF, urging for a genuine fight against tax evasion and avoidance, with the introduction of dissuasive sanctions, for offshore territories and for the enablers or promoters of such activities, particularly and as a first step those operating on the European mainland; believes that Member States should cooperate by establishing a coordinated system for monitoring capital movements in order to fight taxevasion, tax avoidance and money laundering; 1a _________________ 1a Par. 48 of the Interim report on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2021- 2027 adopted in Plenary
Amendment 1024 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158 a (new)
Paragraph 158 a (new)
158 a. Regrets that the current OECD tax committee cannot be nor is sufficiently inclusive, as it is not the United Nations; the OECD is integrated only by 34 countries that tend to be industrialized ones, is not democratically governed and its decisions on recommendations are not guided by democratic rules
Amendment 1026 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158 b (new)
Paragraph 158 b (new)
158 b. Regrets that the G20/OECDBEPS Action Plan did not intend nor did it resulted in addressing the problem of source and residence taxation which is at the core of the base erosion problem;
Amendment 1027 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158 c (new)
Paragraph 158 c (new)
158 c. Underlines that given its lack of representation and of democratic governance, the OECD is not the place to discuss the allocation of taxing rights among industrialized and developing countries;
Amendment 1028 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158 d (new)
Paragraph 158 d (new)
158 d. Calls on Member States to support the creation of a global body within the UN framework, well-equipped and with sufficient additional resources to ensure that all countries can participate on an equal footing in the formulation and reform of global tax policies1a, and for such body to address unsolved tax questions such as the allocation of taxing rights among countries; _________________ 1a European Parliament resolution of 6 July 2016 on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0310); and European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted,P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 1031 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 a (new)
Paragraph 159 a (new)
159 a. Acknowledges that the G77and China have also called in 2017 for the UN Committee of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters to be upgraded to an intergovernmental UN Global Tax Body;
Amendment 1034 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 b (new)
Paragraph 159 b (new)
159 b. Calls for Member States to revise their positions regarding the creation of a global tax body within the UN in order to incorporate this global call to their agendas
Amendment 1035 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159 c (new)
Paragraph 159 c (new)
159 c. Regrets that the G20/OECD’s inclusive framework is stopping a discussion on international taxation that should take place in the context of the United Nations; calls on Member States to support a reform of the United Nations tax committee to turn it into a UN tax body; and ensure that the such body has sufficient resources to ensure all countries can participate on an equal footing;
Amendment 1048 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 161 a (new)
Paragraph 161 a (new)
161 a. Believes that such support can take different forms, but that care should be taken not to impose models thought for tackling the problems of the North, which are convenient for the economic circumstances of the North, into the South; believes that the best cooperation for the South can most generally come from the South, from developing countries that have similar problems and similar economic circumstances; calls for the EU institutions to respect South-South cooperation;
Amendment 1058 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 164
Paragraph 164
Amendment 1079 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 a (new)
Paragraph 168 a (new)
Amendment 1080 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 b (new)
Paragraph 168 b (new)
168 b. Calls for the Commission to strive for a greater degree of specification of the AML/CFT and tax-related requirements in its free trade and association agreements;1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1081 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 c (new)
Paragraph 168 c (new)
168 c. Calls for the Commission to ensure that all free trade and association agreements contain provisions on tax cooperation and that such provisions guarantee cooperation at the bilateral level in addition to any regional or international instruments or arrangements; 1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1082 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 d (new)
Paragraph 168 d (new)
168 d. Calls on the Commission to include in its free trade and association agreements provisions aimed at combating mispricing and misinvoicing of internationally traded goods and services;1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1083 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 e (new)
Paragraph 168 e (new)
168 e. Calls on the Commission to include in its free trade and association agreements provisions on public country by country reporting of corporate tax, the establishment of public registers of beneficial owners, and the establishment of public commercial registers; 1a _________________ 1a Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1084 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 f (new)
Paragraph 168 f (new)
Amendment 1085 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 168 g (new)
Paragraph 168 g (new)
168 g. Calls on the Commission to pursue a strategy of imposing a measure of conditionality during trade negotiations, where structural weaknesses in rule of law enforcement – mainly due to corruption, organised crime and shadow economy – undermine the EU’s trade goals and the trading partner’s legislative and administrative endeavours in combating money laundering and tax evasion; 1a _________________ 1a [1][1] Ioannides, I., Douma, W. T., Güven, O., Jancic, D., Pantaleo, L., van der Velde, S., de Vries, F. (2016). The inclusion of financial services in EU free trade and association agreements: Effects on money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance; EPRS.
Amendment 1101 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 a (new)
Paragraph 171 a (new)
171 a. Notes that developing countries need tax revenue, not least from the profits of multinational companies, to achieve their development goals; yet the taxation of most of those profits is regulated by a global network of bilateral tax treaties; notes that more than half of these treaties, and 40 percent of those with developing countries, have an EU Member State as signatory;1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1104 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 b (new)
Paragraph 171 b (new)
171 b. Recalls that the European Parliament has resolved that the “global network of tax treaties…often impedes developing countries from taxing profits generated in their territory”1aand that “when negotiating tax treaties, the European Union and its Member States should comply with the principle of policy coherence for development;2a _________________ 1a Tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect (TAXE 2) 2a European Parliament resolution of 8 July 2015 on tax avoidance and tax evasion as challenges forgovernance, social protection and development in developing countries(2015/2058(INI)). URL:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides /getDoc.do?type=TA&reference=P8-TA- 2015-0265 uage=EN˚=A8-2015-0184
Amendment 1105 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 c (new)
Paragraph 171 c (new)
171 c. Notes that the European Economic and Social Committee has recommended that “when negotiating double tax agreements with developing countries, EU Member States take more account of the needs of developing countries”1a _________________ 1a European Economic and Social Committee. EU development partnerships and the challenge posed by international tax agreements. REX/487.https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/o ur-work/opinions-information- reports/opinions/eu-development- partnerships-and-challenge-posed- international-tax-agreements
Amendment 1106 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 d (new)
Paragraph 171 d (new)
171 d. Notes that tax treaties place too much emphasis on the taxing rights of the countries of residence of multinational companies, imposing too many restrictions on the countries that are the source of those companies’ income, often developing countries; 1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson (2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1107 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 e (new)
Paragraph 171 e (new)
171 e. Regrets that on average, the treaties developing countries have concluded with EU Member States impose more restrictions on their source taxing rights than their treaties with other countries, even other OECD members; notes that EU Member States’ treaties with developing countries more closely resemble the OECD model convention, which is not designed with developing countries in mind, than the UN model, which is; notes that a study of 172 treaties signed between EU Member States and developing countries noted that the average EU treaty leaves intact 40% of its developing country signatories’ taxing rights;1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1108 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 f (new)
Paragraph 171 f (new)
171 f. Calls on EU Member States and the European Commission to conduct spillover analyses incorporating reviews of EU Member States’ double taxation treaties, based on the principle of policy coherence for development and taking into account the recommendations of the European Parliament and the EESC;1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1109 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 g (new)
Paragraph 171 g (new)
171 g. Calls on EU Member States to undertake a rolling plan of renegotiations with a focus on progressively increasing the source taxation rights permitted by EU Member States’ treaties; calls on such renegotiations to introduce development- friendly measures such as anti-treaty shopping.1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson (2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1110 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 171 h (new)
Paragraph 171 h (new)
171 h. Calls on EU Member States and the European Commission to formulate and publish an EU Model Tax Convention for Development Policy Coherence, setting out source-based provisions that EU Member States are willing to offer to developing countries as a starting point for negotiations, not in return for sacrifices on their part; 1a _________________ 1a Martin Hearson(2018) ‘The European Union’s tax treaties with developing countries. Leading by example?’; GUE/NGL; September 2018.
Amendment 1120 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 175 a (new)
Paragraph 175 a (new)
175 a. Recalls relevant Member States to make use of the opportunity afforded by their direct relations with the countries concerned to take the necessary steps in order to put pressure on their overseas countries and territories (OCTs) and outermost regions that do not respect international standards pertaining to tax cooperation, transparency and anti- money laundering; takes the view that the EU transparency and due diligence requirements should be effectively enforced in these territories;1a _________________ 1a PANA recommendations adopted on December 13, 2018.
Amendment 1126 #
Amendment 1127 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177
Paragraph 177
177. Welcomes the broad definition of both ‘intermediary’ and regrets the incompleteness of the ‘reportable cross- border arrangement’ in the recently adopted DAC683 ; _________________ 83 OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1. OJ L 139, 5.6.2018, p. 1.
Amendment 1135 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 a (new)
Paragraph 177 a (new)
177 a. Urges the Commission, Member States and all EU bodies to refer to “enablers” or “promoters” as opposed to "intermediaries", which disguises the agency of the facilitators and promoters of tax avoidance schemes; notes that Ireland has already classified them as “promoters” in legislation (eg, Mandatory Disclosure of Certain Transactions Regulation 2011);
Amendment 1136 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 b (new)
Paragraph 177 b (new)
177 b. Recalls that the EU’s existing definition of control required to create a group of companies should be applied to accountancy firms that are members of a network of firms associated by legally enforceable contractual arrangements that provide for the sharing of a name or marketing, professional standards, clients, support services, finance or professional indemnity insurance arrangements, as anticipated by Directive2013/34/EU on annual financial statements1a; and calls for the European Commission to present a proposal for professional networks subject to these arrangements to be required to file full country-by-country reports, adapted to meet the particular needs of the sector, on public record;2a _________________ 2a Murphy, R.; Stausholm, S.N. (2017) ‘The Big Four, a study of opacity’; GUE/NGL, July 2017. 1a European Parliament recommendation of 13 December 2017 to the Council and the Commission following the inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion (Texts adopted, P8_TA- (2017)0491).
Amendment 1137 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 c (new)
Paragraph 177 c (new)
177 c. Calls for the Commission to present a proposal whereby the networks of professional service firms (e.g. accountancy firms, tax and legal advisors) to be required to apply for a single license to provide audit, taxation services or legal advice of any sort in the Member States, and that all abusive tax schemes promoted by the firm that have an impact on the tax revenue of a Member State be reported, whether sold in or outside the EU by a network member; 1a _________________ 1a Murphy, R.; Stausholm, S.N. (2017) ‘The Big Four, a study of opacity’; GUE/NGL, July 2017.
Amendment 1138 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 d (new)
Paragraph 177 d (new)
177 d. Calls on the Commission to present a proposal for all audit firms to be required to be entirely separate from those selling any other service;
Amendment 1139 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 e (new)
Paragraph 177 e (new)
177 e. Calls on the European Commission and member states to recognise that there is an inherent conflict of interest between the commercial interests of the tax avoidance industry and the public mandate of the EU to minimise tax avoidance;
Amendment 1140 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 f (new)
Paragraph 177 f (new)
177 f. Stresses that this conflict of interest can come in several forms, including via public procurement contracts that require the provision of paid advice on these issues; the provision of informal or unpaid advice via official advisory and expert groups; and via the revolving door;
Amendment 1141 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 g (new)
Paragraph 177 g (new)
177 g. Notes that in the same way as has been done by the World Health Organisation (WHO) to reduce the effects of the lobbying powers of the Tabaco industry in health policies, measures can be implemented in national, EU and international institutions to protect fiscal policies from commercial and other vested interests of the accountancy industry;
Amendment 1142 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 177 h (new)
Paragraph 177 h (new)
177 h. Calls on the European Commission and member states to put in place a firewall to ensure that those with a commercial or vested interest in promoting tax avoidance and tax evasion should not have arole in advising the EU and member states on action to tackle tax avoidance and tax evasion. Elements of this firewall should include restrictions on the membership of advisory and expert groups, and on the awarding of public contracts for tax-related studies and impact assessments; restrictions on lobbying on tax avoidance and tax evasion; revolving door regulations; and full lobby transparency;
Amendment 1177 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 182 a (new)
Paragraph 182 a (new)
182 a. Deplores that even when in the area of financial services, the added value of sectorial whistleblower protection was already acknowledged by the Union legislator, and measures for the protection of whistleblowers were introduced in a significant number of legislative instruments in this area1a,a number of high profile cases involving European financial institutions have proven that protection of whistleblowers within such financial institutionsstill remains unsatisfactory and that fears of reprisals from both employers and authorities still prevents whistleblowers from coming forward within formation on breaches of law;2a _________________ 1a Communication of 8.12.2010 "Reinforcing sanctioning regimes in the financial services sector".[ 2a A8-0398/2018. Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliamentand of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law (COM(2018)0218 – C8 0159/2018 – 2018/0106(COD))
Amendment 1181 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 183 a (new)
Paragraph 183 a (new)
183 a. Notes that it has been proven that keeping a reporting person’s identity confidential is an essential element in avoiding backsliding and self-censorship. The duty of confidentiality should, therefore, only be waived in exceptional circumstances in which disclosure of information relating to the reporting person’s personal data is a necessary and proportionate obligation required under Union or national law in the context of subsequent investigations or judicial proceedings or to safeguard the freedoms of others including the right of defence of the concerned person, and in each case subject to appropriate safeguards under such laws. Appropriate sanctions should be provided for in the event of breaches of the duty of confidentiality concerning the reporting person’s identity; 1a _________________ 1a A8-0398/2018. Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law (COM(2018)0218 – C8 0159/2018 – 2018/0106(COD))
Amendment 1183 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 183 b (new)
Paragraph 183 b (new)
183 b. Notes that even when appropriate channels should be allowed for internal reporting, experts have noted that internal reporting should not be mandatory and that ultimately a whistleblower must have the right to be able to report externally1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Public hearing “Combatting money laundering in the EU banking sector”, Panel I: Danske Bank and money laundering allegations.
Amendment 1184 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 183 c (new)
Paragraph 183 c (new)
183 c. Notes that in addition to guarding the confidentiality of the identity of whistleblowers as it is essential for the protection of the reporting person, anonymous reporting should be further protected against the generalised threats and the attacks that aim to discredit the anonymously reporting person, by those offended;
Amendment 1205 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 a (new)
Paragraph 188 a (new)
188 a. Deplores that Swiss libel laws are used to silence critics in Switzerland and worldwide because the burden of proof lays on the defendant not the plaintiff; that this not only affects journalists and whistle-blowers, but also reporting entities in the European Union and obliged persons under the beneficial owner register; as in case of having the obligation of reporting a beneficial owner which is Swiss, then the reporting person may end up being sued in Switzerland for libel and slander, being such criminal offences;1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Public hearing “Relations with Switzerland in tax matters and the fight against money laundering”, October 1, 2018.
Amendment 1209 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 b (new)
Paragraph 188 b (new)
188 b. Calls on EU Member States and the Commission not to recognise the Swiss and British libel laws because they are used for libel tourism if in an EU Member States it were not possible to sue a journalist or a whistleblower;1a _________________ 1a TAX3 Public hearing “Relations with Switzerland in tax matters and the fight against money laundering”, October 1, 2018.
Amendment 1211 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 188 c (new)
Paragraph 188 c (new)
188 c. Notes that money laundering, tax evasion and avoidance often involve highly complex international corporate and financial arrangements, which are likely to be within the remit of differing jurisdictions; and recalls the need for provisions to be taken for a unified point of contact for whistleblowers1a _________________ 1a A8-0398/2018. Report on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the protection of persons reporting on breaches of Union law (COM(2018)0218 – C8 0159/2018 – 2018/0106(COD))
Amendment 1212 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 189
Paragraph 189
189. Welcomes the work done by the Platform for Tax Good Governance; notes that the mandate of the Platform applies until 16 June 2019; calls for it to be extended or renewed to ensure that civil society concerns and expertise are heard by Member States and the Commission; but considers that intermediaries with a commercial interest in tax avoidance should no longer be members; encourages the Commission to broaden the scope of the experts invited to the Expert Group on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing (EGMLTF) to include experts from the private sector (business and NGOs) so long as they do not have a commercial interest in these issues;;
Amendment 1217 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 192
Paragraph 192
192. NotDeplores that, despite requests to the Council, no relevant documents have been made available to the TAX3 Committee; calls into question, therefore, the political will of the Council to enhance transparency and cooperation in the fight against money laundering, tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning or to comply with the TEU and the principle of sincere cooperation;
Amendment 1242 #
2018/2121(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 9.5 a (new)
Subheading 9.5 a (new)
Regrets that even when TAXE, TAX2 and PANA committees have managed to make valuable contributions to the legislative discussions, they have not gone in-depth enough to reveal anything new that had not already been said by the media or by the civil society, partly due to the limitations of the powers granted to European Parliament’s special and inquiry committees.
Amendment 15 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
– having regard to the final report of the High-Level Expert Group on Sustainable Finance, 'Financing a sustainable European Economy', published in January 2018,
Amendment 17 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
Citation 6 b (new)
– having regard to the Resolution on Sustainable Finance (2018/2007(INI)) adopted by the European Parliament in May 2018,
Amendment 18 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 c (new)
Citation 6 c (new)
– having regard to the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Sustainable Development Goals,
Amendment 19 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 d (new)
Citation 6 d (new)
– having regard to the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change,
Amendment 20 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 e (new)
Citation 6 e (new)
– having regard to the EU Shadow Banking Monitor No 3 published in September 2018,
Amendment 21 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 f (new)
Citation 6 f (new)
– having regard to the ESRB's report, 'Vulnerabilities in the EU residential real estate sector' of November 2016, and its accompanying country- specific warnings issued to eight Member States,
Amendment 22 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 g (new)
Citation 6 g (new)
– having regard to the European Convention on Human Rights and the European Social Charter, and the implicit right to housing enshrined in several of their Articles;
Amendment 23 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 h (new)
Citation 6 h (new)
– having regard to the report, 'The climate impact of quantitative easing' (2017) by Sini Matikainen, Emanuele Campiglio and Dimitri Zenghelis,
Amendment 29 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas according to Eurostat figures from May 2018, unemployment in the EU and the euro area has now all but returned to pre-crisis levels, standing at 7.0 % and 8.4 % respectively; whereas the number of employed people and labour force participation in the euro area were at their highest levels since the start of the Economic and Monetary Union in 1999; whereas the youth unemployment rate remains more than double the average rate, at 16.8% and 18.8% for the EU and the euro area at the end of 2017;
Amendment 39 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the euro area banks have accelerated their reduction in the number of non-performing loans (NPLs), from 8 % of total loans in 2014 to 4.9 % in the fourth quarter of 2017; whereas the total volume of NPLs across the EU is still at the level of EUR 950 billion; whereas there are significant differences between Member States in the numbers of NPLs;
Amendment 77 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Warns, however, of the rise of uncertainties, which stem from the threat of increased protectionism, the Brexit negotiations, new asset bubbles, the emerging market crisis, historic levels of private debt and rising divergences between Member States on the future of European integration, among other causes;
Amendment 105 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes the risks to financial stability identified by the ESRB's Shadow Banking Monitor, including the interconnectedness of the banking and shadow banking systems in the EU; liquidity risk and risks associated with leverage among some types of investment funds; risks created through the use of derivatives and securities financing transactions; and vulnerabilities in some parts of the other financial institutions sector, where significant data gaps prevent a definitive risk assessment;
Amendment 111 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Notes the ECB's Guidelines for the reduction of non-performing loans in the Member States and the Commission's legislative proposal on this matter; notes the practice in several Member States of banks selling private non-performing mortgages to private equity funds on a mass scale, which has proven to result in a higher rate of home repossessions, and notes the failure of several Member States to deal with this problem through adequate consumer protection laws; calls for the introduction of legal protection from repossession for mortgage-holders at the EU level;
Amendment 121 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that the ECB’s non- standard monetary policy measures have proven successful in forestalling the risks of deflation that were still present at the beginning of 2016 and in initiating a recovery in credit to the private sector, whose annual growth was around 3 % in mid-2018 compared to 0 % in 2015; notes with concern that the ECB's own assessment of its non-standard monetary policies have significantly increased wealth inequality, with resulting capital gains in bonds and equity markets increasing the net wealth of the richest 20 percent by roughly 30 percent than the rest of the population,
Amendment 126 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for vigilance against the risk of a resurgence in real estate bubbles and excessive household and private sector indebtedness in some Member States; Notes with concern that the ESRB issued warnings regarding overheating property markets to eight Member States in 2016 and that these bubbles appear to be affecting several additional Member States at present; calls for vigilance against the risk of a resurgence in real estate bubbles and excessive household and private sector indebtedness in some Member States; notes the comments of ESRB President Mario Draghi* stating that the main source of vulnerability overheating property markets in the EU is the search for yield by international investors - largely cross-border financing and non-banks - and that policymakers should investigate whether new macro- prudential instruments should be introduced for non-banks, especially in relation to their commercial real estate exposures; *Footnote: In the ECON hearing with the ESRB (July 9, 2018)
Amendment 145 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Takes note that of all private sector purchase programmes, the corporate sector programme (CSPP) contributed the most to the APP in 2017, with EUR 82 billion in net purchases; welcomes the fact that since 2017 the ECB has been publishing the full list of all CSPP holdings, including the names of issuers, together with aggregated data on those holdings by country, risk, rating and sector; calls, however, for on the ECB to apply a similar transparency policy for all asset purchase programmes including ABSPP and CBPP3; in addition to further measures in order to disclose the operational procedures used in the choice of securities purchased by national central banks (NCBs);
Amendment 149 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Notes the commitment by the ECB to continue its reinvestment policies beyond the end of the net asset purchases; in this context, calls on the ECB to prioritise the purchasing of bonds connected with long-term strategic investments which contribute to the transition towards a low-carbon economy, and calls on the ECB to immediately develop a transparent and standardised criteria for the selection of beneficiaries for the programme which fully incorporate of environmental, social and governance factors, therefore divesting from carbon-intensive sectors and firms;
Amendment 150 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Recalls its concerns regarding the fact that the CSPP Programme benefits mainly to large and carbon-intensive multinational corporations; recalls the EP’s recommendation T8-0215/2018 that the ECB should explicitly take into account the Paris Agreement and ESG goals in its guidelines orienting its purchase programmes;
Amendment 151 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Calls on the ECB to disclose the full amounts of profits made by the Eurosystem through ANFAs and SMP from 2010until the full expiration of the programme, with a specific breakdown per countries which have been subject to SMP purchases (Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, Italy);
Amendment 186 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Urges the ECB to withdraw its participation in the Troika;
Amendment 188 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Deplores the ECB decision to remove the waiver on the Greek government debt; urges the ECB to review its eligibility rules in order to ensure fair inclusion of all Eurozone Member States' economies into the ECB’s refinancing operations and asset purchases programme;
Amendment 190 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Expresses concern at the ECB's active intervention into shaping financial markets through the promotion of securitisation through its reduction of rating thresholds for ABS collateral, the ABS Purchase Programme and its promotion of regulatory easing;* *Footnote: Benjamin Braun (2018), 'Central banking and the infrastructural power of finance: the case of ECB support for repo and securitization markets'
Amendment 212 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses the importance of the ECB being accountable towards Parliament; welcomes, in this respect, the permanent dialogue between the ECB and Parliament, and the regular appearances of the President of the ECB and, where applicable, other Members of the Executive Board, before the ECON committee and Plenary; encourages the ECB to continue this dialogue and, when necessary, to better explain its decisions and policies; decides to review and improve the setup of the monetary dialogue following the examples of the UK Parliament and the US Congress and the feedback provided by the monetary experts commissioned by ECON in March 2014(see PE 518.753);
Amendment 215 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Regrets the negative attitude of the ECB regarding the European Ombudsman’s case 1697/2016/ANA on the ECB President’s membership in the “Group of Thirty”; calls on the ECB to put an end to the President's membership of the G30, to re-examine the Ombudsman’s recommendations and to carefully review its internal policies in order to protect itself from potential cognitive capture by the financial sector;
Amendment 223 #
2018/2101(INI)
20. Recalls that the coming months will see important changes in the Governing Council of the ECB, with several Board members, including the President; concluding their terms; considers that these changes should be prepared carefully and in full transparency with Parliament, in line with the treaties; regrets the limited involvement of the European Parliament in the process of appointing the ECB vice president this year; expresses concern at the practice of appointing a former Finance Minister of a Member State to such a senior role in the ECB due to the potential for conflicts of interest to arise;
Amendment 225 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls that the coming months will see important changes in the Governing Council of the ECB, with several Board members, including the President; concluding their terms; urges the ECB and the Member States to use this opportunity to address the extreme gender imbalance on the ECB Governing Council; considers that these changes should be prepared carefully and in full transparency with Parliament, in line with the treaties;
Amendment 226 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recalls the Parliaments demands that the ECB should ensure the independence of the members of its internal Audit Committee; urges the ECB, in order to prevent conflicts of interest, to publish declarations of financial interests for its Governing Council members; urges the ECB to ensure that the Ethics Committee is not chaired by a former President or other past members of the Governing Council of the ECB, nor by anyone liable to conflict of interest; calls the ECB Governing Council to follow the EU Staff Regulations and Code of Conduct and require a two-year professional abstention period for its outgoing members after the conclusion of their mandate;
Amendment 227 #
2018/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Deplores the fact that of the 517 members of the ECB's advisory groups, 98%, or 508 are from the private financial sector; believes this situations causes bias, conflicts of interest and regulatory capture in the policy-making process; calls for the greater representation of independent academic experts and consumer protection advocates to be included on all advisory bodies;
Amendment 45 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas regressive changes in the taxation of labour, corporations, consumption and wealth, observable in recent decades across the Member States, have resulted in a shift ofweakening of the redistributive power of tax systems and contributed to the trend in rising income inequality; whereas this structural change in taxation has shifted the tax burden towards low-income groups, and therefore women in particular, on account of the unequal distribution of income between women and men, the small share of women among top-income earners, the above- average consumption ratios for women as regards basic goods and services and the comparatively high share of labour income and small share of capital income in women’s total income8 ; __________________ 8 European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 57 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas almost all Member States have dualised their income tax systems by applying a higher marginal tax rate to the income of the secondary earner and by introducing uniform tax rates for most types of capital income; whereas the disproportionately high tax burden for secondary earners in most Member States as a result of the direct progressive tax schedules applied to labour incomes is one of the main disincentives for women’s participation in the labour market11 , often caused byin addition to other joint tax and benefit provisions and the costs and lack of universal childcare services; __________________ 11 European Parliament Policy Department C (2017) - Gender equality and taxation in the European Union.
Amendment 60 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
Ka. whereas dualised income tax systems have proven to lessen the redistributive power of income taxation; whereas dual income tax systems have failed to remedy the unequal distribution of capital incomes between men and women in shared households, and instead worsen it;
Amendment 61 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K b (new)
Recital K b (new)
Kb. whereas the levels of the inactivity trap (currently at 40%) and the low-wage trap that disproportionately affect women and discourage them from full participation in employment, are determined to a significant degree by direct tax provisions, in addition to the loss of benefits;
Amendment 63 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas personal income taxation may effectively tax women’s income at a higher rate than men’s when household income is pooled to calculate the taxes owed and women’s income is seen as supplemental to that of a male breadwinner; whereas only Sweden and Finland can be considered to have a strictly individualised income tax system; whereas even though a joint tax filing may result in a total financial gain for the household in total, as the combined income is in a lower tax bracket than it would be in an individual filing, it is not the case that women will necessarily benefit from this financial gain or decide how it is used;
Amendment 114 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that prohibitive childcare costs remains the single most significant barrier to women’s equal participation in all aspects of society, including employment; calls on all Member States to address this problem by using the taxation system to fund free or affordable, high-quality childcare services;
Amendment 115 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that tax exemptions are a more effective means than tax allowances and tax credits for reducing childcare costs that disincentivise women’s full participation in the labour market; notes that tax allowances for childcare costs have a regressive effect under a direct progressive income schedule; and tax credits for childcare costs, while more progressive than tax allowances, often do not benefit low-income groups who do not have a high level of tax liability;
Amendment 116 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Notes that in some Member States the provision of private tax relief on pensions benefits high earners and men disproportionately; believes that a universal pension system which gives women equal access to a comprehensive pension guarantee is that the best way to support gender equality in older age;
Amendment 166 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Reminds the Commission that since the Lisbon Treaty incorporated the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU into primary law, it has a legally binding obligation to promote gender equality in its policies and actions;
Amendment 167 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Acknowledges the importance of women’s rights organisations and the community sector playing a leading role in the development of public policy, including in relation to the impact of taxation policy on gender equality; recognises the financial challenges facing women’s and community organisations in many Member States as a result of a decade of austerity policies; calls on Member States that have cut spending in the past decade to restore the level of funding to the women’s community sector to its pre-2008 level;
Amendment 168 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 c (new)
Paragraph 23 c (new)
23c. Recognises that many advocacy and civil society groups feel marginalised from discussions about taxation policy due to a lack of expertise, and that industry and financial groups are thus over-represented in budgeting consultative processes in many Member States; calls for Member States to address this issue by providing education on budget processes in addition to opportunities for genuine consultation with civil society;
Amendment 172 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls on the Commission to meet its legal obligation to promote gender equality by mainstreaming gender aspects in the assessments of fundamental tax policy design conducted within the European Semester; underlines that reviews of Member States’ tax systems within the European Semester, as well as country- specific recommendations, require thorough analyses with regard to effects on socioeconomic gender gaps, the prohibition of discrimination and the promotion of substantive gender equality and should also address the need for adequate institutional measures at Member State level;
Amendment 180 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to implement gender- responsive approaches to budgeting in a way that explicitly tracks what proportion of public funds are targeted at women and that ensures that all policies for mobilising resources and allocating expenditure promote gender equality; calls on the Member States to implement equality budgeting on a statutory basis;
Amendment 184 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Regrets that gender equality has not been recognised as a horizontal priority in the multiannual financial framework for the years 2021 to 2027 and urges the EUbelieves this contravenes the principle of gender mainstreaming in the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (article 8); urges the EU institutions to immediately integrate gender budgeting with regard to revenues and expenditures in the budgetary process, in line with the EU’s gender mainstreaming obligation;
Amendment 186 #
2018/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Calls on Member States to uphold their legal obligation under the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the EU to promote gender equality when implementing EU law and when implementing national policies that are governed by EU law;
Amendment 18 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 a (new)
Citation 6 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 4 April 2017 on women and their roles in rural areas,
Amendment 20 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 6 b (new)
Citation 6 b (new)
– having regard to the European Parliament resolution on the ‘State of play of farmland concentration in the EU: how to facilitate the access to land for farmers’, adopted on 27 April 2017,
Amendment 82 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas over the years the CAP has undergone regular re-programming in line with new challenges, but anotit has now come to a stage where step in this continuous process ofmall incremental adjustments are insufficient, making a more radical programme for modernisation and simplification, building on essential to preovious reforms, is now necessary;de the desired outcomes for farmers:
Amendment 120 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the CAP must play an important role in overcoming stagnation and volatility of prices at source and farm incomes which, despite the concentration and intensification of production and increasing productivity, are still lower than in the rest of the economy;
Amendment 129 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas concentration, intensification and increased productivity have also resulted in negative effects, such as the loss of farmers and the abandonment of villages, as well as affecting the environment and product quality;
Amendment 134 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the volatility of international markets is conditioned by variables – often of a speculative nature – which are incompatible with the production of healthy food and with sustaining small and medium-scale farming and adequate incomes;
Amendment 151 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas the international market, which represents a minimal percentage of European agricultural production, is having a more decisive impact on the future of farmers in Europe than CAP aid;
Amendment 186 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas there is a need for an updated and fairer system of payments, as in many Member States the current system of entitlements is based on historic benchmarks which are now almost 20 years old and which constitute an obstacle to generational renewal and hinder young farmers’ access to farmland, – this being especially the case for young female farmers – as new entrants do not possess entitlements and are thus at a disadvantage;
Amendment 217 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas the emergence of new challenges, such as increasing global trade, is necessitating fair and sustainable conditions for the global exchange of goods and services, something which is not possible within the framework of the WTO and in accordance with existing EU social, economic and environmental standards, which should be promoted;
Amendment 226 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas while the focus on research and development for both product and process innovation is to be welcomed, more must be done to translate the results of research into farming practice, facilitated by EU-wide agricultural extension servicesresearch and innovation are necessary to establish a new European agricultural model based on agroecology;
Amendment 258 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the agriculture and food sector must be incentivised to continue togeared towards a smallholder farming model which contributes to the environmental care and the climate action objectives of the EU set out in international agreements such as the Paris Agreement and the UN SDGs;
Amendment 353 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesTakes note of the intention to simplify and modernise the CAP, but emphasises that the integrity of the singsimplification and modernisation are insufficient to maintain food production in the hands of small/medium-scale mfarket and a truly common policy must be the overriding priorities of reformmers, to ensure measures are taken to combat climate change and to establish a type of farming in which genuine commitments are made concerning the environment;
Amendment 355 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the intention to simplify and modernise the CAP, but emphasises that the integrity of the single market and a truly common policy must be the overriding priorities of reform;is must be more than empty rhetoric and should allow the CAP to adapt to local conditions, be not only outcome but also end-user focused and reduce inequality in farm incomes, while retaining the integrity of the single market and the principle of a common policy
Amendment 371 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Urges the Commission and the Council to place at the heart of the Common Agricultural Policy farm gate prices which cover production costs and wages;
Amendment 380 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that evenViews that the flexibility that Member States currently enjoy in defining basic rules may riskcould be enhanced in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, without necessarily distorting competition within the single market andor granting unequal access to support for famers in different Member States or even in different regions;
Amendment 403 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that subsidiarity for Member States should only be granted within a common set of rules and tools agreed at EU level as part of a uniform approach to all programming efforts and eligibility criteria, should cover both of the CAP’s pillars and ensure, in particular, a European approach in Pillar I and thus a level playing fieldEU objectives, rules and eligibility requirements, to allow Member States sufficient flexibility in programme and tool selection, while at the same time ensuring a level playing field, and common approach in the area of pillar I payments, across the EU;
Amendment 442 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 480 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to ensure that financial and performance control and audit functions are performed to the same standard and under the same criteria across all Member States, irrespective of enhanced flexibility for Member States in rural development programme design and management, and with a view, in particular, to ensuring a timely disbursement of funds across Member States to all eligible famers;
Amendment 563 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that the current CAP architecture can only deliver its objectives if sufficiently funded; calls, therefore, for the CAP budget to be maintained in the next MFF at at least the current level in order to sufficient level to meet the needs that enable achievement of the ambitions of a revised and efficient CAP beyond 2020;
Amendment 608 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that more targeted support for family farms is necessary and can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for small farmand medium-scale farms as social, environmental and economically- sustainable models; considers, moreover, that support for larger farms should be digressive, reflecting economies of scale, with the possibility for capping to be decided by the Member States;at EU level.
Amendment 626 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that more targeted support for family farms is necessary and can be achieved by introducing a compulsory higher support rate for small farms; considers, moreover, that support for larger farms should be digressive, reflecting economies of scale, with the possibility for capping to be decided by thea maximum payment cap of €50,000, strictly adhered to by all Member States;
Amendment 635 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Points out that equality between women and men is a core objective of the EU and its Member States;
Amendment 642 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Believes it necessary to cap farm payments for large farms Europe-wide;
Amendment 644 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Calls on the Commission and Council to ensure that gender equality is mainstreamed into all EU programmes, actions and initiatives, and calls therefore for gender mainstreaming to be applied to the CAP and to rural cohesion policies;
Amendment 684 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls for the existing system for calculating direct payments in Pillar I, which is often based on historic entitlements, to be replaced by an EU-wide uniform method of calculating payments, in order to make the system simpler and more transparent system which works towards eliminating inequality between farmers, within a Member state, and ends the systemic discrimination faced by young farmers;
Amendment 696 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls for that new system to take into account persons who are active and the equalisation of average incomes;
Amendment 751 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for a fair distribution of direct payments between Member Statesfarmers throughout the European Union, which must take into account socio-economic differences, and different production costs and the amounts received by Member States under Pillar II;
Amendment 757 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Calls, in the redistribution of direct payments to family farms, for payments to be split equally between both members of a couple;
Amendment 818 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Recalls that generational renewal is a challenge faced by famers in many Member Statwhich should be tackled through public policies and that each national strategy must therefore address this issue through a comprehensive approach, including top-ups in Pillar I and targeted measures in Pillar II, as well as by means of new financial instruments and national measures, in order to incentivise famers to pass on their farming operations;
Amendment 842 #
2018/2037(INI)
15a. Stresses that it is almost impossible for people from outside the world of farming to enter agriculture; in this context, consideration should be given to ways of supporting small and medium- sized farms and gradual integration in the sector, ensuring that first-pillar aid is provided, given that there are small and medium-sized farms that currently receive no aid;
Amendment 864 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Recalls that mechanisms should be put in place to ensure shared ownership, in order to safeguard the rights of women;
Amendment 872 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 c (new)
Paragraph 15 c (new)
15c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to put measures in place to ensure equitable access to land;
Amendment 899 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Calls on the Commission to urge the Member States to invest in rural areas to provide high-quality public facilities and services to meet people’s everyday needs: health care, education, social services, child care, care of the elderly and other dependent persons, transport services, postal services, internet access and cultural services, among others; believes that the rural development funds will not meet their objectives if the States do not implement decisive policies to ensure that rural areas have an acceptable level of public services;
Amendment 913 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Believes that it has been proven that rural areas need women and men to engage in small and medium-scale farming;
Amendment 937 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission to analyse the delivered outcomes from all environmental measures, and utilise the most successful in the introducetion of a new and comprehensive legal framework which allows the integration of the various types of environmental actions at present, such as cross compliance, greening and the good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAEC) standards, as well as agri-environment measures (AEMs) for rural development, so that farmers can deliver effectively and with less bureaucracy on environmental care, biodiversity and climate action, while ensuring that Member States have adequate control and taking into account local conditions;
Amendment 999 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses the need for payments under rural development to farmers in areas with natural constraints, difficult climatic conditions, steep slopes or limitations in terms of soil quality; calls for a simplification and improved targeting of the ANC plan after 2020;
Amendment 1134 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Insists on the critical need for the future CAP to support farmers more efficiently in order to cope with price and income volatility due to climate, the negative effects of trade deals and health and market risks, by creating additional incentives for flexible risk management and stabilisation tools while ensuring broad access;
Amendment 1142 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Insists on the critical need for the future CAP to support farmers more efficiently in order to cope with price and income volatility due to climate, health and market risks, by creating additional incentives for flexible risk management and stabilisation tools while ensuring broad access and developing measures to discourage output growth above European averages; those growing at a rate exceeding this level must repay sums of money or have their crisis-compensation aid cut; we reject the idea of using insurance to address market volatility;
Amendment 1176 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Insists on the necessity of strengthening the position of producers within the food supply chain, in particular byby means of binding legislation guaranteeing them a fair share of the added value, covering production costs and ensuring payment for work, by fostering inter-sectoral cooperation, and strengthening transparency in the markets and crisis prevention;
Amendment 1178 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Insists on the necessity of strengthening the position of producers within the food supply chain, in particular by guaranteeing them a fair share of the added value, by fostering inter-sectoral cooperation, encouraging cooperatives and strengthening transparency in the markets and crisis prevention;
Amendment 1199 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to allow and indeed encourage – particularly in the dairy sector – active crisis management instruments, such as voluntary sector agreements to manage supply in quantitative terms among producers, producers organisathe regulation of productions and processors, and to examine the possibility of extending such instruments to other sectors;
Amendment 1209 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to allow and indeed encourageprovide for – particularly in the dairy sector – activepermanent crisis management instruments, such as voluntary sector agreements to manage supply in quantitative terms among producers, producers organisations and processors, and to examine the possibility of extending such instrumentsdevelop a strategy on how such instruments could be extended to other sectors;
Amendment 1212 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Also calls for public policies to stabilise the market and limit production and growth, for inflows of investment in production and for an assessment of the socio-economic impact of these investments;
Amendment 1228 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Believes that whileConsiders that trade agreements are not beneficial to the EU agricultural sector oversmall and medium-sized farms or small, and necessary for strengthening the EU’s position on the global agricultural market, they also pose a number of challenges that require reinforced safeguard mechanisms to ensure a level playing field between farmers in the EU and in the rest of the worldmedium-sized enterprises. Trade agreements are having extremely harmful socio-economic effects on small and medium-sized agriculture in the EU and other parts of the world, where cheap European exports often destroy the agriculture that Europe supports, at least in principle, in addition to generating greenhouse gases and wasting a great deal of energy; safeguard mechanisms should take into account the costs of engaging in socially, environmentally and economically sustainable agriculture, both in the EU and in the countries to which it exports;
Amendment 1230 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Believes that while trade agreements arcould be beneficial to the EU agricultural sector overall, and necessary for strengthening the EU’s position on the global agricultural market, they also pose a number of challenges that require reinforced safeguard mechanisms to ensure a level playing field between farmethe benefits are often outweighed by the destabilizing effect of increased imports, often at a lower price and of an inferior quality to EU produce, would have on the European market, and as a result the Commission should, in all cases, put the protection of the European producer before purs uin the EU and in the rest of the worldg an uncompromising free trade agenda;
Amendment 1286 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Insists that these standards must encompass: peasant farmers’ rights, labour rights, human rights and the production costs of sustainable agriculture;
Amendment 1291 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Stresses the importance of short local and regional supply chains, which are more environmentally sustainable – since they cause less pollution because they require less transport – and mean products are more easily traceable and fresher;
Amendment 1300 #
2018/2037(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Points out that producing locally supports the local food culture and local economies;
Amendment 6 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas consumers make an associative link between brand, product and quality and expect products of the same brand to be identical in quality and composition, whether they are sold in their own country or in another Member State;
Amendment 12 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas all farmers in the European Union produce products to the same high standards; customers expect this uniformity of quality to be offered by the other elements of the food chain, regardless of the jurisdiction in which they reside;
Amendment 30 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the analyses show that certain products contain less meaquantity of the main ingredient, or less of other ingredients, in certain countries, in most cases those countries which joined the EU since 2004, 2007 and 2013; whereas the analyses found instances of the same products being sold at considerably higher prices in those countries than in the so- called ‘old Member States’;
Amendment 64 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Firmly believes that, in response to European citizens’ concerns about different products being sold under the same brand in different Member States, the practice of ‘one brand, one product, different content and proportional composition’ needs to be stopped by means of an amendment to Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May 2005 concerning unfair business-to-consumer commercial practicesas it poses a risk of enticing customers to buy products, based on a false expectation of quality or composition;
Amendment 67 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Views that, this should be accomplished by means of an amendment to the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC of 11 May 2005, inter alia, to incorporate the ‘product of reference’ measure, as detailed in the non-binding Commission notice on ‘the application of EU food and consumer protection law to issues of Dual Quality of products’ (2017/C 327/01);
Amendment 79 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that, until that practice is stopped, and in order to raise the profile of manufacturers’ initiatives on the use of local recipes , a system should be introduced for indicating, in a way that respects the consumer’s right of informed choice and consumer preferences, theat a local recipes has been used in the preparation of the specific products;
Amendment 99 #
2018/2008(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for the establishment of an agency or other specialised unit to monitorEuropean Commission to work, in collaboration with the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation, on a larger study to measure consistency of composition and proportional use of ingredients in identically branded and packaged food products.
Amendment 5 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the Commission cCommunication on a balanced and progressive trade policy to harness globalisation1 ; underlines the importance of this communication for a Europeanis concerned about the lack of attention this communication gives to the unequal effects of globalisation, including from the perspective of the agricultureal sector that, which is suffering from unbalanced competition on both the EU and foreign markets; _________________ 1 COM(2017)0492.
Amendment 23 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that harnessing globalisation should involve both strengthening global discipline to prevent unfair competition and distortions of trade in agriculture, and avoiding undupreventing the exposure of sensitive EU agricultural sectors; demands that this be done by not exposing domestic goods to competition from imports of products that are not subject to similar standards, costs and constraints as regards, for example, environmental protection; measures to protect the environment, animal welfare measures including stocking densities, the use of hormones or antibiotics as growth promoters, and the use of substances in the preparation or processing of food products that are banned in the EU, to name a few;
Amendment 52 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Points out that while trade agreements could open up opportunities for the promotion of some EU offensive interests with respect to processed and unprocessed food products, they also entail a significant risk for more sensitive EU agricultural sectors that are already crisis-hit or have been particularly exposed to price volatility and calls for Impact Assessments prepared by the European Commission prior to the opening of negotiations to specifically take into account these sensitivities;
Amendment 59 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that for some agricultural sectors it is often the cumulative impact of a number of agreements as opposed to one free trade deal that has the ability to inflict damage on prices and production; in this regard therefore calls for the European Commission to regularly update the information it has with regard to the potential impact of increased competition;
Amendment 68 #
2018/2005(INI)
3b. Regrets the incompatibility of the European Commission's free trade agenda with its commitments to protect and preserve the small, family farm model; notes that the Commission's own Impact Assessments observe that increased market access for primary agriculture may negatively affect the standard of living and traditional lifestyle of small farmers in the EU and have adverse impacts on rural employment in terms of both skilled and unskilled agricultural labour1a _________________ 1aEuropean Commission Impact Assessment Accompanying the document Recommendation for a Council Decision authorising the opening of negotiations for a Free Trade Agreement with New Zealand, 13.08.2017 at p 40
Amendment 70 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its serious concerns with respect to the possible conclusion of the ongoing free-trade negotiations with Mercosur involving major concessions in sectors such as beef, sugar and biofuels which couldwill endanger the viability of local production in certain parts of the EU and create a direct downward pressure on EU producer prices; recalls that the European Commission's 2016 Report on the Cumulative Economic Impact of Future Trade Agreements on EU Agriculture has forecast a steep drop in beef meat prices and drops in butter and sheep prices as a result of recently concluded and ongoing negotiations;
Amendment 81 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Regrets that while agriculture is often used as a bargaining chip in these negotiations, the sector itself is given very little information until after the deals have already been made; deplores, in this respect, ongoing EU offers to increase the TRQ offered to the US for beef imports as a response to the threatened imposition of duties on European steel and aluminum;
Amendment 119 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to create an advisory group on EU trade negotiations composed of representatives of stakeholders; insists on the need for the strong representation of EU farming organisations representing such amall farmers in this group.
Amendment 122 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to keep a public register of all meetings held with interest groups and lobbyists regarding the negotiation of Free Trade Agreements;
Amendment 126 #
2018/2005(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Rejects recommendations to open multilateral negotiations to establish a multilateral court for the settlement of investment disputes, which has the potential to lower food safety and environmental standards.
Amendment 440 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) to contribute to the development of projects of common interest relating to efficient and interconnected networks and infrastructure for smart, sustainable, inclusive, safe and secure mobility that is accessible to persons with disabilities, and which satisfy public acceptance criteria, including stakeholder mappings and feasibility studies;
Amendment 456 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii
Amendment 509 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i
(i) EUR 12,830,000,000 from the European Strategic Investment cluster, which in real terms represents a decrease of 8% in comparison to the 2014-2020 MFF;
Amendment 522 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i i
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i i
(ii) EUR 11,285,493,000 transferred from the Cohesion Fund to be spent in line with this Regulation exclusively in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund, which in real terms represents a decrease of 13% in comparison with the 2014-2020 MFF;
Amendment 533 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i i i
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i i i
(iii) EUR 6,500,000,000 from the Defence cluster for the specificwill be redirected to civilian purposes in line with the objectives referred to in Article 3(2)(a)(ii). As in Article 41 (2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) ‘expenditure arising from operations having military or defence implications’ is prohibited from being charged to the EU budget;
Amendment 599 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Given the nature of the future relationship between Britain and the EU is not yet agreed, the Programme shall prepare mitigation measures to ensure the connectivity of the countries most affected by Brexit.
Amendment 857 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) innovation, safety, interoperability and accessibility aspects particularly for persons with disabilities;
Amendment 897 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Positive discrimination shall apply to the award of grants for projects located in peripheral regions to prevent further isolation from centres of economic activity. Regional authorities and local government structures shall be consulted for the definition of core and comprehensive networks, and to identify where EU transport funding is most required.
Amendment 906 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The assessment of proposals against the award criteria shall ensure that no proposal is accepted that creates or maintains infrastructure which is not accessible to everyone, including persons with disabilities.
Amendment 907 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 6 b (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Proposals in consideration for award shall have a proven record of public acceptance, such as stakeholder mapping and feasibility studies carried out in its region.
Amendment 1142 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Part III – point 1 – table – Core network corridor “North Sea- Mediterranean”
Annex I – Part III – point 1 – table – Core network corridor “North Sea- Mediterranean”
Core network corridor "North Sea – Mediterranean" Alignment Belfast – Dublin – Shannon Foynes/CorkDerry – Sligo – Galway - Shannon Foynes/Cork – Dublin – Belfast Glasgow/Edinburgh – Liverpool/Manchester – Birmingham Birmingham – Felixstowe/London/Southampton London – Lille – Brussel/Bruxelles Amsterdam – Rotterdam – Antwerp – Brussel/Bruxelles – Luxembourg Luxembourg – Metz – Dijon – Macon – Lyon – Marseille Luxembourg – Metz – Strasbourg – Basel Antwerpen/Zeebrugge – Gent – Dunkerque/Lille – Paris Pre- Cross-border Brussel/Bruxelles – Luxembourg – Rail identified Strasbourg sections Terneuzen – Gent Inland Waterways Seine – Escaut Network and the related Seine, Escaut and Meuse river basins Rhine-Scheldt corridor Missing link Albertkanaal/Canal Bocholt- Inland Herentals Waterways Dunkerque – Lille
Amendment 1169 #
2018/0228(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part III – point 2 – table
Annex I – part III – point 2 – table
Dublin – Strabane – Letterkenny Road Derry – Sligo – Galway Rail Pau – Huesca Rail Lyon – CH border Rail Athus – Mont-Saint-Martin Rail Antwerpen – Duisburg Rail Mons - Valenciennes Rail Gent – Terneuzen Rail Heerlen – Aachen Rail Groningen – Bremen Rail Stuttgart – CH border Rail Berlin – Rzepin/Horka – Wrocław Rail Prague – Linz Rail Villach – Ljubljana Rail Pivka – Rijeka Rail Plzeň – České Budějovice – Wien Rail Wien - Gyor Rail Graz - Gyor Rail Rail Neumarkt-Kalham - Mühldorf Rail Rail Amber Corridor PL-SK-HU Rail Rail Via Carpathia Corridor BY/UA border-PL-SK-HU-RO Road Road Budapest – Osijek – Svilaj (BiH border) Road Road Faro – Huelva Rail Rail Porto – Vigo Rail Rail Giurgiu – Varna/Bourgas Rail Rail Svilengrad – Pithio Rail
Amendment 112 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled ‘The Future of Food and Farming’ of 29 November 2017 sets out the challenges, objectives and orientations for the future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) after 2020. These objectives include, inter alia, the need for the CAP to be more result-drivenfocused on viable income for farmers, to boost modernisation and sustainability, including the economic, social, environmental and climate sustainability of the agricultural, forestry and rural areas, and to help reducing the Union legislation- related administrative burden for beneficiaries.
Amendment 177 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24 a (new)
Recital 24 a (new)
(24a) Member States may, on request, decide to grant more than one recognition to a producer organisation operating in several sectors, provided the producer organisation fulfils the conditions referred to in paragraph 1 of Article 154 of this regulation.
Amendment 199 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
Amendment 245 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 491 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 149 a (new)
Article 149 a (new)
Amendment 609 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 26 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 26 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 220 a (new)
Article 220 a (new)
Amendment 618 #
2018/0218(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 225
Article 225
(27b) Article 225 is replaced by the following: “The Commission shall present a report to the European Parliament and to the Council: (a) every three years and for the first time by21 December 2016the implementation of the measures concerning the apiculture sector as set out in Articles 55, 56 and 57, including on the latest developments on beehive identification systems; (b) by 30 June 2014 and also by 31 December 2018, on the development of the market situation in the milk and milk products sector, and in particular on the operation of Articles 148 to 151, Article 152(3) and Article 157(3), assessing in particular the effects on milk producers and milk production in disadvantaged regions in connection with the general objective of maintaining production in such regions, and covering potential incentives to encourage farmers to enter into joint production agreements, together with any appropriate proposals; (cba) bBy 31 December0 June 20149, on the possibility of extending the scope of the school schemes to include olive oil and table olives; (d) by 31 December 2017, on the application of the competition rules to the agricultural sector in all Member States, in particular on the operation of Articles 209 and 210, and of Articles 169, 170 and 171 in the sectors concerned;Commission’s strategy to use the provisions in this regulation effectively to prevent and manage internal agricultural market crises that may occur following the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union. (ec) by31 July 2023, on the application of the allocation criteria referred to in Article 23a(2); (f(d) by 31 July 2023, on the impact of the transfers referred to in Article 23a(4) on the effectiveness of the school scheme in relation to the distribution of school fruit and vegetables and school milk. ” Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:32013R1308&from=en)
Amendment 112 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) With a view to ensuring that the amounts for the financing of the CAP comply with the annual ceilings, the financial discipline mechanism by which the level of direct support is adjusted, should be maintained. However, the threshold of EUR 2000 should be abolished. An agricultural reserve should be maintained to support the agricultural sector in the event of market developments or major crises affecting the agricultural production or distribution. Article 12(2)(d) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) [New Financial Regulation] foresees that non- committed appropriations may be carried over to to the following financial year only. In order to significantly simplify the implementation for beneficiaries and national administrations, a roll-over mechanism should be used, using any unused amounts of the reserve for crises in the agricultural sector established in 2020. For this purpose a derogation from Article 12(2)(d) is necessary, allowing for non- committed appropriations of the agricultural reserve to be carried over without time limitation to finance the agricultural reserve in the following financial year(s). Furthermore, as regards the financial year 2020, a second derogation is necessary as the total unused amount of the reserve available at the end of year 2020 should be carried over to the year 2021 to the corresponding line of the new agricultural reserve without being returned to the budgetary lines which cover direct payment interventions under the CAP Strategic Planthe reserve should be initially constituted from funds outside the budgetary line for the CAP.
Amendment 164 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) The existing main elements of the integrated system and, in particular, the provisions concerning a system for identifying agricultural parcels, a geo- spatial and an animal-based application system, a system for identifying and registering payment entitlements, a system for recording the identity of beneficiaries and a control and penalties system should be maintained. Member States should continue to use data or information products provided by the Copernicus programme, in addition to information technologies such as GALILEO and EGNOS in order to ensure that comprehensive and comparable data is available throughout the Union for the purposes of monitoring agri-environment- climate policy and for the purposes of boosting the use of full, free and open data and information captured by Copernicus Sentinels satellites and services. To this end, the integrated system should include also an area monitoring system. The purpose of using such technology should be to limit the instances that on farm inspections are required and reduce the administrative burden on farmers.
Amendment 177 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) While Member States should be allowed to set out the details on penalties, those penaltieswhich should be proportionate, effective and dissuasive and should betaking into consideration the economic position of farmers and without prejudice to other penalties laid down under Union or national law. To ensure an effective and coherent approach by Member States, it is necessary to provide for a minaximum penalty rate at Union level for non-compliance occurring for the first time due to negligence, while reoccurrence should lead to a higher percentage and intentionality may result in the total exclusion from the payment. To ensure proportionality of the penalties, where the non-compliance is of a minor nature and occurs for the first time, Member States should be allowed to introduce an early warningintroduce a yellow card system.
Amendment 195 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(c a) "output" means the achievement of a public good in line with the general and specific objectives as defined by Articles 5 and 6 of the Regulation on Strategic Plans.
Amendment 196 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)
(c b) "result indicator" means an indicator to measure the short term effects of the interventions supported, with particular reference to the direct addressees, population targeted or users of infrastructure;
Amendment 225 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
The Funds may, either on the initiative of the Commission or on its behalf, each directly finance the increased preparatory, monitoring, administrative and technical support activities, and the evaluation, audit and inspection, required to implement the CAP. In particular, they shall include:
Amendment 297 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The certification body shall be a public or private audit body designated by the Member State for a minimum three year period, without prejudice to national law. Where it is a private audit body, and where the applicable Union or national law so requires, it shall be selected by the Member State by means of a public tendering procedure.
Amendment 308 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 311 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
The implementing acts shall also set outlist shall include:
Amendment 314 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 325 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
A reserve intended to provide additional support for the agricultural sector for the purpose of market management or, stabilisation or in the case of crises, including extreme price volatility or weather events, affecting the agricultural production or distribution (“the agricultural reserve”) shall be established at the beginning of each year in the EAGF.
Amendment 336 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 371 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Moreover, by derogation from point (d) of Article 12(2) of the Financial Regulation, the total unused amount of the crisis reserve available at the end of year 2020 shall be carried over to the year 2021 without being returned to the budgetary lines which cover the actions referred to in point (c) of Article 5(2) and made available for the financing of the agricultural reservereturned to the beneficiaries that underwent financial discipline in the previous year.
Amendment 384 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The adjustment calculation shall only affect beneficiaries with direct payments of EUR 2 000 or more.
Amendment 389 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Where appropriations to be carried-over as referred to in the first subparagraph remain available, the Commission may, adopt implementing acts setting out per Member State the amounts of non-committed appropriations to be reimbursed to final beneficiaries unless the overall amount of non-committed appropriations available for reimbursement represents less than 0,21% of the annual ceiling for EAGF expenditure.
Amendment 390 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The amounts set by the Commission in accordance with the second subparagraph of paragraph 3 shall be reimbursed to final beneficiaries by Member States in accordance with objective and non- discriminatory criteria. Member States may apply a minimum threshold of amounts of reimbursement per final beneficiary.
Amendment 397 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
In accordance with point (b) of Article 7, the Commission shall supply that satellite data free of charge to the authorities competent for the area monitoring system and control system or to suppliers of services authorised by those bodies to represent them.
Amendment 400 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4
Article 22 – paragraph 4
The Commission may entrust specialised entities to carry out tasks relating to techniques or working methods in connection with the area monitoring and control system referred to in point (c) of Article 64(1).
Amendment 440 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
1. After receiving the last annual performance report on the implementation of a CAP Strategic Plan, the Commission shall pay the balance, subject to the availability of resources, on the basis of the financial plan in force at the level of the types of EAFRD interventions, the annual accounts for the last execution year for the relevant CAP Strategic Plan and of the corresponding clearance decisions. Those accounts shall be presented to the Commission no later than six months after the final eligibility date of expenditure provided for in Article 80(3) of Regulation (EU) No…/…[CAP Strategic Plan Regulation] and shall cover the expenditure effected by the paying agency up to the last eligibility date of expenditure.
Amendment 486 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. Where the Commission establishes from declarations of expenditure or the information referred to in Article 88 that the payment deadlines referred to in Article 36 have not been complied with, the Member State shall be afforded the opportunity to submit its comments within a period which shall not be less than 30 days. Where the Member State fails to submit its comments within the said period or where the Commission considers the response to be unsatisfactoryhas concluded that the comments provided are manifestly insufficient, the Commission may reduce the monthly or interim payments to the Member State concerned in the framework of the implementing acts concerning the monthly payments referred to in Article 19(3) or in the framework of the interim payments referred to in Article 30. The Commission shall ensure that any reductions do not result in further delays or problems in the Member State for final beneficiaries.
Amendment 509 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The Commission, following consultation and an opportunity for the Member State concerned to respond, may adopt implementing acts laying down further rules on the elements of action plans including in particular a definition of progress indicators and the procedure for setting up the action plans. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 101(3).
Amendment 515 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the Member States fails to submit or to implement the action plan referred to in paragraph 1 without rationale or if that action plan is manifestly insufficient to remedy the situation, the Commission may adopt implementing acts suspending the monthly payments referred to in Article 19(3) or the interim payments referred to in Article 30.
Amendment 525 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Where the Member State fails to submit or to implement the action plan referred to in paragraph 1 without rationale or if that action plan is manifestly insufficient to remedy the situation, the Commission may adopt implementing acts suspending the monthly payments referred to in Article 19(3) or the interim payments referred to in Article 30.
Amendment 537 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
Article 42 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1
In the event of an emergency crises caused by such factors as weather or market conditions, the Commission may adopt implementing acts to resolve specific problems in relation to the application of this Article. Those implementing acts may derogate from paragraph 2, but only to the extent that, and for such a period, as is strictly necessary.
Amendment 571 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall adopt implementingdelegated acts laying down rules on the clearance of accounts provided for in paragraph 1 with regard to the measures to be taken in connection with the adoption of the implementing acts referred to in the second subparagraph of paragraph 1 and their implementation, including the information exchange between the Commission and the Member States and the deadlines to be respected.
Amendment 572 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 51 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 579 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 52 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 101(2). The Commission shall inform the Member State of its intention, and shall allow time for the submission of comments, the submission period must be no later than 30 days, before it submits the draft implementing act
Amendment 583 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 52 – paragraph 4
Article 52 – paragraph 4
Amendment 596 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 53 – paragraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall assess the amounts to be excluded on the basis of the gravity of the deficiencies found and with due regard to the proportionality principle.
Amendment 614 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where irregularities and other cases of non-compliance by beneficiaries with the conditions of the rural development interventions referred to in the CAP Strategic Plan are detected, Member States shall make financial adjustments by totpartially or parti, in extreme cases, totally cancelling the Union financing concerned. Member States shall take into consideration the nature and gravity of the non-compliance detected, any external contributing factors, the economic situation of the beneficiary, whether the beneficiary benefited from the yellow card system in relation to the same offence in the past, and the level of the financial loss to the EAFRD.
Amendment 640 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall ensure a level of checks needed for an effective management of the risks. The authority responsible shall draw its check sample from the beneficiaries that pose the highest level of risk of error.
Amendment 746 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 84 – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 84 – paragraph 3 – point d
(d) establish the control sample for the checks referred to in point (a) to be carried out each year on the basis of a risk analysis and shall include a random component and shall provide the control sample to cover at least 1% of beneficiaries receiving the aid provided for in Section 2 of Chapter 1 of Title III of Regulation (EU) …/… [CAP Strategic Plan Regulation].
Amendment 756 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 85 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Under that system, the administrative penalties referred to in the first subparagraph shall only apply where the non-compliance is the result of an act or omission directly attributable to the beneficiary concerned and the beneficiary has already received a yellow card for the same infraction; and where one or both of the following conditions are met:
Amendment 762 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 85 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 85 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Member States shall introduce a yellow card system for first time infractions or failure to comply with the conditions for payment.
Amendment 802 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 86 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Member States may set up an early warningshall put in place a yellow card system, that applies to individual cases of non-compliance occurring for the first time and which, given their minor severity, extent and permanence, shall not lead to a reduction or exclusion. Where a subsequent check within three consecutive calendar years establishes that the non- compliance has not been remedied, the reduction pursuant to the first subparagraph shall be applied retroactively.
Amendment 820 #
2018/0217(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 86 – paragraph 4
Article 86 – paragraph 4
4. In case of intentional non- compliance, the percentage shall be higher than the one applied in case of reoccurrence pursuant to paragraph 3 and may go as far as total exclusion from payments, in cases where the beneficiaries fail to engage or commit to remedy the situation, and may apply for one or more calendar years.
Amendment 479 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Since the CAP needs to sharpen its responses to the challenges and opportunities as they manifest themselves at Union, international, national, regional, local and farm levels, it is necessary to streamline the governance of the CAP and improve its delivery on the Union objectives and to significantly decrease the administrative burden. In the CAP based on delivery of performance (‘delivery model’), the Union should set the basic policy parameters, such as objectives of the CAP and basic requirements, while Member States should bear given greater responsibilitautonomy as to how they meet the objectives and achieve targets. Enhanced subsidiarity makes it possible to better take into account local conditions and needs, tailoring the support to maximise the contribution to Union objectives.
Amendment 485 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The use of some common definitions entirely set at Union level has caused certain difficulties for Member States to cater their own specificities at national, regional, and local level. Member States should therefore be given the flexibility to specify certain definitions in their CAP Strategic Plan. In order to ensure a common level playing field, a certain framework has, however, to be set at Union level constituting the necessary essential elements to be included in those definitions (‘framework definitions’).
Amendment 499 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) In order to retain the essential Union-wide elements to ensure comparability between Member State decisions, without however limiting Member States in reaching Union objectives, a framework definition for ‘agricultural area’ should be set out. The related framework definitions for ‘arable land’, ‘permanent crops’ and ‘permanent grassland’ should be set out in a broad way to allow Member States to further specify definitions according to their local conditions and traditional practices. The framework definition for ‘arable land’ should be laid down in a way that allows Member States to cover different production forms, including system such as agroforestry and arable areas with shrubs and trees and that requires the inclusion of fallow land areas in order to ensure the decoupled nature of the interventions. The framework definition of ‘permanent crops’ should include both areas actually used for production and not, as well as nurseries and short rotation coppice to be defined by Member States. The framework definition of ‘permanent grassland’ should be set in a way that allows Member States to specify further criteria and allows them to include species other than grasses or other herbaceous forage that can be grazed or that may produce animal feed, whether used for actual production or not.
Amendment 544 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to give substance to the objectives of the CAP as established by Article 39 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as well as to ensure that the Union adequately addresses its most recent challenges, it is appropriate to provide for a set of general objectives reflecting the orientations given in the Communication on ‘The Future of Food and Farming’. A set of specific objectives should be further defined at Union level and applied by the Member States in their CAP Strategic Plans. WhileIn order to strikinge a balance across the dimensions of sustainable development, Member States should take action to achieve all objectives, in line with the impact assessment, t. These specific objectives should translate the general objectives of the CAP into more concrete priorities and take into account relevant Union legislation, particularly with regard to climate, energy and environment.
Amendment 551 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11a) Gender equality is a core objective of the EU and its Member States, and should be incorporated into the CAP and Member States' Strategic Plans in a way that promotes rural development and the socio-economic conditions of women living there;
Amendment 564 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) A smarter, modernised and more sustainable CAP needs to embrace research and innovation, in order to serve the multi- functionality of Union agriculture, agro- forestry, forestry and food systems, investing in technological development and digitalisation, as well as improving the access to impartial, sound, relevant and new knowledge.
Amendment 590 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) In the context of greater market- orientation of the CAP, as outlined by the Communication on ‘The Future of Food and Farming’, mMarket exposure, climate change and associated frequency and severity of extreme weather events, as well asglobalised agricultural commodity markets, free trade agreements, and sanitary and phytosanitary crises, mayhave all lead to riskepisodes of price volatility and increasing pressures on incomes. Thus, although farmers are ultimately responsible for designing their on-farm strategies, a robust framework should be set up to ensure appropriate risk management and protection of farm incomes. To this aim, Member States and farmers may be able to draw on a Union-level platform on risk management for capacity-building in order to provide farmers with adequate financial instruments fortools for income savings in good years to cope with bad years, investments and access to working capital, training, knowledge transfer and advice.
Amendment 608 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 – point 1
Recital 16 – point 1
As many rural areas in the Union suffer from structural problems such as lack of attractive employment opportunities, skill shortages, underinvestment in broadband and connectivity, infrastructures and essential services, as well as youth drain, it is fundamental to strengthen the socio- economic fabric in those areas, in line with the Cork 2.0. Declaration, particularly through job creation and generational renewal, by bringing the Commission's jobs and growth to rural areas, promotingpromoting public investment, social inclusion, generational renewal and the development of ‘Smart Villages’ across the European countryside. As indicated in the Communication on ‘The Future of Food and Farming’, nThe CAP currently contributes to the reduction of poverty and the creation of better jobs for farmers across the EU and should continue to do so. New rural value chains such as renewable energy, cooperative movements, the emerging bio- economy, the circular economy, and ecotourism can offer good growth and job potential for rural areas. In this context, financial instruments and the use of the InvestEU guaranteeEU funding can play a crucial role for ensurin providing access to financinge and for bolstering the growth capacsustainability of farms and enterprises. There is a potential for employment opportunities in rural areas for legally staying third country nationalsthose coming from outside the locality, promoting their social and economic integration especially in the framework of Community-led Local Development strategies.
Amendment 620 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The CAP should keep ensuring food security, which should be understood as meaning access to sufficient, safe and nutritious food at all times. Moreover, it should help improving the response of Union agriculture to new societal demands on food and health, including sustainable agricultural production, healthier nutrition, food waste and animal welfare. The CAP should continue to promote production with specific and valuable characteristics, while at the same time helping farmers to proactively adjust their production according to market signals and consumers’consumer and environmental demands.
Amendment 635 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Building on the previous system of cross-compliance implemented until 2020, the system of new conditionality links full receipt of CAP support to the compliance by beneficiaries of basic standards concerning the environment, climate change, public health, animal health, plant health and animal welfare. The basic standards encompass in a streamlined form a list of statutory management requirements (SMRs) and standards of good agricultural and environmental conditions of land (GAECs). These basic standards should better take into account the environmental and climate challenges and the new environmental architecture of the CAP, thus delivering a higher level of environmental and climate ambition as the Commission announced in its Communications on the ‘Future of Food and Farming’ and the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). Conditionality aims to contribute to the development of sustainable agriculture through better awareness on the part of beneficiaries of the need to respect those basic standards. It also aims to make the CAP more compatible with the expectations of society through improving consistency of the policy with the environment, public health, animal health, plant health and animal welfare objectives. Conditionality should form an integral part of the environmental architecture of the CAP, as part of the baseline for more ambitious environmental and climate commitments, and should be comprehensively applied across the Union. Member States shall ensure an adequate level of support for the achievement of these obligations and standards. For those farmers who do not comply with those requirements, Member States should ensure that proportionate, effective and dissuasive penalties are appliedin place only to be applied following a yellow card system in accordance with [the HZR Regulation].
Amendment 662 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) Member States should setdesignate farm advisory services for the purpose of improving the sustainable management and overall performance of agricultural holdings and rural businesses, covering economic, environmental and social dimensions, and to identify the necessary improvements as regards all measures at farm level provided for in the CAP Strategic Plans. These farm advisory services should be offered free of charge as part of specific schemes, and help farmers and other beneficiaries of CAP support to become more aware of the relationship between farm management and land management on the one hand, and certain standards, requirements and information, including environmental and climate ones, on the other hand. The list of the latter includes standards applying to or necessary for farmers and other CAP beneficiaries and set in the CAP Strategic Plan, as well as those stemming from the legislation on water, on the sustainable use of pesticides, as well as the initiatives to combat antimicrobial resistance and the management of risks. In order to enhance the quality and effectiveness of the advice, Member States should integrate advisors within the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS), in order to be able to deliver up-to-date technological and scientific information developed by research and innovation.
Amendment 682 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) In order to ensure a fairer distribution of income support, the amounts of direct payments above a certain ceiling should be reduced and the product should either be used for decoupled direct payments and in priority for the complementary redistributive income support for sustainability, or be transferred to the EAFRD. In order to avoid negative effects on employment, labour should be taken into account when applying the mechanism.
Amendment 694 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26
Recital 26
(26) Union legislation should provide that Member States should set requirements in terms of minimum area for receiving decoupled payments in their CAP Strategic Plan. Such requirements should relate to the need to avoid the excessive administrative burden caused by managing numerous payments of small amounts and to that of ensuring an effective contribution of the support to the objectives of the CAP to which the decoupled direct payments contribute. In order to guarantee a minimum level of agricultural income support for all genuine farmers, as well as to comply with the Treaty objective in ensuring a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, an annual area-based decoupled payment should be established as the type of intervention ‘basic income support for sustainability’. In order to enhance better targeting of this support, the payment amounts can be differentiated, by groups of territories, based on socio-economic and/or agronomic conditions. In view of avoiding disruptive effects for farmers' income, Member States may choose to implement the basic income support for sustainability based on payment entitlements. In this case, the value of payment entitlements before any further convergence should be proportional to their value as established under the basic payment schemes pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013, taking also into account the payments for agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment. Member States should also achieve further convergence in order to continue to move progressively away fromIn order to guarantee a minimum level of agricultural income support for all genuine farmers, as well as to comply with the Treaty objective in ensuring a fair standard of living for the agricultural community, an annual area-based decoupled payment should be established as the type of intervention ‘basic income support for sustainability’. Member States should achieve full convergence by 2023 in order to end historical values.
Amendment 705 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 a (new)
Recital 26 a (new)
(26 a) Income support through the CAP is a major contributor to the stability and sustainability of many small and family farms across Europe, and although expectations on farmers have increased, monetary benefits have not. The CAP's overall share of the EU is decreasing, while market crises in the sector and a falling number of active famers continue to threaten the survival of the sector. The family farm model should be protected as a General Objective of the CAP and through the Member State Strategic Plans, giving proper place to the vital role this model has in contributing to the social fabric of rural life, and the provision of a way of life for many rural dwellers. Family farms contribute to sustainable food production, the preservation of natural resources, diversification needs and ad ensuring food security. The first farmers to suffer under the immense pressures of globalisation will be those that pursue the small family farm model. Such a situation would be an obvious failure to meet the objectives of the CAP and would undermine the argument for support of the CAP in future. Therefore the CAP Strategic Plans should pursue through their specific objectives keeping the protection of this farming model.
Amendment 713 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) When providing decoupled direct support based on the system of payment entitlements, Member States should continue to manage a national reserve or reserves per group of territories. Such reserves should be used, as a matter of priority, for young farmers and farmers commencing their agricultural activity. Rules on theits use and transfers of payment entitlements are also necessary in order to guarantee a smooth functioning of the system.
Amendment 722 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Small farms remain a cornerstone of Union agriculture as they play a vital role in supporting rural employment and contribute to territorial development. In order to promote a more balanced distribution of support and to reduce administrative burden for beneficiaries of small amounts, Member States should have the option of offering to small farmers the possibility of replacing the other direct payments by providing a round somesimplified payment for small farmers.
Amendment 723 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Small farms remain a cornerstone of Union agriculture as they play a vital role in supporting rural employment and contribute to territorial development. In order to promote a more balanced distribution of support and to reduce administrative burden for beneficiaries of small amounts, Member States should have the option of offering to small farmers the possibility of replacing the other direct payments by providing a round someum payment for small farmers.
Amendment 734 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30
Recital 30
(30) The creation and development of new economic activity in the agricultural sector by young farmers is financially challenging and constitutes an element that should be considered in the allocation and targeting of direct payments. This development is essential for the competitivenesssustainability of the agricultural sector in the Union and, for this reason, Member States may establish a complementary income support for young farmers. This type of interventions should be established to provide young farmers with an additional income support after the initial setting up. Low incomes across the farming sector must also be tackled to improve viability of the occupation for new entrants.
Amendment 755 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) The CAP should ensure that Member States increase the environmental delivery by respecting local needs and farmers' actual circumstances. Member States should under direct payments in the CAP Strategic Plan set up Eco-schemes voluntary for farmers, which should be fully coordinated with the other relevant interventions. They should be defined by the Member States as a payment granted either for incentivising and remunerating the provision of public goods by agricultural practices beneficial to the environment and climate or as a compensation for the introduction of these practices. In both cases they should aim at enhancing the environmental and climate performance of the CAP and should consequently be conceived to go beyond the mandatory requirements already prescribed by the system of conditionality. Member States may decide to set up eco- schemes for agricultural practices such as the enhanced management of permanent pastures and landscape features, and organic farming. These schemes may also includeshould be regarded as ‘entry-level schemes’ which may be a condition for taking up more ambitious rural development commitments.
Amendment 811 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) Forestry measures should contribute to the implementation of the Union Forest Strategy, and be based on Member States' national or sub-national forest programs or equivalent instruments, which should build on the commitments stemming from the Regulation on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emission and removals from land use, land use energy and forestry [LULUCF Regulation] and those made in the Ministerial Conferences on the Protection of Forests in Europe. Interventions should be based on forest management plans or equivalent instruments and may comprise forest area development and sustainable management of forests, including the afforestation of land and the creation and regeneration of agroforestry systems; the protection, restoration and improvement of forest resources, taking into account adaptation needs; measures to encourage the plantation of native species ensuring biodiversity in forests; investments to guarantee and enhance forest conservation and resilience, and the provision of forest ecosystem and climate services; and measures and investments in support of the renewable energy and bio-economy.
