63 Amendments of Pedro MARQUES related to 2021/2185(INI)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
- having regard to the European Committee of the Regions Opinion (ECON-VII/015) to the European Commission Report of 7 July 2021on Competition Policy 2020 (COM(2021)0373),
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
- having regard to Directive (EU) 2019/1 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2018 to empower the competition authorities of the Member States to be more effective enforcers and to ensure the proper functioning of the internal market5,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 b (new)
Citation 8 b (new)
- having regard to the Special Advisors Report on “Competition Policy for the Digital Era” commissioned by DG Competition, 1b __________________ 1bEuropean Commission, Directorate- General for Competition, Montjoye, Y., Schweitzer, H., Crémer, J., Competition policy for the digital era, Publications Office, 2019, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2763/407537
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 c (new)
Citation 8 c (new)
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 d (new)
Citation 8 d (new)
- having regard to the Final 1c Report for DG Justice on "Consumer vulnerability across key markets in the European Union"1d, __________________ 1cEuropean Commission, Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency, Consumer vulnerability across key markets in the European Union : final report, Publications Office, 2016, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2818/056024 1dEuropean Commission, Consumers, Health, Agriculture and Food Executive Agency, Consumer vulnerability across key markets in the European Union : executive summary, Publications Office, 2017, https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2818/165625
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 e (new)
Citation 8 e (new)
- having regard to the “Online platforms and digital advertising” Market Study1e of the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) of the United Kingdom, __________________ 1eCompetition and Markets Authority (CMA), "Online platforms and digital advertising market study", Market Study Final Report, 1 July 2020, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/m edia/5fa557668fa8f5788db46efc/Final_re port_Digital_ALT_TEXT.pdf
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 f (new)
Citation 8 f (new)
- having regard to the Digital Advertising Services Inquiry Report1f of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), __________________ 1fAustralian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), "Digital advertising services inquiry", Final report, August 2021, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digit al%20advertising%20services%20inquiry %20-%20final%20report.pdf
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
- having regard to the Communication (C(2021) 8838final) from the Commission on Guidelines on the application of EU competition law to collective agreements regarding the working conditions of solo self-employed persons of December 9th 20217,
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
- having regard to Communication C(2021) 9817 final of December 21st 2021 from the Commission on the Guidelines on State aid for climate, environmental protection and energy 2022 (CEEAG)10,
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 b (new)
Citation 13 b (new)
- having regard to the joint motion for a resolution by the European Parliament on the climate, energy and environmental State aid guidelines (CEEAG) (2021/2923(RSP))of October 20th 2021,2a __________________ 2a Texts Adopted, P9_TA(2021)0441.
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 c (new)
Citation 13 c (new)
- having regard to the European Court of Auditors’ (ECA) Special Report 24/2020 entitled "The Commission’s EU merger control and antitrust proceedings: a need to scaleup market oversight",
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas one of the purposes of Union rules that seek to ensure that competition is not distorted in the internal market, is to increase the well-being2b of consumers, and that competition law and competition policy therefore have an undeniable impact on the specific economic interests of final customers who purchase goods or services as acknowledged by the General Court of the European Union Judgment of June, 7 2006 in Joined Cases T-213/01 and T- 214/01; __________________ 2bJoined Cases T-213/01 and T-214/01 Österreichische Postsparkasse and Bank für Arbeit und Wirtschaft v Commission [2006] ECR II-1601, para 115.
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)
Recital A b (new)
Ab. whereas one of the aims of the Union's competition rules is to protect competition in the market as a means of enhancing consumer welfare2c and of ensuring an efficient allocation of resources in accordance with the European Commission’s Guidelines on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty; __________________ 2c OJ C, 27.4.2004, p. 97, para. 33.
