[ParlTrack]

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
–

The European Parliament rejects the Commission proposal.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Citation 1

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article~~s 43(2), 91, 100, 114, 192, 194(2) and~~ 337 thereof,

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) In accordance with Article 3(3) of Treaty on European Union (TEU), the establishment of an internal market is one of the main objectives to be reached by the Union in cooperation with the Member States. Pursuant to Article 26(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), the Union shall adopt measures with the aim of establishing or ensuring the functioning of the internal market. Under Article 26(2) TFEU, the internal market shall comprise an area without internal frontiers in which the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is ensured. The internal market has generated new opportunities and economies of scale for European undertakings, has created jobs, has offered greater choice at lower prices for consumers and has enabled European citizens to live, study and work in the Union. Despite all the progress made, significant difficulties in the establishment and functioning of the internal market remain and European citizens and undertakings are unable to reap the full benefits of the internal market. In certain cases, suboptimal information affecting the action by the Commission on the application of Union law in the area of the internal market increases the risk of the emergence of difficulties to trade in the internal market resulting from uncoordinated national enforcement activities or multifarious development of national regulatory solutions to those problems.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2

(2) Article 337 TFEU provides for the Commission's power, within the limits and under the conditions, which the Council may lay down acting by a simple majority, to collect any information required for the performance of its tasks. However, in Case C-490/10 European Parliament v Council, the Court has clarified that where the collection of information contributes directly to the achievement of the objectives of a given European Union policy, the act laying down the conditions for such collection must be based on the legal basis which relates to that policy. This Regulation provides ~~not only~~ for a framework in which the Commission can collect information from undertakings and associations of undertakings, but also for measures to enforce the requests for information. Therefore, while taking fully into account the fact that the Commission derives its power to collect information directly from the Treaty, this Regulation should be based, in addition to Article 337 TFEU, on the provisions of Articles 43(2), 91, 100, 192 and 194(2) TFEU and also of Article 114 TFEU, which provides for the adoption of measures necessary for the establishment and functioning of the internal market, including where differences between national rules are such as to obstruct the fundamental freedoms or where it is necessary to prevent the emergence of difficulties in the establishment and functioning of the internal market.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)

(3a) Undertakings and associations of undertakings recognize the importance of the well-functioning internal market, which has been proved by their willingness to cooperate with the Commission. As evidenced by numerous cases, undertakings and associations of undertakings respond to the requests of the Commission to provide also information on a voluntary basis. Nevertheless, it shall be noted, that such tool may prove useful in case when well- targeted and timely information is needed in order to prove the existence of infringement vis-à-vis à Member States.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 b (new)

(3b) The introduction of the Single Market Information Tool does not aim to gather confidential business-related information from undertakings and association of undertakings for the purpose of creating new policies.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) As recognised by the Court of Justice, when enforcing Union law, the Commission, whereas it may rely on indicia, is largely reliant on the information provided by complainants, by public and private bodies, and by the Member States concerned. Pursuant to Article 4(3) TEU, Member States are under the duty, as recalled several times by the Court of Justice, to facilitate the Commission’s tasks, including in particular its role as guardian of the Treaties. However, Member States may not always have access to the relevant market information that the Commission would need to perform its tasks or their national rules on information collection may prevent them from disclosing the information collected.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) Where detailed, comparable, up- to-date, and often confidential market information could only be obtained from market players in a timely manner, it appears therefore appropriate, as a last resort, to empower the Commission, within the limits and under the conditions laid down in this Regulation, to request undertakings and associations of undertakings to directly provide it, in a timely manner, with comprehensive, accurate and reliable quantitative and qualitative market information where other sources of information have proven unavailable, insufficient or inadequate. To this effectBefore requesting information, the Commission should first adopt a decision stating why other means to obtain the necessary information have proven ineffective. It is understood that the notion of undertaking has the same meaning as in other areas of EU law, in particular competition law.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11

