Tag Archives: FI

Financial perspectives system and the multiannual financial framework

Leave a reply

Financial perspectives system and the multiannual financial framework

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Financial perspectives system and the multiannual financial framework

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Budget

Financial perspectives system and the multiannual financial framework

 

The political and institutional balance of the Community’s system of finance gradually was marked by ever-increasing strains in the 1980s. The conflict between the two arms of the budgetary authority (the European Parliament and the Council) meant that the annual budgetary procedure became increasingly difficult to administer and resulted in budgetary imbalances and a growing mismatch between Community resources and requirements. This prompted the Community to introduce a system designed to improve the budgetary procedure.

Through an interinstitutional agreement (IIA), the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agree in advance on the main budgetary priorities for a period covering a number of years. These budgetary priorities establish a framework for Community expenditure (the multiannual financial framework) in the shape of a financial perspective. The system of financial perspectives thus improves the budgetary procedure whilst ensuring budgetary discipline. The multiannual financial framework is not mentioned in the treaties.

Financial perspective and multiannual financial framework: a means of ensuring budgetary discipline

The multiannual financial framework indicates the maximum amount and the composition of foreseeable Community expenditure. The first Interinstitutional Agreement was concluded in 1988 for the application of the 1988-92 financial perspective (Delors I package), which was intended to provide the resources needed for the budgetary implementation of the Single European Act. Since then, the financial perspectives have been updated in 1992 for the period 1993-99 (Delors II package), in 1999 for the period 2000-06 (” Agenda 2000 “) and in 2006 for the period 2007-13.

The purpose of the financial perspective is therefore to strengthen budgetary discipline, to keep the total increase in expenditure under control and to ensure that the procedure runs smoothly. The multiannual financial framework imposes a dual ceiling on expenditure: one for total expenditure and one for each category of expenditure.

Structure of the mutiannual financial framework

For each programming period, the multiannual financial framework determines “ceilings” (the maximum amounts of commitment appropriations and payment appropriations) per “heading” (the categories of expenditure) for each year. The annual budgetary procedure determines the exact level of expenditure and the breakdown between the various budget lines for the year in question.

The expenditure allocated to each heading is based on the Union’s political priorities for the period in question. The structure of the multiannual financial framework for 2007-13 is as follows:

1. Sustainable growth
1 a. Competitiveness for growth and employment
1 b. Cohesion for growth and employment
2. Conservation and management of natural resources (including market expenditure and direct payments)
3. Citizenship, freedom, security and justice
3 a. Freedom, security and justice
3 b. Citizenship
4. EU as a world player
5. Administration
6. Compensation

The ring-fencing of expenditure headings means that a budget line is financed only from a given heading. Each heading should be well enough financed to allow redeployment of expenditure between operations under the same heading where necessary in order to tackle unforeseen issues.

The “margin for unforeseen expenditure” between the own resources ceiling and the ceiling for payment appropriations has a dual role:

  • to allow the multiannual financial framework to be revised if necessary so as to cover any expenditure which is unforeseen when the financial perspective is adopted;
  • to leave a safety margin should economic growth be lower than forecast; should this be the case, actual GNI will be lower than expected and the ceiling for payment appropriations, which is an absolute amount, can be financed from the own resources margin, within the limits of the own resources ceiling expressed as a percentage of GNP.

Link with the own resources system

The overall ceiling for commitment appropriations is obtained by adding together the various ceilings for individual expenditure headings. To check the compatibility of the financial perspective with the ceiling for own resources, which constitutes the absolute limit on the resources that the Member States can make available to the Union, an annual ceiling is also established for payment appropriations. This is an overall ceiling not broken down by expenditure heading. It is also expressed as a percentage of the Community’s estimated gross national product (GNP).

Rules for applying the financial framework

The rules for applying the financial framework are laid down in the Interinstitutional Agreement, which contains the rules and procedures for the annual management of the financial framework (e.g. technical adjustments, adjustments connected with the conditions of implementation or with enlargement of the Union, and revision of the financial perspective). This makes it possible to improve the annual budgetary procedure.

Each year the Commission, under its own responsibility, makes a technical adjustment to the multiannual financial frameworkfor the coming year. This adjustment concerns the following operations:

  • as the multiannual financial framework is drawn up at constant prices, it has to be adjusted each year to take account of inflation so as to ensure that each expenditure heading retains its initial purchasing power. The technical adjustment is generally made at the beginning of year n-2 for a given year n on the basis of the most recent economic data and forecasts available. No subsequent technical adjustment is made for the year in question;
  • the ceiling on own resources is expressed as a percentage of GNI. Translation of this ceiling into an absolute figure means that, for the purposes of the technical adjustment, the calculation has to be based on the most recent data on Community GNI. It is at this point that compatibility between the total payment appropriations and available own resources is verified.

The Commission can also propose changes to the multiannual financial framework to the two arms of the budgetary authority in two cases:

  • re-scheduling of the payment appropriations available for structural operations where delays have been identified in the programming of such operations;
  • re-evaluation of the needs relating to certain headings as a result of the accession of new Member States.

The two arms of the budgetary authority may, following a proposal from the Commission, decide to revise the multiannual financial framework. This will enable the Community, while respecting the own resources ceiling, to take necessary action not foreseen at the time the financial perspective was drawn up.

Fight against Newcastle disease

Leave a reply

Fight against Newcastle disease

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Fight against Newcastle disease

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Food safety > Animal health

Fight against Newcastle disease

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 92/66/EEC of 14 July 1992 introducing Community measures for the control of Newcastle disease [See amending acts].

Summary

This Directive lays down measures for tackling Newcastle disease as soon as its presence is detected in poultry. Similar measures are applied to racing pigeons and other birds kept in captivity.

Once a case of Newcastle disease is suspected, the official veterinarian shall inform the competent authority and implement the measures imposed by them. These measures provide for:

  • the placing of all holdings with suspected outbreaks under surveillance;
  • a record of all categories of poultry kept on the holdings to be made;
  • the isolation of all animals in their living quarters;
  • the banning of transporting poultry;
  • the competent authority to limit the movement of people, vehicles, other animals and materials connected with the poultry, which are liable to be contaminated;
  • the requirement that eggs remain within the holding;
  • the installation of appropriate means of disinfection inside the holding;
  • carrying out an epizootiological inquiry.

The preventative measures shall be withdrawn by the veterinarian once the suspicion of Newcastle disease has been officially ruled out.

Once the presence of Newcastle disease has been officially confirmed, the competent authority shall order a series of measures, including:

  • all poultry on the holding shall be killed;
  • all substances and waste liable to be contaminated shall be destroyed or treated appropriately;
  • meat from poultry from the holding, slaughtered during the presumed incubation period of disease shall be destroyed;
  • eggs laid during the presumed incubation period shall be destroyed;
  • buildings used for housing poultry shall be cleaned and disinfected;
  • no poultry shall be reintroduced to the holding until at least 21 days after completion of cleaning and disinfecting operations;
  • carrying out an epizootiological inquiry.