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A c (new)
Recital A c (new)
Ac. whereas EU competition policy must safeguard a fair labour market, including the digital labour market, with concrete actions to address existing and emerging challenges, such as skills gaps, inequalities in the workforce, and disparities between the functions of traditional and digital labour markets;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A d (new)
Recital A d (new)
Ad. whereas EU competition policy must be adapted to address new vulnerabilities, as well as socio-economic and territorial inequalities and disparities identified across Member States, in order to preserve cohesion in the Single Market;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A e (new)
Recital A e (new)
Ae. whereas EU competition policy must stimulate businesses to invest and deploy more advanced digital infrastructure and tools (e.g. cloud, microprocessors, artificial intelligence) and less polluting and more efficient manufacturing technologies;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the Commission needs an appropriate and effective set of instruments to enforce competition rules, methods, and tools to adapt competition law enforcement and competition rules to the digital market and properly ensure their uniform implementation and full alignment with the Union’s environmental and social goals;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas digital markets are becoming more concentrated and demonstrate lower levels of investment in innovation and overall disruption as a consequence of deteriorating market dynamics and increased market power;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas EU competition rules and the enforcement thereof as regards digital markets have to be reassessed in order to appropriately address the borderless characteristic that defines digital markets;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)
Recital B c (new)
Bc. whereas EU competition policy should be fit for the sustainable transition and should be aligned with the climate, energy, circularity, zero-pollution, and biodiversity goals and ambitions of the Union;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas international cooperation and new instruments such as the Foreign Subsidies Regulation are essential to ensure third countries are disincentivised from subsidising undertakings that are active in the Union, in line with the rules of the single market, which prohibit such practices for Member States and European businesses;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas competitive advantages may be established and unfair competitive practices may be employed, as a result of typically legitimate and highly sophisticated tax avoidance schemes, involving several jurisdictions;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C c (new)
Recital C c (new)
Cc. whereas such tax schemes may be effective through EU based subsidiaries of non – EU legal entities, thus creating a competitive disadvantage of European entities within the single market;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C d (new)
Recital C d (new)
Cd. whereas significant tax differences between Member States regarding digital service providers and digital market participants may result in creating unfair competitive advantages;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C e (new)
Recital C e (new)
Ce. whereas the EU should observe and closely monitor third countries’ and non-EU entities’ policies and practices, which directly or indirectly distort competition within the EU, and proceed with appropriate measures to prevent such policies and practices for the benefit of EU citizens and businesses;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that the challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic need to be adequately taken into account and addressed, and that the guiding principle should be the reasonable phasing out of specific support measuressolidarity, fairness, and the reasonable and progressive phasing out of specific support measures, when the economic situation allows it; stresses the need to avoid cliff-edge effects and avert an asymmetric recovery and risk of an even greater economic divergence within the single market; highlights that the future of the pandemic cannot be safely predicted;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Stresses that companies should respect international standards on social, economic and environmental well-being and climate change along its value chain, in line with OECD guidelines; calls on the Commission, in this light, to present a legal framework for a mandatory human rights and environmental due diligence instrument without delay;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Welcomes the Commission’s initiative to issue guidelines on the application of EU competition law to collective agreements regarding the working conditions of solo self-employed persons; urges the Commission to clarify that collective agreements of solo self- employed persons fall outside the scope of competition law, while respecting existing collective bargaining systems and fundamental labour rights; calls for the broadest possible approach, in order to ensure access to collective bargaining for all solo self-employed workers, offline as well as online;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls for the development of an effective system of well-adjusted and complementing regulatory and enforcement instruments fit for the digital economy, in light of the inherent differences of digital markets to traditional markets for which several competition rules and enforcement tools were initially drafted and provided so as to facilitate the digital and green transition;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for a synchronisation of EU competition law with the broader constitutional values and programmatic aims regarding sustainability, at the international, EU and national levels;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Reaffirms the need for an in-depth review and effective implementation of existing competition instruments, and the adoption of new ones based on digital technologies fit for investigations in digital markets;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Highlights the need to adequately meet the new circumstances, increasing the effectiveness of the investigations through the use of new techniques stemming from computational means (big data, artificial intelligence, machine learning/deep learning) in competition law enforcement, considering in particular tailor-made solutions for competition law monitoring and enforcement in digital markets;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Welcomes the transposition