Amendment 835 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The objectives of the CAP should also be pursued through support for investments, productive as well as non- productive, on farm as well as off-farm. Such investments may concern, inter alia, infrastructures related to the development, modernisation or adaptation to climate change of agriculture and forestry, including access to farm and forest land, land consolidation and improvementsaving of energy and water, agro-forestry practices and, the supply and saving of energy and waterprevention of animal sickness and disease, and the movement towards more sustainable agricultural practices. In order to better ensure the consistency of the CAP Strategic Plans with Union objectives, as well as a level playing field between Member States, a negative list of investment topics is included in this Regulation.
Amendment 844 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 42
Recital 42
(42) In the light of the need to fill the investment gap in the Union agricultural sector and improve access to financial instrumentse for priority groups, notably young farmers and new entrants with higher risk profiles, use of the InvestEU guarantee and combination of grants and financial instrumenta combination of grants and other public funding streams should be encouraged. Since the use of financial instruments across Member States varies considerably as a result of differences in terms of access to finance, banking sector development, presence of risk capital, familiarity of public administrations and potential range of beneficiaries, Member States should establish in the CAP Strategic Plan appropriatmust ensure farmers have a number of options available to them to avoid resorting to financial instruments. In a situation where tfargets, beneficiaries andmers use financial instruments, they must be given preferential conditions, and other possiblebe afforded greater leeway in eligibility rules.
Amendment 858 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
(43) Young farmers and new entrants still face significant barriers regarding access to land, high prices and access to credit. Their businesses are more threatened by price volatility (for both inputs and produce) and their needs in terms of training in entrepreneurial and risk management skills are high. It is therefore essential to continue the support for the setting up of new businesses and new farms. Member States should provide for a strategic approach and identify a clear and coherent set of interventions for generational renewal under the specific objective dedicated to this issue. To this aim, Member States may set in their CAP Strategic Plans preferential conditions for financial instrumentprogrammes for young farmers and new entrants, incentives for farm partnership models, and should include in their CAP Strategic Plan the ring-fencing of at least an amount corresponding to 23% of the annual direct payments' envelope. An increase of the maximum amount of aid for the installation of young farmers and rural business start-ups, up to EUR 100.000, which can be accessed also through or in combination with financial instrument form of support, should be established.
Amendment 875 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In the light of the need to ensure appropriate risk management tools, insurance premia and mutual funds should be maintained, financed by the EAFRD, Member States should be encouraged to establish low cost national insurance schemes. The category of mutual funds encompasses both those linked to production losses, and the general and sector-specific income stabilisation tools, linked to income losses.
Amendment 887 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 45
Recital 45
(45) Support should enable the establishment and implementation of cooperation between at least two entities in view of achieving CAP objectives. Support can entail all aspects of such cooperation, such as the setting up of quality schemes; collective environmental and climate action; the promotion of short supply chain and local markets; pilot projects; Operational Group projects within the EIP for agricultural productivity and sustainability local development projects, Smart Villages, buyers' clubs and machinery rings; farm partnerships; forest management plans; development of agro- forestry systems; networks and clusters; social farming; community supported agriculture; actions within the scope of LEADER; and the setting up of producer groups and producer organisations, as well as other forms of cooperation deemed necessary to achieve the specific objectives of the CAP.
Amendment 957 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) To enhance the Union added value and to preserve a functioningpreserve equal opportunities and conditions between farmers operating in different parts of the agricultural internal market, as well as to pursue the above-mentioned general and specific objectives, Member States should not take decisions according to this Regulation in isolation but in the framework of a structured process that should materialise in a CAP Strategic Plan. Union top-downdraw up CAP Strategic Plan through a structured process. Union-level framework rules should lay down the specific EU- wide objectives of the CAP, the main types of interventions, the performance framework and the governance structure. Such a distribution of tasks is aimed at ensuring full correspondence between financial resources invested and results achieved.
Amendment 982 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) In order to ensure that the setting of targets by Member States and that the design of interventions is appropriate and maximises the contribution to the objectives of the CAP, as well as to ensure schemes meet the needs of farmers, it is necessary to base the strategy of the CAP Strategic Plans on a prior national analysis of the local contexts and an assessment of needs in relation to the objectives of the CAP.
Amendment 994 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 58 a (new)
Recital 58 a (new)
(58 a) the existing knowledge base, in terms of the quantity and quality of available information varies for the purpose of monitoring the specific objectives set in Article 6 of this directive, in particular the knowledge base of biodiversity. The Commission should therefore identify areas where knowledge gaps exist and provide a common response to knowledge-related and monitoring obstacles related to article 6.
Amendment 1008 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Considering the importance of the general objective of modernising the agricultural sector in a way that promotes sustainable agriculture and incomes for farmers, and in view of its crosscutting nature, it is appropriate that Member States include in their CAP Strategic Plan a dedicated description of the contribution that such a Plan will make to this objective.
Amendment 1019 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 64
Recital 64
(64) In view of the concerns related to administrative burden under shared management, simplification for farmers and producers should also be subject to a specific attention in the CAP Strategic Plan.
Amendment 1020 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Considering that it is not appropriate forthe Commission does not have the Ccommissionpetence to approve or amend information which can be considered as background, or historical, or which is under the responsibility of the Member States, some information should be provided as Annexes to the CAP Strategic Plan.
Amendment 1022 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66
Recital 66
(66) Pursuant to paragraph 22 and 23 of the Inter-institutional agreement for Better Law-Making of 13 April 2016, there is a need to evaluate the Funds on the basis of information collected through specific monitoring requirements, while avoiding overregulation and administrative burdens, ion particular onboth Member States and farmers. These requirements, where appropriate, can include measurable indicators, as a basis for evaluating the effects of the Funds on the ground.
Amendment 1031 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 69
Recital 69
(69) A national Managing Authority should be responsible for the management and implementation of each CAP Strategic Plan. Its duties should be specified in this Regulation. The Managing Authority should be able to delegate part of its duties while retaining responsibility for the efficiency and correctness of management. Member States should ensure that in the Management and Implementation of CAP Strategic Plans, the financial interests of the Union are protected, in accordance with [Regulation (EU, Euratom) X] of the European Parliament and the Council [the new Financial Regulation] and Regulation (EU) X of the European Parliament and the Council [the new Horizontal Regulation].
Amendment 1055 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 80
Recital 80
(80) Farmers are increasingly facing risks of income volatility, partly because of increased market exposure, pmartly because of extreme weather eventsket concentration in the food processing sector, extreme weather events brought about by climate change, and frequent sanitary and phytosanitary crises affecting the Union livestock and agronomic assets. To alleviate the effects of income volatility by encouraging farmers to make savings in good years to cope with bad years, national tax measures whereby the income tax base applied to farmers is calculated on the basis of a multiannual period should be exempted from the application of the State aid rules.
Amendment 1069 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 87
Recital 87
(87) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation and to avoid unfair competition or discrimination between farmers, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission as regards the fixing of reference areas for the support for oilseeds, rules for the authorisation of land and varieties for the purposes of the crop- specific payment for cotton and related notifications, the calculation of the reduction where the eligible area of cotton exceeds the base area, the Union financial assistance for distillation of by-products of wine-making, the annual breakdown by Member State of the total amount of Union support for types of interventions for rural development, rules on the presentation of the elements to be included in the CAP Strategic Plan, rules on the procedure and time limits for the approval of CAP Strategic Plans and the submission and approval of requests for amendment of CAP Strategic Plans, uniform conditions for the application of the information and publicity requirements relating to the possibilities offered by the CAP Strategic Plans, rules relating to the performance, monitoring and evaluation framework, rules for the presentation of the content of the annual performance report, rules on the information to be sent by the Member States for the performance assessment by the Commission and rules on the data needs and synergies between potential data sources, and arrangements to ensure a consistent approach for determining the attribution of the performance bonus to Member Statesfor the return of the funds linked to Member State good performance. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.22 _________________ 22 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by the Member States of the Commission's exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 1070 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 88
Recital 88
(88) The Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementingdelegated acts where, in duly justified cases relating to solving specific problems while ensuring the continuity of the direct payments system in the case of extraordinary circumstances, imperative grounds of urgency so require. Moreover, in order to solve urgent problems occurring in one or more Member States while ensuring the continuity of the direct payments system, the Commission should adopt immediately applicable implementing acts where, in duly justified cases, extraordinary circumstances affect the granting of support and jeopardise the effective implementation of the payments under the support schemes listed in this Regulation.
Amendment 1082 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) coordination and governance as well as monitoring, reporting and, evaluation and appeals procedures.
Amendment 1141 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) 'agricultural activity' shall be defined in a way that it includes both the production of agricultural productgoods listed in Annex I to the TFEU, in addition to the production of public goods and eco system services, including cotton and short rotation coppice, and maintenance of the agricultural area in a state which makes it suitable for grazing or cultivation, without preparatory action going beyond usual agricultural methods and machineries;
Amendment 1157 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part
(b) 'agricultural area' shall be defined in a way that it is composed of arable land, permanent crops and, permanent grassland and agro-forestry. The terms 'arable land', 'permanent crops' and 'permanent grassland' shall be further specified by Member States within the following framework:
Amendment 1199 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
(i) that, during the year for which support is requested, is used for an agricultural activity or, where the area is also used for non-agricultural activities, is predominantly used for agricultural activities, and which is at the farmer's disposal. Where duly justified for environmental reasons, eligible hectares may also include certain areas used for agricultural activities only every second year or land habitats on which the vegetation is legally protected and agricultural activity restricted.
Amendment 1240 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) 'genuine farmers' shall be defined in a way to ensure that no support is granted to those whose agricultural activity forms only an insignificant part of their overall economic activities or whose principal business activity is not agricultural, while not precluding from support pluri-active farmers. The definition shall allow to determine which farmers are not considered genuine farmers, based on conditions such as income tests, labour inputs on the farm, company objec, while not precluding from support pluri-active farmers and taking into consideration the important role played farmers on mountain and other marginal land. Member States shall establish a negative list of natural or legal persons, or a group of natural or legal persons, who shall not benefit aund/or inclusion in registerser this Regulation. The definition must preserve the family farm model of the European Union.
Amendment 1267 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e – point ii
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point e – point ii
(ii) the conditions for being 'head of the holding' or a member of a farm partnership, nationally defined;
Amendment 1318 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) to ensure the survival of the small, family farm model and protect farming incomes;
Amendment 1329 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) to strengthen the socio-economic fabric of rural areas and tackle rural depopulation.
Amendment 1348 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) support viable farm income and, eradicate rural poverty, land abandonment and create resilience across the Union to enhance food security;
Amendment 1381 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) enhance market orientation and increase competitiveness, including greater focus on research, technology and digitalisationthe contribution research, technology and digitalisation can make towards sustainable models of farming;
Amendment 1407 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) foster sustainable development and efficient management of natural resources such as water, soil and air, whilst reducing chemical dependency where possible;
Amendment 1420 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) contribute to the protection of and restoration of biodiversity, including agrobiodiversity, enhance ecosystem services and preserve habitats and landscapes;
Amendment 1429 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) attract young and new farmers, and facilitate business development and job creation in rural areas;
Amendment 1447 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) promote employment, growth, social inclusion, the participation of women in the rural economy and local development in rural areas, including bio- economy, agro-forestry and sustainable forestry;
Amendment 1503 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
2. When pursuing the specific objectives, Member States shall ensure simplification and performance of the CAP supporta reduction of the administrative burden for farmers.
Amendment 1631 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that all agricultural areas including land which is no longer used for production purposes, is maintained in good agricultural and environmental condition. Member States shall define in consultation with stakeholders, at national or regional level, minimum standards for beneficiaries for good agricultural and environmental condition of land in line with the main objective of the standards as referred to in Annex III, taking into account the specific characteristics of the areas concerned, including soil and climatic condition, existing farming systems, land use, crop rotation, traditional farming practices, and farm structures.
Amendment 1671 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 12 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall establishnsure a system for providing the Farm Sustainability Tool for Nutrients referred to in Annex III is in place, with the minimum content and functionalities defined therein, to beneficiaries, who shall use the Tool.
Amendment 1712 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall include in the CAP Strategic Plan a system providing free services for advising farmers and other beneficiaries of CAP support on land management and farm management ('farm advisory services').
Amendment 1715 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall ensure a high quality of farm advisory services throughout their territories, including in remote regions and on offshore islands.
Amendment 1723 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The farm advisory services shall cover economic, environmental and social dimensions and deliver up to date technological and scientific information developed by research and innovation in addition. They shall be cognisant of traditional farming practices and foster and incorporate these where appropriate. They shall be integrated within the interrelated services of farm advisors, researchers, farmer organisations and other relevant stakeholders that form the Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems (AKIS).
Amendment 1744 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
(a a) information related to results- based monitoring, including on the measurement of actions to achieve objectives in the CAP Strategic Plans and administrative requirements expected of farmers to provide proof of actions taken;
Amendment 1765 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 4 – point f a (new)
(f a) best practice agro-forestry methods on both agricultural and forest lands;
Amendment 1838 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall reduce theintroduce an upper limit to cap the maximum amount of direct payments to be granted to a farmer pursuant to this Chapter for a given calendar year exceedingat EUR 60 000 as follows:
Amendment 1852 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1874 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1882 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 1910 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) by 100 % for the amount exceeding EUR 1060 000.
Amendment 1913 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(d a) The stated upper limited cap referred to in paragraph 1 may be exceeded up to and until EUR 70 000 in order to take account of payments arising from the participation in a Pillar I Eco Scheme.
Amendment 1921 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1936 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 1945 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 1964 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1988 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
The estimated product of the reduction of payments shall primarily be used to contribute to the financing of the complementary redistributive income support for sustainability and thereafter of other interventions belonging to decoupled direct payments.
Amendment 1990 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Member States shall take effective and proportionate measures to avoid the creation of artificial conditions to circumvent the upper limit.
Amendment 2057 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2080 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2083 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 3
Article 20 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall, by claim year 20261 at the latest, set a maximum level for the value of payment entitlements for the Member State or for each group of territories defined in accordance with Article 18(2).
Amendment 2086 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 4
Article 20 – paragraph 4
4. Where the value of payment entitlements as determined in accordance with paragraph 1 is not uniform within a Member State or within a group of territories as defined in accordance with Article 18(2), Member States shall ensure a convergence of the value of payment entitlements towards a uniform unit value by claim year 20263 at the latest.
Amendment 2094 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 5
Article 20 – paragraph 5
5. For the purposes of paragraph 4, Member States shall ensure that, for claim year 20262 at the latest, all payment entitlements have a value of at least 75% of the average planned unit amount for the basic income support for claim year 20263 as laid down in the CAP Strategic Plan transmitted in accordance with Article 106 (1) for the Member State or for the territories as defined in accordance with Article 18(2).
Amendment 2102 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall finance the increases in the value of payment entitlements needed to comply with paragraphs 4 and 5 by using any possible product resulting from the application of paragraph 3, and, where necessary, by reducing the difference between the unit value of payment entitlements determined in accordance with paragraph 1 and the average planned unit amount for the basic income support for claim year 20263 as laid down in the CAP Strategic Plan transmitted in accordance with Article 106 (1) for the Member State or for the territories as defined in accordance with Article 18(2).
Amendment 2104 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 20 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Member States may decide to apply the reduction to all or part of the payment entitlements with a value determined in accordance with paragraph 1 exceeding the average planned unit amount for the basic income support for claim year 20261, as laid down in the CAP Strategic Plan transmitted in accordance with Article 106 (1) for the Member State or for the territories as defined in accordance with Article 18(2).
Amendment 2107 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 7
Article 20 – paragraph 7
7. The reductions referred to in paragraph 6 shall be based on objective and non-discriminatory criteria. Without prejudice to the minimum set in accordance with paragraph 5, such criteria may include the fixing of a maximum decrease that may not be lower than 30%.
Amendment 2116 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that payment entitlements to a payment, including in the case of actual or anticipated inheritance, be activated only in the Member State or within the group of territories defined in accordance with Article 18(2) where they were allocated.
Amendment 2119 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Article 22 – paragraph 2
Amendment 2123 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
4. Member States shall use their reserve as a matter of priority to allocate payment entitlements to the following farmers:
Amendment 2135 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 5
Article 22 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall allocate payment entitlements to, or increase the value of the existing payment entitlements of genuine farmers who are entitled by virtue of a definitive court ruling or by virtue of a definitive administrative act of the competent authority of a Member State. Member States shall ensure that those genuine farmers receive the number and value of payment entitlements established in that ruling or act at a date to be fixed by the Member State.
Amendment 2140 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 8
Article 22 – paragraph 8
8. Member States shall fix the value of new payment entitlements allocated from the reserve at the national average value of payment entitlements in the year of allocation or at the average value of payment entitlements for each group of territories defined in accordance with Article 18(2) in the year of allocation.
Amendment 2141 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 9
Article 22 – paragraph 9
9. Member States may decide to increase the value of the existing payment entitlements up to the national average value in the year of allocation or up to the average value for each group of territories defined in accordance with Article 18(2).
Amendment 2145 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24
Article 24
Amendment 2154 #
2018/0216(COD)
Amendment 2166 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Article 25 – paragraph 1
Member States may grant payments to small farmers as deby way of a simplifined by Member States by wayscheme for small farmers requesting support of a rmound sumts up to EUR 1 000 , replacing direct payments under this Section and Section 3 of this Chapter. Member States shall design the corresponding intervention in the CAP Strategic Plan as optional for the farmers.
Amendment 2228 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 4
Article 26 – paragraph 4
4. The amount per hectare planned for a given claim year shall not exceed the national average amount of direct payments per hectare for that claim yearMember States must ensure beneficiaries can claim the higher support rate, of the redistributive payment, for at least the first 15 hectares declared.
Amendment 2261 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
2. As part of their obligations to contribute to the specific objective ‘attract young farmers and facilitate business development in rural areas’ set out in point (g) of Article 6(1) and to dedicate at least 23% of their allocations for direct payments to this objective in accordance with Article 86(4), Member States may provide a complementary income support for young farmers who have newly set up for the first time and who are entitled to a payment under the basic income support as referred to in Article 17.
Amendment 2288 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall provide support for voluntary schemes for the climate and the environment (‘eco- schemes’) under the conditions set out in this Article and as further specified in their CAP Strategic Plans. Beneficiaries of basic income support shall, as a condition, participate in at least 1 eco scheme under the first pillar of the CAP, in order to be eligible for basic income support. These schemes shall be entry-level.
Amendment 2311 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2
Article 28 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall support under this type of intervention genuine farmers who make commitments to observe, on eligible hectares, agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment. Areas designated pursuant to Directives 92/43/ EEC and 2009/147/EC shall automatically be regarded as eligible for the scheme.
Amendment 2620 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 42 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) short supply chains, planning of production, adjusting production to demand, particularly in terms of quality and quantity, optimisation of production costs and returns on investments and stabilising producer prices; those objectives relate to the specific objectives set out in points (a), (b), (c) and (i) of Article 6(1);
Amendment 2691 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 43 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) integrated production, promoting, developing and implementing methods of production respectful to the environment, suitable use of natural resources in particular water and soil;
Amendment 2902 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) measures to improve the pollination of honeybees and other wild pollinators.
Amendment 3137 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
Article 60 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i
(i) soil conservation, including the enhancement of soil carbon sequestration capabilities;
Amendment 3278 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) installation of young and new farmers and rural business start-up;
Amendment 3284 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) risk prevention, mitigation and management tools;
Amendment 3317 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 3
Article 65 – paragraph 3
3. Member States mayshall make support under this type of interventions available throughout their territories, in accordance with their national, regional or local specific needs.
Amendment 3457 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 1
Article 67 – paragraph 1
1. Member States mayshall grant payments for area-specific disadvantages imposed by requirements resulting from the implementation of Directives 92/43/EEC and 2009/147/EC or Directive 2000/60/EC under the conditions set out in this Article and as further specified in their CAP Strategic Plans with the view of contributing to the achievement of the specific objectives set out in Article 6(1).
Amendment 3465 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 67 – paragraph 2
Article 67 – paragraph 2
2. These payments mayshall be granted to farmers, forest holders and other land managers in respect of areas with disadvantages referred to in paragraph 1.
Amendment 3480 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 2
Article 68 – paragraph 2
2. Member States may only grant support under this type of interventions for tangible and/or intangible investments, which contribute to achieving the specific objectives set out in Article 6 and are deemed not in direct contradiction to the European Union achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals . Support to the forestry sector shall be based on a forest management plan or equivalent instrument.
Amendment 3492 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) purchase of land with the exception of land purchase for environmental conservation or land purchased by young farmers through the use of financial instruments of land within the context of agri-environmental projects tied to the local development strategy or land purchased by young farmers in accordance with the rules set down by Member States;
Amendment 3544 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 68 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) Investments to fund further intensification of activities in contravention with the stated environmental objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 3566 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point a
(a) afforestation, agro-forestry and non-productive investments linked to the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1);
Amendment 3585 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point c
Article 68 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point c
(c) investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry potential following fires, floods and other natural disasters or catastrophic events and investments in appropriate preventive actions in forests and in the rural environment.
Amendment 3712 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 70 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) financial contributions to measures which increase farm resilience, including but not limited to, crop diversification strategies and agroforestry systems;
Amendment 3745 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 5
Article 70 – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for covering losses of at least 2015% of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry.
Amendment 3756 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 70 – paragraph 6
Article 70 – paragraph 6
6. Member Sates shall limit the support to the maximum rate of 780% of the eligible costs.
Amendment 3833 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 73 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Managing Authority of the CAP Strategic Plan or other designated intermediate bodies shall define selection criteria for interventions relating to the following types of interventions: investments, installation of young farmers, new farmers and rural business start-up, cooperation, knowledge exchange and information, and, specific measures to support women in rural areas, after consultation of the Monitoring Committee referred to in Article 111. Selection criteria shall aim to ensure equal treatment of applicants, better use of financial resources and targeting of the support in accordance with the purpose of the interventions. Beneficiaries will be selected applying effective economic, social and environmental criteria.
Amendment 4287 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 94 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 94 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) Non-Governmental Organisations and other relevant bodies representing civil society and where relevant bodies responsible for promoting social inclusion, fundamental rights, gender equality and non-discrimination.
Amendment 4293 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 94 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 94 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Member States shall fully involve those partners in the preparation of the CAP Strategic Plans, in particular in relation to those elements concerning the environment, social inclusion and tackling poverty in rural areas.
Amendment 4322 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 95 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 95 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) Annex VI on the impact assessment on socio-economic factors.
Amendment 4328 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 96 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 96 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) for the specific objective of supporting viable farm income and resilience set out in point (a) of Article 6(1), an assessment of needs in relation to risk management; , including the promotion of diversification;
Amendment 4331 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 96 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 96 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) where applicable, an analysis of the specific needs of all rural areas, vulnerable geographical areas, such as peripheral areas, offshore islands and the outermost regions;
Amendment 4442 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 103 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 103 – paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Annex VI Annex V to the CAP Strategic Plan referred to in point (e) Article 95(2) shall contain the following: (a) an analysis of urban versus rural average incomes within the Member State; (b) an analysis of the value of CAP funds to rural incomes and social conditions; (c) the threats of rural abandonment to the socio-economic situation of rural communities.
Amendment 4450 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 104 – paragraph 1
Article 104 – paragraph 1
Amendment 4481 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 106 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The Member State shall provide to the Commission all necessary additional information and, where appropriate, revise the proposed plan. Following a dialogue between the Member State and the Commission, revisions may be proposed where appropriate.
Amendment 4613 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 111 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 111 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The Member State shall decide the composition of the Monitoring Committee and shall ensure a balanced representation of the relevant public authorities and intermediate bodies and of representatives of the partners referred to in Article 94(3). Farming representative bodies shall be given a right to seek membership of the Committee.
Amendment 4627 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 111 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 111 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) issues relating to the quality and quantity of data and indicators for monitoring;
Amendment 4656 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 113 – paragraph 1
Article 113 – paragraph 1
1. Each Member State shall establish a national Common Agricultural Policy Network (national CAP network) for the networking of organisations and administrations, advisors, researchers representatives of producer organisations and other innovation actors in the field of agriculture and rural development at national level at the latest 12 months after the approval by the Commission of the CAP Strategic Plan.
Amendment 4725 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 120 – paragraph 1
Article 120 – paragraph 1
The Commission shall adopt implementingdelegated acts on the content of the performance framework. Such acts shall include the list of context indicators, other indicators needed for the appropriate monitoring and evaluation of the policy, the methods for the calculation of indicators and the necessary provisions to guarantee accuracy and reliability of the data collected by Member States. Those implementingdelegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 1398(2).
Amendment 4818 #
Amendment 4823 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 123 – paragraph 1
Article 123 – paragraph 1
1. A performance bonus may be attributed to Member States in the year 2026 to reward satisfactory performancecentage of funds will be withheld, in the year 2026, from the Member State allocation to encourage the meeting of targets in relation to the environmental and climate targets provided that the Member State concerned has met the condition, as set out in Article 124(1).
Amendment 4827 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 123 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 123 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
The performance bonus shacentage withheld will be equal to 5% of the amount per Member State for financial year 2027 as set out in Annex IX.
Amendment 4830 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 123 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 123 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Resources transferred between the EAGF and the EAFRD under Articles 15 and 90 are excluded for the purpose of calculating the performance bonussum to be withheld.
Amendment 4850 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 124 – paragraph 1
Article 124 – paragraph 1
1. Based on the performance review of the year 2026, the performance bonufunds withheld from a Member State’s allocation following the second paragraph of Article 123 shall be attributed to this Member State if the result indicators applied to the specific environmental- and climate-related objectives set out in points (d), (e) and (f) of Article 6(1) in its CAP Strategic Plan have achieved at least 90% of their target value for the year 2025.
Amendment 4855 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 124 – paragraph 3
Article 124 – paragraph 3
3. Where the target values referred to in paragraph 1 are achieved, the amount of the performance bonufunds shall be granted by the Commission to the Member States concerned and considered to be definitely allocated to financial year 2027 on the basis of the decision referred to in paragraph 2.
Amendment 4858 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 124 – paragraph 4
Article 124 – paragraph 4
4. Where the target values referred to in paragraph 1 are not achieved, the commitments for financial year 2027, relating to the amount of the performance bonus offunds withheld from the Member States concerned, shall not be granted by the Commission.
Amendment 4861 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 124 – paragraph 5
Article 124 – paragraph 5
5. When attributconsidering twhe performance bonuther to release the withheld funds, the Commission may take into consideration cases of force majeure and serious socio- economic crises impeding the achievement of the relevant milestones.
Amendment 4899 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 131 – paragraph 3
Article 131 – paragraph 3
3. By way of derogation from paragraph 2, Articles 107, 108 and 109 TFEU shall apply to support provided for an operation falling both within and outside the scope of Article 42 TFEU, save where support for working capital is provided through a financial instrument or other approved public finance programme.
Amendment 4909 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 134 – paragraph 1
Article 134 – paragraph 1
1. In order to resolve specific problems, the Commission shall adopt implementingdelegated acts which are both necessary and justifiable in an emergency. Such implementingdelegated acts may derogate from provisions of this Regulation, to the extent and for such a period as is strictly necessary. Those implementingdelegated acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 1398(2).
Amendment 5074 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Impact indicators – I.26 a (new)
Annex I – Impact indicators – I.26 a (new)
I.26a Sustainable use of veterinary products in livestock: sales/use in food producing animals
Amendment 5076 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – Result indicators – R.36 a (new)
Annex I – Result indicators – R.36 a (new)
I.36a Sustainable veterinary product use: Share of livestock units concerned by supported actions to limit the use of veterinary products (prevention/reduction) in order to reduce risks and impacts of these products
Amendment 5106 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 2
Annex III – GAEC 2
Amendment 5138 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 6
Annex III – GAEC 6
Tillage management reducing loss of soil organic matter, the risk of soil degradation, including slope consideration Minimum land management reflecting site specific conditions to limit erosion and preserve carbon stock
Amendment 5143 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 7
Annex III – GAEC 7
No bare soil in most sensitive period(s) Protection of soils in winter, with the exception of grazing in situ forage crops and supplementary feeding supporting year round grazing systems Protection of soils in winter, whilst allowing for traditional practices
Amendment 5179 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 9 – Requirements and standards – indent 1
Annex III – GAEC 9 – Requirements and standards – indent 1
- Minimum share of agricultural area devoted to non-productive featurebiodiverse features, water features, pond and streams or areas
Amendment 5185 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 9 – Requirements and standards – indent 4
Annex III – GAEC 9 – Requirements and standards – indent 4
Amendment 5202 #
2018/0216(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – GAEC 10 – Requirements and standards
Annex III – GAEC 10 – Requirements and standards
Amendment 70 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point ii
(ii) developing a sustainable, climate resilient, intelligent, secure and intermodal TEN-T, with a particular emphasis on creating an EU transport network that creates links between rural hubs rather than merely routes to capitals or large urban centres;
Amendment 79 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – point i
(i) enhancing the effectiveness of labour markets and access to quality employment through developing social innovation and infrastructure, in particular for women in rural areas;
Amendment 83 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point d – point ii
(ii) improving access to inclusive and quality services in education, preschool, training and life long learning through developing infrastructure;
Amendment 94 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – introductory part
(e) 'a Europe closer to citizens by fostering the sustainable and integrated development of urban, rural, island and coastal areas and local initiatives' ('PO 5') by:
Amendment 98 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e – point ii
(ii) fostering the integrated social, economic and environmental local development, cultural heritage and security, includingespecially for rural, island and coastal areas also through community-led local development.
Amendment 106 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Member States of groups 1, 2 and 3 shall allocate at least 1% of their total ERDF resources to its islands that have a gross national income ratio below 75% of the Member State average and which support a permanent population;
Amendment 29 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Whereas on 8 October 2018, the IPCC published its special report entitled 'Global Warming of 1.5°C' which warned of the extreme risks of reaching global warming of 2°C above pre-industrial levels and called for the limiting of global warming to 1.5ºC, noting this would require "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society";
Amendment 30 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 b (new)
Recital 2 b (new)
Amendment 89 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 a (new)
(23a) ‘low-carbon'Paris Agreement-aligned benchmark’' means a benchmark where the underlying assets, for the purporoadly diversified benchmark that seeks to ensure a representation of a given market compatible with a decarbonisation pathway basesd of point 1(b)(ii) of this paragraph, are selected so that the resulting benchmark portfolio has less carbon a climate scenario associated with at least a 75% probability to limit global warming to well below 2°C at the end of the 21st century, as per the objectives of the Paris Agreement (bearing in emissions when compared to the assets that comprise a standard capital- weighted benchmark and which is constructed in accordance with the standards laid down in the delegated acts referred to in Article 19a(2); nd the possible revision of the target of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C by the end of the 21st century based on the evidence presented in the IPCC's October special report), and which is constructed in accordance with the standards laid down in the delegated acts referred to in Article 19a(2). Such benchmarks over-weigh the economic activities contributing to accelerate the decarbonisation of the given market, and under-weigh the economic activities meant to decline in the decarbonised market, in line with the proportions set in the selected decarbonisation pathway;
Amendment 95 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b (new)
Amendment 102 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 b a (new)
(23ba) ‘Climate transition benchmark’ means a benchmark where the underlying assets are selected on the basis that they have taken a clear, public, measurable and time-bound science-based target and the related detailed implementation plan at asset level to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions in alignment with a decarbonisation pathway based on a climate scenario associated with at least a 75% probability to limit global warming to well below 2°C at the end of the 21st century, as per the objectives of the Paris Agreement, (bearing in mind the possible revision of the target of the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to 1.5°C by the end of the 21st century based on the evidence presented in the IPCC's October special report) and annually report on the progress made towards achieving the target.
Amendment 110 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
(d) an explanation of how the key elements of the methodology laid down in point (a) reflect environmental, social or governance (‘ESG’) factors for each benchmark or family of benchmarks which pursue or take into account ESG objectives;;
Amendment 111 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(aa) “(da) an explanation of how the benchmark or family of benchmarks impact the climate, notably their degree of alignment with the objectives of the Paris Agreement;”;
Amendment 118 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – title
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – title
Amendment 128 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 1
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 1
(1) The requirements laid down in Annex III shall apply to the provision of, and contribution to, low-carbon or positive carbon impact Paris-aligned or climate transition benchmarks in addition to, or as a substitute for, the requirements of Title II, III and IV.
Amendment 139 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c
(c) the method for the calculation of carbon emissions and science-based methodological framework and decarbonisation pathway selected for the benchmark; the related metrics and thresholds used to select, weight and exclude the economic activities in line with the decarbon isavings associated with the underlying assets.tion pathway, and to assess the exposure of the underlying assets to such economic activities;
Amendment 143 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c a new
Title III – Chapter 3 a (new) – Article 19 a – paragraph 2 – IP – point c a new
(ca) the comparison of the selected economic activities with the Union taxonomy;
Amendment 147 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 Regulation (EU) 2016/1011
2a. For each requirement in paragraph 2, a benchmark statement shall contain an explanation of how environmental, social and governance factors are reflected for each benchmark or family of benchmarks provided and published which pursueincluding their degree of alignment with the objectives orf take into account ESG objectives.he Paris Agreement. This information should be disclosed in a standardised format, with colour-coded information on the degree of alignment with the Paris Agreement;
Amendment 164 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – subheading 1
Annex I – subheading 1
Amendment 174 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – introductory part
Annex I – point 1 – introductory part
1. The administrator of a low-carbonParis- aligned benchmark shall formalise, document and make public any methodology used for the calculation of low carbonParis-aligned benchmarks, describing the following:
Amendment 178 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point a
Annex I – point 1 – point a
(a) the list of the underlying assets that are used for calculating the low carbonParis-aligned benchmark;
Amendment 183 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point c
Annex I – point 1 – point c
(c) the criteria applied to exclude assets or companies that are associated with a level of carbon footprint or a level of fossil reserves that are incompatible with inclusion in the low carbonParis-aligned benchmark;
Amendment 185 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point d
Annex I – point 1 – point d
(d) the criteria fscience-based methodological framework and the methods of how the low carbon benchmark measures the carbon footprint and decarbonisation pathway selected for the benchmark; the related metrics and thresholds used to select, weight and exclude the economic activities in line with the decarbon isavings associated with the underlying assets in the index portfoliotion pathway, and to assess the exposure of the underlying assets to such economic activities;
Amendment 190 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point d a (new)
Annex I – point 1 – point d a (new)
(da) the comparison of the selected economic activities with the EU taxonomy
Amendment 197 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point e
Annex I – point 1 – point e
(e) the tracking error between the low carbonParis-aligned benchmark and the parent index;
Amendment 202 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point f
Annex I – point 1 – point f
(f) the positive reweighting of low- carbon assets in the low carbonParis-aligned benchmark versus the parent index and the explanation of why this reweighting is necessary to reflect the chosen objectives of the low carbonParis-aligned benchmark;
Amendment 209 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point g
Annex I – point 1 – point g
(g) the ratio between the market value of the securities that are in the low carbonParis- aligned benchmark and the market value of the securities in the parent index;
Amendment 214 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – introductory part
Annex I – point 1 – point h – introductory part
(h) the type and source of input data used for the selection of assets or companies eligible for the low carbon benchmark, includingParis-aligned benchmark:
Amendment 217 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point i
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point i
Amendment 220 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point ii
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point ii
Amendment 223 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iii
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iii
Amendment 227 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iv
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point iv
Amendment 232 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point v
Annex I – point 1 – point h – point v
Amendment 239 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point i
Annex I – point 1 – point i
(i) the total carbon-footprint exposure of the index portfolio and the estimated impacts on climate- change mitigation and contribution to the objectives of the Paris Agreement of the low carbon strategy pursued by the benchmark;
Amendment 243 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 1 – point j
Annex I – point 1 – point j
(j) the rationale for adopting a particular low-carbon methodology strategy or objective and an explanation of why the methodology is appropriate for the calculation of the low-carbonParis-aligned objectives of the benchmark;
Amendment 251 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – subheading 3
Annex I – subheading 3
Methodology for positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmarks
Amendment 253 #
2018/0180(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – point 2
Annex I – point 2
2. The administrator of a positive carbon impactclimate transition benchmark, in addition to the obligations applicable to the administrator of a low carbonParis-aligned benchmark, shall disclose the positive carbon impact of each underlying asset included in the benchmark and shall specify the formula or calculation that is used to determine whether the emission savings exceed the investment asset's or company's carbon footprint ('positive carbon impact ratio').measurable and time-bound science-based target, and the link to the related implementation plan and the annual report on progress made towards achieving the target, of each underlying asset included in the benchmark and shall specify the science-based methodological framework and decarbonisation pathway selected for the benchmark; the related metrics and thresholds used to select, weight and exclude the economic activities in line with the decarbonisation pathway, and to assess the exposure of the underlying assets to such economic activities;
Amendment 53 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) As the largest source of external financing, banks are an essential component of the financial system. Lending and financing by this sector need to be fully aligned with the European Union’s sustainability objectives if those goals are to be achieved. Therefore they should be included in the scope of this Regulation. Banks should integrate sustainability risks when making financial products available, in its risk management and in its corporate loan origination process.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The disclosure rules contained in this Regulation should supplement, and should apply in addition to, the provisions of Directive 2009/65/EC, Directive 2009/138/EC, Directive 2011/61/EU, Directive (EU) 2016/2341 of the European Parliament and of the Council,44 Regulation (EU) No 345/2013, Regulation (EU) No 346/2013 and Regulation (EU) No 346575/2013. _________________ 44 Directive (EU) 2016/2341 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 December 2016 on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision (IORPs) (OJ L 354, 23.12.2016, p. 37).
Amendment 85 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
This Regulation lays down harmonised rules on the transparency to be applied by financial market participants, insurance intermediaries which provide insurance advice with regard to IBIPs and investment firms which provide investment advice on the integration of sustainability risks in investment decision-making process or advisory process and the transparency of all financial products that have as their targets sustainable investments, including the reduction in carbon emissions.
Amendment 92 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) ‘financial product’ means a portfolio managementn investment product, including listed securities, an AIF, an IBIP, a pension product, a pension scheme or a UCITS;
Amendment 97 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – introductory part
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – introductory part
(o) ‘sustainable investments’ mean any of the following or a combination of any of the following:
Amendment 98 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point i
(i) investments in an economic activity that contributes to an environmental objective, including an environmentally sustainable investment as defined in Article 2 of [PO: Please insert reference to Regulation on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment], and which does not harm a social objective in accordance with Article 2 (o) (ii), and which is in accordance with good governance practices as referred to in Article 2 (o) (iii);
Amendment 102 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point ii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point ii
(ii) investments in an economic activity that contributes to a social objective, and in particular an investment that contributes to tackling inequality, an investment fostering social cohesion, social integration and labour relations, or an investment in human capital or economically or socially disadvantaged communities; and which does not harm an environmental objective as defined in Article 2 of [PO: Please insert reference to Regulation on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment], and which is in accordance with good governance practices as referred to in Article 2 (o) (iii);
Amendment 106 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point o – point iii
(iii) investments that meet the conditions of Article 2 (o) (i) or Article 2 (o) (ii) and are done in companies following good governance practices, and in particular companies with sound and transparent management structures, employee relations, transparent remuneration of relevant staffpolicies and tax compliance;
Amendment 110 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point p a (new)
(pa) ‘ESG preferences’ means a client’s or potential client’s preferences for environmental investment indicators, social investment indicators, and good governance indicators;
Amendment 112 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point s a (new)
(sa) ‘sustainability risks’, for the purposes of this Regulation, mean the potential positive or adverse financial or non-financial outcomes of the investment in the short term and the long term, measured by an assessment of at least the following environmental, social and governance indicators: (i) indicators that show the economic activity’s positive or negative contribution to an environmental objective, and in particular an environmentally sustainable investment objective, regarding the quality and functioning of the natural environment and natural eco-systems. At least, these indicators shall include, where applicable: Animals: animal testing, factory farming, fisheries, and fur and specialty leather; Environment: biodiversity, deforestation, energy efficiency, non-renewable energy, greenhouse gas emissions and energy that produces non-renewable waste, genetic engineering, hazardous substances and contamination, natural resources and mining, water, use of POPs and pesticides, deforestation, waste management (ii) indicators that show the economic activity’s positive or negative contribution to a social objective, the rights, well-being and interests of people and communities, and in particular to tackling inequality, fostering social cohesion, social integration and labour relations, and human capital or economically or socially disadvantaged communities. At least, these indicators shall include: Health and safety: alcohol, gambling, tobacco and weapons Labour rights, notably those identified in the International Labour Organisation’s declaration on Fundamental Rights and Principles at Work: forced labour, freedom of association, workers' right to organise, the right to collective bargaining, equal remuneration for men and women workers for work of equal value, non-discrimination in opportunity and treatment with respect to employment and occupation, the right not to be subjected to child labour; Human rights, notably those identified in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, including: access to food, access to basic needs incl. medicine, conflict minerals (iii) indicators of good governance practices, in particular sound management structures, employee relations, remuneration of relevant staff and tax compliance; At least, these indicators shall include: Accounting and remuneration, corruption, tax-compliance and tax- evasion, codes and conventions, board structure, breach of privacy and data protection, bribery, cartels.
Amendment 123 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Financial market participants shall publish writtentheir policies on the integration of sustainability risks in the investment decision-makselection and monitoring process on their websites.
Amendment 150 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the extent to which sustainability riskthe investments are expected to have a relevant impact on the returnsfinancial or non-financial performance of the financial products made available, using the ESG indicators as listed in Article 2 (sa) (new), where appropriate;
Amendment 169 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 4 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the extent to which sustainability riskinvestments are expected to have a relevant impact on the returns of the financial products advised onfinancial or non-financial performance of the financial products advised on, using the ESG indicators as listed in Article 2 (sa) (new), where appropriate;
Amendment 193 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
(ba) an explanation of how ESG indicators as listed in Article 2 (sa) (new) are considered in the methodology of this index;
Amendment 194 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Where a financial product has as its target sustainable investments or investments with similar characteristics and no index has been designatedno index as a reference benchmark, the information referred to in Article 4(1) shall include an explanation on how that target is reachedf sustainability impact using the indicators listed in Article 2 (sa) (new).
Amendment 230 #
2018/0179(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Without prejudice to stricter sectoral legislation, in particular Directive 2009/65/EC, Directive 2014/65/EU, Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Regulation (EU) No 1286/2014, financial market participants, insurance intermediaries which provide insurance advice with regard to IBIPs and investment firms which provide investment advice shall ensure that their marketing communications shall be fair, clear and not misleading and do not contradict the information disclosed pursuant to this Regulation.
Amendment 40 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) To focus efforts where they are most needed, this Directive should only cover the most commonly found single-use plastics products, which are estimated to represent around 86% of the single-use plastics found, in counts, on beaches in the Union, and also fishing gear. The transition to a circular economy will necessitate a reduction in the overall use of single use plastic.
Amendment 46 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) For certain single-use plastic products, suitable and more sustainable alternatives are not yet readily available and the consumption of most such single- use plastic products is expected to increase. To reverse that trend and promote effortsmove towards more sustainable solutions Member States should be required to take the necessary measures to achieve a significant reduction in the consumption of those products, without compromising food hygiene or food safety, good hygiene practices, good manufacturing practices, consumer information, or traceability requirements set out in Union food legislation44 . Reduction in overall consumption of single use products is crucial in transitioning to a circular economy. _________________ 44 Regulation (EC) 178/2002 laying down the general principles and requirements of food law (OJ L 31, 1.2.2002, p.1-24), Regulation (EC) No 852/2004 on the hygiene of foodstuffs (OJ L 139, 30.4.2004, p.1-54), Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 on materials intended to come into contact and other relevant legislation related to food safety, hygiene and labeling (OJ L 338, 13.11.2004, p.4-17).
Amendment 62 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Directive 2008/98/EC lays down general minimum requirements for extended producer responsibility schemes. Those requirements should apply to extended producer responsibility schemes established by this Directive. This Directive, however, establishes additional extended producer responsibility requirements, for examplenotably, the requirement on producers of certain single-use plastic products to cover the costs of clean-up of litter, as well as other measures that would be effective in reducing the impact of plastic on the environment and human health.
Amendment 63 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) Beverage bottles that are single-use plastic products are one of the most found marine litter items on the beaches in the Union. This is due to ineffective separate collection systems and low participation in those systems by the consumers. It is necessary to promote more efficient separate collection systems and therefore, a minimum separate collection target should be established for beverage bottles that are single-use plastic products. Member States should be able to achieve that minimum target by setting separate collection targets for beverage bottles that are single-use plastic products in the framework of the extended producer responsibility schemes or by establishing deposit refund schemes or by any other measure that they find appropriate. This will have a direct, positive impact on the collection rate, the quality of the collected material and the quality of the recyclates, offering opportunities for the recycling business and the market for the recyclate. Reducing single use plastic bottles is also an aim of the revised Drinking Water Directive. By advancing the human right to water, with the provision of safe drinking water through public infrastructure and enhanced consumer confidence in tap water, a reduction in plastic bottles use can be achieved.
Amendment 64 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201648 , the Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Directive. That evaluation should be based on experience gathered and data collected during the implementation of this Directive and data collected under Directive 2008/56/EC or Directive 2008/98/EC. The evaluation should provide the basis for an assessment of possible further measures and an assessment whether, in view of monitoring of marine litter in the Union, the Annex listing single-use plastic products needs to be reviewed. The evaluation should also consider whether scientific and technical progress that has taken place in the meantime, including the development of biodegradable materials and the development of criteria or a standard for biodegradability of plastics in the marine environment, as foreseen in the European Plastics Strategy, allows the setting of a standard for biodegradation of certain in order to expand the list of single- use plastic products in the marine environment. That standard would include a standard to test if, as a result of physical and biological decomposition in the marine environment, plastics would fully decompose into carbon dioxide (CO2), biomass and water within a timescale short enough for the plastics not to be harmful for marine life and not lead to an accumulation of plastics in the environment. If that is the case, single-use plastic products that meet such a standard could be exempted from the prohibition on placing on the market. While the European Strategy for Plastics already envisages action in this area, it also recognises the challenges in relation to determining a regulatory framework for plastics with biodegradable properties due to different marine conditions across seas. _________________ 48items. There should be no consideration of biodegradability in reviewing the annex. _________________ 48 OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1. OJ L 123, 12.5.2016, p. 1.
Amendment 69 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1
Article 1 – paragraph 1
The objective of this Directive is to prevent and significantly reduce the impact of certain plastic products on the environment, in particular the aquatic environment, and on human health as well as to promote the transition to a circular economy with innovative business models,through a reduction in productsion and materials, thus also contriconsumption of single use plastics, with sustainable butsing to the efficient functioning of the iness models, non-toxic products and maternial markets.
Amendment 77 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Member States shall take the necessary measures to achieve a significant50% reduction in the consumption of the single-use plastic products listed in Part A of the Annex on their territory by … [six year2025 and an 80% reduction by 2030. Member States shall establish a baseline by [18 months after the end- date for transposition of this Directive]. Member States shall adopt plans for the achievement of these reductions, including the measures taken.
Amendment 81 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Those measures mayshall include national consumption reduction targets, measures ensuring that reusable alternatives to those products are made available at the point of sale to the final consumer, economic instruments such as ensuring that single- use plastic products are not provided free of charge at the point of sale to the final consumer, and may include other measures. Those measures may vary depending on the environmental impact of the products referred to in the first subparagraph.
Amendment 87 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Member States shall also take the necessary measures to achieve a 35% reduction by 2025 and a 60% reduction by 2030 in the consumption of the products listed in Part F of the Annex, with baseline as above.
Amendment 89 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Member States shall prohibit the placing on market of the single-use plastic products listed in Part B of the Annex. Given that products other than those covered by this Directive are significant contributors to marine litter, the Member State will be empowered to apply to those products the same measures applicable to the items listed in Part B of the Annex. The Member State shall inform the Commission of the adoption of these measures, including their rationale, scientific evidence in support and details on their practical implementation and enforcement.
Amendment 112 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)
(b a) information on the extended producer responsibility schemes established by Member States for the purposes of Article 8, including: (i) the quantity of the products placed in the market and the waste flows resulting from those; (ii) the financial contribution paid by producers of products per unit sold or per tonne of product placed on the market; (iii) and the extent to which the scheme(s) reduce the amount of plastic in residual waste.
Amendment 114 #
2018/0172(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 15 – paragraph 3 – point c
Amendment 57 #
2018/0169(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) It is necessary to ensure the safe use of reclaimed water, thereby encouraging water reuse at Union level and enhancing public confidence in it. Supply of reclaimed water for particular uses should therefore only be permitted, on the basis of a permit, granted by competent authorities of Member States. Where an environmental impact assessment has concluded on the need for certain infrastructure, national timeframes shall be put in place for the delivery of this infrastructure in order to uphold public health and environmental standards. Such timeframes shall take into consideration the timeline for the grant of permits in the Member State, but shall not be longer than 24 months. In order to ensure harmonised approach at Union level, traceability and transparency, the substantive rules for that permit should be laid down at the Union level. However, the details of the procedures for granting permits should be determined by Member States. Member States should be able to apply existing procedures for granting permits which should be adapted to take account of the requirements introduced by this Regulation.
Amendment 3 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that the common agricultural policy (CAP) plays a crucial role in delivering key EU objectives such as food security and a fair standard of living for farmers; points out that the rules with which farmers must comply governing food, health and environmental protection have greatly increased, while the relative share of agriculture in the EU budget keeps declining;is continually declining, to an unsustainable level; it is clear that farmers are being asked to do more with less support
Amendment 29 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Reiterates its call for the CAP budget to be maintained in the 2021-2027 MFF at least at the level of the 2014-2020 budget for the EU-27 in real terms, given the fundamental role of this policy; reaffirms its view that agriculture must not suffer any financial disadvantage as a result of political decisions such as the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU or the funding of new European policiesrojects, such as PESCO;
Amendment 41 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Disagrees with the Commission’s proposal for the next MFF, which would entail substantial cuts to the CAP; highlights the fact that the extent of the cuts varies according to the parameters used for the comparison; disagrees with the Commission’s approach of providing two calculation methods for the MFF (current vs constant), which is used to hide the true severity of such cuts;
Amendment 80 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Reiterates its call for a reform of thejects any attempt to extract additional revenue through increases in EU’s own- resources systemrevenue streams; stresses the need to safeguard duties on agricultural products as a source of revenue for the EU budget;
Amendment 125 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Emphasises that the majority of farmers are facing more challenges than ever before due to the agreement of market destabilising trade deals, market concentration in the retail and processing sector, and unfair trading practices.
Amendment 129 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Recognises that the decrease in EU farms, due to decreasing income support, will result in a break in the social fabric of rural Europe and an increased dependence on imports from third countries, contrary to the proclaimed desire for short food supply chains to combat climate change
Amendment 132 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7 c. Highlights that in order to regain support for a well-funded CAP, reforms for the next funding period must deliver better value for money, as demonstrated by a greater redirection of funds to lower income farmers
Amendment 22 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesTakes note of the EU’s new approach to investment protection and its enforcement mechanism (ICS), which has replacedis in essential the same as the highly controversial investor- to-state dispute settlement (ISDS); notes that several studies have shown that ICS would bring no changes to the extremely far-reaching rights that are afforded to foreign investors in current investment treaties.
Amendment 28 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 37 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Notes that there are no safeguards foreseen that would prevent this ICS system from creating regulatory chill effect by threatening a government with an ICS case to prevent unwanted legislation from being developed or passed.
Amendment 39 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Acknowledges the right of both parties to introduce legislation on all governmental levels and to pursue public policy objectives.
Amendment 46 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the transparency rules applying to proceedings before the tribunals, which will help to instil public trust in the systemany and all tribunals;
Amendment 48 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. StresseRegrets that third parties such as labour and environmental organisations can only contribute to ICS proceedings through amicus curiae briefs; urges the EU and Singapore to make it possible for these organizations to join the proceedings as parties affected.
Amendment 52 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that the agreement represents an nominal improvement on the investment protection provisions in CETA, as it incorporates provisions on obligations for former judges, a code of conduct to prevent conflicts of interests and a fully functioning Appellate Tribunal at the time of its conclusion;
Amendment 55 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Recalls that the Investment Court System as introduced in CETA is currently pending before the European Court of Justice for an Opinion on its compatibility with the EU treaties and that therefore a signal from the EP on the ICS is at this moment highly counterproductive.
Amendment 58 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. WelcomesTakes note of Singapore’s commitment to the multilateral investment court, a public international court which should be empowered to hear disputes on investments between investors and states that will have accepted its jurisdiction over their bilateral investment treaties, and whose ultimate goal is to overcome the current, unbalanced and fragmented investment protection regime; considers the agreement a crucial stepping . Regrets the fact that there is no respect for domestic courts to hear disputes first. Furthermore, this multilateral investment court is contrary to customary international law and international human rights law, which requires the exhaustione towards that end; of local remedies.
Amendment 65 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the Council’s decision to make public the negotiating directive of 20 March 2018 on the multilateral investment court and calls on the Council to make public all previous and future trade and investment agreement negotiating directives immediately after they are adopted in order to increase transparency and public scrutiny;
Amendment 68 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights that the agreement will replace the existing bilateral investment treaties between 13 EU Member States and Singapore, which are based on outdated investment protection provisions and include the controversial ISDS; considers that this constitutes an important step in reforming global rules on investment dispute settlement and, it is hoped, will progressively lead to the removal of ISDS from bilateral investment treaties;
Amendment 87 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 91 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission and Singapore to agree stronger sanctions in the event that a member of the tribunals does not comply with the code of conduct, and to ensure that they are in place as soon asbefore this agreement enters into force;
Amendment 94 #
2018/0095M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
Amendment 4 #
2018/0095(NLE)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GDeclines to gives its consent to conclusion of the agreement;
Amendment 5 #
2018/0095(NLE)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Gives its consent to conclusion of the agreementSuspends the consent procedure until the European Court of Justice has delivered its opinion regarding the compatibility of Investment Court System with European Union Treaties, Opinion 1/17;
Amendment 17 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 25 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas more than 10 000 European companies have their regional'letterbox' offices in Singapore;
Amendment 33 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomesTakes note of the signing in Brussels, on 19 October 2018, of the FTA;
Amendment 39 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that negotiations were originally concluded in 2012 and regrets the longtakes note of the delay in bringing forward the agreement for ratification due to a request for an Opinion from the Court of Justice;
Amendment 45 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 53 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Is concerned that the Prudential Carve-Out paragraph (article 8.50) is less strong than the one used in CETA, since it does not refer to measures that can be taken to safeguard the security and integrity of an individual financial institution, and asks the Commission for an explanation thereof;
Amendment 54 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Is concerned that the phrasing “not […] more burdensome than necessary” in reference to measures that can be taken under the Prudential Carve- Out is highly contestable and poses a serious threat to governments’ right to regulate in order to safeguard the integrity and stability of a Member State’s financial system;
Amendment 55 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5 c. Is concerned that the Prudential Carve-Out paragraph is not strong enough to enable the EU and governments to refuse the supply of new financial services provided Singapore – being a big supplier of financial services and a tax haven – in order to protect the integrity and stability of the financial system;
Amendment 56 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5 d. Remarks that the phrasing “each Party shall make its best endeavours” to implement and apply financial regulation and guidelines such as the Basle Committee’s “Core Principles for Effective Banking Supervision” is of a noncommittal character,whereas the implementation of these kind of rules and guidelines should always be a prerequisite for concluding any agreement with a Party in order to safeguard the EU’s and Member States’ financial stability;
Amendment 57 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5 e. Is concerned that the Specific Exceptions paragraph (8.55)explicitly refers to exceptions that can be made regarding the domain of services forming part of a public retirement plan or statutory system of social security, especially since a motivation of allowing these exceptions is lacking;
Amendment 66 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Regrets that despite all the efforts to battle tax avoidance and tax dodging, Singapore still remains a tax heaven and that Singapore is ranked 5 in Tax justice Network's Financial Secrecy Index because of its secrecy.
Amendment 67 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7 b. Notes that intermediation by banks in the setting-up of offshore structures has significantly decreased since 2007, when it was revealed that banks were promoting evasion of the provisions of the European Savings Directive of 2005 on a large scale; notes that reputational and regulatory risks in the aftermath of the financial crisis have also added to the decline in the offshore entities intermediated by banks since 2008; acknowledges, however, that at the global level statistical data do not show a general decline in the funds channelled through tax havens, at least up to 2014, but, rather, a reorganisation of jurisdictions and instruments used; notes that in parallel to the progressive rise in withholding tax levied by Luxembourg, Austria and Belgium (until 2009), from15 % in 2005 to 20 % in 2008 and 35 % in 2011, offshore money was increasingly allocated to letterbox companies in jurisdictions such as the Bahamas, Singapore and Hong Kong; notes, however, that the intermediation business has been taken over by other professions, namely lawyers, as demonstrated in the Panama Papers.
Amendment 72 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. WelcomNotes the fact that only around 190 EU geographical indications will be protected as of the entry into force of the agreement, with the possibility of adding more at a later stage, in view of the fact that Singapore is the fifth largest market in Asia for EU food and drink exports;
Amendment 86 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines that the agreement safeguards the EU’s right to keep and to apply its own standards to all goods and services sold in the EU and upholds the EU’s precautionary principle;
Amendment 93 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that this is a progressive trade agreement and that both Parties committed in the trade and sustainable development (TSD) chapter to ensure a high level of environmental and labour protection;
Amendment 94 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12 a. Urges both parties to introduce a sanctions based mechanism for the Trade and Sustainable Development Chapter.
Amendment 97 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls that the Parties committed to make sustained efforts towards ratifying and effectively implementing the fundamental ILO conventions before entering into force of this FTA; welcomes the information provided so far by the Government of Singapore in relation to its compliance with three outstanding ILO conventions, namely those on Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise, on Discrimination and on Forced Labour, and expects Singapore to further engage with the ILO with a view to progressing towards full alignment with their content and ultimately pursuing their ratification;
Amendment 115 #
2018/0093M(NLE)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls on the Commission to trigger the general review clause of the agreement as soon as possible in order to strengthen the enforceability of labour and environmental provisions including through a sanctions-based mechanism as a last resort;
Amendment 1 #
2018/0093(NLE)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. GDeclines to gives its consent to the agreement;
Amendment 73 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The number and size of operators vary across the different stages of the food supply chain. Differences in bargaining power relate to the different levels of concentration of operators and can enable the unfair exercise of bargaining power by using unfair trading practices. Unfair trading practices are in particular harmful for small and medium-sized operators in the food supply chain both inside and outside the union. Agricultural producers, who supply primary agricultural products, are largely small and medium- sized.
Amendment 80 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) A minimum Union standard of protection against certain manifestly unfair trading practices should be introduced to reduce the occurrence of such practices and to contribute to ensuring a fair standard of living for agricultural producers inside and outside the Union. It should benefit all agricultural producers or any natural or legal person that supplies food products, including producer organisations and associations of producer organisations, provided that all those persons meet the definition of micro, small and medium- sized enterprises set out in the Annex to Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC12 . Those mthey do not represent an enterprise consisting of over 500 employees. Micro, small or medium suppliers are particularly vulnerable to unfair trading practices and least able to weather them without negative effects on their economic viability. As the financial pressure on small and medium- sized enterprises caused by unfair trading practices often passes through the chain and reaches agricultural producers, rules on unfair trading practices should also be enforceable at higher levels of the food chain to protect small and medium-sized intermediary suppliers at the stages downstream of primary production. Protection of intermediary suppliers should also avoid unintended consequences (notably in terms of unduly raising prices) of trade diversion away from agricultural producers and their associations, who produce processed products, to non- protected suppliers. _________________ 12 OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36.
Amendment 92 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Suppliers established outside the Union should be able to rely on the Union minimum standard when they sell food products to buyers established in the Union to avoid unintended distorting effects resulting from the protection of suppliers in the Union and to ensure Member States meet their responsibilities under the Sustainable Development Goals.
Amendment 103 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The relevant rules should apply to business conduct by larger, that is to say non-small and medium-sized, operators in the food supply chain as they are the ones who normally possess stronger relative bargaining power when trading with small and medium-sized suppliers.
Amendment 112 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) As a majority of Member States already have national rules on unfair trading practices, albeit diverging, it is appropriate to use the tool of a Directive to introduce a minimum protection standard under Union law. This should enable Member States to integrate the relevant rules into their national legal order in such a way as to bring about a cohesive regime. Member States should not be precluded from adopting and applying on their territory stricter national laws protecting small and medium-sized suppliers and buyers against unfair trading practices occurring in business-to-business relationships in the food supply chain, subject to the limits of Union law applicable to the functioning of the internal market.
Amendment 143 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Complaints by producer organisations or associations of such organisations or organisations with knowledge of trading practices in supply chains can serve to protect the identity of individual members of the organisation who are small and medium- sized suppliers and consider themselves exposed to reprisals if they complain of unfair trading practices. Enforcement authorities of the Member States should therefore be able to accept and act upon complaints by such entities while protecting the procedural rights of the defendant.
Amendment 209 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive applies to certain unfair trading practices which occur in relation to the sales of food products by a supplier that is a small and medium-sized enterprisen enterprise of less than five hundred employees to a buyer that is not a small and medium-sized enterprise.
Amendment 297 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(e a) "producer organisation" for the purposes of this Directive means any producer organisation or association of producer organisations of which there is a voluntary cooperation of producers of agricultural products, which is owned and controlled by its user members and operates for the benefit of its user members.
Amendment 304 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that the followingunfair trading practices are prohibited. Furthermore Member states shall introduce a specific prohibition of at least the following practices:
Amendment 366 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) a supplier pays for the wastage of food products that occurs once the product has passed into the buyer's premisesownership and that is not caused by the negligence or fault of the supplier.
Amendment 370 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) a buyer sells a product for a less than of 110% of the purchase price unless it is placing the product under promotion. Promotions must be for no more than 30 days and not reduce the product by more than one third of its non-promotion price. The supplier may only place 25% of the volume purchased on promotion.
Amendment 383 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(db) a buyer fails to agree a written contract with a supplier prior to delivery of the agricultural products, unless an underlying supply agreement with the buyer exists, supplemented as required by details of an individual transaction agreement.
Amendment 399 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d c (new)
(dc) A buyer imposing disproportionately high contractual sanctions in comparison to the value and significance of the subject of the obligation.
Amendment 411 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 (new)
A buyer compelling a supplier to avail of services it, or a third-party it has a contract with, offers not requested by the supplier and/or not serving its interests.
Amendment 445 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d d (new)
(dd) a buyer requests compensation from the supplier for the cost of examining customer complaints related to its products.
Amendment 446 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d e (new)
(de) a buyer terminates, or threatens to terminate, a supply contract for reasons other than those listed as reasons for termination in the supply contract.
Amendment 449 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d f (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d f (new)
(df) a buyer compels a supplier to manufacture the same product to be sold under the retailer's own brand at the same or a lower cost than the supplier's branded product.
Amendment 450 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d g (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d g (new)
(dg) a buyer charges the supplier a fee which is directly or indirectly a product listing fee.
Amendment 451 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d h (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d h (new)
(dh) a buyer demands a supplier to change any part of its supply chain procedures during the period of supply, unless that buyer: (a) gives reasonable notice of such a change in writing or (b) fully compensates that supplier for any net resulting cost as a result of the failure to give reasonable notice.
Amendment 452 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d i (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d i (new)
(di) a buyer comes to an agreement with a supplier which would result in the supplier receiving less than the net cost of production per unit supplied.
Amendment 453 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d j (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point d j (new)
(dj) a buyer charges the supplier a fee for retention of the contract;
Amendment 542 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. A supplier shall address a complaint to the enforcement authority of the Member State in which the buyer suspected to have engaged in a prohibited trading practice is established. Where a buyer established inside the Union uses a buyer established outside of the Union to purchase products for retail inside the Union, it shall assume the obligations of its non Union purchaser in the event of a dispute. Complaints shall be addressed to the enforcement authority of the Member State in which the buyer is established.
Amendment 560 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. Producer organisations , or associations of producer organisations whose member(s) or member(s) of their members consider(s) that they are affected by a prohibited trading practice or organisations with knowledge of trading practices in food supply chains shall have the right to submit a complaint.
Amendment 618 #
2018/0082(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
(f) to inform buyers and suppliers about its activities, by way of annual reports, which shall inter alia describe the number of complaints received and, the investigations initiated and closed by it and a list of the enterprises who have had findings made against them. For each investigation, the report shall contain a summary description of the matter and the outcome of the investigation.
Amendment 204 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
–
–
The European Parliament rejects [the Commission proposal].
Amendment 214 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) In the process of developing macro-prudential approaches to prevent the emergence of system-wide risks associated with NPLs, the European Systemic Risk Board shall develop appropriate macro-prudential standards and supervision of the other financial institutions involved in the secondary market for NPLs. These regulatory measures will ensure that such institutions are required to meet the same standards as banks, including in relation to prudential requirements, disclosure requirements and the fair treatment of borrowers. These institutions shall also be bound by all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable.
Amendment 215 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Credit institutions will be required to put aside sufficient resources when new loans become non- performing, which should create appropriate incentives to address NPLs at an early stage and should prevent an excessive accumulation of them. Where loans become non- performing, more efficient enforcement mechanisms for secured loans would allow credit institutions to enforce NPLs, subject to appropriate safeguards for borrowers, including legal protection against evictions from primary residences. Nevertheless, should NPL stocks become too high – as it is currently the case for some credit institutions and some Member States – credit institutions should be able to sell them in efficient, competitive and transparent secondary markets to other operatorsincentivised to work through the NPLs on a case-by-case basis. This Directive does not express a preference for certain NPL reduction tools over others, and the combination of tools or strategy reduction drivers for a given credit institution is the responsibility of, and chosen at the discretion of, its management. Competent authorities of credit institutions will guide them in this, based on their existing bank-specific, so- called Pillar 2, powers under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 (CRR). Where NPLs become a significant and broad-based problem, Member States can set up national asset management companies or other alternative measures within the framework of current state aid and banks resolution rules. _________________ 27Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1).
Amendment 217 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
Amendment 221 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) This Directive should foster the development of secondary markets for NPLs in the Union by removing impediments to the transfer of NPLs by credit institutions to non-credit institutions, while at the same time safeguarding consumers' rights, particularly legal protection for mortgage-holders against eviction from primary residences. Any proposed measure should also simplify and harmonise the authorisation requirements for credit servicers. This Directive should therefore establish a Union-wide framework for both purchasers and servicers of credit agreements issued by credit institutions.
Amendment 224 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Other financial institutions active in the secondary market should take into account the interests of consumers and comply with all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU1a, in the EBA guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final guidelines on the management of non-performing and forborne exposures. _________________ 1aDirective 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34–85).
Amendment 225 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9b) Forbearance measures should aim to return the borrower to a sustainable performing repayment status, having regard to the fair treatment of the consumer and to all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable. When deciding on which steps or forbearance measures to take, credit institutions should take into account the interests of consumers and comply with consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU, in the EBA Guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final guidelines on the on management of non- performing and forborne exposures.
Amendment 226 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 c (new)
Recital 9 c (new)
(9c) Forbearance measures may include the following concessions to the consumer: (a) a total or partial refinancing of a credit agreement; (b) a modification of the previous terms and conditions of a credit agreement, which may include among others: i. extending the term of the mortgage; ii. changing the type of the mortgage (such as, changing the type of mortgage from a capital and interest mortgage to an interest only mortgage); iii. deferring payment of all or part of the instalment repayment for a period; iv. changing the interest rate up to a certain cap; v. offering a payment holiday.
Amendment 227 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 230 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12 a (new)
Recital 12 a (new)
(12a) There are currently no common minimum standards at European level to regulate credit servicing activities. Moreover, no common standards are currently laid down to regulate the activities related to debt collection.
Amendment 231 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 233 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Therefore, action at Union level is necessary in order to address the protection of the borrowers as well as the sustainability of the banking system and the position of credit purchasers and credit servicers in relation to credit originally granted by credit institutions. It is not proposed to cover credit originally issued by non-credit institutions or debt collection in general at this stage, as there is no evidence of macroeconomic relevance, misaligned incentives or ill-functioning markets for such an extended scope.
Amendment 235 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) Entities engaging in credit servicing activities shall be subject to the same rules, be it specialised credit servicers, banking institutions or credit purchasers. This could be a direct consequence of subjecting credit servicing activities to MiFID rules.
Amendment 236 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Although the purpose of this Directive is to protect consumers' rights and to strengthen the credit institutions' capacity to deal with credit that has become non-performing or risks becoming non-performing, the secondary market for credit covers both performing and non- performing credit. Actual market sales encompass credit portfolios, consisting of a mix of performing,heavily under- performing and non- performing credit. The portfolios include credit that is both secured and unsecured and that is owed by consumers or businesses. Where rules for the enforcement of credit differed for each type of credit or borrower, there would be additional costs to the packaging of those credit portfolios for sale. The provisions in this Directive that target the development of the secondary market cover performing and non- performing credit in order to avoid a situation that these additional costs would result to a social crisis and at the same time discourage investor participation and fragment this emerging market. Credit institutions will benefit from facing a larger investor base and more efficient credit servicers. Similar benefits will accrue to asset management companies that are instrumental in some Member States in marketing both non-performing and performing credit originated from credit institutions that had been resolved or been restructured or that have otherwise offloaded them from their balance sheets28 . _________________ 28See Commission staff working document SWD(2018 72) on the AMC Blueprint.
Amendment 240 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The importance placed by the Union legislature on the protection provided for consumers in Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29 , Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Council Directive 93/13/EEC31 means that the assignment of the creditor's rights under a credit agreement or of the agreement itself to a credit purchaser should not affect the level of protection granted by national and Union law to consumers in any way. Credit purchasers and credit servicers should therefore comply with national and Union law as applicable to the initial credit agreement and the consumer should retain the same level of protection as provided under Union law or as determined by Union or national conflict of law rules regardless of the law applicable to thenational and Union law regardless of the law applicable to the credit purchaser or credit servicer. National competent authorities must ensure that no borrower is worse off following the transfer of their credit agreement from a credit institution to a credit purchaser or credit servicer. _________________ 29Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34). 30Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ L 60/34, 22.5.2008, p. 66). 31Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29).
Amendment 242 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, Union and national law provide for a number of rights and safeguards related to credit agreements promised or granted to a consumerthat are not consumer loans, in particular those secured by the primary residential property. Those rights and safeguards apply in particular to the negotiation and conclusion of the credit agreement and to its performance or default thereof. This is notably the case in relation to long-term consumer credit agreements falling within Directive 2014/17/EU, in respect of the right of the consumer to discharge fully or partially his obligations under a credit agreement prior to the expiry of that agreement or to be informed by means of the European Standardised Information Sheet, where applicable, on the possiblehowever, a transfer of the credit agreement to a credit purchaser. B should not be allowed whatsoever as borrower rights should also not be altered if the transfer of the credit agreement between a credit institution and a purchaser takes the form ofunder any circumstance or contract novation.
Amendment 243 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20a) Residential mortgages for primary residences must be excluded from the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 244 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 b (new)
Recital 20 b (new)
(20b) Under this Directive, a non- performing loan secured by the mortgage of a residential property must not be transferred without the written consent of the borrower.
Amendment 246 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to allow existing credit purchasers and credit servicers to adapt to the requirements of the national provisions implementing this Directive and, in particular, to allow credit servicers to be authorised, this Directive will only apply to transfers of credit agreements that take place six months after the transposition deadline has expired and only after the creditor has given to distressed borrowers the right to buy back their debt at the same price.
Amendment 247 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) The authorisation of a credit servicer to provide credit servicing activities throughout the Union should be subject to a uniform and harmonised set of conditions that should be applied in a proportionate manner by the competent authorities. To avoid a reduction in debtor or borrower protection and in order to promote trust, the conditions for granting and maintaining an authorisation as a credit servicer should ensure that credit servicers, persons who hold a qualifying holding in the credit servicer or who are part of the management of the service provider have a clean police record in relation to serious criminal offences linked to crimes against property, to crimes related to financial activities or to crimes against the physical integrity and that they are of good repute. Similarly, these persons as well as the credit servicer should not be subject to an insolvency procedure or have not previously been declared bankrupt, unless they have been reinstated in accordance with national law. Finally, to ensure compliance with debtor protection as well as personal data protection rules, it is necessary to require that appropriate governance arrangements and internal control mechanisms and recording and handling of complaints, are established and subject to supervision. Moreover, credit servicers should be obliged to act fairly and with due consideration for the financial situation of the borrowers. In addition, when dealing with borrowers, credit servicers should follow minimum EU common standards as laid down in this Directive and transposed by Member States. Where debt advice services facilitating debt repayment are available at national level, the credit servicers should considerare obliged to referring borrowers to such services.
Amendment 254 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Third-country credit purchasers may make it harder for the Union consumer to rely on their rights under Union law and for the national authorities to supervise the enforcement of the credit agreement. Credit institutions may also be discouraged from transferring such credit agreements to third-country credit purchasers because of the reputational risk involved. Imposing an obligation on the representative of the third-country purchasers of consumer credit to appoint a credit institution or a credit servicer authorised in the Union for servicing a credit agreementAs a result, both the credit purchasers and credit servicers operating in the Union must be obliged to be authorised in the Union to ensures that the same standards of consumers' rights are preserved after the transfer of the credit agreement. The credit purchaser and credit servicer isare under an obligation to respect the applicable Union and national laws and the national authorities in individual Member States should be given the necessary powers to effectively supervise itstheir activityies.
Amendment 255 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34a) Credit purchasers generally rely on a short-term business model that specialises in purchasing distressed debt at a large discount and attempting to procure the underlying asset as quickly as possible. As it is the credit purchaser that makes the key decisions regarding the distressed loan, including on the setting of interest rates, whether to restructure a loan, and the enforcement of the loan, it is crucial that the credit purchaser - and not only the credit servicer that acts as an intermediary - is authorised and regulated in the Union, and subject to supervision, investigation and sanctions by the national competent authorities in the Member State in which it operates.
Amendment 258 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 53 a (new)
Recital 53 a (new)
(53a) In order to achieve a sufficient level of borrower protection and to address debt collection malpractice, harmonised EU regulation should ensure that the costs and remuneration of credit servicers are never charged to borrowers.
Amendment 259 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 54 a (new)
Recital 54 a (new)
(54a) Member States shall ensure that behaviour or practices that are likely to negatively impact on borrower privacy and/or human dignity, or are likely to mislead them are prohibited. Practices that can be considered as harassment include sending excessive numbers of dunning letters, using intimidating language, using stigmatizing envelopes, visiting the borrower during working hours or at the workplace, or contacting their colleagues or family members. These practices can aggravate the borrower's situation causing possible loss of employment and reduce their capacity to repay a debt.
Amendment 271 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 a (new)
This Directive relates to non-performing credit agreements. Creditors shall not be allowed to transfer to third parties performing credit agreements concluded with consumers.
Amendment 286 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
(ca) the purchase of a credit agreement by a credit institution or non-credit institution which has been involved in a tax avoidance or tax evasion case in any Member State of the EU;
Amendment 299 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – introductory part
(8) '‘A business to business credit servicer'’ means any natural or legal person, other than a credit institution or its subsidiaries, which carries out one or more of the following activities on behalf of a creditor of a business or professional borrower:
Amendment 301 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point f
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point f
Amendment 302 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point f a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point f a (new)
(fa) handles any activities related to debt collection;
Amendment 303 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9 a (new)
(9a) A 'business to borrower credit servicer' means any natural or legal person, other than a credit institution or its subsidiaries, which carries out one or more of the following activities on behalf of a creditor of a borrower: (a) monitors the performance of the credit agreement; (b) collects and manages information about the status of the credit agreement, of the borrower and of any collateral used to secure the credit agreement; (c) informs the borrower of any changes in interest rates, charges or of payments due under the credit agreement; (d) enforces the rights and obligations under the credit agreement on behalf of the creditor, including administering repayments; (e) renegotiates the terms and conditions of the credit agreement with borrowers, where they are not a 'credit intermediary' as defined in Article 4(5) of Directive 2014/17/EU or Article 3(f) of Directive 2008/48/EC; (f) handles any activities related to debt collection.