Some flocks of poultry do not have to be destroyed if the official veterinarian confirms that the animals are healthy and have been completely separated from infected flocks.

After the confirmation of Newcastle disease, the competent authority shall establish a protection zone (based on a minimum radius of three kilometres around the infected holding) and a surveillance zone (based on a minimum radius of 10 kilometres around the infected holding), in which specific measures apply. These measures include, amongst others, the identification of all holdings keeping poultry, periodic visits, clinical examinations and isolating animals. The measures applied in the protection zone shall be withdrawn no less than twenty one days after the cleaning and disinfecting of the holding. In the surveillance zone the measures shall be maintained for thirty days after the cleaning and disinfecting operations.

Each Member State shall designate a national laboratory responsible for coordinating the standards and methods of diagnosis, the use of reagents and the testing of vaccines for Newcastle disease. Each Member State shall then communicate the details of their laboratory to the other Member States and the public. The national laboratories shall work in cooperation with the Community reference laboratory, located in Weybridge (United Kingdom).

Vaccination against Newcastle disease can be carried out in accordance with procedures laid down by Member States. Member States may also provide a vaccination programme for racing pigeons. If the presence of the disease is confirmed, emergency vaccination may also be performed in the zones and for periods as defined by the competent authority.

Each Member State shall draw up a contingency plan which shall determine how Newcastle disease will be managed nationally. The plans shall comply with the series of criteria detailed in this Directive. For example, they must include the establishment of a crisis centre, local disease control centres and detailed information on the staff responsible for the emergency measures.

Commission experts may undertake checks on national establishments.

In order to eradicate Newcastle disease, Member States shall benefit from Community financial assistance according to the conditions defined in Decision 90/424/EEC.

The Standing Committee on the Food Chain and Animal Health shall assist the Commission in managing Newcastle disease. They will be involved in designing the checks carried out by the Commission’s experts, amongst other tasks.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Directive 92/66/EEC

25.9.1992

1.10.1993

OJ L 260 of 5.9.1992
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 806/2003

5.6.2003

–

OJ L 122 of 16.5.2003
Directive 2008/73/EC

3.9.2008

1.1.2010

OJ L 219 of 14.8.2008

The successive amendments and corrections to Directive 92/66/EEC have been incorporated into the original text. This consolidated versionis of documentary value only.

Related Acts

Commission Decision 2007/24/CE of 22 December 2006 approving contingency plans for the control of avian influenza and Newcastle disease [Official Journal L 8 of 13.1.2007].

Fiscalis 2013

Leave a reply

Fiscalis 2013

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Fiscalis 2013

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Taxation

Fiscalis 2013 (2008-2013)

Document or Iniciative

Decision No 1482/2007/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2007 establishing a Community programme to improve the operation of taxation systems in the internal market (Fiscalis 2013) and repealing Decision No 2235/2002/EC.

Summary

The Fiscalis 2013 programme is set up for the period from 1 January 2008 to 31 December 2013 and is intended to improve the operation of the taxation systems * in the internal market of the European Union (EU).

Objectives

The overall objective of Fiscalis 2013 is to improve the functioning of the tax systems in the internal market by strengthening cooperation between participating countries, their administrations and any other body.

The contribution of the Fiscalis 2013 programme to the development of cooperation between tax administrations will mean that the following objectives can be attained:

  • the uniform application of the EU tax laws in all the EU countries;
  • the protection of national and EU financial interests;
  • the smooth functioning of the internal market through the combating of tax avoidance and evasion, including its international dimension;
  • the avoidance of distortions of competition;
  • the ongoing reduction of compliance burdens on administrations and tax-payers alike.

Activities

Activities under Fiscalis 2013 are based in particular on:

  • communication and information-exchange systems;
  • multilateral controls;
  • seminars and project groups;
  • working visits;
  • training activities.

The Excise Movement Control System (EMCS) will be incorporated in the Fiscalis 2013 programme from 2009.

Participation in the programme

The countries participating in the Fiscalis 2013 programme are the EU member countries. The programme is also open to participation by the candidate countries benefiting from a pre-accession strategy, potential candidate countries (following the establishment of framework agreements concerning their participation in EU programmes), as well as some partner countries under the European Neighbourhood Policy.

Budgetary implications

The Fiscalis 2013 programme will run for a period of six years, in line with the duration of the 2007-2013 Financial Perspective. The amount to be borne by the EU budget is EUR 156.9 million.

Key terms used in the act
  • Taxation systems: this refers to the following taxes applied in the countries participating in the programme:
    1. value added tax;
    2. excise duties on alcohol, tobacco products and energy products;
    3. taxes on income and on capital as defined in Article 1(2) of Council Directive 77/799/EEC;
    4. taxes on insurance premiums as defined in Article 3 of Council Directive 76/308/EEC.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Decision No 1482/2007/EC

4.1.2008

–

OJ L 330, 15.12.2007

Related Acts

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – Midterm evaluation of the Fiscalis 2013 programme [COM (2011) 538 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The midterm evaluation concluded that the programme operates cost efficiently and is effective in the achievement of its objectives. Further improvements in the monitoring and the reporting of activities are possible, although the achievement of this may be restricted due to the limited human resources available in the European Commission and the participating countries’ tax administrations for managing the programme. The report recommends the following improvements for the remaining programming period:

  • prioritise cooperation in the field of direct taxation;
  • make the reduction of administrative burdens on taxpayers a specific objective of Fiscalis;
  • set up a results-based monitoring and evaluation system;
  • improve dissemination and application of knowledge and best practices in national administrations;
  • explore the potential for further improvement and development of the value-added tax information exchange system (VIES);
  • introduce a dedicated planning, monitoring and reporting system for the organisation and follow-up of working visits;
  • involve a larger community of stakeholders;
  • ensure proportionate programme management capacity.

Financial framework for the urban environment

Leave a reply

Financial framework for the urban environment

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Financial framework for the urban environment

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Environment > Soil protection

Financial framework for the urban environment

The aim of this Decision is to encourage local authorities to rise to the challenge of environmental issues and to provide them with financial and technical assistance in working towards sustainability.

Document or Iniciative

Decision No 1411/2001/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on a Community framework for cooperation to promote sustainable urban development.

Summary

1. The state of the urban environment, where some 80% of Europeans live, is a matter of concern with implications at the local, European and global levels. The depletion of natural resources and the increase in pollution and waste are impacting upon local, regional and global ecosystems.

2. The Community has already entered into an international commitment at the Rio summit. Agenda 21, which was the subject of the Protocol signed at Rio, stipulates that most local authorities in each country should undertake a consultative process with their populations.

3. Following the communication entitled “Sustainable urban development in the European Union: a framework for action” [COM(1998) 605 final], this Decision of the Council and of the European Parliament puts in place a Community framework for cooperation to define, exchange and implement good practices with regard to sustainable urban development and in the framework of Agenda 21. The main partners are the Commission and the networks of towns and cities organised at European level. The European campaign for sustainable towns and cities is an alliance which brings together 540 local authorities committed to the development of local policies and activities to ensure sustainability.