of Directive (EU) 2019/1 into national law in Member States, empowering national competition authorities (NCAs) to be more effective enforcers of competition policy; emphasises that NCAs’ strengthened investigation and decision-making capacities as well as sufficient levels of human and financial resources allow for a better enforcement of competition rules independently and impartially; recommends increasing the analytical capacity of NCAs to enable them to better address the complexities arising in the enforcement of competition law in digital markets; further recommends NCAs to collaborate on sharing of best practices and work together with other competent authorities taking a multi-disciplinary approach in breaking down enforcement silos as anti-competitive conduct may also break areas of data protection or consumer law;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Takes note of theNotes with appreciation the six month renewal of the temporary framework for State aid measures, which was established in response to the COVID- 19 crisis and is designed to accelerate the recovery; emphasises that the prolongation of the economic effects of the COVID-19 crisis on several core industries with the emergence of new virus variants need be taken into consideration for possible future renewals of the temporary framework; reminds that State aid schemes are devised at the Member State level; is concerned with possible distortions to the cohesion of the internal market as a result of the temporary measures contributing to an uneven playing field with undertakings based in Member States with different spending power take advantage of the exceptional measures and the divergent fiscal spaces; urges the Commission monitor any such effects;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Emphasises that a smooth, timely, and proportionate exit from the Temporary State aid Framework is necessary to progressively reduce the flexibility granted under the temporary measures in alignment with the evolution of the COVID-19 crisis; reiterates that the National Recovery and Resilience Plans (NRRPs) are appropriate vehicles to accelerate the recovery of national economies; reminds that NRRP spending at the Member State level should incorporate European goals to deliver on the digital and green transitions; highlights the possible distortive effects to competition in national markets stemming from NRRPs pending should be monitored; calls on the Commission to maintain its coordinating role in ensuring that NRRPs are synchronised with the EU’s Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF); urges the Commission to closely monitor possible fragmentations of the European Industrial strategy stemming from diverging national industrial policies in order to deliver a coherent, sustainable, and resilient recovery from the COVID-19 crisis; further calls on the Commission to introduce a post COVID-19 roadmap for targeted State aid in order to promote competitiveness and safeguard jobs, in particular in areas where employment levels are abnormally low;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Reiterates the importance of the Commission and the Member States launching a post-COVID-19 roadmap for better targeted State aid in order to promote competitiveness and growth and ensure high-quality jobs; calls on the Commission and Member States to launch a post COVID-19 roadmap to tackle fragmentation, market distortions and a possible unlevelled playing field in the single market caused by Member States’ asymmetric application of State aid; further calls on the Commission to introduce guidance on the appropriate use competition policy tools to foster a recovery cantered on sustainable jobs and sustainable transition of market participants; recommends the roadmap encompassed an assessment on the effect of the COVID-19 crisis on EU competition policy;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Stresses the need to take into account particularly the SMEs from rural and less developed areas in the post- COVID-19 roadmap which need to be provided access to wider markets and eliminate spatial problems resulting from geographical disadvantages, aiming to provide them with equal support, fair opportunities and a balanced development across the single market;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal for a new regulation on foreign subsidies in order to curtail potentially distortive effects on the single market, close the enforcement gap, and level the playing field for European companieall undertakings active in the internal market including non-EU undertakings by using EU competition law instruments and their key building blocks;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Notes that national tax policies and measures can impact tax collection of other Member States and can have a distortive effect on both fair competition and investments in the single market; recalls that some Member States’ schemes taxing profits made in an international context at a lower rate than the national nominal rate or artificially lowering marginal rates risk putting SMEs at a competitive disadvantage;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Welcomes the adoption of the public country-by-country reporting (pCBCR) proposal in November 2021 and urges Member States to transpose the obligations into their national laws as soon as possible; looks forward to the Commission legislative proposal to extend corporate tax transparency to all countries where an undertaking or group of undertakings operates in, based on the methodology for calculating effective tax rates established under Pillar 2 of the OECD negotiations; repeats its call for a minimum effective corporate tax rate; welcomes the Commission’s “Business in Europe: Framework for Income Taxation”(BEFIT) proposal and calls on Member States to swiftly agree on an ambitious proposal for a European corporate tax rulebook;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Reiterates that limited access to relevant data may hinder participants’ entry into the market, and inhibit the overall rate of expansion and innovation in a given market; notes with concern that gatekeepers that develop a data advantage over rivals can achieve critical economies of scale therefore contributing to the further tilting of competitive balances in digital markets;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)
Paragraph 13 b (new)