Amendment 306 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3a Forbearance measures and foreclosure 1. Creditors shall make every effort to avoid transferring consumer non- performing loans to third parties. Notably, Member States shall ensure that creditors exercise reasonable forbearance towards the distressed borrowers, in accordance with Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU and the EBA guidelines on arrears and foreclosure EBA/GL/2015/12. 2. Forbearance measures may include the following concessions to the consumer: (a) a total or partial refinancing of a credit agreement; (b) a modification of the previous terms and conditions of a credit agreement, which may include among others: i. extending the term of the mortgage; ii. changing the type of the mortgage (such as, changing the type of mortgage from a capital and interest mortgage to an interest only mortgage); iii. deferring payment of all or part of the instalment repayment for a period; iv. changing the interest rate up to a certain cap; v. offering a payment holiday. 3. Definition of non-performing loans adopted by the Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/227 shall be without prejudice to the creditors’ forbearance obligations. 4. In case of foreclosure, when the credit is secured by the consumer’s primary residence, return or transfer to the creditor or a third-party of the security or proceeds from the sale of the security shall be sufficient to repay the credit. Article 28(4) of Directive 2014/17/EU shall be amended accordingly.
Amendment 307 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Amendment 308 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 b (new)
Article 3 b (new)
Article 3b Exclusion of primary residences Residential mortgages for primary residences are excluded from the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 309 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 c (new)
Article 3 c (new)
Article 3c Borrower protection A sufficient level of borrower protection shall be ensured at all times. Credit servicers dealing with borrowers must comply with the specific requirements laid down in this Directive.
Amendment 311 #
2018/0063A(COD)
1a. Member States shall be able to maintain the existing national measures aiming at protecting distressed borrowers, as well to adopt stricter measures, such as personal insolvency measures, restriction of the activity of credit servicers and credit purchasers.
Amendment 314 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) Credit servicers and credit purchasers shall act in good faith, treat consumers fairly and respect their privacy. The following practices shall be forbidden: i) provision of misleading information to consumers; ii) harassment of consumers, including communication of information about the consumers’ debt to their employer, family, friends and neighbours; iii) charging fees and penalties to consumers that exceed the costs directly related to the management of the debt. Member States shall place a cap on fees and penalties referred to in point (iii) according to the principles of fairness, rationality and proportionality.
Amendment 318 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i
(i) are of sufficiently good repute, according to Article 135 of Directive 2006/48/CE and Article 13 of Guideline: EBA/CP/2013/03 EBA Consultation Paper on draft Guidelines for assessing the suitability of members of the management body and key function holders of a credit institution;
Amendment 336 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Amendment 338 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6a Debt buy-back 1. When a credit institution intends to transfer a credit agreement to a credit purchaser at a specified price, before the transfer the credit institution shall allow the debtors concerned who are consumers to buy back their debt at the same price or with a small mark-up, which would be specified by the relevant competent authorities. For that purpose, credit institutions shall be required to disclose to the relevant competent authorities the necessary details of expected deals with credit purchasers. 2. Member States shall ensure that the buy-back option can be exercised in instalments.
Amendment 343 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) commits a serious breach of the applicable rules outlined in Article 6(a) (new).
Amendment 350 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8a Borrowers' protection 1. Member States shall require that credit servicers, in their relationship with the debtors, act in good faith, fairly, professionally and respect their privacy. 2. Member States shall ensure that credit services comply with the following requirements: (a) The information provided shall not be misleading, unclear or false; (b) Credit servicers shall protect the personal information and privacy of the debtors and not to communicate with persons other than the borrower, including family members or employers, unless under authorisation by the debtor; (c) Credit services shall not communicate to debtors in way which constitutes harassment, coercion, or undue influence. 3. Member States shall ensure that fees and penalties charged on borrowers by credit servicers do not exceed the cost directly related to the management of the debt. Member States shall require that in the event of the transfer of the creditor’s rights under a credit agreement or the credit agreement itself to a credit purchaser, the debtor is notified in due time about the transfer and that all relevant Union and national law concerning in particular the enforcement of contracts, consumer protection, borrower’s rights and criminal law continues to apply to the credit purchaser or the credit servicer. 4. Member States shall ensure that credit servicers and credit purchasers foresee the possibility, if viable, and set out the conditions for non-performing borrowers to exit their non-performing status in line with measures set out in the ECB Guidance to banks on non-performing loans.
Amendment 356 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that where a credit servicer uses a third party to perform activities that would normally be undertaken by that credit servicer ('credit service provider'), the credit servicer should be supervised by the same supervisory authorities the banking system of the Member State has and remains fully responsible for complying with all obligations under the national provisions transposing this Directive. The outsourcing of those credit servicing activities shall be subject to the following conditions:
Amendment 361 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10a Right to legal representation 1. In any court hearing involving a distressed borrower there shall be consideration of the equality of representation status to ensure a full and fair hearing and full and complete understanding of all of the parameters and legal contentions being addressed. 2. This demands that there be an equivalent of legal representation provided and available to all distressed borrowers and, insufficient advance, to ensure comprehensive preparation of all relevant facts and detail for appropriate court representation of the case in dispute. 3. Where necessary, this service shall be provided at the cost of the Member State through free legal aid or its equivalent.
Amendment 365 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. With regard to credit agreements concluded between creditors and consumers, as well as credit agreements concluded between creditors and business borrowers secured by the immovable residential property which is the primary residence of a business borrower, a credit servicer shall be required to obtain an authorisation and establish a branch or a subsidiary in the Member State where it intends to operate.
Amendment 370 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Credit servicers shall follow any additional host Member State laws and rules for debt collection activities regardless of where the headquarters of the credit servicer is located in the EU.
Amendment 374 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Credit servicers shall not be allowed to provide cross-border services in respect of credit agreements concluded between creditors and consumers, as well as credit agreements concluded between creditors and business borrowers secured by the immovable residential property which is the primary residence of a business borrower. In that case, credit servicers shall be authorised and supervised by the competent authorities of the Member State where they effectively operate.
Amendment 397 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a Credit purchasers subject to national law A credit purchaser carrying out activities in a Member State is subject to the restrictions and requirements established in the national law of the Member State in accordance with this Directive.
Amendment 403 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the represente direct regulativeon of a credit purchaser referred to in Article 17(1) appoints a credit institution established in the Union or its subsidiary established s operating in their jurisdiction by ensuring the Union or an authorised credit servicernational competent authorities are empowered to superform credit servicing activities in respect of credit agreements concluded with consumvise, investigate and sanction the credit purchasers.
Amendment 404 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 408 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a credit purchaser is not subject to any necessary additional requirements for the purchase of credit agreements other than as provided for by the national measures transposing this Directive.
Amendment 412 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17
Article 17
Amendment 413 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that a credit purchaser, entities or, where applicable, its representative designated in accordance with Article 17, shall be subject to the same rules, be it specialised credit servicers and banking institutions. Moreover, it communicates to the competent authorities of the Member State where the credit purchaser or, where applicable its representative is domiciled or established that it intends to directly enforce a credit agreement by providing the following information:
Amendment 414 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that a credit purchaser or, where applicable, its representative designated in accordance with Article 17, communicates to the competent authorities of the Member State where the credit purchaser or, where applicable its representative is domiciled or establishedcommunicates to the competent authorities of the Member State that it intends to directly enforce a credit agreement by providing the following information:
Amendment 416 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Member States shall require the national competent authorities to make publicly available information regarding the transfer of credit agreements from a credit institution to a credit purchaser, or from one credit purchaser to another, including the identity and address of the new credit purchaser and, where applicable, its representative designated in accordance with Article 17.
Amendment 429 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a credit purchaser or credit servicer's governance arrangements and internal control mechanisms fail to ensure respect for borrower rights and compliance with personal data protection rules;
Amendment 431 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a credit purchaser or credit servicer's policy is inadequate for the proper treatment of borrowers as set in Article 5(1)(d);
Amendment 432 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) a credit purchaser or credit servicer's internal procedures fail to provide for the recording and handling of borrower complaints according to the obligations set in the national measures transposing this directive;
Amendment 446 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 a (new)
Article 22 a (new)
Amendment 463 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the identity of the credit servicer and, where applicable, the credit purchaser it is providing the service to;
Amendment 465 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37a Illegal state aid The Commission shall investigate whether the past sale of credit agreements by publicly owned, or partially publicly owned, credit institutions to credit purchasers which have received special tax advantages may have constituted illegal state aid.
Amendment 466 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. FiveTwo years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a Report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
Amendment 467 #
2018/0063A(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Commission's impact assessment carried out prior to the proposal for this Directive failed to take into account the impact of the Directive on EU citizens' human rights under the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The transposition of this Directive must be delayed until the Commission produces a new assessment that takes into account the impact of this Directive on the Charter rights of EU citizens.
Amendment 204 #
Amendment 215 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) In the process of developing macro-prudential approaches to prevent the emergence of system-wide risks associated with NPEs, the European Systemic Risk Board should develop appropriate macro-prudential standards and supervision of the other financial institutions involved in the secondary market for NPEs. These regulatory measures will ensure that such institutions are required to meet the same standards as banks, including in relation to prudential requirements, disclosure requirements and the fair treatment of borrowers. These institutions should also be bound by all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable.
Amendment 216 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Credit institutions will be required to put aside sufficient resources when new loans become non- performing, which should create appropriate incentives to address NPLs at an early stage and should prevent an excessive accumulation of them. Where loans become non- performing, more efficient enforcement mechanisms for secured loans would allow credit institutions to enforce NPLs, subject to appropriate safeguards for borrowers including legal protection against evictions from primary residences. Nevertheless, should NPL stocks become too high – as it is currently the case for some credit institutions and some Member States – credit institutions should be able to sell them in efficient, competitive and transparent secondary markets to other operatorsincentivised to work through the NPLs on a case-by-case basis. This Directive does not express a preference for certain NPL reduction tools over others, and the combination of tools or strategy reduction drivers for a given credit institution is the responsibility of, and chosen at the discretion of, its management. Competent authorities of credit institutions will guide them in this, based on their existing bank- specific, so-called Pillar 2, powers under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 (CRR). Where NPLs become a significant and broad-based problem, Member States can set up national asset management companies or other alternative measures within the framework of current state aid and banks resolution rules. _________________ 27Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1).
Amendment 217 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Credit institutions will be required to put aside sufficient resources when new loans become non- performing, which should create appropriate incentives to address NPLs at an early stage and should prevent an excessive accumulation of them. Where loans become non- performing, more efficient enforcement mechanisms for secured loans would allow credit institutions to enforce NPLs, subject to appropriatimplement a holistic strategy that protects distressed borrowers and safeguards the sustainability of the banking system, subject to strong and effective safeguards for borrowconsumers. Nevertheless, should NPL stocks become too high – as it is currently the case for some credit institutions and some Member States – credit institutions shouldall not be able to sell them in efficient, competitive and transparent secondary marketsor transfer to other operators. Competent authorities of credit institutions will guide them in this, based on their existing bank-specific, so-called Pillar 2, powers under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council27 (CRR). Where NPLs become a significant and broad-based problem, Member States can set up national asset management companies or other alternative measures within the framework of current state aid and banks resolution rules. _________________ 27Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on prudential requirements for credit institutions and investment firms and amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 (OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1)ird parties performing credit agreements concluded with consumers. Where NPLs become a significant and broad-based problem, Member States can set up national asset management companies or other alternative measures within the framework of current state aid and banks resolution rules.
Amendment 220 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
Amendment 225 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) This Directive should fosregulater the development of secondary markets for NPLs in the Union by removing impediposing safeguards and minimum requirements to the transfer of NPLs by credit institutions to non-credit institutions, while at the same time safeguarding consumers' rights. Any proposed measure should also simplify and harmonise the authorisation requirements for credit servicers. This Directive should therefore establish a Union-wide framework for both purchasers and servicers of credit agreements issued by credit institutions, whereby credit servicers shall obtain authorisation and be subject to the supervision of the Member State they operate in; furthermore, this Directive allows Member States to subject credit servicers and credit purchasers to stricter requirements.
Amendment 227 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) This Directive should foster the development of secondary markets for NPLs in the Union by removing impediments to the transfer of NPLs by credit institutions to non-credit institutions, while at the same time safeguarding consumers' rights, particularly legal protection for mortgage-holders against eviction from primary residences. Any proposed measure should also simplify and harmonise the authorisation requirements for credit servicers. This Directive should therefore establish a Union-wide framework for both purchasers and servicers of credit agreements issued by credit institutions.
Amendment 228 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9 a) Other financial institutions active in the secondary market should take into account the interests of consumers and comply with all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU, in the EBA Guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final Guidelines on the management of non-performing and forborne exposures.
Amendment 229 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 b (new)
Recital 9 b (new)
(9 b) Forbearance measures should aim to return the borrower to a sustainable performing repayment status, having regard to the fair treatment of the consumer and to all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable. When deciding on which steps or forbearance measures to take, credit institutions should take into account the interests of consumers and comply with consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU, in the EBA Guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final Guidelines on the management of non- performing and forborne exposures;
Amendment 230 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 c (new)
Recital 9 c (new)
(9 c) Forbearance measures may include the following concessions to the consumer: a) a total or partial refinancing of a credit agreement; b) a modification of the previous terms and conditions of a credit agreement, which may include among others: i. extending the term of the mortgage; ii. changing the type of the mortgage (such as, changing the type of mortgage from a capital and interest mortgage to an interest only mortgage); iii. deferring payment of all or part of the instalment repayment for a period; iv. changing the interest rate up to a certain cap; v. offering a payment holiday.
Amendment 231 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 233 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 15
Recital 15
Amendment 235 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) Therefore, action at Union level is necessary in order to address the protection of the borrowers as well as the sustainability of the banking system and the position of credit purchasers and credit servicers in relation to credit originally granted by credit institutions. It is not proposed to cover credit originally issued by non-credit institutions or debt collection in general at this stage, as there is no evidence of macroeconomic relevance, misaligned incentives or ill-functioning markets for such an extended scope.
Amendment 238 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16 a) Entities engaging in credit servicing activities shall be subject to the same rules, be it specialised credit servicers, banking institutions or credit purchasers. This could be a direct consequence of subjecting credit servicing activities to the rules of Directive 2014/65/EU.
Amendment 239 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Although the purpose of this Directive is to protect consumers' rights and to strengthen the credit institutions' capacity to deal with credit that has become non-performing or risks becoming non-performing, the secondary market for credit covers both performing and non- performing credit. Actual market sales encompass credit portfolios, consisting of a mix of performing,heavily under- performing and non- performing credit. The portfolios include credit that is both secured and unsecured and that is owed by consumers or businesses. Where rules for the enforcement of credit differed for each type of credit or borrower, there would be additional costs to the packaging of those credit portfolios for sale. The provisions in this Directive that target the development of the secondary market cover performing and non- performing credit in order to avoid a situation that these additional costs would result to a social crisis and at the same time discourage investor participation and fragment this emerging market. Credit institutions will benefit from facing a larger investor base and more efficient credit servicers. Similar benefits will accrue to asset management companies that are instrumental in some Member States in marketing both non-performing and performing credit originated from credit institutions that had been resolved or been restructured or that have otherwise offloaded them from their balance sheets28 . _________________ 28 See Commission staff working document SWD(2018 72) on the AMC Blueprint.
Amendment 242 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) The importance placed by the Union legislature on the protection provided for consumers in Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29 , Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council30 and Council Directive 93/13/EEC31 means that the assignment of the creditor's rights under a credit agreement or of the agreement itself to a credit purchaser should not affect the level of protection granted by national and Union law to consumers in any way. Credit purchasers and credit servicers should therefore comply with national and Union law as applicable to the initial credit agreement and the consumer should retain the same level of protection as provided under Union law or as determined by Union or national conflict of law rules regardless of the law applicable to the credit purchaser or credit servicer. National competent authorities must ensure that no borrower is worse off following the transfer of their credit agreement from a credit institution to a credit purchaser or credit servicer. _________________ 29Directive 2014/17/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 February 2014 on credit agreements for consumers relating to residential immovable property and amending Directives 2008/48/EC and 2013/36/EU and Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010 (OJ L 60, 28.2.2014, p. 34). 30Directive 2008/48/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 April 2008 on credit agreements for consumers and repealing Council Directive 87/102/EEC (OJ L 60/34, 22.5.2008, p. 66). 31Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (OJ L 95, 21.4.1993, p. 29).
Amendment 245 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure a high level of consumer protection, Union and national law provide for a number of rights and safeguards related to credit agreements promised or granted to a consumerthat are not consumer loans, in particular those secured by the primary residential property. Those rights and safeguards apply in particular to the negotiation and conclusion of the credit agreement and to its performance or default thereof. This is notably the case in relation to long-term consumer credit agreements falling within Directive 2014/17/EU, in respect of the right of the consumer to discharge fully or partially his obligations under a credit agreement prior to the expiry of that agreement or to be informed by means of the European Standardised Information Sheet, where applicable, on the possiblehowever a transfer of the credit agreement to a credit purchaser. B should not be allowed whatsoever as borrower rights should also not be altered if the transfer of the credit agreement between a credit institution and a purchaser takes the form ofunder any circumstance or contract novation.
Amendment 246 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
(20 a) Residential mortgages for primary residences should be excluded from the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 247 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 b (new)
Recital 20 b (new)
(20 b) Under this Directive, a non- performing loan secured by the mortgage of a residential property should not be transferred without the written consent of the borrower.
Amendment 248 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) In order to allow existing credit purchasers and credit servicers to adapt to the requirements of the national provisions implementing this Directive and, in particular, to allow credit servicers to be authorised, this Directive will only apply to transfers of credit agreements that take place six months after the transposition deadline has expired and only after the creditors have given to distressed borrowers the right to buy back their debt at the same price.
Amendment 255 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
(34) Third-country credit purchasers may make it harder for the Union consumer to rely on their rights under Union law and for the national authorities to supervise the enforcement of the credit agreement. Credit institutions may also be discouraged from transferring such credit agreements to third-country credit purchasers because of the reputational risk involved. Imposing an obligation on the representative of the third-country purchasers of consumer credit to appoint a credit institution or a credit servicer authorised in the Union for servicing a credit agreementAs a result, both the credit purchasers and credit servicers operating in the Union must be obliged to be authorised in the Union to ensures that the same standards of consumers' rights are preserved after the transfer of the credit agreement. The credit purchaser and credit servicer isare under an obligation to respect the applicable Union and national laws and the national authorities in individual Member States should be given the necessary powers to effectively supervise itstheir activityies.
Amendment 256 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34 a (new)
Recital 34 a (new)
(34 a) Credit purchasers generally reply on a short-term business model that specialises in purchasing distressed debt at a large discount and attempting to procure the underlying asset as quickly as possible. As it is the credit purchaser that makes the key decisions regarding the distressed loan, including on the setting of interest rates, whether to restructure a loan, and the enforcement of the loan, it is crucial that the credit purchaser - and not only the credit servicer that acts as an intermediary - is authorised and regulated in the Union, and subject to supervision, investigation and sanctions by the national competent authorities in the Member State in which it operates.
Amendment 266 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 b (new)
Article 1 b (new)
Article 1 b Rules of conduct for credit servicers and credit purchasers 1. Credit servicers and credit purchasers shall act in good faith, treat consumers fairly and respect their privacy. The following practices shall be forbidden: a. Provision of misleading information to consumers; b. Harassment of consumers, including communication of information about the consumers’ debt to their employer, family, friends and neighbours; c. Charging fees and penalties to consumers that exceed the costs directly related to the management of the debt. Member States shall place a cap on those fees and penalties according to principles of fairness, rationality and proportionality.
Amendment 280 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
(c a) the purchase of a credit agreement by a credit institution or non credit institution which has been involved in a tax avoidance or tax evasion case in any Member State of the EU;
Amendment 298 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Title 1 a (new)
Title 1 a (new)
Title Ia Conditions for the sale of non-performing residential mortgages
Amendment 299 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 a (new)
Article 3 a (new)
Amendment 300 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 b (new)
Article 3 b (new)
Article 3 b Exclusion of primary residences Residential mortgages for primary residences are excluded from the scope of this Directive.
Amendment 301 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall be able to maintain the existing national measures aimed at protecting distressed borrowers, as well to adopt stricter measures, such as personal insolvency measures, restriction of the activity of credit servicers and credit purchasers.
Amendment 305 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(a a) Credit servicers and credit purchasers shall act in good faith, treat consumers fairly and respect their privacy. The following practices shall be forbidden: a) Provision of misleading information to consumers; b) Harassment of consumers, including communication of information about the consumers’ debt to their employer, family, friends and neighbours; c) Charging fees and penalties to consumers that exceed the costs directly related to the management of the debt. Member States shall place a cap on those fees and penalties according to principles of fairness, rationality and proportionality.
Amendment 322 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. When a credit institution intends to transfer a credit agreement to a credit purchaser at a specified price, before the transfer the credit institution shall allow the debtors concerned who are consumers to buy back their debt at the same price or with a small mark-up, which would be specified by the relevant competent authorities. For that purpose, credit institutions shall be required to disclose to the relevant competent authorities the necessary details of expected deals with credit purchasers.
Amendment 323 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Member States shall ensure that the buy-back option can be exercised in instalments.
Amendment 331 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a (new)
Article 6 a Debt buy-back 1. When a credit institution intends to transfer a credit agreement to a credit purchaser at a specified price, before the transfer the credit institution shall allow the debtors concerned who are consumers to buy back their debt at the same price or with a small mark-up, which would be specified by the relevant competent authorities. For that purpose, credit institutions shall be required to disclose to the relevant competent authorities the necessary details of expected deals with credit purchasers. 2. Member States shall ensure that the buy-back option can be exercised in instalments.
Amendment 346 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that where a credit servicer uses a third party to perform activities that would normally be undertaken by that credit servicer ('credit service provider'), the credit servicer should be supervised by the same supervisory authorities the banking system of the Member State has and remains fully responsible for complying with all obligations under the national provisions transposing this Directive. The outsourcing of those credit servicing activities shall be subject to the following conditions:
Amendment 349 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a (new)
Article 10 a Right to legal representation 1. In any court hearing involving a distressed borrower there shall be consideration of the equality of representation status to ensure a full and fair hearing and full and complete understanding of all of the parameters and legal contentions being addressed. 2. This demands that there be an equivalent of legal representation provided and available to all distressed borrowers and, insufficient advance, to ensure comprehensive preparation of all relevant facts and detail for appropriate court representation of the case in dispute. 3. Where necessary, this service shall be provided at the cost of the Member State through free legal aid or its equivalent.
Amendment 352 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. With regard to credit agreements concluded between creditors and consumers, as well as credit agreements concluded between creditors and business borrowers secured by the immovable residential property which is the primary residence of a business borrower, a credit servicer shall be required to obtain an authorisation and establish a branch or a subsidiary in the Member State where it intends to operate.
Amendment 358 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Credit servicers shall not be allowed to provide cross-border services in respect of credit agreements concluded between creditors and consumers, as well as credit agreements concluded between creditors and business borrowers secured by the immovable residential property which is the primary residence of a business borrower. In that case, credit servicers shall be authorised and supervised by the competent authorities of the Member State where they effectively operate.
Amendment 383 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a Credit purchasers subject to national law A credit purchaser carrying out activities in a Member State is subject to the restrictions and requirements established in the national law of the Member State in accordance with this Directive.
Amendment 397 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 1
Article 15 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that the represente direct regulativeon of a credit purchaser referred to in Article 17(1) appoints a credit institution established in the Union or its subsidiary established s operating in their jurisdiction by ensuring the Union or an authorised credit servicernational competent authorities are empowered to superform credit servicing activities in respect of credit agreements concluded with consumvise, investigate and sanction the credit purchasers.
Amendment 400 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Amendment 401 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that a credit purchaser is not subject to any necessary additional requirements for the purchase of credit agreements other than as provided for by the national measures transposing this Directive.
Amendment 411 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 17
Article 17
Amendment 413 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that a credit purchaser, entities or, where applicable, its representative designated in accordance with Article 17, shall be subject to the same rules, be it specialised credit servicers and banking institutions; moreover, it communicates to the competent authorities of the Member State where the credit purchaser or, where applicable its representative is domiciled or established that it intends to directly enforce a credit agreement by providing the following information:
Amendment 414 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Member States shall ensure that a credit purchaser or, where applicable, its representative designated in accordance with Article 17, communicates to the competent authorities of the Member State where the credit purchaser or, where applicable its representative is domiciled or establishedcommunicates to the competent authorities of the Member State that it intends to directly enforce a credit agreement by providing the following information:
Amendment 423 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Member States shall require the national competent authorities to make publicly available information regarding the transfer of credit agreements from a credit institution to a credit purchaser, or from a one credit purchaser to another, including the identity and address of the new credit purchaser and, where applicable, its representative designated in accordance with Article 17.
Amendment 440 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a credit purchaser or credit servicer's governance arrangements and internal control mechanisms fail to ensure respect for borrower rights and compliance with personal data protection rules;
Amendment 441 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) a credit purchaser or credit servicer's policy is inadequate for the proper treatment of borrowers as set in Article 5(1)(d);
Amendment 442 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) a credit purchaser or credit servicer's internal procedures fail to provide for the recording and handling of borrower complaints according to the obligations set in the national measures transposing this directive;
Amendment 476 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) the identity of the credit servicer and, where applicable, the credit purchaser it is providing a service to;
Amendment 478 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a (new)
Article 37 a State aid The Commission shall investigate whether the past sale of credit agreements by publicly owned, or partially publicly owned, credit institutions to credit purchasers which have received special tax advantages may have constituted illegal state aid.
Amendment 479 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
1. FiveTwo years after the entry into force of this Directive, the Commission shall carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a Report on the main findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.
Amendment 480 #
2018/0063(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 40 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. The Commission's impact assessment carried out prior to the proposal for this Directive failed to take into account the impact of the Directive on EU citizens human rights under the Charter of Fundamental Rights. The transposition of this Directive must be delayed until the Commission produces a new assessment that takes into account the impact of this Directive on the Charter rights of EU citizens.
Amendment 69 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 201317 forms, together with Directive 2013/36/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 201318 , the legal framework governing the prudential rules for institutions. Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 contains, inter alia, provisions directly applicable to institutions for determining their own funds. It is therefore necessary to complement the existing prudential rules in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 relating to own-funds with provisions requiring a deduction from own funds where NPEs are not sufficiently covered via provisions or other adjustments. This would amount to effectively creating a prudential backstop for NPEs that will apply uniformly to all Union institutions, which shall include all institutions active in the secondary market for NPEs in order to avoid creating a competitive advantage for the non-bank sector.
Amendment 70 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4 a) In the process of developing macro-prudential approaches to prevent the emergence of system-wide risks associated with NPEs, the European Systemic Risk Board shall develop appropriate macro-prudential standards and supervision of the other financial institutions involved in the secondary market for NPEs. These regulatory measures will ensure that such institutions are required to meet the same standards as banks, including in relation to prudential requirements, disclosure requirements and the fair treatment of borrowers. These institutions shall also be bound by all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable.
Amendment 71 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 b (new)
Recital 4 b (new)
(4 b) Other financial institutions active in the secondary market shall take into account the interests of consumers and comply with all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU, in the EBA Guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final Guidelines on the management of non-performing and forborne exposures.
Amendment 79 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) For the purposes of applying the backstop, it is appropriate to introduce in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 a clear set of conditions for the classification of NPEs. As Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 already lays down criteria concerning NPEs for the purposes of supervisory reporting, it is appropriate that the classification of NPEs builds on that existing framework. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 680/2014 refers to defaulted exposures as defined for the purposes of calculating own funds requirements for credit risk and exposures impaired pursuant to the applicable accounting framework. As forbearance measures may influence whether an exposure is classified as non- performing, the classification criteria are complemented by clear criteria on the impact of forbearance measures. Forbearance measures may have different justifications and consequences, it is therefore appropriate to provide that a forbearance measure granted to a non- performing exposure should not discontinue the classification of that exposure as non-performing unless certain strict discontinuation criteria are fulfilled, in accordance with the EBA's final Guidelines on management of non- performing and forborne exposures.
Amendment 80 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6 a) Forbearance measures should aim to return the borrower to a sustainable performing repayment status, having regard to the fair treatment of the consumer and to all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable. When deciding on which steps or forbearance measures to take, credit institutions should take into account the interests of consumers and comply with consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU, in the EBA Guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final Guidelines on the on management of non- performing and forborne exposures.
Amendment 92 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 99 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 139 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 47a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 47a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
For the purposes of Article 36(1)(m), the following exposures shall be classified as non-performing, where this definition is compatible with national laws aimed at protecting distressed borrowers:
Amendment 166 #
2018/0060(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 47b – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 47b – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. For the purposes of Article 47a, 'forbearance measure' shall include a concession by an institution towards an obligor that is experiencing or is likely to experience a deterioration in its financial situation. The objective of forbearance measures should be to aim to return the borrower to a sustainable performing repayment status, having regard to the fair treatment of the borrower, and to all relevant national and EU consumer protection requirements that may be applicable. When deciding on which steps or forbearance measures to take, credit institutions should take into account the interests of consumers and comply with consumer protection requirements, including those set out in Article 28 of Directive 2014/17/EU, in the EBA Guidelines on arrears and foreclosure and in the EBA final Guidelines on the management of non-performing and forborne exposures. With regard to residential loans, only when a full exploration of forbearance measures has been carried out and no sustainable restructuring solution can be reached should the credit institution move towards resolution of the NPE. A concession may entail a loss for the lender and shall refer to either of the following actions:
Amendment 32 #
2017/2254(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls for legislative solutions that will assist farmers in reducing the use of antibiotics in livestock farming, with the aim of prudent and responsible use of antimicrobials; insists that such legislative solutions must address prophylactic and metaphylactic use; in this regard notes the progress that has already been made in this direction through negotiations for a Regulation on Veterinary Medicinal Products and the Regulation on Medicated Feed: manufacture, placing on the market and use;
Amendment 105 #
2017/2254(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that good animal welfare is key to good animal health and contributes to the reduction in use of antimicrobials which is essential for productive and sustainable farming;
Amendment 125 #
2017/2254(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses the need for the independence of veterinary practitioners, and others who prescribe, from incentives to push certain drugs;
Amendment 136 #
2017/2254(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to promote high standards of animal welfare and food production in trade agreements in order to ensure a level playing field between EU producers and third country producers; further calls on the Commission to encourage partners to align their AMR objectives and adopt best practice solutions used in the EU on their territories;
Amendment 139 #
2017/2254(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Calls for a halt to free trade negotiations with Mercosur countries, where the use of antibiotics as growth promoters is expected to double from 2010 to 2030;
Amendment 14 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that an ambitious, balanced and comprehensive free trade agreement (FTA) which respects vulnerable sectors of European agriculture, such as dairy and sheep and goat meat, can be of mutual benefit, offering opportunities for European producers and advancing the EU’s position as a key player on the global marketthe agricultural sector will be particularly vulnerable in any free trade agreement (FTA) with New Zealand;
Amendment 29 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to secure a level playing field, treating as sensitive, or exclude, those products for which direct competition would expose EU agricultural producers to excessive or unsustainable pressure, for instance by introducing transitional periods or appropriate quotas, or by not making any commitments in the most sensitive sectors; calls on the Commission to factor in respect for seasonal cycles of production in Europe, particularly for the lamb and dairy sectors;
Amendment 62 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that New Zealand has a very competitive and strongly export-orientated agricultural sector which is unique in its exposure to international markets owing to a low level of agricultural support; notes the dominance of the dairy and sheep and goat sectors in particular and a largely intensified farming model; notes that New Zealand is the world’s eighth largest dairy producer, exporting 95% of its production and engaging a third of world trade in these products; further notes that New Zealand is the second largest exporter of sheep meat in the world putting it in direct competition with domestic European farmers;
Amendment 69 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that several sensitive European agricultural sectors have experienced the negative impact of the ongoing Russian embargo, currency fluctuations caused by the outcome of the Brexit Referendum and extreme price volatility and; stresses that the final outcome must give due consideration to the interests of all European producers;
Amendment 73 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Notes that the EU already has an agreement in place to buy 230,000 tonnes of New Zealand lamb and goat meat each year under a quota with reduced tariffs; notes that Britain traditionally buys 40% of this quota; highlights that the loss of this market through Brexit could potentially lead to a flood of product into other EU markets creating massive price pressures on European farmers;
Amendment 75 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to conclude as soon as possible its assessmentnot to open negotiations on a free trade agreement with New Zealand until such time as a full impact assessment has been conducted ofn the potential impact of an EU-New Zealand FTA in order to be able to evaluate completely the possible gains and losses of such a trade deal for European producersn the European family-farm model, the impact on prices received by farmers, the potential pressure on subsidies and on commitments under the Paris Climate Change Agreement;
Amendment 94 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls on the European Commission to recognise the harm that will be inflicted on the family-farm model, prices and European agriculture at large, should it continue to use the agricultural sector as a bargaining chip in the pursuit of its aggressive free trade agenda;
Amendment 95 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Calls for the exclusion of the Investment Court System from any negotiating exchanges owing to the detrimental impact such a system would have on rural communities; further calls on the European Commission to abandon advances towards a Multilateral Investment Court System in all of its free trade agreements in order to preserve public services and judicial integrity;
Amendment 96 #
2017/2193(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Strongly disagrees with the aggressive free trade agenda currently being pursued by the European Commission; believes that at the very least the European Commission should not be opening new free trade negotiations before the impact of recently concluded deals on the agriculture sector have been assessed;
Amendment 50 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
F a. whereas, growth and unemployment rates remain geographically uneven in a significant way, causing dangerous fragility to the economy and the sound development;
Amendment 64 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines the federal nature of the ECB, which rules out national vetoes, enabling it to act decisively in addressing the crisis; however, independence and transparency in the decision-making process should be significantly enforced.
Amendment 82 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Gives a positive assessmentQuestions the efficiency of the monetary policy pursued by the ECB in the period 2012-2016 in terms of its contribution to economic recovery by preventing deflation, preserving favourable financing conditions and maintaining financial stability and the proper functioning of the payment systems; however, the policy chosen by the ECB, especially in countries in crisis, was not always politically neutral.
Amendment 115 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is concerned that the ECB will likely not reach its inflation target for at least six consecutive years and will remain below the medium-term target level of 2 % until at least 2020 despite pursuing a very accommodative monetary policy, which indicates that the economy is not operating at full capacity partly due to the inefficient policies designed by the ECB;
Amendment 129 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Agrees with the ECB that in order to reach the inflation target, supportive fiscal policies and socially balanced productivity-enhancing reforms are required; points out that reforms should take into consideration also social indicators, social cohesion, protection of medium and low income families and raising inequalities as well as distributive taxation according to member-states particularities;
Amendment 153 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. BGiven the large current inefficiencies of the monetary policy transmission channels, believes that additional growth-oriented policy measures should be considered in order to move closer and more rapidly towards the inflation objective, including a restructuring and an increase in monthly purchases, the inclusion of equity purchases in the APP and the extension of the TLTRO programme to households through zero-coupon perpetual loans;
Amendment 176 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Asks the ECB to consider complementing its price stabiConsiders that the repeated failure of the ECB to reach its inflation target, calls for considering the adoption of a nominal GDP target as a new monetary politcy objective with nominal GDP growth targfor the ECB; therefore calls upon the Council to put this topic into the agenda of its future Council meetings;
Amendment 199 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. HighlightsNotes with regret that according to the IMF’s April 2017 World Economic Outlook, the Eurozone output gap was -1.2 % of the potential GDP in 2016, a gap which will remain negative until 2019;
Amendment 206 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Underlines the positivelimited effect of the ECB monetary policy on growth, employment and the financing costs of Member States, non-financial companies and households; calls for additional and alternative measures to enhance inclusive growth, policies that focus on job-creating development, quality employment fight poverty and youth unemployment and enforce SMEs participation and development, preventing and managing better in that way future crises;
Amendment 244 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers that monetary policy alone is not sufficient to achieve a sustainable and more even and inclusive economic recovery, and that public and private investments should therefore be encouraged in the context of a moderately positive fiscal stance in the Eurozone as proposed by the Commission to fill the regional investment gap; thereby calls for a recomposition of the ECB's portfolio of securities held under the APP towards more bonds linked with sustainable investments, for example in the context of a mutually noncoercive coordination between the ECB and the European Investment Bank (EIB);
Amendment 255 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Points out that while unemployment has decreased, aggregate demand in the euro area remains subdued, largely as a result of the rise in poor quality, temporary, low-paid jobs; calls on the ECB to evaluate how this phenomenon is slowing the recovery and explore ways to stimulate demand, in spite of wage stagnationcrease wages and promote quality employment, equal access to education and training to new technologies;
Amendment 264 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15 a. calls the ECB to explore the economic and legal feasibility of policy options, beyond interest rate policy and bond purchases, to channel money or credit efficiently into the real economy and hence induce investment demand and ensuring proper transmission of monetary policy;
Amendment 282 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that excessive current account surpluses in some Member States must be corrected through appropriate fiscal policies, including the European Commission recommendations for more public investments and incease of demand, in order to tackle macroeconomic imbalances in Europe;
Amendment 307 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18 a. Encourages further improvement of SMEs' access to credit, enforcing inclusiveness in economic development;
Amendment 338 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Acknowledges that the current policy of low interest rates has a positive effect on the level of nonperforming loans (NPLs); calls for a European strategy involving a secondary market for NPLs in order to alleviate the burden of NPLs in some Member States, taking into account social implications and protecting the first residence and medium and low income families;
Amendment 376 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Welcomes the improvements made by the ECB in disclosing the list of securities held by the Eurosystem under the ECB’s CSPP; but remains concerned that this programe mainly benefits large multinationals; thereby reinforcing capital misallocation towards shareholders and the over-concentration of some oligopolistic sectors;
Amendment 396 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Encourages the ECB to take steps to align its CSPP purchases with the EU’s commitment to tackling climate change, since ECB as an EU organization is committed to the goals of the Paris Agreement;
Amendment 402 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 418 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28 a. acknowledges that the third pillar of the banking union is a necessary condition for full mutualisation of the risk with regard to the guarantee of the deposits of all the European depositors;
Amendment 471 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Urges the ECB to support Greece, for example through ensuring the eligibility of Greek companies for the CSPP and the timely inclusion of Greek sovereign bonds in the APP, ensuring the timely access to QE and provide an independent debt sustainability analysis, as well as to support investments for countries to risk;
Amendment 519 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36 a. Calls for full European Parliamentary scrutiny over ECB policy and full revision of the ECB accountability framework by an EU independent body.The European Parliament should confirm the appointment of the ECB Executive Board members and be timely and in full transparency informed forthe ECB policies at all levels;
Amendment 525 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 b (new)
Paragraph 36 b (new)
36 b. Calls the ECON Committee to further enhance the monetary dialogue by revising the relevant rules, in the direction of the monetary experts’, commissioned by ECON in March 2014, recommendations and feedback;
Amendment 526 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 c (new)
Paragraph 36 c (new)
36 c. Calls the ECB Governing Council to follow EU staff regulation and code of conduct regarding to a two-year professional abstention period after the conclusion of its members’ mandate and to file public declarations of interests and assets;
Amendment 528 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 d (new)
Paragraph 36 d (new)
36 d. Calls the ECB to enhance whistle- blowers protection, as clearly indicated in relevant reports by the Commission, the Parliament, the European Ombudsman and the UN Convention against corruption;
Amendment 529 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 e (new)
Paragraph 36 e (new)
36 e. Notes that the current ECB employment system regarding temporary agents, which is placed within a system or repetitive temporary contracts, is reportedly creating instability in the working environment and undermining professional cohesion within the ECB;
Amendment 544 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Asks the ECB to make it a rule to publish its decisions, recommendations and opinions, thereby drastically reducing the number of exemptions from disclosure as well as to follow closer international best practises in improving the disclosure of bank supervisory data;
Amendment 550 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38 a. Stresses that in accordance with Article 7 of its Statute, neither the ECB, nor a national central bank, nor any member of their decision-making bodies shall seek or take instructions from Community institutions or bodies, from any government of a Member State or from any other body;
Amendment 556 #
2017/2124(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 b (new)
Paragraph 38 b (new)
38 b. Stresses that the Members of the Executive Board of the ECB, should abstain from being simultaneous members of forums or other organisations which include executives from banks supervised by the ECB;
Amendment 17 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the shortage of young people pursuing careers in farming is jeopardisa direct result of an agricultural policy that has undermined the profitability of most farming enterprises to the extent, that farmers, despite making huge increases in output, working long hours, are still unable to generate a viable income from their enterprise and is jeopardizing the economic and social sustainability of rural areas;
Amendment 32 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas supporting young farmersall farmers and encouraging generational renewal is a prerequisite for preserving agriculture across the EU and for keeping rural areas alive;
Amendment 59 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the Cork 2.0 Declaration of 6 September 2016 expresses concerns about rural exodus and youth drain, and the need to ensure that rural areas and communities (countryside, farms, villages, and small towns) remain attractive places to live and work by improving access to services andsuch as Schools, Hospitals including maternity services, broadband and recreational amenities together with opportunities for rural citizens andto fostering entrepreneurship in traditional rural domains as well as new sectors of the economy;
Amendment 92 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recommends that the limit placed on access to supports (currently five years from the establishment of the business) as well as other criteria such as age and previous involvement in agriculture should be reviewed in order to encourage generational turnover;
Amendment 104 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomNotes the creation of an agricultural guarantee instrument, proposed by the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) in March 2015, which should make it easier for young farmers to access credit; recommends that access to finance be improved through subsidised interest rates on loans for new entrants; calls for improved cooperation with the EIB and the European Investment Fund (EIF) to foster the creation of financial instruments dedicated to young farmers across all Member Statebelieves however that the core issue is lack of farm profitability and encouraging farmers to take on unsustainable debt is not in their best long term interests;
Amendment 113 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Draws attention to the opportunities for young farmers offered in the European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds to design and implement financial instruments in the form of loan, guarantee or equity funds in order to provide access to financeStructural and Investment (ESI) Funds to provide access to finance in the form of a loan to those in need;
Amendment 125 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that the norms of prudent lending should apply and unsustainable debt should not be encouraged;
Amendment 168 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that access to land is the largestn addition to lack of realistic returns in most farming enterprises are the main barrier to new entrants to farming in Europe and is limited by the low supply of land for sale or rent in many regions, as well as by the competition from other farmers, investors and residential users; considers that the land access problem is exacerbated by the current direct payment structure, which requires minimal active use of the land and allocates subsidies largely on the basis of land ownership; believes that the existing farmers are incentivised to retain land access in order to retain subsidy access instead of ensuring the best use of the land; recommends increasing the activity levels required to receive payments and to target subsidy payments towards the achievement of particular outcomes (e.g. production of specific environmental or social goods);
Amendment 189 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Proposes legislative action to enable the establishment of national programmes aimed at facilitating land mobility and, encouraging farm partnerships and providing succession planning services;
Amendment 210 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that in many Member States the generational renewal and the access of young people to agricultural land is hindered by late succession; considers that the current CAP lacks any incentives for older farmers to pass their businesses to younger generations particularly so in Member States where payments are based on historical data; recommends reconsidering the implementation of measures that would motivate older holders to pass their farms to young farmers, such as the ‘farm-exit scheme’ and other incentives for retirement;
Amendment 256 #
2017/2088(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that there is a need to modernise the vocational training provided in rural regions that is funded separate from the CAP budget; believes that access to the European Social Fund (ESF) should be facilitated and an increased budget given to vocational training in rural areas;
Amendment 2 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the common agricultural policy (CAP) is fundamental for food securityvital for the production of quality food, the preservation of rural populations and sustainable development; regrets that the CAP, which once accounted for 75 % of the EU budget is now only 38 % as laid down in the current multiannual financial framework (MFF), while food requirements have increased, as has budget is increasingly coming under threat due to rising appropriations for security and defence spending, while farming incomes have dropped significantly; notes the pressure on farmers dealing with ever unpredictable weather conditions brought about by climate change and the need to develop environmentally friendly farming practices and to mitigate the effects of climate change; urges the Commission to increase, or at least to maintain at its current level, the CAP budget post-2020;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission to continue defending farmers and to fund information campaigns on the CAP budget since the amount of aid publicisboth in terms of securing a robust budgetary contribution, as well as protecting them from below cost selling by supermarkets and other retailers; notes the helpfulness of national campaigns that ed ucan be misleading, given that the public is unaware of the fact that the bulk of the CAP is financed at EU level and replaces national spendingte the non-farming sector on the importance of short supply chains that ensure farmers get a fair price for their product; regrets that while for many farmers CAP subsidies are the only thing standing between their business and indebtedness, extortionate, uncapped payments in some instances are contributing to a negative conception of what the scheme is intending to achieve; stresses that the CAP delivers good quality products at affordable prices to Europeans;
Amendment 49 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Recalls that in its Reflection paper on the Future of EU Finances1a, the European Commission acknowledges that one way to effectively ensure income for all farmers across the EU is to provide support particularly for marginal, poorer farmers, thus reducing the direct payments for large farms; _________________ 1a https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta -political/files/reflection-paper-eu- finances_en.pdf
Amendment 52 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Calls on the Commission to conduct a study on the amount of money that would revert to the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) if direct payment caps of €150,000, €100,000 and €50,000 were applied across the EU;
Amendment 54 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that Brexit will have a projected impact of between EUR 3.8 and EUR 4.1 billion a year on the CAP, and calls therefore on the Commission to find alternative forms of financing, for example by increasing Member States’ contributions as a percentage of gross national income; stresses the need to increase funding in line with responses to the various cyclical crises in sensitive sectors such as milk, pork, fruits and vegetables, and to create instruments that can mitigate price volatility;
Amendment 72 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to keep direct payments intact as they help to avoid distortions of competition between Member States, and to maintain them without any national co-financing; urges the Commission to continue the process of both convergence of direct payments between Member States, as well as internal convergence within Member States and their regions;
Amendment 91 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Amendment 98 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Deplores the announcement of a € 5.5bn European Defence Fund on 7 June 2017, which is an insult to the millions of European farmers left waiting to hear their fate on the Brexit budgetary shortfall;
Amendment 114 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to ensure the necessary financial and legal framework for the food supply chain, in order to combat unfair trading practices; stresses that continued failure by the Commission to address this issue has contributed to practices such as below- cost selling and the resultant drop in farming incomes;
Amendment 131 #
2017/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that the duration of the next MFF should be as long as possible (at least seven years), in order to ensure the predictability and stability of CAP funding, as well as increase the possibility for pilot programmes to succeed.
Amendment 5 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the 2030 Agenda and its sustainability goals; stresses that, although the EU farming industry is already making a valuabl the successive market-driven reforms of the CAP have contributioned to sustainability, through the Common Agricultural Policy and stringent environmental requirements, it still needs to adapt better to the many challenges facing itmore intensive production, thereby compromising these goals, and agri-environmental measures are very far from offsetting this trend;
Amendment 17 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Rejects the idea that more production and growth whatever the cost could be compatible with sustainable development or could serve the purpose of combating the problem of hunger and malnutrition in the world;
Amendment 21 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1c. Urges the Commission to avoid defining the nutritional dimension of food production in simplistic terms, disregarding the fact that food and nutrition security means (continuing) access to a varied and wholesome diet, in terms of quality, quantity, and variety and must not be reduced purely to calorie intake;
Amendment 22 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 d (new)
Paragraph 1 d (new)
1d. Recalls the role and importance of agriculture in guaranteeing access to varied and healthy diets, in keeping with cultural values; urges that emphasis be placed on growing food with a high nutritional content instead of on crops produced in abundance which have a high calorie content, as opposed to nutritional content (maize, sugar), since this strategy could cause dietary nutrient deficiencies;
Amendment 27 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 e (new)
Paragraph 1 e (new)
1e. Notes that food security should be defined as a guarantee that families have regular and permanent physical and economic access to a basic set of foodstuffs in sufficient quantity and quality to meet their nutritional needs;
Amendment 28 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 f (new)
Paragraph 1 f (new)
1f. Notes that healthy food is defined as a food pattern that meets the biological and social needs of individuals in keeping with the various stages in their lives; notes that this concept considers food practices to have a cultural reference point and attaches value to the consumption of healthy regional food, while always taking into account behavioural and emotional aspects linked to food practices, which are incompatible with the practices of agro- industry, intensive farming and monoculture;
Amendment 33 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 g (new)
Paragraph 1 g (new)
1g. Recognises that the proper biological use of food, a process involving the digestion-absorption-metabolism- excretion chain that is necessary for full health and well-being, can be guaranteed only through access to basic public services (health, water and sanitation, housing and social security, among others);
Amendment 34 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 h (new)
Paragraph 1 h (new)
1h. Draws attention to the fact that guaranteeing and complying with the right to food and nutrition and combating hunger are incompatible with the goal of maximising profits, the abuse of market power and pricing dominance, the occupation of land, poor working conditions and pesticide use;
Amendment 36 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 i (new)
Paragraph 1 i (new)
1i. Condemns the imposition by rich countries of agricultural models designed to further the interests of large agro- industry multinationals, as has been occurring with free-trade agreements;
Amendment 51 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that adequate levels of public investment must be ensured so as to guarantee lasting, sustainable and inclusive solutions;
Amendment 52 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Takes the view that every farmer should receive a decent income resulting primarily from the sale of his product;
Amendment 53 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Stresses the need to enter into commitments enabling workers to enjoy social protection and a decent income from their output, guaranteeing a minimum income sufficient to cope with hunger and pay for proper food;
Amendment 54 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Stresses, in particular, women’s fundamental role as members of family farms, which constitute the main socioeconomic cell of rural areas, in caring for food production, preservation of traditional knowledge and skills, cultural identity and protection of the environment, bearing in mind that women in rural areas are also affected by wage and pension gaps;
Amendment 55 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)
Paragraph 2 e (new)
2e. Recalls that it is important to guarantee proper public services, notably care for children and the elderly, given that such services are particularly important for women, since they have traditionally played a major role in looking after young and elderly members of the family;
Amendment 70 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)
Paragraph 3 c (new)
3c. Rejects attempts of any kind to patent life, plants and animals, genetic material, or essential biological processes, especially where native strains and species are concerned;
Amendment 71 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)
Paragraph 3 d (new)
3d. Stresses that a sustainable future for farming and the environment means safeguarding and promoting access to seeds and agricultural inputs for smallholder farmers and marginalised groups, and promoting and safeguarding the exchange of seeds and their public ownership, and sustainable traditional techniques that guarantee the human right to proper food and nutrition;
Amendment 73 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 f (new)
Paragraph 3 f (new)
3f. Urges that action be taken to promote the effective use of traditional agricultural varieties specific to certain regions, combating the export-led standardisation of agricultural production and intensive models of agriculture that result from current agricultural and trade policies, of which the CAP is an example, and to encourage sustainable small and medium-scale production linked to local and regional markets and consumption;
Amendment 113 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses the contribution that the livestock sector will be able to makes to the EU economy, provided that it is regulated and subject to fair systems for distributing production, and notes its potential to contribute to a better functioning agricultural ecosystem and a climate- friendly farming industry;
Amendment 119 #
2017/2009(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the need to prevent measures that would have the effect of obstructing access to adequate nutrition and food, in particular measures that prevent people's access to and use of local resources and inputs that guarantee their survival;
Amendment 14 #
2017/0334(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
–
–
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Regional Development, as the committee responsible, to propose rejection of the Commission proposal.
Amendment 45 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) To ensure a coherent framework for the inter-urban carriage of passengers by regular coach and bus services throughout the Union, Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 should apply to all inter-urban carriage by regular services. The scope of that Regulation should therefore be extended, subject to appropriate safeguards and limitations.
Amendment 52 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Commercial regular service operations should not compromise the economic equilibrium of existing public service contracts. For this reason, the regulatory body should be able to carry out an objective economic analysis to ensure that this is the case.
Amendment 70 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Authorisation for both national and international regular services should be subject to an authorisation procedure. Authorisation should be granted, unless there are specific grounds for refusal attributable to the applicant, or the service would compromise the economic equilibrium of a public service contract. A distance threshold should be introduced to ensure that commercial regular service operations do not compromise the economic equilibrium of existing public service contracts. In the case of routes already served by more than one public service contract, it should be possible to increase that threshold.
Amendment 79 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Non-resident carriers should be able to operate national regular services under the same conditions as resident carriers, as long as they can demonstrate compliance with all relevant provisions of national, Union and international law.
Amendment 138 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 3 a – paragraph 1
Article 3 a – paragraph 1
Each Member State shall designate a single national regulatory body for the road passenger transport sector. That body shall be an impartial authority which is, in organisational, functional, hierarchical and decision making terms, legally distinct and independent from any other public or private entity. It shall be independent from any competent authority involved in the award of a public service contract.
Amendment 154 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 3 a – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 3 a – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) carry out economic analyses of whether a proposed new service would compromise the economic equilibrium of a public service contract;.
Amendment 166 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 3 a – paragraph 5
Article 3 a – paragraph 5
5. Member States shall ensure that decisions taken by the regulatory body are subject to judicial review. That review may have suspensive effect only when the immediate effect of the regulatory body’s decision may cause irretrievable or manifestly excessive damages for the appellant. This provision is without prejudice to the powers of the court hearing the appeal as conferred by constitutional law of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 184 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a
Article 5 a
1. Terminal operators shall grantconsider applications from carriers for the right to access terminals for the purpose of operating regular services including any facilities or services provided in that terminal under fair, equitable, non-discriminatory and transparent conditions.
Amendment 185 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 5 a – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Where terminal operators grant access, bus and coach operators must comply with the terminal's existing terms and conditions.
Amendment 186 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 193 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Requests for access may be refused only on the grounds of lack of capacityfor justified reasons of public interest, including environmental and capacity considerations.
Amendment 199 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 5 a – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 217 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Amendment 227 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 5 b – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 5 b – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The decision of the regulatory body on the appeal shall be binding, subject to national law provisions regarding judicial review. The regulatory body shall be able to enforce it by means of penalties which are effective, proportionate and dissuasive
Amendment 239 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 – title
Article 8 – title
Authorisation procedure for the international carriage of passengers over a distance of less than 100 kilometres as the crow flies
Amendment 249 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
4. Authorisation shall be granted unless refusal can be justified on one or more of the grounds listed in points (a) to (d) of Article 8c(2)bjective grounds related to the public interest, such as that the service would compromise the equilibrium of a public service contract, environmental considerations or that the applicant has not complied with road transport or other relevant provisions of national, Union or international law..
Amendment 253 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Article 8 – paragraph 5
Amendment 254 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Article 8 – paragraph 6
Amendment 257 #
2017/0288(COD)
Amendment 263 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 a – title
Article 8 a – title
Amendment 269 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 a – paragraph 1
Article 8 a – paragraph 1
Amendment 274 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Amendment 281 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 a – paragraph 3
Article 8 a – paragraph 3
Amendment 294 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 b – title
Article 8 b – title
Amendment 320 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Decisions rejecting an application or granting authorisation with limitations shall state the reasons on which they are based and shall be informed by the analyses of the regulatory body.
Amendment 321 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 c – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 335 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 c – paragraph 3
Article 8 c – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that decisions taken by the authorising authority are subject to judicial review. That review may have suspensive effect only when the immediate effect of the authorising authority’s decision may cause irretrievable or manifestly excessive damages for the appellant. This provision is without prejudice to the powers of the court hearing the appeal as conferred by constitutional law of the Member State concerned.
Amendment 341 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 d – paragraph 1
Article 8 d – paragraph 1
1. Member States may limit the right of access to the international and national market for regular services if thon objective pgroposed regular service carries passengers over distances of less than 100 kilometres as the crow flies and ifunds related to the public interest, such as that the service would compromise the economic equilibrium of a public service contract, environmental considerations or that the applicant has not complied with road transport or other relevant provisions of national, Union or international law.
Amendment 354 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 d – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 8 d – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Where the regulatory body carries out an economic analysis, it shall inform all interested parties of the results of that analysis and its conclusions within six weeks following receipt of all relevant information. The regulatory body may concluderecommend that the authorisation is to be granted, is to be granted subject to conditions or is to be rejected.
Amendment 355 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 8 d – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 8 d – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 404 #
2017/0288(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21
Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
5. By [please insert the date calculated 5 years after date of application of this Regulation], the Commission shall submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation. The report shall include information on the extent to which this Regulation has contributed to a better functioning road passenger transport markesystem, in particular for passengers, the bus and coach workforce and the environment.
Amendment 281 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) Despite the improvements to consumer protection that have been made since the creation of the ESAs, consumers continue to experience abuse in the financial services market in the Union. In particular, problems that remain include: the conflict of interest that can arise when NCAs are charged with ensuring prudential supervision at the same time as being responsible for consumer protection; an inadequate statutory basis for ensuring consumer protection underpinning the NCAs in many Member States; insufficient resources dedicated specifically to pro-active consumer protection by the ESAs and the NCAs; a lack of consistent enforcement of EU and national consumer protection laws by the ESAs and NCAs in the Member States; inadequate legislation regulating the provision of financial advice to consumers and financial services users; and the impact of a sectoral approach by the ESAs, which fails to grasp the integrated reality of retail financial markets.
Amendment 283 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) The review of the mandate and powers of the ESAs presents an opportunity to boost consumer protection significantly by moving towards the solution suggested in the de Larosière report of establishing a dedicated authority to be responsible for conduct of business and market issues, across the three main financial sectors, which is separate from prudential supervision. Establishing a dedicated consumer protection organisation in the area of financial services has benefited consumers where it has been implemented, such as in the US, the UK, the Netherlands and Belgium. The High Level Expert Group on financial supervision should be reconvened in order to examine this proposal and produce a more comprehensive analysis of the value of this proposal being implemented in the Union;
Amendment 285 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) It is therefore crucial that the financial system plays its full part in meeting critical sustainability challenges and ensuring the EU meets its obligations under the Paris Agreement. This will require a deep re-engineering of the financial system to which the ESAs should make an active contribution starting with reforms to create the right regulatory and supervisory framework to mobilise and orient private capital flows towards sustainable investments. The ESAs should be equipped to monitor the implementation of this framework and its specific requirements by financial institutions and national competent authorities and to take action in response to the failure to ensure their implementation.
Amendment 289 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The ESAs should play an important role in identifying and reporting risks that environmental, social and governance factors pose to financial stability, and in rendering financial markets activity more consistent with sustainability objectives. The ESAs should provide guidance on how sustainability considerationsto financial institutions, national competent authorities and EU legislators on how sustainability considerations that are consistent with the EU's obligations under the Paris Agreement can be effectively embodied in relevant EU and national financial legislation, and promote coherent implementation of these provisions upon adoption. This requires that the ESAs have a clear mandate requiring them to not only consider environmental, social and governance factors but to be responsible for ongoing analysis of these factors across the financial sector. Each of the ESAs should be mandated with monitoring the enforcement of ESG requirements, issuing opinions and proposals on ESG factors in relation to financial services legislation in the Union, and intervening in the market where necessary to ensure the application of ESG requirements. Adequate resources should be dedicated to these tasks by the ESAs.
Amendment 298 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 301 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) A harmonised supervision of the financial sector also requires that disagreements between the competent authorities of different Member States in cross–border situations are settled efficiently. The existing rules for settling such disagreements are not fully satisfactory. They should therefore be adapted so as to be more easily applicable. The collaboration platforms established by EIOPA provide a good example of dispute resolution that could be adopted formally by the ESAs under their coordination function.
Amendment 309 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) Moreover, the Union dimension in the decision-making process within the Board of Supervisors should be enhanced by including independent full time members as members of the Board, who are not subject to possible conflicts of interest, including members representing the interests of consumers and civil society. Decision-making powers on issues of a regulatory nature and on direct supervision should remain fully with the competence of the Board of Supervisors. The Management Board should be transformed into an Executive Board composed of full time members and should decide on certain non-regulatory issues, including independent reviews of competent authorities, dispute settlements, breach of Union law, the Strategic Supervisory Plan, monitoring of outsourcing, delegation and risk transfers to third countries, stress tests and requests for information. The Executive Board should also examine and prepare all decisions to be taken by the Board of Supervisors. Moreover, the position and role of the Chairperson should be enhanced by empowering the Chairperson with formal tasks and with a casting vote in the Executive Board. Finally, the Union dimension in the ESAs governance should also be strengthened by amending the selection procedure of the Chairperson and the members of the Executive Board to one which will include the role of the Council and the European Parliament. The Executive Board should have a balanced composition.
Amendment 367 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point –i (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point –i (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(-i) point (a) is replaced by the following: "(a) to contribute to the establishment of high-quality common regulatory and supervisory standards and practices that ensure consumer protection, financial stability and environmental sustainability, in particular by providing opinions to the Union institutions and by developing guidelines, recommendations, and draft regulatory and implementing technical standards which shall be based on the legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2);"
Amendment 435 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Regulation 1093/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Amendment 436 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Regulation 1093/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. WThere two thirds of the members of the Banking S role of the stakeholder Gs group are of the opinion that the Authority has exceeded its competence by issuing certain guidelines or recommendations, they may send a reasoned opinion to the Commission. The Commission shall request an explanation justifying the issuance of the guidelines or recommendations concerned from the Authority. The Commission shall, on receipt of the explanation from the Authority, assess the scope of theis as an advisory body established to provide feedback on the Authority's guidelines orand recommendations in view of the Authority's competence. Where the Commission consid. It shall not have the powers that the Authority has exceeded its competence, and after having given the Authority the opportunity to state its views, the Commission may adopt an implementing decision requiring the Authority to withdraw the guidelines or recommendations concerned .The decision of the Commission shall be made public.;o block the Authority's proposals or work.
Amendment 446 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d a (new)
Regulation 1093/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(da) the following paragraph 5a is inserted: “5a. When carrying out its tasks in accordance with this Regulation, the authority shall take into account the integration of environmental, social and governance related factors. This shall including monitoring of how financial institutions identify, report, and address risks that environmental, social and governance factors may pose to financial stability, providing guidance on how sustainability considerations can be effectively incorporated into relevant EU financial legislation, and promoting coherent implementation of these provisions upon adoption.”
Amendment 485 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a – point iii
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a – point iii
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) establishing sectoral and cross- sectoral training programmes, including with respect to technological innovation, and environmental, social and governance-related risks, facilitating personnel exchanges and encouraging competent authorities to intensify the use of secondment schemes and other tools;;
Amendment 488 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a – point iii a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(iiia) the following point (ea) is added: “(ea) providing guidance on how to appropriately use forward-looking climate scenario analysis for financial institutions, built on standardised climate scenarios, including a well below 2°C scenario that is consistent with the Paris Agreement.”
Amendment 491 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point iii b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point iii b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(iiib) the following point (eb) is added: “(eb) putting in place a monitoring system to assess material environmental, social and governance-related risks built on standardised forward-looking climate scenarios.”
Amendment 659 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point –a (new)Regulation (EU) 1093/2010
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point –a (new)Regulation (EU) 1093/2010
Article 37 – paragraph 2
(-a) paragraph 2 shall be replaced by the following: “2. The Banking Stakeholder Group shall be composed of 30 members, representing in balanced proportions credit and investment institutions operating in the Union, their employees’ representatives as well as consumers and consumer protection organisations, users of banking services and representatives of SMEs. At least five of its members shall be independent top-ranking academics. Ten of its members shall represent financial institutions, at least three of whom shall represent cooperative and savings banks. At least 50% of the Group shall not be representatives of the financial services industry. At least five of its members shall represent environmental, social and governance-related interests.”
Amendment 664 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point –a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point –a a (new)
Regulation 1093/2010
Article 37 – paragraph 3
Article 37 – paragraph 3
(-a a) paragraph 3 is amended as follows: “3. The members of the Banking Stakeholder Group shall be appointed by the Board of Supervisors, following proposals from the relevant stakeholders. In making its decision, the Board of Supervisors shall, to the extent possible, ensure an appropriate geographical and gender balance and representation of stakeholders across the Union.”
Amendment 726 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30
Regulation 1093/2010
Article 45 – paragraph 1
Article 45 – paragraph 1
1. The Executive Board shall be composed of the Chairperson and three full time members. The Chairperson shall assign clearly defined policy and managerial tasks to each of the full time members. Sustainable finance and consumer protection policy shall each be assigned to one of the full-time members. One of the full time members shall be assigned responsibilities for budgetary matters and for matters relating to the work programme of the Authority ("Member in charge "). One of the full time members shall act as a Vice Chairperson and carry out the tasks of the Chairperson in his or her absence or reasonable impediment, in accordance with this Regulation.
Amendment 872 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point -i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point -i
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point a
(-i) point (a) is replaced by the following: “(a) to contribute to the establishment of high-quality common regulatory and supervisory standards and practices, including with respect to environmental, social and governance-related risks, in particular by providing opinions to the Union institutions and by developing guidelines, recommendations, and draft regulatory and implementing technical standards which shall be based on the legislative acts referred to in Article 1(2);”
Amendment 875 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a – point iii
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point h
(h) to foster the protection of policyholders, pensions scheme members and beneficiaries, consumers and investors through ensuring the representation of their representative organisations in the decision-making process;
Amendment 892 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. Where two thirds of the members of the Insurance and Reinsurance SThe role of the stakeholder Gs group or Occupational Pensions Stakeholder Group are of the opinion that the Authority has exceeded its competence by issuing certain guidelines or recommendations, they may send a reasoned opinion to the Commission. The Commission shall request an explanation justifying the issuance of the guidelines or recommendations concerned from the Authority. The Commission shall, on receipt of the explanation from the Authority, assess the scope of theis as an advisory body established to provide feedback on the Authority's guidelines orand recommendations in view of the Authority's competence. Where the Commission considers that the Authority has exceeded its competence, and after having given the Authority the opportunity to state its views, the Commission may adopt an implementing decision requiring the Authority to withdraw the guidelines or recommendations concerned. The decision of the Commission shall be made public.;. It shall not have the power to block the Authority's proposals or work.
Amendment 893 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Amendment 911 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) establishing sectoral and cross- sectoral training programmes, including with respect to technological innovation, environmental, social and governance- related risks, facilitating personnel exchanges and encouraging competent authorities to intensify the use of secondment schemes and other tools;;
Amendment 913 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 – point a – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(iiia) the following point (e a) is added: “(ea) providing guidance on how to appropriately use forward-looking climate scenario analysis for financial institutions, built on standardised climate scenarios, including a well below 2°C scenario that is consistent with the Paris Agreement.”
Amendment 915 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 point a – point iii b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 13 point a – point iii b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(iiib) the following point (e a) is added: “(eb) putting in place a monitoring system to assess material environmental, social and governance related risks built on standardised forward-looking climate scenarios.”
Amendment 988 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a
Article 8 – paragraph 1 a
1a. " When carrying out its tasks in accordance with this Regulation, the authority shall take account of technological innovation, innovative and sustainable business models, and the integration of environmental, social and governance related factors.;governance related factors, including monitoring of how financial institutions identify, report, and address risks that environmental, social and governance factors may pose to financial stability, providing guidance on how sustainability considerations can be effectively embodied in relevant EU financial legislation, and promoting coherent implementation of these provisions upon adoption.
Amendment 995 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Amendment 996 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d – introductory part
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d – introductory part
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5
Article 16 – paragraph 5
5. WThere two thirds of the members of the Securities and Markets S role of the stakeholder Gs group are of the opinion that the Authority has exceeded its competence by issuing certain guidelines or recommendations, they may send a reasoned opinion to the Commission. The Commission shall request an explanation justifying the issuance of the guidelines or recommendations concerned from the Authority. The Commission shall, on receipt of the explanation from the Authority, assess the scope of theis as an advisory body established to provide feedback on the Authority's guidelines orand recommendations in view of the Authority's competence. Where the Commission consid. It shall not have the powers that the Authority has exceeded its competence, and after having given the Authority the opportunity to state its views, the Commission may adopt an implementing decision requiring the Authority to withdraw the guidelines or recommendations concerned. The decision of the Commission shall be made public.;o block the Authority's proposals or work.
Amendment 999 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 16 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(da) the following paragraph (5a) is added: ‘5a. The Authority shall ensure that environmental, social and governance considerations, as those relate to the Authority’s tasks, are properly assessed in all guidelines and recommendations, and ensure that clear expectations as to these considerations are set for both national competent authorities and financial institutions. This should include specific guidance on how to appropriately use forward-looking climate scenario analysis for financial institutions, built on standardised climate scenarios, including a well below 2°C scenario that is consistent with the Paris Agreement.’
Amendment 1011 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point iii a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
(iiia) the following point (ea) is added: ‘(ea) providing guidance on how to appropriately use forward-looking climate scenario analysis for financial institutions, built on standardised climate scenarios, including a well below 2°C scenario that is consistent with the Paris Agreement.’
Amendment 1014 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point iii a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point iii a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – point e b (new)
(iiib) the following point (eb) is added: ‘(eb) putting in place a monitoring system to assess material environmental, social and governance related risks built on standardised forward-looking climate scenarios.’
Amendment 1062 #
2017/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point -a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point -a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Amendment 108 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council46 requires standardised OTC derivatives contracts to be cleared through a Central Counterparty (CCP) in line with similar requirements in other G20 countries. That Regulation also introduced strict prudential, organisational and business conduct requirements for CCPs and established arrangements for their prudential supervision in order to minimise risks to users of a CCP and underpin financial stability. While the increase in central clearing is welcome in that it manages risks to the financial system more effectively than bilateral clearing, the CCP system presents new risks to the financial system. The massive amounts of funds involved, the extreme concentration of the clearing market, and its complexity and interconnectedness, combine to pose serious and systemic risks, while supervision, competition and recovery and resolution mechanisms have not kept up with the rapid pace of the market’s development. __________________ 46 Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (OJ L201, 27.7.2012, p.1).
Amendment 110 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Since the adoption of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, the volume of CCP activity in the Union and globally has grown rapidly in scale and in scope. The expansion in CCP activity is set to continue in the coming years with the introduction of additional clearing obligations and the rise in voluntary clearing by counterparties not subject to a clearing obligation. The Commission’s proposal of 4 May 201747 to amend Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 in a targeted manner, to improve its effectiveness and proportionality, will create further incentives for CCPs to offer central clearing of derivatives to counterparties and facilitate access to clearing to small financial and non- financial counterparties. Deeper and more integrated capital markets resulting from the Capital Markets Union (CMU) willManaging and reducing the massive systemic risks posed to financial stability by OTC derivatives further increases the need for cross-border clearing in the Union, thus further increasing the importance and the interconnectedness of CCPs within the financial system. __________________ 47 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 as regards the clearing obligation, the suspension of the clearing obligation, the reporting requirements, the risk-mitigation techniques for OTC derivatives contracts not cleared by a central counterparty, the registration and supervision of trade repositories and the requirements for trade repositories, COM/2017/0208 final.
Amendment 115 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The number of CCPs currently established in the Union and authorised under Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 remains relatively limited, standing at 17 in June 2017. 28 third-country CCPs have been recognised under the equivalence provisions of that Regulation, allowing them also to offer their services to clearing members and trading venues established in the Union48 . Clearing markets are well integrated across the Union but highly concentrated in certain asset classes and highly interconnected. Euro clearing is highly concentrated in the City of London, where ever year British-based CCPs process around €1,300 billion of euro-denominated trades. The concentration of risk makes the failure of a CCP a low- probability but a potentially extremely high-impact event. In line with the G20 consensus, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Regulation on CCP Recovery and Resolution49 in November 2016 to ensure that authorities are appropriately prepared to address a failing CCP, safeguarding financial stability and limiting taxpayer costs. __________________ 48 In accordance with Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, ESMA provides a list of the third-country CCPs that have been recognised to offer services and activities in the Union. The third-country CCPs are established in 15 countries covered by CCP equivalence decisions adopted by the Commission, including Australia, Hong Kong, Singapore, Japan, Canada, Switzerland, South Korea, Mexico, South Africa and the US CFTC, Brazil, UAE, Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC), India and New Zealand. 49 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a framework for the recovery and resolution of central counterparties and amending Regulations (EU) No 1095/2010, (EU) No 648/2012, and (EU) 2015/2365. COM(2016) 856 final.
Amendment 127 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) The potential high correlation between euro clearing activity and monetary policy means it is in the interests of the citizens of the EU and the Eurozone for euro-clearing to be primarily based in the eurosystem where it can be subject to full EU supervision. The striking down of the ECB’s ‘location policy’ (which required CCPs with at least €5 billion in daily exposure to be located in the eurosystem) by the EU General Court was not based on an assessment of the substance of the policy, which aimed to manage systemic risk.
Amendment 130 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In view of the global nature of financial markets and of the need to address inconsistencies in the supervision of Union and third-country CCPs, ESMA’s legally binding ability to promote convergence in the supervision of CCPs should be enhanced. In order to confer new roles and responsibilities on ESMA, Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a European Supervisory Authority (ESMA)53 should be amended. __________________ 53 Regulation (EU) No 1095/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Securities and Markets Authority), amending Decision No 716/2009/EC and repealing Commission Decision 2009/77/EC (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p.84
Amendment 134 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) A specific Executive Session (“CCP Executive Session”) should be created within the Board of Supervisors of ESMA to handle tasks related to CCPs in general, and supervise Union and third- country CCPs in particular, including relocation decisions or requirements. In order to guarantee a smooth establishment of the CCP Executive Session, it is necessary to clarify its interactions with the Board of Supervisors of ESMA, its organisation and the tasks it should perform.
Amendment 156 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to ensure transparency and democratic control, as well as to safeguard the rights of the Union institutions, the Head and the two Directors of the CCP Executive Session shouldall be accountable to the European Parliament and to the Council for anyll decisions taken on the basis of this Regulation.
Amendment 170 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) While national competent authorities continue to exercise their current supervisory responsibilities under Regulation (EU) No 648/2012, the prior consent of ESMA should be required for certain decisions in order to promote consistency in the supervision of CCPs throughout the Union, and being conscious of the issue of interdependencies between the clearing system and the broader financial system. A specific mechanism is introduced for cases of disagreement between ESMA and the national competent authorities. Similarly, there is a need to better reflect the mandates of the central banks of issue concerning their monetary policy responsibilities, due to the potential risks that the malfunctioning of a CCP could pose to the implementation of the monetary policy of the Union and the promotion of the smooth operation of payment systems. Therefore, the prior consent of the relevant central banks of issue should be required on certain decisions envisaged by national competent authorities, in particular when it relates to a CCP’s payment and settlement arrangements and related liquidity risk management procedures for the transactions denominated in that central bank of issue’s currency.
Amendment 175 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) A significant amount of financial instruments denominated in the currencies of the Member States are cleared by recognised third-country CCPs. This will increase substantially when the United Kingdom withdraws from the Union and the CCPs established there will no longer be governed by the requirements of this Regulation. Cooperation arrangements agreed in the supervisory colleges will no longer be subject to the safeguards and procedures of this Regulation, including the Court of Justice of the European Union. This implies significant challenges for Union and Member State authorities in safeguarding financial stabilitye withdrawal of Britain from the EU poses special and severe risks to the euro- clearing system due to the fact the overwhelming majority of euro-clearing takes place in the City of London. Removing EU supervision and oversight rights in this regard will significantly limit the ability of EU authorities to gain necessary information and take any required action, and requires a fundamental revision of current practice.