4. The types of activity which might be eligible for funding are:

  • information and exchanges of information on sustainable urban development and local Agenda 21 and improvement of environmental quality in areas where environmental problems occur alongside socio-economic problems;
  • cooperation between the partners concerned by sustainable development and Agenda 21 at European level;
  • accompanying measures.

These activities must take place in the course of the year to which the financial contribution relates or the following two years.

5. The Commission will ensure consistency and complementarity between these activities and other programmes and initiatives, in particular the URBAN initiative. Projects eligible under other Community programmes and funds are not eligible under this cooperation framework. The selection criteria for the activities are:

  • a sound cost/benefit ratio;
  • a lasting multiplier effect at European level;
  • effective and balanced cooperation among the partners concerned;
  • a contribution to a multinational approach;
  • a multisectoral approach taking account of the social, economic and environmental dimensions;
  • a high degree of involvement of all the players, including the representatives of civil society;
  • revitalisation of public services of general interest.

6. Calls for proposals for projects are published each year by no later than 31 January. The Commission decides by 31 May which projects it will finance, and then makes that decision public.

7. The programme is open to participation by Cyprus, Malta, the Central and Eastern European countries (CEECs) and countries which have concluded association agreements with the Community.

8. The Commission will take all necessary measures to combat fraud, and the financial audit will be carried out by the Court of Auditors.

The financial support given by the Commission may be reduced, suspended or recovered if irregularities are found. Beneficiaries must explain any delays in the progress of a project and must submit a financial report to the Commission six months after completion of the project. For contracts of more than one year, beneficiaries must present annual progress reports.

9. The Community cooperation framework operates from 1 January 2001 to 31 December 2004. An interim assessment is scheduled for 31 March 2003 at the latest.

10 The budget for the period 2001-2004 is EUR 14.8 million. 80% of the resources are allocated equally to information and cooperation activities. The remaining 20% goes to accompanying measures.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Decision No 1411/2001/EC 1.1.2001 – OJ L 191 of 13.7.2001

Related Acts

Regulation (EC) No 614/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 May 2007 concerning thet (LIFE+) – Commission statement [Official Journal L 149 of 9.6.2007].

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on Thematic Strategy on the Urban Environment [COM(2005)718 final – Not published in the Official Journal]

Communication from the Commission of 11 February 2004 “Towards a thematic strategy on the urban environment” [– Official Journal C 98 of 23.04.2004]

First Progress Report on Economic and Social Cohesion

Leave a reply

First Progress Report on Economic and Social Cohesion

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about First Progress Report on Economic and Social Cohesion

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Regional policy > Review and the future of regional policy

First Progress Report on Economic and Social Cohesion

1) Objective

To update the analysis of economic and social cohesion presented in the second cohesion report published in January 2001 and outline the state of the debate on future cohesion policy for the period after 2006.

2) Document or Iniciative

Commission Communication of 30 January 2002 – First progress report on economic and social cohesion [COM(2002) 46 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

3) Summary

Every three years, the Commission submits a “report […] on the progress made towards achieving economic and social cohesion and on the manner in which the various means […] have contributed to it” (Article 159 of the Treaty). Published in January 2001, the second report on economic and social cohesion pursues two objectives: to analyse the development of economic and social cohesion in a European Union with 27 members and open the debate on the future of Community cohesion policy.

In December 2001, the Laeken European Council concluded that, if the current rate of progress of the negotiations was maintained, all the applicant countries except Bulgaria and Romania could join the Union soon. This means that by 2004 the European Union could have 25 members.

The purpose of this progress report on economic and social cohesion is therefore:

  • to update the analysis of economic and social cohesion presented in the second cohesion report published in January 2001, including for the first time, an analysis of disparities in a Europe of 25;
  • to outline the state of the debate on future cohesion policy for the period after 2006.

SITUATION AND TRENDS

The progress report provides data on regional GDP in 1999 and on employment and unemployment in 2000. The updated analysis of growth, employment and factors promoting sustainable development confirms the main trends set out in the second report on economic and social cohesion:

  • “Although disparities between the present Member States still persist, they have diminished since 1998.”
    The main change concerns the countries receiving assistance from the Cohesion Fund. Spain, Greece and Portugal have made up a third of their development gap over 10 years. The Irish GDP rose from 64 % of the Community average in 1988 to 119 % in 2000.
  • “The reduction in regional disparities within the Fifteen continues, although to a lesser extent than at national level.”

    These disparities have grown within some Member States. The process of catching up will therefore be a long haul.
  • “Enlargement will be accompanied by a major fall in average per capita GDP and a widening of regional disparities on a scale without precedent in any previous enlargement.”

    The fall in GDP in a Europe of 25 will be 13 %. Nevertheless, that fall and the widening of disparities will be less pronounced than the previous assumptions for a Union made up of 27 Member States.
  • “In a Union of 27 Member States there would be three groups of countries”: A) nine applicant countries with a standard of living 41 % of the Community average; B) three applicant countries (Cyprus, Slovakia and the Czech Republic) and three cohesion countries (Spain, Greece and Portugal) with a GDP of 87 % of the Community average; C) the other current Member States, who would be well above that future average.

Economic and social cohesion in the existing Union and in the applicant countries

For the period 1995-99, it is now possible to examine per capita GDP at regional level. The analysis in the progress report highlights the following features:

  • At 3.2 %, the rate of growth in the twelve applicant countries was higher than in the existing Union (2.4 %) over that period.
  • “Three million jobs were created in the European Union in 2000.”

    Thus employment in the Europe of Fifteen rose by 1.8 % in 2000. Unemployment fell from 9.1 % to 8.4 %, the largest fall in almost ten years. This reduction also benefited the most disadvantaged categories such as the long-term unemployed, young persons and women.
    Nevertheless, “major disparities continue to exist, particularly between the regions”: in the regions least affected by unemployment (accounting for 10 % of the total population of the Union), the rate is 2.7 % as against 21.9 % in the regions most affected (also accounting for 10 % of the total population of the Fifteen).
    Over the same period, “employment fell by 1.4 % in the applicant countries”, i.e. 600 000 jobs were lost. This trend could become more pronounced in future with the restructuring currently underway in some sectors such as agriculture and manufacturing. In Central and Eastern Europe, employment in the tertiary sector – finance, business and services – is only three quarters of the EU average.
    In those countries long-term and youth unemployment is high while women are less affected.
  • “The phenomenon of demographic concentration is becoming more pronounced.”

    The regions whose population has the highest annual growth rate are already densely populated. Similarly, the regions with a falling population are the regions with the lowest population density.
  • “The general trend of a slow-down in population growth and an ageing population are more varied at regional level.”

    Though there has been a general increase in the level of education, wide regional disparities persist.
    The human factor will be decisive in enabling the least developed regions to catch up. Thus, education and training are two vital elements in ensuring that all Europeans are in a position to gain the knowledge and the skills necessary to live and work in the information society. To achieve this, the regions should also be given incentives and help to improve their technical infrastructure and increase their capacity for innovation and research.
    The population with the lowest level of education remains concentrated in southern Europe (Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece), but also in Ireland and in some areas of northern France and Belgium. The highest levels of education are to be found in the Nordic countries, the United Kingdom, Germany and the Benelux, and in Paris, Madrid and the Basque Country.
    The level of Internet access (the percentage of households having access to the Internet from home) tends to be less than 30 % in the cohesion countries, while in the Nordic countries and the Netherlands it is around 60 %.