13b. Stresses that digital transformation is exacerbating the need for adaptation of competition policy and adjustments to the enforcement thereof; reminds that the characteristics of digital markets such as higher returns to scale and strong network externalities, particularly in the platform economy, enable incumbent market participants to establish advantageous competitive positions and create lock-in effect for categories of users; reminds that participants in the digital market can collect, store, process, combine, and accumulate vast amounts of data, and that differential access thereto may enable possible barriers to market entry and distortions to competition; highlights that data concentrations are increasingly relevant and appropriate identifiers for relevant markets and potential distortions to competition;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 c (new)
Paragraph 13 c (new)
13c. Takes note of the Commission’s opening of antitrust investigations into possible anticompetitive conducts in the online advertising technology sector; reminds that the investigations are aimed at assessing whether EU competition rules have been violated by favouring own online display advertising technology services in the ad tech supply chain, and for using advertising data gathered from advertisers to compete with them in the classified ads market; takes note of the CMA’s 2020 market study into online platforms and digital advertising, and the ACCC’s 2021 report of its inquiry into the markets for the supply of ad tech services and ad agency services; urges the Commission to build on the momentum and early indications of the recent antitrust investigations into possible anticompetitive conduct in the online advertising technology sector, and commence a market study of the sector in the EU to investigate issues that have an impact on competition, the functioning of the market, and consumer-specific issues such as choice, quality, safety, privacy, and information, as well as consumer understanding, behaviour and decision making;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Welcomes the recent judgment by the General Court of the EU3 , which confirms the Commission’s assessment as regards a dominant market position and is proof and an example of the effective application of traditional EU competition rules in the context of a digital economy; notes with concern that Case T-612/17 started in November 2010, and that the digital market is a fast-moving market; emphasises the need for new instruments to respond more swiftly to actual or potential market dominance and the potential distortions to competition thereof, as well as any negative impacts on consumer welfare and choice they create; __________________ 3Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2021, Google and Alphabet v Commission, T-612/17, ECLI:EU:T:2021:763.
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses that the rise of exploitative and exclusionary practices such as self- preferencing, exploitation of upstream providers, and excessive data collection enables digital platforms to determine market dynamics and control the ecosystem; notes with concern that excessive data processing whether through direct or third-party tracking which is non-compliant with data protection and privacy legislation can be viewed as a form of quality degradation by dominant providers and negatively impact consumer welfare;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Reaffirms the need to redefine the concept of consumer welfare and well- being within the scope of application of EU competition law based on appropriate benchmarks, values and a range of variables that account for the impact thereto; emphasises that a novel concept of consumer welfare in competition policy should encompass sustainability, social progress and economic resilience goals to the same extent as the goals of effective competition; notes with concern that short-term consumer price effects are insufficient indicators of economic welfare and social progress; reminds that a price-centric approach to consumer welfare is incompatible with the zero monetary price norms in the digital ecosystem and where possible consumer harm may not be easily demonstrable in price and output effects;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)
Paragraph 14 c (new)
14c. Emphasises the importance of developing accurate and appropriate new theories of harm to take account of the evolution of business models and enforcing competition law thereto; calls on enforcement authorities and agencies to incorporate the intricacies of evolving business models when exploring novel theories of harm in order to avoid situations where infringement procedures may result in unintended consequences such as increased business uncertainty or possible chilling effects on competition;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 d (new)
Paragraph 14 d (new)
14d. Considers the introduction of the concept of consumer vulnerability in competition assessments an appropriate measure to adapt the enforcement of EU competition law to evolving market dynamics; emphasises that established concepts from consumer law can enable the creation of an intervention benchmark in competition cases; stresses that enhanced protection to vulnerable groups of consumers is pivotal in digital markets, where the information asymmetry between the consumer and the provider as regards data processing and analytic processes employed to influence consumption behaviour may result in exposure to vulnerability and increased switching costs for consumers; further considers that the identification of consumer vulnerabilities in competition assessments could provide relevant insights to assessing restrictive practices or designing consumer-facing remedies;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Recalls the Council's call on the Commission to consider how to tackle distortive effects resulting from a participation of bidders using tax havens outside the EU for tax avoidance purposes, giving a potential unfair advantage to multinational companies participating in such activities3a; recalls the European Parliament’s call on the Commission to consider the development of certain conditions to be applied to corporations and aggressive tax planning enablers and facilitators in public procurement procedures3b; urges the Commission to evaluate whether current legal standards allow the exclusion of undertakings or groups of undertakings using tax havens to reduce their tax bill based on the possible exclusion of bidders based on their integrity; invites the Commission to provide legal clarity in the form of guidelines to its Public Procurement Framework in this regard; calls on national governments to integrate this in their national frameworks; __________________ 3aCouncil Conclusions: Public Investment through Public Procurement: Sustainable Recovery and Reboosting of a Resilient EU Economy (13352/20), 25 November 2020, General Secretariat of the Council, para. 20, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/4 6905/st13352-en20.pdf 3b P9_TA(2021)0022, para. 23 - 26.