Amendment 178 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25
Recital 25
(25) As part of its commitment to integrated financial markets, the Commission should continue to determine by way of equivalence decisions that the legal and supervisory frameworks of third countries fulfil the requirements of Regulation (EU) No 648/2012. In order to enhance the implementation of the current equivalence regime in relation to CCPs, the Commission should be able to, if necessary, specify further the criteria for assessing the equivalence of third-country CCP regimes. It is also necessary to empower ESMA with the supervision of regulatory and supervisory developments in those third-country CCP regimes that have been deemed equivalent by the Commission. This is in order to ensure that the equivalence criteria and any specific conditions set for their use continue to be satisfied by third countries. ESMA should report its findings to the Commission on a confidential basis.
Amendment 181 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26 a (new)
Recital 26 a (new)
(26a) Should voluntary or mandatory relocation of clearing houses take place in future as a result of this revision, further steps must be taken to ensure that competition is guaranteed in the clearing system so that a new EU-based concentration of CCPs does not result from this change.
Amendment 183 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) Once the Commission has determined the legal and supervisory framework of a third country as equivalent to the Union framework, the process to recognise CCPs from that third country should take into account the risks those CCPs present for the financial stability of the Union or for the Member State. If the risk posed to the EU financial system is high, based on a defined and transparent criteria, then recognition should be denied.
Amendment 219 #
2017/0136(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) ESMA should be able to impose fines on both Tier 1 and Tier 2 CCPs where it finds that they have committed, intentionally or negligently, an infringement of this Regulation by providing incorrect or misleading information to ESMA. In addition, ESMA should be able to impose fines on Tier 2 CCPs where it finds that they have committed, intentionally or negligently, an infringement of the additional requirements applicable to them in this Regulation, and to withdraw recognition from Tier 2 CCPs in the case of more than one infringement.
Amendment 32 #
2017/0125(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Title 1
Title 1
rejects the Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the European Defence Industrial Development Programme aiming at supporting the competitiveness and innovative capacity of the EU defence industry
Amendment 122 #
2017/0122(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Special consideration and flexibility shall be given to road hauliers operating on the island of Ireland, who face the threat of diverging rules north and south of the border. Ireland's island status, geographical and peripheral location must therefore be taken into account when affording legislative options to achieve high worker and drivers' rights.
Amendment 395 #
2017/0122(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 (new)
Regulation (EC) No 561/2006
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 1 a (new)
9 a. In Article 9, paragraph 1 a is inserted: "1a. This derogation should be extended to regular weekly rests when the ferry or similar journey duration exceeds 10 hours."
Amendment 490 #
2017/0122(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 165/2014
Article 34 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 7 a (new)
(2 a) In Article 34, new paragraph 7 a shall be inserted: "7a. Drivers shall be provided with training on how to correctly use a tachograph in order to achieve full use of the equipment. The driver must not be responsible for the cost of their training, which should be provided by their employer."
Amendment 491 #
2017/0122(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 165/2014
Article 34 – paragraph 7 b (new)
Article 34 – paragraph 7 b (new)
(2 b) In Article 34, new paragraph 7 b shall be inserted: "7b. The maximum amount of control authorities should be trained on how to correctly read and monitor a tachograph."
Amendment 15 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) By nature, annual vehicle taxes are unrequited payments linked to the fact that the vehicle is registered on behalf of the taxpayer during a given period and, as such do nothe setting and collection of annual vehicle taxes are a national competency. Objective criteria to set vehicle taxation depends on a wide range of variables which are best rdeflect any particular use of infrastructure. For similar reasons, vehicles taxeined at national level. These may include environmental criteria such as arge not effective when it comes to incentivising cleanerof vehicle, fuel consumption and morefuel efficient operations, or reducing congestioncy.
Amendment 17 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Tolls being directly linked to road- use, they are considerably better fitted to achieve these objectives. In accordance with Article 7k of Directive 1999/62/EC, Member States which introduce tolls may provide appropriate compensation to national haulierAny tolls introduced in Member States should be under public ownership so that the tax collected is redistributed for the benefit of citizens. The privatization of public roads, or ownership by public-private partnerships, should be discouraged to prevent tolls from negatively affecting the mobility of EU citizens.
Amendment 20 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) The application of vehicle taxes represents a cost the industry must so far is a national competency implemented by the Membear in any event, even if tolls were to be levied by Member States. Therefore, vehicle taxes may act as an obstacle to the introduction of tollStates. The ability to choose how best to incentivise low-emission transport through vehicle taxation must remain a decision for Member States.
Amendment 27 #
2017/0115(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Therefore, Member States should be afforded more scope to lowerregulate vehicle taxes, namely by way of a reduction of the minima set out in Directive 1999/62/EC. In order to minimise the risk of distortions of ation since collection of taxes is a national competency. Member States must have the necessary scompetition between transport operators established in different Member States, such reduction should be gradual to take into account objectively defined criteria set at a national level for vehicle taxation.
Amendment 158 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37a. Considers that it is vital for exercise of democratic control over the executive for the Parliament to be empowered with powers of inquiry that match those of national parliaments of the EU; believes that in order to exercise this role of democratic oversight the Parliament must have the power to summon and compel witnesses to appear and compel the production of documents; believes that in order for these rights to be exercised the Member States must agree to implement sanctions against individuals for failure to appear or produce documents in line with national law governing national parliamentary inquiries; reiterates the Parliament's support for the position outlined in the 2012 report on this issue;
Amendment 159 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 37 b (new)
37b. Considers that the limitation on the subject matter of a committee of inquiry set out in the Lisbon Treaty means that special committees must also have the same powers of investigation as a committee of inquiry in order to effectively examine broader public policy questions that may not involve alleged contravention or maladministration of EU law;
Amendment 160 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 37 c (new)
37c. Considers that in order to closely align with the parliamentary inquiry powers of Member States, the Parliament should establish a permanent subcommittee on investigations;
Amendment 161 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 37 d (new)
37d. Considers that the 12-month time limit on committees of inquiry is arbitrary and often insufficient; believes the members of the inquiry committee are best placed to determine if an inquiry should be extended and if so, for what period; calls for the only pre-existing binding time limit on an inquiry committee to be linked to the Parliamentary term;
Amendment 163 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 38
38. Considers that the powers of Parliament’s committees of inquiry should be better aligned with those of the national parliaments, in particular as regards the summoningto ensure the effective summoning and participation of individuals and the application of sanctions in the event of refusal to cooperate; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support the related provisions in Parliament’s current proposal;
Amendment 165 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38a. Considers that the operating period of any inquiry committee should be synchronised with the legislative processes relating to the subject under investigation;
Amendment 167 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 41 a (new)
41a. Notes that in several recent committees of inquiry and special committees, the Commission and Council have in some cases failed to provide the documents requested and in other cases provided the requested documents only after long delays; considers that there must be an accountability mechanism introduced in order to ensure the immediate and guaranteed transfer of documents to the Parliament that the committee of inquiry or special committee requests and is entitled to access;
Amendment 171 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 45
45. Notes that Rule 198 of Parliament’s Rules of Procedure should define more clearly when the 12-month duration of a committee of inquiry should start; suggests to have enough flexibility to ensure that there is enough time for the investigations; calls for the inquiry committee work to start only after the requested documents are received from the EU institutions;
Amendment 172 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 46
Amendment 174 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 47
Amendment 176 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 48
48. Underlines that Parliament’s internal administrative rules are aligned to the established practice of standing committees and as such are often not suited to the ad-hoc and temporary nature of a committee of inquiry, which operates under more unusual circumstances, with a very specific scope and during a limited timeframe; considers, therefore, that the development of a defined set of rules relating to the effective functioning of committees of inquiry in regards to the conducting of hearings and missions, for example, in a way that guarantees fair political representation, would increase efficiency; considers that there is a risk that financial constraints may prevent committees of inquiry from hearing all the experts deemed necessary for the committee to perform its duty; considers that internal authorisation deadlines for hearings and missions should be made more flexible;
Amendment 177 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Notes that inquiry committees are temporary committees overlapping with the members' standing committee work and therefore requests flexibility of using members outside of the inquiry committee to cover the absence of any member or substitute member;
Amendment 179 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 48 b (new)
48b. Considers that the inquiry committee mandate should be able to be altered according to the findings during the investigation in order to have full picture of the issues under investigation;
Amendment 180 #
2016/2908(RSP)
Paragraph 50
50. Notes that accredited parliamentary assistants are not allowed to consultthe current rules for accessing classified and other confidential information made available by Council, Commission or Member States to the European Parliament in the context of an inquiry do not provide full legal clarity but are generally interpreted as excluding parliamentary assistants (APAs) from consulting and analysing non- classified ‘other confidential information’ in a secure reading room under the current rules; notes that somea range of Members found that this rule stands in the way of effective and thorough consultation of such documents within the limited time available to committees of inquiry, and that the TAX2 committee, during which access was temporarily and exceptionally granted to APAs, was able to make use of these resources in a more comprehensive and effective manner; calls therefore for the introduction of a clearly worded provision guaranteeing the right of access to documents for APAs on the basis of the 'need to know' principle, in their support role for Members, in a renegotiated Inter- institutional Agreement; urges the relevant bodies to expedite the renegotiation of this point so as not to hamper the effectiveness and efficiency of future and ongoing parliamentary inquiries;
Amendment 4 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to the European Systemic Risk Board's first EU Shadow Banking Monitor from July 2016,
Amendment 7 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 b (new)
Citation 1 b (new)
- having regard to the IMF's 2016 Global Financial Stability Report,
Amendment 30 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A (new)
Recital -A (new)
-A. whereas the Banking Union has further weakened Member States’ control over their banking systems, and this situation is particularly serious in the Member States which are more peripheral and worst hit by the economic and financial crisis;
Amendment 31 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A a (new)
Recital -A a (new)
-Aa. whereas the Banking Union, with its unique bank supervision and resolution methods, is a political way of enforcing the centralisation and capital concentration process in the European Union, and whereas it has been used to promote and carry out merger and acquisition operations in the banking sectors of a number of Member States and to concentrate deposits and investments in the hands of Europe’s financial behemoths, exacerbating the ‘too big to fail’ problem;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A b (new)
Recital -A b (new)
-Ab. whereas the Banking Union has given rise to a pan-European banking oligopoly, a development which runs counter to one of its supposed main objectives – combating the ‘too big to fail’ problem;
Amendment 33 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital -A c (new)
Recital -A c (new)
-Ac. whereas the Banking Union guarantees stability for big capital, ensuring that public funds continue to be channelled for purposes which serve big capital’s own interests;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas since the establishment of the Banking Union has been a fundamental step taken towards the completion of a genuine Economic and Monetary Unionthere has already been an increased concentration of European megabanks; whereas the envisaged 'level playing field' and an increasingly integrated single market for financial services will contribute further to this concentration instead of addressing the too-big-to-fail problem;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the establishment of the Banking Union has been a fundamental step taken towards the completion of a genuine Economic and Monetary Uniondoes not deal with the too- big to fail, too-interconnected-to-fail and too-complex-to-resolve problems; whereas as a result it does not secure an end to publicly funded bank bailouts nor to the imposition of conditional austerity measures;
Amendment 39 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the establishment of the Banking Union hwas been a fundamentalone of the most important steps taken towardsfollowing the complereation of a genuinthe Economic and Monetary Union;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the capital and liquidity ratios of EU banks appear to have steadilightly improved over the last years; whereas risks to financial stability nevertheless remain; whereas the current sinternal models for capital requirement calculations have allowed some instituation calls for caution when introducing regulatory changes; s to artificially boost their level of capital; whereas risks to financial stability nevertheless remain;
Amendment 57 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas despite the fact that the European banking sector has received more than €1.6 trillion in taxpayer support since 2008, and despite the fact that the ECB has provided €80 billion a month in life-support financing, another crisis is unfolding in the European banking sector;
Amendment 61 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas the EBA chairperson observed in October 2016 that as a result of the high level of non-performing loans in European banks, banking supervisors have "serious doubts [about] the long term viability of significant segments of the banking system"1a; _________________ 1a https://konferenz.fma.gv.at/media/124793 9980
Amendment 62 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas parallel to the improvement of banking regulations on capital requirements, there has been a significant rise in the largely unregulated shadow banking sector; whereas the European Systemic Risk Board noted in July 2016 that the following factors were significant sources and amplifiers of systemic risks: financial leverage in hedge funds and real estate funds; systemic interconnectedness, especially between money market funds and the banking system; and maturity and liquidity transformation; whereas the systemic risks posed by the shadow banking sector highlight the urgent need for regulation of the sector;
Amendment 64 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)
Recital B d (new)
Bd. whereas the restructuring of European banks in response to the sector's lack of profitability has led to the announcement of 130 000 job losses in the second half of 2015 and a further 46 000 job losses in 2016;
Amendment 65 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B e (new)
Recital B e (new)
Be. whereas the low profitability of the European banking sector is being driven by the huge level of NPLs, sectoral over- capacity, and the low/negative interest rate environment caused by the low demand for credit;
Amendment 66 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B f (new)
Recital B f (new)
Bf. whereas it is not the role of the European institutions to ensure the profitability of the banking sector;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2247(INI)
Bg. whereas the ECB's conventional and unconventional expansionary monetary policies have underpinned a small amount of growth in the euro area at the cost of contributing to an excess demand for financial assets, producing overvalued and increasingly volatile financial markets;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B h (new)
Recital B h (new)
Bh. whereas Deutsche Bank has been found to be seriously undercapitalised in relation to the Basel standards and its own targets; whereas the US division of Deutsche Bank failed the Federal Reserve stress test this year; whereas the reason Deutsche Bank passed the EBA's stress test this year was due to special treatment; whereas the IMF described Deutsche Bank in June 2016 as probably "the most important net contributor to systemic risks";
Amendment 69 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the new resolution regime that entered into force in January 2016 represented a change of paradigm;, and whereas market participants need to fully understand and adapt to the new systemin practice it prevents Member States from nationalising banks regarded as systemically important (i.e. those covered by the single dispute settlement mechanism), whilst doing nothing to obviate the need for a Member State to inject money into a systemically important bank which runs into difficulties;
Amendment 87 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Rejects the theory that the Banking Union will necessarily resolve the ‘too big to fail’ problem and strengthen the banking and financial sector; considers that the class-motivated nature of this project and the political- ideological approach it involves will not prevent the continued use of public money to bail out the banks’ major shareholders, nor will it stop banks engaging in financial manipulation or speculation;
Amendment 89 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 a (new)
Paragraph -1 a (new)
-1a. Stresses that, given the importance of the financial system, and in view of current and recent experiences, capital concentration policies in the banking sector must be ended, and control of the banks and the financial system must be placed in public hands; takes the view that these two measures are prerequisites for guaranteeing that financial resources used to stimulate the economy foster the development of countries and improve the living standards of their people and workers;
Amendment 99 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the high level of non- performing loans (NPLs) in some jurisdictions, particularly in the periphery economies resulting from the 2008 financial crisis and the EU's response to it; considers that this issue is crucial and has yet to be solved; welcomes the work of the SSM and its draft guidance on this issue; looks forward to the results of the work on a minimum EU insolvency framework; calls on Member States to improve their insolvency legislation and to stimulate growth in order to tackle NPLs;
Amendment 106 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that according to ECB data, by April 2016 banks in the euro area held EUR 1 014 billion in non-performing loans; notes that the decline of the industrial sector in Italy and Greece has been a major contributing factor to the growth in NPLs in these states; considers that the austerity policies enforced by the Troika in the memorandum countries, and through the Stability and Growth Pact, have exacerbated the NPL problem;
Amendment 113 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Considers that the lack of profitability in the European banking sector is caused by demand-side problems in addition to the stock of NPLs and the interest rate environment; notes that general economic stagnation and the record-high levels of liquid assets held by non-financial corporations in the euro area (in part due to decades of wage compression), which reduce reliance on and demand for loans by corporations, are significant factors in the chronically low level of bank profitability; considers that this situation requires an end to austerity policies and an urgent and substantial EU infrastructure investment programme that invests new funds into the real economy;
Amendment 122 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Considers that there are massive risks associated with sovereign debt; notes, however, that modifying itsconsiders the attempts by some Member States to weaken prudential treatment could have a significant effect on the financial sector, which calls for caution in reform efforts; awaits with interest the results of the international work on this issue; considers that, in the end, a better regulatory framework, be it European or international, will be neededquirements to be counter-productive; considers that only the structural separation of trading and credit activities will effectively reduce the link between sovereigns and banks;
Amendment 147 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers it essential to ensure the comparability of risk-weighted assets across institutions in order to allow for effective supervision; welcomes the work done internationally to streamline the resort to internal models, as well as the introduction of a leverage ratio to act as a backstop; recalls, however, that the regulatory changes planned should not result in significant increases in capital requirements, nor harm the ability of banks to finance the real economy, in particular SMEs; supports the introduction of regulatory capital levels of at least 15% of risk-weighted assets;
Amendment 205 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the ‘too-big-to-fail’ issue still needs to be addressed; , too- interconnected-to-fail and too-complex- to-resolve problems will not be resolved by the Banking Union but rather exacerbated by it; calls for serious action to finally be taken to address the too-big- to fail issue by separating banks into investment and commercial banks; believes that investment banks should be restricted in size and connectedness and allowed to fail; calls for the introduction of a maximum size of banks and a cap on exposure to derivatives in all financial institutions; calls on Member States and the Commission to promote regional public banking as a credible alternative to the current crisis-ridden banking sector;
Amendment 208 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the ‘too-big-to-fail’ issue still needs to be addressedBanking Union will not help to resolve the ‘too-big-to-fail’ issue, as it furthers concentration in the banking sector and, consequently, increases the number of institutions that are ‘too big to fail’;
Amendment 237 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Condemns the EBA for providing special treatment to Deutsche Bank in the 2016 stress test by including the $4bn proceeds from a sale of its stake in Hua Xia before the sale had actually been made; expresses doubt that the ECB is capable of identifying a failing bank in due time; expresses concern that there is a fundamental conflict of interest between the ECB's role in defending the stability of the euro and the supervision of European megabanks;
Amendment 286 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Considers that the Banking Union does not meet its stated goal of preventing taxpayer-funded bank bailouts from occurring in future as a result of the precautionary recapitalisation clause in the BRRD/SRM by which a Member State may provide public money to an ailing bank before a bail-in of creditors is triggered on the grounds of protecting financial stability; considers that the burden-sharing requirement in the EU's State Aid legislation likewise contain a 'safeguard' clause under which bail-in can be avoided and public funds used on the grounds of protecting financial stability;
Amendment 292 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)
Paragraph 10 b (new)
10b. Believes the bail-in of creditors of only 8 per cent will raise only a small proportion of the costs of resolution, which is totally insufficient; notes that in ordinary insolvency procedures investors would usually lose far more than 8 per cent;
Amendment 294 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)
Paragraph 10 c (new)
10c. Believes that bail-in still poses risks to ordinary taxpayers in a number of ways including increased premiums in pensions and health insurance and in the mis-selling of risky financial products eligible for bail-in to small retail investors; calls for the introduction of strict disclosure requirements on risk factors for securities eligible for bail-in in order to protect retail investors from being mis-sold inappropriate and high-risk bank securities;
Amendment 299 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Takes note of the differences between the FSB TLAC standard and the MREL; stresses, however, that both standards share the same objective; concludes therefore that a holistic approach tourges the Commission to ensure the MREL standards fully meet the TLAC benchmarks; supports a loss- absorption can be reached by combining the two; highlights that due consideration should be given to retaining the two criteria of size and risk- weighted assetbency requirement based on the leverage ratio, which is not dependent on risk weights and internal models; notes that Risk Weighted Assets are not always a reliable predictor of banking resilience; expresses concern that including the RWA in the TLAC requirement may incentivise megabanks to take on more risks;
Amendment 305 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Considers that a loss absorbency amount based on capital requirements will fail in a crisis of megabanks if the too-big-to-fail and too-interconnected-to- fail problems are not dealt with through structural separation; supports the view that the MREL floor should be supplemented with a measure to take into account a bank's exposure to the distress of other institutions in order to deal with the too-interconnected-to-fail problem;
Amendment 425 #
2016/2247(INI)
24. WBelcomieves the establishment of loan facility agreements between the SRF and the Banking Union Member States; is of the opinion, nevertheless, that this solution will again result in taxpayer-funded bailouts and is not sufficient to do away with the bank- sovereign vicious circle and that the work on a common fiscal backstop for the SRF, which should be fiscally neutral over the medium term, should continue step by step;
Amendment 435 #
2016/2247(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls for the Banking Union and its mechanisms to be dissolved;
Amendment 3 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that farmers’ livelihoods depend on getting produce to the market and that loss of produce at farm level equates to loss of investment and incomeby ignoring the demand of the market the Common Agricultural Policy leads to destroyed produce and prices far below the cost;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Stresses that around 88 million tonnes of food are wasted in the EU every year, with associated costs estimated at 143 billion euros; stresses that reducing food waste is one of the key strategies to combat hunger in the world;
Amendment 22 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. Stresses that food wastage has huge environmental consequences, contributes to climate change and represents a waste of limited resources such as land, energy and water;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)
Paragraph 1 c (new)
1 c. Notes that the global food production is more than enough to feed the growing world population, but highlights that the production is not sustainable and that large volumes of food go to waste;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Stresses the fact that, in general, the EU produces more food than domestic consumption demands and thereby it contributes to the food-wastage phenomenon with agricultural overproduction as one of its causes;
Amendment 69 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Calls for a tailor-made approach in the EU agricultural production, so that production is adjusted to the demand in order to avoid over-supply and food wastage, with positive effects also on the environment;
Amendment 85 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Encourages Member States and the Commission to promote local and organic food and short food supply chains which can contribute to the reduction of the food waste;
Amendment 88 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Stresses that fight against food wastage should not compromise food safety and environmental standards, nor animal protection standards, notably animal health and welfare;
Amendment 97 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Calls on all stakeholders in the food production, supply and consumption chains, from consumers and retailers to the food processors and producers, including farmers, to use various best practices from the EU Member States to combat food losses and prevent food waste generation on different levels along the food production, supply and consumption chains;
Amendment 116 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Believes in the polluter pays principle and calls on the Commission to review the VAT Directive in order to allow Member States to put sustainable products in the low VAT rate category and products that incur environmental damage and animal suffering in the high VAT rate category;
Amendment 147 #
2016/2223(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls on the EU Commission and Member States to launch a campaign to raise awareness among the EU citizens on the serious economic, social and environmental implications of food wastage;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the increased use of palm oil in processed food, with some 50 % of packaged goods now containing palm oil, and as a biofuel; calls for introduction of clear and transparent mandatory labelling schemes of palm oil in processed goods in order to help consumers to make informed purchasing choices;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes with concern that processed palm oil that is contained in wide variety of products may have serious health risks and implications to the consumers;
Amendment 29 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the alarming scale of deforestation driven by palm oil, especially in the South-East Asia, where the majority of palm oil production takes place in Malaysia and Indonesia; notes that palm oil is an important driver of deforestation for commercial agriculture, where extremely biodiverse tropical forest is being converted to monocultural palm oil plantations at the expense of natural habitats and ecosystems and biodiversity;
Amendment 44 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that deforestation of rainforest for palm oil production contributes significantly to climate change; in addition palm oil development is causing severe damage to the landscape and have been linked to issues such as land erosion and the pollution of rivers;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Stresses with great concern that palm oil expansion and deforestation of rainforests is pushing a considerable number of animal species in South-East Asia to extinction, notably orang-utans, Sumatran tigers or Malayan sun bears which are critically endangered and could become extinct in the wild within the next years;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)
Paragraph 2 d (new)
2d. Underlines that deforestation of rainforests driven by land-use change to palm oil plantations greatly reduces the carbon sequestration potential and thereby significantly contributes to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions;
Amendment 61 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that plantations are systematically destroying the rainforest land that the local people depend on for subsistence, thus giving them no choice but to become plantation workers under the poor and degrading working conditions;
Amendment 114 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b(new)
Paragraph 6 b(new)
6b. Stresses that the palm oil industry has been linked to major human rights violations, including child labour in some remote areas of South-East Asia;
Amendment 154 #
2016/2222(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Stresses that the right to food, preservation of biodiversity and the protection of the environment must take priority over the one-sided business interests of the agro-fuel industry;
Amendment 949 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Rule 34 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Intergroups shall be required to publish information on support that they receive, whether financial or in-kind. Intergroups and all unofficial groupings shall be required to keep a list of their members (Members of the European Parliament and third parties). Such lists shall be published on the European Parliament website and updated at least twice a year. In order to operate in the European Parliament, all intergroups and unofficial groupings which involve non- parliamentary third parties shall also be required to register on the Union Transparency Register.
Amendment 1030 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Rule 115 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Rule 115 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Members shall only meet interest representatives (lobbyists) who have registered in the Transparency Register, with the exception of local citizens from their constituencies.
Amendment 1205 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) Members are banned from having remunerated positions with companies or other organisations involved in influencing the Parliament.
Amendment 1210 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Annex I – Article 4 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Amendment 1233 #
2016/2114(REG)
Parliament's Rules of Procedure
Annex I – Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Annex I – Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Parliament shall introduce a two year cooling-off period for Members taking any paid work involving EU lobbying, or any other paid work which involved a possible conflict of interests with their former work as a Member of the European Parliament .
Amendment 1 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 3
Citation 3
Amendment 2 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13
Citation 13
Amendment 3 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the protocol 26 of the Treaties,
Amendment 4 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 b (new)
Citation 17 b (new)
- having regard to the FMI report "Fiscal Monitor. Taxing times" of October 2013
Amendment 5 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Commission’s spring 2016 forecast indicates growth rates of 1.6 % for the eurozone and 1.8 % for the EU in 2016. whereas this growth rate is unequally distributed, with rising inequality both across and within Member States;
Amendment 9 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Europe still flaceks a huge investment deficit, even though the current account surplus in the eurozone continues to rise, theoretically creating more favourable conditions for public and private investment due to the exceptionally low interest rates on government borrowingfrom public investment, capable of steering away the economy from market-driven dynamics to a more robust model for economic growth, capable of ensuring social and regional cohesion in the EU;
Amendment 12 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Europe still faces a huge investment deficit, even though the current account surplus in the eurozone continues to rise, theoretically creating more favourable conditionswhich indicates the need for pubolic and private investment due to the exceptionally low interest rates on government borrowingies geared toward internal demand and public investment;
Amendment 18 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas unemployment in the EU remains one of the main challenges that Member States are facing as ithere are currently stands at a very over 21,1 million unemployed (of whigch rate (10.5 million long-term unemployed in the EU), even if the numbers have improved slightly compared with previous year); whereas official figures underestimate real unemployment, registering workers as underemployed or inactive or otherwise failing to register them accurately due to national statistical practices;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Ca (new)
Recital Ca (new)
Ca. whereas unemployment rates remain significantly higher in the Eurozone and the European periphery, which have suffered most from neoliberal policies; whereas these divergences are in fact much higher, but are disguised due to forced migration flows of the workforce in the periphery;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas depressed wage dynamics, slow economic growth and falling oil prices at the start of 2016 appear to be the key reasonre dragging down the inflation rate to below zero levels;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
Amendment 52 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Fa (new)
Recital Fa (new)
Fa. whereas putting an end to tax evasion and tax fraud of corporations and wealthy individuals would suffice to close the remaining public deficit; whereas public spending is not constrained but available resources, but by the political constraints imposed by the EU and particularly, its governance structure and the euro;
Amendment 55 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Fb (new)
Recital Fb (new)
Fb. whereas Ireland has shown a 26% growth rate for 2015. Whereas this data demonstrates the way how a model of growth could be based in protect transnational capital interest and foster capital mobility with no impact on the real economy. Whereas Ireland has been a model country for the European Commission;
Amendment 56 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Fc (new)
Recital Fc (new)
Fc. whereas the Juncker Plan has failed to increase investment and has only served as another avenue for financial speculation, as many critics had noted before its implementation; whereas the funds diverted have had serious consequences for public spending through the EU budget, in programs such as Horizon 2020 and Connecting Europe Facility;
Amendment 63 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the challenges in the EU are linked to the deteriorating international environment and the divergences in the economic and social performance achieved in different parts of the Unioninadequacy of the neoliberal economic model, which depresses economic growth and increases divergences in the economic and social performance in different Member States of the Union by reducing public spending and wages, while fostering market-driven economic policies regardless of its economic and social effects;
Amendment 78 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomeRejects the Commission’s focus in its 2016 country-specific recommendations (CSRs) on the three main priorities to further strengthen economic growth: supporting investment, pursuing structural reforms and preserving responsible public finances, as they continue the failed stance of current policies;
Amendment 92 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. WelcomNotes the Commission’'s continuing approach to limit the number of recommendations and its effort to mainstream the semester by covering mainly key priority areas of macroeconomic and social relevance, when setting the policy objectives for the next 18 months; reiteratdeplores that this facilitatenhances the implemnterventation of recommendations according to a comprehensive and meaningful range of social benchmarksthe Commission over the democratic will of its elected, national authorities; underlines that, notwithstanding the introduction of alleged "social" indicators and benchmarks, the overall aims of the recommendations have single-mindedly pushed for the same neoliberal agenda, with dramatic effects on the social cohesion and the economic development of the Member States under supervision;
Amendment 103 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Fully supports the efforts made to ensure greater Highlights that ‘national ownership’ in the process of formulation and implementation of CSRs as an ongoing reform process; only refers to the ad hoc involvement of national authorities and civil society organisation in the deepening of the EU's neoliberal agenda, rather than a genuine expression of national sovereignty and democracy;
Amendment 115 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that Europe’'s long economic crisis has shown that there is a strong need to focus on public and private investment, in order to enhance the EU’s competitivenesmobilise investment and generate growth and jobs;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the still-too-high unemployment rates show that the capacity to create jobs in most Member States is still limited; emphasises that further action is needed, in consultation with social partners and in accordance with national practices, to make labour markets more inclusive overallcalls for a radical shift in economic policies; stresses, as a first set of priorities, the need to increase public employment, reduce working-hours without a reduction in wages and strengthen social protection for the unemployed, including through minimum income schemes; emphasises that further action is needed, in consultation with social partners, to increase wages and protect workers’ rights;
Amendment 156 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Expresses disquiet aboutit concerns that the deeply ideologised monetary policy of the ECB has led to the current ‘liquidity trap’ theat EU economy seems to have fallen intois facing, with interest rates at the Zero Lower Bound (ZLB), weak demand prospects, and restricted investment and spending by households and companies, not least in surplus countrie; Stresses that an alternative monetary policy focused on purchases of sovereign debt of Member States in secondary markets, as well as debt mutualisation through instruments such as Eurobonds, would have avoided the contagion of the financial crisis to the sovereign debt markets;
Amendment 159 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Expresses disquiet about the current ‘'liquidity trap’' the EU economy seems to have fallenfell into, with interest rates at the Zero Lower Bound (ZLB), weak demand prospects, and restricted investment and spending by households and companies, not least in surplus countries;
Amendment 167 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the Commission’'s recommendation for three Member States to exit the Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP), but stresses the need to abolish the economic governance structure of the EU, as implemented by the SGP, the Two-Pack and the Six-pack; agrees with the Commission that large and consistent current account surpluses reflect a clear need to stimulate demand and investment in order to cope with the; challenges ofn the future regarding transport and communications, the digital economy, education and research, climate change, energy, environmental protection and the ageing population; calls on the Commission to continue to support budgetary policies that underpin growth and recovery in all Member States and support sustainable structural reformCommission to end its support for austerity budgetary policies and structural reforms in all Member States;
Amendment 175 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the Commission’'s recommendation for three Member States to exit the Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP); agrees with the Commission that large and consistent current account surpluses reflect a clear need to stimulate demand and investment in order to cope with the challenges of the future regarding transport and communications, the digital economy, education and research, climate change, energy, environmental protection and the ageing population; calls on the Commission to continue to support budgetary policies that underpin growth and recovery in all Member States and support sustainable structural reformsto act toward excessive surpluses with the same level of zeal that is dedicated to countries with high levels of public debt;
Amendment 195 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that further measures are neededboosting aggregate demand is needed in order to reduce non- performing loans (NPL) in the euro area and to increase the ability of banks to lend to the real economy, notably to SMEs;
Amendment 205 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines the fact that private investment has so far lagged and failed to lead to sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU and that under the current circumstances, monetary policy alone is unlikely to bring about recovery, even though the rules made necessary by banking union have imposed more stringent financial criteria on banks; considers that a coordinated fiscal expansion is also needed in the EU, therefore, in line with the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact and its flexibility clauseswill bring no recovery; considers that a coordinated fiscal expansion is also needed in the EU, in order to place emphasis on public and private investment;
Amendment 227 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the need to improve the EU’s overall capacity to create and sustain quality jobs and thus to tackle high levels of unemployment, while considering that migration could play an important role in compensating for the negative effects of the ageing population; emphasises, however, that this alone cannot be the main response to address structural demographic, labour market or fiscal challenges but and in-work poverty, through a strengthening of collective bargaining and the protection of social and labour rights; emphasises that ithis should be complemented with efficient public expenditure, especially in high-quality social and environmentally sustainable investments and an expansion of the welfare state;
Amendment 244 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Highlights the importance of resilient labour markets where an appropriate trade-off is maintained between economic, social and human costs in accordance with the EU values of solidarity and subsidiarity, with a focus on the upgrading of educational systems and vocational educationith a focus on maintaining and improving social and workers’ rights, also in the design and implementation active employment policies;
Amendment 260 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission to give priority to measures that reduce the obstacles to greater investment flows, which arise at both an EU level from a lack of clarity regarding strategies that are to be followed, especially in the fields of energy, transport, communications and the digital economy, as well as from the effect on bank lending in the wake of the adoption of the banking union, and a national level from cumbersome legal systems, corruption, lack of transparency, outdated bureaucracy, inadequate digitalisation of public services, lack of mutual recognition of academic and technical qualifications in the professions and certain services sectors, and educational systems that remain out of synch with modern requiremensupport the improvement of public services, particularly in those countries most deeply affected by past budgetary cuts;
Amendment 262 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Invites the Commission to give priority to measures that reduce the obstacles to greater investment flows, which arise at both an EU level from a lack of clarity regarding strategies that are to be followedfrom privatization policies, especially in the fields of energy, transport, and communications and the digital economy, as well as from the effect on bank lending in the wake of the adoption of the banking union, and a national level from cumbersome legal systems, corruption, lack of transparency, outdated bureaucracy, inadequate digitalisation of public services, lack of mutual recognition of academic and technical qualifications in the professions and certain services sectors, and educational systems that remain out of synch with modern requirementsof insufficient aggregate demand;
Amendment 279 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Deeply deplores the fact that with regard toneoliberal approach of the Europe 2020 strategy, the biggest failure to be recorded concerns the goal of reducing the scale of poverty in the Union, aswhich explains the lack of progress in achieving its most significant goal, lifting 20 million Europeans out of poverty and social exclusion, since not only will the goal not be reached, but poverty will in fact have increasedincrease under the current policy framework;
Amendment 310 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Points out that efforts should be made to remove remaining barriers to investment in the Member States and allow for a more suitable policy mix, including a genuine focus on research and development spending; believes that public and private spending and support for research and higher education institutions are crucial factors and that the weakness or absence of this infrastructure places certain countries at a massive disadvantage; In this regard, urges the creation of co-financing exception clauses that allow room for budgetary manoeuvre, in order to provide liquidity for public investment purposes, the development in the fields of education, culture and health and social development as a whole, which will facilitate the creation of quality jobs, as well as the strengthening of the welfare state;
Amendment 319 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17a (new)
Paragraph 17a (new)
17a. Calls for the exclusion of public investment from the calculation of the deficit of the Member States in order to boost investment in the EU;
Amendment 322 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17b (new)
Paragraph 17b (new)
17b. Rejects the use of sanctions against Spain and Portugal by the European Commission as they will increase inequalities and prevent the recovery of their economy; underlines that any sanctions represents an undemocratic attempt to impose neoliberal measures; highlights the serious impact that the freeze of European funds will have on both economies, with negative cumulative effects over time; stresses that the proposed path of fiscal consolidation will further depress economic activity by reducing public spending and slowing down the de-leveraging of the private sector;
Amendment 326 #
2016/2101(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17c (new)
Paragraph 17c (new)
17c. Calls to the Commission and Member States to open a process of renegotiation of public debt in the most indebted countries, substantially reducing its level and the annual charges, and bringing it down to sustainable levels, thereby making the debt service compatible with economic and social development;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the most recent reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP) sought to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain through a series of derogations and exemptions from the provisions of Article 101 TFEU, not withstanding this, the reform failed to address the anti competitive elements of the Common Agricultural Policy inherent in itself where farmers receive vastly differing levels of payments based on historic criteria which are no longer justified;
Amendment 14 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that competition policy must attach the same importance to defending the interests of agricultural producers as it does to defending consumers’ interests, ensuring that the conditions for competition are fair so asbelieves that "own brand" labelling leads to less competition in the market place and in the long term acts as a disincentive to fostering investment, employment and innovation in agricultural markets;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that the current crisis situation in farming calls for fresh initiatives to ensure that competition policy takes better account of the specific nature of agriculturea better understanding of agricultural markets, acknowledging that the overarching EU policy of "cheap food" coupled with direct income supports resulting in below cost production where farmers are not remunerated from the market place creates a situation unlike other sectors of the economy, which must be taken into consideration by competition policy;
Amendment 43 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Finds it regrettable that the scope of the current derogations is unclear and that national competition authoriare not maximized by the Member States in order to strength the position of the primary producer, further regrets that the Commission is unwilling to take regulatory action to combat the clearly identified and recognized unfair trading practices do not apply them in a uniform wayin the food chain, calls on the Commission to now act on the parliaments call for binding regulatory action in this area;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to broaden its approach in terms of criteria for determining whether an agricultural undertaking, or a number of such undertakings linked by a horizontal agreement, is deemed to be in a ‘dominant position’, taking into consideration the degree of concentbelieves that market share at input, processing and retail level must be capped to allow competition to develop, is also of the opinion that the final beneficial ownership of companies operationg in the sectors downstream must be scrutinized to ensure that there is adequate genuine competition;
Amendment 74 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for simplification of the rules on farmers’ organising collectively, so as to strengthen their negotiating capacity while safeguarding the principles set out in Article 39 TFEUbelieves that farmers and Member States must fully engage with, and exploit the potential of producer groups so as to strengthen their negotiating capacity while safeguarding the principles set out in Article 39 TFEU; is of the opinion that producer groups must focus on quality and regional specialties to differentiate themselves from their opposition and not to engage in a "race to the bottom" by focusing on cost alone;
Amendment 97 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that full and satisfactory implementation of the ‘Milk Package’ is essential in order to strengthen the dairy sector; asks the Commission to propose that the ‘Milk Package’ should continue to apply beyond mid-2020, and to examine whether its rules could be extended to other sectors of agriculturelso believes that dairy producers should be encouraged and incentivized to act in a more commercial manner to market movements by creating linkages with the Milk Market Observatory which would enable them the react to price fluctuations by reducing output to match demand;
Amendment 121 #
2016/2100(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Believes that the cumulative effect of trade deals such as TTIP, CETA and Mercosur will further undermine the position of the EU primary producer and will encourage additional uncompetitive practices by providing the retail sector with the tool of cheaper imports.
Amendment 7 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the Special Eurobarometer 442 "Attitudes of Europeans towards Animal Welfare",
Amendment 8 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 b (new)
Citation 17 b (new)
- having regard to the European Convention for the Protection of Animals kept for Farming Purpose,
Amendment 11 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas responsible ownership and care of equidae starts with proper attention to animal health and welfare conditions;
Amendment 21 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the estimated 7 million equidae in the EU perform hugely varied roles, from racing and competition animals to pets, working animals in transport, tourism, circuses, zoos, forestry and agriculture, sources of milk and meat, research animals, and wild and semi-feral animals, and whereas they may perform several of these roles during their lives;
Amendment 52 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas unlimited, indiscriminate and irresponsible breeding of equidae can lead to animals that are devoid of economic value and are often left with serious welfare problems, particularly during an economic downturn; whereas equid abandonment has increased since 2008 in western Member States, especially where they have become expensive luxuries as opposed to working animals16 , without an adequate and satisfactory response to this problem from the Commission and Member States; _________________ 16 The Donkey Sanctuary & University College Dublin: Donkey Welfare in Ireland in 2015.
Amendment 68 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
M a. whereas equine animals are slaughtered for food production both within and outside of the Union;
Amendment 150 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to support the production and dissemination of information on how to meet the needs of equidae, whatever their role, based around the ‘five freedoms’ and covering the entirety of an equid’s life; calls also on the Commission to include guidance on responsible breeding, animal health and welfare, and the benefits of equid sterilisation; recommends that such guidance should be disseminated to breeders, equid societies, farms, stables, sanctuaries, transporters and slaughterhouses, and that it should be accessible in a variety of formats and languages, including online;
Amendment 201 #
2016/2078(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Member States to fully and properly commit to inspections of the slaughterhouses on their territory that are licenced to take equidae, to ensure they are able to meet the specific welfare needs of equidae;
Amendment 6 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the large investment gap, in Europeglobal terms, within the EU, which the Commission estimates at a minimum of EUR 200-300 billion a year; , highlights in particular, against this backdrop, the market needs in Europe for high-risk financat the main barrier to business investment is not difficulty in accessing, for instance in the fields of R&D, energy and ICT; is concerned by the fact that the most recent data on national accounts do not indicate any surge in investment since the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) was launched, leading to risks of continued subdued growth and continuing high unemployment ratesinancing but rather the lack of demand resulting from austerity measures, that have meant a sharp drop in workers’ disposable income and in public consumption and investment; argues, therefore, that it is not surprising that the most recent data on national accounts do not indicate any surge in investment since the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) was launched; believes that only an increase in workers’ income and public investment will be able to avoid risks of continued weak growth, or even recession, and continuing high unemployment rates, but warns that if this is to be brought about, it is urgent to reverse austerity measures, repeal the budget deficit and public debt limits, and create a broad public investment plan; stresses that closing this investment gap is key to reviving growth, fighting unemployment and attaining long-term EU policy objectives; poverty and promoting social, economic and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 22 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that EFSI was, which aspired to be an ‘Investment Plan for Europe’, was in theory launched to help resolve difficulties and remove obstacles to financing as well as to implement strategic, transformative and productive investments that provide a high level of added value to the economy, the environment and society; considers, however, that in practice this investment plan is nothing more than a financing model resting on public guarantees, and thus helping to promote public-private partnerships;
Amendment 34 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Draws attention to the fact that, in the particular case of infrastructure, this model of investment financing will help to increase the cost of investment on the one hand, albeit with some delay, while on the other hand contributing to the privatisation of fundamental sectors of the economy;
Amendment 42 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls the role of Parliament as foreseen in the regulation, in particular in relation to the monitoring of EFSI implementation; acknowledges, however, that it is too early to finalise a comprehensive assessment of the functioning of EFSI and its impact on the EU economy, but is of the opiniontakes the view that a preliminary evaluation is crucial; ins order to identify possible areas of improvement for EFSI 2.0 and thereafterf the opinion, therefore, that the proposal to extend the duration of EFSI to 2020, increasing the amount targeted to EUR 500 billion, is premature and lacks foundation;
Amendment 73 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that, while all projects approved under EFSI are presented as ‘special activities’, an independent evaluation has found that some projects could have been financed otherwise; notes that these evaluations, together with the risk profile of the operations financed by the EIB under EFSI, indicate a failure to comply with the additionality criterion;
Amendment 115 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that, as provided for in the regulation, prior to a project being selected for EFSI support, it has to undergo due- diligence and decision-making processes both in the EIB and the EFSI governance structures; observes that project promoters have expressed a wish for swift feedback and enhanced transparency in relation to both the selection criteria and the amount and type/tranche of possible EFSI support; criticises the current lack of clarity, which deters project promoters from applying for EFSI support; calls for the decision-making process to be made more transparent in respect of the selection criteria and financial support and to be speeded up;
Amendment 165 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Considers it important to discuss whether the envisaged leverage of 15 is appropriate to enable EFSI to support high quality projects bearing a higher risk; invites the EIB to weigh up complementing the volume requirement with secondary goals to be achieved; points out that this ratio represents a highly subjective estimate that can only be evaluated a posteriori, and that can on no account be used as a basis for extrapolation for the purpose of publishing values of the investment made or to be made under the financial instruments that have been created;
Amendment 178 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Argues that the selection of a project cannot be based solely on the inherent financial risk or the financial profitability associated with it; calls, therefore, for a comprehensive assessment to be made which should include, among other factors, its economic importance for the country and/or region where the project is to be carried out, the specific development needs of the country and/or region, social externalities (including the creation of new jobs), and its contribution to social, economic and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 180 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Condemns the possibility that any undertaking or group of undertakings using tax havens or practising social dumping might have access to Community funds, including EFSI; calls, therefore, for this concern to be addressed when revising Regulation (EU) 2015/1017;
Amendment 205 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Welcomes that all sectors defined in the EFSI Regulation have been covered by EFSI financing; points out, however,Points out that certain sectors are under- represented; notes that this might be due to the fact that certain sectors already offered better investment opportunities in terms of shovel-ready, bankable projects when EFSI started up; invites the EIB against this backdrop to discuss how to improve sectorial diversification, linking it to the goals set out in the Regulation as well as the issue of whether EFSI support should be extended to other sectors;
Amendment 238 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Proposes discussing means of enhancing the transparency of EFSI governance structures for Parliament, involving representatives of the Member States, and the addition of a further full member to the SB representing the European Parliament; urges the EFSI governance bodies to share information with the EP on a proactive basis;
Amendment 280 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Welcomes that by the end of 2016, all 28 countries received EFSI funding; underlines, however,Underlines that as of 30 June 2016, EU-15 had received 91% whereas EU-13 had only received 9% of EFSI support; regretscondemns the fact that EFSI support has mainly benefitted a limited number of countriesthose EU countries with higher levels of gross domestic product and gross fixed capital formation;
Amendment 287 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Acknowledgesgain condemns the fact that GDP and the number of projects approved are linked; recognises that larger Member States are able to take advantage of more developed capital markets and are therefore more likely to benefit from a market-driven instrument such as EFSI; underlines that lower EFSI support in EU-13 may be attributable to other factors, such as the small size of projects, and competition from the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF); observes with concern, however, direct proportion; deplores the disproportionate benefit to certain countries and underlines the need to diversify geographical distribution further, especially in crucial sectors such as modernising and improving the productivity and sustainability of economies; calls, therefore, for a change to the regulation whereby the geographical distribution of part of the investment would be based on cohesion criteria favouring the weakest, least developed and diverging economies;
Amendment 319 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Stresses that, due to a very strong uptake reflecting the high market demand, the SME Window was further reinforced by EUR 500 million from the IIW Debt Portfolio under the existing legislative framework; welcomes that, due to the flexibility of the EFSI Regulation, the additional financing was granted to benefit SMEs and small mid-caps; intends to monitor closely the allocation of the guarantee under the two windows; believes that micro enterprises and SMEs should benefit from positive discrimination to the detriment of mid-caps;
Amendment 327 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Notes that the Commission has proposed an extension of EFSI, both in terms of duration and financial capacity, and that this would have an impact on the EU budget; expresses its intention to put forward alternative financing proposalsserious reservations regarding this proposal, since there has not yet been any solid, thorough and impartial assessment indicating the need for the programme to be extended;
Amendment 334 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Recalls that Member States were invited to contribute to EFSI in order to broaden its capacity, thereby enabling it to support more higher-risk investments; regretnotes that despite such investment being considered as a one-off measure within the meaning of Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary provisions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies and Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure, Member States did not take this initiative; requests information from the EIB and the Commission as to whether they have undertaken effornotes that this reflects the severe budgetary constraints ion the meantime to convince Member States to contribute to EFSI, and whether they might be able to attract other investors; invites the Commission and the EIB to step up their efforts in this directionMember States imposed by the European institutions, forcing cuts in public investment and making it impossible for them to participate in EFSI;
Amendment 343 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 45
Paragraph 45
45. NotesCondemns the fact that awareness of overlaps and competition between EFSI and financial instruments of the EU budget on the part of the Commission and the EIB has led to the adoption of guidelines recommending the combination of EFSI and ESI financing; points, however, to persistent differences in the eligibility criteria, regulations, timeframe for reporting and the application of state aid rules, which hinder combined usage; welcomes the fact that the Commission has begun to address these in its proposal for a revision of the Financial Regulation; believes that further efforts are required and that the second and third pillars of the investment plan are key to this end;
Amendment 356 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Is deeply concernedDeplores the fact that that the EIB has been pushing via EFSI to support projects that have been structured using firms in tax havens; urges the EIB and the EIF to refrain from making use of or engaging in tax avoidance structures, in particular aggressive tax planning schemes, or practices which do not comply with EU good governance principles on taxation, as and to cancel all ongoing projects that make uset out in the relevant Union legislation, including Commission recommendations and communicationf these structures;
Amendment 360 #
2016/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46 a (new)
Paragraph 46 a (new)
46a. Calls for a ban on EFSI financing for any entity which practices tax evasion and avoidance and/or makes use of tax havens, and for any entity where those holding the capital concerned, or their spouses or lineal ascendants or descendants who directly or indirectly hold at least a 10% stake in the capital or voting rights, practice tax evasion and avoidance and/or make use of tax havens;
Amendment 376 #
2016/2064(INI)
49. Acknowledges that EFSI alone - and on a limited scale- will probably not be able to close the investment gap in Europe, but that it nevertheless constitutes a central pillar of the EU’s investment plan and signals the EU’s determination to tackle this issue; calls for further proposals to be maPoints out that EFSI’s results fall far below the Commission’s expectations; notes that, leaving aside the financial instruments provided on the ground and the agreements with banks, little information is available on the investment made and its externalities; stresses that the need for investment is far from being met, and therefore advocates a broad public investment plan geared to social, economic and territorial cohesion; in this context, insists that the extension of EFSI should be decided on how to permanently boost investment in Europely if a solid, thorough and impartial assessment indicates the need for such an extension;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to Article 127(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Amendment 19 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, according to the same forecast, the euro area will continue to exhibit an external surplus, of around 3 % of GDP; whereas the emergence of a persistent external surplus of the euro area is a worrying development and a potential threat to global economic stability, which needs to be countered by policies to strengthen domestic demand;
Amendment 24 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, according to the ECB projection of March 2016, the average inflation rate in the euro area, after being nil in 2015, will remain close to this level in 2016 (0.2 %) and reach 1.2 % in 2017; whereas the inflation rate in the euro area has been below the ECB's target rate since early 2013;
Amendment 32 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the inflation target is getting harder to reach owing to consolidation of demographic trends and the full impact of trade globalisation on a high-unemployment European societyhigh- unemployment, insufficient wage growth, and low investment in the euro area;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas there is increased risk that the ECB's APP fuel asset price bubbles that may pose a threat to financial stability;
Amendment 48 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I b (new)
Recital I b (new)
Ib. whereas overreliance on monetary policy for economic stimulus via asset purchases contributes to inequality as asset ownership is reserved to wealthier households;
Amendment 64 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the euro area continues to suffer from a high level of unemployment and excessive low inflation and that, in addition, the euro area is facing a very low level of productivity growth, which is the result of the lack of investment since the beginning of the crisis; notes that the high level of public debt and the huge number of non- performing loans in the banking sector in some Member States are still fragmenting the euro area financial market, thuwhile the debt and deficit rules reducinge room for manoeuvre to support the most fragile economies;
Amendment 84 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges that, confronted with this very complex environment and the risks of a prolonged period of low inflation, the ECB was within the terms of its mandate in adopting extraordinary measures to lift inflation back up to the medium-term objective of 2 %; notes that, since the launching of the APP in March 2015, and owing to targeted long-term refinancing operation (TLTRO) programmes targeted at the real economy, financial conditions have improved, which has promoted a recovery in lending to firms and households in the euro area; notes that improvements have not affected Member States equally and that credit demand especially in southern Member States remains weak, due to the depressed economic situation;
Amendment 100 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that the APP would have an even higher impact on the European economy if it had a higher share of EIB bond buying, particularly related to the TEN-T and TEN-E (projects with proven added European value in social and economic terms), and SME securitised loanspublic infrastructure, or if the ECB were able to buy Member States’' public debt directly linked to investment and research expenditure on the secondary markets; believes that in order to choose the eligibility of public debt assets for the APP, the Eurosystem should assign a complementary credit rating in addition to those assigned by private agencies;
Amendment 104 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Underlines the risks arising from the ECB's corporate bond purchases, particularly in terms of vested interests and moral hazard;
Amendment 115 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Agrees with ECB President Mario Draghi that the single monetary policy cannot stimulate aggregate demand unless it is complemented by soundexpansionary fiscal policies and ambitious structural reform; believes that ambitious public investment programmes at EU and Member State level are needed to enhance productivity, employment and wage growth and crowd in private investment; recalls that the main benefit of monetary policy is to safeguard price and financial stability in order to guarantee a stable environment for investment; considers that monetary policy is not the appropriate tool to solve the structural problems of the European economy;
Amendment 124 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 135 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes, however, that even though the impact of unconventional measures has been significantd some impact on the financial markets, inflation is not expected to converge to the 2 % medium-term objective at the 2017 horizon; notes that the current recovery in bank and market lending has not wholly produced the expectis geographically unevenly distributed among Member States and did not have a marked effect on the existing investment gap in the euro area so far;
Amendment 161 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Understands the reason why negative rates have been implemented, but remains concerned about the potential consequences of negative interest rate policy for individual savers and the financial equilibrium of pension schemes; believes that owing to demographic trends and cultural preferences for savingin light of the worrying trend towards privatization of pension schemes, these negative effects on income may lead to an increase in the household saving rate, which could be detrimental to domestic demand in the euro area;
Amendment 168 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Underlines that negative rates are no substitute for policies boosting aggregate demand, particularly through stabilizing income distribution via wage growth in line with trend productivity and the ECB's inflation target;
Amendment 170 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Agrees with ECB President Mario Draghi that negative rates are a symptom of an underlying problem caused by a global excess of savings and a lack of appetite for investment; underlines in this context that the euro area's and particularly Germany's current account surplus of €257 billion in 2015 strongly contribute to this problem globally;
Amendment 178 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the ECB to carefully assess the risks of a future resurgence of asset and housing bubbles owing to its ultra-low (negative) interest rate policy, particularly in big cities, and to design specific macroprudential recommendations in this regard;
Amendment 186 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Recognises the existence of distributional consequences of the ECB policies, which can be perceived as increasinge inequalities, but believes that the ECB policies are the right ones to lower the costs of credit for citizens and SMEs and enhance employment in the euro areay;
Amendment 194 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the ECB’'s APP has lowered bond yields in most Member States to unprecedented levels, but with little effect on the real economy; warns against the risk of too-high valuations on the bond markets, which would be difficult to handle if interest rates start to rise again, particularly for the countries involved in the excessive deficit procedure or with high levels of debt;
Amendment 202 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Deplores the fact that some Member States are not using the ultra-low (negative) interest rate policy as a pretext to defer the necessary consolidation of their primary public deficits, particularly at central government levelto increase public investment;
Amendment 222 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Recalls that theinstrumental independence of the ECB for the conduct of monetary policy, as enshrined in the Treaties, is crucial to the objective of safeguarding price stability; asks all governments to avoid statements questioning the role played by the institution within its mandateinsists that the ECB nevertheless has to be held democratically accountable for its decisions and that ECB decisions must be subject to democratic control by the European Parliament;
Amendment 235 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Deplores the role played by the ECB during the negotiations with the Greek government for the Third Economic Adjustment Programme for Greece;
Amendment 237 #
2016/2063(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)
Paragraph 16 b (new)
16b. Is of the opinion that the ECB's governance council decisions on 4 February 2015 to lift the waiver affecting marketable debt instruments issued or fully guaranteed by the Hellenic Republic, and on 28 June 2015 to freeze the level of emergency liquidity assistance to Greek banks directly led to the introduction of capital controls in Greece; considers these decisions to be in violation of the ECB's mandate to promote the smooth operation of payment systems;
Amendment 16 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 34 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the rapid transformation brought about by digitisation and fintech innovation not only creates new and often bettercan create an easier and faster access to financial products for consumers, but also involvesposing key challenges in terms of security, data protection, consumer protection and taxation;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 69 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises, in particular because of low levels of consumer trust and satisfaction, that the Green Paper initiative can succeed only if it has a strong focus on creating an EU market in which well- protected consumers have access to transparent, straightforward and good- value-for-money productsconsumers are effectively protected;
Amendment 101 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes the increasing complexity of retail financial products; insists on the need to develop initiatives and instruments thatregulations that actively limit retail products' complexity, allowing consumers to identifyaccess safe and simple products within the range of products available to them; supports initiatives such as the Key Investment Information Document for undertakings for collective investments in transferrable securities (UCITS) and the Key Information Document for packaged retail and insurance-based investment products (PRIIPs);
Amendment 110 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls the recent developments in the legislative framework for the banking sector, in particular the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive and the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive; insists onthat the need to inform consumers fully about the impact of the new rules is not a substitute for effective product regulation, as the retail financial services market is characterised by extremely asymmetrical information;
Amendment 133 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes that consumers' financial and non-financial data collected from different sources are being increasingly used by financial service providers for various purposes, in particular in credit and insurance sectors; stresses that the use of personal data and big data by financial service providers should comply with the EU data protection legislation, be strictly limited to what is necessary to provide the service and bring benefits to consumers; in this perspective, the demutualisation of risk in insurance triggered by the big data should be under close scrutiny;
Amendment 134 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Calls on the Commission to assess what information is needed and sufficient to conduct an appropriate creditworthiness assessment by the lender; based on the assessment, propose binding measures regulating the creditworthiness assessment process; scrutinise the relevance of private credit bureaus' activities related to collecting and processing consumer data in order to ensure that consumer rights are fully respected;
Amendment 142 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that frontline employees at financial institutions have a crucial role to play in opening up retail services to all strands of society and to consumers all over Europe; points out that such employees should, in principle, be given the training and time necessary to be able to serve their customers accurately, and should cannot be made subject to sales targets, incentives or inducements that could bias or distort their adviceservice; notes that cross- selling and mis-selling of financial products and services are mainly caused by sales-driven remuneration of sales staff and intermediaries; stresses, however, that frontline employees are not and cannot be made responsible for product design and dishonest business strategies, much less for regulatory failures;
Amendment 190 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to introduce simple and standardised product rules, default options in different product categories, and the obligation to perform a horizontal product suitability check that all financial providers and intermediaries should apply; Compliance with these rules should be confirmed by regulator before a financial product or service can be sold to the consumer;
Amendment 191 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)
Paragraph 12 b (new)
12b. Calls on the Commission to address the issue of mis-selling of financial products and services; introduce a full ban on cross-selling, (except specific cases defined by European regulations) commissions and inducements for sales of investment products;
Amendment 218 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Asks the Commission to investigate further the confusing and sometimes misleading practices with which consumers are faced when making card payments and ATM withdrawals involving currency conversion, and to present a coherent solution that would make it possible, including in practice, for the consumer to understand and control the situation fully;
Amendment 249 #
Amendment 264 #
2016/2056(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
Amendment 14 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas agriculture has to meet the major challenge of world population growth, however, CAP's aim is to satisfy needs of local population in the first place, to ensure a fair standard of living for the EU's agricultural community and to assure the availability of food supplies at reasonable prices in the EU;
Amendment 17 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas around 88 million tonnes of food are wasted annually in the EU, with associated costs estimated at 143 billion euros;
Amendment 19 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, while climate change affects agricultural output levels, intensification of agricultural production pressures natural resources and has a negative impact on the environment and is a significant contributing factor to climate change;
Amendment 49 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas bilateral agreements, such as CETA or TTIP, may lead to further market liberalization of the EU's agricultural sector and thus undermine the local production and short chains of supply and expose farmers across the EU, especially those small and medium-sized, to even greater price volatility;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas the agricultural sector and food security is too important an issue for the EU to be left only to market forces;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Stresses that price volatility is a problem of a structural nature given the current agricultural model in the EU; emphasizes that increased liberalisation of trade in agricultural products greatly contributes to price volatility and that long-term regulatory mechanisms are needed to address price volatility;
Amendment 149 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Calls on the Commission for additional mechanisms to be developed, applicable throughout the EU to counteract current market crises and calls for a tailor-made approach within CAP, so that production is adjusted to the fall in demand in order to avoid over supply and prevent prices from collapsing, stabilize the agricultural sector and tackle price volatility in the EU;
Amendment 173 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Stresses that the recognized inequality in the food chain between large retailers and primary producers, especially small-scale producers, contributes to price volatility; considers that the downward pressure on prices by retailers from own brand labelling undermines the work and investment of producers and devalues the end product; regrets that the commission does not see the need for regulatory action in this area;
Amendment 322 #
2016/2034(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Considers that, as farmers cannot control the factors that determine their turnover and gross margins, they should be encouraged to develop tools for coping with market volatility, especially mutual funds, such tools being better suited to that purpose than direct payments;
Amendment 5 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, under Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Council shall, acting unanimously, adopt directives for the completion of the common VAT system and, in particular, the progressive curtailment or revocation of exemptions thereto;
Amendment 7 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas VAT, which raised almost EUR 1 trillion in 2014, is a major and growing source of revenue in the Member States and contributes to EU own resources; whereas the shift towards increased VAT taxation, also supported in the Commission's CSRs, has contributed to rising inequality in the EU;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the current VAT system is vulnerable to fraud, particularly by large corporations and those active at cross- border level, and the estimated 'VAT gap' amounts to around EUR 170 billion annually;
Amendment 26 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas VATit is a tax on consumption that should only be levied on the final consumer so as to achieve a significant reduction in administrative and financial costs along the supply chain and reduce the possibility ofup to Member States to define the practical levy of VAT in order to ensure that it falls on the final consumer, while keeping track of all intermediate transactions in the supply chain and fighting fraud;
Amendment 28 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 34 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomNotes the Commission’s intention to propose a definitive VAT system by 2017 that is simple, fair, robust, efficient and less susceptible to fraud;
Amendment 37 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the viewNotes that the expert advice on which the Commission’s proposals for the programme of action are based contains a number of valuable indicators for a robust, simple and fraud- proof VAT system, but expresses its concerns about the lack of public participation, particularly of social partners, and democratic overview in the process; takes the view that this results in a bias against the inclusion of social considerations which are of high relevance in the matter of taxation;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. WelcomNotes the recent Commission communication of 7 April 2016 and the projected additional measures designed to prevent fraud and help improve the existing VAT system;
Amendment 42 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Objects to the narrowing down of the proposed improvements to parts of the existing system, and calls for fundamental reform with a view to removing or at least substantially reducing the problems affecting it and particularly its regressive effects on distribution, ensuring that the system of VAT rates safeguards the right of access to goods and services that are either essential to the consumption of low- income households or of public interest (e.g. cultural goods), and penalizes the consumption of those goods aimed only at high-income households;
Amendment 47 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 52 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 60 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that it is essential for the Member States to adopt a coordinated tax policy in order to combat tax evasion and tax avoidance more effectively and finally close the existing ‘VAT gap’, reinforcing tax authorities and inspections and sanctions against the largest avoiders;
Amendment 70 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Takes the view that cooperation between the Member State tax authorities has been inadequatesufficient in the past and the activities of Eurofisc have to date failed achieve any satisfactory results;
Amendment 109 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Notes that the current plethora of VAT rates causes great uncertainty forare used by companies involved in cross-border trading to profit from tax fraud; calls on the Commission and Member States to focus on these loopholes, strengthening inspections and sanctions against this type of fraudulent activity;
Amendment 116 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes that the current system of reduced VAT rates is, as is currently applied, has been inefficient in terms of social policy and redistribution, as is confirmed by the Court of Auditors in its most recent report; ; highlights that the use of reduced and luxury rates can contribute to a fairer distribution, if properly applied, but that a shift towards progressive and effective direct taxation of income and wealth, rather than indirect taxation, is still required;
Amendment 128 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Takes the view that the complete abolition of minimum tax rates as an alternative, as advocated by the Commission, might cause considerable distortions of competitshould not result in strengthening the powers of the Commission, and problems in the single market and can only be sanctioned if the reverse charge procedure is introduced for all levels and types of VAT and not only for individual sectors which are particularly susceptible to fraudarticularly its competition and governance competences, over democratic control of taxation;
Amendment 136 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls instead for a single listystem of reduced goods and services to be compiled which would allow far fewer exemptions than is currently the case; and luxury rates for goods and services that minimizes the regressive impact of VAT on household budgets and safeguards access to goods and services that are either essential to the consumption of low-income households or of public interest (e.g. cultural goods);
Amendment 147 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Takes the view that the present complicated system could be considerably simplified if minimal criteria for the goods and services eligible for reduced tax rates were determined jointly at EU level, while ensuring full respect to national competences in developing a more progressive taxation system;
Amendment 162 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 174 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Notes that the application of a general reverse charge procedure might enablreduce the administrative cross-border carousel fraud to be largely eradicated and would significantly reduce the administrative cots for SMEs, but due attention should be paid to the other objectives of current VAT taxation systems, including the fight againsts for SMEsraud;
Amendment 185 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to conduct pilot projects to test outevaluate the effects of a general reverse charge procedure in terms of cost, implementation problems and long-term advantages, as some Member States have offered to carry out or have called forfraud, effectiveness and implementation problems;
Amendment 190 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Takes the view that national tax administrations must take greater responsibility for ensuring tax compliance and reducing opportunities for evasion in the reverse charge procedure and in the general implementation of the country-of- destination principle; highlights the need to fight the structural under-staffing of tax authorities in Member States and strengthening tax inspections and sanctions on the largest avoiders; calls on the Commission to provide adequate financial and technical support in this regard, as well as improved coordination between national tax authorities;
Amendment 201 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Notes that a 'one-stop shop' is essential ican contribute to the implementation of the country-of-destination principle isand to be imposed and made less prone to fraudmake it less prone to fraud, but that this is no substitute for the improvement of tax collection systems; calls for a clear definition of which Member State is responsible for tax inspection in the case of cross-border transactions;
Amendment 209 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for all proposals to be studied in order to keep turnover tax for companies, in particular SMEs, cost- neutral as far as possible and to minimise the administrative burden of turnover taxes for MSMEs;
Amendment 212 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. WelcomNotes the Commission's announcement that it will submit an SME package for VAT in 2017;
Amendment 231 #
2016/2033(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Takes the view that the VAT reform plans announced by the Commission in the action programme must be subject to a comprehensive and qualitatively-sound impact assessments with input from science, tax administrations and companies in the EUpublic scrutiny, including social partners, tax authorities and relevant civil society organizations in the field of taxation and social policy;
Amendment 11 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas SMEs and mid-caps play an important role for the European economy in terms of employment and growth;
Amendment 19 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas access to finance is not the main problem of EU SMEs, which consistently report the lack of final demand as the main obstacle to their growth; whereas austerity policies have had a depressing effect on final demand, through the lowering of wages and cuts in public expenditure;
Amendment 25 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas improving access to finance for SMEs should not lead to a lowering of financial standards and regulation;
Amendment 36 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Acknowledges the diversity of SMEs and mid-caps in the Member States, which is reflected in their business models, size, stages of development, financial structure and legal form;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes differences in financing conditions for SMEs between Member States, notably the quantity and cost of available funding, which are influenced by SME-specific and country-specific factors, including economic volatility, slow growth and higher financial fragility; stresses that the asymmetric economic development of the EU, along with austerity policies, are a key factor in explaining these divergences, with cumulative effects;
Amendment 51 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the need for diverseimproving funding options for SMEs throughout their lifecycle; stresses that access to finance is also of importance for the transfer of businesses; calls on the Commission and the Member States to support SMEs in this process;
Amendment 57 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that a diversifiwell-regulated financial services sector offering a wide range of cost-efficient tailor-made funding options serves the actual funding needs of SMEs bestand closely involved with real economic activity serves the actual funding needs of SMEs best; underlines the importance of traditional models of banking, including small regional banks, savings cooperatives and public institutions in this regard;
Amendment 61 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages SMEs to consider the whole EU as their home market and to use the potential of the single market for their financing needs; welcomes the Commission’s initiatives supporting SMEs and start-ups in an upgraded Single Market; underlines, in this context, the importance of the implementation of the Small Business Act; calls on the Commission for a follow-up to the Small Business Acparticipate in those EU-funded initiatives tailored to their needs; highlights that most EU programs and actions are designed without regard for SMEs characteristics; expresses, in this regard, its concern at the de-regulatory bias of EU proposals for SMEs; calls, instead, for improving public information and assistance available for SMEs, along with a pro-active approach on SME participation in EU programs, as means to foster their development;
Amendment 71 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that SMEs and start-ups in particular may find it difficult to obtain appropriate funding and to identify and meet regulatory financial requirements; encourages therefore Member States in their efforts to create one-stop shops as hubs for all regulatory requirements for entrepreneurs; welcomes the Commission’s plan to launch a European Pact for starts-ups to address these issue; encourages therefore Member States in their efforts to provide financial support for SMEs;
Amendment 79 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. WelcomNotes the Commission’s initiative to identify undue barriers and obstacles to the financial sector providing funding to the real economy, in particular SMEs; underlines the importance of simplifying or modifying rules which gave rise to unintended consequences; stresses that this should not lead to a lowering of financial regulatory standards; underlines the importance of reviewing financial policies that may have induced a concentration of financial activity or diverted it towards more speculative activities, draining resources from SME funding;
Amendment 85 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines that the development of new financial instruments is unlikely to play a major role in improving access to finance for SMEs; stresses on the other hand the risk that these tools may deepen the financialisation of economic activity, leading to less stable demand and higher financial fragility for SMEs and the overall economy;
Amendment 107 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Reiterates that it is primordial to enhance the SME lending capacity of banks; points out that financing by capital markets alone will not succeed in providing sufficient funding and appropriate financing solutions for SMEs;
Amendment 112 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Highlights that a healthy, stable and resilient banking sector is a prerequisite for strengthening SMEs’ access to finance; points outnotes that the CRR and CRD IV are a direct response to the crisis and form the core of th, but will be insufficient to ensure renewed stability of the financial sector;
Amendment 120 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned about multiplthe rnegulatory requirements for banks and possible negative effects on lending to SMEsative effects on lending to SMEs of the EU's financial policies, particularly as they foster banking privatization, banking concentration and enhanced financial speculation through the Banking Union and Capital Markets Union, respectively; calls on the Commission to assess these effects on SME lending, with the support of the EBA and SSM;
Amendment 126 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises the importanceNotes the contribution of the SME Supporting Factor for maintaining and increasing bank lending to SMEs; calls on the Commission to examine the appropriate calibration of the factor, including size, threshold and possible interactions with other regulatory requirements; is concerned about the possible negative impact of its removal; calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of making this factor permanent;
Amendment 137 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Notes the various ongoing initiatives to improve the availability of standardised and transparent SME credit information; stresses the need to apply the principle of proportionality when requesting such credit information so as not to overburden SMEs;
Amendment 144 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
Amendment 154 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses the importance of public institutions as an alternative to private banking as a source of funding for SMEs;
Amendment 160 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the Member States to foster a risk-taking and capital market culture; reiteratesenhance thate financial education for SMEs is key to increasing the use and acceptance of capital market solutions, allowing for a better assessment of costs, benefits and the associated risks; calls on the Member States to enhance the financial literacy of SMEliteracy of SMEs; stresses the importance of clear financial information requirements to protect SMEs from predatory financial practices;
Amendment 176 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Points out that the ongoing development of the CMU must be accompanied by recurring efforts to evaluate the existing financial regulatory framework, in particular with regard to its effects on SMEs and overall macrofinancial and macroeconomic stability;
Amendment 179 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Recalls the sizeable cost for SMEs to access capital markets; stresses the need for a proportionate regulation, with less complex and burdensome disclosure and listing requirements for SMEs;
Amendment 199 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 225 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
Amendment 228 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Notes that the complexity of new financial instruments may be used to transfer the risk from financial companies to SMEs, placing an additional burden on the latter;
Amendment 229 #
2016/2032(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 44 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part I – point 1 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part I – point 1 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 29 a – paragraph 2
Article 29 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 29 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless theEuropean Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 45 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part I – point 2 – paragraph 4 – point 3
Annex I – part I – point 2 – paragraph 4 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 46 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part I – point 3 – paragraph 3 – point 11
Annex I – part I – point 3 – paragraph 3 – point 11
2016/0400(COD)
Article 24 a – paragraph 2
Article 24 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 7(2), Article 8(3) and (5), Article 10(3) and (6), Article 13(2), Article 18(9), Article 19, Article 20(2), Article 22(3), (4) and (5), Article 23(4) and (7), Article 24(2) and (3), Article 26(3) and Article 27(10) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 47 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – point 4 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part II – point 4 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 14 b – paragraph 2
Article 14 b – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(5) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [from the date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [the date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 48 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part II – point 5 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part II – point 5 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 5 a – paragraph 2
Article 5 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(1) and Article 5(1) and (2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 49 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 8 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IV – point 8 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 17 b – paragraph 2
Article 17 b – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 16a shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of the entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 50 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 9 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 9 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 9 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 10 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 10 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 9 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 52 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 11 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 11 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 53 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 12 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 12 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 10 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 54 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 13 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 13 – paragraph 2 – point 2
016/0400(COD)
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 55 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 14 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 14 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 13 a – paragraph 2
Article 13 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 13 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 56 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 15 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 15 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 9 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 57 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 16 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 16 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 58 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 17 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 17 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power to not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 59 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 18 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 18 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 12 a – paragraph 4
Article 12 a – paragraph 4
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 12 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 60 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 19 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 19 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 15 a – paragraph 4
Article 15 a – paragraph 4
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 15 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 61 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 20 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IV – point 20 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 15 a – paragraph 2
Article 15 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(2) and Article 12(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 62 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 21 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 21 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 10 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus]. period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 63 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 22 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 22 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 19 a – paragraph 2
Article 19 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 19 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 64 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 23 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 23 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 65 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 24 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 24 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 12 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period. .