The updated information confirms the very high concentration of activities in a triangle formed by North Yorkshire (United Kingdom), Franche-Comté (France) and Hamburg (Germany).

The socio-economic role of the border regions is increasing and will be bigger after enlargement. Mountain, coastal and maritime areas, islands and archipelagos will cover a large part of the enlarged Union. The special needs of these geographic areas are the focus of studies on the natural handicaps that they face. Two of these are already in progress: one on the island regions (including the outermost regions) and one on mountain areas (including Arctic areas). The main aim of these studies is to establish a database for such areas with statistical information on sustainable development (based on the collection of socio-economic, environmental, demographic and other indicators) at all administrative levels in order to carry out an objective analysis of the situation in these regions.

A Union of 25 Member States

The progress report makes an initial assessment of economic and social cohesion in a Union of 25 Member States:

  • Using the current criterion for eligibility for Objective 1 of the Structural Funds, the regions whose per capita GDP is less than 75 % of the average in a Community of 25 would have a population of 115 million people, 25 % of the total population.
  • “The regions considered less developed under the present criterion will be more concentrated in the applicant countries.”

    Of these 115 million inhabitants, 40 % would live in the 15 current Member States and 60 % in the applicant countries. There would therefore have to be a shift eastwards of future regional policy.
  • The regions currently eligible under Objective 1 which, after enlargement, would be above the threshold of 75 % of average per capita GDP have a population of 37 million.
    About two thirds of the population of these regions, i.e. 25 million, would automatically cease to be eligible because of the statistical fall in the Community GDP average by about 13 %.
    The remaining third would in any case be above the 75 % threshold, irrespective of enlargement. This phenomenon demonstrates the genuine convergence of some Community regions.

ASSESSMENT OF DISCUSSIONS ON THE FUTURE OF COHESION POLICY

The European Cohesion Forum

The European Cohesion Forum, held on 21 and 22 May 2001, was attended by over 1 800 political leaders from the Europe of Fifteen and the applicant countries, who had the opportunity to express their opinion on the future of cohesion policy.

There is a broad consensus on the need for greater cohesion. Cohesion policy is the way the European Union expresses solidarity and bears witness to the existence in the Community of a special model of development. Regional disparities will increase as a result of enlargement, and it will be essential to help those regions in most need. If it is not to lose credibility, cohesion funding must be maintained at its current level of 0.45 % of the EU’s GDP as decided at the Berlin European Council. Cohesion policy is also beneficial because it has a knock-on effect, helping not only the regions receiving financial support but also their partners in the internal market.

The main conclusions of the Forum are as follows:

  • “Cohesion should not be confined to structural policy.”

    Other Community policies, particularly the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and rural development, environment and transport policy, must make a more effective contribution towards this goal.
  • “The Union needs a cohesion policy which addresses three types of region and structural problems”: (1) regions whose development is lagging very far behind, 60 % of which are in the applicant countries; (2) regions of the Fifteen which have not completed the process of real convergence (particularly in the three cohesion countries); (3) regions facing serious structural problems, such as some urban areas, areas affected by industrial conversion, rural areas dependent on agriculture and/or fishing, and areas suffering from natural or demographic handicaps (islands, mountain areas, outermost regions, etc.).
    To avoid funding being spread too thinly, cohesion policy should concentrate on those measures where the Community can add real value, resulting in stronger links between financial allocations, the value added by the measures and the anticipated results.
  • “The regions and local authorities would like to see real partnerships established with the Community institutions.”
    There is a need for greater decentralisation and clarification of roles in order to ensure that partnership is not restricted to the national level only. In the context of the White Paper on Governance, the regions would like to see full recognition for the action they take on the ground to promote economic and social cohesion. Thus, they would like to play a greater role in defining policies directly affecting them. In the context of subsidiarity, the Commission is therefore encouraged to more clearly define the division of responsibilities between the various administrative levels.

The discussions at institutional level

An informal meeting of regional policy ministers was held under the Belgian Presidency in Namur on 13 and 14 July 2001 to discuss the, “challenge of economic, social and territorial cohesion in the context of enlargement”. There was broad agreement on the need to continue with a strong cohesion policy and, in an enlarged Union, priority would be given to regions whose development is lagging behind. Assistance would be concentrated on those measures where Community added value was greatest and the involvement of the other Community policies would be sought.

A number of Member States took part in the debate and submitted positions on the future of cohesion policy. For example, the Spanish government sent a memorandum in June 2001 on the consequences of enlargement for regional policy, in particular in the cohesion countries. Lithuania, Italy, the Netherlands and Germany also sent in documents and studies on this subject.

The Economic and Social Committee delivered an opinion [OJ C 193, 10.7.2001] on the second report on economic and social cohesion. It favours raising the current threshold of 75 % for eligibility under Objective 1 of the Structural Funds (regions whose development is lagging behind). In its opinion on the same report, the Committee of the Regions concludes that the regional dimension should be strengthened and that the current Objective 1 regions, which have not completed the process of convergence after enlargement, should continue to be eligible. It also said that a sudden stop to structural aid should be avoided by expanding transitional support. The European Parliament resolution of 7 February 2002 stresses the need to reduce regional development disparities. At a technical level, it regrets the fact that no penalty can be imposed when Member States infringe the additionality principle. It believes that the Cohesion Fund should continue, but that it should become an instrument of structural policy subject to the rules of the Structural Funds. It would also like to see operational mechanisms made available to promote coordination between the Structural Funds and the EDF, Phare and Meda Programmes.

Throughout 2002, the Commission is organising seminars on the 10 questions relating to the future of regional policy after 2006. Aimed at identifying measures with a high value added, the discussions focus on the following subjects:

  • There is unanimous agreement that regional disparities will grow after enlargement, hence the importance of action for the least developed regions. “The question is therefore how to define regions whose development is lagging behind and lay down the limits of and rules for Community support.”
    The report reviews the four possible options for determining the eligibility of regions whose development is lagging behind: 1) application of the present threshold of 75 % irrespective of the number of countries joining the Union. This option would eliminate a large number of regions in EU 15; 2) the same approach, but all regions above this threshold currently eligible under Objective 1 would receive temporary transitional support; 3) setting a threshold of per capita GDP higher than 75 % of the average, at a level which would eliminate the automatic effect of excluding those regions in the EU 15 simply because of the reduction in the average per capita GDP in an enlarged Union; 4) setting two eligibility thresholds, one for the regions in EU 15 and one for the applicant countries, and leading de facto to the creation of two categories of lagging region.
  • “A regional or national approach?”