(11) ~~For this investigative tool to be effective, the~~In order to minimise costs of replying to requests for information, sought should relate to the application of relevant Union law. This may consist, for example, of factual market data, including cost structure, pricing policy, products or services characteristics or geographical distribution of customers and suppliers. It may also consist ofuch requests should only cover information that is likely to be at the disposal of the undertakings’ or associations of undertakings’ fact-based analysis of the functioning of the internal market, such as in relation to perceived regulatory and entry barriers or to costs of cross-border operations. In order to minimise costs of replying to requests for information, such requests should only cover information that is likely to be concerned (its ‘raw data’). The Commission cannot request information that needs to be aggregated according to specific criteria, spans a long period of time or goes significantly back in time, ats th~~e disposal of the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned~~is may prove unduly burdensome.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 a (new)

(11a) The Commission should only be allowed to request undertakings and associations of undertakings to deliver pre-existing documents and the answers to purely factual questions.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11 b (new)

(11b) As enshrined in Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Articles 47 and 48 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and confirmed by the Court of Justice of the European Union, undertakings and association of undertakings have right for the protection against self-incrimination. Therefore, the right not to give evidence against oneself or the right of silence shall be granted to all undertakings and the associations of undertakings without exception, regardless the area of the internal market and the nature of information requested by the Commission.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) When issuing requests for information to undertakings and associations of undertakings, the Commission is required to undertake a careful selection of addressees of the requests, so that requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing sufficiently relevant information, notably larger undertakings in the relevant Member States. These requests for information are aimed at solving a presumed, i.e. based on the available information, serious problem with the application of Union law in the areas of the internal market, agriculture and fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resources), transport, environment and energy. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. Accordingly, sanctions provided for in the instrument are designed to address exclusively two instances. They only cover an intentional or through gross negligence lack of a response to a request for information and an intentionally or through gross negligence incorrect, incomplete, or misleading reply. The collected information, if relevant, could also be used to provide insight into situations where undertakings find it difficult to comply with the legislation, with a view to improving the proper application of the internal market rules. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro- undertakings, which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requests for information to this category of undertakings. When issuing requests for information to small and medium-sized undertakings, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality. While SMEs are unlikely to operate at a larger scale enabling them to significantly affect market outcomes, the information gathered from SMEs could prove valuable in informing the Commission on difficulties in establishment and functioning of the internal market. Information readily available to SMEs might be of anecdotal nature but it could still alert the Commission about single market difficulties SMEs might suffer from. SMEs would normally not and should not incur any significant additional costs of data gathering in response to this tool. Given their relatively weaker bargaining position in value chains, SMEs might be more forthcoming with information when granted a procedure duly respecting confidentiality and anonymity. Resolving a difficulty in the single market establishment and functioning could in particular benefit SMEs as it is often the small innovative firms which face the greatest barriers when trying to start up and scale up across the single market. For reasons of consistency and legal certainty, the definitions of ‘micro-undertaking’, ‘small undertaking’ and ‘medium-sized undertaking’ of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29 should apply. __________________ 29 Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p.19).deleted Directive 2013/34/EU of the European