Amendment 66 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 25 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 25 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 17 a – paragraph 2
Article 17 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 17 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 67 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 26 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 26 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 10 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 68 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 27 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IV – point 27 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 69 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IV – point 28 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IV – point 28 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 18 a – paragraph 2
Article 18 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 18(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of the entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of the entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 70 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part V – point 29 – paragraph 2 – point 8
Annex I – part V – point 29 – paragraph 2 – point 8
2016/0400(COD)
Article 50 a – paragraph 2
Article 50 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(4), Article 11(10), Article 15(3), Article 36(10), Article 42(5), Article 43(9) and Article44(4) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 71 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part V – point 30 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Annex I – part V – point 30 – paragraph 2 – point 6
2016/0400(COD)
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(5), Article 6(11), Article 7(3), Article 12(3) and Article 23(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 72 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part V – point 31 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part V – point 31 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time [from the entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years [from the entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 73 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 32 – paragraph 2 – point 6
Annex I – part VI – point 32 – paragraph 2 – point 6
2016/0400(COD)
Article 17 a – paragraph 2
Article 17 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 3(2), Article 4(3), Article 5(3), Article 11(2) and Article 12(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 74 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 33 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 33 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 75 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 34 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part VI – point 34 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 7 a – paragraph 2
Article 7 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(1) and Article 7 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 76 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 35 – paragraph 3 – point 3
Annex I – part VI – point 35 – paragraph 3 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 10 b – paragraph 2
Article 10 b – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 10(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 77 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 36 – paragraph 4 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 36 – paragraph 4 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 78 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 37 – paragraph 3 – point 6
Annex I – part VI – point 37 – paragraph 3 – point 6
2016/0400(COD)
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(2)(b), Article 5(5), Article 6(6), Article 7(2) and Article 8(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 79 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 38 – paragraph 3 – point 3
Annex I – part VI – point 38 – paragraph 3 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 20 a – paragraph 2
Article 20 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8(3), in the first subparagraph of Article 20(1) and in Annex V, paragraph 1.4.1, point (ix), shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 80 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 39 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part VI – point 39 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
Article 12 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(2) and (3) and Article 12 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 81 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 40 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 40 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 82 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 41 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 41 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 5 a – paragraph 2
Article 5 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(15) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 83 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 42 – paragraph 3 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 42 – paragraph 3 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 5 a – paragraph 2
Article 5 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 15(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 84 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 43 – paragraph 3 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 43 – paragraph 3 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 22 a – paragraph 2
Article 22 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 22(2) and (3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 85 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 44 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 44 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 86 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 45 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part VI – point 45 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 18 a – paragraph 2
Article 18 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8(3) and Article 18 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 87 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 46 – paragraph 3 – point 5
Annex I – part VI – point 46 – paragraph 3 – point 5
2016/0400(COD)
Article 21 a – paragraph 2
Article 21 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(7), Article 7(1), Article 16 and Article 17(8) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 88 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 47 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 47 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 89 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 48 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 48 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 28 a – paragraph 2
Article 28 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 28(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 90 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 49 – paragraph 2 – point 4
Annex I – part VI – point 49 – paragraph 2 – point 4
2016/0400(COD)
Article 24 a – paragraph 2
Article 24 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 9(3), Article 11(4) and Article 24(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of time from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 91 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 50 – paragraph 3 – point 4
Annex I – part VI – point 50 – paragraph 3 – point 4
2016/0400(COD)
Article 53 a – paragraph 2
Article 53 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 37(5), Article 45(4) and Article 53(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus]. period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 92 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 51 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 51 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
Article 8 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 8 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 93 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 52 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VI – point 52 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 15 a – paragraph 2
Article 15 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 15 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 94 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 53 – paragraph 3 – point 6
Annex I – part VI – point 53 – paragraph 3 – point 6
2016/0400(COD)
Article 48 a – paragraph 2
Article 48 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 17(3) and Article 48 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 95 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VI – point 54 – paragraph 4 – point 4
Annex I – part VI – point 54 – paragraph 4 – point 4
2016/0400/COD
Article 15 a – paragraph 2
Article 15 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(7), Article 8(2) and Article 15 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 96 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VII – point 55 – paragraph 3 – point 6
Annex I – part VII – point 55 – paragraph 3 – point 6
2016/0400(COD)
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
Article 9 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 2(6), Article 3(5), Article 4, Article 5(1) and Article 6 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time [from the entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 97 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VII – point 56 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VII – point 56 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 6 a – paragraph 2
Article 6 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time [from the entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 98 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VII – point 58 – paragraph 3 – point 4
Annex I – part VII – point 58 – paragraph 3 – point 4
2016/0400(COD)
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(3) and Article 10(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 100 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VII – point 60 – paragraph 3 – point 5
Annex I – part VII – point 60 – paragraph 3 – point 5
2016/0400(COD)
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
Article 10 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated referred to in Article 3(1) and Article 5 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 101 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part VII – point 65 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part VII – point 65 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 6 a paragraph 2
Article 6 a paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 102 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IX – point 82 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part IX – point 82 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 6a Paragraph 2
Article 6a Paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 6 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 103 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IX – point 86 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IX – point 86 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 31 a – Paragraph 2
Article 31 a – Paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 29(4) and Article 31(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus]. period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 104 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IX – point 93 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IX – point 93 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 13 a – paragraph 2
Article 13 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 4(3) and Article 13 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from the [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 105 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IX – point 96 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IX – point 96 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 66 a – paragraph 2
Article 66 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 68(1) and Article 69(2) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 106 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part IX – point 98 – paragraph 2 – point 3
Annex I – part IX – point 98 – paragraph 2 – point 3
2016/0400(COD)
Article 14 a – paragraph 2
Article 14 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 14 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from the date of entry into force of this Regulation period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 107 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part XI – point 102 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part XI – point 102 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11(1) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 108 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part XI – point 103 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part XI – point 103 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016–0400(COD)
Article 9 aa – paragraph 2
Article 9 aa – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 9a shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 116 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part XI – point 107 – paragraph 3 – point 2
Annex I – part XI – point 107 – paragraph 3 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
Article 27 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 27 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 117 #
2016/0400(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – part XI – point 110 – paragraph 2 – point 2
Annex I – part XI – point 110 – paragraph 2 – point 2
2016/0400(COD)
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
Article 11 a – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Article 11 shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Omnibus] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 25 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The programme of European surveys on the structure of agricultural holdings, which has been carried out in the Union since 1966, should be continued in order to examine the trends in the structure of agricultural holdings at the Union level and to provide the statistical knowledge base necessary for the design, implementation, monitoring and, evaluation and review of related policies, in particular the Common Agricultural Policy and environmental, climate change adaptation and mitigation policies.
Amendment 36 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Comparable statistics from all Member States on the structure of agricultural holdings are important to determine the development of the common agricultural policy. The statistical collection and review process should be an exercise in tracking policy efforts to achieve fairness between countries, regions and farmers across the Union. Therefore standard classifications and common definitions should be used insofar as possible for survey characteristics.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13a) The collection of information on young or new entrants into farming should be improved to better inform agricultural policies dealing with new challenges such as generational renewal and rural depopulation.
Amendment 75 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) a list of characteristics not exceeding 40 variables and the reasons for those additional statistical needs to be transmitted to the Commission (Eurostat) and the corresponding measurement units;
Amendment 78 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. The Commission shall ensure adherence to the same quality and transparency standards in the collation and publication of this statistical data.
Amendment 79 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The Commission shall ensure timely collation and publication of the data received. This data shall be presented in a manner that includes a breakdown of the relevant statistics by Member State as well as overall trends.
Amendment 80 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 12 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The collated data and statistics shall be published and made available in a transparent manner for policy makers and members of the public alike.
Amendment 92 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – General characteristics – Legal Personality of the holding – row 9 a (new)
Annex III – General characteristics – Legal Personality of the holding – row 9 a (new)
The holder is classified as a Young yes/no Farmer or New Entrant into Farming within the meaning of Article 50 (2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 1307/2013
Amendment 95 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – General characteristics – Manager of the holding – row 3 a (new)
Annex III – General characteristics – Manager of the holding – row 3 a (new)
Year when classified as manager of Year holding
Amendment 99 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – Land characteristics – Other farmland – row 2 a (new)
Annex III – Land characteristics – Other farmland – row 2 a (new)
Mountain or hill land ha
Amendment 106 #
2016/0389(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – Module: Labour force and other gainful activities – topic 3 a (new)
Annex IV – Module: Labour force and other gainful activities – topic 3 a (new)
Participation by labour force in farm safety trainings
Amendment 21 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Citation 5 a (new)
Citation 5 a (new)
Having regard to the reasoned opinions submitted, within the framework of Protocol No 2 on the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, by 6 national parliaments, asserting that the draft legislative act does not comply with the principle of subsidiarity,
Amendment 28 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The goal of a resilient Energy Union with an ambitious climate policy at its core is to give Union consumers, both households and businesses, secure, sustainable, competitive and affordable energy, which requires a fundamental transformation of Europe's energy system. That objective can only be achieved through coordinated action, combining both legislative and non-legislative acts at Union and national levelrecognition that energy is a public social good.
Amendment 43 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
Amendment 44 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
Amendment 46 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The European Parliament's resolution "Towards a European Energy Union" of 15 December 201517 called for the Governance framework for the Energy Union to be ambitious, reliable, transparent, democratic and fully inclusive of the European Parliament and to ensure that the 2030 climate and energy targets are achieved, while recognising that it is for Member States to determine their energy mix and decide how to decarbonise their economies. That resolution also underlined that energy is a public social good, and that the EU should therefore focus closely on the issue of energy poverty and promote concerted measures to ensure affordable energy for the benefit of consumers. _________________ 17 European Parliament resolution of 15 December 2015 on "Towards a European Energy Union" (2015/2113(INI)).
Amendment 49 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Therefore, the main objective of the Energy Union Governance should be to enable the achievement of the objectives of the Energy Union and in particular the targets of the 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy. This Regulation is therefore linked to sectorial legislation implementing the 2030 targets for energy and climate. WhileIt is vital that Member States needretain the flexibilities necessary to choose policies that are best-matched to their national energy mix and preferences, that. This flexibility should be compatible with further market integration, increasedbased on mutual comopetiration, the attainment of climate and energy objectives with EU partners to promote energy savings, sustainable consumption and thea gradual shift towards a low-carbon economy.
Amendment 56 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The achievement of the Energy Union objectives should be ensured through a combination of Union initiatives and coherent national policies set out in integrated national energy and climate plans. Sectorial Union legislation in the energy and climate fields sets out planning requirements, which have been useful tools to drive change at the national level. Their introduction at different moments in time has led to overlaps and insufficient consideration of synergies and interactions between policy areas. Current separate. Existing planning, reporting and monitoring in the climate and energy fields should therefore as far as possible be streamlined and integratbe simplified and streamlined.
Amendment 62 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) A mandatory template for the national plans should be established to ensure that all national plans are sufficiently comprehensive and to facilitate comparison and aggregation of national plans, while at the same time ensuring sufficient flexibility to Member States to set out the details of national plans reflecting national preferences and specificities.
Amendment 63 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Regional cooperation is key to ensure an effective achievement of the objectives of the Energy Union. Dialogue between Member States should get the opportunity to comment on other Member States' plans before they are finalised to avoidensure that any potential inconsistencies and potential negative impacts on other Member States and ensure that common objectives are met collectively. Regional cooperation in elaborating and finalising national plans as well as in the subsequent implementation of national plans should be essential to improve effectiveness and efficiency of measures and foster market integration and energy securitare avoided collectively.
Amendment 67 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) National plans should be stable to ensure transparency and predictability of national policies and measures in order to ensure investor certainty. Updates of national plans should however be foreseen once during the ten-year period covered to give Member States the opportunity to adapt to significant changing circumstances. For the plans covering the period from 2021 to 2030, Member States should be able to update their plans by 1 January 2024. Targets, objectives and contributions should only be modified to reflect an increased overall ambition in particular as regards the 2030 targets for energy and climate. As part of the updates, Member States should make efforts to mitigate any adverse environmental impacts that become apparent as part of the integrated reporting.
Amendment 72 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28
Recital 28
(28) The experience in the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 525/2013 demonstrated the importance of transparency, accuracy, consistency, completeness and comparability of information. Building on that experience, this Regulation should ensure that Member States report on their policies and measures and projections as a key component of the progress reports. The information in those reports should be essential for demonstrating the timely implementation of commitments under Regulation [ ] [ESR]. Operating and continuously improving systems at Union and Member State level coupled with better guidance on reporting should significantly contribute towards an on-going strengthening of the information necessary in order to track progress in the decarbonisation dimensionReporting should significantly contribute towards decarbonisation initiatives.
Amendment 77 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) In view of the collective achievement of the objectives of the Energy Union Strategy, it will be essential for the Commission to assess national plans and, based on progress reports, their implementation. For the first ten-year period, this concerns in particularProgress reports should track the achievement of the Union-level 2030 targets for energy and climate and national contributions to those targets. Such assessment should be undertaken on a biennial basis, and on an annual basis only where necessary, and should be consolidated in the Commission's State of the Energy Union reports.
Amendment 80 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) Should the ambition of integrated national energy and climate plans or their updates be insufficient for the collective achievement of the Energy Union objectives and, for the first period, in particular the 2030 targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency, the Commission should take measures at Union level in order to ensure the collective achievement of these objectives and targets (thereby closing any 'ambition gap'). Should progress made by the Union towards these objectives and targets be insufficient for their delivery, the Commission should, in addition to issuing recommendations, take measures at Union level or Member States should take additional measures in order to ensure achievement of these objectives and targets (thereby closing any 'delivery gap'). Such measures should take into account early ambitious contributions made by Member States to the 2030 targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency when sharing the effort for collective target achievement. In the area of renewable energy, such measures can also include financial contributions by Member States to a financing platform managed by the Commission, which would be used to contribute to renewable energy projects across the Union. Member States' national renewable energy targets for 2020 should serve as baseline shares of renewable energy from 2021 onwards. In the area of energy efficiency, additional measures can in particular aim at improving the energy efficiency of products, buildings and transport.
Amendment 82 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) Member States and the Commission should ensure close cooperation on all matters relating to the implementation of the Energy Union and this Regulation, with close involvement of the European Parliament. The Commission should as appropriate assist Member States in implementing this Regulation, particularly with regard to the establishment of the national plans and associated capacity buildingachievement of emission reduction targets, with close involvement of the European Parliament.
Amendment 86 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
Amendment 89 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) The power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should be delegated to the Commission in order to amend the general framework for integrated national energy and climate plans (template), set up a financing platform to which Member States can contribute in case the Union trajectory towards the 2030 Union renewable energy target is not collectively met, take account of changes in the global warming potentials ("GWPs") and internationally agreed inventory guidelines, set substantive requirements for the Union inventory system and set up the registries pursuant to Article 33. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level, and that those consultations be conducted in accordance with the principles laid down in the Inter- institutional Agreement on Better Law- Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and the Council should receive all documents at the same time as Member States' experts, and their experts should systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts. It should also take into account, where necessary, decisions adopted under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement.
Amendment 90 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 43
Recital 43
Amendment 92 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The governance mechanism shall be based on integrated national energy and climate plans covering ten-year periods starting from 2021 to 2030, corresponding integrated national energy and climate progress reports by the Member States and integrated monitoring arrangements by the European Commission. It shall define a structured, iterative process between the Commission and Member States in view of the finalisation of the national plans and their subsequent implementation, including with regard to regional cooperation, and corresponding Commission action.
Amendment 97 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Chapter 2 – title
Chapter 2 – title
Amendment 98 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – title
Article 3 – title
Amendment 139 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The Commission may issue recommendationsmonitor progress made on the draft plans toby Member States in accordance with Article 28. Those recommendations shall in particular set , recognising their sovereign right to determine their own energy mix. This monitoring should take into account:
Amendment 143 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall take utmost account of any recommendations fromduly refer to monitoring reports of the Commission when finalising their integrated national energy and climate plan.
Amendment 145 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Article 11 – paragraph 4
Amendment 146 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 151 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall onlmay modify the targets, objectives and contributions set out in the update referred to in paragraph 2 to reflect an increased ambition as compared to the ones set in the latest notified integrated national energy and climate plan.
Amendment 152 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Amendment 160 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Article 15 – paragraph 4
Amendment 161 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Amendment 174 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 185 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 – paragraph 6
Article 25 – paragraph 6
Amendment 197 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Amendment 198 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Article 27 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 205 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 28 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 208 #
2016/0375(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37
Article 37
Amendment 52 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Own funds add-ons imposed by competent authorities should be set in relation to the specific situation of an institution and should be duly justified. These requirements should not be used to address macroprudential risks and should be positioned, in the stacking order of own funds requirements, above the minimum own funds requirements and below the combined buffer requirement.
Amendment 53 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Well-capitalised institutions support economic growth rather than hamper it. Significant risk reduction can only be achieved when institutions are not able to pose systemic threats to the economies of the Union or the Member States and when orderly failure is possible without the socialisation of losses. It is therefore appropriate to increase capital buffers for institutions that are classified as O-SIIs and G-SIIs so that possible losses which may occur can be absorbed by the owners of such institutions.
Amendment 57 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
Amendment 117 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 21b – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 21b – paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Competent authorities may allow the institutions referred to in paragraph 1 to have two intermediate EU parent undertakings where the competent authorities ascertain that a single intermediate EU parent undertaking would be operationally incompatible with a mandatory requirement for separation of activities in accordance with the rules of the third country where the ultimate parent undertaking of the third country group has its head office.
Amendment 150 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 21b – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Article 21b – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2
Competent authorities shall ensure that there is a single intermediate EU parent undertaking for all institutions that are part of the same third country group., unless the competent authorities have permitted the institution to have two intermediate EU parent undertakings in order for the institution to be compatible with a mandatory requirement for separation of activities in accordance with the rules of the third country where the ultimate parent undertaking of the third country group has its head office.
Amendment 267 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 103
Article 103
Amendment 284 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 104a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Competent authorities shall impose the additional own funds requirement referred to in Article 104(1)(a) only where, on the basis of the reviews carried out in accordance with Articles 97 and 101, they ascertain any of the following situations for an individual institution:
Amendment 285 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 104a – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the institution has reached a size and level of complexity such that its failure would lead to significant disruptions of the economy of the Member State or parts of it;
Amendment 289 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 104a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 307 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104a – paragraph 6
Article 104a – paragraph 6
Amendment 324 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 104b – paragraph 5
Article 104b – paragraph 5
5. An institution that fails to meet the expectations set out in paragraph 3 shall notmay be subject to the restrictions referred to in Article 141.
Amendment 354 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 131 – paragraph 5
Article 131 – paragraph 5
(30 a) In Article 131, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: "5. The competent authority or designated authority may require each O- SII, on a consolidated or sub-consolidated or individual basis, as applicable, to maintain an O-SII buffer of up to 2 5% of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, taking into account the criteria for the identification of the O-SII. That buffer shall consist of and shall be supplementary to Common Equity Tier 1 capital. "
Amendment 358 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 b (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 131 – paragraph 9
Article 131 – paragraph 9
(30 b) In Article 131, paragraph 9 is replaced by the following: "9. There shall be at least five subcategories of G-SIIs. The lowest boundary and the boundaries between each subcategory shall be determined by the scores under the identification methodology. The cut-off scores between adjacent sub-categories shall be defined clearly and shall adhere to the principle that there is a constant linear increase of systemic significance, between each sub- category resulting in a linear increase in the requirement of additional Common Equity Tier 1 capital, with the exception of the highest sub-category. For the purposes of this paragraph, systemic significance is the expected impact exerted by the G-SII's distress on the global financial market. The lowest sub-category shall be assigned a G- SII buffer of 12 % of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and the buffer assigned to each sub-category shall increase in gradients of 0,51 % of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 up to and including the fourth sub-category. The highest sub-category of the G-SII buffer shall be subject to a buffer of 3,58 % of the total risk exposure amount calculated in accordance with Article 92(3) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. "
Amendment 406 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32
Directive 2013/36/EU
Article 141a – paragraph 2
Article 141a – paragraph 2
Amendment 421 #
2016/0364(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 32 a (new)
Directive 2013/36/EU
Chapter 4 a (new)
Chapter 4 a (new)
Amendment 35 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Member States should ensure that institutions have sufficient loss absorbing and recapitalisation capacity to ensure smooth and fast absorption of losses and recapitalisation in resolution with a minimum impact on financial stability and taxpayerwithout taxpayer bail-outs. That should be achieved through compliance by institutions with an institution-specific minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities ('MREL') as provided in Directive 2014/59/EU.
Amendment 37 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Eligibility criteria for bail-inable liabilities for the MREL should be closely aligned with those laid down in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for the TLAC minimum requirement, in line with the complementary adjustments and requirements introduced in this Directive. In particular, certain debt instruments with an embedded derivative component, such as certain structured notes, should be eligible to meet the MREL to the extent that they have a fixed principal amount repayable at maturity while only an additional return is linked to a derivative and depends on the performance of a reference asset. In view of their fixed principal amount, those instruments should be highly loss-absorbing and easily bail-inable in resolution. Eligible liabilities should be clearly subordinated to other liabilities in order to avoid any ‘no creditor worse off’ issues.
Amendment 38 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7 a) Recent cases of bank bail-outs with public money have highlighted fundamental shortcomings of the current recovery and resolution framework, which was drafted with the intention that no socialisation of losses should take place. It is therefore appropriate to close existing loopholes, namely precautionary recapitalisation, which enable authorities to inject public money into failing banks.
Amendment 39 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) The scope of liabilities to meet the MREL includes, in principle, all liabilities resulting from claims arising from unsecured non-preferred creditors (non- subordinated liabilities) unless they do not meet specific eligibility criteria provided in this Directive. To enhance the resolvability of institutions through an effective use of the bail-in tool, resolution authorities should be able to require that the MREL is met with subordinated liabilities, in particular when there are clear indications that bailed-in creditors are likely to bear losses in resolution that would exceed their potential losses in insolvency. The requirement to meet MREL with subordinated liabilities should be requested only for a level necessary to prevent that losses of creditors in resolution are above losses that they would otherwise incur under insolvency. Any subordination of debt instruments requested by resolution authorities for the MREL should be without prejudice to the possibility to partly meet the TLAC minimum requirement with non-subordinated debt instruments in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 as permitted by the TLAC standard.
Amendment 43 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The MREL should allow institutions to absorb losses expected in resolution and recapitalise the institution post-resolution. The resolution authorities should, on the basis of the resolution strategy chosen by them, duly justify the imposed level of the MREL in particular as regards the need and the level of the requirement referred to in Article 104a of Directive 2013/36/EU in the recapitalisation amount. As such, that level should be composed of the sum of the amount of losses expected in resolution that correspond to the institution's own funds requirements and the recapitalisation amount that allows the institution post- resolution to meet its own funds requirements necessary for being authorised to pursue its activities under the chosen resolution strategy. The MREL should be expressed as a percentage of the total risk exposure and leverage ratio measures, and institutions should meet simultaneously the levels resulting from the two measurements. The resolution authority should be able to adjust the recapitalisation amounts in cases duly justified to adequately reflect also increased risks that affect resolvability arising from the resolution group’s business model, funding profile and overall risk profile and therefore in such limitednecessary circumstances require that the recapitalisation amounts referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 45c(3) and (4) are exceeded.
Amendment 46 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) To enhance their resolvability, resolution authorities should be able to impose an institution-specific MREL on G- SIIs in addition to the TLAC minimum requirement laid down in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013. That institution-specific MREL may only be imposed where the TLAC minimum requirement is not sufficient to absorb losses and recapitalise a G-SII under the chosen when deemed necessary by the resolution strategauthority.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) When setting the level of MREL, resolution authorities should consider the degree of systemic relevance of an institution and the potential adverse impact of its failure on the financial stability. They should take into account the need for a level playing field between G-SIIs and other comparable institutions with systemic relevance within the Union. Thus MREL of institutions that are not identified as G-SIIs but the systemic relevance within the Union of which is comparable to the systemic relevance of G-SIIs should not diverge disproportionately from the level and composition of MREL generally set for G-SIIs and may also exceed that level.
Amendment 53 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Similarly to powers conferred to competent authorities by Directive 2013/36/EU, this Directive should allow resolution authorities to require institutions to meet higher levels of MREL while addressing in a more flexible manner any breaches of those levels, in particular by alleviating the automatic effects of those breaches in the form of limitations to the Maximum Distributable Amounts (MDAs). Resolution authorities should be able to give guidance to institutions to meet additional amounts to cover losses in resolution that are above the level of the own funds requirements as laid down in Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 and Directive 2013/36/EU, and/or to ensure sufficient market confidence in the institution post-resolution. To ensure consistency with Directive 2013/36/EU, guidance to cover additional losses may only be given where the 'capital guidance' has been requested by the competent supervisory authorities in accordance with Directive 2013/36/EU and should not exceed the level requested in that guidance. For the recapitalisation amount, the level requested in the guidance to ensure market confidence should enable the institution to continue to meet the conditions for authorisation for an appropriate period of time, including by allowing the institution to cover the costs related to the restructuring of its activities following resolution. The market confidence buffer should not exceed the combined capital buffer requirement under Directive 2013/36/EU unless a higher level is necessary to ensure that, following the event of resolution, the entity continues to meet the conditions for its authorisation for an appropriate period of time. Where an entity consistently fails to have additional own funds and eligible liabilities as expected under the guidance, the resolution authority should be able to require that the amount of the MREL be increased to cover the amount of the guidance. For the purposes of considering whether there is a consistent failure, the resolution authority should take into account the entity's reporting on the MREL as required by this Directiveen deemed necessary for resolution.
Amendment 55 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Institutions that are not resolution entities should comply with the MREL at individual level. Loss absorption and recapitalisation needs of those institutions should be generally provided by their respective resolution entities through the acquisition by resolution entities of eligible liabilities issued by those institutions and their write-down or conversion into instruments of ownership at the point where those institutions are no longer viable. As such, the MREL applicable to institutions that are not resolution entities should be applied together and consistently with the requirements applicable to resolution entities. That should allow resolution authorities to resolve a resolution group without placing certain of its subsidiary entities in resolution, thus avoiding potentially disruptive effects on the market. Subject to the agreement of the resolution authorities of the resolution entity and of its subsidiary, it should be possible to replace the issuance of eligible liabilities to resolution entities with collateralised guarantees between the resolution entity and its subsidiaries, that can be triggered when the timing conditions equivalent to those allowing the write down or conversion of eligible liabilities are met. The resolution authorities of subsidiaries of a resolution entity should also be able to fully waive the application of the MREL applicable to institutions that are not resolution entities if both the resolution entity and its subsidiaries are established in the same Member State. The application of the MREL to institutions that are not resolution entities should comply with the chosen resolution strategy, in particular it should not change the ownership relationship between institutions and their resolution group after those institutions have been recapitalised.
Amendment 169 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 20 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 20 a (new)
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Article 32 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1 – point d
Amendment 202 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
1. Eligible liabilities shall be included in the amount of own funds and eligible liabilities of resolution entities only where they satisfy the conditions referred to in Article 72a, except for point (d) of Article 72b(2) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013.
Amendment 206 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45b – paragraph 2
Article 45b – paragraph 2
Amendment 216 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45b – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 45b – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 223 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 45b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Resolution authorities may decidshall ensure that the requirement referred to in Article 45f is met by resolution entities with instruments that meet all conditions referred to in Article 72a of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 with a view to ensure that the resolution entity can be resolved in a manner suitable to meet the resolution objectives.
Amendment 225 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 45b – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 262 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 271 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Amendment 272 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Amendment 276 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Amendment 283 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Amendment 292 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 294 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Article 45c – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 297 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 3 –subparagraph 4
Article 45c – paragraph 3 –subparagraph 4
Amendment 308 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45c – paragraph 4
Article 45c – paragraph 4
Amendment 358 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Amendment 368 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45d – paragraph 2
Article 45d – paragraph 2
Amendment 384 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45e
Article 45e
Amendment 439 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 4
Article 45g – paragraph 4
Amendment 470 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45g – paragraph 5 – point f
Article 45g – paragraph 5 – point f
(f) the resolution entity holds more than 50 % of the voting rights attached to shares in the capital of the subsidiary orand has the right to appoint or remove a majority of the members of the management body of the subsidiary;
Amendment 487 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45i – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 45i – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Entities referred to in Article 1(1) shall report to their competent and resolution authorities on the following upon request and at least on a yearly basis:
Amendment 499 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Article 1 – paragraph 23
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 45k – paragraph -1 (new)
Article 45k – paragraph -1 (new)
-1. An institution that meets the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities shall not make a distribution in connection with Common Equity Tier 1 capital or make payments on Additional Tier 1 instruments to an extent that would decrease its Common Equity Tier 1capital to a level where the minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities is no longer met.
Amendment 519 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 24
Article 1 – paragraph 24
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 55 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 55 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Amendment 537 #
2016/0362(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 24
Article 1 – paragraph 24
Directive 2014/59/EU
Article 55 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
Article 55 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3 a (new)
The liabilities for which a waiver from the contractual recognition of bail-in has been granted by the resolution authority in accordance with this paragraph shall not exceed 10 per cent of all liabilities of an institution or entity referred to in points (b), (c) and (d) of Article 1(1).
Amendment 49 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51 a (new)
Recital 51 a (new)
(51a) Institutions should benefit from an optional phased-in transitional period of a maximum duration of three years. In line with the Standard on regulatory treatment of accounting provisions - interim approach and transitional arrangements of March 2017 by Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the impact of the expected credit loss provisions on CET1 capital should not be fully neutralised during the transition period.
Amendment 51 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 51 b (new)
Recital 51 b (new)
(51b) Institutions should disclose publicly their capital ratios as well as their leverage ratio both with and without the application of the IFRS 9 transitional arrangements specified in this Regulation in order for the public to be able to determine the impact of those arrangements on those ratios.
Amendment 87 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 1
Article 473a – paragraph 1
1. Until [date of application of this Article + 5 years]31 December 2020, institutions that prepare their accounts in conformity with the international accounting standards adopted in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 6(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1606/2002 may, and institutions that are required pursuant to Article 24(2) of this Regulation to effect the valuation of assets and off-balance sheet items and the determination of own funds in accordance with international accounting standards, shall, by way of derogation from Article 50 of this Regulation, add to their Common Equity Tier 1 capital the amount calculated in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article multiplied by the applicable factor laid down in paragraph 3.
Amendment 100 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 2
Article 473a – paragraph 2
2. The amount referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated asthe greater of the following, but only in case the total impact of IFRS 9 on CET 1 is negative: (a) zero (b) the after-tax amount calculated in accordance with point (i) reduced by the amount calculated in accordance with point (ii): (i) the sum of the twelve month expected credit losses determined in accordance with paragraph 5.5.5 of the Annex to Commission Regulation (EU) No …. / 2016 (32 )2016/2067 and the amount of the loss allowance for financial instruments equal to the lifetime expected losses determined in accordance with paragraph 5.5.3 of the Annex to Commission Regulation (EU) No …. / 2016 (1). _________________ 32 …./2016/2067 as at 1 January 20168 of .. …… 2016 adopting certain international accounting standards in accordance withr on the date of initial application of IFRS 9; (ii) the total amount of impairment losses on loans and receivables, held to maturity investments and available for sale assets determined in accordance with paragraphs 63, 67 and 68 of IAS 39 adopted in the Union by Commission Regulation (EC) No 160126/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L , ……, p. ).8 as at 31 December 2017 or on the day before the first application of IFRS 9. Commission Regulation (EU) No
Amendment 102 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119 (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 2a (new)
Article 473a – paragraph 2a (new)
2a. For financial assets that are exposures subject to risk weighting in accordance with Chapter 3 of Title II of Part Three, institutions shall reduce the amount of expected credit losses for non- defaulted assets calculated in accordance with point (b)(i) of paragraph 2 of this Article by the expected loss shortfall amounts currently deducted from CET 1 capital calculated in accordance with Article 158(5), (6) and (10).Where the reduction would result in a negative amount it shall be calculated as zero.
Amendment 113 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) 10,7 in the period from [date of application of this Article] to [ date of application of this Article + 1 year - 1 day]1 January 2018 to 31 December 2018;
Amendment 121 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point b
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point b
(b) 0,84 in the period from [date of application of this Article + 1 year] to [date of application of this Article + 2 years - 1 day]1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019;
Amendment 132 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point c
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) 0,62 in the period from [date of application of this Article +2 years] to [date of application of this Article +3 years - 1 day];1 January 2020 to 31 December 2020.
Amendment 136 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point d
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point d
Amendment 151 #
2016/0360B(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 119
Regulation (EU) 575/2013
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point e
Article 473a – paragraph 3 – point e
Amendment 183 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) In order not to unnecessarily constrain lending by institutions to corporates and private households and to prevent unwarranted adverse impacts on market liquidity, tThe leverage ratio requirement should be set at a level where it acts as a credible backstop to the risk of excessive leverage without hampering economic growthand it should be aligned with the institution's risk profile.
Amendment 187 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) TWhile the European Banking Authority (EBA) concluded in its report to the Commission19 that a Tier 1 capital leverage ratio calibrated at 3% for any type of credit institution would constitute a credible backstop function. A 3% leverage ratio requirement was also agreed upon at international level by, the OECD9a and US FDIC recommend a leverage ratio of at least 5% for institutions that are systemically important. It is therefore justified to deviate from the Basel Committee. T and to set higher leverage ratio requirement should therefore be calibrated at 3%s of 4%, and 6% for systemically important financial institutions. __________________ 19 Report on the leverage ratio requirement of 3 August 2016 https://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/101 80/1360107/EBA-Op-2016- 13+(Leverage+ratio+report).pdf 9a Adrian Blundell-Wignall, Paul Atkinson, 2012. ‘Deleveraging, Traditional versus Capital Markets Banking and the Urgent Need to Separate and Recapitalise G-SIFI Banks’, OECD Journal: Financial Market Trends, 03 Oct 2012, No 1, Volume: 2012, Issue: 1. pp 7–44.
Amendment 190 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 197 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) To ensure the effectiveness of the requirement on own funds and eligible liabilities, it is essential that the instruments held for meeting that requirement have a high capacity of loss absorption. Liabilities that are excluded from the bail-in tool referred to in Directive 2014/59/EU do not have that capacity, and neither do other liabilities that, although bail-in-able in principle might raise difficulties for being bailed in in practice. Those liabilities should therefore not be considered eligible for the requirement on own funds and eligible liabilities. On the other hand, capital instruments, as well as subordinated liabilities have a high loss absorption capacity. Also, the loss absorption potential of liabilities that rank pari passu with certain excluded liabilities should be recognised up to a certain extent, in line with the TLAC standard.
Amendment 198 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The implementation of the FRTB standards in the Union needs to preserve the good functioning of financial markets in the Union. Recent impact studies about the FRTB standards show that the implementation of the FRTB standards is expected to lead to a steep increase in the overall own fund requirement for market risks. To avoid a sudden contraction of trading businessesnegative effects for the real economy in the Union, a phase-in period should therefore be introduced so that institutions can recognise the overall level of own fund requirements for market risks generated by the transposition of the FRTB standards in the Union. Particular attention should also be paid to European trading specificities and adjustments to the own funds requirements for sovereign and covered bonds, and simple, transparent and standardised securitisations.
Amendment 200 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) The NSFR should be expressed as a percentage and set at a minimum level of 100%, and 120% for G-SIIs, which indicates that an institution holds sufficient stable funding to meet its funding needs during a one-year period under both normal and stressed conditions. Should its NSFR falls below the 100% levels, the institution should comply with the specific requirements laid down in Article 414 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 for a timely restoration of its NSFR to the minimum level. The supervisory measures in case of non- compliance should not be automatic, competent authorities should instead assess the reasons for non-compliance with the NSFR requirement before defining potential supervisory measures.
Amendment 201 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 39
Recital 39
(39) In accordance with the recommendations made by EBA in its report of 15 December 2015 prepared pursuant to paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 510 of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013, the rules for calculating the NSFR should be closely aligned with the Basel Committee's standards, including developments in those standards regarding the treatment of derivatives transactions. The necessity to take into account some European specificities to ensure that the NSFR does not hinder the financing of the European real economy however justifies adopting some limited adjustments to the Basel NSFR for the definition of the European NSFR. Those adjustments due to the European context are recommended by the NSFR report prepared by EBA and relate mainly to specific treatments for i) pass- through models in general and covered bonds issuance in particular; ii) trade finance activities; iii) centralised regulated savings; iv) residential guaranteed loans; and v) credit unions. These proposed specific treatments broadly reflect the preferential treatment granted to these activities in the European LCR compared to the Basel LCR. Because the NSFR complements the LCR, those two ratios should indeed be consistent in their definition and calibration. This is in particular the case for required stable funding factors applied to LCR high quality liquid assets for the calculation of the NSFR that shall reflect the definitions and haircuts of the European LCR, regardless of compliance with the general and operational requirements set out for the LCR calculation that are not appropriate in the one-year frame of the NSFR calculation.
Amendment 208 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 53
Recital 53
(53) IPublic investments in infrastructure are essential to strengthen Europe's competitiveness and to stimulate job creation. The recovery and future growth of the Union economy depends largely on the availability of capital for strategic investments of European significance in infrastructure, notably broadband and energy networks, as well as transport infrastructure, particularly in industrial centres; education, research and innovation; and renewable energy and energy efficiency. The Investment Plan for Europe aims at promoting additional funding to viable infrastructure projects through, inter alia, the mobilization of additional private source of finance. For a number of potential investors the main concern is the perceived absence of viable projects and the limited capacity to properly evaluate risk given their intrinsically complex nature.
Amendment 210 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 54
Recital 54
(54) In order to encourage public and private investments in infrastructure projects it is therefore essential to lay down athe prudential regulatory environment that is abcan play a role toin promoteing high quality infrastructure projects and reduce risks for investors. In particular capital charges for exposures to infrastructure projects should be reduced provided they comply with a set of strict criteria able to reduce their risk profile and enhance predictability of cash flows. The Commission should review the provision by [three years after the entry into force] in order to assess a) its impact on the volume of infrastructure investments by institutions and the quality of investments having regard to EU's objectives to move towards a low-carbon, climate-resilient and circular economy; and b) its adequacy from a prudential standpoint. The Commission should also consider whether the scope should be extended to infrastructure investments by corporates.
Amendment 355 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 72a – paragraph 2 – point j – point ii
Article 72a – paragraph 2 – point j – point ii
(ii) a commercial or trade creditor, where the liability arises from the provision to the institution or the parent undertaking of goods or services that are critical to the daily functioning of the institution's or parent undertaking's operations, including IT services, utilities and the rental, servicing and upkeep of premises; and the creditor is not itself an institution as defined by Art. 4(1) of this Regulation;
Amendment 360 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 72b – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii a (new)
Article 72b – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii a (new)
(iia) retail clients as defined by Art 4 (1) (11) of Directive 2014/65/EU.
Amendment 389 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 72b – paragraph 3
Article 72b – paragraph 3
Amendment 395 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 72b – paragraph 4
Article 72b – paragraph 4
Amendment 399 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 72b – paragraph 5
Article 72b – paragraph 5
Amendment 402 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 27
Amendment 477 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) a leverage ratio of 3%.6% for G-SIIs.
Amendment 484 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(aa) in paragraph 1, the following point (da) is added: "(da) a leverage ratio of 4%. for O- SIIs."
Amendment 485 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
Article 92 – paragraph 1 – point d b (new)
(ab) in paragraph 1, the following point (db) is added: "(db) a leverage ratio of 3% for all other institutions."
Amendment 488 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 a – title
Article 92 a – title
Article 92a G-SII and O-SII Requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities
Amendment 492 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 92 a – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Subject to Articles 93 and 94 and to the exceptions set out in paragraph 2 of this Article, institutions identified as resolution entities and that are a G-SII or an O-SII or part of a G- SII or O-SII shall at all times satisfy the following requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities:
Amendment 500 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 a – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 92 a – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) within the threone years following the date on which the institution or the group of which the institution is part has been identified as a G-SII or O-SII;
Amendment 504 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 a – paragraph 3
Article 92 a – paragraph 3
3. Where the aggregate resulting from the application of the requirements laid down in point (a) of paragraph 1 to each resolution entity of the same G-SII or O- SII exceeds the requirement of own funds and eligible liabilities calculated in accordance with Article 12, the resolution authority of the EU parent institution may, after having consulted the other relevant resolution authorities, act in accordance with Articles 45d(3) or 45h(1)of Directive 2014/59/EU.
Amendment 505 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 92 a – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The requirements for G-SII as laid down in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be multiplied with the following factors: (a) 1,2 in the period from [date of application of this Article + 1 year] to [date of application of this Article + 2 years - 1 day] (b) 1,4 in the period from [date of application of this Article +2 years] to [date of application of this Article +3 years - 1 day]; (c) 1,6 in the period from [date of application of this Article +3 years] to [date of application of this Article +4 years - 1 day]; (d) 1,8 in the period from [date of application of this Article +4 years] to [date of application of this Article +5 years - 1 day].
Amendment 507 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 b – title
Article 92 b – title
Article 92b Non-EU G-SII and O-SII Requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities
Amendment 511 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 40
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 92 b – subparagraph 1
Article 92 b – subparagraph 1
Institutions that are material subsidiaries of non-EU G-SIIs and that are not resolution entities shall at all times satisfy a requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities equal to 9100% of the requirements for own funds and eligible liabilities laid down in Article 92a.
Amendment 532 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 99 – paragraph 11
Article 99 – paragraph 11
11. Competent authorities may waive the requirements to report data items specified in the implementing technical standards referred to in this Article and Articles 100, 101, 394, 415 and 430 where, or allow the institution to report in another reporting format, if: (a) those data items are already available to the competent authorities by means other than those specified under the above mentioned implementing technical standards, including where that information is available to the competent authorities in a different formats or levels of granularity.; the competent authority may then only grant the waiver or exception stated in this paragraph if data received or collated through such alternative methods are identical to those data points which otherwise ought to be reported in accordance with the respective implementing standards; (b) the data points or formats have not been updated in accordance with the amendments to this Regulation within an appropriate time period before the deadline for the data to be reported.
Amendment 539 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 48
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 48
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 104 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 104 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) financial assets or liabilities measured at fair valuestruments held as accounting trading assets or liabilities;
Amendment 629 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 84
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 325 a i – table 4 – column Sector – row Bucket 4
Article 325 a i – table 4 – column Sector – row Bucket 4
Table 4 Financial sector entities including credit institutions incorporated or established by a central government, a regional government or a local authority and promotional lenders , excluding public sector entities as defined in Art 4 (8) of Regulation EU 575/2013
Amendment 731 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 b – paragraph 2
Article 428 b – paragraph 2
2. Institutions other than G-SIIs shall maintain a net stable funding ratio of at least 100%.
Amendment 732 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 b – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 428 b – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. G-SIIs shall maintain a net stable funding ratio of at least 120%.
Amendment 733 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 b – paragraph 3
Article 428 b – paragraph 3
3. Where at any time the net stable funding ratio of an institution has fallen or can be reasonably expected to fall below 100%the thresholds specified in paragraph 2 and 2a (new) of this Article, the requirement laid down in Article 414 shall apply. The institution shall aim at restoring its net stable funding ratio to the levels referred to in paragraph 2 and 2a (new). Competent authorities shall assess the reasons for non- compliance with the level referred to in paragraph 2 and 2a (new) before taking, where appropriate, any supervisory measures.
Amendment 794 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 s – point b
Article 428 s – point b
Amendment 811 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 u – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 428 u – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) assets that have a residual maturity of less than six months resulting from secured lending transactions and capital market-driven transactions as defined in Article 192(2) and (3) with financial customers, other than thosewhere those assets are collateralised by assets that qualify as Level 1 assets under Title II of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/61, excluding extremely high quality covered bonds referred to in point (bf) of Article 428s. Those assets shall be taken10(1) of that Delegated Regulation , and where the institution would be legally entitled and operationally able to reuse those assets for the life of the transaction, regardless of whether the collateral has already been reused. Institutions shall take those assets into account on a net basis where Article 428e(1) of this Regulation applies;
Amendment 812 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 u – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 428 u – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 816 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Amendment 820 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 w – point a a (new)
Article 428 w – point a a (new)
(aa) assets that have a residual maturity of less than six months resulting from secured lending transactions and capital market-driven transactions as defined in Article 192(2) and (3) with financial customers, other than those referred to in point (a) of Article 428u. Those assets shall be taken into account on a net basis where Article 428e(1) applies
Amendment 826 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 w – point b a (new)
Article 428 w – point b a (new)
(ba) assets that have a residual maturity of less than six months resulting from transactions with financial customers other than those referred to in point (a) of Article 428u and in point (a) of this Article.
Amendment 830 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 114
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 428 x – paragraph 2
Article 428 x – paragraph 2
2. For all netting sets of derivative contracts subject to margin agreements under which institutions post variation margins to their counterparties, institutions shall apply a 20% required stable funding factor to the absolute market value of those netting sets of derivative contracts, gross of any collateral posted, where those netting sets have a negative market value.
Amendment 904 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 429 a – paragraph 2 – point e
Amendment 930 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 115
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 429 c – paragraph 4
Article 429 c – paragraph 4
4. For the purposes of paragraph 1 of this Article, institutions shall not include collateral received in the calculation of NICA as defined in point 12a of Article 272, except in the case of derivatives contracts with clients where those contracts are cleared by a QCCP.
Amendment 1041 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 a – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 501 a – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. For the purpose of paragraph 1(b) essential public services have to deliver a positive social impact and have to meet core values of the European Union notably human rights, inclusion, respect and justice, preferably but not exclusively aimed at: (i) health and safety, human rights and labour rights; (ii) organic farming, circular economy, biodiversity, renewable energy, water preservation, preservation of natural resources;
Amendment 1049 #
2016/0360A(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 127
Regulation (EU) No 575/2013
Article 501 b – paragraph 1
Article 501 b – paragraph 1
1. Until [date of application + 3 years], institutions that use the approaches set out in Chapters 1a and 1b, Title IV, Part Three to calculate the own funds requirement for market risks shall multiply their own funds requirements for market risks calculated under these approaches by a factor of 65%80% for institutions that use the IRB approach and 40% for institutions that use the standardised approach.
Amendment 68 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) All workers should have the right to protection of their claims in the event of the insolvency of their employer, as set out in the European Social Charter;
Amendment 90 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) To promote efficiency and reduce delays and costs, national preventive restructuring frameworks should include flexible procedures limiting the involvement of judicial or administrative authorities to where it is necessary and proportionate in order to safeguard the interests of creditors and other interested parties likely to be affected. To avoid unnecessary costs and reflect the early nature of the procedure, debtors should in principle be left in control of their assets and the day-to-day operation of their business. The appointment of a restructuring practitioner, whether a mediator supporting the negotiations of a restructuring plan or an insolvency practitioner supervising the actions of the debtor, should not be mandatory in every case, but made on a case-by-case basis depending on the circumstances of the case or on the debtor's specific needs. Furthermore, there should not necessarily be a court order for the opening of the restructuring process which may be informal as long as the rights of third parties are not affected. Nevertheless, aA degree of supervision should be ensured when this is necessary to safeguard the legitimate interests of one or more creditors or another interested party. This may be the case, in particular, when a general stay of individual enforcement actions is granted by the judicial or administrative authority or where it appears necessary to impose a restructuring plan on dissenting classes of creditors.
Amendment 116 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 46 a (new)
Recital 46 a (new)
(46a) Under no circumstances should workers bear the burden of restructuring, insolvency and discharge procedures, and the debts owing to them (such as unpaid wages) should always be recovered first. In order to guarantee the continuity of production and employment and to better fight tactical or fraudulent practices by management, workers should also be informed and consulted at the initial stage of restructuring, insolvency and discharge procedures.
Amendment 154 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 2
Article 4 – paragraph 2
2. Preventive restructuring frameworks may consist of one or more procedures or measures, duly negotiated and consulted with workers’ representatives, who shall retain all rights of collective bargaining and industrial action. Preventive restructuring frameworks shall provide for procedures or measures destined to the recovery of the indebted firm by workers, in accordance with the relevant national law.
Amendment 157 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 3
Article 4 – paragraph 3
3. Member States shallmay put in place provisions limiting the involvement of a judicial or administrative authority to where it is necessary and proportionate sowhile ensuring that rights of any affected parties are safeguarded.
Amendment 159 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 4
Article 4 – paragraph 4
4. Preventive restructuring frameworks shall be available on the application by debtors, or byby workers or by other creditors with the agreement of debtors.
Amendment 162 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2
Article 5 – paragraph 2
2. The appointment by a judicial or administrative authority of a practitioner in the field of restructuring shall not be mandatory in every case.
Amendment 163 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Amendment 168 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Amendment 176 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 2 shall not apply to workers' outstanding claims except if and to the extent that Member States ensure by other means that the payment of such claims is guaranteed at a level of protection at least equivalent to that provided for under the relevant national law transposing Directive 2008/94/EC.
Amendment 181 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
4. Member States shall limit the duration of the stay of individual enforcement actions to a maximum period of no more than four month70 days.
Amendment 187 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 7
Article 6 – paragraph 7
7. The total duration of the stay of individual enforcement actions, including extensions and renewals, shall not exceed twelve month100 days.
Amendment 190 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. A general stay covering all creditors shall prevent the opening of insolvency procedures at the request of one or more creditors, with the exception of workers, in accordance with Article 6(3).
Amendment 202 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) a valuation of the present value of the debtor or the debtor's business as well as a reasoned statement on the causes and the extent of the financial difficulties of the debtor, including a description of any assets, debts and their location; this shall include a relation of the financial obligations and flows with the business' parent companies and subsidiaries in order to estimate the financial capacity of the debtor's economic group when joint responsibility may arise;
Amendment 207 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g
(g) an opinion or reasoned statement by the person responsible for proposing the restructuring plan which explains why the business is viable, how implementing the proposed plan is likely to result in the debtor avoiding insolvency and restore its long-term viability, and states any anticipated necessary pre-conditions for its success. Such an opinion or reasoned statement shall be the subject of validation by an external expert.
Amendment 209 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) Workers’ claims or other rights shall be treated taking into account that any financial claims by workers shall have full priority.
Amendment 221 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that any affected creditors, including workers, have a right to vote on the adoption of a restructuring plan. Member States may also grant such voting rights to affected equity holders, in accordance with Article 12(2).
Amendment 227 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall ensure that affected parties are treated in separate classes which reflect the class formation criteria. Classes shall be formed in such a way that each class comprises claims or interests with rights that are sufficiently similar to justify considering the members of the class a homogenous group with commonality of interest. As a minimum, secured and unsecured claims shall be treated in separate classes for the purposes of adopting a restructuring plan. Member States may alsoshall provide that workers are treated in a separate class of their own.
Amendment 232 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 6 a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Member States shall guarantee that in the case of lack of collaboration of other creditors, the workers’ restructuring plan may be presented to the competent administration or court and adopted without the consent of non-cooperative creditors.
Amendment 239 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) workers’ representatives have been informed and consulted.
Amendment 249 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12a Workers Member States shall ensure the rights of workers are not undermined by the restructuring process and that there is independent supervision of compliance with relevant national and Union legislation, including those set out in the present directive. Those rights shall include, in particular: (i) the right to collective bargaining and industrial action; (ii) the right to information and consultation of workers and workers' representatives, including notably access to information on any procedure which could have an impact on employment and/or the ability of workers to recover their wages and any future payments, including occupational pensions. Members States shall also ensure that workers are everywhere treated as a preferential and secure class of creditors.
Amendment 264 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) not to reduce intentionally the value of the company's net assets below the level necessary to discharge accrued liabilities to workers;
Amendment 278 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 25 – paragraph 2
Article 25 – paragraph 2
2. Member States shall encourage, by any means which they consider appropriate, the development of, and adherence to, voluntary codes of conduct bysure that practitioners in the field of restructuring, insolvency and second chance, as well as other effective oversight mechanisms concerning the provisions of such services, comply with statutory codes of conduct, which shall include at least relevant provisions on: training, qualification, licensing, registration, personal liability, insurance and good repute.
Amendment 283 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) notifications to creditors and workers' representatives;
Amendment 286 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g a (new)
(ga) the number of job losses and the impact on workers' conditions of restructuring agreements and insolvency procedures;
Amendment 288 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g b (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g b (new)
(gb) the number of fraudulent restructuring and insolvency procedures and the functioning of enforcement mechanisms in place;
Amendment 292 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 a (new)
Article 30 a (new)
Amendment 295 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) Directive 2008/94/EC concerning the protection of employees in the event of insolvency of an employer
Amendment 297 #
2016/0359(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
2. This Directive shall be without prejudice to workers' rights guaranteed by Directives 98/59/EC, 2001/23/EC, 2002/14EC, 2008/94/EC and 2009/38/EC and the European Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Amendment 37 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) It is imperative to stop tax avoidance by multinational corporations, restore trust in the fairness of tax systems and allow governments to effectively exercise their tax sovereignty. Therefore, the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development (OECD) has issued concrete action recommendations in the context of the initiative against Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS).
Amendment 41 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) It is necessary to establish rules that neutralise hybrid mismatches and branch mismatches in a comprehensive manner. Considering that Directive (EU) 2016/1164 only covers hybrid mismatch arrangements that arise in the interaction between the corporate tax systems of Member States, the ECOFIN Council issued a statement on 20 June 2016 requesting the Commission to put forward by October 2016 a proposal on hybrid mismatches involving third countries in order to provide for rules consistent with and no less effective than the rules recommended by the OECD BEPS report on Action 2, with a view to reaching an agreement by the end of 2016.
Amendment 45 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Considering that[, amongst others, it is stated in Recital (13) of Directive (EU) 2016/1164 that] it is critical that further work is undertaken on other hybrid mismatches such as those involving permanent establishments, including disregarded permanent establishments, it is essential that hybrid permanent establishment mismatches are addressed in that Directive as well. In addressing such mismatches regard should be had to the recommended rules included in the OECD’s Public Discussion Draft of 22 August 2016 concerning BEPS Action 2 - Branch Mismatch Structures.
Amendment 46 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to provide for a comprehensive framework consistent with to OECD BEPS report on hybrid mismatch arrangements it is essential that Directive (EU) 2016/1164 would also include rules on hybrid transfers, imported mismatches and dual resident mismatches, in order to prevent taxpayers from exploiting remaining loopholes. Those rules should be standardised and coordinated to the maximum extent possible between Member States. Member States should consider the introduction of sanctions against taxpayers that exploit hybrid mismatches.
Amendment 56 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Rules on hybrid mismatches should address mismatch situations which are the result of conflicting tax rules of two (or more) jurisdictionspply automatically whenever a payment comes across the border having been deducted at the paying end, without having to prove a tax avoidance motive. However, those rules should not affect the general features of the tax system of a jurisdiction.
Amendment 60 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
Amendment 61 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
Amendment 62 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to provide for a sufficiently comprehensive definition ofThe concept and threshold for control in ‘associated enterprises’ are open to abuse and not useful for the purposes of the rules on hybrid mismatches, that definition should also comprise an entity that is part of the same consolidated group for accounting purposes, an enterprise in which the taxpayer has a significant influence in the management and reversely, an enterprise that has a significant influence in the management of the taxpayer.
Amendment 63 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
Amendment 78 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c
Directive (EU) 2016/1164
Article 2 – point 11
Article 2 – point 11
(11) ‘structured arrangement’ means an arrangement involving a hybrid mismatch where the mismatch is priced into the terms of the arrangement or an arrangement that has been designed to produce a hybrid mismatch outcome, unless the taxpayer or an associated enterprise could not reasonably have been expected to be aware of the hybrid mismatch and did not share in the value of the tax benefit resulting from the hybrid mismatch.covers any payers that have entered into transaction forms with the expectation of some amount of economic benefit from inappropriate payee tax effects; in any case where the payer’s tax authority becomes aware of a payee having used a D/NI arrangement, the burden of proof that there is no structured arrangement must be on the payer;
Amendment 81 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Directive (EU) 2016/1164
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
To the extent that a hybrid mismatch involving a third country results in a double deduction of the same payment, expenses or losses, the Member State concerned shall deny the deduction of such payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. The burden of proof of demonstrating that a deduction has been denied by the third country shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 85 #
2016/0339(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Directive (EU) 2016/1164
Article 9a – paragraph 1
Article 9a – paragraph 1
To the extent that a payment, expenses or losses of a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in both a Member State and a third country, in accordance with the laws of that Member State and that third country, are deductible from the taxable base in both jurisdictions and that payment, those expenses or losses can be set-off in the Member State of the taxpayer against taxable income that is not included in the third country, the Member State of the taxpayer shall deny the deduction of the payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. This covers situations where a taxpayer is ‘stateless’ for tax purposes. The burden of proof of demonstrating that the third country has denied the deduction of the payment, expense or loss shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 42 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1 a (new)
Recital 1 a (new)
(1 a) Attempts to eliminate double taxation have often led to "double non- taxation", where, through the practice of base erosion and profit shifting, companies have managed to have their profits taxed in those Member States which have close to zero corporate taxes. This ongoing practice distorts competition, damages domestic enterprises and undermines taxation, to the detriment of growth and jobs.
Amendment 44 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) For this reason, it is necessary that mechanisms available in the Union ensure the resolution of double taxation dispuo give to authorities the necessary tools and time in order to investigates and the effective elimination of the double taxation at stakecontrol irregular practices of base erosion and profit shifting.
Amendment 68 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The elimination of double taxation should be achieved through a procedure under which, as a first step, the case is submitted to the tax authorities of the Member States concerned with a view to settling the dispute by Mutual Agreement Procedure. In the absence of such agreement within a certain time frame, the case should be submitted to an Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission, consisting both of representatives of the tax authorities concerned and of independent persons of standing. The tax authorities should take a final binding decision by reference to the opinion of an Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission. The decisions reached by any of the above-mentioned bodies should be made publicly available. Secrecy is inappropriate in relation to international tax disputes, and publication is in the interest of the public. Publication also provides an incentive for decision-makers to ensure the decision reached is defensible and can contribute to improved understanding of how the rules should be interpreted and applied.
Amendment 86 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. Any taxpayer subject to double taxation shall be entitled to submit a complaint requesting the resolution of the double taxation to each of the competent authorities of the Member States concerned within threone years from the receipt of the first notification of the action resulting in double taxation, whether or not it uses the remedies available in the national law of any of the Member States concerned. The taxpayer shall indicate in its complaint to each respective competent authority which other Member States are concerned.
Amendment 94 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authorities shall acknowledge receipt of the complaint within onetwo months from the receipt of the complaint. They shall also inform the competent authorities of the other Member States concerned on the receipt of the complaint.
Amendment 104 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 4
Article 3 – paragraph 4
4. The competent authorities of the Member States concerned may request the information referred to in point (f) of paragraph 3 within a period of twosix months from the receipt of the complaint.
Amendment 121 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authorities of the Member States concerned may decide to reject the complaint where the complaint is inadmissible or there is no double taxation or the three-one year period set forth in Article 3(1) is not respected.
Amendment 138 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
The Advisory Commission shall be set up no later than fifninety calendar days after the end of the six-month period provided for in Article 3(5), if the Advisory Commission is set up in accordance with paragraph 1.
Amendment 139 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The Advisory Commission shall be set up no later than fifninety calendar days after the end of the period provided for in Article 4(1) if the Advisory Commission is set up in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment 167 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
Member States shall provide that within the period of fifninety calendar days as provided for in Article 6(4), each competent authority of the Member States concerned notifies the taxpayers on the following:
Amendment 169 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The date referred to in point (b) of the first subparagraph shall be set no later than 6 monthsone year after the setting up of the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
3. In absence or incompleteness of notification of the Rules of Functioning to the taxpayers, the Member States shall provide that the independent persons and the chair shall complete the Rules of Functioning according to Annex II and send it to the taxpayer within two weeks from the expiry date of the fifninety calendar days provided in Article 6(4). When the independent persons and the chair do not agree on the Rules of Functioning or do not notify them to the taxpayers, the taxpayers can refer to the competent court of their state of residence or establishment in order to draw all legal consequences and implement the Rules of Functioning.
Amendment 181 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 1
1. The Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission shall deliver its opinion no later than six monthsone year after the date it was set up to the competent authorities of the Member States concerned.
Amendment 183 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission shall adopt its opinion by a simple majority of its membersconsensus. If consensus was not reached, the agreement would be taken by simple majority. Where majority cannot be reached, the vote of the chair shall determine the final opinion. The chair shall communicate the opinion of the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission to the competent authorities. The members will be allowed to present a minority opinion also to the competent authorities.
Amendment 186 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
1. The competent authorities shall agree within six monthsone year of the notification of the opinion of the Advisory Commission or Alternative Dispute Resolution Commission on the elimination of the double taxation.
Amendment 195 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. The competent authorities shall publish the final decision referred to in Article 14, subject to consent of each of the taxpayers concerned.
Amendment 197 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 200 #
2016/0338(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 80 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Companies which seek to do business across frontiers within the Union encounter serious obstacles and market distortions owing to the existence and interaction of 28 disparate corporate tax systems. Furthermore, tax planningavoidance structures have become ever-more sophisticated over time, as they develop across various jurisdictions and effectively take advantage of the technicalities of a tax system or of mismatches between two or more tax systems for the purpose of reducing the tax liability of companies. Although those situations highlight shortcomings that are completely different in nature, they both create obstacles which facilitate tax avoidance, reducing the budgetary resources available to Member States, and impede the proper functioning of the internal market. Action to rectify those problems should therefore address both types of market deficiencies.
Amendment 90 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that discourage companies from taking advantage of mismatches amongst national tax systems in order to lower their tax liability. It is equally important to also stimulate growth and economic development in the internal market by facilitating cross-border trade and corporate investment. To this end, it is necessary to eliminate both double taxation and double non-taxation risks in the Union through eradicating disparities in the interaction of national corporate tax systems. At the same time, companies need an easily workable tax and legal framework for developing their commercial activity and expanding it across borders in the Union. In that context, remaining cases of discrimination should also be removed.
Amendment 94 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) The new proposals promise to prevent profit-shifting by ending transfer pricing tax avoidance schemes; however, for unitary taxation to work as a means to end profit-shifting it needs to be global. Implementing the CCCTB at an EU level runs the risk that current losses from EU members to the rest of world could be locked in, and so could the exploitation of the rest of the world by some Member States. An EU-only approach could eliminate the incentives to profit-shift within the EU, but exacerbate the incentives and opportunity to profit-shift out of the EU.
Amendment 99 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) While strong cooperation among Member States in setting EU-wide rules for tackling cross-border tax avoidance and tax evasion by multinationals corporations operating within the EU is to be welcomed, the provision of further economic and fiscal decision-making powers from Member States to the Commission results in transferring power from democratically elected governments in very diverse economies across the EU, reducing accountability and control over economic decision-making by citizens in these Member States.
Amendment 102 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) The ability to set tax rates and control tax-collection systems must remain in the hands of Member States.
Amendment 103 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 c (new)
Recital 3 c (new)
(3c) The adoption of proposals relating to taxation must continue to be made according to the principle of unanimity in the Council.
Amendment 105 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. At a first stage, rulesimplement the legislative proposal on a Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) and on a cCommon cConsolidated Corporate tTax bBase should be enacted, before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation(CCCTB) simultaneously, as loss consolidation has potentially large and immediate revenue costs, with no likely offsetting benefits approaching anything like the same scale. Loss consolidation without a contemporary move to a unitary basis would thus be illogical, and also costly.
Amendment 116 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) The proposal to separate the implementation of the CCTB and CCCTB proposals is likely to result in significant declines in corporate tax bases across the EU; if loss consolidation were to be implemented with no switch to unitary taxation and formula apportionment at the same time the revenue impact would be dramatic and immediate; and any possible gains would be gradual and quite likely small in comparison.
Amendment 118 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 127 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) For reasons of proportionality, the rules for the CCTB and CCCTB should in a first step only be mandatory for companies which belong to a group above a certain size. For that purpose, a size- related threshold should be fixed on the basis of the total consolidated revenue of a group which files consolidated financial statements. In addition, to ensure coherence between the two steps of the CCCTB initiative, the rules on a common base should be mandatory for companies which would be considered as a group. After a transitional period of several years, the new rules should be compulsory for all companies.
Amendment 139 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) It is necessary to define the concept of a permanent establishment situated in the Union and belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes within the Union. The aim would be to ensure that all concerned taxpayers share a common understanding and to exclude the possibility of a mismatch due to divergent definitions. On the contrary, it should not be seen as essential to have a common definition of permanent establishments situated in a third country, or in the Union but belonging to a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in a third country. This dimension should better be left to bilateral tax treaties and national law due to its complicated interaction with international agreements.
Amendment 144 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) To mitigate tax avoidance risks, which distort the functioning of the internal market, a common corporate tax base should be designed broadly. Based on this premise, all revenues should be taxable unless expressly exempted. As regards participations of at least 10 %, income consisting in dividends or proceeds from the disposal of shares held in a company outside the group should be exempt, in order to prevent double taxation in foreign direct investment. In the same vein, the profits of permanent establishments should also be exempt from tax in the state of the head office. It is also considered that the exemption of income earned abroad meets the need for simplicity for businesses. Indeed, in giving relief for double taxation, most Member States currently exempt dividends and proceeds from the disposal of shares, thereby avoiding computing the taxpayer's entitlement to a credit for the tax paid abroad, in particular where such entitlement must take account of the corporation tax paid by the company distributing the dividends.
Amendment 159 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The fact that interest paid out on loans is deductible from the tax base of a taxpayer whilst this is not the case for profit distributions creates a definitive advantage in favour of financing through debt as opposed to equity. Given the risks that this entails for the indebtedness of companies, it is critical to provide for measures which neutralise the current bias against equity financing. In this light, it is envisaged to give taxpayerthe deductibility of interest payments aon allowance for growth and investment according to which increases in a taxpayer's should be restricted through thin capitalization rules. Moreover, loans are more and more often used as equity s, althouldgh be deductible from its taxable base subject to certain conditions. Thus, it would be essential to ensure that the system does not suffer cascading effects and to this end, it would be necessary to exclude the tax value of a taxpayer's participations in associated enterprises. Finally, to make the scheme of the allowance sufficiently robust, it would also be required to lay down anti-tax avoidance rulesnefiting from deductibility of interest payments, and are the scheme most used in hybrid mismatch arrangements; for such reasons taxpayers should be provided with incentives to grow their equity share without further narrowing down the tax base.
Amendment 160 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 12
Recital 12
Amendment 166 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
Amendment 170 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) To avoid the base erosion of higher tax jurisdictions through shifting profits via inflated transfer prices towards lower tax countries, transactions between a taxpayer and its associated enterprise(s) should be subject to pricing adjustments in line with the 'arm's length' principle, which is a generally applied criterionfull inclusion CFC rules should apply to ensure that an entity is liable for its world income.
Amendment 173 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) As far as specific anti-tax avoidance measures are concerned, it is often necessary to ascertain the level of taxation on the other side of the border, in order to determine whether the taxpayer is liable to pay tax on foreign generated income. This would create a level-playing field regarding the level of tax and competition within the internal market and also protect the market from base erosion vis-à-vis third countries. In this context, it is necessary to provide for a switch-over clause targeting some types of income earned in a third country, such as profit distributions and proceeds from the disposal of shares, in order to ensure that income be taxable in the Union if it has been taxed below a certain level in a third country. Controlled foreign company (‘CFC’) legislation is also an indispensable element of a corporate tax system and has the effect of re-attributing the income of a low-taxed controlled subsidiary to its parent company in an effort to discourage profit shifting. In that regard, it is necessary that CFC rules extend to the profits of permanent establishments where those profits are not subject to tax or are tax exempt in the Member State of the taxpayer. Under the Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive Member States are provided with two options for implementing CFC rules - to either tax interest, royalties and other relevant types of income of all low- tax foreign subsidiaries, or alternatively to tax income of low-tax subsidiaries arising from non-genuine arrangements which have been put in place for the essential purpose of obtaining a tax advantage. The second option is very weak and open to abuse, because it only protects against profit-shifting out of the home country and requires the tax authority to analyse many individual transactions of low-tax subsidiaries; Member States should implement the strongest possible CFC rules under the ATAD.
Amendment 176 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Taking into account that the effect of branch and hybrid mismatches is usually a double deduction (i.e. deduction in both states) or a deduction of the income in one state without inclusion in the tax base of another, such situations clearly affect the internal market by distorting its mechanisms and creating loopholes for tax avoidance practices to flourish. Given that mismatches generate from national differences in the legal qualification of certain types of entities or financial payments, they normally do not occur amongst companies which apply the common rules for calculating their tax base. Mismatches would however persist in the interaction between the framework of the common base and national or third- country corporate tax systems. To neutralise the effects of branch and hybrid mismatch arrangements, it is necessary to lay down rules whereby one of the two jurisdictions in a mismatch deny the deduction of a payment or ensures that the corresponding income is included in the corporate tax base. Such rules on branch and hybrid mismatches should act automatically whenever a payment comes across the border having been deducted at the paying end, without having to prove a tax avoidance motive. Member States should revise their double taxation treaties in order to remove provisions that facilitate tax avoidance through mismatches.
Amendment 206 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 7540 000 000 during the financial year preceding the relevant financial year; this threshold shall be phased out over a period of five years;
Amendment 215 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it has a right to exercise more than 250 % of the voting rights; and
Amendment 218 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it has an ownership right amounting to more than 75 50% of the subsidiary’s capital or owns more than 75 50% of the rights giving entitlement to profit.
Amendment 221 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 10
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point 10
(10) 'consolidated group for financial accounting purposes' means all entities that are fully included in consolidated financial statements drawn up ias calculated on ac cordance with the International Financial Reporting Standards or a national financial reporting systemnsistent accounting basis applicable to all group members;
Amendment 241 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A taxpayer shall be considered to have a permanent establishment in a Member State other than the Member State in which it is resident for tax purposes when it has a fixed or virtual place in that other Member State through which it carries on its business, wholly or partly, including in particular:
Amendment 245 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) a virtual platform.
Amendment 247 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 5 – point b
(b) For the purposes of this Article, a person is 'closely related' to a taxpayer if one possesses, directly or indirectly, a right to exercise more than 250 % of the voting rights in the other or an ownership right amounting to more than 250 % of the other's capital or more than 250 % of the rights giving entitlement to profit.
Amendment 252 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 254 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 257 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 272 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
In addition to the amounts which are deductible as costs for research and development in accordance with paragraph 2, the taxpayer may also deduct, per tax year, an extra 510% of such costs, with the exception of the cost related to movable tangible fixed assets, that it incurred during that year. To the extent that costs for research and development reach beyond EUR 20 000 000, the taxpayer may deduct 25% of the exceeding amount.
Amendment 278 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, the taxpayer may deduct an extra 1050% of its costs for research and development up to EUR 210 000 000 where that taxpayer meets all of the following conditions:
Amendment 285 #
Amendment 304 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Exceeding borrowing costs shall be deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred for maximum of 310 % of the taxpayer's earnings before interest, tax, depreciation and amortisation (‘EBITDA’) or for a maximum amount of EUR 3 000 000, whichever is higherdefined by the thin capitalization rules.
Amendment 307 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
For the purposes of this Article, where a taxpayer is permitted or required to act on behalf of a group, as defined in the rules of a national group taxation system, the entire group shall be treated as a taxpayer. In those circumstances, exceeding borrowing costs and the EBITDA shall be calculated for the entire group. The amount of EUR 3 000 000defined by the thin capitalization rules shall also be considered for the entire group.
Amendment 308 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Article 13 – paragraph 4
Amendment 310 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 6
Article 13 – paragraph 6
6. Exceeding borrowing costs that cannot be deducted in a given tax year shall be carried forward without time limitationfor a maximum of five years.
Amendment 313 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 – paragraph 7
Article 13 – paragraph 7
7. Paragraphs 1 to 6 shall not apply to financial undertakings, including those that are part of a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes for a duration of five years starting on the date of entry into force of this directive.
Amendment 315 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13 a (new)
Article 13a Royalties limitation rule 1. Royalty costs shall be fully deductible in the tax year in which they are incurred if the corresponding income with the recipient of the royalty or licence fee payments by the taxpayer is subject to an effective tax rate at least as high than the effective tax rate that would have applied for the taxpayer in case of non- deductibility. The deductibility of royalty costs shall be limited in time to three years so as to consider the contribution to the global brand value of the different entities in the group. 2. Royalty costs for which the corresponding income with the recipient of the royalty and licence fee payments is, at its final destination, subject to an effective tax rate lower than the effective tax rate that would apply for the taxpayer in case of non-deductibility shall only be deductible proportionally to the difference in effective tax rates. For the purpose of this paragraph, "proportional" means that for x% difference between the effective tax rates applicable for the taxpayer and the final recipient of the royalty income, a share of x% of the royalty costs are deductible for the taxpayer.
Amendment 329 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41
Article 41
Amendment 338 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 42
Article 42
Amendment 349 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 53 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 351 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 55 – paragraph 1
Article 55 – paragraph 1
1. A deduction from the tax liability (‘tax credit’) of a taxpayer shall be allowed where that taxpayer derives income that has been taxed in another Member State or in a third country, other than income that is exempt under points (c), (d) or (e) of Article 8.
Amendment 358 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) in the case of an entity, the taxpayer itself, or together with its associated enterprises, holds a direct or indirect participation of more than 50 % of the voting rights, or owns directly or indirectly more than 50 % of capital or is entitled to receive more than 50 % of the profits of that entity or can be considered the ultimate place of effective management of the entity meaning the place where key management and commercial decisions of the entity that are necessary for the conduct of the entity’s business are in substance made; and
Amendment 363 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 369 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
(da) income from immovable property, unless the Member State of the taxpayer would not have been entitled to tax the income under an agreement concluded with a third country;
Amendment 372 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point f
(f) income from invoicing companies that earn sales and services income from goods and services purchased from and sold to associated enterprises and add no or little economic valueservices rendered to or goods traded with the taxpayer or its associated enterprises .
Amendment 375 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
An entity or permanent establishment shall not be treated as a controlled foreign company as referred to in paragraph 1 where not more than one third25% of the income accruing to the entity or permanent establishment falls within categories (a) to (f) of paragraph 2.
Amendment 379 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 61 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
To the extent that a hybrid mismatch involving a third country results in a double deduction of the same payment, expenses or losses, the Member State concerned shall deny the deduction of such payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 384 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Article 61 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2 – point b
(b) if the payment has its source in a third country, the Member State concerned shall require the taxpayer to include such payment in the taxable base, unless the third country has already denied the deduction or has required that payment to be included. The burden of proof of this denial of deduction or requirement of inclusion shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 385 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 4
Article 61 – paragraph 4
4. To the extent that a payment by a taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country is set off directly or indirectly against a payment, expenses or losses which due to a hybrid mismatch are deductible in two different jurisdictions outside the Union, the Member State of the taxpayer shall deny the deduction of the payment by the taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country from the taxable base, unless one of the third countries involved has already denied the deduction of the payment, expenses or losses that would be deductible in two different jurisdictions. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 386 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 5
Article 61 – paragraph 5
5. To the extent that the corresponding inclusion of a deductible payment by a taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country is set off directly or indirectly against a payment which, due to a hybrid mismatch, is not included by the payee in its taxable base, the Member State of the taxpayer shall deny the deduction of the payment by the taxpayer to an associated enterprise in a third country from the taxable base, unless one of the third countries involved has already denied the deduction of the non-included payment. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 388 #
2016/0337(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 61a – paragraph 1
Article 61a – paragraph 1
To the extent that a payment, expenses or losses of a taxpayer who is resident for tax purposes in both a Member State and a third country, in accordance with the laws of that Member State and that third country, are deductible from the taxable base in both jurisdictions and that payment, those expenses or losses can be set-off in the Member State of the taxpayer against taxable income that is not included in the third country, the Member State of the taxpayer shall deny the deduction of the payment, expenses or losses, unless the third country has already done so. The burden of proof of this denial shall be on the taxpayer.
Amendment 50 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) To support the proper functioning of the internal market, the corporate tax environment in the Union should be shaped in accordance with the principle that companies pay their fair share of tax in the jurisdiction(s) where their profits are generated. It is therefore necessary to provide for mechanisms that discourage companies from taking advantage of mismatches amongst national tax systems in order to lower their tax liability. It is equally important to also stimulate growth and economic development in the internal market by facilitating cross-border trade and corporate investment. To this end, it is necessary to eliminate both double taxation and double non-taxation risks in the Union through eradicating disparities in the interaction of national corporate tax systems. At the same time, companies need an easily workable tax and legal framework for developing their commercial activity and expanding it across borders in the Union. In that context, remaining cases of discrimination should also be removed.
Amendment 62 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The ability to set tax rates and control tax collection systems must remain in the hands of Member States.
Amendment 63 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 b (new)
Recital 3 b (new)
(3b) The adoption of proposals relating to taxation must continue to be made according to the principle of unanimity in the Council.
Amendment 64 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3 c (new)
Recital 3 c (new)
(3c) For unitary taxation to work as a means to end profit-shifting it needs to be global, and that implementing the CCCTB at an EU level runs the risk that current losses from EU members to the rest of world could be locked in, as could the exploitation of the rest of the world by some Member States. An EU-only approach could eliminate the incentives to profit shift within the EU, but exacerbate the incentives and opportunity to profit shift out of the EU. For this reason full- inclusion CFC rules should apply. No income arising from economic activity undertaken by the CFC should be exempted.
Amendment 70 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Considering the need to act swiftly in order to ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendlier to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to divide the ambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. At a first stage, rulesimplement the legislative proposal on a Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB) and on a cCommon cConsolidated Corporate tTax bBase should be agreed, before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidation. (CCCTB) simultaneously, as loss consolidation has potentially large and immediate revenue costs, with no likely offsetting benefits approaching anything like the same scale. Loss consolidation without a contemporary move to a unitary basis would thus be illogical, and also costly.