    Some studies argued for a national rather than a regional approach to both the eligibility of the applicant countries for Objective 1 and the economic development strategy to be followed in the Member States, the distribution of Community funds and the definition of the various political and administrative structures. This approach gives the Member States greater freedom, although it would require eligibility criteria to be defined which seem to be difficult to reconcile with the Treaty and Community secondary legislation. The regional approach is ambitious in that it is geared to greater autonomy and flexibility at local level.
  • “The second cohesion report did not cover the financial implications of enlargement for cohesion policy.”
    It simply refers to the figure of 0.45 % of GDP allocated to cohesion policy from 2000 to 2006. The Commission sees this rate as a minimum below which the credibility of future cohesion policy would be called into question.
  • “Simplification of the transfer and management mechanisms for the Structural Funds must continue to be a major objective of future cohesion policy.”
    The Commission is committed to further measures in this area. It announced that the basic texts for future cohesion policy would be adopted as quickly as possible so that assistance can begin to flow in the regions as soon as the next programming period begins in 2007.
  • “The other Community policies must take greater account of the regional dimension.”

    In a context of balanced regional development, they must not focus solely on the most prosperous areas of the European Union.

The Commission is aware of the challenge that enlargement poses for regional policy, and its proposals on cohesion policy after 2006 will be drawn up to take account of the suggestions developed in this major consultation exercise. It will incorporate them into the third cohesion report.

For more information on the cohesion reports, see the following:

  • SCADplus factsheets on the second report on economic and social cohesion (January 2001): an assessment, conclusions and recommendations, 10 questions for the debate on tomorrow’s cohesion policy;
  • the first progress report on economic and social cohesion (January 2002);
  • the second progress report on economic and social cohesion (January 2003);
  • SCADplus factsheets on the third report on economic and social cohesion (2004): the socio-economic situation of the Union and the impact of European and national policies, proposals for regional policy after 2006.

4) Implementing Measures

5) Follow-Up Work

Financing the common agricultural policy

Leave a reply

Financing the common agricultural policy

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Financing the common agricultural policy

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Financing the common agricultural policy

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy [See amending acts].

Summary

This Regulation establishes a single legal framework for financing CAP spending, creating two new funds: the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). Although operating in a similar fashion, each has certain specific features. Since some of the measures financed by these funds are those managed jointly with Member States, the Regulation sets out conditions under which the Commission may exercise its responsibilities for implementing the general budget and clarifies the areas in which Member States are obliged to cooperate.

The Regulation lays down the conditions under which Member States can accredit and withdraw accreditation from paying agencies and coordinating bodies. The agencies are responsible for making payments, whilst the bodies monitor the accounting carried out by the paying agencies. It also provides for the creation of certification bodies, public or private legal bodies appointed by the Member States which are responsible for certifying the management, monitoring and control systems implemented by the accredited paying agencies and the agencies’ annual accounts. The Member States are asked to take all necessary steps to effectively protect the financial interests of the Community. In addition, only expenditure incurred by accredited paying agencies will be financed by the Community and payments will be made in full to the beneficiaries.

EAGF

As regards expenditure managed jointly by the Member States and the Commission, the EAGF finances:

  • refunds for exporting farm produce to non-EU countries;
  • intervention measures to regulate agricultural markets;
  • direct payments to farmers under the CAP;
  • certain informational and promotional measures for farm produce implemented by Member States both on the internal EU market and outside it;
  • expenditure on restructuring measures in the sugar industry under Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006;
  • programmes promoting the consumption of fruit in schools.

As regards expenditure managed centrally by the Commission, EAGF financing covers:

  • the Community’s financial contribution for specific veterinary measures, veterinary inspection and inspections of foodstuffs and animal feed, animal disease eradication and control programmes and plant-health measures;
  • promotion of farm produce, either directly by the Commission or via international organisations;
  • measures required by Community legislation to conserve, characterise, collect and use genetic resources in farming;
  • setting up and running farm accounting information systems;
  • farm survey systems;
  • expenditure relating to fisheries markets.

The monies to cover expenditure financed by the EAGF are paid by the Commission to the Member States in the form of monthly reimbursements. These are made on the basis of a declaration of expenditure and other information provided by the Member States. If funds are committed without following the Community rules, the Commission may decide to reduce or suspend payments.

The Commission sets the net balance available for EAGF spending and will put in place a monthly early-warning and monitoring system for such spending. Every month, it will present the Parliament and Council with a report examining spending trends in relation to the profiles set at the beginning of the financial year and assessing how these are likely to develop in the current year.

Any amounts recovered as a result of irregularities or negligence are paid to the paying agencies, which must book them in the month they are actually received as revenue earmarked for EAGF spending only.

EAFRD

The EAFRD finances rural development programmes implemented in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 solely where expenditure is jointly managed.

The budget commitments for this purpose will be made annually in the form of prefinancing, interim payments and payment of the final balance. Interim payments will be made for each rural development programme subject to the budget funding available within the ceiling limits established by Community legislation and the increased amounts laid down by the Commission in applying provisions laid down for direct payments to farmers and for the wine market. These payments will be made subject to certain conditions: for example, the Commission must be sent a declaration of expenditure and a payment claim certified by the accredited paying agency. If this declaration does not comply with the Community standards, the Commission may reduce or suspend payments.

In the event of any irregularities, Community financing will be totally or partially cancelled or, if the monies in question have already been paid to the beneficiary, they will be recovered by the accredited paying agency. The cancelled or recovered amounts may be used by the Member State for a different operation planned under the same rural development programme.

As regards payment of the balance, this is not made until the Commission has received the final implementing report on the implementation of a rural development programme and the corresponding clearance decision. If the necessary documents are not sent to the Commission, the balance will be automatically decommitted.

Commission controls

The Commission will ensure that the financial management of the Community Funds is sound, mainly through a two-stage clearance procedure: clearance of accounts and conformity clearance. The Member States must keep for the Commission all the information needed for the smooth running of the Funds. To supplement checks made by the Member States under national legislation, the Commission may organise on-site audits of its own. Payments made to a Member State under the EAGF and EAFRD may be reduced or suspended where certain serious and persistent deficiencies are detected.

The names of the beneficiaries of the Agricultural Funds, and the amounts they have received, must be made public after payment has been made.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005

18.8.2005

–

 OJ L 209 of 11.8.2005
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 320/2006

3.3.2006

–

OJ L 58 of 28.2.2006
Regulation (EC) No 378/2007

12.4.2007

–

OJ L 95 of 5.4.2007
Regulation (EC) No 1437/2007

15.12.2007

–

OJ L 322 of 7.12.2007
Regulaton (EC) No 479/2008

13.6.2008

–

OJ L 148 of 6.6.2008
Regulation (EC) No 13/2009

16.1.2009

–

OJ L 5 of 9.1.2009
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009

1.2.2009

–

OJ L 30 of 31.1.2009
Regulation (EC) No 473/2009

9.6.2009

–

OJ L 144 of 9.6.2009

Successive amendments and corrections to Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 have been incorporated into the basic text. This consolidated versionis for reference only.

RELATED ACTS

Available amounts and excluded expenditure

Decision 2008/321/EC [Official Journal L 109 of 19.4.2008].