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Welcomes the Commission’s revised Climate, Energy and Environmental Aid Guidelines (CEEAG) and its efforts to strengthen the 2014 guidelines and to aim for a higher level of environmental protection, which includes the decarbonisation of the energy sector; recalls the Union’s climate objective of reducing green house gas emissions by at least 55 % by 2030, as laid down in the European Climate Law, and the target of reaching climate neutrality by 2050 at the latest; welcomes the increased focus on fighting climate change and reducing green house gas emissions in the draft CEEAG; maintains that environmentally sustainable State aid is key to meeting the EU climate, energy and environmental protection objectives, while ensuring a just transition;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
18b. Welcomes the new chapter in the CEEAG on aid for the closure of coal, oil shale and peat activities; underlines that the phasing out of coal is one of the most important drivers for decarbonisation and recalls that the European Parliament in its resolution of 20 October 2021 called for introducing clear safeguards on the phasing out of fossil fuels, and that these safeguards may include mandatory closure dates; recalls furthermore that this resolution states that state aid rules should not cause or contribute to lock-in effects of green house gas emissions or the creation of stranded assets, and asks the Commission to monitor and apply measures to avoid lock-in effects where possible, in a way that is fully in line with the Union’s climate objectives;
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 c (new)
Paragraph 18 c (new)
18c. Welcomes European Commission’s Executive Vice-President Vestager’s remarks at the Conference of Europe Ministers of the German Länder on January 30, 2020 regarding the EU’s State aid rules for the future, enabling governments to support companies to decarbonise and electrify production4a; highlights that the results of the “fitness check” of the State aid rules confirms that adjustments would be necessary to align State aid rules with the objectives of the European Green Deal; __________________ 4aConference of Europe Ministers of the German Länder, Brussels, European Commission Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager, "State aid and a green, digital future", 30 January 2020, https://ec.europa.eu/commission/commissi oners/2019- 2024/vestager/announcements/state-aid- and-green-digital-future_en
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 d (new)
Paragraph 18 d (new)
18d. Reaffirms that individual State aid rules require further adaptation to be aligned with recent environmental and energy legislation, political and sustainability priorities, and developments in both technology and markets; emphasises that State aid rules should also be aligned with future challenges, in particular through the revision of the energy and environmental rules aimed at facilitating measures to further promote a modern decarbonised and circular economy;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 e (new)
Paragraph 18 e (new)
18e. Welcomes the European Commission’s introduction of common assessment principles in a number of State aid guidelines to determine the compatibility of State aid with the internal market, including the proportionality test to ensure the consistent application of the rules; recommends that adjustments may be necessary to the common assessment principles to ensure that the objectives of the European Green Deal are met; notes with regret the Judgement of the European Court of Justice of September in case C-594/18 P, according to which the Commission did not have to take into account environmental protection principles in its State aid decision4b; calls on the Commission to update the common assessment principles and develop new guidelines on how sustainability considerations should be incorporated in the assessment of compatibility of aid to facilitate competitiveness based on high social and environmental standards; __________________ 4bCase C-594/18 Austria v Commission [2020] ECLI:EU:C:2020:742, para. 102.