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) When issuing requests for information to undertakings and associations of undertakings, the Commission is required to undertake a careful selection of addressees of the requests, so that requests are only addressed to undertakings and associations of undertakings that are capable of providing sufficiently relevant information, notably larger undertakings in the relevant Member States. These requests for information are aimed at solving a presumed, i.e. based on the available information, serious problem with the application of Union law in the areas of the internal market, agriculture and fisheries (excluding the conservation of marine biological resoupporting the Commission´s actual findings in infringement procedurces), transport, environment and energy. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. Accordingly, sanctions provided for in the instrument are designed to address exclusively two instances. They only cover an intentional or through gross negligence lack of a response to a request for information and an intentionally or through gross negligence incorrect, incomplete, or misleading reply. The collected information, if relevant, could also be used to provide insight into situations where undertakings find it difficult to comply with the legislation, with a view to improving the proper application of the internal market rules. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro- undertakings, which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requ against Member States in pending cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union. Their aim is not to prosecute undertakings for the underpinning behaviour, if any. With a view to avoid disproportionate administrative burden for micro, small and medium-sized undertakings unlests for information to this category of undertakings. When issuing requests for information to small and medium-sized undertakings, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality. While SMEs are unlikely to operatethey are part of a group of undertakings which qualifies at least ats a larger scale enabling them to significantly affect market outcomes, the information gathered from SMEs could prove valuable in informing the Commission on difficulties in establishment and functioning of the internal market. Information readily available to SMEs might be of anecdotal nature but it could still alert the Commission about single market difficulties SMEs might suffer from. SMEs would normally not and should not incur any significant additional costs of data gathering in response to this tool. Given their relatively weaker bargaining position in value chains, SMEs might be more forthcoming with information when granted a procedure duly respecting confidentiality and anonymity. Resolving a difficulty in the single market establishment and functioning could in particular benefit SMEs as it is often the small innovative firms which face the greatest bar group under Article 3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council29, and which are anyway unlikely to be in a position to provide sufficiently relevant information, the Commission should be precluded from issuing requests for information to these categoriers ~~when trying to start up and scale up across the single market~~of undertakings. For reasons of consistency and legal certainty, the definitions of ‘micro-undertaking’, ‘small undertaking’ and ‘medium-sized undertaking’ of Directive 2013/34/EU ~~of the European Parliament and of the Council29~~ should apply. __________________ 29 Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, p.19).

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14

(14) The investigative tool provided for in this Regulation is particularly useful for ensuring the application of Union law in the area of the internal market by the Commission. It is also useful, for any subsequent enforcement action by the Member States concerned that would require the use of the relevant information collected using this power and disclosed by the Commission to the Member States concerned. Moreover, where difficulties in the application of existing rules are experienced, including situations where undertakings are not able to comply with the legislation due to lack of legal clarity, this investigative tool could also be useful after the use of other tools and sources of relevant information have proven inadequate, for contributing to the conception or design of regulatory solutions. It is also appropriate not to allow the use of such information for other purposes, in particular the application of the competition rules of the TFEU, without prejudice to the reuse of information made public.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) The Commission should be able to enforce compliance with the requests for information it addresses to any undertaking or association of undertakings, as appropriate, by means of proportionate fines and periodic penalty payments imposed by way of decision. In setting the amounts of fines and periodic penalty payments, the Commission should take due account of the principle of proportionality (including the aspects of appropriateness), in particular as regards small and medium-sized undertakings. The rights of the parties requested to provide information should be safeguarded by giving them the opportunity to make known their views before any decision imposing fines or periodic penalty payments is taken.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Taking due account of the principle of proportionality (including the aspects of appropriateness), the Commission should be able to reduce the periodic penalty payments or waive them entirely, when addressees of requests provide the information requested, albeit after the expiry of the deadline. For reasons of legal certainty, it is also appropriate to provide for limitation periods for the imposition and enforcement of fines and periodic penalty payments.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) The Court of Justice should, in accordance with Article 261 TFEU, have unlimited jurisdiction in respect of decisions by which the Commission imposes fines or periodic penalty payments under this Regulation, which means that it may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed by the Commission.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) The disclosure of information about an undertaking’s business activity could result in a serious harm to the same undertaking. Therefore, the Commission should take due account of the legitimate interests of undertakings, in particular the protection of their business secrets. To ensure that business secrets and other confidential information provided to the Commission are treated in compliance with Article 339 TFEU, any undertaking or association of undertaking submitting information should clearly identify which information it considers to be confidential and why it is confidential. The Commission should not be able to disclose confidential information provided by such respondents to the Member State concerned by the request unless it has previously obtained their agreement to disclose that information to that effect. The respondent concerned should be required to provide the Commission with a separate non-confidential version of the information that could be disclosed to the relevant Member State. In cases where information marked as confidential does not seem to be covered by obligations of professional secrecy, it is appropriate to have a mechanism in place according to which the Commission can decide the extent to which such information can be disclosed. Any such decision to reject a claim that a piece of information is confidential should indicate a period at the end of which it may be disclosed, so that the respondent can make use of any judicial protection available to it, including any interim measure. The rights of the respondent should be safeguarded by giving it the opportunity to make known its views before any decision to reject the confidentiality claim is takenEven if the Commission considers that a confidentiality claim is ill- founded, it should not decide that the relevant information is to be disclosed.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) The disclosure of information about an undertaking’s business activity could result in a serious harm to the same undertaking. Therefore, the Commission should take due account of the legitimate interests of undertakings, in particular the protection of their business secrets. It is essential that the undertakings or association of undertakings concerned by the request, if they estimate that it could jeopardise their substantial economic interests, have the right to appeal against the request by the Commission through the national courts, with suspensive effect concerning Commission’s procedure. To ensure that business secrets and other confidential information provided to the Commission are treated in compliance with Article 339 TFEU, any undertaking or association of undertaking submitting information should clearly identify which information it considers to be confidential and why it is confidential. The Commission should not be able to disclose confidential information provided by such respondents to the Member State concerned by the request unless it has previously obtained their agreement to disclose that information to that effect. The respondent concerned should be required to provide the Commission with a separate non-confidential version of the information that could be disclosed to the relevant Member State. In cases where information marked as confidential does not seem to be covered by obligations of professional secrecy, it is appropriate to have a mechanism in place according to which the Commission can decide the extent to which such information can be disclosed. Any such decision to reject a claim that a piece of information is confidential should indicate a period at the end of which it may be disclosed, so that the respondent can make use of any judicial protection available to it, including any interim measure. The rights of the respondent should be safeguarded by giving it the opportunity to make known its views before any decision to reject the confidentiality claim is taken.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19 a (new)