This Decision contains a list of expenditure items excluded from Community financing because they do not comply with the CAP financing rules. The exclusion of such expenditure items, incurred by the paying agencies of certain Member States between 2002 and 2007, is a consequence of verifications, bilateral discussions and conciliation procedures and entails the deduction of the amounts concerned.

Decision 2009/379/EC [Official Journal L 117 of 12.5.2009].

The Decision lays down the amounts made available to the EAFRD and EAGF for the period 2007-2013.

Detailed rules for application

Regulation (EC) No 883/2006 [Official Journal L 171 of 23.6.2006].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the keeping of accounts by the paying agencies, declarations of expenditure and revenue and the conditions for reimbursing expenditure under the EAGF and the EAFRD.
See consolidated version .

Regulation (EC) No 884/2006[Official Journal L 171 of 23.6.2006].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the financing by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) of intervention measures in the form of public storage operations and the accounting of public storage operations by the paying agencies of the Member States.
See consolidated version .

Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 [Official Journal L 171 of 23.6.2006].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the accreditation of paying agencies and other bodies and the clearance of the accounts of the EAGF and of the EAFRD.
See consolidated version .

Regulation (EC) No 259/2008 [Official Journal L 76 of 19.3.2008].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the publication of information on the beneficiaries of funds deriving from the EAGF and the EAFRD. This information must be published on a single website by 30 April of each year and must include beneficiaries’ personal details and the amounts received.

Clearance of accounts

Regulation (EC) No 941/2008 [Official Journal L 258 of 9.10.2009].

This Regulation lays down the form and content of the accounting information to be submitted to the Commission for the purpose of the clearance of the accounts of the EAGF and EAFRD, as well as for monitoring and forecasting purposes.

Decision 2009/373/EC [Official Journal L 116 of 9.5.2009].

This Decision presents the clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the EAFRD for the 2008 financial year.

Decision 2009/367/EC [Official Journal L111 of 5.5.2009].

This Decision presents the clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the EAGF for the 2008 financial year.

Irregularities, fraud and recovery

Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006 [Official Journal L 355 of 15.12.2006].

This act sets out information and investigation measures to be taken by the Member States in cases of fraud in connection with the financing of the CAP and sets up an information system in this field.

Surveys

Regulation (EC) No 78/2008 [Official Journal L 25 of 30.1.2008].

This act relates to the measures to be undertaken by the Commission in 2008-2013 making use of the remote-sensing applications developed within the framework of the common agricultural policy.

Another Normative about Financing the common agricultural policy

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic

Regional policy > Provisions and instruments of regional policy

Financing the common agricultural policy

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 of 21 June 2005 on the financing of the common agricultural policy [See amending acts].

Summary

This Regulation establishes a single legal framework for financing CAP spending, creating two new funds: the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). Although operating in a similar fashion, each has certain specific features. Since some of the measures financed by these funds are those managed jointly with Member States, the Regulation sets out conditions under which the Commission may exercise its responsibilities for implementing the general budget and clarifies the areas in which Member States are obliged to cooperate.

The Regulation lays down the conditions under which Member States can accredit and withdraw accreditation from paying agencies and coordinating bodies. The agencies are responsible for making payments, whilst the bodies monitor the accounting carried out by the paying agencies. It also provides for the creation of certification bodies, public or private legal bodies appointed by the Member States which are responsible for certifying the management, monitoring and control systems implemented by the accredited paying agencies and the agencies’ annual accounts. The Member States are asked to take all necessary steps to effectively protect the financial interests of the Community. In addition, only expenditure incurred by accredited paying agencies will be financed by the Community and payments will be made in full to the beneficiaries.

EAGF

As regards expenditure managed jointly by the Member States and the Commission, the EAGF finances:

  • refunds for exporting farm produce to non-EU countries;
  • intervention measures to regulate agricultural markets;
  • direct payments to farmers under the CAP;
  • certain informational and promotional measures for farm produce implemented by Member States both on the internal EU market and outside it;
  • expenditure on restructuring measures in the sugar industry under Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006;
  • programmes promoting the consumption of fruit in schools.

As regards expenditure managed centrally by the Commission, EAGF financing covers:

  • the Community’s financial contribution for specific veterinary measures, veterinary inspection and inspections of foodstuffs and animal feed, animal disease eradication and control programmes and plant-health measures;
  • promotion of farm produce, either directly by the Commission or via international organisations;
  • measures required by Community legislation to conserve, characterise, collect and use genetic resources in farming;
  • setting up and running farm accounting information systems;
  • farm survey systems;
  • expenditure relating to fisheries markets.

The monies to cover expenditure financed by the EAGF are paid by the Commission to the Member States in the form of monthly reimbursements. These are made on the basis of a declaration of expenditure and other information provided by the Member States. If funds are committed without following the Community rules, the Commission may decide to reduce or suspend payments.

The Commission sets the net balance available for EAGF spending and will put in place a monthly early-warning and monitoring system for such spending. Every month, it will present the Parliament and Council with a report examining spending trends in relation to the profiles set at the beginning of the financial year and assessing how these are likely to develop in the current year.

Any amounts recovered as a result of irregularities or negligence are paid to the paying agencies, which must book them in the month they are actually received as revenue earmarked for EAGF spending only.

EAFRD

The EAFRD finances rural development programmes implemented in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 solely where expenditure is jointly managed.

The budget commitments for this purpose will be made annually in the form of prefinancing, interim payments and payment of the final balance. Interim payments will be made for each rural development programme subject to the budget funding available within the ceiling limits established by Community legislation and the increased amounts laid down by the Commission in applying provisions laid down for direct payments to farmers and for the wine market. These payments will be made subject to certain conditions: for example, the Commission must be sent a declaration of expenditure and a payment claim certified by the accredited paying agency. If this declaration does not comply with the Community standards, the Commission may reduce or suspend payments.

In the event of any irregularities, Community financing will be totally or partially cancelled or, if the monies in question have already been paid to the beneficiary, they will be recovered by the accredited paying agency. The cancelled or recovered amounts may be used by the Member State for a different operation planned under the same rural development programme.

As regards payment of the balance, this is not made until the Commission has received the final implementing report on the implementation of a rural development programme and the corresponding clearance decision. If the necessary documents are not sent to the Commission, the balance will be automatically decommitted.

Commission controls

The Commission will ensure that the financial management of the Community Funds is sound, mainly through a two-stage clearance procedure: clearance of accounts and conformity clearance. The Member States must keep for the Commission all the information needed for the smooth running of the Funds. To supplement checks made by the Member States under national legislation, the Commission may organise on-site audits of its own. Payments made to a Member State under the EAGF and EAFRD may be reduced or suspended where certain serious and persistent deficiencies are detected.

