6 Amendments of Burkhard BALZ related to 2013/0264(COD)
Amendment 156 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Since the adoption of Directive 2007/64/EC new types of payment services have emerged, especially in the area of internet payments. In particular, third party providers (hereinafter ‘TPPs’) have evolved, offering so-called payment initiation services to consumers and merchants, often without entering into the possession of the funds to be transferred. Those services facilitate the e-commerce payments by establishing a software bridge between the website of the merchant and the online banking platform of the consumer in order to initiate internet payments on the basis of credit transfers or direct debits. The TPPs offer a low-cost alternative to card payments for both merchants and consumers and provide consumers a possibility to shop online even if they do not possess credit cards. However, as TPPs are currently not subject to Directive 2007/64/EC, they are not necessarily supervised by a competent authority and do not follow the requirements of Directive 2007/64/EC. This raises a series of legal issues, such as consumer protection, security and liability as well as competition and data protection issues. The new rules should therefore respond to those issueA European regulation and supervision should thus be applicable to TPPs. The new rules should therefore respond to those issues, safeguard the high level of security as well as ensure practicability and user-friendliness in the interaction with account servicing payment service providers.
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 63
Recital 63
(63) Different national practices concerning charging for the use of a given payment instrument (hereinafter ‘surcharging’) have led to extreme heterogeneity of the Union’s payments market and become a source of confusion for consumers, in particular in the e- commerce and cross-border context. Merchants located in Member States where surcharging is allowed offer products and services in Member States where it is prohibited and in this case still surcharge the consumer. Moreover, a strong rationale for revision of surcharging practices is supported by the fact that Regulation (EU) No xxx/yyyy establishes rules for multilateral interchange fees for card-based payments. As interchange fees are the mainone element making most card payments expensive and surcharging is in practice limited to card-based payments, the rules on interchange fees should be accompanied by a revision of surcharging rules. In order to promote cost transparency and the use of the most efficient payment instruments, Member States and payment service providers should not prevent the payee from requesting a charge from the payer for using a specific payment instrument, duly taking into account the provisions set out in Directive 2011/83/EU. However, the right of the payee to request a surcharge should onlyremain applicable during a transitional period and after that period apply to those payment instruments for which interchange fees are not regulated. This should act as a steering mechanism towards the cheapest means of payments.
Amendment 376 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 55 – paragraph 4
Article 55 – paragraph 4
4. However, after the completion of the transitional period referred to in Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No [XX/XX/XX] on interchange fees, Member States shall ensure that the payee shall not request charges for the use of payment instruments for which interchange fees are regulated under Regulation (EU) No [XX/XX/XX/] [OP please insert number of Regulation once adopted]
Amendment 399 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
(aa) when communicating with the account servicing payment service provider, in order to authenticate itself in an unequivocal manner, to comply with the security features provided by the account servicing payment service provider;
Amendment 402 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 58 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) to authenticate itself in an unequivocal manner towards the account servicing payment service provider(s) of the account owner. and to transmit the consent of the payer to the account servicing payment service provider simultaneously with the payment initiation;
Amendment 583 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 94 a (new)
Article 94 a (new)
Article 94a Single European Interface 1. EBA shall create a panel under Article 41 of Regulation (EU) 1093/2010 to develop a single European payments interface focused on achieving a maximum security level for all payments services in the Union and to allow third party payment services providers to access the information necessary to authorise a payment on behalf of the payer, including certain account data necessary for the validation of a positive account balance and including the secure transmission of the payer's credentials. 2. The panel will consist of representatives of the Commission, EBA and different market players from all Member States, and shall ensure that the entire market for payments services is represented. 3. EBA shall develop draft regulatory technical standards in order to specify the requirements for the single European payments interface. EBA shall submit those draft regulatory technical standards to the Commission by ...* [OJ please insert date: 12 months after the date of entry into force of this Directive]. Power is conferred on the Commission to adopt the regulatory technical standards referred to in the first subparagraph in accordance with Articles 10 to 14 of Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010. 4. The single European interface and the requirements shall be subject to regular reviews in order to take account of innovations and technical developments. 5. This Article shall not preclude the application of other obligations laid down in this Directive.