(19a) According to the subsidiarity rule, it is essential to include national courts in the procedure. Therefore, the undertakings or associations of undertakings shall have the right to appeal against the request by the Commission before the national courts as well as against the Commission's decision on confidentiality of the information to be provided, as provided for in Article 7. Submitting an appeal against the Commission request or decision to the court shall have a suspensive effect on the Commission’s proceeding.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. In particular, this Regulation seeks to ensure full respect for the right to respect for private and family life, the right to protection of personal data, the right to good administration, in in particular the access to files, while respecting business secrecy, the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial, the right of defence and the principles of legality ~~and proportionality of penalties~~.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) Where the measures provided for in this Regulation entail the processing of personal data, they should be carried out in accordance with Union law on the protection of personal data, in particular Directive 95/46/EC30 . With regard to the processing of persona data by the Commission and within the framework of this Regulation, it shall comply with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council31 . __________________ 30Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, (OJ L 281, 23.11.1995). 31Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data, (OJ L 8, 12.1.2001, p. 1).

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2

(2) agriculture and fisheries, ~~other than~~excluding the conservation of marine biological resources;

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

(3a) ‘association of undertakings’ means a group of companies as defined in Article 2(13) of Regulation (EU) 2015/848.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1

Where a serious difficulty with the application of Union law risks undermining the attainment of an important Union policy objective, the Commission may request information from undertakings or associations of undertakings, as provided for in Chapter II, for the purpose of addressing the above- mentioned difficultyThe Commission may request information from undertakings or associations of undertakings, as provided for in Chapter II, where justified on the basis of the following: (a) public security requirements; (b) fighting economic crimes; or (c) combating unfair commercial practices across the Member States as laid down in the Directive 2005/29/EC.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

~~The Commission shall take due account of the principle of proportionality, in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings.~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. The undertakings or association of undertakings concerned by the request as referred to in Article 4 may, if they consider that the request could jeopardise their substantial economic interests, appeal against the request by the Commission before the national courts. The national court may quash the request from the Commission. Submitting an appeal to the court shall have suspensive effect on the time limits.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