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Urges the Commission to accelerate its commitment to reviewing its notice on the definition of relevantthe notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of Community competition law (“Notice”); recalls that the Notice is an important tool the Commission uses in its enforcement of those rules to identify the boundaries of competition between companies; emphasises that the Notice needs to be updated to reflect technological change, the evolving market characteristics of the digital market ecosystem, multi-sided markets, the importance of data, and zero-price markets;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Is of the opinion that the accelerating speed of market entry and exit, and that of innovation, in combination with shorter innovation cycles, requires more dynamic analyses as regards market definition in digital markets; recalls that in dynamic market contexts, high market shares may not necessarily be indicative of market power as demonstrated by Case T-79/125a, and Commission decision in Case M.62815b; highlights that in digital markets where boundaries are becoming increasingly more blurred, ecosystem-specific aftermarkets may need to be defined where market players’ lock-in strategies are successful and consumers find it difficult to leave the ecosystem; __________________ 5aCase T-79/12, ECLI:EU:T:2013:635, para. 69. 5bCommission decision of 7 October 2011 in Case M.6281 Microsoft/Skype para. 78.
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)
Paragraph 20 b (new)
20b. Emphasises that price is not an all-encompassing parameter for market definition in all cases in the digital economy; highlights that in zero-price markets, consumers access products and services in exchange for their data and are, in return, exposed to profiling and advertising where functionalities such as quality, privacy, data processing, and attention are more fitting parameters; reminds that the Small but Significant Non-transitory Increase in Price (SSNIP) is not the only method available to the Commission when defining the relevant product market; calls on the Commission to consider the Small but Significant Non- transitory Decrease in Quality (SSNDQ) method employed in Case AT.400995c as an alternative tool, where appropriate, for market definition in the review of the Notice; __________________ 5c Commission decision of 18 July 2018 in Case AT.40099, para. 263 - 267
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)
Paragraph 20 c (new)
20c. Emphasises that technological means and the large amounts of personal data relevant for online personalisation and price discrimination are extensive, developing rapidly, and difficult to detect; recalls that online marketplaces, platforms, and social media may use data analytics and profiling techniques to improve the efficiency of advertising up to the level of individual consumers, personalise the ranking of the offers, or vary prices to reflect the cost of serving individual customers; reiterates that personalised pricing practices including but not limited to ranking and nudging may present a challenge for consumers and prevent them from getting the best deal on the market; calls on the Commission to further investigate the impact of personalised pricing and integrate this practice in the product dimension of the evidence relied on to define relevant markets in the review of the Notice;
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)
Paragraph 20 d (new)
20d. Reaffirms that the possession of data which is not available to market entrants, and may result in a competitive advantage, can also lead to market dominance; notes with concern that the development of such dominance over market rivals can extend to adjacent markets where the possession of data may result in a competitive advantage in providing complimentary services; urges the Commission to coordinate the development of an analytical framework as regards access to data, and the sustainability of differential access to data, and provide guidance to competition authorities to objectively, and on a case- by-case basis, incorporate such assessments in measuring market power;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Calls on the Commission to review its merger and acquisition rules when it comes to assessing personal data; calls, in particular, on the Commission to fully consider and assess personal data assets as all other traditional physical assets when it decides on digital mergers and acquisitions; urges the European Commission to take a broader view when evaluating digital mergers and assess the impact of data consolidation; notes that the acquisition of targets with specific data resources can bring about a concentration in control over valuable and non-replicable data resources and result in better data access for the merging parties than for their competitors; stresses that data consolidation via mergers may strengthen a dominant position or allow the acquiring entity to leverage market power, and sometimes raise foreclosure concerns;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Considers in particular antitrust proceedings as too lengthy, slowing down much needed market corrections and consequently negatively impacting effectiveness of competition law enforcement, especially in the case of rapidly growing digital markets; calls therefore for faster antitrust proceedings and asks for cooperation on this not only from the Commission but also from the companies under investigation; condemns in that context that some companies under investigation artificially prolong investigations by systematically requesting prolongations of deadlines and by replying to requests for information only with substantial delays or by submitting ineffective proposals for commitments they would take;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Points out that while the level of fines that can be imposed by the Commission is amongst the highest in the world, nearly two-thirds of the fines imposed by the Commission in cartel cases since 2006 stayed below 0.99% of global annual turnover, thus well below the ceiling of 10% of a company’s annual worldwide turnover allowed; notes that while the ECA rightly points out that the amount of fines alone does not allow conclusions on whether they are effective deterrents, the ECA also underlines that the ceiling itself of possible fines can limit the deterrent effect in “serious cases”;