The names of the beneficiaries of the Agricultural Funds, and the amounts they have received, must be made public after payment has been made.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005

18.8.2005

–

 OJ L 209 of 11.8.2005

Amending act(s) 		Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 320/2006

3.3.2006

–

OJ L 58 of 28.2.2006
Regulation (EC) No 378/2007

12.4.2007

–

OJ L 95 of 5.4.2007
Regulation (EC) No 1437/2007

15.12.2007

–

OJ L 322 of 7.12.2007
Regulaton (EC) No 479/2008

13.6.2008

–

OJ L 148 of 6.6.2008
Regulation (EC) No 13/2009

16.1.2009

–

OJ L 5 of 9.1.2009
Regulation (EC) No 73/2009

1.2.2009

–

OJ L 30 of 31.1.2009
Regulation (EC) No 473/2009

9.6.2009

–

OJ L 144 of 9.6.2009

Successive amendments and corrections to Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 have been incorporated into the basic text. This consolidated versionis for reference only.

RELATED ACTS

Available amounts and excluded expenditure

Decision 2008/321/EC [Official Journal L 109 of 19.4.2008].

This Decision contains a list of expenditure items excluded from Community financing because they do not comply with the CAP financing rules. The exclusion of such expenditure items, incurred by the paying agencies of certain Member States between 2002 and 2007, is a consequence of verifications, bilateral discussions and conciliation procedures and entails the deduction of the amounts concerned.

Decision 2009/379/EC [Official Journal L 117 of 12.5.2009].

The Decision lays down the amounts made available to the EAFRD and EAGF for the period 2007-2013.

Detailed rules for application

Regulation (EC) No 883/2006 [Official Journal L 171 of 23.6.2006].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the keeping of accounts by the paying agencies, declarations of expenditure and revenue and the conditions for reimbursing expenditure under the EAGF and the EAFRD.
See consolidated version .

Regulation (EC) No 884/2006[Official Journal L 171 of 23.6.2006].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the financing by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) of intervention measures in the form of public storage operations and the accounting of public storage operations by the paying agencies of the Member States.
See consolidated version .

Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 [Official Journal L 171 of 23.6.2006].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the accreditation of paying agencies and other bodies and the clearance of the accounts of the EAGF and of the EAFRD.
See consolidated version .

Regulation (EC) No 259/2008 [Official Journal L 76 of 19.3.2008].

This Regulation lays down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the publication of information on the beneficiaries of funds deriving from the EAGF and the EAFRD. This information must be published on a single website by 30 April of each year and must include beneficiaries’ personal details and the amounts received.

Clearance of accounts

Regulation (EC) No 941/2008 [Official Journal L 258 of 9.10.2009].

This Regulation lays down the form and content of the accounting information to be submitted to the Commission for the purpose of the clearance of the accounts of the EAGF and EAFRD, as well as for monitoring and forecasting purposes.

Decision 2009/373/EC [Official Journal L 116 of 9.5.2009].

This Decision presents the clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the EAFRD for the 2008 financial year.

Decision 2009/367/EC [Official Journal L111 of 5.5.2009].

This Decision presents the clearance of the accounts of the paying agencies of Member States concerning expenditure financed by the EAGF for the 2008 financial year.

Irregularities, fraud and recovery

Regulation (EC) No 1848/2006 [Official Journal L 355 of 15.12.2006].

This act sets out information and investigation measures to be taken by the Member States in cases of fraud in connection with the financing of the CAP and sets up an information system in this field.

Surveys

Regulation (EC) No 78/2008 [Official Journal L 25 of 30.1.2008].

This act relates to the measures to be undertaken by the Commission in 2008-2013 making use of the remote-sensing applications developed within the framework of the common agricultural policy.

Fight against illegal logging

Leave a reply

Fight against illegal logging

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Fight against illegal logging

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > Environment

Fight against illegal logging

Document or Iniciative

Regulation (EU) No 995/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 October 2010 laying down the obligations of operators who place timber and timber products on the market.

Summary

Illegal logging covers any form of harvesting, processing or marketing of timber in violation of the legislation of the country of harvest. Due to the deforestation and damage that they cause, such practices have serious repercussions on the environment, such as loss of biodiversity and an increase in CO2 emissions. Illegal logging also has economic and social repercussions.

Timber and timber products

This Regulation applies not only to imported timber, but also to timber harvested or processed within the European Union. It covers a wide range of timber products, listed in the Annex in accordance with the nomenclature of the Community Customs Code.

Obligations for operators

This Regulation establishes three principal obligations:

  • Timber and timber products placed on the market must come from legal harvesting;
  • Operators placing timber and timber products on the market must use a system of ‘due diligence’. The system of due diligence is a risk management system which aims to minimise the risk of illegal timber being present in the supply chain. Operators must be able to provide specific information on the timber and timber products placed on the market and to conduct a risk analysis;
  • Operators must keep information on their suppliers and on the traders they have supplied with timber for at least five years. This ensures traceability.

Due diligence systems

This Regulation offers operators the option of using the due diligence systems put in place by the monitoring organisations. These are organisations with the necessary expertise and analysis capacity to help their members comply with the rules. These organisations must meet legal and technical conditions in order to be recognised by the European Commission.

Status of timber and timber products

The Union negotiates and concludes voluntary partnership agreements (“FLEGT”) with certain countries in order to ensure that the timber imported from these countries is from a legal origin. The timber exported under these agreements is covered by an authorisation system introduced by Regulation (EC) No 2173/2005.

In accordance with the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Regulation (EC) No 338/97 specifies the conditions for the issue of permits for certain types of timber. Timber which has such a permit is also considered by this Regulation to have been legally harvested.

Application

The date of application for this Regulation is set for 3 March 2013. European operators, timber producers and Member States (including commercial partners) should therefore have the necessary time to prepare themselves. In the meantime, the Commission may adopt more detailed rules.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EU) No 995/2010

2.12.2010

–

OJ L 295, 12.11.2010

Financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

Leave a reply

Financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

External relations > Mediterranean partner countries

Financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip

This Regulation establishes the conditions and areas of financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip with a view to contributing to economic, political and social development in the region. It will be replaced by the European Neighbourhood instrument when this comes into force.

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EC) No 1734/94 of 11 July 1994 on financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and Gaza Strip [see amending acts].

Summary

1. Originally titled “On financial and technical cooperation with the Occupied Territories”, the Regulation sets up financial and technical cooperation with the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

2. The financial and technical cooperation is intended to contribute to sustainable economic, political and social development in the region, with multi-annual programmes where possible.

3. Projects and operations under the Regulation cover infrastructure, production, urban and rural development, education, health, the environment, services, foreign trade, job creation, institution building, promotion of democracy and human rights and development of civil society. These activities are financed by grants and 3% interest rate subsidies.

4. Apart from the States and regions involved, other local, regional, private and non-Governmental bodies may also benefit from the support measures. Participation in invitations to tender and contracts is open on equal terms to all natural and legal persons in the Member States and in the Mediterranean partner States.

5. The aid may be combined with European Investment Bank (EIB) financing from own resources and may be used for co-financing with Member States, non-member countries in the region, multilateral bodies or the West Bank and Gaza Strip themselves.