In the cases provided for in Article 4 and under the conditions laid down in Article 5, the Commission may, by simple request or by decision, requ~~ire~~est undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide information on a voluntary basis.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

In the cases provided for in Article 4 and under the conditions laid down in Article 5, the Commission may, by ~~simple request or by decision~~formal written request, require undertakings and associations of undertakings to provide information.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Jasenko SELIMOVIC, Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 3

The Commission shall not issue requests for information in accordance with this Regulation to micro-undertakings, small undertakings and medium-size undertakings unless they are part of a group of undertakings which qualifies at least as ~~small group as defined in~~a large group under Article ~~6(5~~3(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. The simple request referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis and its purpose, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information ~~is to~~may be provided. ~~It shall also refer to the fines provided for in Article 9(1) for supplying incorrect or misleading information.~~

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2

2. The ~~simple~~ request referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis and its purpose, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. I~~t shall also refer to the fines provided for in Article 9(1) for supplying incorrect or misleading information~~n addition, it shall indicate the right of the undertaking or association of undertakings to appeal against the request through the national courts.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis, the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information is to be provided. It shall also indicate the fines provided for in Article 9(1) and the periodic penalties payments provided for in Article 9(2), as appropriate. In addition, it shall indicate the right of the undertaking or association of undertakings to have the decision reviewed by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The undertaking and association of undertakings concerned may request an extension of the time-limit, in accordance with Article 14.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

The decision referred to in paragraph 1 shall state the legal basis, the purpose of the request, specify what information is required and prescribe a proportionate time limit within which the information ~~is to be provided. It shall also indicate the fines provided for in Article 9(1) and the periodic penalties payments provided for in Article 9(2), as appropriate~~may be provided.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

The Commission shall simultaneously provide a copy of the ~~simple request or of the decision~~request referred to in this Article to the Member State in whose territory the registered seat of the undertaking or association of undertakings is situated.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Where the Commission has launched a formal infringement procedure pursuant to Article 258 TFEU, the Commission shall provide the Member State concerned by the procedure with a copy of all ~~simpl~~the requests ~~or decisions~~ referred to in this Article issued in the context of that procedure, irrespective of where the registered seat of the undertaking or association of undertakings is situated.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 5

5. The ~~decisions~~request referred to in paragraph 1 shall be addressed to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. The Commission shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

The Commission shall ~~verify whether~~not be entitled to object the confidentiality claim of the information transmitted made by the respondent undertakings or associations of undertakings under subparagraph 2 of paragraph 2 ~~is well-founded and proportionate~~.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

After giving the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned the opportunity of making known its views, the Commission may take a decision finding that the information claimed to be confidential is not protected, and setting a date after which the information is to be disclosed. That period shall not be less than 1 month.deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3

~~That decision shall be notified to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned without delay.~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3 a (new)

That decision may be appealed against before the national courts within one month from the date of its formal written notification by the Commission. The period of time referred to in the second subparagraph of this paragraph shall be suspended from the date of appeal to a national court.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Edward CZESAK

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3

~~The~~Any information ~~that has already been made public may be used by the Commission for a purpose other than the one set out in this Regulation~~gathered for the purpose set out in this Regulation can be processed by the Commission no longer than for the period of 36 months as from the date of their provision, after which period they must be removed from the database and destroyed.