Amendment 73 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Considering the need to act swiftly in orderDividing the CCCTB initiative into two ensure a proper functioning of the internal market by making it, on the one hand, friendliseparate proposals is likely to result in significant declines in corporate tax bases across the EU; if loss consolidation were to trade and investment and, on the other hand, more resilient to tax avoidance schemes, it is necessary to dividebe implemented with no switch to unitary taxation and formulary apportionment at the sambitious CCCTB initiative into two separate proposals. At a first stage, rules on a common corporate tax base she time the revenue impact would be dramatic and immediate; and any possible gains would be agreed, before addressing, at a second stage, the issue of consolidatiadual and quite likely small in comparison.
Amendment 79 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
Amendment 85 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
Recital 5 a (new)
(5a) For reasons of proportionality, the rules for the CC and CCCTB should in a first step only be mandatory for companies which belong to a group above a certain size. For that purpose, a size- related threshold should be fixed on the basis of the total consolidated revenue of a group which files consolidated financial statements. In addition, to ensure coherence between the two steps of the CCCTB initiative, the rules on a common base should be mandatory for companies which would be considered as a group. After a transitional period of several years, the new rules should be compulsory for all companies.
Amendment 95 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Eligibility for the consolidated tax group should be determined in accordance with a two-part test based on (i) control (more than 250 percent of voting rights) and (ii) ownership (more than 750 percent of equity) or rights to profits (more than 750 percent of rights giving entitlement to profit). Such a test would ensure a high level of economic integration between group memberControl may also exist where there are agreements with fellow shareholders or members. Control may also be effectively exercised in certain circumstances where the parent holds a minority or none of the shares in the subsidiary. Member States should be entitled to require that undertakings not subject to control, but which are managed on a unified basis or have a common administrative, managerial or supervisory body, be included in consolidated financial statements. To guarantee the integrity of the system, the two thresholds for control and ownership or profit rights should be met throughout the tax year; otherwise, the failing company should leave the group immediately. To prevent a manipulation of the tax results through companies entering and leaving the group within a short-term, there should also be a minimum requirement of nine consecutive months for establishing group membership.
Amendment 96 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) Eligibility for the consolidated tax group should be determined in accordance with a two-part test based on (i) control (more than 250 percent of voting rights) and (ii) ownership (more than 750 percent of equity) or rights to profits (more than 750 percent of rights giving entitlement to profit). Such a test would ensure a high level of economic integration between group members. To guarantee the integrity of the system, the two thresholds for control and ownership or profit rights should be met throughout the tax year; otherwise, the failing company should leave the group immediately. To prevent a manipulation of the tax results through companies entering and leaving the group within a short-term, there should also be a minimum requirement of nine consecutive months for establishing group membership.
Amendment 104 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The formula apportionment for the consolidated tax base should comprise threewo equally weighted factors, namely labour, assets and sales by destination. Those equally weighted factors should reflect a balanced approach to distributing taxable profits amongst the relevant Member States and should ensure that profits are taxed where they are actually earned. Labour and assets should therefore be allocated to the Member State where the labour is performed or the assets are located, and would thereby give appropriate weight to the interests of the Member State of origin, whilst sales should be allocated to the Member State of destination of the goods or services. To account for differences in the levels of wages across the Union and thus allow for a fair distribution of the consolidated tax base, the labour factor should comprise both payroll and the number of employees (i.e. each item counting for half). The asset factor, on the other hand, should comprise all fixed tangible assets, but not intangible and financial assets because of their mobile nature and the resulting risk that the rules of this Directive could be circumvented. Where, due to exceptional circumstances, the outcome of the apportionment does not fairly represent the extent of business activity, a safeguard clause should provide for an alternative method of income allocation.
Amendment 110 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The formula apportionment for the consolidated tax base should comprise threewo equally weighted factors, namely labour, assets and sales by destination. Those equally weighted factors should reflect a balanced approach to distributing taxable profits amongst the relevant Member States and should ensure that profits are taxed where they are actually earned. Labour and assets should therefore be allocated to the Member State where the labour is performed or the assets are located, and would thereby give appropriate weight to the interests of the Member State of origin, whilst sales should be allocated to the Member State of destination of the goods or services. To account for differences in the levels of wages across the Union and thus allow for a fair distribution of the consolidated tax base, the labour factor should comprise both payroll and the number of employees (i.e. each item counting for half). The asset factor, on the other hand, should comprise all fixed tangible assets, but not intangible and financial assets because of their mobile nature and the resulting risk that the rules of this Directive could be circumvented. Where, due to exceptional circumstances, the outcomeAssets should not be included in the formula due to difficulties in accurately valuing them, and the potential for intangible and financial assets to be converted in tangible assets. The allocation formula should accurately reflect demand-side (sales) and supply- side factors (labour), and reflect the factors that generate income and the location where this income is generated. Sales and labour are the factors that generate income while assets generally do not1a; __________________ 1aFor more information ofn the apportionment does not fairly represent the extent of busCanadian model, which does not include assets in the formula, see: Mintz, J., & Smart, M. (2004). Income shifting, invess activity, a safeguard clause should provide for an alternative method of income allocation.tment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada. Journal of Public Economics, 88(6), 1149–1168, and Mintz, J., & Smart, M. (2004). Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada. Journal of Public Economics, 88(6), 1149–1168.Sadiq, K (2015). Unitary Taxation of the Finance Sector: ICTD Working Paper 25)
Amendment 128 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Directive, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission (i) to adopt annually a list of third country company forms that are similar to the company forms listed in Annex I; (ii) to lay down detailed rules on the calculation of the labour, asset and sales factors, the allocation of employees and payroll, assets and sales to the respective factor and the valuation of assets; (iii) to adopt an act establishing a standard form of the notice to create a group; and (iv) to lay down rules on the electronic filing of the consolidated tax return, the form of the consolidated tax return, the form of the single taxpayer's tax return and the supporting documentation required. Those powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council12 . __________________ 12 Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 2011 laying down the rules and general principles concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p. 13).
Amendment 145 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) it belongs to a consolidated group for financial accounting purposes with a total consolidated group revenue that exceeded EUR 7540 000 000 during the financial year preceding the relevant financial year; this threshold shall be phased out over a period of five years;
Amendment 155 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 23
(23) 'consolidated tax base' means the result of adding up the tax basesconsolidated net taxable revenue of allthe group members, as calculated on a consistent accounting basis applicable to all group members in accordance with Directive 2016/xx/EU;
Amendment 166 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
1. A company that has its registered office, place of incorporation, virtual presence as laid down in Article 5 of Directive 2016/xx/EU or place of effective management in a Member State and is not, under the terms of an agreement concluded by that Member State with a third country, regarded as tax resident in that third country shall be considered resident in that Member State for tax purposes.
Amendment 170 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 5
Article 4 – paragraph 5
5. A non-resident taxpayer shall be subject to corporate tax on all income from an activity carried on through a permanent establishment in a Member Statederived from any source, whether inside or outside of the Union.
Amendment 171 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) it has a right to exercise more than 250 % of the voting rights; and
Amendment 173 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) it has an ownership right amounting to more than 750 % of the subsidiary’s capital or it owns more than 750 % of the rights giving entitlement to profit.
Amendment 175 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) entitlement to profit and ownership of capital shall be calculated by multiplying the interests held, directly and indirectly, in subsidiaries at each tier. Ownership rights amounting to 750 % or less held directly or indirectly by the parent company, including rights in companies resident in a third country, shall also be taken into account in the calculation.
Amendment 182 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Amendment 185 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. The net taxable revenue of members of a group shall be based on their financial statements that shall be adjusted so that taxable revenues shall be all cash, exchange or barter receipts arising during or due for the period less those accounted for in previous periods, those of a capital nature and those explicitly exempted from charge; less those cash, barter or exchange payments made or due for the period that were incurred for the purposes of the trade of the corporation less those accounted for in previous periods, those that represent loan or equity capital repayment and those that are explicitly exempted from deduction; less those allowances and reliefs specifically permitted and those excesses of deductions over revenues brought forward from previous periods.
Amendment 188 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Where the consolidated tax base is negative, the loss shall be carried forward, for a maximum of five years, and be set off against the next positive consolidated tax base. Where the consolidated tax base is positive, it shall be apportioned in accordance with Chapter VIII.
Amendment 192 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 2
2. Groups shall apply a consistent and adequately documented method for recording intra-group transactions. Groups may change the method only for valid commercial reasons and only at the beginning of a tax yearAll such transactions shall be eliminated from the tax base as a result of the consolidation required by Article 7 (1).
Amendment 193 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Article 9 – paragraph 3
Amendment 195 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Article 9 – paragraph 4
Amendment 202 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Where, as a result of a business reorganisation, one or more groups, or two or more group members, become part of another group, any unrelieved losses of the previously existing group or groups shall be allocated to each of the group members in accordance with Chapter VIII and on the basis of the factors as they stand at the end of the tax year in which the business reorganisation takes place. Unrelieved losses of the previously existing group or groups shall be carried forward for futurno more than five years.
Amendment 203 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Where two or more group members become part of another group, no unrelieved losses of the first group shall be allocated as referred to in subparagraph 1, provided that the joint value of the asset and labour factors of the departing group members amounts to less than 20 % of the value of these two factors for the entire first group.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 2
Article 23 – paragraph 2
2. Where two or more principal taxpayers merge within the meaning of points (i) and (ii) of Article 2(a) of Council Directive 2009/133/EC15 , any unrelieved losses of a group shall be allocated to its members in accordance with Chapter VIII, on the basis of the factors as they stand at the end of the tax year in which the merger takes place. Unrelieved losses shall be carried forward for futurno more than five years. __________________ 15 Council Directive 2009/133/EC of 19 October 2009 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, partial divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States and to the transfer of the registered office of an SE or SCE between Member States (OJ L 310, 25.11.2009, p. 34).
Amendment 208 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Interest and, royalties and other financial flows paid by a group member to a recipient outside the group may be subject to a withholding tax, in accordance with the applicable rules of national law and any applicable double tax convention, in the Member State where the group member is resident for tax purposes or situated, as the case may be. The withholding tax shall be shared amongst the Member States, in accordance with Chapter VIII, using the formula applicable in the tax year in which the tax is charged.
Amendment 213 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The consolidated tax base shall be shared between the group members in each tax year on the basis of a formula for apportionment. In determining the apportioned share of a group member A, the formula shall take the following form, giving equal weight to the factors of sales, and labour and assets:
Amendment 217 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – formula
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – formula
Amendment 219 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Article 28 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Share A = (1/2 (Sales^A/Sales^Group) + 1/2 (1/2(Payroll^A/Payroll^Group) + 1/2(No of employees^A/No of employees^Group))) * Con'd Tax Base
Amendment 223 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 28 – paragraph 5
Article 28 – paragraph 5
5. When determining the apportioned share of a group member, equal weight shall be given to the factors of sales, and labour and assets.
Amendment 227 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 31 – paragraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 1
The factors used in calculating the apportioned share of a group member holding an interest in a transparent entity shall include the sales, and labour and assets of the transparent entity, in proportion to the taxpayer's participation in the profits and losses of that entity.
Amendment 229 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 34
Article 34
Amendment 233 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 35
Article 35
Amendment 235 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 36
Article 36
Amendment 238 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 4
Article 38 – paragraph 4
4. Where there is no group member in the Member State where the goods are delivered or the services are supplied, or where goods are delivered or services are supplied in a third country, the sales of goods and supplies of services shall be included in the sales factor of all group members in proportion to their labour and asset factors.
Amendment 239 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 5
Article 38 – paragraph 5
5. Where there is more than one group member in the Member State where the goods are delivered or the services are supplied, the sales shall be included in the sales factor of all group members located in that Member State in proportion to their labour and asset factors.
Amendment 241 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 1
Article 39 – paragraph 1
The Commission may adopt acts laying down detailed rules on the calculation of the labour, asset and sales factors, the allocation of employees and payroll, assets and sales to the respective factor and the valuation of assets. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 77(2).
Amendment 242 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Article 40 – paragraph 1
Amendment 243 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 40 – paragraph 2
Article 40 – paragraph 2
2. The sales factor of a financial institution, as referred to in point (29)(a), (d), (e), (f), (g), (h) and (i) of Article 4 of Directive 2016/xx/EU, shall be 10 20% of its revenues in the form of interest, fees, commissions and revenues from securities, excluding value added tax, other taxes and duties. Intra-group sales shall not be included. For the purposes of Article 38(2), financial services shall be considered to be carried out, in the case of a secured loan, in the Member State in which the security is situated or, if that Member State cannot be identified, the Member State in which the security is registered. Other financial services shall be considered to be carried out in the Member State of the borrower or of the person who pays fees, commissions or other revenue. Where the borrower or the person who pays fees, commissions or other revenue cannot be identified or if the Member State in which the security is situated or registered cannot be identified, the sales shall be attributed to all group members in proportion to their labour and asset factors.
Amendment 244 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Amendment 245 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2
Article 41 – paragraph 2
2. The sales factor of an insurance undertaking, as referred to in point (29)(b) and (c) of Article 4 of Directive 2016/xx/EU, shall be 120 % of all earned premiums, net of reinsurance, allocated investment returns transferred from the non-technical account, other technical revenues, net of reinsurance, and investment revenues, fees and commissions, excluding value added tax, other taxes and duties. For the purposes of Article 38(2), insurance services shall be considered to be carried out in the Member State of the policy holder. Other sales shall be attributed to all group members in proportion to their labour and asset factors.
Amendment 261 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 267 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 69 – paragraph 2
Article 69 – paragraph 2
2. Where paragraph 1 applies, the exceeding borrowing costs and EBITDA shall be calculated at the level of the group and comprise the results of all group members. The amount of EUR 3 000 000 referred to in Article 13 of Directive 2016/xx/EU shall be increased to 5 000 000.
Amendment 270 #
2016/0336(CNS)
Proposal for a directive
Article 71
Article 71
Amendment 34 #
2016/0287(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Due to the limited reach of any single local wireless access point and the small value of individual projects covered,, it is not expected that access points benefitting from financial assistance under this Regulation are not expected to challenge commercial offers. In order to further ensure that such financial assistance does not unduly distort competition, crowd out private investments or create disincentives for private operators to invest, the intervention should be limited to projects that do not duplicate already existing private or public offers of similar characteristics in the same area. This should not exclude additional support to deployments under this initiative from public or private sources of fundingwill challenge commercial offers.
Amendment 43 #
2016/0287(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Given Internet connectivity needs within the Union and the urgency of promoting access networks that can deliver, throughout the EU, an Internet experience of high quality based on very high-speed broadband services, financial assistance should seek to attain a geographicregionally balanced distribution.
Amendment 46 #
2016/0287(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)
Recital 11 a (new)
(11 a) In recognition of the fact that rural areas experience lower levels of internet connectivity in comparison to urban areas, priority should be given to projects in peripheral and rural areas.
Amendment 48 #
2016/0287(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 b (new)
Recital 11 b (new)
(11 b) The need for internet connectivity in peripheral regions is a crucial factor for attracting tourism into rural areas. In acknowledgement of the fact that rural areas depend on internet connectivity to sustain their tourism businesses and to promote themselves, it is necessary to establish a basis on which projects from peripheral regions can be prioritised.
Amendment 83 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Rapid technological developments continue to transform the way works and other subject-matter are created, produced, distributed and exploited. New business models and new actors continue to emerge. The objectives and the principles laid down by the Union copyright framework remain sound. However, legal uncertainty remains, for both rightholders and users, as regards certain uses, including cross-border uses, of works and other subject-matter in the digital environment. As set out in the Communication of the Commission entitled ‘Towards a modern, more European copyright framework’26 , in some areas it is necessary to adapt and supplement the current Union copyright framework. This Directive provides for rules to adapt certain exceptions and limitations to digital and cross-border environments, as well as measures to facilitate certain licensing practices as regards the dissemination of out-of- commerce works and the online availability of audiovisual works on video- on-demand platforms with a view to ensuring wider access to content. In order to achieve a well-functioning marketplace for copyright, there should also be rules on rights in publications, on the use of works and other subject-matter by online service providers storing and giving access to user uploaded content and on the transparency of authors' and performers' contracts. _________________ 26 COM(2015) 626 final. COM(2015) 626 final.
Amendment 281 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 31
Recital 31
Amendment 295 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 32
Recital 32
Amendment 312 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) For the purposes of this Directive, it is necessary to defineclarify the sconceptpe of press publication in a way that embraces only journalistic publications, published by a service provider, periodically or regularly updated in any media, for the purpose of informing or entertaining. Such publications would include, for instance, daily newspapers, weeklotection set out in Article s2 and 3 of Directive 2001/29/EC. In order to improve legal certainty for all concerned parties, and to ensure the freedom to carry out certain acts necessary for monthly magazines of general or special ithe normal functioning of the Internest and news websites. Periodical publications which are published for scientific or academic purposes, such as scientific journals, should not be covered by the protection granted to press publications under this Directive. This protection doess well as to take account of certain fundamental rights, these Articles should not extend to acts of hyperlinking, which do not constitute communication to the public.
Amendment 326 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 34
Recital 34
Amendment 340 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
Recital 35
Amendment 519 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Amendment 731 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 11
Article 11
Amendment 995 #
2016/0280(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Amendment 13 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) The European Council conclusions of October 2014 foresaw that the target should be delivered collectively by the Union in the most cost-effective manner possible, with the reductions in the Emissions Trading System (ETS) and non- ETS sectors amounting to 43% and 30% by 2030 compared to 2005 respectively, with efforts distributed on the basis of relative Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita. All sectors of the economy should contribute to achieving these emission reductions, and all Member States should participate in this effort, balancing considerations of fairness and solidarity, and national targets within the group of Member States with a GDP per capita above the Union average should be relatively adjusted to reflect cost- effectiveness in a fair and balanced manner. Achieving these greenhouse gas emission reductions should boost efficiency and innovationencourage more sustainable practices in the European economy and in particular should promote improvements, notably in buildings, agriculture, waste management and transport, in so far as they fall under the scope of this Regulation.
Amendment 24 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The transition to clean energy requires changes in investment behaviour and incentives across the entire policy spectrum and incentives for SMEs with less capital and small farms to adapt their business models. It is a key Union priority to establish a resilient Energy Union to provide secure, sustainable, competitive and affordable energy to its citizens. Achieving this requires continuation of ambitious climate action with this Regulation and progress on the other aspects of Energy Union as set out in the Framework Strategy for a Resilient Energy Union with a Forward- Looking Climate Change Policy.16 __________________ 16 COM(2015)80 COM(2015)80
Amendment 30 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) A range of Union measures enhance Member States’ ability to meet their climate commitments and are crucial to achieving necessary emission reductions in the sectors covered by this Regulation. These includeIn this respect legislation on fluorinated greenhouse gases, CO2-reductions from road vehicles, energy performance of building, renewables, energy efficiency and the Circular Economy, as well as Union funding instruments for climate- related investments and legislation favouring smaller and more sustainable farming models all play a vital part. The environmental impact of free trade agreements including rising food miles and the replacement of local products with cheaper and less sustainably produced imports, counter these efforts.
Amendment 42 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Regulation [ ] [on the inclusion of greenhouse gas emissions and removals from land use, land use change and forestry into the 2030 climate and energy framework] lays down accounting rules on greenhouse gas emissions and removals relating to land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF). While the environmental outcome under this Regulation in terms of the levels of greenhouse gas emission reductions that are made is affected by taking into account a quantity up to the sum of total net removals and total net emissions from deforested land, afforested land, managed cropland and managed grassland as defined in Regulation [ ], flexibility for a maximum quantity of 280 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent of these removals divided among Member States according to the figures in Annex III should be included as an additional possibility for Member States to meet their commitments when needed. Where the delegated act to update the forest reference levels based on the national forestry accounting plans pursuant to Article 8 (6) of Regulation [LULUCF] is adopted, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of Article 7 to reflect a contribution of the accounting category managed forest land in the flexibility provided by that Article. Before adopting such a delegated act, the Commission should evaluate the robustness of accounting for managed forest land based on available data, and in particular the consistency of projected and actual harvesting rates. The Commission should also evaluate changes in land ownership as a result of the LULUCF provisions to ensure that land use change policies do not encourage land-grabs. In addition, the possibility to voluntarily delete annual emission allocation units should be allowed under this Regulation in order to allow for such amounts to be taken into account when assessing Member States’ compliance with requirements under Regulation [ ].
Amendment 55 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) As a means to enhance the overall cost-effectiveness of total reductions, Member States should be able to transfer part of their annual emission allocation to other Member States. The transparency of such transfers should be ensured and may be carried out in a manner that is mutually convenient, including by means of auctioning, the use of market intermediaries acting on an agency basis, or by way of bilateral arrangements.
Amendment 59 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) In order to provide for the appropriate accounting of transactions under this Regulation including the use of flexibilities and the application of compliance checks the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union should be delegated to the Commission in respect of Article 11. The necessary provisions should be contained in a single instrument combining the accounting provisions pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC, Regulation (EU) No 525/2013, Regulation [ ] and this Regulation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level conductedby consulting with a wide range of experts in accordance with the principles laid down in the Inter- institutional Agreement on Better Law- Making of 13 April 2016. In particular, to ensure equal participation in the preparation of delegated acts, the European Parliament and Council receive all documents at the same time as Member States’ experts, and their experts systematically have access to meetings of Commission expert groups dealing with the preparation of delegated acts.
Amendment 110 #
2016/0231(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the Member State shall be temporarily prohibited from transferring any part of its annual emission allocation to another Member State until it is in compliance with this Regulation. The Central Administrator shall implement this prohibition in the registry referred in Article 11.
Amendment 48 #
2016/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6 a (new)
Recital 6 a (new)
(6a) Agriculture and land use sectors directly impact on biodiversity. In light of this, LULUCF sector measures undertaken my Member States aimed in particular towards climate change mitigation, should ensure coherence with European Union biodiversity objectives.
Amendment 132 #
2016/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
For the period from 2021 to 2025 and from 2026 to 2030, taking into account the flexibilities provided for in Article 11, each Member State shall ensure that emissions do not exceed removals, calculated as the sum of total emissions and removals on their territory in the land accounting categories referred to in Article 2 combined, as accounted in accordance with this Regulation, in line with Union long term commitments under the Paris Agreement.
Amendment 135 #
2016/0230(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 125 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a
(-1) in point (3) of Article 2(1), point (a) is replaced by the following: (a) auditors, and external accountants and tax advisors; ; Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 127 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b – point iii a (new)
Amendment 131 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c a (new)
Amendment 133 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 c (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d
(d) estate agents; -1c) in point (3) of Article 2(1), point (d) is replaced by the following: (d) estate agents and persons providing customers, through sale or rental, with the possibility to use freeports or similar arrangements; Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 140 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 2 – paragraph 4
Article 2 – paragraph 4
(1a) in Article 2, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: "4. For the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 3, Member States shall require that the total turnover of the financial activity does not exceed a threshold, which must be sufficiently low. That threshold shall be established at national level, depending on the type of financial activity." The threshold shall be reported to the European Commission and assessed in the risk analyses performed by the Commission and each Member States in accordance with Articles 6 and 7 of this Directive." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 142 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 4 – point f
Article 3 – point 4 – point f
Amendment 145 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 4 – point f a (new)
Article 3 – point 4 – point f a (new)
Amendment 146 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point -a b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 6 – point a – point i
Article 3 – point 6 – point a – point i
Amendment 158 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 6 – point a – point ii
Article 3 – point 6 – point a – point ii
Amendment 162 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point a b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 6 – point b
Article 3 – point 6 – point b
(ab) in point (6), point (b) is replaced by the following "(b) in the case of trusts: (i) the settlor(s); (ii) the trustee(s); (iii) the protector(s), if any; (iv) the beneficiaries; or where the individuals benefiting from the legal arrangement or entity have yet to be determined, the class of persons in whose main interest the legal arrangement or entity is set up or operates; (v) any other natural person exercising ultimate control over the trust by means of direct or indirect ownership or by other means" . If any of the above categories (i) - (v) involves, instead of or in addition to natural persons, one or several legal entities, the beneficial owners of that entity, as defined in the paragraph above, shall in turn be considered as part of the beneficial owners of the trust." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 165 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a c (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 9 – point f
Article 3 – point 9 – point f
(ac) in point (9), point (f) is replaced by the following: "(f) ambassadors, chargés d'affaires and high-ranking officers in the armed forces;" , intelligence and other security services;" Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 168 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point a d (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 3 – point 9 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – point 9 – subparagraph 2
(ad) in point (9), subparagraph 2 is replaced by the following: "No public function referred to in points (a) to (h) shall be understood as covering middle-ranking or more junior officials."" All categories in points (a) to (h) shall however be understood as also covering former holders of the listed public functions." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 174 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
(2a) in Article 6(1), subparagraph 1is replaced by the following: The Commission shall conduct an assessment of the risks of money laundering and terrorist financing affecting the internal market and related to cross- border activities. , including between Member States and third countries. Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 175 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the risks associated with each relevant sector; 2b) in Article 6(2), point b is replaced by the following: (b) the risks associated with each relevant sector, including estimates of the monetary volumes of money-laundering for each of those sectors; Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 176 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 c (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c
(2c) in Article 6(2), point (c) is replaced by the following: (c) the most widespread means used by criminals to launder illicit proceeds. , including those particularly used in transactions between Member States and third countries, independently of the latter's classification as regards the list drawn up on the basis of Article 9 (2). Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 177 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 d (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 3
Article 6 – paragraph 3
(2d) in Article 6, paragraph (3) is replaced by the following: 3. The Commission shall make the report referred to in paragraph 1 available to the Member States and obliged entities in order to assist them to identify, understand, manage and mitigate the risk of money laundering and terrorist financing, and to allow other stakeholders, including national legislators, the European Parliament, the ESAs, and representatives from FIUs to better understand the risks. Reports shall be made public six months after having been made available to Member States. Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 178 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 e (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 e (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 6 – paragraph 4
Article 6 – paragraph 4
(2e) in Article 6, paragraph (4) is replaced by the following: 4. The Commission shall make the recommendations to Member States on the measures suitable for addressing the identified risks. In the event that Member States decide not to apply any of the particular recommendations in their national AML/CFT regimes, they shall notify the Commission thereof and provide a justification of such a decision. Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 180 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 f (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 f (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Amendment 182 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 g (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 g (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 7 – paragraph 5
Article 7 – paragraph 5
(2g) in Article 7, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: 5. Member States shall make the results of their risk assessments available to the Commission, the ESAs and the other Member States." , and shall publish them after a period of six months." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 187 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 h (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 h (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
(2h) in Article 9, paragraph (1) is replaced by the following: 1. Third-country jurisdictions which have strategic deficiencies in their national AML/CFT regimes that pose significant threats to the financial system of the Unionr to public budgets of member states or the Union or have other laws or provisions in place with a similar effect ("high-risk third countries"), shall be identified in order to protect the proper functioning of the internal market. Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 188 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 i (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 i (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
(2i) in Article 9(2), the introductory part is replaced by the following: 2. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 64 in order to identify high-risk third countries, taking into account strategic deficiencies, in particular in relation to: deficiencies both in law and actual administrative and commercial practice, in particular in relation to: Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 189 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 j (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 j (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point a – point i a (new)
Amendment 193 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 k (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 k (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b
(2k) in Article 9(2), point b is replaced by the following: (b) the powers and procedures of the third country's competent authorities for the purposes of combating money laundering and terrorist financing; , including appropriately dissuasive and effective penalties and sanctions, as well as its practices in cooperation with competent authorities in member states or the Union; Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 195 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 l (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 l (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Amendment 222 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 15
Article 15
Amendment 223 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 16
Article 16
Amendment 225 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 18 – paragraph 2
Article 18 – paragraph 2
(6a) in Article 18, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: "2. Member States shall require obliged entities to examine, as far as reasonably possible, the background and purpose of all complex, unusually large transactions, and alltransactions that fulfil one of the following conditions: (i) they are complex transactions; (ii) they are unusually large transactions; (iii) the are conducted in an unusual patterns of transactions, which have no apparent economic or; (iv) they do not seem to have an entirely lawful purpose. In particular, obliged entities shall increase the degree and nature of monitoring of the business relationship, in order to determine whether those transactions or activities appear suspicious." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 234 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 18 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 (new)
Article 18 a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 (new)
In addition to these enhanced CDD measures, obliged entities shall, for all their customers, report to the responsible FIU and competent authorities, including tax authorities, any transactions originating from or destined to high risk third countries.
Amendment 247 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 20 – point b – point ii
Article 20 – point b – point ii
(7a) in article 20(b), point (ii) is replaced by the following: "(ii) take adequate measures to establish the source of wealth and source of funds that are involved in the business relationship or transaction with such persons;" persons and spontaneously provide this information to the competent authorities of the person's countries of origin and residence. If there are grounds to believe that the person in question is or was involved in the illicit transfer of funds or the obliged entity is not capable of identifying the source of wealth or source of funds relating to the person, it shall automatically repeat the provision of information to the competent authorities of the person's countries of origin and residence in regular intervals of not more than five years;" Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 250 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 22
Article 22
(7b) Article 22 is replaced by the following: "Where a politically exposed person is no longer entrusted with a prominent function by a Member State or a third country or with a prominent function by an international organisation, obliged entities shall for at least 1236 months, be required to take into account the continuing risk posed by that person and to apply appropriate and risk-sensitive measures until such time as that person is deemed to pose no further risk specific to politically exposed persons." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 271 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Article 30 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 278 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point b a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 8
Article 30 – paragraph 8
(ba) paragraph 8 is replaced by the following: "8. Member States shall require that obliged entities do not rely exclusively on the central register referred to in paragraph 3 to fulfil their customer due diligence requirements in accordance with Chapter II. Those requirements shall be fulfilled by using a risk-based approach." When carrying out customer due diligence requirements, obliged entities shall however be required to report any discrepancy between central registers and information obtained directly through clients or other sources to competent authorities with a view to ensuring that central registers contain the most accurate, up-to-date and complete information possible." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 283 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point c
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 30 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1
Article 30 – paragraph 9 – subparagraph 1
In exceptional circumstances to beand other specific terms laid down in national law, where the access referred to in point (b) of paragraph 5 would expose the beneficial owner to the risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, violence or intimidation, or where the beneficial owner is a minor or otherwise incapable, Member States may provide for an exemption from such access to all or part of the information on the beneficial ownership on a case-by-case basis. Member States shall ensure that these exemptions are granted upon a detailed evaluation of the exceptional nature of the circumstances. Exemptions shall be reassessed at regular intervals to avoid abuse. When an exemption is granted, this has to be clearly indicated in the register. It shall further be possible to challenge exemptions before the national authority that granted the exemption.
Amendment 299 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Each Member State shall require that trustees of any express trusttrust created, administered or operated in that Member State under the law of a Member State or of a third country obtain and hold adequate, accurate and up-to-date information on beneficial ownership regarding the trust. That information shall include the identity of: (a) the settlor(s); (b) the trustee(s); (c) the protector(s) (if any); (d) the beneficiaries or class of beneficiaries;, (e) any other natural person exercising effective control over the trust or being mentioned in the trust deed or related documents.
Amendment 302 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Article 31 – paragraph 2
Amendment 305 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point a b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Article 31 – paragraph 3
Amendment 306 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point b
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point b
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 3 a
Article 31 – paragraph 3 a
Amendment 315 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 4 a – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 4 a – subparagraph 1
The following parts of the information held in the register referred to in paragraph 31a of this Article with respect to any other trusts than those referred to in Article 7b (b) of Directive (EC) 2009/101 shall be accessible to any person or shall be publicly accessible: the name, the date of birth, the nationality, the country of residence and the nature and extent of the beneficial interest of the beneficial owner(s) as defined in Article 3(6)(b). For the purpose of this paragraph, access to the information on beneficial ownership shall be in accorgdanisation that can demonstrate a legitimate interestce with data protection rules and made possible in machine-readable and open format as defined in Directive 2013/37/EU.
Amendment 328 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 5
Article 31 – paragraph 5
(da) paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: "5. Member States shall require that the information held in the central register referred to in paragraph 41a is adequate, accurate and up-to-date." To the extent that there is doubt as to whether the information held in the central register is adequate, accurate and up-to-date and the person(s) identified are the actual beneficial owner(s) and the trust or trustee do not cooperate to clarify the information, or where the trust or trustee do not provide identity information of all natural persons meeting the criteria under paragraph 1 above, trusts should not be allowed to register in the central register." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 331 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 5 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 5 a (new)
(da) the following paragraph 5a is inserted: "5a. Trusts that are not registered in the central register should not be allowed to operate (i.e. hold bank accounts, engage in business transactions, hold or purchase assets, be enforceable under domestic laws and courts, etc.) within the territory of the Union. Existing registered trusts that do not update information, should be "inactivated": while their available information will be kept, they will be unable to operate within the territory of the Union as if they were unregistered trusts."
Amendment 332 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point d c (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 6
Article 31 – paragraph 6
(dc) paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: "6. Member States shall ensure that obliged entities do not rely exclusively on the central register referred to in paragraph 4 to fulfil their customer due diligence requirements as laid down in Chapter II. Those requirements shall be fulfilled by using a risk-based approach." When carrying out customer due diligence requirements, obliged entities shall however be required to report any discrepancy between central registers and information obtained directly through clients or other sources to competent authorities with a view to ensuring that central registers contain the most accurate, up-to-date and complete information possible." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 335 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point e
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point e
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a – subparagraph 1
Article 31 – paragraph 7 a – subparagraph 1
In exceptional circumstances and under specific terms laid down in national law, where the access referred to in paragraphs 4 and 4a would expose the beneficial owner to the risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, violence or intimidation, or where the beneficial owner is a minor or otherwise incapable, Member States may provide for an exemption from such access to all or part of the information on the beneficial ownership on a case-by- case basis. case basis. Member States shall ensure that these exemptions are granted upon a detailed evaluation of the exceptional nature of the circumstances. Exemptions shall be reassessed at regular intervals to avoid abuse. When an exemption is granted, this has to be clearly indicated in the register. It shall further be possible to challenge exemptions before the national authority that granted the exemption.
Amendment 344 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point h
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 – point h
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 31 – paragraph 10
Article 31 – paragraph 10
10. For the purposes of this Article, a trust is considered to be created, administered in each Member State where the trustees are established;or operated in a Member State where one or more of the following conditions are fulfilled: (a) it is created according to or governed by the law of the Member State or has its ultimate court of appeal in the jurisdiction of the Member State; (b) it is connected to the Member State by: (i) having one or more of the persons referred to in paragraph 1 or beneficial owners of the trust, as defined in Article 3(6)(b), resident in that Member State; (ii) holding real estate or other tangible assets in the Member State; (iii) holding shares or voting rights or ownership interest in a legal entity incorporated in that Member State; (iv) holding a bank or payment account in a credit institution situated in that Member State.
Amendment 353 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point a a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 32 – paragraph 7
Article 32 – paragraph 7
(aa) paragraph 7 is replaced by the following: "7. Member States shall ensure that the FIU is empowered to take urgent action, directly or indirectly, where there is a suspicion that a transaction is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, to suspend or withhold consent to a transaction that is proceeding, in order to analyse the transaction, confirm the suspicion and disseminate the results of the analysis automatically to the competent authorities. The FIU shall be empowered to take such action, directly or indirectly, at the request of an FIU from another Member State for the periods and under the conditions specified in the national law of the FIU receiving the request." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 354 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 32 a – paragraph 1
Article 32 a – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall put in place automated centralised mechanisms, such as central registries or central electronic data retrieval systems, which allow the identification, in a timely manner, of any natural or legal persons holding or controlling payment accounts as defined in Directive 2007/64/EC, financial instruments as defined in Directive 2014/65/EU and bank accounts held by a credit institution within their territory. Member States shall notify the Commission of the characteristics of those national mechanisms.
Amendment 368 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 32 b (new)
Article 32 b (new)
Amendment 372 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 34 – paragraph 2
Article 34 – paragraph 2
(13a) in Article 34, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: "2. Member States shall not apply the obligations laid down in Article 33(1) to notaries, other independent legal professionals, auditors, external accountants and tax advisors only to the strict extent that such exemption relates to information they receive from, or obtain on, one of their clients, in the course of ascertaining the legal position of their client or performing their task of defending or representing that client in, or concerning, judicial proceedings, including providing advice on instituting or avoiding such proceedings, whether such information is received or obtained before, during or after such proceedings." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 375 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 37
Article 37
(13b) Article 37 is replaced by the following: "Disclosure of information in good faith by an obliged entity or by an employee or director of such an obliged entity, FIUs or other relevant public bodies in accordance with Articles 33 and 34 shall not constitute a breach of any restriction on disclosure of information imposed by contract or by any legislative, regulatory or administrative provision, and shall not involve the obliged entity or its directors or employees in liability of any kind even in circumstances where they were not precisely aware of the underlying criminal activity and regardless of whether illegal activity actually occurred." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 377 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 c (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 38
Article 38
(13c) Article 38 is replaced by the following: "Member States shall ensure that individuals, including employees and representatives of the obliged entity, FIUs or other relevant public bodies who report suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing internally or to the FIU, are protected from being exposed to threats or any hostile action, and in particular from any adverse or discriminatory employment actions." . This protection shall also effectively comprise relatives or any other person with close links to the one that has reported the suspicion. Where there is reasonable ground to suspect that money laundering, associated predicate offences or terrorist financing, or an action with comparable risks for the public interest, have actually occurred and not been adequately dealt with by the obliged entity or the FIU, an individual, including employees and representatives of the obliged entity or employees of the FIU or other relevant bodies shall also be protected if these cases are exposed publicly. In such circumstances, protection shall entail reasonable financial support or compensation in addition to the elements listed in paragraph 1." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 385 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 44 – paragraph 2 – point d
(15a) in Article 44(2), point (d) is replaced by the following: "(d) data regarding the number of cross- border requests for information that were made, received, refused and partially or fully answered by the FIU." , broken down by counterpart country." Or. en (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal- content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:JOL_2015_141_R_0003&from=ES)
Amendment 396 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 50 a – introductory part
Article 50 a – introductory part
Member States shall not prohibit or place unreasonable or unduly restrictive conditions onensure the exchange of information orand assistance between competent authorities. In particular Member States shall ensure that competent authorities do not refuse a request for assistance on the grounds that:
Amendment 397 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 50 a – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 50 a – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The obligation to ensure effective, comprehensive and timely exchange of information with counterpart authorities shall apply to all types of exchanges including automatic, spontaneous and on request.
Amendment 403 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 – point b a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 – point b a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 53 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 53 – paragraph 3 a (new)
(ba) the following paragraph is added: 3a. The FIU of each Member State shall quarterly publish summary statistics on its collaboration and the exchange of information with other FIUs. This should at least include the number of requests sent and received, whether those have been successfully followed-up and concluded, the type of information received or requested, the economic sector and nationality of the entity or individual concerned and the overall as well as average amounts of money included in requests, if applicable.
Amendment 415 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 b (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 59 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
(21b) In Article 59, the introductory part of paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: "1. Member States shall ensure that this Article applies at least to breaches on the part of obliged entities that are serious, repeated, systematic, or a combination thereof, of the requirements laid down in:"
Amendment 417 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 c (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 59 – paragraph 2 – point c
Amendment 420 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 d (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 21 d (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
Article 59 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)
(21d) in Article 59(3), the following point is inserted: '(ba) for cases that are serious, repeated, systematic, or a combination thereof the withdrawal of the authorisation to operate;'
Amendment 429 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24 a (new)
Directive 2015/849/EU
Annex II
Annex II
Amendment 434 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2009/101/EC
Article 1 a – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 1 a – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) corporate and other legal entities referred to in Article 30 of Directive 2015/849 of the European Parliament and of the Council*, including the types of companies referred to in Article 1 of this Directive, save for those which are non profit-making;
Amendment 436 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Directive 2009/101/EC
Article 1 a – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 1 a – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) trusts which comprise any property held by, or on behalf of, a person carrying on a business which consists of or includes the management of trusts, and acting as trustee of a trust in the course of that business with a view to gain profit, and other types of legal arrangements having a structure or functions similar to such trustsare covered by Article 31 of Directive 2015/849/EU.
Amendment 437 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1 a (new)
Directive 2009/101/EC
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Amendment 442 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
The information shall at least consist of the name, the month and yeardate of birth, the nationality and the country of residence of the beneficial owner as well as the nature and extent of the beneficial interest held.
Amendment 448 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2009/101/EC
Article 7 b – paragraph 3
Article 7 b – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall ensure that the beneficial ownership information referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall also be made publicly available through the system of interconnection of registers referred to in Article 4a(2). For the purpose of this paragraph, access to the information on beneficial ownership shall be in accordance with data protection rules and made possible in machine- readable and open format as defined in Directive 2013/37/EU.
Amendment 452 #
2016/0208(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2009/101/EC
Article 7 b – paragraph 4
Article 7 b – paragraph 4
4. In exceptional circumstances and other specific terms laid down in national law, where the access to the information set out in paragraph 1 would expose the beneficial owner to the risk of fraud, kidnapping, blackmail, violence or intimidation, or where the beneficial owner is a minor or otherwise incapable, Member States may provide for an exemption from the compulsory disclosure ofsuch access to all or part of the information on the beneficial ownership on a case-by-case basis. Member States shall ensure that these exemptions are granted upon a detailed evaluation of the exceptional nature of the circumstances. Exemptions shall be reassessed at regular intervals to avoid abuse. When an exemption is granted, this has to be clearly indicated in the register. It shall further be possible to challenge exemptions before the national authority that granted the exemption.
Amendment 39 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 (new)
Recital -1 (new)
(-1) Tax avoidance and tax evasion, along with profit-shifting schemes, have deprived governments and populations of the necessary resources to, among other things, guarantee universal free access to public education and health services and state social services, as well as depriving states of the possibility of ensuring a supply of affordable housing and public transport, and of building infrastructure that is essential in order to achieve social development and economic growth. In short, these schemes have been a factor of injustice, inequality and economic, social and territorial divergences.
Amendment 40 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital -1 a (new)
Recital -1 a (new)
(-1a) A fair and effective corporate tax system should respond to the urgent need for a progressive and fair global tax policy, promote the redistribution of wealth and combat inequalities.
Amendment 44 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) In recent years, the challenge posed by corporate income tax avoidance has increased considerably and has become a major focus of concern within the Union and globallyparticularly after the revelations concerning various tax scandals, corporate income tax avoidance has been on the agenda and has sparked strong and justified demands for governments, both nationally and within the framework of international cooperation, to take practical and effective action to put an end to this phenomenon. The European Council in its conclusions of 18 December 2014 acknowledged the urgent need to advance efforts in the fight against tax avoidance both at global and Union level. The Commission in its communications entitled ‘Commission Work Programme 2016 - No time for business as usual’16 and ‘Commission Work Programme 2015 - A New Start’17 identified as a priority the need to move to a system whereby the country in which profits are generated is also the country of taxation. The Commission also identified as a priority the need to respond to our societies’ call for fairness and tax transparency. Despite all the intentions expressed, however, there is an urgent need for action. __________________ 16 COM(2015) 610 final of 27 October 2015. 17 COM(2014) 910 final of 16 December 2014.
Amendment 67 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Tax policy plays a central role in the redistribution of wealth. Enhanced public scrutiny of corporate income taxes borne by multinational undertakings carrying out activities in the Union is an essential element to further foster corporate responsibility, to contribute to the welfare through taxes, to promote fairEuropean Union Member States is an essential element to put pressure on those under tax competition within the Union through a better informed public debate and to restore public trustkings not to evade their obligations to society in the fairnessield of the naxational tax systems. Such public scrutiny can be achieved by means of a report on income tax information, irrespective of where the ultimate parent undertaking of the multinational group is established.
Amendment 78 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The public should be able to scrutinise all the activities of a group when the group has certain establishments within the UnionEuropean Union Member States. For groups which carry out activities within the UnionEuropean Union Member States only through subsidiary undertakings or branches, subsidiaries and branches should also publish and make accessible the report of the ultimate parent undertaking. However for reasons of proportionality and effectiveness, ta report. The obligation to publish and make accessible the report should be limited to medium-sized or largeapplies to all subsidiaries established in the Union, or branchEuropean Union Member States, ofr a comparable sizell branches opened in a Member State. The scope of Directive 2013/34/EU should therefore be extended accordingly to branches opened in a Member State by an undertaking which is established outside the UnEuropean Union and which has a consolidated net turnover exceeding EUR 40 million.
Amendment 124 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The report on income tax information shall be made accessible to the public on the website of the undertaking on the date of its publication. published, by six months after the closure of accounts for the tax year in question, in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible to the public on the website of the undertaking on the date of its publication in at least one of the official languages of the EU. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file it in a public online registry; that registry shall be managed by the tax authority of the Member State applying the rules laid down in the first subparagraph of this paragraph.
Amendment 145 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
The report on income tax information shall be published, by six months after the closure of accounts for the tax year in question, in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible to the public on the date of its publication on the website of the subsidiary undertaking or on the website of an affiliated undertaking in at least one of the official languages of the EU. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file that report in a public online registry; that registry shall be managed by the tax authority of the Member State applying the rules laid down in the first subparagraph of this paragraph.
Amendment 152 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 b – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
The report on income tax information shall be made accessible to the public on the date of its publication on the website of the branch or on the website of an affiliated undertakingpublished, by six months after the closure of accounts for the tax year in question, in a common template available in an open data format and made accessible to the public on the date of its publication on the website of the branch or on the website of an affiliated undertaking. On the same date, the undertaking shall also file the report in a public registry managed by the tax authority of the Member State applying the rules laid down in the first subparagraph of this paragraph.
Amendment 169 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point a
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point a
(a) a brief description of the nature of the activities carried out by each entity, together with a breakdown of the respective areas of business, functions and geographical location;
Amendment 176 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) the number of employeesworkers on the undertaking’s staff on a full-time equivalent basis and workers who, although not on the undertaking’s staff, are leased on a full-time equivalent basis, and a breakdown of the allocation of workers by area of business and function;
Amendment 180 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) staffing costs, by entity, broken down between wages and salaries, social security costs, pension costs and staff leasing costs;
Amendment 181 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b b (new)
Amendment 182 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b c (new)
Amendment 187 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b d (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point b d (new)
(bd) sales and purchases carried out by each entity with related parties and with unrelated parties;
Amendment 200 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
(ga) interest and expenses and/or similar income, with a breakdown of the amounts to be paid and/or received from related parties;
Amendment 204 #
2016/0107(COD)
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2
Directive 2013/34/EU
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point g b (new)
Chapter 10 a – Article 48 c – paragraph 2 – point g b (new)
(gb) the amount paid and/or received in royalties, including a distinction between that made with related parties and that made with unrelated parties;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8
Citation 8
Amendment 33 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the Treaty on European Union establishes the creation of the single market, whose currency is the euro; whereas the European Monetary Union currently consists of 19 members, two of whom have opt-out clauses, the remaining seven EU Member States having yet to join; whereas no financial liability will be incurred by the two countries with opt-outs from EMU in the framework of any fiscal capacity for the euro area;
Amendment 72 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas it became apparent during the sovereign debtfinancial crisis that the European Treaties do not provide the euro area with the instruments to deal effectively with shocks; whereas the economic governance framework has, in fact proven to be counter-productive as it forces Member States to adopt pro-cyclical measures;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas, following real convergence in the run-up to the introduction of the common currency, the euro area witnessed structural divergence between 1999 and 2009, which made the euro area as a whole less resilient to shocks; whereas regulatory adjustments and structural reforms aimed at reducing risks and improving convergence have been introduced since 2009 at both European and national level, but some euro area Member States still require solidarity and sustainable reforms in their catching-up processthis situation can only be overcome with an increase in investment and a change of productive model;
Amendment 95 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas progress has been achieved in addressing the flaws of EMU throughausterity measures prescribed in legislation such as the Six- Pack and the Two-Pack regulations, as well as through the introduction of the European Semester and the creation of new instruments such as the ESMe European Semester and enforced as conditions for financial assistance from the ESM have deepened the economic crisis and led to a depression in some Member States;
Amendment 110 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)
Recital H a (new)
Ha. whereas Member States under duress have been forced to adopt harsh adjustment programs at enormous social and economic costs; whereas several national governments resigned after financial assistance was withheld; whereas this has severely damaged the reputation of the EU, its institutions and some Member States;
Amendment 116 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas a great deal of trust has been lost in the process, both between Member States and on the part of citizens and the markets in the EU institutions and the Union as a whole;
Amendment 121 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
Amendment 172 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the introduction of the euro as a common currency has eliminated tried and tested policy options for counterbalancing asymmetric shocks such as exchange rate fluctuation; reiterates that the relinquishing of autonomy over monetary policy therefore requires alternative adjustment mechanisms to cope with asymmetric macroeconomic shocks in order to make the euro zone an optimal currency area able, inter alia, to implement a proper policy mix to achieve real and social convergence priorities under full democratic control;
Amendment 184 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that EMU exposed its vulnerability in the context of the global financial and economic crisis when unsustainable imbalances, triggered by capital flows fromcaused by beggar-thy-neighbour policies in core euro area nations to the periphery and a rising public spending ratio in some Member States, aggravated and led to a sovereign debt crisis, in which government borrowing costs dramatically increased in some Member Stateand by capital flows to the periphery leading to elevated debt levels (private or public), which caused a dramatic increase in government borrowing costs in some Member States, following the rise in public spending due to bank bailouts and initial counter- cyclical policy responses to the crisis, jeopardising, in the absence of a proper fiscal backstop, the mere existence of the euro area;
Amendment 191 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that the narrow focus on public deficit and debt level does not address the main causes of the euro crisis; stresses that unsustainable current account imbalances had developed before the crisis, due to beggar-thy-neighbour policies in some Member States, which led to increasing debt levels (public and private) in deficit countries;
Amendment 221 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Observes that the stabilisation of the economic cycle since the beginning of the crisis has relied almost exclusively on the ECB, and that the reduced options available for monetary policy in a context of zero lower bound rates have led the ECB to implement unconventional monetary policy measures; recalls that the President of the ECB has called for integrated institutions, for a stronger and proactive fiscal policy on the euro area scale and for euro area Member States to deliver on structural reform;
Amendment 229 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Acknowledges the results achieved since the crisis broke in terms of risk reduction and better coordination; points in particular to the many measures taken by the EU institutions to address the shortcomings revealed by the crisis by strengthening coordination of national fiscal policies, in particular via the adoption of the Six-Pack and the Two- Pack Regulations; welcomes furtherNotes the fact that the EU institutions have set up frameworks for action in current and future crises, namely by creating the European Financial Stability Mechanism (EFSM), the temporary European Financial Stabilisation Facility (EFSF) and its permanent successor, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM); underlines, however,stresses that these mechanisms dramatically lack transparency, democratic oversight and parliamentary control, and hence ownership;
Amendment 241 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 250 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls the four pillars set out in the Five Presidents’ Report: completing the economic, financial and fiscal Union and strengthening democratic accountability, legitimacy and the institutional setting; emphasises that this report reiterates the view set out in the Blueprint of the Commission and the Four Presidents’ Report, coordinated by then President of the European Council Mr Herman van Rompuy,Stresses that a shock absorption capacity at euro area level is needed to complement automatic stabilisers at national level, whose functioning is limited, as was shownhas been limited by the imposition of deficit constraints on Member States budgets and austerity policies during the crisis;
Amendment 263 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Makes it clear that rapid action is needed to ensure the sustainability of the euro providing proper living conditions for all citizens; stresses that this requires strong joint efforts on the part of the EU and its Member States to complete the EMU and to restore the trust of citizens and markets;
Amendment 303 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that incentives for soundsound and progressive fiscal policymaking and for addressing structural weaknesses at national and cross-border level, taking into account the aggregate euro area fiscal stance, are core elements for the functioning of the euro area; considers that a fiscal capacity should, moreover, address specific concerns for the euro area in the case of absorbing shocks;
Amendment 340 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Takes the view that the European Investment bank (EIB) supported by guarantees from the European Central Bank (ECB) can complement a fiscal capacity and play a key role in promoting public investment programs in the EU;
Amendment 387 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
Amendment 446 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 454 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 493 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
Amendment 535 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 2
Paragraph 26 – indent 2
– labour market, including minimum wagpublic employment programs to actively fight unemployment, promote collective bargaining, labour and union rights, decent minimum wages, and improvement of social protection schemes,
Amendment 554 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 1
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 1
– investment, notably inpublic investment especially in infrastructure, research and development;
Amendment 562 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 2
Paragraph 26 – indent 3 – paragraph 2
Amendment 574 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
Amendment 609 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
Amendment 625 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
Amendment 651 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Acknowledges that the model of a European Unemployment Benefit Scheme wcould foster convergence of labour markets in the medium term; insists that the a European Unemployment Benefit Scheme must be complemented by policies that enhance the creation of decent employment;
Amendment 667 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Considers that the EMF should provide thefiscal capacity should be endowed with sufficient financial resources for either of these models, which could require increasing the amount of capital; points out that the fund should avoid long-term redistribution effects by ensuring Member States’ contributions are balanced over the cycle effective stabilisation of Member States whose currency is the euro;
Amendment 684 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Warns that future symmetric shocks could destabilise the euro area as a whole since the currency area is not endowed with the instruments to cope with another crisis of the extent of the previous one; is convinced that the right instrument to deal with symmetric shocks depends on the nature of the shock; recalls that the EMF should be used as an appropriate financial resource;
Amendment 698 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Considers that in the case of symmetric shocks brought about by a lack of internal demand, monetary policy alone cannot reignite the economy, particularly in a context of zero lower bounds; is therefore convinced that public and private investment must be increased, withe administrative burden reduced and a proper regulatory framework developed, with a view to stimulating view to stimulating potential growth and crowding-in private investment; is also convinced that public policies oriented to directly increase internal demand should be pursued by Member States and supportential growthd at EU level;
Amendment 707 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 722 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Considers that instability in the financial sector could also poses severe challenges for the euro area as a whole; urges completion of the Banking Union in order to lessen these challenges; calls for the fiscal capacity to operate as a fiscal backstop for the Banking Union, as agreed in the SRM;
Amendment 741 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Points out that the fiscal capacity has to be of significant size in order to be able to address, these euro-area-wide shocks and to finance its functions; insists that in order to provide sufficient financial resourcogether with the Member States, these euro -area fiscal capacity, including the EMF, should be able-wide shocks and to fincrease the issuance of equities via a rise in guarantees; considers that these common issued equities should have the highest credit rateance its functions;
Amendment 769 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Calls urgently for the European Parliament and national parliaments to be given a strengthened role in the renewed economic governance framework in order to reinforce democratic accountability; calls for increased national ownership in the European Semester in order to improve compliance with the CSRs, participation and transparency;
Amendment 772 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
Amendment 784 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
Amendment 804 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
Amendment 817 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Acknowledges that the current political climate characterised by deep inequality, mistrust and uncertainty is not conducive to proper reformspolicy to achieve and complete EMU; believes, therefore, that a comprehensive roadmap, including clear milestones within an agreed timetable and taking into account the political situation, should be urgently adopted with a clear commitment by euro area Heads of State and Government to achieving a genuine and completeprogressive and democratic EMU;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers that the effectiveness of EU law is systematically undermined by its unsatisfactory application by Member States; notes that this lack of enforcement is at the root of a number of European crisesthe EU routinely ignoring every legal and constitutional obstacle in its way in order to increase their supranational power; notes that this lack of respect for the rule of Law is at the root of a number of European crises and has led to a widespread lack of trust and confidence in the aims and objectives of the European Union;
Amendment 28 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that non-compliance with the Maastricht criteria, and the lenient enforcement of the Stability and Growth Pact rules by the Commission and the Council before 2010,the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP), the 6-pack and the 2-pack, as well as the Fiscal Compact, unnecessarily constrains the vital fiscal policy space of the Eurozone Member States, depriving them of the only effective macroeconomic tool in a context of weak demand and ineffective monetary policy; recalls that it was these austerity policies which contributed to the emergence of the European debt crisis that followed the global financial crisis;
Amendment 30 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Stresses that the 2008 financial crisis resulted in a colossal intervention by EU governments in support of the financial sector; points out that the total state aid granted to the financial sector amounted to more than EUR 5 trillion, representing 40.3 % of EU GDP;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Recalls, that according to the OECD 2012 report, the sustainability of sovereign debt was significantly affected by the extent of explicit or implicit guarantees for bank debt;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that in 2014 only 10 of the 157 main recommendations made to Member States in the framework of the European Semester were fully implemented or showedthe European Semester has failed to address the challenges of ensuring macroeconomic stability or promoting substantial progress4 ; __________________ 4Success rate of around 6.5%: Zsolt Darvas and Alvaro Leandro, ‘The Limitations of Policy Coordination in the Euro Area under the European Semester’, Bruegel, November 2015.inable growth; underlines that the current framework does not allow for a proper debate on the alternatives to an unbalanced governance framework based on arbitrary budgetary rules;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Is very concerned by the fact that the Deposit Guarantee Scheme Directive (DGSD) has still not been implemented by 10 Member States6 , which undermines the efforts to build a European Deposit Guarantee Scheme that would complete the Banking Union; __________________ 6Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Poland, RomBelieves that it should be the role of national central banks to guarantee all foreign-currency deposits held by financia, Slovenia and Sweden; Commission press release, 10 December 2015.l institutions based in their countries;
Amendment 47 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Notes that the creation of a European Deposit Insurance Scheme (EDIS) requires the implementation of the single rulebook as well as of the first and second pillars of the Banking Union, as well as the transposition of the BRRD and the Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive (DGSD) by all the participating Member States. Stresses with grave concern, that these are moves towards the creation of a Financial Union, notably through a European Deposit Insurance Scheme;
Amendment 50 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. stresses that all Legislation should respect the principle of subsidiarity; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States' is upheld;
Amendment 52 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 58 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Believes that the Commission should propose more regulations and fewer directives in orNotes with concern that Regulations are "binding in their entirety" and "directly applicable" on all member states. Directives provide Member States with the autonomy to consider the most appropriate means of implementing directives into domestic law provided that the objectives of the directives are attained and providerd to ensure a level playing field amonghat the directive is implemented into domestic law within the required timescale. Stresses theat Member States should retain as much competence and sovereign decision making vis-à-vis legislation;
Amendment 68 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Is of the opinion that financial penalties for non-compliance with EU lLaw should include a multiplier for those Member States for which several procedures are openis not effective as powerful states who infringe European law are less sensitive to the costs imposed by sanctions;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. SupportsHighlights that the creation of a subcommittee of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs to focus on monitoring the application of EU law in the Member States. does not address the legislative defects within the EU Legislature process;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2279(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the role and contribution of women are of fundamental importance in maintaining mountainous regions;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2279(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Calls on the Commission to draw up affirmative action policies to encourage women to settle in farmland in mountainous regions and to participate in the projects listed in paragraph 6;
Amendment 113 #
2015/2279(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Calls on the Commission to draw up affirmative action policies to facilitate and promote women's involvement in all areas of decision-making under equal conditions;
Amendment 114 #
2015/2279(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 f (new)
Paragraph 7 f (new)
7f. Calls on the Commission to draw up measures to ensure that family farms are owned by both members of couples;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to makexclude financial services one of the EU’s priorities in the TiSA negotiations, as the EU’s own market for those services is already comparatively open; to ensure that, in the area of financial services, no new commitments will be taken on that would jeopardise EU financial regulation, and that EU regulators retain the ability to authorise or deny any new financial productfrom the TISA negotiations by adding them in the text proposed by INTA rapporteur Reding in Article 1 (b) i., as is stands the EU’s own market for those services is already comparatively open and regulation and supervision reforms, including of cross- border financial operators still have to be assessed for their effectiveness to avoid another crisis;
Amendment 13 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to ensure that TiSA results in limiting market access reservations to duly justified exceptions and in a commitment by all parties to a standstill on nation, in the area of financial services, no new commitments will be taken on that would jeopardise any existing or future EU financial treatment, and thereby to defend the position that market openness will not prevent the introduction of new measures for prudential reasons or the modification of existing domestic disciplinesgulation, and that EU regulators retain the ability amongst others to authorise or deny any new financial product, to ban certain financial products, and to impose certain legal forms (e.g. restructuring requirements);
Amendment 16 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
(b) to ensure that TiSA results in limitallowing market access reservations to dulyhat are justified exceptions and in a commitment by all parties to a standstill on national treatmentfor prudential, economic and sustainability reasons and that no commitment to a standstill or ratchet clauses on national treatment and market access is taken, and thereby to defend the position that market openness rules and commitments will not prevent the introduction of new measures for prudential reasons or the modification of existing domestic disciplines;
Amendment 29 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 37 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d
Paragraph 1 – point d
(d) to ensure that the TiSA in no way hinders the negotiating agenda of the WTO, but, rather, fosters a valuable discussion on establishing ‘gold standards’ for tackling trade obstacles and developing regulatory best practices for financial servicregulatory best practices for financial services which promote economic and sustainability objectives, and also prepares the ground for itstheir possible adoption at multilateral level;
Amendment 42 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
(e) to urge the negotiating parties to establish a binding high-levelnsure that the framework for the domestic regulation of financial services is based on the needs to make financial sector resilient and serve the needs of the economy and the society, and not repeat the WTO’s GATS Annex on Financial Services, as well asnor make deeper commitments based on the sui generis Understanding on Commitments in Financial Services;, and at least not repeating phrases of the Understanding such as No Member shall take measures that prevent transfers of information or the processing of financial information, including transfers of data by electronic means (Understanding Art. 8) and ‘Art. 10. Each Member shall endeavour to remove or to limit any significant adverse effects on financial service suppliers of any other Member of: [...] (b.) non-discriminatory measures that limit the expansion of the activities of financial service suppliers into the entire territory of the Member;[...] (d) other measures that, although respecting the provisions of the Agreement, affect adversely the ability of financial service suppliers of any other Member to operate, compete or enter the Member’s market’.
Amendment 52 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
(f) to lay down, in the regulatory chapter on financial services and inter alia, strong transversal rules on regulatory transparency that ensures access by all stakeholders and a balance between the interests of diverse stakeholders that is taken into account while protecting the public interest; and solutions for ensuring respect of national treatment for cross- border suppliers too.
Amendment 53 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
(fa) Not to replicate the GATS prudential carve-out so as to allow parties to deviate from their trade commitments when this is necessary for prudential reasons; but to amend the GATS prudential carve-out as in CETA by including that the ‘safety, soundness, integrity or financial responsibility of a Financial Institution, cross-border financial service supplier or financial service supplier’ and the ‘registration of cross-border financial service suppliers of the other Party and of financial instruments’ are protected; furthermore include ‘consumer protection’ and ‘social and environmental goals’ as legitimate purposes; and delete the phrases ‘Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Agreement’ and ‘Where such measures do not conform with the provisions of the Agreement, they shall not be used as a means of avoiding the Member’s commitments or obligations under the Agreement.’
Amendment 66 #
2015/2233(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f c (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f c (new)
(fc) Not to strive to regulatory convergence nor to use regulatory convergence as a condition for more market access commitments.
Amendment 5 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, in many European countries over the past few decades, the number of farmers in rural areas has drastically decreased and employment in those areas has continued to decline; whereas between 2005 and 2014, there was a reduction of almost one quarter (- 23.6%) in agricultural labour input in the EU-281a; _________________ 1a Eurostat, 2016
Amendment 12 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas, the economic crisis hit all parts of Europe, but none more so than rural areas; whereas such areas experienced unprecedented devastation as a result of austerity policies;
Amendment 14 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas there is a relatively low income per labour unit for agricultural activities and that this is a point of concern;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas, although studies have shown that Direct Payments through Pillar 1 do not directly create jobs, they play a vital role in maintaining jobs and keeping farmers on the land; whereas should this policy support be withdrawn, 30% of European farmers would be forced to cease activities and exit the agricultural sector; whereas these payments keep small farmers and rural areas alive;
Amendment 39 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)
Recital E b (new)
Eb. whereas direct payment supports for farmers in peripheral areas, farming on disadvantaged or marginal land are vital not only to ensure that these farmers remain on the land and earn a decent livelihood, but also to ensure that this land is protected and plays a role in attracting tourism to these areas;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E c (new)
Recital E c (new)
Ec. whereas there is a requirement to ensure a fairer distribution of Pillar 1 payments to maximise the positive impact of this support;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas European farmers operate in an increasingly global market and therefore experience greater exposure to price volatility than other sectors; whereas trade deals currently being negotiated such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) and the EU-Mercosur Free Trade Agreement pose a threat to job creation and the creation of conditions to support agricultural livelihoods;
Amendment 59 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas the European Commission's own impact assessment on the effects TTIP notes that "predominantly rural areas focussed on specific activities and with limited alternatives are more vulnerable"; whereas rural areas and rural jobs are threatened by the movements away from traditional farming models that this agreement will bring;
Amendment 88 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L a (new)
Recital L a (new)
La. whereas the European Commission's Report on the Needs of Young Farmers, November 2015 1a shows that availability of land to buy and to rent are the biggest problems facing young farmers and new entrants into farming; _________________ 1a http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/external- studies/2015/young-farmers/final-report- 1_en.pdf
Amendment 108 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Encourages the Member States to step up their support for small and medium-sized farms, in particular by making more use of the redistributive payment, and to introduce a ceiling on aid of between EUR 50 000 and EUR 1500 000 across the board;
Amendment 140 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that geographical indications and organic farming represent and guarantee territory-based added value and create jobs, and as such should not only be protected but also developed; highlights however the processes for attaining these quality standards can be overly burdensome, should be simplified and that short supply chains linking farmers to local producers can stimulate rural job creation;
Amendment 160 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States and their regions to shift the focus of their rural policy to job creation, and calls on the Commission to assist them in achieving that objectiveEmphasises that rural development and job creation go hand in hand;
Amendment 209 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission to review how it currently defines 'jobs' in agriculture; highlights the distinction between a 'job', which has connotations that a person is an employee and receives a wage (subsidy), and a person earning a 'livelihood' as someone who deals with a resource and makes what they can from it; believes that most farmers fall into the latter category and thus that the Commission should restructure its policy focus towards creating conditions that support livelihoods;
Amendment 228 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to ensure maximum support for small and medium size farms and for a fairer redistribution of payments; calls on the Commission to introduce a ceiling on aid of between EUR 50 000 and EUR 100 000, while protecting national envelopes;
Amendment 247 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Takes the view that regaining control of the European market must be a principle for action under the future CAP, before turning to markets outside the EU; in this regard, considers that trade agreements such as TTIP, CETA and the EU-Mercosur Trade Agreement pose a significant threat the European Agriculture and Employment markets and will work against policies aimed at stimulating local production and supporting agricultural livelihoods;
Amendment 285 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Takes the view that bottom-up approaches to local development such as LEADER/CLLD have proven to be effective and that they should be further strengthened and implemented in all Member States by means of multi-fund approaches; takes the view that recent reforms in some Member States away from the bottom-up approach have contributed to a loss in the entire social fabric of the LEADER programme;
Amendment 292 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the European Commission to come forward with models of good practice with regard to transnational LEADER II projects;
Amendment 298 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Stresses that the importance of the Second Pillar for job creation can be enhanced by allowing much more flexibility according to region specific needs;
Amendment 307 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the Commission to establish more support for local cooperatives in order to regain control over prices and their products;
Amendment 309 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Invites the Commission to consider setting definitions for what it means to be a local producer in order to stimulate this type of production;
Amendment 323 #
2015/2226(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Takes the view that it is vital to ensure that public and private services such as broadband, integrated and accessible transport networks, and finance and credit schemes for rural entrepreneurs, micro-enterprises and SMEs, are in place to make it possible to maintain and develop employment in rural areas;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the BU is instrumental to ensuring stability and restoring confidence in euro area banks, enhancing financial integration, fostering risk sharing within the monetary union and contributing to breaking the link between sovereigns and banks at national level in order to avoid a socialisation of private debt by financial institutions;
Amendment 36 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the SSM is the first pillar of the BU and should aims to ensure a uniform and homogeneous supervision of euro area banks, createtaking into account the uneven framework of the European construction derived from the international division of labour between core and peripheral regions, creating a level playing field in the banking market, and contributeing to the safety and soundness of credit institutions and the stability of the financial system;
Amendment 44 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas the SRM is the second pillar of the BU and should aims to ensure uniform rules and procedures and a common decision- making process for orderly resolution of failing banks with minimum impact on the real economy and public finance throughout Europe;
Amendment 57 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)
Recital F a (new)
Fa. whereas the current economic crisis was largely caused by the financial industry where many actors have become too-big and too-interconnected-to fail and had to be bailed-out with public funds; in contrast to any market-economy logic, losses were socialised and profits privatised; not only did this send national economies spiralling downwards and set off a public debt crisis, it also led to a regime of harsh austerity policies, imposed by EU institutions and the IMF as conditions for loans;
Amendment 58 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F b (new)
Recital F b (new)
Fb. whereas the key role of financial institutions is to channel savings into productive investments and to guarantee the socioeconomic function of credit, the invention of various toxic financial instruments and dubious business practices - which for example set exorbitantly high profit targets - has increased volatility and short-term orientation on the financial markets with negative effects on societies and economies; it is therefore imperative to shrink the financial sector to its core functions; hence, institutions that have reached a size and level of interconnectedness which is likely to pose a systemic threat to the functioning of the economies of single Member States or the Union as a whole should be downsized and separated;
Amendment 59 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F c (new)
Recital F c (new)
Fc. whereas a proper Structural Reform of Banks which separates trading activities from retail banking and downsizes banks is key to the resolvability of banks and hence the credibility and efficiency of the BU;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 67 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Welcomes the attempt to put in place a European banking supervisory mechanism while being concerned about the conflict of interest entailed in the ECB being a supervisor and a lender of last resort;
Amendment 70 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Points out that the establishment of the SSM is much too recent and does not allow for a full evaluation both from an operational point of view and in terms of supervisory quality;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point a
Paragraph 2 – point a
(a) the recruitment process, which resulted in a good blend of competences, cultures and gender, thus contributing to the supranational nature of the SSM, and the thorough training activity programme for national competent authorities (NCAs) and ECB staff; regrets, however, that the professional background of the recruited staff gives rise to conflict of interest in terms of prior service to financial industry;
Amendment 91 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes with satisfaction that the ethics rules of the ECB have been reviewed but underlines the need for further development in the light of the expanded mandate of the ECB which requires stronger rules on conflict of interests and safeguards against undue influence of financial industry on staff as well as members of the governing bodies;
Amendment 92 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Demands that the President of the European Central Bank immediately steps down from his seat in the Group of Thirty (G30); believes that the ECB President, Mario Draghi, is guilty of conflict of interest as his role as supervisor of all large banks in the Eurozone is incompatible with his association with private market players;
Amendment 96 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises the need to avoid double reporting requirements and more generally an unnecessary administrative burden on credit institutions, in particular smaller banks;
Amendment 122 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines that economic recovery is underway but is still fragile and modest, inflation remains below its target, credit dynamics are still subdued in many jurisdictions and a large stock of non- performing loans weighs on many European banks’ balance sheets, limiting their capacity to finance the economy;
Amendment 139 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Believes that the worldwide drive towards more and better quality bank capital is a necessary condition for a sound banking system capable of supporting the economy and for avoiding any repeat of the enormous bailouts witnessed during the crisis; considers therefore the Commission's proposal for a Capital Market Union and its attempt to revitalize securitization to be counterproductive as contributing to greater systemic risk and volatility in financing conditions;
Amendment 151 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that an increase in capital requirements, beyond a certain threshold, may in the short term induce banks tousterity policies which hamper investment and credit demand as well as a lack of capital and non- performing loans weighing on banks’ balance sheets may curtail the supply of credit, and therefore looks forward to an end of austerity policies and the overall stabilisation of the level of capital;
Amendment 179 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Stresses the importance of the work that has been undertaken on the homogenisation of the calculation of risk- weighted assets, which is pivotal for comparability purposes, and on the review of internal models for the calculation of banks’ capital requirements, and considers progress in this area, for all portfolios, crucial in order to preserve the effectiveness and credibility of banking supervision in the euro area; calls for regular evaluations of the application of the capital requirements in order to avoid loopholes in the calculation of risk- weighted assets;
Amendment 187 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Considers that appropriatmore attention should be paid to increased exposure in the form of off-balance sheet items, in particular for global systematically important banks (G- SIBs);
Amendment 191 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Underlines the important role played by the SSM during the Greek crisis in monitoring the condition of the country’s banking sector, in conducting a comprehensive assessment of the significant Greek institutions and in contributing to the determination of the recapitalisation needs; condemns the SSM decision to limit Greek banks' exposure to Greek sovereign debt, thus increasing the danger of state bankruptcy, a decision which contributed to the systemic instability and which appeared as a political decision to add pressure to the Greek government in the context of the negotiations, in a breach of the political neutrality principle which should govern this institution;
Amendment 198 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Believes that the ECB’s supervisory strategy, while avoiding any differentiation along national lines, should reflect and safeguard pluensure decentralism ofed banking models across the EU;
Amendment 212 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. WelcomNotes the efficient and open way in which the ECB has so far fulfilled its accountability obligations towards Parliamentscope for improvement in the fulfilment of the ECB's accountability obligations towards Parliament with regard to providing more specific information on prudential supervision of banks and calls upon the ECB to continue to fully engage in this regard and to further contribute to improving Parliament’'s capacity to assess SSM policies and activities;
Amendment 222 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Considers that the ECB Annual Report on supervision should contain actual numbers on 'on-site inspections', 'internal model investigations' and a description of the subject and result of these inspections; and calls for target numbers on inspections and investigations for the coming year to be published as well;
Amendment 226 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 b (new)
Paragraph 25 b (new)
25b. Believes that the SSM will not be able to conduct effective banking supervision due to the EU's watered down version of Basel III which is already insufficient; calls therefore on the Commission to create more ambitious regulation within the Union, and to allow Member States to adopt more ambitious regulation should they wish to do so;
Amendment 230 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Welcomes the efficientNotes the setting up of the Single Resolution Board (SRB) and the establishment of the national resolution authorities (NRAs) in the Member States;
Amendment 231 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)
Paragraph 26 a (new)
26a. Recalls that 4.5 trillion EUR of public money and guarantees were made available to bailed out banks; believes that all measures to avoid bail out of private banks with public money must be taken; deems that any capital injection given in the past should be turned into golden shares and the loans granted by other banks counted in the liability of the balance sheet should turn into preferred stock or shares as well. The purpose is to change the practices of the banking system, increasing the participation of a public banks network under social control, and reinforcing the capitalization rate to recover the viability and solvency of the banking system to put it in favour of social interest;
Amendment 232 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 b (new)
Paragraph 26 b (new)
26b. Believes that in principle banks should be allowed to fail and go bankrupt. This requires a complete ban on the existence of banks that are too-big-to-fail;
Amendment 233 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Paragraph 26 c (new)
26c. Regrets therefore that banking regulation at national and European level continues to allow for the existence of Systemically Important Financial Institutions (SIFI) despite their central role in causing the financial crisis and its global contagion;
Amendment 234 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 d (new)
Paragraph 26 d (new)
26d. Believes that the existence of SIFIs not only makes it impossible to allow the banks to go bankrupt, it makes them very difficult if not impossible to resolve. Many actors are still 'too-big-to fail' and 'too- interconnected-too-fail' and 'too-complex- to-resolve'. None of these problems have been remotely addressed by the SRM;
Amendment 235 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 e (new)
Paragraph 26 e (new)
26e. Believes that the European banking sector is as concentrated as it ever was; believes therefore that the BU has failed to break the link between banks and sovereigns;
Amendment 236 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 f (new)
Paragraph 26 f (new)
26f. Believes it is highly necessary to separate banking activities: on one hand retail banking and on the other investment banking. Furthermore, the shadow banking system has to be duly identified and regulated preventing all the irregular banking practices (leveraged buy out, abusing of transfer prices, decapitalisation of viable companies, etc.);
Amendment 237 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 g (new)
Paragraph 26 g (new)
26g. Believes the SRM itself encourages a greater concentration of too-big-to-fail actors in the European banking sector. The sale of business tool allows megabanks to grow even bigger by taking over ailing banks at bargain basement prices - rather than the long term value of the asset. The result of consolidation will be even more concentration and even bigger banks;
Amendment 238 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 h (new)
Paragraph 26 h (new)
26h. Believes that in those cases where a public intervention is the only option left to ensure macroeconomic stability, the intervention should be in a manner in which public money is not lost but is used to create a new public bank network, under a sound management but not looking for the maximum profit. The starting point should be the bailed out banks and their solvent assets with the financial support of the ECB and under social and democratic control;
Amendment 240 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Highlights the importance of establishing efficient cooperation between the SRB and the NRAs for the smooth functioning of the SRM; considers the organisational model established by the SSM through the JSTs to be a good basis for organising cooperation within the SRM;
Amendment 254 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33a. Calls for further regulation of banking products and their respective interest rates as well as complementing prudential regulation by asset based reserve requirements, limits to those investors being hidden as false creditor in order to avoid shareholder's risk when they behave in fact as them, and specifically the shadow banking sector in order to reduce complexity of financial markets and improve monetary transmission;
Amendment 257 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Paragraph 33 b (new)
33b. Proposes to attribute more importance to the dividend distribution limit in case of low rate of capitalisation before selling assets at whatever price. A relevant initiative would be to create a European Public Banks net. This would be based on those public contributions (for instance, from ESM) granted, deeming any of this financing, even in a retrospective way, as golden shares and the corresponding participation within the Board of directors of the banks concerned. At the same time, in equivalent cases of intervention, it would be appropriate to determine an orderly exchange process of contracted bonds, subordinated and junior debt, which are property of private banks, turning them into preferred stock or shares to improve the capitalisation rate;
Amendment 268 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls on Member States to fully and swiftly implement the Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive (BRRD) and the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) on transfer and mutualisation of contributions to the Single Resolution Fund; regrets the decision to set up the fund through an IGA rather than through Union law;
Amendment 287 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Stresses the need, as a consequence of the existence of the national compartments in the SRF, to rapidly put in place an adequate bridge financing mechanism in order to provide the fund, if necessary, with sufficient resources in the period before its completion; recalls that the Eurogroup and the Ecofin ministers identified, in their statement of 18 December 2013, the possibility of having recourse to both national sources and the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), and considers the latter the most effective and credible solution, which could be implemented either through a swift revision of the ESM treaty or through appropriate implementation of the provisions of Article 13 thereof; believes however that the ESM - which has been set up with money from taxpayers - should not be used to recapitalise private banks;
Amendment 292 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36 a (new)
Paragraph 36 a (new)
36a. Recalls that ESM funds come with harsh austerity which in the end will be passed on to citizens, contradicting any attempt to break the link between banks and sovereigns;
Amendment 295 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
Amendment 306 #
2015/2221(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Recalls that the credibility of the BU, and in particular of bail-in and single resolution provisions, requires a common backstop in order to be able to support the SRF, if necessary, beyond its capacity of EUR 55 billion, and considers that its setting-up should start swiftly and be based on the ESMmuch greater contributions to the SRF from the banking sector itself. Taking into account the costs of the financial crisis, the current target of EUR 55 billion is grossly insufficient. Banks should also speed up the process and make the full amount available much earlier than 2023;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. WelcomeDoubts the fact that economic recovery is slowly gaining ground, with GDPdespite forecasts predicting GDP growth in the euro area expected to rise by 2.1% in 2016; notes with concern, however, that its foundations are fragile, mainly owing to the EU's underlying structural weaknessethat growth rates in some Member States specifically in Ireland, are masked by the impact of foreign multinationals; notes with concern that a substantial proportion of growth in specific member states, is due to low-tax financial services sectors, which do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors cand resulting low international competitivenes; notes with concern that the foundations of any growth are fragile, mainly owing EU's policies suppressing domestic demand and increasing economic problems in China and other countries;
Amendment 52 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission's focusattention in the 2015 Country-Specific Recommendations (CSRs) on the four main priorities for economic growth: boosting investment, implementation of structural reforms in product, service and labour markets, fiscal responsibility and improving employment policy; stresses the importance of these growth drivers, also in the context of achieving the goals set out in the Europe 2020 strategyboosting investment; stresses the importance public investment for growth, also in the context of achieving the goals set out in the Europe 2020 strategy; regrets that no public investment program is forthcoming in the Union or individual Member States;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 67 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 93 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that many Member States, in particular in the eurozone, are faced with similar macroeconomic challenges, including most importantly high debts and low investexternal and public debts, high unemployment and low investment; deplores the insistence of the Eurogroup on austerity policies harming both investment and employment;
Amendment 108 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Deplores the persistently high unemployment rates across most Member States, in particular the youth and long- term unemployment rates; stresses the need to reform national labour markets in order to increase job creation ratesnotes with concern that a falling unemployment rate also disguises the social epidemic of emigration; stresses the need to reform national labour markets, reduce precariousness and raise internal demand in order to increase job creation rates; Notes with concern the use of draconian and compulsory work activation schemes for young people;
Amendment 115 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. WelcomStresses the entry into force of the regulation onneed for public investment programs in the Union or individual Member States; regrets that the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI), is aimed at boosting private investment in the EU, and calls on all relevant stakeholders to ensure its swift and effective implementationthe interests of private investors in the EU;
Amendment 132 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that further fiscal consolidation is still needed in many Member States in order to comply with the conditions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP)deflationary fiscal policies combined with banking policies which socialised private debt and austerity policies have led to extremely high levels of public debt in many Member States; notes the Commission's interpretative communication on flexibility in the SGP, aimed at clarifying the scope of the investment clause and allowing for a certain degree of temporary flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP;
Amendment 134 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that further fiscal consolidation is still needed in many Member States in order to comply with the conditions of the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP)which austerity policies have led to extremely high levels of public debt; notes the Commission's interpretative communication on flexibility in the SGP, aimed at clarifying the scope of the investment clause and allowing for a certain degree of temporary flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP;
Amendment 144 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is concerned at the persisting macroeconomic imbalances in some Member States, in particular the high public debt levels, high unemployment levels and large current accounts gaps, as well as the excessive risks in the banking systems, which stem from structural deficiencies in the Eurozone's institutional design and policies; stresses the need to asymmetrically close current account gaps by increasing domestic demand in surplus countries; regrets that so far the burden of adjustment has been placed on deficit countries, deepening the recession and increasing unemployment and public deficits;
Amendment 169 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Underlines the need to improve the EU's business environment as well as to raise productivity levelthrough increases in demand and public investment, as well as to raise productivity levels, through public education and innovation policies; stresses the importance of sound business regulation for thany future success of the EFSI; calls, therefore, for the removal of administrative barriers, cutting red tape and reform of Member States' tax systems; noting that the setting of tax rates is a crucial component of the principle of subsidiarity and must therefore remain within each member states own competency.