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9

1. where deemed necessary and proportionate, impose on undertakings or association of undertakings fines not exceeding 1 % of their total turnover in the preceding business year where they intentionally or through gross negligence: (a) supply incorrect or misleading information in response to a request made pursuant to Article 6(2); (b) supply incorrect, incomplete or misleading information in response to a decision adopted pursuant to Article 6(3) or do not supply the information within the prescribed time limit. 2. The Commission may, by decision, impose on undertakings or associations of undertakings periodic penalty payments where an undertaking fails to supply complete, accurate and not misleading information within the prescribed deadline as requested by the Commission by a decision adopted pursuant to Article 6(3). The periodic penalty payments shall not exceed 5 % of the average daily turnover of the undertaking or association concerned in the preceding business year for each working day of delay, calculated from the date established in the decision, until it supplies the information requested or required by the Commission. 3. association of undertakings provides no or incomplete information, the Commission shall prior the imposition of a fine or penalty, set a final deadline of two weeks to receive the missing information. 4. account the nature, gravity and duration of the breach of Article 6(1), as well as the principle of proportionality in particular with regard to small and medium-sized undertakings when fixing the amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment. 5. associations of undertakings have satisfied the obligation which the periodic penalty payment was intended to enforce, the Commission may reduce or waive the amount of the periodic penalty payment. 6. accordance with paragraph 1 or 2, the Commission shall give the concerned undertakings or associations of undertakings the opportunity of making known their views.Article 9 deleted Fines and periodic penalty payments The Commission may, by decision, Where the undertaking or The Commission shall take into Where the undertakings or Before adopting any decision in

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10

Limitation period for the imposition of 1. Commission by Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of three years. 2. paragraph 1 shall start on the day on which the infringement referred to in Article 9 is committed. However, in the case of continuing or repeated breaches of Article 6(1), the period shall begin on the day on which the breach ceases. 3. Commission for the purpose of investigating or pursuing a possible breach of Article 6(1) shall interrupt the limitation period for the imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments, with effect from the date on which the action is notified to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. 4. limitation period shall start running afresh. However, the limitation period shall expire at the latest on the day on which a period of six years has elapsed without the Commission having imposed a fine or a periodic penalty payment. That period shall be extended by the time during which the limitation period is suspended in accordance with paragraph 5. 5. imposition of fines or periodic penalty payments shall be suspended for as long as the decision of the Commission is the subject of proceedings pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union.Article 10 deleted fines and periodic penalty payments The powers conferred on the The period provided for in Any action taken by the After each interruption, the The limitation period for the

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11

Limitation period for the enforcement of fines and periodic penalty payments 1. enforce decisions adopted pursuant to Article 9 shall be subject to a limitation period of five years. 2. paragraph 1 shall startArticle 11 deleted The powers onf the ~~day on which the dec~~Commission taken pursuant to Article 9 becomes final. 3. The limitation period provided for in paragraph 1 shall be interrupted: (a) modifying the original amount of the fine or periodic penalty payment or refusingo The period provided for in by notification of a decision by any application for modification; (b) acting at the request of the Commission, or of the Commission, intended to enforce payment of the fine or periodic penalty payment. 4. limitation period shall start running afresh. 5. in paragraph 1 shall be suction of a Member State, After each interruption, the The limitation period provided for the respeonde~~d for so long as: (a) pay; (b) suspended pursuant to a decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union.~~nt is allowed time to the enforcement of payment is

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12

The decisions taken pursuant to Article 9(1) and (2) shall be addressed to the undertaking or association of undertakings concerned. The Commission shall notify the decision to the addressee without delay.Article 12 deleted Addressees of decisions

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13

Review by the Court of Justice The Court of Justice of the European Union shall have unlimited jurisdiction within the meaning of Article 261 TFEU to review fines or periodic penalty payments imposed by the Commission. It may cancel, reduce or increase the fine or periodic penalty payment imposed.Article 13 deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2

~~2. The Commission shall publish in the Official Journal of the European Union the decisions which it takes pursuant to Article 9(1) and (2).~~deleted

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

Richard SULÍK, Edward CZESAK, Daniel DALTON

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1

With regard to the processing of personal data within the framework of this Regulation, Member States shall carry out their tasks for the purposes of this Regulation, Regulation (EU) 2016/6791a and in accordance with the national laws~~, regulations or administrative provisions transposing Directive 95/46/EC~~ implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/679. With regard to the processing of personal data by the Commission within the framework of this Regulation, it shall comply with the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001. __________________ 1aRegulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)

2018/03/28
Committee: IMCO

49 Amendments of Edward CZESAK related to 2017/0087(COD)

ParlTrack - 2011-2024