Amendment 177 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 190 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the need for Member States to adaopt their public finances by conducting a counter-cyclical policy when necessary and making full use of the existing flexibility clauses foreseen in the legislationgrowth enhancing policies and to raise employment and growth rates through public investments programs; Urges the Commission to support public investment policies in order to give traction to economic recovery based on a combination of fiscal and monetary policy; considers that Member States with high debt levels in particular must continue with growth-friendly fiscal consolidcan only achieve fiscal conditions through economic and job creation and should urgently implement the recommended structural reformpolicies that ensure job protection and stability and higher wages, while those with more fiscal space should use it to accelerate investment;
Amendment 206 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the fall in the number of Member States subject to the Excessive Deficit Procedure (EDP), from 11 in 2014 to 9 in 2015; notes, however, that the number is still relatively high, and reiterates its call for a shift in the Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) to be, where relevant, better coordinated with the EDP recommendations so as to ensure consistency between surveillance of the fiscal position and economic polward growth and job-friendly policies and a larger reliance on national government's democraticy coordinationhoices;
Amendment 212 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses the need to adopt policies that enhance growth and employment and considers that fiscal consolidation is a secondary objection; stresses that for Members States suffering from excessive debt burdens, public debt needs to be restructured through extending maturities, lowering interest rates and haircuts;
Amendment 221 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Stresses the role of flexible labour markets in combatting unemployment, in particular the negative impact on job creation rates of rigid rules on dismissal, excessive minimum wage levels and lengthy labour disputes; calls for a shift away from labour taxes to other sources of taxationjob protection in avoiding recessionary spirals and sustaining wage and aggregate demand levels; calls for a shift toward direct taxes and away from indirect taxes, which are unfair and harm small and medium enterprises;
Amendment 234 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Stresses the role of strong unions and labour protection laws in safeguarding employment and enhancing wage growth; calls for a shift away from consumption taxes to wealth taxes;
Amendment 244 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Deplores the fact that the CSRs suffer from lack of ownership at national level and from a democratic accountability mechanism; calls, in this context, for an increased role for national parliaments in the preparatheir substitution ofby the National Reform Programmes (NRPs) prepared and approved by national parliaments; stresses that increased ownership is a crucial factor for the successful implementation of the CSRsany reform agenda and, in the longer term, for the success of the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 257 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
Amendment 271 #
2015/2210(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Underlines the destructive impact of high debprivate debt and unemployment levels on economic growth in the EU; recalls that these stem structural flaws of the Eurozone and the resulting current account gaps; calls on the Commission to explore innovative ways of speeding up and lessening the negative impactdisastrous economic and social consequences of deleveraging in the banking, and private and public sectorssectors and enhance public investment;
Amendment 23 #
2015/2155(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Stresses that the Court of Auditors report adopted on 11.07.2014 states that the potential saving for the EU budget would be about 114 million EUR per year if the European Parliament centralised its activities; reiterates the call on Parliament and the Council to address, in order to create long term savings, the need for a roadmap to a single seat, as stated by Parliament in several previous resolutions;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes however that the competing ideologies of agriculture and the environment have not been addressed within the concept of a multifunctional agriculture, as a result a consistent and joined approach is not being implemented which adds to the error rate;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that 2014 was a transitional year, involving significant payments for the last part of the 2007-2013 funding period and during which the final elements (the implementing and delegated acts) were put in place half way through the year for the CAP 2014-2020 funding period, and believes that the year 2015 should be considered as another transitional year given that many of the multiannual measures in member states Rural Development Plans (RDP) will only begin to be implemented in 2016;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the reduction in error rates compared to 2013 and acknowledges the major efforts and resources devoted to achieving this, particularly through information and technical support from the Commission for member state authorities on implementation, and believes, however, that a simple measure of error is not in itself a measure of performance or delivery, is of the opinion that an incentivised and output driven approach in delivery where an increased rate of compliance would lead to a reduction in inspections would deliver the twin benefits of lower error rate and enhanced results;
Amendment 33 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes that the European Court of Auditors is exploring how to measure performance in its Annual Report, particularly as the Commission intends its spending to be focused on results, points nevertheless to the difficulty of judging delivery of multiannual funding programmes, which are the preferred method of delivery of environmental measures in pillar II, through a tool which examines a single year and invites the Court to explain its performance orientation specifically in relation to agricultural spending;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Believes that the principle of subsidiarity should be respected and be central in the implementation of both pillars of the CAP however the issue of "gold plating" at national level which has been shown to add complexity and therefore to the error rate, particularly so in pillar II, should be addressed;
Amendment 55 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the importance of resource efficiency, and a shift towards a low carbon and climate resilient economy in the agri-food and forestry sectors (reduced greenhouse gas and ammonia emissions, more carbon sequestration) and the need to measure the overall achievements related to environmental targets 2014- 2020, this should not put viable food production at riskwhile viable food production remains the central aim the emerging markets in carbon offsets and carbon sequestration should not be used solely to counterbalance intensive agriculture elsewhere with none of the benefits of these new income streams accruing to local populations;
Amendment 78 #
2015/2154(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Reminds that the objectives of the 2007-2013 programme period (viable food production, balanced territorial development, enhanced farm viability and promoting food chain organisation) are still important goals, and that the focus is to be put on quality schemes, short supply chains, social cooperatives, local markets strictly in rural areas in new RDPs, and involving reasonable environmental expenditure;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 101 to 109 thereof, 147 and 174;
Amendment 2 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to the competition inquiry into the pharmaceutical sector of 8th of July 2009 and follow-up reports, in particular the 5th Report on the Monitoring of Patent Settlements,
Amendment 3 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 b (new)
Citation 4 b (new)
– having regard to the study of the Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection, ‘Unfair trading practices in the business-to-business food supply chain (UTPs)’,
Amendment 4 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 c (new)
Citation 4 c (new)
– having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee ‘Internal market of international road freight: social dumping and cabotage’,
Amendment 5 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 d (new)
Citation 4 d (new)
– having regard to the universal framework for Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture systems (SAFA) developed by FAO,
Amendment 6 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 e (new)
Citation 4 e (new)
Amendment 7 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 f (new)
Citation 4 f (new)
– having regard to Council Directives 77/799/EEC and 2011/16/EU on administrative cooperation in the field of taxation,
Amendment 8 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 g (new)
Citation 4 g (new)
– having regard to the conclusions and action proposals of the OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project,
Amendment 15 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the strong application of competition- law principles under the EU Treaty primarshould contribute to the general objectives of EU economic policy, including employment and cohesion, whilye benefitsting consumers, promotesing innovation and growth, and controlsling and restrictsing unfair market practices as well as monopolies and dominant market positions;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas in countries dominated by large private energy operators, regulators often fail to comply with the ‘full independence of network operation from supply and generation interests’ laid down in directives 2009/72/EC and 2009/73/EC;
Amendment 38 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
Recital D b (new)
Db. whereas social dumping is a factor distorting the internal market, hurting both consumers’ and workers’ rights;
Amendment 41 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D c (new)
Recital D c (new)
Dc. whereas ‘unfairness’ in the food supply chain is difficult to translate into infringement of current competition law, as its existing tools are only effective on some forms of anti-competitive behaviour;
Amendment 51 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that a successful competition policy must not be directed exclusively towards bringing down prices for consumers, but must also be mindful of the innovativeness of the European economy and special competitive conditions for small and medium-sized businesses, as well as the promotion of high labour and environmental standards;
Amendment 96 #
Amendment 97 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 7 – point 1 (new)
(1) Regrets that competition authorities and regulators often fail to exhibit the necessary independence from energy producers in countries dominated by large private operators; stresses that this is a factor behind the slow development of renewable energies or its retrospective shut-down in countries like Spain;
Amendment 98 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 7 – point 2 (new)
(2) Stresses that an increase in industrial scale and concentration, even within a larger market, may provide a significant opportunity for anti-competitive practices, as evidenced by the recent Volkswagen scandal;
Amendment 99 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 – point 3 (new)
Paragraph 7 – point 3 (new)
(3) Calls on the Commission to study if the privatization of energy assets in many countries may have constituted a form of State aid, either because of the low prices of sales or the considerable scope for anti- competitive behaviour through the opaque valuation of assets and costs of production in a regulated sector;
Amendment 167 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 15 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Social and environmental dumping
Amendment 168 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 15 – point 1 (new)
(1) Calls on the Commission to develop its competition policy in full respect of EU policy objectives, including a high level of employment and fostering social and regional cohesion; draws attention to the fact that competition authorities must take into full account potential market externalities, particularly of a social or environmental kind, in framing their activity;
Amendment 169 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 15 – point 2 (new)
(2) Calls on the Commission to take measures against social dumping as a way to guarantee workers’ and consumers’ security; stresses the heavy deterioration of working conditions due to social dumping in sectors such as transport;
Amendment 170 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point 3 (new)
Paragraph 15 – point 3 (new)
(3) Draws attention to the fact that environmental dumping is a factor affecting workers’ health and safety and consumers’ security; is particularly concerned by the effects if this trend on traditional industries such as the chemical or base metal sectors;
Amendment 171 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 – point 4 (new)
Paragraph 15 – point 4 (new)
(4) Stresses that deregulation within the internal market and as a consequence of international agreements such as TTIP or TiSA are key factors behind the development of new anti-competitive practices, in the form of social and environmental dumping;
Amendment 192 #
Amendment 193 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 18 – point 1 (new)
(1) Competition policy at EU level must guarantee that the pharmaceutical industry does not hamper the universal right to healthcare of EU citizens, fighting any kind of market abuse that may block access of generic medicines to the internal market; is concerned about the reiterative abuse of market position of the pharmaceutical industry against generic medicine providers;
Amendment 194 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 18 – point 2 (new)
(2) Calls, in this respect, for the development of generic medicines and their preferential use, when available, by public procurement systems;
Amendment 197 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the temporary State aid in the financial sector for the stabilisation of the global financial system was nexcessary but on completion of the Banking Union must be quickly reduced or totally removed and scrutinisedive and must be quickly reduced or totally removed and scrutinised; considers it regrettable that no action has been taken by the Commission to address the abuses committed in the restructuring of private banks, including those affecting small depositors and small owners of financial instruments such as preferred shares, which in many cases had been marketed without full compliance with EU legislation;
Amendment 281 #
Amendment 282 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 1 (new)
Paragraph 25 – point 1 (new)
(1) Is concerned that the most recent study of DG Competition in the field of retail, ‘The economic impact of modern retail on choice and innovation in the EU food sector’ remains solely focused on consumer choice rather than on the abuse of dominant position against food producers; stresses that unfair practices of big retailers hurt consumers and agricultural producers alike;
Amendment 283 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 2 (new)
Paragraph 25 – point 2 (new)
(2) Calls on the Commission to develop progressively the EU competition framework to include the monitoring of SAFA indicators in the food supply chain in Europe, including Fair Pricing and Transparent Contracts (S.2.1.1.) and Right of Suppliers (S2.2.1);
Amendment 285 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 4 (new)
Paragraph 25 – point 4 (new)
(4) Calls for binding action in the food supply chain against retailers harming farmers and consumers;
Amendment 286 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – point 5 (new)
Paragraph 25 – point 5 (new)
(5) Is particularly concerned by the situation in the dairy sector, where retailers have been imposing prices well- below costs following the end of the quota system;
Amendment 299 #
2015/2140(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Condemns the non-cooperative attitude of many multinational companies with the European Parliament on matters relating to competition policy, as in the current workings of the Committee on Tax Rulings and Other Measures Similar in Nature or Effect; calls for binding action against non-cooperative MNCs;
Amendment 3 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas, according to the Commission’s latest predicted spring forecast, economic recovery in the euro area is expected to expand, with real GDP predicted to rise by 1.5 % in 2015 and 1.9 % in 2016; notes with concern, that growth rates in some Member States are masked by the impact of foreign multinationals; notes with concern that a substantial proportion of growth in specific member states, is due to low-tax financial services sectors, which do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can; notes with concern that the foundations of any growth are fragile, mainly owing EU's policies suppressing domestic demand and increasing economic problems in China and other countries;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, according to the same forecast, predicted unemployment in the euro area is expected to record a slow decrease, from 11.6 % at the end of 2014 to 10.5 % at the end of 2016; whereas there are major disparities between the unemployment rates in different Member States, with figures ranging from 6.4 % in Germany to 26.6 % in Greece; deplores the persistently high unemployment rates across most Member States, in particular the youth and long-term unemployment rates; notes with concern that a falling unemployment rate also disguises the social epidemic of emigration; stresses the need to reform national labour markets, reduce precariousness and raise internal demand in order to increase job creation rates; Notes with concern the use of draconian and compulsory work activation schemes for young people;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, again according to the same forecast, the fiscal outlook in the euro area should exhibit a slight improvement, with decreases expected in the public deficit (from 2.4 % in 2014 to 1.7 % in 2016) and the public debt (from 94 % at the end of 2014 to 92.5 % at the end of 2016); notes that deflationary fiscal policies combined with banking policies which socialised private debt and austerity policies have led to extremely high levels of public debt in many Member States;
Amendment 19 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the current recovery is mainly supported by private consumption, while private investment in the euro area continues to stagnate at levels significantly below those registered before the start of the crisiCalls on the Commission and the Member States to prioritise public investment; urges the Commission and Member States to do more from the economic crisis as an opportunity to promote a more equitable, socially and environmentally sustainable economic model, by, among other means, accelerating public investment and promoting social enterprise and alternative business models, such as mutuals and cooperatives;
Amendment 35 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas in 2014 the ECB lowered its key refinancing rates to the effective lower bound and reduced its deposit facility rate to -0.20 %; whereas lower real rates have not translated into either increased credit for households and businesses, especially SMEs, or GDP growth and job creation; stresses the need to prioritise action to tackle unemployment, poverty and social exclusion, and to give priority to sustainable employment/quality jobs, investment, and quality public services which ensure social inclusion, especially in the areas of agriculture, education, health, childcare, care of dependent persons, public transport and social services;
Amendment 50 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that the modest recovery expected for the coming years in the euro area will not be sufficient to reduce the high unemployment rates recorded in many euro area Member States or to reduce the burden of debt; stresses that many Member States, in particular in the eurozone, are faced with similar macroeconomic challenges, including most importantly high external and public debts, high unemployment and low investment; deplores the insistence of the Eurogroup on austerity policies harming both investment and employment;
Amendment 82 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Acknowledges that, in reaction to a complex environment of falling inflation, contraction of credit and sluggish economic growth, and with its interest rates close to the zero lower bound, the ECB resorted to non-conventional monetary policy instruments; Notes that the ECB should address economic divergences such as regional or sectoral asset price bubbles via discretionary asset-based reserve requirements, as opposed to a concentration on interest rates; notes that raising interest rates can have secondary unintended consequences such as suffocating the euro economy.
Amendment 110 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Asks the ECB to carefully monitor the risks associated with its purchase programmes, in order to avoid an unfair burden on EU taxpayers; notes that the expansion of European Investment Bank activities should be backed by ECB bond buying; notes that such a joint effort would not only recycle large amounts of unused liquidity from financial markets, but also be much more targeted than the current quantitative easing programme which injects ever more liquidity into financial markets without unlocking substantive real-economy activity, therefore feeding new asset price bubbles.
Amendment 159 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the existing flexibility within the Stability and Growth Pact rules could be used to better address the weak recovery in some Member States; Considers that austerity packages have killed investment demand altogether; Notes that the stability and growth pact (SGP), the fiscal compact (FC) and the European central bank's (ECB) initial reluctance to act as governments' last resort lender, restricted member states in their ability to absorb private slack and recycle abundant liquidity on financial markets through higher public investment.;
Amendment 160 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers that the existing flexibility within the Stability and Growth Pact rules could be used to better address the weak recovery in some Member States; considers that deflationary fiscal policies combined with banking policies which socialised private debt and austerity policies have led to extremely high levels of public debt in many Member States; notes the Commission's interpretative communication on flexibility in the SGP, aimed at clarifying the scope of the investment clause and allowing for a certain degree of temporary flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP;
Amendment 183 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that austerity policies in a number of Member States have contributed to stagnation and recession, with damaging effects on euro area members’ public accounts, levels of unemployment and social cohesion; Notes that the architecture of the economic governance is undemocratic and rather than developing further steps towards pooling sovereignty, there is a need to reject austerity policies, prioritise public investment, democratise the governance structure and to redefine the European Monetary Union;
Amendment 217 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Underlines the need for democratic accountability in view of the new responsibilities conferred on the ECB regarding supervisory tasks, as well as its involvement in the Troika and Quadriga programmes, while also stressing the ECB’s independence in the field of monetary policy and the need to avoid any conflict of interest in the execution of its functions; notes with concern the rescue packages to the bailed-out countries, the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) as well as its predecessor the European Financial Stability Facility (EFSF) and the new Single Supervisory Mechanism (SSM) within the European Central Bank (ECB) have fragile legal foundations based on the EU treaties. Moreover, aside from the substantive validity of these initiatives, many of the procedures adopted in their establishment deviate from the processes as provided for in the treaties, thus undermining their democratic legitimacy.
Amendment 223 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls for a thorough assessment of the Troika’s modus operandi and of the ECB’s involvement in the Troika and Quadriga frameworks, with a view to clarifying and redefining onsiders that the architecture of the economic governance is undemocratic and rather than developing further scope of responsibilities and ensuring greater democratic accountability in the adoption and implementation of bailout programmes; invites the Council to reconsider the involvement of the ECB and IMF in the Troikateps towards pooling sovereignty, there is a need to democratise the governance structure and to redefine the European Monetary Union;
Amendment 232 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls the report of Parliament of 28 February 2014 on the inquiry into the role and operations of the Troika, which calls on the next Parliament to build on the work of this report, develop its key findings and investigate further; calls for a complete over-hall in the ECB mandate and statutes, putting an end to its false autonomy, assuring its political and democratic control by the States (on an equal footing) and returning to Member- States the power of decision on crucial economic options, including the control of its monetary policy;
Amendment 236 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – introductory part
Paragraph 25 – introductory part
25. Calls for a thorough assessment ofDeplores the ECB’s modus operandi and actions towards Greece, especially as regards the decisions taken by it, namely:
Amendment 252 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Asks the ECB to examine the gender imbalance factor on its Council when its membership is renewed; notes with concern that the economic crisis and fiscal consolidation policies have disproportionately affected women, particularly those from marginalised communities, young women, and women suffering from multiple discrimination;
Amendment 258 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. BelieveConsiders that the current structure of the Banking Union should be complemented in the future with a single mechanism to guarantee bank deposits, aimed at avoiding capital flight in the event of a futurBanking Union legislation serves only the interests of the big financial capital in the EU and infringes basic democratic principles; defends the repeal of the Banking Union legislation and the need to assure a public and democratic control over the banking crisissystem;
Amendment 272 #
2015/2115(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. WelcomesNotes the Commission's Investment Package, including the cCapital mMarket us Union project and its potential contribution to reducing excessive dependence of euro ar(CMU); stresses that an equitable and robustly regulated financial services framework which ensures financial stability is a prerequisite in order to increase (long-term) investment and to foster growth in a sustainable and socially balanced European economies on the banking systemy; underlines the linkage between socially sustainable polices and financial stability;
Amendment 7 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in recent years an ambitious passive reform agenda ofor the EU financial sector has been launched togun with the presumed intention of strengthening financial regulation and supervision, the aim of restoreing financial stability and make the financial system more resilient to shockresilience has not been met, owing to inadequate financial regulatory policies;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in recent years an ambitious reform agenda for the EU financial sector has been launched to strengthen financial regulation and supervision, restore financial stability and make the financial system more resilient to shocks; whereas these fell short of addressing the fundamental problems of the financial sector, i.e. too-big-to fail and too-interconnected-to fail;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the financial crisis of 2007/2008 has largely been the result of past policy failures, namely the deregulation of the financial sector, which has fuelled speculative bubbles and has been the main cause for the too-big-to fail and too-interconnected-to fail problems;
Amendment 13 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas these policy failures have led to the deepest political and socio- economic crisis in the recent history of the European Union;
Amendment 14 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas profoundcosmetic changes have occurred in all financial sectors, including banking, insurance, securities markets, investment funds and financial market infrastructure;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas profoundsome changes have occurred in all financial sectors, including banking, insurance, securities markets, investment funds and financial market infrastructure, which unfortunately leave the problems of too-big-to fail and too-interconnected-to fail untouched;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas the transposition and implementation of the financial regulatory reform is still ongoing and not yet completed, with many delegated and implementing acts in particular still to be finalised; whereas especially the strict separation of investment from retail banking is still outstanding;
Amendment 22 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the current investment gap is largely the result of deflationary austerity policies and subdued demand rather than an over-regulated financial sector; whereas the crisis has shown that relationship with retail banks is more robust and more focused on lending to the real economy than large universal and investment banks; whereas in the US after the financial crisis, bank lending to corporates has developed stronger than capital markets based financing;
Amendment 25 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas according to the European Banking Federation, credit supplied by banks appears to have broadly matched credit demand1 a ; whereas according to the ESBG, there is no fundamental supply-side shortage of lending in general2 a ; whereas specific shortages of credit to MSMEs derive largely from economic instability and growing disinvolvement of financial activity from the productive economy; whereas these problems will not be alleviated by the plans for a CMU; __________________ 1a cf. http://www.ebf- fbe.eu/uploads/FF2012.pdf 2a cf. http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/consu ltations/2013/long-term- financing/docs/contributions/registered- organisations/european-savings-banks- group_en.pdf
Amendment 36 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomNotes the Commission’s Investment Package, including the Capital Markets Union (CMU); stresses that an efficient and effectivequitable and robustly regulated financial services framework which ensuringes financial stability is a prerequisite in order to increase (long-term) investment and to foster growth in a competitivesustainable and socially balanced European economy; underlines the linkage between economicsocially sustainable polices and financial stability;
Amendment 37 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. WelcomesTakes note of the Commission’s Investment Package, including the Capital Markets Union (CMU); stresses that an efficient and effective financial services frameworkregulation ensuring financial stability is a prerequisite in order to increase (long- term) investment and to foster growth in a competitivthe European economy; underlines the linkage between economic and financial stability;
Amendment 46 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the Commission’s ambition to build a Capital Markets Union should be matched by an equivalent focus on raising the bar for retail investor protection to restore their trust; recommends that the Commission should make concrete proposals on how to (a) improve and harmonise retail investor protection rules for all saving and investment products, including pension products and individual shares and bonds;(b)impose effective supervision and enforcement by national and EU supervisory authorities in retail financial markets; (c) promote the development and distribution of simple and standardised investment products; (d) tackle conflicts of interest when giving advice by banning inducements;
Amendment 57 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned abouthat the increased complexity, reflected in the greater amount, degoal of economic efficiency at the expense of social goals and objectives will result in financial instability and number of layers of regulation and supervision with requiremonly undermine the level of financial protection for citizents at international, European and national levelof the European Union;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned about the increased complexity, reflected in the of financial products and markets, requiring a greater amount, detail and number of layers of regulation and supervision with requirements at international, European and national level;
Amendment 68 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that a sound and robust CMU has to acknowledge thpromoting the development of capital markets in Europe might create an even more volatile finterdependencies with other financial sectors and has to be based on well-established existing structures; stresses the need for a holistic view of EU financial services regulationancial system that is more vulnerable to domino effects; stresses that much of the regulation which has been put in place after the crisis is focused on making individual banks more robust but very little has been done to make the financial system as a whole more robust and stable; stresses the need of ensuring that financial institutions do not run into trouble at the same time;
Amendment 80 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that an effective and efficien robust EU financial services regulation should be coherent, consistent (also on a cross- sectoral basis), proportionate, and free of superfluous complexityequitable; believes that it should enable intermediaries to fulfil their role in funding the real economy and serve savers and investors; considers that it should contribute to the single market and focus on goals better achievable at European levelthe focus on boosting short term growth over financial regulation is dangerous: believes if systemic risks are not comprehensively addressed the risk of future crises is multiplied;
Amendment 84 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that an effective and efficient EU financial services regulation should be coherent, and consistent (also on a cross- sectoral basis), proportionate, and free of superfluous complexity; believes that it should enable intermediaries to fulfil their role in funding the real economy and serve savers and investors; considers that it should contribute to the single market and focus on goals better achievable at European level;
Amendment 95 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need to take stock of the financial services framework, in line with the review clauses adopted in each specific legislative act, in order to pave the way for more fundamental and ambitious reforms of this sector; notes that similar exercises are being undertaken in other jurisdictions, notably in the US;
Amendment 97 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Underlines the need to take stock of the financial services framework; notes that similar exercises are being undertaken in other jurisdictions, notably in the US; notes that the structure of a financial system, whether it is bank based or capital market based, is secondary from a growth perspective; notes in this respect the growth differential between the EU and the US is not directly linked to the development of their respective capital markets;
Amendment 105 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that a single market for financial services serves businesses, but ultimately has to benefit businesses, customers and investors; insists that barriers to cross- border access, marketing and investment have to be analysed and addressed;
Amendment 106 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that a single market for financial services should serves businesses, but ultimately has to benefit custoitizens, consumers and investors; insists that barriers to cross- border access, marketing and investment have to be analysed and addressed; stresses the importance of sound business regulation;
Amendment 116 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Believes that consumer protection does not necessarily entail large volumes of information; is concerned that the multiplicity of customer information might not ultimately serve real customer needs; points to the necessity of a Europenformation must always be relevant, comparable, user-friendly, reliable and timely; information alone is not sufficient to protect consumers and enhance their decision-making process; it must go hand in hand with developing unbiased comparison tools, independent and affordable financial advice and initiative for more and better financial educationtermediation, and strong supervisory authorities in charge of consumer protection, equipped with the powers to test new products before they are sold to consumers;
Amendment 167 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Is concerned about the lack of available and attractive risk-appropriate (long-term) investmentpush to shift retail savings to capital markets for alleged higher returns aund savings products for consumers; reiterates the need for diversity in investor and consumer choiceser the disputable assumptions that consumers can have higher returns without increasing the risk they are taking;
Amendment 177 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the diversity of business models; cCalls for a differentiation in regulation and supervision regarding the nature, size, riskiness and complexity of entities; believes however that the key priority of policy makers and supervisors must be to end the too-big-to fail and too- interconnected-to fail problems;
Amendment 181 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Welcomes the diversity of business models; calls for a differentiation in regulation and supervision regarding the nature, size, riskiness and complexity of entities; stresses the importance of sound business regulation;
Amendment 203 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the achievements in establishing a banking union; stresses that the next step has to be its full implementation, including full capitalisation of national Deposit Guarantee Schemes (DGS) and the Single Resolution Fund (SRF); emphaEU’s economic and monetary union (EMU) needs urgent reform; notes the EMU and banking unions flawed architecture, the unconditional bailout of insolvent banks, as well as austerity in response to the financial crisis; notes the need to improve the EU’s busisnes the aim of avoiding moral hazard and ensuring that risk-takers bear the costs when their risks materialises environment through increases in demand and public investment, as well as to raise productivity levels, through public education and innovation policies;
Amendment 241 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. RecognisesTakes note of the efforts made to establish a more transparent securitisation market; emphasises that stringent requirements for underlying high-quality assets and calibrations according to the actual risk profile are necessary, beartaking in mindto account the riskiness of securitisation as shown during the crisis; emphasises that simple, standardised and transparent securitisation rules out practices like tranching or synthetic securitisation; calls on the Commission to conduct a thorough assessment of the risks and benefits of securitisation for SMEs, investors and financial stability and the marketability of securitisation instruments as a matter of priority, and to report to Parliament;
Amendment 253 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Is highly concerned about the revival of synthetic securitization as expressed in the forthcoming STS Regulation; warns that in particular synthetic securitization worsened the impact of the financial crisis; calls on the Commission to definitively close the door to synthetic securitization in the simple and transparent securitization (STS) framework;
Amendment 274 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Stresses that efforts for a cultural change in the financial sector have to be pursued further; is therefore convinced that strict regulation and supervision of the industry remains a key priority for policy makers; acknowledges the benefits of relationship banking for consumers and SMEs;
Amendment 281 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 283 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Demands a stronger focus on the global competitiveness ofconsumer protection in the EU financial sectors when making policy;
Amendment 291 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Demands that the EU and Member States push for efficient and effective regulation of financial sectors at a global level; stresses the need for strong global regulation to prevent foreign financial institutions from gaining an unfair competitive advantage vis-à-vis EU financial institutions;
Amendment 293 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines the importance of the international framework with respect to its scope, methodologies and implications on the EU framework; calls on the Commission and ESAs to coordinate more closely with international bodies promoting EU interestlong-term global stability and sustainability goals;
Amendment 312 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Believes that better financial regulation starts with Member States applying the current acquis; considers that gold-plating does not facilitate the functioning of the internal market;
Amendment 324 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Calls onUrges the Commission to ensure balanced participation in consultations by reflecting the diversity of stakeholders and providing better conditions for small stakeholders to participate, including in the way consultations are organised and questions asked; further urges the Commission to make the lobbying outside of the consultations more transparent and make use of the lobby register mandatory;
Amendment 335 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. WelcomNotes the objectives of the better regulation agenda; underlinequestions the role of REFIT in achieving an efficient and effective financial services regulation; reminds that the focus of EU decision- making must be on improving regulation, not deregulating;
Amendment 361 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Calls on the Commission to make any amendment made to the draft regulatory technical standards (RTS) and implementing technical standards (ITS) submitted by the ESAs transparent to the co-legislators and stakeholders;
Amendment 390 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
Paragraph 42
42. Stresses that the impact of individual legislative measures differs from their cumulative impact; cCalls on the Commission services, in corporation with the ESAs, SSM and ESRB, to conduct a comprehensive quantitative and qualitative assessment every five years of the cumulative impact of the EU financial services regulation at EU and Member State level;
Amendment 401 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – introductory part
Paragraph 43 – introductory part
43. Calls on the Commission services to complete the first assessment by the end of 2016in five years’ time from now and to report on the overall impact and, in separate chapters, on the following:
Amendment 422 #
2015/2106(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43 – indent 9
Paragraph 43 – indent 9
– the interdependencies with international standards and the effects on the global competitiveness of European businessesfinancial stability;
Amendment 8 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. RecognisNotes that CAP reform introduced measures aimed at addressing the bargaining power gap between farmers and other stakeholders in the food supply chain, measures which have so far proved ineffective;
Amendment 39 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points to the limitations of the Supply Chain Initiative (SCI), and specifically the absence of farmers’ organisations owing to lack of trust, restriction of anonymous complaints, absence of meaningful mechanisms to adequately combat well- documented unfair trading practices (UTPs), and, in particular, the lack of enforcement measures andgiven its lack of statutory power its inability to apply any meaningful sanctions;
Amendment 63 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Doubts whetherBelieves that voluntary initiatives are inadequate for addressing UTPs and the acknowledged ‘fear factor’ in the supply chain arising from the imbalance of power between farmers and retailers and must be complemented by regulatory action combined with a fundamental rebalancing of the market to give parity to the primary producer;
Amendment 80 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Notes that the Supply Chain Initiative (SCI), which is purely voluntary in nature, does not address the real problem arising from the highly concentrated structure of large-scale distribution and the supply-side rigidity that applies to most agricultural producers;
Amendment 88 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Questions the Commission’s unwavering support for the SCI, given its limited success and also given the reluctance of farmers to participate; regrets the pre- emptive conclusion that regulatory action at EU level is not foreseen;
Amendment 116 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes that several Member States have initiated actions in national law to address the concerns of primary producers regarding the negative impact of UTPs; asks the Commission to assess these national efforts with a view to selecting best practices for application at EU level; notes in particular the Groceries Code Adjudicator in the UK as a potential model for adaptation at EU level;
Amendment 140 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to examine Australian competition law which inserts powers to allow for collective bargaining where there is a serious imbalance in market power between two or more levels of the supply chain that is likely to have an adverse effect on the public interest;
Amendment 149 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that framework legislation at EU level is essentialmay help to tackle UTPs and to address their negative consequences for farmers, given that it has an impact on specific issues such as pricing policies and payment deadlines and reflects the social and economic situation in each Member State; urges the Commission to consider this when assessing the SCI;
Amendment 150 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that framework legislation at EU level is essentialnecessary to tackle UTPs and to address their negative consequences for farmers; urges the Commission to consider this an essential part of a long term solution when assessing the SCI;
Amendment 171 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Argues that such legislation would complement the SCI and protect stakeholders who are fully engaged with the Initiativethe production side, which is considered the most vulnerable bearing in mind the supply-side rigidity arising from long production cycles and the perishable nature of products, while ensuring that UTPs are eradicated from the food supply chain and providing primary producers with the necessary legal certainty to address their concerns.
Amendment 173 #
2015/2065(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Argues that such legislation wouldis needed to complement the SCI and protect stakeholders who are fully engaged with the Initiative, whilelong with a number of other measures to increase the bargaining power of the farmers to ensuringe that UTPs are eradicated from the food supply chain and to providinge primary producers with the necessary legal certainty to address their concerns.;
Amendment 5 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the stability of the financial system, which is essential for the effective allocation of resources for growth and jobs, is now a global public good; whereas in reality the financial system never has been stable, and that is what has caused the current crisis;
Amendment 11 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas the financial system, having been shaped by a lengthy process of privatisation and deregulation, is impinging to an intolerable degree on politics and political institutions and hence on countries’ sovereign development;
Amendment 21 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 33 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
Amendment 35 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas, because it is a project comprising many countries, the EU encompasses economies which are economically variously advanced and culturally dissimilar and consequently do not hold out the same prospects for the development of society; whereas, therefore, neither the Commission President nor any other senior EU leader should ever speak for the Member States in international discussion forums;
Amendment 38 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G b (new)
Recital G b (new)
Gb. whereas the EU has been showing itself to be not so much a project for cooperation among Member States as one in which the aims being pursued by the most powerful political and economic vested interests are one and the same;
Amendment 43 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the need for international regulatory cooperation based on solidarity among peoples and not on defence of major economic and financial interests;
Amendment 58 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Takes the view that the EU could streamline its representation, with a view to increasing its influence and promoting the legislation it has adopted through a democratic procesis a project whose goal is cooperation among Member States and not a federal state, and therefore maintains that Member States should not discard their own representation in international forums for the sake of one-size-fits-all representation speaking with one voice for all EU countries;
Amendment 64 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 78 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Considers that unified representation of the Member States within international financial institutions, including the proposal for single representation of the euro area countries within the IMF, poses serious problems in terms of financial sovereignty;
Amendment 80 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Considers that Member States, given that they remain sovereign states, have the right to defend, at first hand, the interests of their people and their national interests in international forums; therefore vehemently rejects any code of conduct intended to inhibit individual action by Member States;
Amendment 89 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers it dangerous and anti- democratic to believe that peer review makes for greater accountability to the people than the traditional formal democratic accountability model based on the ‘agent and principal’ concept (in which elections are the means whereby ‘agents’ – elected representatives – are made accountable by the ‘principal’, in other words electors);
Amendment 91 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 1
Paragraph 9 – indent 1
Amendment 99 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 2
Paragraph 9 – indent 2
Amendment 115 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 3
Paragraph 9 – indent 3
– Calls for a formalised and regular ‘financial dialogue’ to be organised in the European Parliament for the purpose of establishing guidelines regarding the adoption of European positionsproviding an opportunity, in the run- up to major international negotiations, making sure that these positions are known and ensuring follow-upto discuss the most pressing issues under negotiation; the European institutions, the Member States and, where appropriate, the heads of the international organisations concerned would be invited to attend; the nature (public or in camera) and frequency of this dialogue would depend on practical requirements;
Amendment 131 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 5
Paragraph 9 – indent 5
Amendment 139 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 6
Paragraph 9 – indent 6
Amendment 158 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 7
Paragraph 9 – indent 7
Amendment 164 #
2015/2060(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 – indent 8
Paragraph 9 – indent 8
Amendment 1 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the importance of the European Structural and Investment (ESI) Funds in providing urgently needed investment for jobs, boosting jobs, reducing unemployment and gprowthmoting sustainable development for regions in the EU, alsoparticularly including those which are suffering most from the financial, economic and social crisis; welcomes the objective of making the use of these funds more effective and efficient by strengthening their link with the EU's economic governance framework;
Amendment 1 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Title
Title
on the European Structural and Investment Funds and soundin the context of economic governance: guidelines for the implementation of Article 23 of the Common Provisions Regulation
Amendment 3 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
– having regard to the study for the LIBE Committee of the European Parliament entitled 'The impact of the crisis on fundamental rights across Member States of the EU'.
Amendment 23 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the need for a stable and predictable investment environment, not least with a view to attracting private investment; underlines the role of sound economic governance in the creation of this kind of favourable investment environment; emphasises the need for an overall investment framework in the EUexpresses its concerns about the negative impact that reprogramming might have on the aforementioned but also on the undermining of the effectiveness of cohesion policy; underlines the role of strengthening aggregate demand in the creation of this kind of favourable investment environment; emphasises the need for an investment framework in the EU that supports public and productive investment in order to contribute to social progress, to create full employment, reducing unemployment, strengthening quality public services and ecological sustainability;
Amendment 24 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas there are evidences that CSRs are a total failure in the achievement of growth and jobs and imply measures against the objectives of the cohesion policy;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 1
Subheading 1
Amendment 31 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises the importance of cohesion policy instruments and resources in maintaining the level of European added- value investment and boosting demand, growth, jobs and social inclusion in Member States and regions;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission's intention to use its reprogramming powers carefully, preferring stability over too frequent reprogramming; expresses its concerns that the application of Article 23 CPR may lead to economic instability and uncertainty, deteriorating the situation in Member States and regions which confront problems and have been most affected by the crisis; stresses the need for a well-founded and detailed justification for reprogramming, with a detailed assessment of why it delivers more effective and efficient results and to ensure all the other possible available options;
Amendment 32 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Believes that an increased emphasis on economic governance mechanisms cannot jeopardise the achievement of the ESI Funds' policy objectives and goalsIs strongly opposed to the principle of applying macroeconomic conditionality to the implementation of cohesion policy, and more specifically, to any links between the ESIF and economic governance;
Amendment 38 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for the investment clause to be reviewed so as to enable regional and national investments co-financed through ESI Funds to be excluded from the calculation of national deficits in the framework of the European Semester;
Amendment 39 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Expresses its disapproval for the institutionalisation of the principle of macroeconomic conditionality and the link between cohesion policy and Structural Funds on the one hand and Stability and Growth Pact, package of economic governance and any economic agreement of Member States, on the other; the assumptions underlying them are undeniably different and their objectives diametrically opposed; emphasises that the purpose of cohesion policy should not be to impose stringent macroeconomic and financial conditions necessitating austerity measures or to penalise Member States and regions; stresses that cohesion policy is designed to ensure balanced growth and eliminate inequalities with a view to achieving genuine convergence; indicates that funding for European regions cannot be suspended for non-compliance by Member States with macroeconomic conditions and suspending funding for Member States in difficulties will make the situation worse;
Amendment 40 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
Amendment 44 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to give careful consideration to the economic and social effects on the regions affected by a suspension of payments; underlines the importance of the principles of proportionality and effectiveness when the Commission proposes such a suspension of payment but also the social and economic conditions prevailing in the Member State concerned before taking any decision; underlines that decisions to suspend payment should not be linked to the economic policies of Member States but only to the detection of serious infringements of the system of project management, control and monitoring and spending irregularities concerning Member States which have failed to take corrective measures;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2052(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Parliament to submit a proposal concerning the review of the implementation of Article 23 CPR as defined in paragraph 17 of this Article;
Amendment 61 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Recalls that any decision regarding reprogramming or suspension under Article 23 CPR must be exceptional, well- weighed, thoroughly justifwould unfairly penalise local, regional and national authoritieds and implemented in a swift way, in order to ensure transparency and allow for verification and reviewall beneficiaries; believes that such reprogramming or suspension are likely to happen to less developed regions and to Member States already suffering the most from the economic and social crisis and would thus exacerbate the effects of the crisis;
Amendment 68 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that the partnership agreements and programmes adopted in the current programming period have taken account of the relevant CSRs and the relevantCSRs and Council recommendations, thus making any reprogramming unnecessary in the medium term;
Amendment 74 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the view that reprogramming should be avoided to the greatest extent possible in order not to disrupt fund management or undermine the stability and predictability of the multiannual investment strategy; welcomes the cautious approach of the Commission in this regard and its intention to keep any reprogramming requests to a minimum; believes that reprogramming or suspensions could have serious consequences on absorption of ESI funds;
Amendment 101 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Asks the Commission to apply Article 23 CPR in line with the principle of proportionality, by properly takinge into account the real situation of those Member States and regions which are facing socio- economic difficulties and where ESI Funds represent a significant share of investment;
Amendment 107 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
Amendment 109 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Expresses its disapproval for the institutionalisation of the principle of macroeconomic conditionality and the link between cohesion policy and Structural Funds on the one hand and Stability and Growth Pact, package of economic governance and any economic agreement of Member States, on the other; the assumptions underlying them are undeniably different and their objectives diametrically opposed; emphasises that the purpose of cohesion policy should not be to impose stringent macroeconomic and financial conditions necessitating austerity measures or to penalise Member States and regions; stresses that cohesion policy is designed to ensure balanced growth and eliminate inequalities with a view to achieving genuine convergence; indicates that funding for European regions cannot be suspended for non-compliance by Member States with macroeconomic conditions and suspending funding for Member States in difficulties will make the situation worse;
Amendment 112 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Emphasises the penalising nature of any suspension of payments, and asks the Commission to use its discretionary power to propose the suspension of payments with utmost caution and strictly in line with Article 23(6) CPR, after due consideration of all relevant information and elements arising from and opinions expressed through the structured dialogue;
Amendment 123 #
2015/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Calls on the Parliament to submit a proposal concerning the review of the implementation of Article 23 CPR as defined in paragraph 17 of this Article
Amendment 2 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas a consortium of journalists, the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), on tax rulings and other harmful practices in Luxembourg (LuxLeaks) revealed in November 2014 that nearly 340 multinational companies secured secret deals from Luxembourg that allowed many of them to slash their global tax bills, while creating little or no economic activity within Luxembourg; whereas further revelations such as the second batch of documents released by the ICIJ on 9 December 2014 on tax deals brokered by Ernst & Young, Deloitte, KPMG along with Luxembourg-based tax and law firms, have highlighted that measures which reduce multinational companies' overall tax liabilities and reduce overall tax revenue by artificially shifting profits across borders are systemic and are endemic to the European Union and beyond;
Amendment 6 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the revelations showed that tax advisors have helped multinational companies to obtain at least 548 tax rulings in Luxembourg between 2002 and 2010; whereas those secret deals feature complex financial structures designed to create substantial tax reductions; whereas the tax rulings provide written assurance that multinational companies’ tax-saving plans would be viewed favourably by Luxembourg authorities; whereas such revelations highlight the need for measures to be implemented in order to ensure a functional split between tax advisory and auditing services for large auditing firms in order to firmly exclude conflicts of interest;
Amendment 15 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. Stresses that tax avoidance by some MNCs can result in close-to-zero effective tax rates for the profits generated in European jurisdictions, highlighting the fact that such MNCs, while benefiting from various public goods and services where they operate, do not pay their fair share, thereby contributing to national tax base erosion; highlighting with concern that close-to-zero effective tax rates for the profits generated by some MNCs, do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can;
Amendment 18 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas in many cases Luxembourg subsidiaries handling hundreds of millions of euros in business maintain little presence and conduct little economic activity in Luxembourg, with some addresses being home to more than 1,600 companies; whereas much of this economic activity does not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas the practice of rulings developed, in the framework of a closer and more cooperative relationship between tax administrations and taxpayers, as a tool to tackle the increasing complexity of the tax treatment of certain transactions in an increasingly complex, global and digitalised economy; whereas, as undisclosed and potentially discretionary/negotiated arrangements, rulings could at the same time be used as a means of obtaining derogations and more favourable tax treatments; whereas this seems to particularly be an issue – although not exclusively – with rulings related to pricing of intra-company transfers (so-called Advance Pricing Agreements);
Amendment 31 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas corporate income tax revenue for the 28 Member States of the Union amounted to an average of 2,6% of GDP in 20121 ; notes further with concern, that growth rates in some Member States are masked by the impact of foreign multinationals; notes with concern that a substantial proportion of growth in specific Member States, is due to low-tax financial services sectors, which do not positively impact upon domestic or real economies in the manner other sectors can; __________________ 1 http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resou rces/documents/taxation/gen_info/economi c_analysis/tax_structures/2014/report.pdf
Amendment 49 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas multinational companies’ use of aggressive tax planning practices conflicts with the principle of fair competition and corporate responsibility; stresses further, that tax competition in the Union and vis-à-vis third countries is harmful and leads to a race to the bottom in terms of tax rates and regulatory standards and should therefore be replaced by a consistent cooperative framework; this should take place within a clear framework of rules in order to guarantee fair competition between firms in the Union;
Amendment 54 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital N
Recital N
N. whereas the Union has been a pioneerplayed an important role in the global fight against aggressive tax planning, notably in promoting progress at OECD level on the BEPS project ; whereas the Union should continue to play a pioneering role as the BEPS project developsositive and proactive role as the BEPS project develops; notes with concern the late and still unequal inclusion of developing countries in the OECD BEPS process as well as the rejection of Member States of an intergovernmental body on taxation under the auspice of the UN at the third Financing for Development Conference;
Amendment 60 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O
Recital O
O. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation is currently vested in themust always remain vested in the Member States; whereas Union law contains no specific requirement with regard to the way in which a Member State must deal with corporate tax, provided that the conditions governing it do not constitute a discrimination, either direct or indirect; stresses that corporate tax as a component of direct taxation is a competence of Member States;
Amendment 66 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas the lack of coordinated taxabuse of tax legislation and policies in the European Union leads to significant cost and administrative burden for citizens and businesses operating cross- border within the Union, and results in unintended non-taxation or faciliEuropean Union, which facilitates aggressive tax planning; notes that Union action on direct tax beyond administrative cooperation can have consequences for individual Member States' aggressive tax planningbility to shape their domestic tax systems to raise revenue and to support domestic growth;
Amendment 73 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital Q
Recital Q
Q. whereas the revelations of the LuxLeaks scandal and the work carried out by the TAXE Committee clearly show the need for Union legislative measures to improve transparency, coordination and convergence within corporate tax policies in the UnionMember States to improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between themselves as well as between tax administrations; stresses that all policy formulation should respect the tax sovereignty of national governments; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States' is upheld;
Amendment 76 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital R
Recital R
R. whereas the European Commission and the Member States should continue to play a very active role in the international arena in order to work for the establishment of international standards based at least on principles of transparency, exchange of information and abolition of harmful tax measures;
Amendment 82 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – introductory part
Recital T – introductory part
T. whereas increased transparency in the area of corporate taxation can improve tax collection, make work of tax authorities m and is crucial fore efficient or cnsuring an increase in public trust and confidence in tax systems and governments;
Amendment 95 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point ii
Recital T – point ii
(ii) whereas some companies within the Union have already begun to demonstrate that they are fully tax compliant by applying for and promoting their ownership of a 'Fair Tax Payer' label6 ; whereas firms and citizens alike across the Union would benefit from wider take-up of such labels by companies who are fully tax compliant in order to set a high standard for others to emulate; Underlines that such measures can have a strong deterrent effect and change behaviours, through both the reputational risk for non- compliant firms and the provision of information to the competent authorities, which can then adopt appropriate corrective measures and sanctions; __________________ 6 Such as the Fair Tax Mark: http://www.fairtaxmark.net/.
Amendment 115 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vi
Recital T – point vi
(vi) whereas progress in the fight against tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning can only be monitored with a harmonised methodology that can be used to estimate the size of the direct and indirect tax gaps in all Member States, and across the European Union as a whole; expresses its support for the intention in the action plan proposed by the Commission on 17 June 2015 to address tax avoidance and promote fair and efficient corporate taxation in the EU; highlights that the European market is not homogeneous and that national markets evolve at different rates and have different needs;
Amendment 121 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii
Recital T – point vii
(vii) whereas the current European Union- wide legal framework to protect whistleblowers is insufficient, and there exists significant variation between the ways in which different Member States provide protection for whistleblowers; whereas in the absence of such protection, those employees who hold vital information will understandably be reluctant to come forward and therefore that information will not be made available; whereas since whistleblowers helped to mobilise public attention on the issue of unfair taxation, Member States should consider measures that will protect such activity; whereas it would therefore be appropriate to offer Union-wide protection for whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to national regulators or, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity that could affect the public interest, to the public as a whole; whereas such protection should be coherent with the overall legal system;
Amendment 125 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital T – point vii a (new)
Recital T – point vii a (new)
(viia) Calls on National Governments, including Luxembourg, to consider amending their national legislation to provide further protection for whistle- blowers and journalists that act in the public interest;
Amendment 128 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – introductory part
Recital U – introductory part
U. whereas the power to legislate on corporate taxation ismust remain vested in thewithin Member States, yet; whereas the vast majority of problems linked to aggressive tax planning are of a multinational nature; whereas more coordination of national tax policies therefore represents the only feasible way to address the problems of BEPS and aggressive tax planninginsists that Member States must improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between themselves as well as between tax administrations; in order to ensure fair competition between firms;
Amendment 130 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point i
Recital U – point i
Amendment 145 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii
Recital U – point ii
Amendment 150 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point ii a (new)
Recital U – point ii a (new)
(iia) Calls also on the Commission, in the absence of any generally accepted definition, to conduct further analyses and studies in order to define harmful tax practices, calls on the Commission, in the absence of any generally accepted definition, to conduct further analyses and studies in order to define aggressive tax planning;
Amendment 158 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital U – point vi
Recital U – point vi
Amendment 172 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – introductory part
Recital V – introductory part
V. whereas improved coordination alone will not solve fundamental problems arising from the fact that different rules regarding corporate taxation exist in different Member States; whereas part of the overall response to aggressive tax planning must involve the convergence of a limited number of national tax practices; whereas this can be achieved while still preserving the sovereignty ofbetween Member States is crucial in order to combat aggressive tax planning; notes that Member States must improve and strengthen administrative cooperation between each country and tax administrations; stresses that all policy formulation should respect the principle of subsidiarity; stresses that issues of subsidiarity and proportionality must be thoroughly agreed upon and should always ensure the competency and autonomy of each Member States is upheld in relation to other elements of theireach Member State's corporate tax systems;
Amendment 181 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point ii
Recital V – point ii
(ii) whereas the European Union should have its own up to date list of 'tax havens'; calls on the Commission, in particular, to develop a clear definition, a common set of criteria to identify tax havens and appropriate sanctions for countries cooperating with them, on the basis of its December 2012 Recommendation regarding measures intended to encourage third countries to apply minimum standards of good governance in tax matters and on defining appropriate common measures applying to those jurisdictions; refers to its resolution of 21 May 2013 on 'the fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax havens' for a non-exhaustive list of such possible measures including among others to suspend or terminate existing Double Tax Conventions with jurisdictions that are on the blacklist, to prohibit access to Union public procurement of goods and services and refuse to grant state aid to companies based in blacklisted jurisdictions, to prohibit Union financial institutions and financial advisors from establishing or maintaining subsidiaries and branches in blacklisted jurisdictions and to consider revoking licences for European financial institutions and financial advisors which maintain, to introduce a special levy on all transactions to or from blacklisted jurisdictions, to examine a range of options for the non-recognition, within the Union, of the legal status of companies set up in blacklisted jurisdictions, to apply tariff barriers in cases of trade with blacklisted third countries; reiterates that genuinely European lists, regularly updated, would be more effective as a means of promoting good tax governance and changing tax behaviours towards and within those jurisdictions;
Amendment 191 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital V – point vii
Recital V – point vii
Amendment 202 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital W
Recital W
W. whereas the overall efficiency of tax collection, the notion of tax fairness and the credibility of national tax administrations are not undermined only by aggressive tax planning and BEPS activities; whereas the Union should take similarly decisive action to address the problems of tax evasion and tax fraud within both corporate and individual taxation as well as problems relating to the collection of taxes other than corporate taxes; whereas those other elements of tax collection and administration represent a substantial part of the existing tax gap; stresses, the application of the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality under Article 5(3) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Protocol (No 2) ; believes in this regard that an erosion or breaches of the principle of subsidiarity can lead to unintended consequences such as undermined faith in the European Union for citizens and that erosion or breaches of the principle of subsidiarity should therefore be avoided;
Amendment 222 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls once again on the European Commission to bring forward a legislative proposal by June 2016 to introduce comprehensive and public country-by-country reporting (CBC- R) for all multinational companies in all sectors.
Amendment 228 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 1 – indent 1
This proposal should be developed on the basis of the requirements put forward by the OECD in its CBC-R data template published in September 2014 (Action 13 of the OECD/G20 BEPS project), utilising the information requirements set out in the template but with a particular focus and strengthening of the provisions on targeted transparency and exchange of information.
Amendment 243 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – introductory part
The European Parliament calls on the European Commission to bring forward a proposal as soon as possible on a new mechanism whereby Member States are compelled to inform other Member States (initially via the Code of Conduct Group)and the public if they intend to introduce a new allowance, relief, exception, incentive or similar measure that could have a material impact on the effective tax rate in the Member State or on the tax base of another Member State.
Amendment 248 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 1
These notifications by Member States shall contain spillover analyses, which will be published along with the notification, of the material impact of the new tax measures on other Member States and developing countries, to support the action of the Code of Conduct Group in identifying harmful tax practices.
Amendment 252 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 3 – indent 2
Amendment 273 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 4 – indent 2
Significantly increasing the transparency of tax rulings at the EU level, with due consideration given to business confidentiality and trade secrets and taking into account the current best practices applicable in some Member States via one of the following methods: ° requiring Member Statesby making publicly available the exchanged tax rulings via the central directory orf the Commission to produce an annual list, published in a fully public directory accessible to all, of companies with which they have concluded tax rulings, one year at the , with the exception of specific parts for which corporations can demonst after the tax ruling is signed by tax authorities ; ° requiring Member Statesrate a financial loss as a consequence orf the Commission to publish a summary of the main important (anonymised) tax rulings that have been agreed in the previous yearir public disclosure.
Amendment 288 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – indent 2
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 5 – indent 2
Oblige customs-free ports authorities to immediately inform the relevant Member States’ and third countries’ tax authorities of any transaction carried on by their tax residents in customs-free ports premises. These communications should be embedded in the automatic exchange of information framework according to the CRS.
Amendment 300 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 1
Protect whistleblowers who act in the public interest only (and not also for money or any other personal agenda) in order to exposeby exposing misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity in relation to corporate taxpublic or private organisations in any Member State in the European Union. Such whistleblowers should be protected if they report suspected misconduct, wrongdoing, fraud or illegal activity to their relevant competent authority, and should also be protected if, in cases of persistently unaddressed illegal activity in relation to corporate taxation that could affect the public interestinsufficient action by the competent authority, they report their concerns to the public as a whole;
Amendment 309 #
2015/2010(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4
Annex – title 1 – subtitle 7 – indent 4
Amendment 32 #
2015/0263(COD)
(3) Several Member States have been undergoing and continue to undergo adjustment processes to correct macroeconomic imbalances accumulated in the past and many are facing the challenge of low potential growth. The Union has identified the implementation of structural reforms among its policy priorities to set the recovery on a sustainable path, unlock the growth potential to strengthen the adjustment capacity, and support the process of convergencerequired by the troika of the Commission, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund to undergo structural adjustment processes in order to reduce their public deficits caused by the financial crisis and public bailouts of financial institutions, with devastating social consequences in those Member States.
Amendment 37 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) The institutions of the Union have used the sovereign debt crisis in some Member States in order to enforce an agenda of privatisation of public services, and deregulation of labour markets and pension systems, alongside deflationary policies of fiscal austerity.
Amendment 44 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Reforms are by their very nature complex processes that require a complete chain of highly-specialised knowledge and skills. Addressing sThe predecessors of the Structural rReforms in a variety of public policy areas is challenging since their benefits often take time to materialise. Therefore, early and efficient Support Programme in place since 2011 - namely, the Structural Reform Support Service and the Task Forces for Greece and Cyprus - have pursued an agenda of designing and implementation is crucial, be it for crisis-struck or structurally-weak economies. In this context, the provision of support by the Union in the form of technical assistance has been crucial in supporting the economic adjustment of Greece and Cyprus in the last yearsosing deregulation in labour and product markets in the affected Member States against the democratic will of their populations, and have failed to achieve economic growth and recovery.
Amendment 46 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)
Recital 4 a (new)
(4a) Structural reform that is aimed solely at deregulating labour and product markets is based on the assumption that flexible prices and wages are the key to responding to economic shocks. However, empirical evidence shows that such reforms have failed to deliver growth and contributed to deflation. Such reforms have also failed to result in the mobilisation of private capital. In the absence of a programme of massive public investment, the Structural Reform Support Programme is bound to fail in its stated objective of contributing to economic growth and recovery.
Amendment 63 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) Against this background, it is necessary to establish a Structural Reform Support Programme ('the Programme') with the objective of strengthening the capacity of Member States to prepare and implement growth-enhancing administrative and structural reforms, including through assistance for the efficient and effective use of the Union funds. The Programme is intendednarrow view held by the Union institutions of what constitutes a 'structural reform' under such an assistance programme should be widened to include programmes of public investment, the renationalisation and remunicipalisation of public goods and services, and reforms that advance collective bargaining and promote real wage growth. The Programme should aim to contribute to the achievement of common goals towards obtaining economic recovery, quality job creation, boosting Europe's competitivenesscombating poverty and stimulating investment in the real economy.
Amendment 70 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7 a (new)
Recital 7 a (new)
(7a) Macroeconomic reforms that benefit society should be initiated and designed at the Member State, regional or local level, with guaranteed maximum input from the social partners and civil society.
Amendment 73 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8
Recital 8
(8) Support under the Programme should be provided by the Commission upon request by a Member State, in areas such as budget and taxation, public function, institutional and administrative reforms, the justice system, anti-fraud, anti-corruption and anti-money laundering, buspublic invess environment, private sector development, investment, competition, public procurement, privatiztment, development of quality, accessible public services including through renationalisation and remunicipalisation processes, access to finance, public investment, trade, sustainable development, innovation, education and training, labour policies, public health, asylum, migration policies, agriculture and rural development and financial sector policreception of asylum seekers, agriculture and rural development and financial sector policies. While a Member State should request such support, the process of initiating the request should take place in consultation with the social partners, civil society, and local and regional authorities.
Amendment 77 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)
Recital 8 a (new)
(8a) Participation in the Programme should be strictly voluntary for Member States and should not include compulsory or punitive measures regarding implementation. Withdrawal from participation in the Programme should be able to occur immediately upon the request of a Member State.
Amendment 82 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) Member States should be able to request support from the Commission under the Programme in relation to the implementation of reforms in the context of economic governance processes, in particular of Country Specific Recommendations in the context of the European Semester, to actions related to the implementation of Union law, as well as in relation to the implementation of economic adjustment programmes. They should also be able to request support in relation to reforms undertaken at their own initiative, in order to achieve sustainable investment, growth and job creation.
Amendment 97 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
Amendment 115 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
1. 'Beneficiary Member State' means a Member State that requests and receives support from the Union under this Programme;
Amendment 126 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
The general objective of the Programme shall be to contribute to institutional, administrative and structural reforms initiated and designed in the Member States by providing support to national, regional and local authorities for measures aimed at reforming institutions, governance, administration, economic and social sectors in response to economic and social challenges with a view to enhancing competitiveness, growth,promoting public investment, combating poverty and social exclusion, creating quality jobs, and investmentpromoting collective bargaining, in particular in the context of economic governance processes, including through assistance for the efficient and effective use of the Union funds.
Amendment 135 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) to assist the initiatives of national, regional and local authorities to design their reforms according to priorities, taking into account initial conditions and expected socio- economic impacts;
Amendment 153 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. The specific objectives set out in paragraph 1 shall refer to policy areas related to competitiveness, growth, jobs and investment, in particular to the following:
Amendment 158 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point c
(c) business environment, private sector development, public investment, privatizdevelopment of quality, accessible public services including through renationalisation and remunicipalisation processes, trade and foreign direct investment, competition and public procurement, sustainable sectoral development and support for innovation;
Amendment 161 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d
(d) education and training, labour market policiecreation and defence of quality jobs, social inclusion, social security and social welfare systems, public health and healthcare systems, asylum, migration and borders policies;
Amendment 171 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. A Member State wishing to receive support under the Programme shall submit a request for support to the Commission, identifying the policy areas and the priorities for support within the scope of the Programme as set out in Article 5(2). This request shall be submitted at the latest by 31 October of each calendar year. Local and regional authorities shall also have the ability to initiate the submission of a request. The requesting Member State shall guarantee the right to consultation of the social partners and civil society during the process, including prior to the initiation of the request.
Amendment 191 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 1
Amendment 193 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2
Amendment 194 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 3
Amendment 109 #
2015/0226(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
-
-
Amendment 178 #
2015/0226(COD)
Draft legislative resolution
Recital 38 a (new)
Recital 38 a (new)
(38a) Account should be taken of the viewpoints expressed by the Member States’ academic communities on the risks associated with reviving securitisation;
Amendment 46 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Securitisations awere an important constituent part of well-functioning financial markets insofar as they contribute to diversifying institutions' funding sources and releasing regulatory capital which can then be reallocated to support further lending. Furthermore, securitisations provide institutions and other market participants with additional investment opportunities, thus allowing portfolio diversification and facilitating the flow of funding to businesses and individuals both within Member States and on a cross-border basis throughout the Union. These benefits, however, should be weighed against their potential costs. As seen during the first phase of financial crisis starting in the summer of 2007the central cause of the financial crisis, namely because of systemic flaws in the financial system and investors' lack of due diligence as well as institutions lack of responsibility. As seen during the financial crisis, unsound practices in securitisation markets resulted in significant threats to the integrity of the financial system, namely due to excessive leverage, opaque and complex structures that made pricing problematic, mechanistic reliance on external ratings or misalignment between the interests of investors and originators ("agency risks").
Amendment 50 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) In recent years, securitisation issuance volumes in the Union have remained below their pre-crisis peak for a number of reasons, among them the stigma generally associated with these transactions. The recoincluding the low demand for non-bank lending. According to the ECB SAFE survery of securitisation markets should be based on sound and prudent market practi2015, European SMEs’ biggest concern today is "finding customers" whereas "access to prevent a recurrence of the set of circumstances that triggered the financial crisis. To that end, Regulation [Securitisation Regulation] lays down the substantive elements of an overarching securitisation framework, with ad-hoc criteria to identify simple, transparent finance" is their lowest. It is therefore not clear that there is an overall European need to promote non-bandk standardised ("STS") securitisations and a system of supervision to monitor the correct application of these criteria by originators, sponsors, issueources of finance for SMEs. A revival of securitisation is likely to first and institutional investors. Furthermore, Regulation [Securitisation Regulation] provides for a sforemost benefit the balance sheets of common requirements on risk retention, due diligence and disclosure for all financial services sectorsbanks at the expense of financial stability.
Amendment 52 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) Without banking structural reform that addresses the problem of 'too-big-to- fail' banks, a revival of securitisation is likely to once again fail and harm the real economy and ultimately the welfare and lives of ordinary people.
Amendment 57 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Capital requirements for positions in a securitisation under Regulation (EU) No 575/2013 should be subject to the same calculation methods for all institutions. In the first instance and to remove any form of mechanistic reliance on external ratings, an institution should use its own calculation of regulatory capital requirements where the institution has permission to use the In. Relying on external Rratings Based approach (the "IRB") in relation to exposures of the same type as those underlying the securitisation and is able to calculate regulatory capital requirements in relation to the underlying exposu agencies is not desirable. However, the flaws of internal models ares as if these had not been securitised ("Kirb"), in each case subject to certain pre-defined inputs (the "SEC- IRBA"). A Securitisation External Ratings-Based Approach (the "SEC- ERBA") should then be available to institutions that may not use the SEC- IRBA in relation to their positions in a given securitisation. Under the SEC- ERBA, capital requirements should be assigned to securitisation tranches on the basis of their external rating. When the first two approaches are not available or the use of the SEC-ERBA would result in incommensurate regulatory capital requirements relative to the credit risk embedded in the underlying exposures, ilso well known and have yet to be addressed. Banks can manipulate risk weights and different banks can give very different risk weights to similar assets. Institutions should be able to apply the Securitisation Standardised Approach (the "SEC-SA") which should rely on a supervisory-provided formula using as an input the capital requirements that would be calculated under the Standardised Approach to credit risk (the "SA") in relation to the underlying exposures if these had not been securitised ("Ksa").
Amendment 64 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Agency and model risks are more prevalent for securitisations than for other financial assets and give rise to somea high degree of uncertainty in the calculation of capital requirements for securitisations even after all appropriate risk drivers have been taken into account. Securitisations are too complex and have a fundamental flaw, which is a lack of transparency and accountability. In order to capture those risks adequately, Regulation (EU) No. 575/2013 should be amended to provide for a minimum 15% risk weight floor for all securitisation positions. Re- securitisations, however, exhibit greater complexity and riskiness and, accordingly, positions in them, should be subject to a more conservative regulatory capital calculation and a 100% risk weight floor.
Amendment 126 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation 575/2013
Article 254 – Paragraph 2 – point a
Article 254 – Paragraph 2 – point a
(a) an institution shall use the Internal Ratings-Based Approach (SEC-IRBA) where the conditions set out inSecuritisation Standardised Approach (SEC-SA) in accordance with Articles 258 are met63 and 264;
Amendment 127 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
(b) where the SEC-IRBSA may not be used, institutions shall use the Securitisation External Ratings-Based Approach (SEC-ERBA) for rated positions or positions in respect of which an inferred rating may be used in accordance with Articles 261 and 262;
Amendment 133 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation 575/2013
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 Regulation 575/2013
Amendment 137 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation 575/2013
Article 254 – paragraph 3
Article 254 – paragraph 3
Amendment 159 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation 575/2013
Article 260 – paragraph 2
Article 260 – paragraph 2
risk weight floor for senior securitisation positions = 1020%
Amendment 177 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation 575/2013
Article 264 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 264 – paragraph 1 – point 1
risk weight floor for senior securitisation positions = 1020 %
Amendment 191 #
2015/0225(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7
Regulation 575/2013
Article 270– paragraph 1 – point c
Article 270– paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the securitisation is backed by a pool of exposures to undertakings, provided that at least 8100% of those in terms of portfolio balance qualify as SMEs as defined in Art 501 at the time of issuance of the securitisation;
Amendment 1 #
2015/0076(NLE)
Draft legislative resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Approves conclusion of the agreement, while regretting that no improvements can be made, particularly regarding information provided and the automatic, binding and unrestricted nature of exchanges of information;
Amendment 14 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The austerity policies in response to the economic and financial crisis hasve led to a lowering of the level of investments within the UnionEuropean Union and have particularly impacted on rural communities and the agriculture sector. Investment has fallen by approximately 15% since its peak in 2007. The at least. The European Union suffers in particular from a lack of investment as a consequence of market uncertainty regarding the economic future and the fiscal constraints on Member States. This lack of investment slows economic recovery and negatively affects job creation, long-term growth prospects and competitivenessarbitrary fiscal constraints on Member States, due to the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact and the Fiscal Compact, resulting in a prolonged recession, sluggish recovery and uncertainty regarding the economic future for many member states. This lack of investment, which has been particularly severe in Member States most affected by the crisis slows economic recovery and impedes sustainable job creation and economic growth.
Amendment 17 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Comprehensive action is required to reverse the vicious circle created by a lack of investment. Structural reforms and fiscal responsibility are necessary preconditions for stimulating investment. Along with a renewed impetus towards investment financing, these preconditions especially in rural communities. Increased public investment and reforms which will optimise the potential of local indigenous enterprises within rural and peripheral communities and can contribute to establishing a virtuouspositive circle, where investment projects help support employment and demand and lead to a sustained increase in growth potential in the areas most affected by the economic crisis.
Amendment 19 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Throughout the economic and financial crisis, the European Union has made efforts to promote growth, in particular throughpromoted policies that have prolonged the recession and impeded recovery, regardless of initiatives set out in the Europe 2020 strategy that aimed to put in place an approach for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The European Investment Bank ('EIB') has also strengthened its role in instigating and promoting investment within the European Union, partly by way of an increase in capital in January 2013. Further action is required to ensure that the investment needs of therural communities and the agricultural sector within the European Union are addressed and that the liquidity available oin the financial markets is used efficientlyto target vulnerable sectors and is channelled towards the funding of viable investment projects that require it most.
Amendment 26 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) The public, social and private investment environment within the European Union should be improved by removing barriers to investment, reinforcing the Single Market and by enhancing regulatory predictability. The work of the EFSI, and investments across Europe generally, should benefit from this accompanying work.
Amendment 30 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The purpose of the EFSI should be to help resolve the difficulties in financing and implementing productive investments in the European Union and to ensure increased access to financing for projects which require it most. It is intended that increased access to financing should be of particular benefit to small and medium enterprisesagriculture and food processing industries and small and medium enterprises including indigenous enterprises within member states, as well as other entities, such as local high -tech enterprises and social economy enterprises that provide high value for invested money. It is also appropriate to extend the benefit of such increased access to financing to mid- cap companies, which are companies having up to 3000 employees. Overcoming Europe's current investment difficulties should contribute to strengthening the Union's economic, social and territorial cohesrural development within the European Union.
Amendment 37 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The EFSI should support strategic investments with high social or economic value added, within the agricultural sector, including contributing to achieving European Union policy objectives.
Amendment 38 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The EFSI should support strategic investments with high social or economic value added contributing to achieving, within the agricultural sector, including contributing to achieving sustainable and equitable European Union policy objectives.
Amendment 44 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Many small and medium enterprises, as well as mid-cap companies and indigenous sectors, across the European Union require assistance to attract market financing, especially as regards investments that carry a greater degree of risk. The EFSI should help these businesses to overcome capital shortages by allowing the EIB and the European Investment Fund ('EIF') to provide direct and indirect equity injections, as well as to provide guarantees for high-quality securitisation of loans, and other products that are granted in pursuit of the aims of the EFSI.
Amendment 55 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The EFSI should target projects delivering high societal and economic value. In particular, the EFSI should target projects that promote job creation, and long- term growth and competitivenessustainable growth including within the agricultural sector, which will optimise the potential of local indigenous enterprises. The EFSI should support a wide range of financial products, including equity, debt or guarantees, to best accommodate the needs of the individual project. This wide range of products should allow the EFSI to adapt to market needs whilst encouraging private investment in the projects. The EFSI should not be a substitute for private market finance but should instead catalyse private finance by addressing market failures so as to ensure the most effective and strategicquitable and uniform use of public money. The requirement for consistency with State aid principles should contribute to such effective and strategic usewhilst acknowledging the need for each Member State to organise and prioritise funding for public services, should contribute to such equitable and uniform use of public money.
Amendment 64 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The EFSI should target projects with a higher risk-return profile than existing EIB and European Union instruments to ensure additionality over existing operations. The EFSI should finance projects across the European Union, including irural and sustainable development projects with an emphasis on the countries most affected by the financial crisis. The EFSI should only be used where financing is not available from other sources on reasonable terms.
Amendment 68 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16
Recital 16
(16) The EFSI should target investments that are expected to be economically and technicencourage sustainable development across peripheral regions which are socially viable, which may entail a degree of appropriate risk, whilst still meeting the particular requirements for EFSI financing.
Amendment 93 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The purpose of the EFSI shall be to support investments in the Unionpublic and private investments across Member States and to ensure increased access to financing for companies having up to 3000 employees, social economy enterprises and service providers, with a particular focus on small and mediums enterprises, and local indigenous companies through the supply of risk bearing capacity to the EIB ('EFSI Agreement'). The overall objective of the EFSI shall be to promote and guarantee sustainable, inclusive and long-term growth across all regions and quality job creation as well as an emphasis on infrastructure investments projects.
Amendment 98 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The EFSI Agreement shall be open to accession by Member States. Subject to the consent of existing contributors, the EFSI Agreement shall also be open to accession by other public third parties, including national promotional banks or public agencies owned or controlled by Member States, and private sector entities.
Amendment 99 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) The austerity policies in response to the economic and financial crisis hasve led to a lowering of the level of investments within the Union. Investment has fallen by approximately 15% since its peak in 2007. The Union suffers in particular from a lack of investment as a consequence of market uncertainty regarding the economic future and the fiscal constraints on Member States. This lack of investment in relative terms, while the absolute loss in investment due to the deep recession in some Member States is much larger. The Union suffers in particular from a lack of investment as a consequence of arbitrary fiscal constraints on Member States, due rules of the Stability and Growth Pact and the Fiscal Compact, resulting in a deeper recession, sluggish recovery and uncertainty regarding the economic future. This lack of investment, which has been particularly severe in Member States most affected by the crisis and the policies prescribed in the Memorandums of Understanding signed with the Troika, slows economic recovery and negatively affects job creation, and long-term growth prospects and competitiveness.
Amendment 108 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 110 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The EFSI agreement shall provide that the EFSI shall have an advisory board composed of representatives of the European Social partners including representatives from agricultural stakeholders and national social partner organisations from both sides of industry. Members of the Steering Board will participate in the meetings of the social advisory board.
Amendment 113 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Investment Committee shall be composed of sixeight independent experts and the Managing Director. Independent experts shall have a high level of relevant market experience in project structuring and financing, as well as macroeconomic expertise. The Investment Committee shall have a pluridisciplinary composition encompassing a broad range of expertise in various sectors, such as agricultural, rural development and sustainability, transport, research and SMEs. A specialist in agricultural policies and rural and sustainable development and a specialist finance and environmental policy shall be appointed as independent experts in the Investment Committee. The Investment Committee shall be appointed by the Steering Board for a renewable fixed term of three years.
Amendment 114 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) Comprehensive action is required to reverse the vicious circle created by a lack of investment. Structural reforms and fiscal responsibility are necessary preconditions for stimulating investment. Along with a renewed impetus towards investment financing, these preconditions can contributeIncreased public investment and reforms that reduce inequality, support rising wages and social transfers and enhance fiscal sustainability through a fair and progressive tax system, constitute a way to establishing a virtuous circle, where investment projects help support employment and demand and lead to a sustained increase in growth potential.
Amendment 128 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Throughout the economic and financial crisis, the Union has made efforts to promote growth, in particular throughpromoted policies that deepen the recession and impede recovery, regardless of initiatives set out in the Europe 2020 strategy that put in place an approach for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. The European Investment Bank ('EIB') has also strengthened its role in instigating and promoting investment within the Union, partly by way of an increase in capital in January 2013. Further action is required to ensure that the investment needs of the Union are addressed and that the liquidity available on the market is used efficiently and channelled towards the funding of viable investment projects.
Amendment 136 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) investments in the agricultural sector focusing on long-term and sustainable effects, including widespread and strategic infrastructure development as well as the social economy.
Amendment 143 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) EIB funding to the EIF enabling it to undertake loans, guarantees, counter- guarantees, any other form of credit enhancement instrument, capital market instruments and equity or quasi-equity participations. These Instruments shall be granted, acquired or issued for the benefit of operations carried out in the European Union, in compliance with this Regulation and where EIF financing has been granted in accordance with a signed agreement which has neither expired nor been cancelled.
Amendment 151 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
The EU guarantee and the payments and recoveries under it that are attributable to the general budget of the Union shall be audited by the Court of Auditorsexternal audit of the activities undertaken in accordance with the EFSI Regulation is carried out by the European Court of Auditors in accordance with Article 287 TFEU.
Amendment 153 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. In its financing and investment operations, the EIB shall apply the principles and standards set out in Union law on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and ter under the EFSI and through investment platforms and national promotional banks, the EIB shall make both direct funding or funding via intermediaries contingent upon the disclosure of both country-by-country tax relevant data along the lines of the CRD IV prorvist financing, including a requirement to take reasonable measures to identify the beneficial owners where applicablion for credit institutions, as well as disclosure of beneficial ownership information according to the EU Anti- Money Laundering Directive.
Amendment 180 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The purpose of the EFSI should be to help resolve the difficulties in financing and implementing productive investments in the Union and to ensure increased access to financing. It is intended that increased access to financing should be of particular benefit to small and medium enterprises, as well as other entities, such as social economy enterprises that provide high value for invested money, including a high social and societal quality and citizen-ownership of economic processes and results. It is also appropriate to extend the benefit of such increased access to financing to mid- cap companies, which are companies having up to 3000 employees. Overcoming Europe's current investment difficulties should contribute to strengthening the Union's economic, social and territorial cohesion.
Amendment 203 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) The EFSI should support strategic investments with high social or economic value added contributing to achieving Union policy objectives of enhancing economic, social and territorial cohesion across the Union.
Amendment 268 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) The EFSI should target projects delivering high societal and economic value. In particular, the EFSI should target projects that promote job creation, and long- term growth and competitivenesssustainable growth. The EFSI should support a wide range of financial products, including equity, debt or guarantees, to best accommodate the needs of the individual project. This wide range of products should allow the EFSI to adapt to market needs whilst encouraging private investment in the projects. The EFSI should not be a substitute for private market finance but should instead catalyse private finance by addressing market failures so as to ensure the most effective and strategic use of public money. The requirement for consistency with State aid principles should contribute to such effective and strategic use.
Amendment 576 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The purpose of the EFSI shall be to support public and private investments in the Union and to ensure increased access to financing for companies having up to 3000 employees, social economy enterprises and service providers, with a particular focus on small and medium enterprises, through the supply of risk bearing capacity to the EIB ('EFSI Agreement'). The overall objective of the EFSI shall be to promote and guarantee sustainable, inclusive and long-term growth and quality job creation as well as social inclusion in the Union.
Amendment 597 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
2. The EFSI Agreement shall be open to accession by Member States. Subject to the consent of existing contributors, the EFSI Agreement shall also be open to accession by other public third parties, including national promotional banks or public agencies owned or controlled by Member States, and private sector entities.
Amendment 811 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. The EFSI agreement shall provide that the EFSI shall have an advisory board composed of representatives of the European Social partners as well as representatives from national social partner organisations from both sides of industry. Members of the Steering Board will participate in the meetings of the social advisory board.
Amendment 873 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Investment Committee shall be composed of six eight independent experts and the Managing Director. Independent experts shall have a high level of relevant market experience in project structuring and financing, as well as macroeconomic expertise. The Investment Committee shall have a pluridisciplinary composition encompassing a broad range of expertise in various sectors, such as research and development, transport and SMEs. A specialist finance and social policies and a specialist in environmental policy shall be appointed as independent experts in the Investment Committee. The Investment Committee It shall be appointed by the Steering Board for a renewable fixed term of three years.
Amendment 1010 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point e a (new)
(ea) investments in sectors with high job- creation potential, focusing on long-term and sustainable effects, including the social, health and care sectors as well as the social economy.
Amendment 1093 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) EIB funding to the EIF enabling it to undertake loans, guarantees, counter- guarantees, any other form of credit enhancement instrument, capital market instruments and equity or quasi-equity participations. Credit enhancement instruments such as project bonds shall not be granted until the evaluation of the Project Bond Initiative has been carried out as requested by the relevant EU decisions. These Iinstruments shall be granted, acquired or issued for the benefit of operations carried out in the Union, in compliance with this Regulation and where EIF financing has been granted in accordance with a signed agreement which has neither expired nor been cancelled.
Amendment 1263 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – point f a (new)
(fa) detailed information on the tax payments resulting from its investment and lending operations under the EFSI.
Amendment 1356 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1
Article 14 – paragraph 1
The EU guarantee and the payments and recoveries under it that are attributable to the general budget of the Union shall be audited by the Court of Auditorsexternal audit of the activities undertaken in accordance with the EFSI Regulation is carried out by the European Court of Auditors in accordance with Article 287 TFEU.
Amendment 1377 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. In its financing and investment operations, the EIB shall apply the principles and standards set out in Union law on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and terrorist financing, including a requirement to take reasonable measures to identify the beneficial owners where applicable. In its financing and investment operations under the EFSI and through investment platforms and national promotional banks, the EIB shall make both direct funding or funding via intermediaries contingent upon the disclosure of both country-by-country tax relevant data along the lines of the CRD IV provision for credit institutions, as well as disclosure of beneficial ownership information according to the EU Anti- Money Laundering Directive.
Amendment 1378 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 16 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The EIB shall not cooperate with financial intermediaries having a negative track record in terms of transparency, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning practices, or use other harmful tax practices such as 'tax rulings' and abusive transfer pricing.
Amendment 18 #
2014/2254(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that the external dimension of the Union's policies should comply with the Charter of Fundamental Rights as well as the ECHR, including association agreements, international trade agreements such as TTIP, the neighbourhood policy, the CSDP and CFSP;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that the economic crisis and the austerity measures have greatly increased economic and social disparities, worsening the differences between (and within) Member States; calls on the Commission to consider the effects on regional and social cohesion of its macroeconomic policies and recommendations, as well as of its investment and competition policies;
Amendment 22 #
2014/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses the important role of cohesion policy in mitigating the effects of the financial, economic and social crisis, as well as its positive effects on all regions; underlines its importance in closing the public/ and private investment gaps, especially in the Member States hit most by the crisis;
Amendment 24 #
2014/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses the difficulties of many Member States with financial difficulties to achieve their co-financing targets; calls on the Commission to review these levels and funding requirements in order to allow these Member States to make full use of the support provided through structural and cohesion funds;
Amendment 27 #
2014/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the reform of cohesion policy has focused on delivering an investment policy; welcomes the Commission’s Investment Plan, and endorses its proposal to finance the new EFSI by making national contributions to the fund fiscally neutral as regards the SGP; stresses the interdependence of cohesion policy with the EU’s other investment initiatives; calls on the Commission to create a coherent and effective investment framework;
Amendment 61 #
2014/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the EIB to increase its financing of investments by MSMEs, cooperatives and the public sector, with the aim to strengthen social and regional cohesion.
Amendment 70 #
2014/2245(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Welcomes the closer alignment of cohesion policy with the overall economic strategy and the EU’s Economic Governance Framework; opposes creating a close link between financial and fiscal objectives and cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to ensure that the effectiveness of the ESIF is not compromised by macroeconomic policies; calls for the full and formal involvement of Parliament in the future governance structure of the fund;
Amendment 1 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph a
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph a
a. take immediate action to ensure that a comprehensive and ambitious agreement is reached on the TTIP enhancing fair competition on both sides of the Atlanticsuspends all actions with regards to the TTIP agreement in view of guaranteeing the adequate democratic scrutiny of the citizens of the options, at both European and national level;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas there are strong trade links between the EU and the US and it is possible to build further trade links even in the absence of a TTIP Agreement; due recognition needs to be provided to the fact that the EU agricultural sector is a very sensitive and essential part of the TTIP negotiations and one in which the EU, which already enjoys a significant trade surplus with the US, stands to benefit greatly from new or increased market access opportunitie; this could be put at risk if proper consideration is not provided to this vulnerable sector during negotiations;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the EU agricultural sector is a very sensitive and essential part of the TTIP negotiations and one in which the EU, which already enjoys a significant trade surplus with the US, stands to benefit greatly from new or increased market access opportunitiere are strong trade links between the EU and the US and taking into account the consequences of the CAP in the employment and the rural areas, it is necessary to build new trade links even in the absence of a TTIP Agreement; however, the EU agricultural and food sector is a very sensitive part of the TTIP negotiations;
Amendment 11 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph b
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph b
b. take immediate action to ensure that free and fair competition on both sides of the Atlantic, as well as market access,any dispositions in the Treaty are subordinated to the right of the EU and its Member-States to define the levels of protection and that any such policy is not secured at the cost of social cohesion or the delivery of critical infrastructure or public services and is addressed on the basis of maintaining the highest standards possible within theand is done so with regard to existing levels of protection, especially within areas such as health and safety, education, consumer, labour and environmental legislation;
Amendment 27 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas it is important forthat European agriculture to secure a mutually beneficial trade deal with the US in order to advance Europe’s position as a key player on the global marketbenefits mutually from any trade deal with the US;
Amendment 28 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas it is important for Europethe need to get out of the commercial and agriculture to secure a mutually beneficial trade deal with the US in order to advance Europe’s position as a key player on the global marketal export policy is important for European agriculture;
Amendment 29 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph c
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph c
c. take immediate action to include restrictions on state aid in the agreement; propose greater transparency within state aid rules and within the allocation of state aidallow individual member states use more state aid to vulnerable sectors of industry and allow for more proactive public sector enterprises. ;
Amendment 38 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas respect for food safety and human and animal health standards will be a fundamental tenet of the negotitrade relations for European agriculture;
Amendment 43 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph d
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph d
d. take immediate action to ensure that market accessongoing negotiations on financial services are combined with upward convergence in financial regulation; support high international standards in on-going cooperation efforts in other international foraand any eventual Agreement are used as an opportunity to improve and enforce higher standards through regulatory convergence;
Amendment 48 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas practices such as the treatment of poultry meat with chlorinated products, the treatment of pork meat with organic acid and the use of Somatotropin in bovine are commonly used in the meat and dairy sectors in the US;
Amendment 52 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph e
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph e
e. take immediate action to ensure that aggressive tax planning, and distortion of competition by e.g. moving of headquarters across the Atlantic to obtain competition-distorting conditions, are addressedprevent fiscal competition, namely through the dumping in the taxation of profits and financial gains and maintenance of offshores and other fiscally privileged zones;
Amendment 54 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas the use of antibiotics in the EU is more restrictive than in the US and the US has not banned other pharmaceutical products as growth promoters in animals including the use of ractopanima, banned in 160 countries;
Amendment 57 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas there is a majority both in the European Parliament and amongst EU citizens which demands a prohibition of products from cloned animals and their descendants;
Amendment 61 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas the EU animal welfare standards have no equivalence in the US;
Amendment 63 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Ce. having regard to the use and approval of new GMOs in the US and its use for animal and human consumption;
Amendment 65 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C f (new)
Recital C f (new)
Cf. whereas there are many sensitivities and problems with products in the US’s market defaulting protected geographical indications including port wine;
Amendment 66 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph f
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph f
f. take immediate action to ensure that systematic movement of capital across the Atlantic, in order to avoid tax payments in the country of production and/or sale of goods or services, is addressedprohibited or subject to heavy taxation within the realm of TTIP;
Amendment 67 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C g (new)
Recital C g (new)
Cg. considering that each year in the United States of America, an estimated 9 million people get sick, 55,000 are hospitalized, and 1,000 die of foodborne disease caused by known pathogens, such as Salmonella, Escherichia coli O157 (E. coli O157), Listeria monocytogenes (Lm), and Campylobacter as outlines in the report ‘Foodborne Illness Source Attribution Estimates for Salmonella, Escherichia coli O157 (E. coli O157), Listeria monocytogenes (Lm), and Campylobacter using Outbreak Surveillance Data’ by the Interagency Food Safety Analytics Collaboration (IFSAC);
Amendment 68 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C h (new)
Recital C h (new)
Ch. whereas existing agreements between the US and the EU, particularly those relating to the recognition by the United States of winemaking practices, recognition of geographical indications for this sector, agreements related to sanitary measures for the protection of public and animal health have not solved today divergent conception of risk analysis;
Amendment 69 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph g
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph g
Amendment 70 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C i (new)
Recital C i (new)
Ci. whereas the import of products which fail to meet EU standards on animal welfare, food safety, human and animal health, put farmers, consumers and animals in the EU at a disadvantage;
Amendment 71 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C j (new)
Recital C j (new)
Cj. whereas the survival of small and medium-sized farms cannot be abandoned to the volatility of prices in the international markets;
Amendment 72 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C k (new)
Recital C k (new)
Ck. whereas the approval of TTIP would lead us to a situation of weakening of the European legislation to permit the use of carcinogens and other substances of very high concern as pesticides, posing a health hazard to workers, consumers and communities, as well as weaken, slow or stop efforts to regulate endocrine (hormone) disrupting chemicals;
Amendment 73 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C l (new)
Recital C l (new)
Cl. whereas the approval of TTIP would obstruct efforts to save bee populations, risking irrevocable damage to the quality and quantity of our food supply;
Amendment 74 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Recital C m (new)
Recital C m (new)
Cm. whereas the approval of TTIP would install a ‘regulatory ceiling’ hampering global pesticide regulation.
Amendment 79 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. prioritise an ambitious and balanced balanced and sustainable result of the negotiations for agriculture, the three main components of which (market access, geographical indications and sanitary and phytosanitary measures) should be tackled early and in parallel in the negotiation process,before the next round of negotiations. This Committee gives priority to the Agreements content over time frame. Given the extensive feedback received from European Citizens over other elements of negotiations thus far it is vital that a reflection period occur in order to give Parliament enough time to discuss and evaluate this chapter with stakeholders and European citizens;
Amendment 80 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph h
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph h
Amendment 81 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point a
Paragraph 1 – point a
a. prioritise an ambitious and balanced result of the negotiations for agriculture, the three main components of which (market access, geographical indications and sanitary and phytosanitary measures) should be tackled early and in parallel reorientation of trade and agricultural policy by removing the negotiation process, in order to give Parliament enough time to discuss and evaluate this chapter with stakeholders and European citizeagriculture and food out of the negotiations;
Amendment 98 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph i
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph i
i. propose the introduction of a national court systems-first principle, to be supplemented with mediation and intergovernmental dispute mechanisms in legal disputes in order to ensure easier access and lower litigation costs than those offered by current ISDS- mechanisms, benefitting especially SMEs (having fewer resources available than large corporations), thus insists on the protection of democratic powers of legislators and takes immediate action to ensure the removal of any investor - state dispute settlement body (ISDS) as any interference from non- democreating more equal competition conditions; stress that any and all dispute mechanisms set in place within the TTIP-framework must uphold full transparency and be subject to democratic principlesc or non -EU bodies, contravenes democratic principles of sovereignty, transparency and scrutiny;
Amendment 100 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. firmly commit to the strict preservation of standards on food safety and human and animal health, as defined under EU legislation, and ensure that fundamental values of the EU such as the precautionary principle are not undermined; Further, this committee calls on the Commission to outline specific measures to uphold the precautionary principle in negotiations;
Amendment 105 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b
Paragraph 1 – point b
b. firmly commit to the strict preservation of standards on food safety and, human and animal health and animal welfare, as defined under EU legislation, and ensure that fundamental values of the EU such as the precautionary principle are not undermin, the recognition of animals as sentient beings as enshrined in Article 13 TFEU, and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union are not undermined and will be respected;
Amendment 119 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
ba. prevent products that have not been produced in line with EU food safety, human and animal health, and animal welfare standards from entering the EU-market;
Amendment 123 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph j
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph j
j. acknowledge the importance of state- owned enterprises for certain crucial services; and calls for immediate action in order to ensure that specific and identifiable provisions for the protection of State Owned Enterprises are prioritised;
Amendment 125 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point b b (new)
bb. prevent any interference of non- democratic or non-EU bodies in or prior to the democratic decision making process in the EU regarding any future SPS- measures that might be considered;
Amendment 133 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
c. ensure a positive final outcome of the negotiations for agriculture reflecting both the offensive and defensive interests of the EU agricultural sector concerning the abolition or reduction of both tariff and non-tariff barriers, including in particular sanitary and phytosanitary standards and procedures, so that EU producers make genuine and operative gains in terms of access to the US market; Considering the trade surplus enjoyed by the EU this committee calls on the commission to outline which regulations specifically constitute barriers to trade so that this Committee can evaluate the merits of removal before inclusion in negotiations;
Amendment 137 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph k
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph k
k. stress the need to uphold the EU’s tradition for organisfor each Member State to organise its own public services, to prioritise funding itsfor public services, and calls for an exclusion of public services from the agreementimmediate action to make provisions to allow flexibility to bring public services back into public control;
Amendment 137 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point c
Paragraph 1 – point c
c. ensure a positive final outcome of the negotiations for agriculture reflecting both the offensive and defensive interests of the EU agricultural sector concerning the abolition or reduction of both tariff and non-tariff barriers, including in particular sanitary and phytosanitary standards andthat trade relations between the EU and the US do not put access to land for feeding local populations at risk; prevent products coming to market with proicedures, so that EU producers make genuine gains s below costs of production, including terms of access to the US markethe correct remuneration of the producers;
Amendment 145 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph l
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph l
l. propose that there should be no obligation in TTIP to expose sensitive sectors to competitiontake immediate action in order to table additional vulnerability provisions which will allow for the exclusion of susceptible sectors from any final trade agreement; any agreed provisions should be made in tandem with consultation with relevant stakeholders and interested committees.
Amendment 155 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph l a (new)
Paragraph 1 – subparagraph l a (new)
la. ensure that the application of the Lisbon Treaty Article 218.10 (TFEU) which provides that the European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure;
Amendment 156 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d
Paragraph 1 – point d
d. secensure a level playing field, treating as sensitive those products for which direct competition would expose EU agricultural producers to excessive pressure, for example in cases where regulatory conditions and related costs of production in the EU diverge from those in the USthat the precautionary principle is not called into question, as this means the defence of quality standards and food safety demanded by European consumers, and serves as an added value that ensure the maintenance of public health;
Amendment 174 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
da. prioritise the protection of vulnerable sectors in agriculture- if measures cannot be agreed to protect vulnerable sectors then such sectors should be removed from negotiations;
Amendment 187 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e
Paragraph 1 – point e
e. secure significantly improvedthe protection of EU geographical indications and better consumer information as an essential element of a balanced agreement, taking the relevant chapter of the CETA with Canada as a good example;
Amendment 203 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point e a (new)
ea. not question the aspects relating to the establishment of standards of European public procurement law, as applied in practice, especially at regional and local level, when you take into account, for example, compliance labour and social legislation and collective agreements, GPP, local hiring and prioritize local development, or attention to small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which ensures that, when awarding the contract to the highest bidder, you can weigh in addition to price, other criteria such as social aspects related to sustainability;
Amendment 211 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f
Paragraph 1 – point f
f. engage in a fully transparent, timely and comprehensive manner with all agricultural stakeholders on all aspects of the negotiations.sure the application of the Lisbon Treaty Article 218.10 (TFEU) which says that the European Parliament shall be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure;
Amendment 219 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
fa. ensure that products such as GMOs or coming from cloned animals and their descendants, and with substances banned in the EU do no enter the EU market or end up in the EU food chain;
Amendment 224 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f a (new)
fa. That this committee, while calling for the ISDS mechanism to be removed from any agreement specifically calls for Agricultural provisions to be exempt from ISDS if it generally included.
Amendment 226 #
2014/2228(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
Paragraph 1 – point f b (new)
fb. remove regulatory cooperation and any investor-state dispute settlement body (ISDS) as these defy EU standards on animal welfare, food safety, public and animal health, transparency, accountability and traceability.
Amendment 32 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Russian ban on European dairy products since August 2014 has had a significant impact on the EU internal market and demonstrated the need to apply market measures at this critical time so that production can be adjusted to the fall in demand in order to avoid over supply and prevent prices from collapsing, and demonstrated importance of securing diverse export markets for EU products;
Amendment 81 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Recalls that a sustainable and competitive dairy sector with responsive tools is the goal of the Milk Package; stresses that the issues identified in the Milk Package remain a barrier to a sustainable, competitive and equitable milk market and a fair income for farmers;
Amendment 92 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that dairy farmers are particularly vulnerable to income variations and risks owing to high capital costs, volatile dairy commodity prices, input and energy costs, and that a sustainable livelihood from dairy farming is an ongoing challenge as production costs are frequently close to or above farm gate prices;
Amendment 102 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Urges the Commission to address the crisis currently facing the dairy sector as a result of the lack of adequate crisis instruments, a dip in global demand, global price volatility and the Russian embargo, and recognises the targeted measures taken thus far in addressing the impact of the Russian embargo;
Amendment 119 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Recalls that the dairy crisis of 2009 occurred under the quota structure; this crisis demonstrated that the quota was not applied effectively in reducing volume according to demand, reminds the Commission that the delay in responding to the crisis forced many dairy farmers out of business, and expresses concern regarding the Commission’'s capacity to respond rapidly and effectively to market crises;
Amendment 127 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes thatRemains cautious regarding the medium and long-term prospects for the dairy sector in both domestic and global markets remain favourable and, as a key part of the agri- food industry, the dairy sector has significant long-term growth and job creation potential which should be targeted under the new Investment Plan. While prospects seem favourable it is important to remain vigilant without measures in place in the case of less positive development;
Amendment 184 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Takes the view that EU dairy policy after the expiry of milk quotas presents an opportunity for the EU economy, but only if market measures ensure a fair price for farmers and considers that any future measures must strengthen its sustainability, competitiveness and facilitate growth and innovation;
Amendment 191 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Confidence and competition in emerging markets is a challenge for the dairy sector. China has seen a decline in self-sufficiency and an increase in import dependency for dairy products. However, any shift towards self-sufficiency will massively impact on global prices. Further, India has emerged as a competitor to European producers which will impact on price;
Amendment 199 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes the Russian ban on EU products damaged the Eastern European Market. It has also sparked competition for the same markets between Member states which can drive prices down;
Amendment 200 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Notes that consideration must be given to the long-term impact of climate change on the Dairy package. Agriculture accounts for 70% of worlds fresh water use, measures are required to deal with the long-term sustainability of dairy expansion. JRC report ‘An economic assessment of GHG mitigation policy options for EU agriculture’ calls for the reduction in herd numbers across the EU to reduce GHG emissions. The report outlines that it is likely that some farmers might have to leave the sector in case they are not able to cope with the GHG mitigation obligations. Energy prices and scarcity of resources will also affect the long term prospect for the dairy sector;
Amendment 220 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Notes that so far the contracts are not working effectively as a result of lacking minimum standards and the current weak market position of farmers. Minimum standards should include: a defined quantity ; an agreed fixed price geared towards the average full costs of milk production including surcharges and reductions; defined contract terms and defined quality;
Amendment 237 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that the sector could further explore the potential offered by longer- term integrated supply chain contracts, forwards contracts, fixed margin contracts, and the opportunity to ‘'lock in’' a milk price reflective of production costs for a set period of time; believes that the option to avail of new instruments in contractual relations should be available; contract mediation tools must also be made available;
Amendment 260 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Notes that establishing producer organisations could be pushed by providing proactive political support encouraging farmers to consider Pos as adequate instruments. Incentives and supports should include funding, information, administrative support, and raising of pooling limits;
Amendment 272 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Notes the significance of establishing Interbranch Organisations for ensuring transparency and sharing of best practice;
Amendment 273 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Notes the important role of dairy cooperatives in helping farmers market their product and manage the risk to their income;
Amendment 275 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Proposes supports be extended to Cooperatives to modernise their operations;
Amendment 283 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Emphasises the importance of the Milk Market Observatory (MMO) in disseminating and analysing market data and calls for an increased role for the MMO; recommends that the Commission take the necessary action to ensure that the MMO is in a position to communicate early warnings to the Commission, Member States and relevant stakeholders, when the market situation so requires; considers that the information provided by the MMO should involve updates on market and price trends, and should be easily accessible and user-friendly for all stakeholders; the analysis of the MMO should be updated more regularly. The MMO should play a role in future crisis management for the dairy market;
Amendment 293 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Proposes a mechanism be established for stakeholders to make recommendations for new measures and give feedback on existing measures and instruments;
Amendment 323 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Points out that global dairy demand is predicted to grow by 2 % per annum, offering opportunities for products of EU origin; notes, howeverpoints out that a blind expectation of export growth is irresponsible and dangerous, moves should be made in establishing a stable dairy market. Notes, that the market is increasingly dominated by dried dairy products;
Amendment 348 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Underlines that bilateral trade negotiations may represent strategic opportunities for the EU dairy sector, however must be approached with extreme vigilance to ensure sustainable and equitable benefits for agriculture sector as a whole;
Amendment 353 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Notes the dangers associated with FTAs such as TTIP as a threat to vulnerable sectors in agriculture. Urges the Commission to immediately introduce measures to protect agriculture as a vulnerable sector in ongoing negotiations;
Amendment 356 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. The greatest risk to European dairy farming and to the consumer will be posed by falling quality and health standards resulting from FTAs;
Amendment 357 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. The non-recognition of PDO status called for by the American dairy industry and producers also poses a threat;
Amendment 363 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses the continuing need to identify and develop new markets, increase the EU global market share, secure fair access for EU exporters and stimulate export growth in a sustainable way;
Amendment 365 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Stresses the need to introduce instruments so that the market can also react to falling exports in order to be able to handle whatever situation might occur;
Amendment 392 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Notes that the sector has not engaged with the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indications (PGI) schemes in a meaningful manner; calls on the Commission to simplify access to these schemes;
Amendment 423 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Stresses the need to introduce a market management programme combining market surveillance tools with reactive intervention mechanism to identify impending crises and provide an action plan;
Amendment 434 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission to implement more responsive and realistic safety net provisions, and for the intervention price to be fixed in the short term at 25c/l until measures are put in place to ensure that intervention price is more reflective of productions costs and adapted as the market changes;
Amendment 441 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Recommends that the intervention price be revised on a biannual basis to keep balance with rapid changes in the market and conditions;
Amendment 451 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Underlines the importance of a more responsive and realistic crisis instrument, and recommends that the Commission engage with the sector on the possibility of using risk management instruments such as the futures markets to take advantage of the volatility in the sectora Market Management Programme outlined in point 24 and the futures markets to stabilise the market to increase its competitiveness;
Amendment 472 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Calls on Member States to introduce legislation to prohibit below cost selling;
Amendment 478 #
2014/2146(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Notes that dairy producers will be in an even weaker position without a crisis programme. Measures introduced must strengthen the position of producers and achieve a more level playing field with large food corporate groups and retailers;
Amendment 170 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the current economic situation calls for urgent, comprehensive and decisive measures to face the threat of deflation or very low invery low inflation and the threat of deflation, low growth and high unemployment;
Amendment 196 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights the fact that the current economic governance framework does not allow for a proper debate on the economic perspective of the euro area or on an aggregate fiscal stance and does not address the different economic and fiscal situations on an equal footing;
Amendment 211 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes that high surpluses in the core of the Eurozone, most notably in Germany, are just as alarming as high deficits in the Eurozone periphery and therefore insists that macroeconomic imbalances must be considered of joint responsibility;
Amendment 212 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Finds that changes in economic governance have not fostered European solidarity, but instead resulted in great tensions and divisions between income groups and between surplus and deficit countries.
Amendment 213 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Believes that internal devaluation such as wage restraint is just as harmful to the collective of the euro zone as excessive debt;
Amendment 228 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that major policy initiatives which included policy recommendations were based on economic forecasts that had not anticipated the low growth and inflation experienced and have not fully taken into account the underestimation of the size of the fiscal multiplier, the importance of spillover effects across countries in a period of synchronised consolidation and the deflationary impact of cumulative structural reforms, leading to the failure of those initiatives;
Amendment 250 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the current situation calls for closer and inclusive economic coordination (to increased aggregate demand, improve fiscal sustainability and allow for fair and sustainable structural reforms and related investments) and for swift reactions so as to correct the most obvious fault lines in the economic governance framework;
Amendment 262 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Believes that the crisis tools promoted and implemented by the European institutions and Member States have resulted in a decline in internal demand and consumption, which has subsequently led to deflation, negative growth and an increase in unemployment, particularly among young people;
Amendment 269 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Warns that the accumulation of procedures makes the economic governance framework complex and not transparent enough, which is detrimental to the ownership and acceptance by parliaments, social partners and citizens of guidelines, recommendations and reforms stemming from this framework;economic governance framework undermines the relevance of democratic choices made at the national and local level which is in contradiction with the primacy of local parliaments, social partners and citizens.
Amendment 286 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Believes that the economic governance framework has not been able to alleviate the negative social impacts of the crisis and has in some cases prolonged the crisis for ordinary people;
Amendment 289 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 314 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines all the existing provisions under the Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) which have been put in place to ensure an anti counter-cyclical policy; finds it regrettable that these provisions were not put to full use in previous years, in the context of low inflation, low growth and high unemployment, even more so in the case of the countries under adjustment programmes;
Amendment 338 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers however that persisting poor economic performance should lead to a serious debate on those fiscal rules and their capacity to serve economic performance, job creation and fiscal sustainability;
Amendment 339 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Insists that the economic governance framework - in particularly the SGP - must not prevent Member States from adopting the necessary counter-cyclical actions aimed at stimulating internal demand, countering high unemployment, social exclusion and low growth;
Amendment 343 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Supports all the incentives to finance the new European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI), mainly by making national contributions to the fund fiscally neutral as regards the SGP; calls for further clarification regardnew investments. Believes that all investment should be regarded as fiscally neutral as regards the SGP. Believes, however, that the primacy of private investors ing the concrete European Fund for Streatment of these contributions in accordance with the new paradigm set out in the communication;egic Investments (EFSI) implies an unequal distribution of risks which puts additional costs on taxpayers
Amendment 372 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Believes that the communication righdoes not sufficiently broadens the scope of the investment clause, and does not allowing for sufficient flexibility in the preventive arm of the SGP to accommodate investment programmes by the Member States, in particular as regards expenditure on projects under structural and cohesion policy, including the Youth Employment Initiative, trans- European networks and the Connecting Europe Facility, and co-financing under the EFSI; believes that this approach must be urgently reassessed to be symmetrically applied to; believes that this approach must be urgently reassessed, both in terms of broadening the scope to all investment programmes and of a similar treatment in the corrective arm of the SGP;.
Amendment 383 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 403 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that structural reforms should be designed by national parliaments and governments, with full knowledge of each country's specific challenges and respect for the choices of its elected officials, and should have a positive socioeconomic return and contribute to increased administrative capacity;
Amendment 415 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Deplores, however, the fact that the communication does not touch upon the nature of ‘'unusual events’' falling outside the control of a Member State which could allow it to temporarily depart from the adjustment path towards achieving its MTO, leaving an unacceptable margin for discretion for european institutions and paving the way for the different treatment of similar situations;
Amendment 435 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Believes that morethere is no room for flexibility and soft laws exists under the SGP and in the European Semester; invites the Commission to build on this flexibility and to propose rule changes where neededUnderlines that economic performance in the Euro area as a whole, and in the peripheral economies in particular, strongly requires a new and flexible approach; invites the Commission to propose rule changes that allow for flexible ways of reaching economic, social and environmental sustainability;
Amendment 453 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Invites the Commission and the Council to better articulate the fiscal and macroeconomic frameworks, notably in the corrective arm of the SGP, to allow for earlier debate among stakeholders, taking into account the need to increase convergence between euro area Member States and the role of national parliaments and social partner and social partners and deliberation by national parliaments regarding the design and implementation of structural reforms;
Amendment 470 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Insists that the Annual Growth Survey (AGS) and euro area recommendation must be better designed and put to better use to allow for a global economic debate, notably as regards convergence in the euro areathe structural flaws and inequalities in the euro area and the rise in unemployment and social exclusion; proposes that the country-specific recommendations (CSRs) should be established on the basis of striking a better balance between the AGS and the macroeconomic imbalance procedure (MIP), and suggests that the euro area recommendation should be madenon- compulsory following a proper debate with the European Parliament, with incentives being offered so as to encourage the implementation thereof; requests that the excessive deficit procedure (EDP) recommendation be joined together with the CSRand preceded by a proper debate in National and European Parliaments;
Amendment 488 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Asks the Commission to verify whetherConsiders that the current 1/20 rule on debt reduction is sustainable and whether it needs to be reconsidernot viable for many of the member states and should be revoked;
Amendment 511 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Asks the Commission's to make the three-pillar strategy (investment, fiscal rules and structural reforms), presented in the AGS 2015, more concrete under the euro area recommendation and in the CSRs and to strengthen its approach by building a fourth pillar on taxation, with a particular focus on european-wide tax evasion, avoidance and arbitrage;
Amendment 569 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Asks the Commission to take into account all relevant factors, including real growth and, inflation and unemployment, when evaluating the economic and fiscal situations of Member States under the EDP;
Amendment 598 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls on the Commission, when evaluating the fiscal position of Members States, to include a better balance betweenassessment of the impact of the agreed fiscal measures and the fiscal figures based on estimated potential growth for GDP, output gaps and structural deficits that may introduce unexpected radical change at a later stage;on GDP growth, drawing from the experience of consistently optimistic forecasts for adjustment countries and the debate on the fiscal multiplier.
Amendment 614 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Believes there is a strong need for less complexity, better ownership, more transparency and democracy in economic governance; believes that looking forward towards deeper integration cannot be achieved by adding a new layer of rules to the already existing ones or by imposing economic policies on elected national governments or parliaments;
Amendment 624 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Acknowledges, based on the current situation, that the economic governance framework must be corrected and completed in both the medium and long term to allow for the EU and the euro area to meet the challenges of growth, economic convergence, long- lasting investment, job creation and reliance;
Amendment 662 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Calls for a new legal framework and a policy shift for future assistance programmes in order to ensure that all decisions are taken under the responsibility of the Commission with full and real involvement of European and National Parliament;
Amendment 697 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Recalls that a ‘the realisation of a 'genuine Economic and Monetary Union’' (EMU) cannot simply be limited to a system of rules but also requires an increased euro area fiscal capawould require political and democratic support of a transfer union which is nowhere to be found in the EU. As it stands, the EMU will continue to exacerbate the macroeconomic imbalances within the Eurozone, leading to excessive surpluses and corresponding excessive deficity;s
Amendment 711 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
Amendment 751 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 1
Paragraph 37 – indent 1
– a ‘taxation union’commitment to European-wide measures against tax fraud and evasion and corporate tax dumping,
Amendment 766 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 2
Paragraph 37 – indent 2
– a social dimension, including a minimum wage mechanism and a minimum unemployment benefit scheme for the euro area and in-depth reforms to favour mobilityreduce income inequalities,
Amendment 796 #
2014/2145(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 – indent 4
Paragraph 37 – indent 4
– a euro area fiscal capacity notably to finance counter cyclical actions, structural reforms or part of debt reduction;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2122(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that, given its limited resources, ESMA must stick strictly to the tasks assigned to it by the Union legislator, remain free of political agenda and must not seek to broaden its mandate beyond those assignments;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2121(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that, given its limited resources, EIOPA must stick strictly to the tasks assigned to it by the Union legislator remain free of political agenda and must not seek to broaden its mandate beyond those assignments;
Amendment 15 #
2014/2120(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that, given its limited resources, EBA must stick strictly to the tasks assigned to it by the Union legislator, remain free of political agenda and must not seek to broaden its mandate beyond those assignments;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 1 a (new)
Citation 1 a (new)
- having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union,
Amendment 9 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas compliance with the EU fiscal and macroeconomic surveillance frameworkfiscal sustainability is essential to the proper functioning of the European Monetary Union (EMU);
Amendment 16 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
Amendment 24 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
Recital D a (new)
Da. whereas low or negative growth and unemployment are responsible for lower revenues and increasing social expenditure and are, thus, the main cause for fiscal unsustainability;
Amendment 29 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas, in the context of persistently high debt and unemployment levels, low nominal GDP growth, and the challenges of an ageing society and of supporting job creation, particularly for young people, fiscal consolidation must continue in a growth-friendly and differentiated mannergrowth and job creation policies are the crucial pre- conditions to fiscal consolidation;
Amendment 34 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the priorities for this year’s European Semester were established by the European Council in March, and were reconfirmed in June; whereas the emphasis is on policies that enhance competitiveness, support job creation and fight unemployment, and on the follow-up to reforms to improve the functioning offurther deregulate labour markets;
Amendment 40 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the global financial crisis and the sovereign debt crisis in the EU have significantly hampered access byausterity policies have significantly hampered demand, restricting the flow of credit to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to financial resources;
Amendment 55 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes the fact that economic recovery in the EU is under way; reiterates, howgrowth in the EU has stagnated, with 0,2% in the 2nd semester of 2014. Furthermore, ever,n that this recovery is fragile and uneven, and must be sustained in orderis stagnation scenario is uneven, with several member-states in recession. In any case, austerity policies are failing to deliver more growth and jobs in the medium term;
Amendment 59 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that even this extremely low growth was only possible because of 0,3% rise in household consumption, showing the importance of a shift from labour market deregulation to demand-oriented policies and wages increases;
Amendment 72 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the ambitiousNotes the structural reforms implemented by Member States under the macroeconomic adjustment programmes; finds it regrettable that the Member States in the rest of the euro area are less ambitious in modernising their economies, which is one of the reasons for the low growth prospects in the medium and long term which have caused recession, huge rises in unemployment and also public debt relative to GDP;
Amendment 89 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses, therefore, the importance of continuing the process of deep and sustainable structural reformshifting from austerity to public investment and demand-oriented policies to deliver on growth and jobs; reiterates, in this connection, the fact that the EU cannot compete on costs alone, but needs to invest more in research and development, education and skills, and resource efficiency, both at national and European level;
Amendment 100 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines, once again, the fact that the overall indebtedness of Member States in the euro area was worsened by austerity policies; Notes that this situation is not only an obstacle to growth but also puts a huge burden on future generations;
Amendment 106 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates, therefore, the fact that Member States should pay particular attention when devising economic policies and reforms as regards the impact on future generations not to deprive young people of theirjob opportunities from th, decent work and welfare starte;
Amendment 121 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 134 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes the 2014 package of country- specific recommendations (CSRs) by the Commission; notesIs puzzled by the Commission’'s assessment that some progress has been achieved in sustaining fiscal consolidation and structural reform, particularly in reforming labour marketswhen the opposite has occurred;
Amendment 141 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Supports the objective of placing emphasis on policies that enhance competitiveness, support job creation, fight unemployment and improve the functioning of the labour market; Notes however that emphasis on labour market and "competitiveness" that has inspired those policies has failed to deliver on any those objectives;
Amendment 154 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Recalls, however, that Member States’ track record of implementing the CSRs is very lowariable; believes that there is an inconsistency between European commitment and national implementation of the CSRs by Member States; stresses the importance of ‘national ownership’ by the relevant governments of EU-level commitmentrespecting the sovereignty of elected governments and deplores persistent attempts by the Commission to put pressure or override national institutions;
Amendment 167 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. UnderRealinzes theat this fact that thesuch low levels of implementation of CSRs is a precoinseparable from the poor track record of European recommendiation fors in achieving economic convergence in the EMU, which is key to the proper functioning thereof, allowing for financial and economic stability that is conducive to growth and jobs;
Amendment 181 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Calls on the Commission, as guardian of the Treaty, to make full use of all measures provided for in EU law to support the enforcement of the implementation of the CSRsto assess the results of the implementation of the CSRs and other European policies on eurozone economic performance and evaluate the impact of its guidelines on growth and job creation;
Amendment 190 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Requests that the Commission report on a quarterly basis in Parliament’s competent committee on the measures taken to ensure progress on the implementation of the CSRs and on the progress achieved thus far; invites Member States to explain the reasons for non- compliance with the CRSs in Parliament’s competent committee; suggests that the economic results of complying member- states are compared with those of non- complying ones;
Amendment 192 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls on the President of the Eurogroup to effectively monitor the implementation of the CSRs by the Member States of the euro area, and to report on the progress made and the results as part of the assessment by the Eurogroup of the draft 2015 budgetary plans, to be submitted by mid-October 2014 by the Member States concerned;
Amendment 214 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Encourages Member States to overcome domestic political opposition to modernise their economies,strengthen their public social security systems and health care, in order to avoid placing an excessive burden on future generationsrobbing future generations of the welfare state;
Amendment 224 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that structural reforms should particularly be targeted at improving labour markets’ capacity to integrate young people into the workforce; believes, also, that structural reform should be aimed at theunemployment is, by far, the greatest threat to mid- and long-term sustainability ofor social security, health-care and pension systems, making job creation the absolute priority to protect these systems;
Amendment 248 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses, once again, its call on Member States to simplifyrove the redistributive capacity of their tax systems and reiterates its call to shift taxes from labour to consumption to make the use of resources more efficient and sustainablrevenue; calls on the Commission to take urgent action and develop a comprehensive strategy based on concrete legislative measures to fight tax fraud and tax evasion banning tax heavens and creating and a minimum corporate tax rate in the eurozone;
Amendment 264 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Reiterates the fact that structural reforms must be complemented by longer- term investment in education, research, innovation and sustainable energy; stresses, however, the fact that private investment is more conducive to growth than public investment;
Amendment 273 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Points out that government-induced growth risks being unsustainable over the medium term; stresses the fact that the already high levels of public debt do not allow for a significant increase in spending, if the reform and consolidation efforts are not to be in vainin a liquidity trap scenario, with historically low levels of credit to the real economy, even unconventional monetary policy will prove ineffective without public expenditure and investment; stresses the fact that austerity reforms and consolidation efforts proved counter- productive, particularly in the countries under the adjustment programmes which have consistently failed all consolidation objectives;
Amendment 295 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Underlines the fact that public and private investment iss are crucial, as it works on the supply and demand side of the economy creating jobs, generating incomes for households, increasing tax revenue, helping governments consolidateing and boosting growth;
Amendment 315 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
Amendment 326 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
Amendment 335 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Stresses the fact that a solid and stable financial system, only possible with strong market-making public institutions, is crucial for future growth;
Amendment 350 #
2014/2059(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Stresses the need to strengthen democratic accountability to the European Parliament and the national parliaments as regards essential elements of the euro area’s operation, such as the European Central Bank, the European Stability Mechanism, Eurogroup decisions, and the monitoring and evaluation of financial assistance programmes;
Amendment 7 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Regrets the cut of EUR 481 289 for the school milk programme and the cut of EUR 900 073 for the school fruit programme, as both programmes have proven to be useful and efficient within the Member States and considers this cut to be extremely inappropriate given the current crisis and levels of child malnutrition in the EU; asks to increase the fund for both programmes to previous levels; asks that both programmes are designed to be less bureaucratic and more user friendly;
Amendment 13 #
2014/2040(BUD)
11. Calls on the Commission and Member States to ensure that funds allocated to the Reserve for crises in the agricultural sector in the 2015 budget which are subsequently left unspent are made available in full as direct payments in the following budgetary year; in addition to this welcomes the increase in the crisis reserve fund, but would like to see this go further;
Amendment 14 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission and Member States to monitor the significant price volatility of agricultural products, notably in the beef sector, which has adverse effects on farmers’ incomes, and to react promptly and effectively when needed;
Amendment 17 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Regrets the cut in funds to support beekeeping, as Parliament has consistently viewed beekeeping as a priority for the future of agriculture; notes that this cut jepordises the future of the EU'S biodiversity and agri-food sector;
Amendment 20 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 a – new
Paragraph 15 a – new
15 a. Regrets the suggested cuts in rural development programmes. Asks the council to reconsider this given the current atmosphere given the ongoing increasing insecurity and depopulation in many rural communities;
Amendment 23 #
2014/2040(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 15 d – new
Paragraph 15 d – new
15 d. Calls on the council to use the money saved under 'enchancing public awareness of the Common Agricultural Policy' to increase the rural development budget.
Amendment 429 #
2014/0257(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 118 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 118 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
The principles to be used to establish the list of antimicrobials which will be restricted in veterinary medicine should not interfere with or deter Member States from prohibiting the use of certain antimicrobials in some species if they deem it appropriate.
Amendment 73 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19
Recital 19
(19) Taking into account the serious public health risk posed by resistance to antimicrobials, it is appropriate to limit the use of medicated feed containing antimicrobials for food-producing animals. Preventive use orMedicated feed containing antimicrobials should not be used to enhance the performance of food-producing animals should in particular not be allowedprevent diseases in food-producing animals unless such use is permitted under Regulation (EU) 2015/... (Veterinary Medicinal Products). The ban on the use of antibiotics as growth-promoting agents as provided by Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003 should be strictly complied with.
Amendment 169 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 1
1. Feed business operators manufacturing, storing, transporting and placing on the market medicated feed and intermediate products shall apply measures in accordance with Article 3 and 4 to avoid carry-over or restrict the levels determined by the European Food Safety Authority.
Amendment 171 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 180 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 a
Carry-over limits for specific active substances shall be determined by a scientific risk assessment carried out by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), where such limits have not been already determined.
Amendment 189 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. In Member States where reduction to these levels will be burdensome, the Commission and Member States shall promote potential funding sources to provide assistance to farmers to meet these targets, from within the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund or EU Health Programme, for example.
Amendment 226 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Article 15 – paragraph 5
5. The prescribed medicated feed may be used only for animals examined by the person who issued the prescription and only for a diagnosed disease. Significant and imminent health risks may be grounds for the limited and non-routine prophylactic use of vaccines and anti- parasitical treatments. The person who issued the prescription shall verify that this medication is justified for the target animals on veterinary grounds. Furthermore hethat person shall ensure that the administration of the veterinary medicinal product concerned is not incompatible with another treatment or use and that there is no contra-indication or interaction where several medicinal products are used.
Amendment 256 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) the quantities required for one month's treatment or two weeks in case of medicated feed containing antimicrobial veterinary medicinal products, unless prescribed for longer by a veterinarian in exceptional cases with veterinarian justification.
Amendment 266 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2
Article 16 – paragraph 2
2. Medicated feed containing antimicrobial antibiotic veterinary medicinal products shall not be used to prevent diseases in food-producing animals or to enhance their performanceunless such use is permitted under Regulation (EU) 2015/... (Veterinary Medicinal Products).
Amendment 289 #
2014/0255(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Member States shall ensure that develop appropriate collection systems are in place, in cooperation with the operators of the sector for medicated feed and intermediate products that are expired or in case the animal holder has received a bigger quantity of medicated feed than he actually uses for the treatment referred to in the veterinary prescription.
Amendment 47 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) The analysis of different policy options points out that a unified approach under a common legal and financial framework, across the two existing schemes, is more appropriate and effective in meeting the specific objectives that the Common Agricultural Policy is pursuing through school schemes. This would allow Member States to maximise the impact of distribution within a constant budget and increase the management efficiency. However, in order to take into account the differences between the fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk products and their supply chains, certain elements should remain separate, such as the respective budgetary envelopes. In light of the experience with the current schemes, the participation in the scheme should continue to be voluntary for Member States. Taking into the account the different consumption situations across Member States, the possibility should be given to participating Member States to choose whether they want to distribute all or just one of the products eligible for the supply to children in educational establishments.
Amendment 61 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) A trend of declining consumption in particular of fresh fruit and vegetables including bananas and drinking milk has been identified. It is therefore appropriate to focus the distribution under the school schemes on these products. This would in turn also help reduce the organisational burden for schools, increase the impact of the distribution within a limited budget and would be in line with the current practice, as these products are most frequently distributed. However, efforts will also be made to ensure the distribution of locally grown products.
Amendment 73 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Educational measures that support the distribution are necessary in order to make the scheme effective in reaching its short- and long-term objectives of increasing the consumption of selected agricultural products and shaping healthier diets. Considering their importance, these measures should support both the fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk distribution. They should be eligible for the Union aid. As supporting measures they represent a critical tool to reconnect children with agriculture and its different products and to meet the objectives that the scheme is pursuing, Member States should be allowed to include a wider variety of agricultural products into their thematic measures. However, so as to promote healthy eating habits, Member States may involve their national health authorities should be involved in this process andto approve the list of these products, as well as the two groups of products eligible for the distribution, and decide on their nutritional aspects, if they so wish.
Amendment 74 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Educational measures that support the distribution are necessary in order to make the scheme effective in reaching its short- and long-term objectives of increasing the consumption of selected agricultural products and shaping healthier diets. Considering their importance, these measures should support both the fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk distribution. They should be eligible for the Union aid. As supporting measures they represent a critical tool to reconnect children with agriculture and its different locally-grown products and t. To meet the objectives that the scheme is pursuing, Member States should be allowed to include a wider variety of agricultural products into their thematic measures, preferably according to what is produced in the region. However, so as to promote healthy eating habits, the national health authorities should be involved in this process and approve the list of these products, as well as the two groups of products eligible for the distribution, and decide on their nutritional aspects.
Amendment 86 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In order to ensure a sound budgetary management, a fixed ceiling of the Union aid towards the distribution of fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk, supporting educational measures and related costs should be provided for. This ceiling should reflect the current situation. In light of the experience gained and with a view to simplify the management, the financing models should be approximated and based on a single approach as regards the level of Union financial contribution. It is therefore appropriate to limit the level of Union aid towards the price of products through a maximum Union aid per portionchild both for fruit and vegetables including bananas and for milk andto abolish the principle of obligatory co-financing for fruit and vegetables including bananas. Considering the price volatility of products in question, the power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of measures setting the levels of the Union aid towards the price of a portion of products and laying down the definition of a portion.
Amendment 92 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) In order to ensure the efficient and targeted use of Union funds, the power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of measures fixing the indicative allocations of the Union aid to each Member State and the methods for reallocating aid between Member States on the basis of aid requests received. The indicative allocations should be fixed separately for the fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk in line with the voluntary approach to distribution. The allocation key for fruit and vegetables including bananas should reflect the current allocations by Member States, will be based on the objective criteria of the number of children in the age group of six- to ten-year olds as a proportion of the population, taking into the account also the development status of regions concerned. In order to allow Member States to maintain used for bothe scale of their current programmes and with a view of encouraging others to take up the distribution of milk, it is appropriate to use the combination of two keys for the allocation of the funds for milk, namely the historical use of funds by Member States under the School Milk Scheme and the objective criteria of the number of children in the age group of six- to ten- year olds as a proportion of the population used for the fruit and vegetables including bananas. In order to find the right proportion for these two keys, the power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of adopting additional rules concerning the balance between the two criteria. Furthermore, considering the recurrent changes in the demographic or development situation of regions in Member States, the power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of assessing every three years whether the Member States' allocations, based on those criteria, are still up to datehemes.
Amendment 112 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9
Recital 9
(9) In the interest of sound administration and budget management, Member States wishing to participate in the distribution of fruit and vegetables including bananas and/or milk should apply every five years for the Union aid. With a view of simplifying the procedures and management, this application should be done on the basis of separate aid requests. Following the requests of the Member States, the Commission should decide on the definitive allocations for fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk within the appropriations available in the budget and after taking into account limited transfers between their allocations, which encourage prioritising of distribution based on the nutritional needs, The power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the measures setting the conditions and the limits concerning these transfers.
Amendment 120 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The national strategy should be considered as the condition for the Member State's participation in the scheme and as a strategic multiannual document, setting out targets to be achieved by Member States and their priorities. To reduce the administrative burden on national authorities, the national strategies should be submitted once every five years. Member States should be allowed to update them regularly, in particular in light of the evaluations and reassessment of priorities or targets.
Amendment 121 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) The national strategy should be considered as the condition for the Member State’s participation in the scheme and as a strategic multiannual document with a timeframe of three to five years, setting out targets to be achieved by Member States and their priorities. Member States should be allowed to update them regularly, in particular in light of the evaluations and reassessment of priorities or targets.
Amendment 124 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) In order to ensure the visibility of the scheme, Member States should explain in their strategy how they will guarantee the added value of their scheme, especially where products financed under the Union scheme are consumed at the same time as other meals provided to children in an educational establishment. In order to ensure that the educational purpose of the Union scheme is attained and effective, the power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the rules concerning the distribution of the products financed under the Union scheme in relation to the provision of other meals in educational establishments and their preparationbe empowered to decide how best to promote it both nationally and locally as a tailored approach promoting local produce is likely to have the largest uptake.
Amendment 129 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to ensure that the price of products provided to children under the scheme fully reflects the amount of the aid provided and that subsidised products are not deflected from their intended use, the power to adopt certain acts should be delegated to the Commission in respect of establishment of price monitoring under the scheme. These acts will not act as deterrents to Member States encouraging the sourcing of local produce.
Amendment 175 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 – paragraph 3
Article 23 – paragraph 3
3. As a condition for their participation in the school scheme Member States shall draw up, prior to their participation in the school scheme, and subsequently every sixthree years, at national or regional level, a strategy for the implementation of the scheme. The strategy may be amended by a Member State, in particular in the light of monitoring and evaluation. The strategy shall at least identify the needs to be met, the ranking of the needs in terms of priorities, the target population, the results expected and the quantified targets to be attained in relation to the initial situation, and lay down the most appropriate instruments and actions for attaining those objectives.
Amendment 200 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 – paragraph 5
Article 23 – paragraph 5
5. When drawing up their strategies, Member States shall determine a list of agricultural products, in addition to fruit and vegetables, bananas and milk, that may occasionally be included under the supporting educational measures, as well as the region where they are produced.
Amendment 207 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 – paragraph 6
Article 23 – paragraph 6
6. Member States shall choose the products to be featured in the distribution or to be included in supporting educational measures on the basis of objective criteria which may include the health and environmental considerations, seasonality, variety, or availability of local produce, always giving priority to the extent practicable to products originating in the Unregion, particularly to local purchasing, organic products, short supply chains or environmental benefits.. When this is impossible, the programme must justify this option.
Amendment 216 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 – Paragraph 7
Article 23 – Paragraph 7
7. Member States shallmay, in order to promote healthy eating habits, ensure thatmpower their competent health authorities to endorse the list of all the products supplied under the school scheme and decide on their nutritional aspects, if they so wish.
Amendment 236 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 2
Article 23 a – paragraph 2
2. The aid referred to in paragraph 1 for fruit and vegetables including bananas and milk shall be allocated to each Member State taking into account of the following:the objective criteria based on the number of six- to ten-year old children as a proportion of the population.
Amendment 238 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 2 – point a
Article 23 a – paragraph 2 – point a
Amendment 255 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 23 a – paragraph 2 – point b
Amendment 278 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 3
Article 23 a – paragraph 3
3. Member States shall apply every five years for the participation in the school scheme by submitting their request for the Union aid for each product they wish to distribute as referred to in Article 23(1)(a).
Amendment 284 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 4
Article 23 a – paragraph 4
4. Without exceeding the global ceiling of EUR 230 million resulting from the amounts referred to under points (a) and (b) of paragraph 1, Member States may transfer up to 150% of their indicative allocations for fruit and vegetables including bananas or for milk to the other sector under the conditions to be specified by the Commission by means of delegated acts adopted in accordance with Article 227.
Amendment 307 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 8
Article 23 a – paragraph 8
8. Member States participating in the school scheme shallmay, if they wish, publicise, at the places where the food is distributed, their involvement in the scheme and the fact that it is subsidised by the Union. Member States shallmay, if they wish ensure the added value and the visibility of the Union school scheme in relation to the provision of other meals in educational establishments.
Amendment 312 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 23 a – paragraph 8 a (new)
Article 23 a – paragraph 8 a (new)
8 A. Member States guarantee that at least 5 % of their annual allocations are put towards measures promoting the programme and education for healthy eating.
Amendment 340 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Article 24 – paragraph 3
Amendment 346 #
2014/0014(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5
Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Article 24 – paragraph 4
Amendment 252 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9 a (new)
Recital 9 a (new)
(9a) Physical commodities present unique characteristics which must be taken into account in order to avoid undermining the integrity of commodity benchmarks and ensure the existing transparency in the commodity market. Accordingly Annex III of this Regulation reflects the principles developed for commodities benchmarks by IOSCO, the International Energy Agency and the International Energy Forum specially designed to apply to all commodity benchmarks within this Regulation.
Amendment 279 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 37 a (new)
Recital 37 a (new)
(37a) In the cases where this Regulation captures or potentially captures supervised entities and markets covered by Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1a (REMIT), the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) should be consulted by ESMA in order to draw on ACER's expertise in energy markets and to mitigate dual regulation. ______________ 1a Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on wholesale energy market integrity and transparency (OJ L 326, 8.12.2011, p. 1).
Amendment 281 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41
Recital 41
(41) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) and in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to respect for private and family, the protection of personal data, the right to freedom of expression and information, the freedom to conduct a business, the right to property, the right to consumer protection, the right to an effective remedy, the right of defence. ThereforeAccordingly,, this Regulation should be interpreted and applied in accordance with those rights and principles. Notably, when this Regulation refers to rules governing the freedom of expression in other media and the rules or codes governing the journalist professions, consideration should be given to these freedoms as they are guaranteed in the Union as in the Member States and as recognised under Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights and other relevant provisions.
Amendment 305 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) commodity benchmarks which comply with the IOSCO Principles of 5 October 2012 for Oil Price Reporting Agencies or the IOSCO Principles of 17 July 2013 for Financial Benchmarks, until such time as ESMA, on the basis of the review of the IOSCO Principles for Oil Price Reporting Agencies, and of Annex III of this Regulation, has determined whether and how commodity benchmarks can be encompassed within the scope of this Regulation or whether they should be governed by their own rules.
Amendment 385 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) The administrator shall obtain the input data from a reliable and representative panel or sample of contributors so as to ensure that the resultant benchmark is reliable and representative of the market or economic reality that the benchmark is intended to measure (‘Representative contributors’). In case of transactional based benchmarks the administrator shall obtain the data in an aggregated anonymous form from trade repositories and regulators according to Directive 2014/65/EU [MIFID], in Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011 [REMIT] and Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 [EMIR].
Amendment 403 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1
Article 8 – paragraph 1
1. The administrator of benchmarks under Article 5 shall ensure that there are adequate systems and effective controls designed to ensure the integrity of the input data for the purpose of paragraph 2.
Amendment 409 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The administrator shall adopt in collaboration with the contributors a code of conduct for each benchmark clearly specifying the administrator's and contributors' responsibilities and obligations with respect to the provision of the benchmark which shall include a clear description of the input data to be provided, and at least the elements set out in Section D of Annex I.
Amendment 413 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Article 9 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The Commission shall take into account the different characteristics of benchmarks and contributors, notably in terms of differences in input data and methodologies, whether the contributors are voluntary, the risks of input data being manipulated and international convergence of supervisory practices in relation to benchmarks. of this regulation. ESMA shall provide guidelines, after close consultation with ACER, with regard to applicability of legally binding codes of conduct in particular with regard to non-regulated entities and price reporting agencies within the EU.
Amendment 458 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. Where contributors, comprising at least 20% of the contributors to a critical benchmark have ceased contributing, or there are sufficient indications that at least 20% of the contributors are likely to cease contributing, in any year, the competent authority of the administrator of a critical benchmark shall have the power to:
Amendment 475 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Article 14 – paragraph 2 – introductory part
2. For a critical benchmark, tThe supervised entities that are required to contribute in accordance with paragraph 1 shall be determined by the competent authority of the administrator on the basis of the following criteria:
Amendment 511 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15 a (new)
Article 15a Disclosure or dissemination of information in the media Where information is disclosed or disseminated and where recommendations are produced or disseminated for the purpose of journalism, such disclosure or dissemination of information shall be assessed taking into account the rules of governing the freedom of expression, the freedom and pluralism of the media and the rules or codes of governing the journalist profession, unless: a) the persons concerned or persons closely associated with them derive, directly or indirectly, an advantage or profits from the disclosure or the dissemination of the information in question; or b) the disclosure or the dissemination is made with the intention of misleading the market as to the supply of, demand for, or price of financial instruments.
Amendment 554 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 20 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) administrators authorised or registered in that third country comply with binding requirements which are equivalent to the requirements resulting from this Regulation, in particular taking into account if the legal framework and supervisory practice of a third country ensures compliance with the IOSCO principles on financial benchmarks published on 17 July 2013; and with the IOSCO Principles for Oil Price Reporting Agencies, published on 5 October 2012, and with the IOSCO Principles for the Regulation and Supervision of Commodity Derivative Markets published on 15 September 2011, when oil or commodity benchmarks are involved; and
Amendment 657 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – point e
Article 31 – paragraph 2 – point e
(e) a temporary ban prohibiting any natural person, who is held responsible for such breach, from exercising managementy functions in administrators or contributors;
Amendment 708 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Performing its role in the implementation and monitoring of Regulation (EU) No 1227/2011, the Agency for the Cooperation of Energy Regulators (ACER) shall cooperate with ESMA for the purposes of this Regulation and, without delay, shall supply all information necessary to fulfil its obligations.
Amendment 709 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 35 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. As regards commodity benchmarks, ESMA, on the basis of the review of the IOSCO Principles of 5 October 2012 for Oil Price Reporting Agencies, and of Annex III of this Regulation, which is to serve as a guide, shall, within 18 months of the entry into force of this Regulation, determine whether and how commodity benchmarks can be encompassed within the scope of this Regulation or whether they should be governed by their own rules. It shall submit its findings to the European Parliament and the Commission.
Amendment 712 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 2
Article 37 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated acts referred to in Articles 3(2), 5(3), 7(3), 9(3), 11(4), 12(3), 16(2), and 23(7) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from [date of entry into force of this Regulation] period of five years from [date of entry into force of this Regulation]. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the five-year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended for periods of an identical duration, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension no less than three months before the end of each period.
Amendment 728 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 40 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
By 1 July 2018, the Commission shall review and rassess if this Regulation, in what concerns the Commodity Benchmarks, is in line with the Final Report ton the European Parliament and the Council on this Regulation and in particular:IOSCO Principles for Oil Price Reporting Agencies, and present its recommendations and proposals to the European Parliament to encompass the international agreements, if it is considered to be adequate.
Amendment 780 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 1 – point e
Annex III – point 1 – point e
(e) criteria that address the assessment periods where the submitted data fall below the methodology's recommended transaction data threshold or the requisite administrator's quality standards, including any alternative methods of assessment including theoretical estimation models. The criteria shall explain the procedures used where no transaction data exists;
Amendment 781 #
2013/0314(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex III – point 3 – point b a (new)
Annex III – point 3 – point b a (new)
(ba) for the continued publication of the benchmark according to the previous methodology so as to compare its integrity to that of the new methodology and ensure a transition period for entities using it for their contracts.
Amendment 98 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Money market funds (MMF) provide, similar to banks and other financial institutions, short-term finance to financial institutions, corporates or governments. By providing finance to these entities, money market funds contribute to the financing of the European economy.
Amendment 106 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4
Recital 4
(4) Large redemption requests force MMFs to sell some of their investment assets in a declining market, fuelling a liquidity crisis. In these circumstances, money market issuers can face severe funding difficulties if the market of commercial papers and other money market instruments dries up. Any contagion to the short term funding market could then also represent direct and major difficulties for the financing of the financial institutions, corporations and governments, thus the economy. In the absence of a credible solution to the too- big-too fail problem for banks this has major implications from an economic stability point of view.
Amendment 109 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) In order to preserve the integrity and stability of the internal marketduce systemic risk and the possibility of public bail-outs by promoting more resilient MMFs and limiting contagion channels, it is necessary to lay down rules regarding the operation of MMFs, in particular on the composition of the portfolio of MMFs. Uniform rules across the Union are necessary to ensure that MMFs are able to immediately redeem investors, especially during stressed market situations. Uniform rules on the portfolio of a money market fund are also required to ensure that MMFs are able to face massive and sudden redemption requests by a large group of investors.
Amendment 122 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23
Recital 23
(23) Asset Backed Commercial Papers (ABCPs) should not be considered eligible money market instruments to the extent that they respect additional requirements. Due to the fact that during the crisis certain securitisations were particularly unstable, it is necessary to impose maturity limits and quality criteria on the underlying assets. Not all categories of underlying assets should be eligible because some were more confronted to instability than others. For this reason the underlying assets should be exclusively composed of short-term debt instruments that have been issued by corporates in the course of their business activity, such as trade receivables. Instruments such as auto loans and leases, equipment leases, consumer loans, residential mortgage loans, credit card receivables or any other type of instrument linked to the acquisition or financing of services or goods by consumers should not be eligible. ESMA should be entrusted with drafting regulatory technical standards to be submitted for endorsement by the Commission with regard to the conditions and circumstances under which the underlying exposure or pool of exposures is considered to exclusively consist of corporate debt and the conditions and numerical thresholds determining when corporate debt is of high credit quality and liquid, due to the fact that these instruments have proven to be particularly unstable and intransparent.
Amendment 133 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) In order to limit risk-taking by MMFs it is essential to reduce counterparty risk by subjecting the portfolio of MMFs to clear diversification requirements. To this effect it is also necessary that the reverse repurchase agreements be fully collateralized and that, for limiting the operational risk, one reverse repurchase agreement counterparty cannot account for more than 20% of the MMF's assets. All over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives should be subject to Regulation (EU) No 648/20125. Over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives should not be eligible. __________________ 5 Regulation (EU) No 648/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (OJ L 201, 27.7.2012, p. 1).
Amendment 171 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) As a MMF should publish a NAV that reflects all movements in the value of its assets, the published NAV should be rounded at maximum to the nearest basis point or its equivalent. As a consequence, when the NAV is published in a specific currency, for example €1, the incremental change in value should be done every €0.0001. In the case of a NAV at €100, the incremental change in value should be done every €0.01. Only if the MMF is a CNAV MMF, the MMF can publish a price that does not follow entirely the movements in the value of its assets. In this case the NAV can be rounded to the nearest cent for a NAV at €1 (every €0.01 move) for an interim period of five years.
Amendment 196 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 47
Recital 47
(47) External support provided to a MMF other than a CNAV MMF with the intention of ensuring either liquidity or stability of the MMF or de facto having such effects increases the contagion risk between the MMF sector and the rest of the financial sector. Third parties providing such support have an interest in doing so, either because they have an economic interest in the management company managing the MMF or because they want to avoid any reputational damage should their name be associated with the failure of a MMF. Because these third parties do not commit explicitly to providing or guaranteeing the support, there is uncertainty whether such support will be granted when the MMF needs it. In these circumstances, the discretionary nature of sponsor support contributes to uncertainty among market participants about who will bear losses of the MMF when they do occur. This uncertainty likely makes MMFs even more vulnerable to runs during periods of financial instability, when broader financial risks are most pronounced and when concerns arise about the health of the sponsors and their ability to provide support to affiliated MMFs. For these reasons, MMFs should not rely on external support in order to maintain their liquidity and the stability of their NAV per unit or share unless the competent authority of the MMF has specifically allowed the external support in order to maintain stability of financial markets.
Amendment 226 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Article 1 – paragraph 2
Amendment 238 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 11
(11) ‘amortised cost method’ means a valuation method which takes the acquisition cost of an asset and adjusts this value for amortisation of premiums (or discounts) until maturity; the use of this accounting method shall be subject to approval of national competent authorities;
Amendment 263 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
An MMF or an MMF manager may be established in a third country provided that the third country is not a country: - where there are no or nominal taxes, - where there is a lack of effective exchange of information with foreign tax authorities, - where there is a lack of transparency in legislative, judicial or administrative provisions, - where there is no requirement for a substantive local presence, - which acts as an offshore financial centre.
Amendment 270 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
An AIF MMF or an AIFM of a MMF may be established in a third country provided that the third country is not a country: - where there are no or nominal taxes, - where there is a lack of effective exchange of information with foreign tax authorities, - where there is a lack of transparency in legislative, judicial or administrative provisions, - where there is no requirement for a substantive local presence, - which acts as an offshore financial centre.
Amendment 280 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) financial derivative instruments used exclusively for hedging purposes;
Amendment 300 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point d
Amendment 307 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. A securitisation shall not be considered as eligible provided that all of the following conditions are met:.
Amendment 309 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point a
Amendment 313 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point b
Amendment 316 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 1 – point c
Amendment 323 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 335 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 337 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 343 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
A financial derivative instrument shall be eligible for investment by a MMF if it is dealt in on a regulated market referred to in Article 50(1)(a), (b) or (c) of Directive 2009/65/EC or over-the-counter (OTC) , provided that all of the following conditions are in any case fulfilled:
Amendment 346 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the counterparties to OTC derivative transactions are institutions subject to prudential regulation and supervision and belonging to the categories approved by the competent authorities of the MMF's home Member State;
Amendment 349 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) the OTC derivatives are subject to reliable and verifiable valuation on a daily basis and can be sold, liquidated or closed by an offsetting transaction at any time at their fair value at the MMF's initiative.
Amendment 352 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. Securitisations as defined in Article 10 shall not be received by the MMF as part of a reverse repurchase agreement. The assets received by the MMF as part of a reverse repurchase agreement shall not be sold, reinvested, pledged or otherwise transferred.
Amendment 367 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Article 14 – paragraph 2
Amendment 372 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3
Article 14 – paragraph 3
3. The aggregate risk exposure to the same counterparty of the MMF stemming from OTC derivative transactions shall not exceed 5% of its assets.
Amendment 382 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 5 – point c
Article 14 – paragraph 5 – point c
(c) OTC financial derivative instruments giving counterparty risk exposure to that body.
Amendment 602 #
2013/0306(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
Article 29 – paragraph 2 – point g a (new)
(ga) it shall not be offered to retail investors as defined in Article 4 (11) of Directive 2014/64/EU [MIFID II].