6. The Commission is assisted by the MED Committee set up under Regulation (EC) No 1488/96 for financing decisions on the following matters:

  • projects and operations under the Regulation for amounts of over EUR 2 million other than those relating to interest rate subsidies on EIB loans;
  • financing decisions on overall allocations for technical cooperation, training and trade promotion.

7. Within an overall allocation, the Commission adopts financing decisions not exceeding EUR 2 000 000. It also adopts decisions amending financing decisions where they do not entail any substantial amendments or additional commitments in excess of 20 % of the original commitment. The financing decisions are subject to supervision and financial control by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), including on-the-spot audits and checks, and audits by the Court of Auditors.

References

Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 1734/94 19.7.1994 – OJ L 182, 16.7.1994
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EC) No 2824/98 1.1.1999 – OJ L 351 of 29.12.1998
Regulation (EC) No 2840/98 2.1.1999 – OJ L 354 of 30.12.1998
Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 20.11.2003 – OJ L 284 of 30.10.2003
Regulation (EC) No 669/2004 17.4.2004 – OJ L 105 of 14.4.2004
Regulation (EC) No 2110/2005 28.12.2005 – OJ L 344 of 27.12.2005

Related Acts

Regulation (EC) No 1638/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 2006 laying down general provisions establishing a European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument [Official Journal L 310 of 9.11.2006]

This Regulation repeals Regulation (EC) No 1734/94.

Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 September 2003 adapting to Council Decision 1999/468/EC the provisions relating to committees which assist the Commission in the exercise of its implementing powers laid down in instruments subject to the procedure referred to in Article 251 of the EC Treaty [Official Journal L 284 of 31.10.2003].

Financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation

Leave a reply

Financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

External relations > Relations with third countries > Asia

Financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation (1992 – 2006)

This Regulation lays down the main guidelines and procedures for financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation between the European Community and the developing countries in Asia and Latin America with a view to promoting their development and reducing poverty

Document or Iniciative

Council Regulation (EEC) No 443/92 of 25 February 1992 on financial and technical assistance to, and economic cooperation with, the developing countries in Asia and Latin America.

Summary

1. This Regulation concerns the extension of Community cooperation with the developing countries in Asia and Latin America (ALA). This cooperation includes financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation. It gives priority to the promotion of human rights and democratisation and to good governance, protection of the environment, trade liberalisation and strengthening the cultural dimension.

2. The Regulation cites respect for, and the exercise of, human rights and fundamental freedoms as preconditions for development. The countries that are committed to these principles receive greater Community support. In addition, the Community can amend and even suspend its cooperation with the country concerned in the case of fundamental and persistent violations of human rights and democratic principles. In this case, cooperation would be confined to activities of direct benefit to those sections of the population in need.

3. All ALA developing countries are eligible for financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation. Depending on the project, the recipients of aid and partners in cooperation may include not only states and regions but also decentralised authorities, regional organisations, public agencies, private institutes and operators, including cooperatives and non-governmental organisations, etc.

Financial and technical assistance

4. Financial and technical cooperation is targeted at the poorest sections of the population and the poorest countries in the two regions. It includes, in particular:

  • rural development and improving the level of food security in order to reduce poverty;
  • improving the economic, legal and social environment for the private sector;
  • protection of the environment and natural resources, especially tropical forests;
  • special attention for the cultural and human dimensions of development (education, health, social services, democracy, promotion of human rights, participation of women, child protection and respect for the specific cultures of ethnic minorities);
  • special attention for the structural dimension of development (support for national, regional and local institutions, strengthening administrative capacities and good governance);
  • regional cooperation;
  • reconstruction and prevention of natural disasters.

Economic cooperation

5. Economic cooperation, devised to serve the mutual interests of the Community and the countries receiving assistance, is aimed in particular at countries whose economic development is relatively advanced. It includes:

  • improvement of scientific and technological potential in the recipient countries through training schemes and the transfer of know-how;
  • institutional support, at both national and regional levels, with a view to making the economic, legislative, administrative and social environment more conducive to development and investment;
  • support for undertakings or economic partners through training and measures to promote technologies and trade.

Implementing procedures

6. Expenditure on financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation is provided in the form of grants financed from the general budget of the Community. Indicative five-year programming may be established for each objective, country or region. The Regulation provides for the possibility of cofinancing with the Member States or other donors.

7. For the initial five-year period (1991-1995), Community funding totalled EUR 2 750 million. For the subsequent period, the amount of aid is determined according to the procedures in force under the Community financial framework. Thus, in 2001, the appropriations set aside for ALA developing countries totalled EUR 588 million.

8. Financial and technical assistance covers all of the costs necessary to carry out the projects and programmes financed by the Community. Maintenance and operating expenses are covered only at the launching stage, except for training and research programmes. Community funds are also provided for study costs and the use of experts as well as monitoring and evaluating costs.

9. Participation in invitations to tender and purchasing and other contracts financed by the Community is open on equal terms to all natural or legal persons of the Member States. This participation is extended to the recipient state and may also be extended to other developing countries.

10. The Commission is responsible for administering the financial and technical assistance and economic cooperation. It is assisted by a committee composed of the representatives of the Member States and chaired by a representative of the Commission. The Commission representative submits to the committee a draft of the measures to be taken. The committee delivers its opinion on the draft. The Commission adopts the measures envisaged if they are in accordance with this opinion. If not, the Council acts on the proposal submitted by the Commission.

11. The Commission must submit to the European Parliament and the Council a detailed annual report on the projects and programmes financed under this Regulation. It must also submit, at the end of each five-year period, a comprehensive report assessing the Community’s aid to the developing countries in Asia and Latin America.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Regulation (EEC) No 443/92 1.3.1992 – OJ L 52 of 27.2.1992

Related Acts

Regulation (EC) No 1905/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2006 establishing a financing instrument for development cooperation [Official Journal L 378 of 27.12.2006].

This Regulation repeals Regulation (EEC) No 443/92 and forms the basis for aid during the period 2007-13.

Five years of Euro banknotes and coins

Leave a reply

Five years of Euro banknotes and coins

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Five years of Euro banknotes and coins

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Economic and monetary affairs > Practical aspects of introducing the euro

Five years of Euro banknotes and coins

Document or Iniciative

Communication of 28 December 2006 from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the European Central Bank: Five years of euro banknotes and coins [COM(2006) 862 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

The European Commission reviews the introduction on 1 January 2002 of euro banknotes and coins into the daily life of citizens.

Informing citizens about the euro remains crucial

Surveys carried out among citizens show a lack of general information about the advantages of the euro, with insufficient information and even misconceptions remaining very widespread. The European Commission believes that renewed efforts are required to inform the general public about the euro, as the following still remain:

  • lack of awareness of some of the euro’s benefits: only a quarter (23 %) of euro-area citizens know that no extra charges apply when withdrawing money with a bank card in another euro-area country, or when paying with a bank card (27 %) or executing a bank transfer (16 %) within the euro area;
  • firmly-anchored misconceptions: a large majority of respondents in the euro area believe that the euro contributed to an increase in prices. In the ten Member States which joined the European Union in May 2004, 45 % of respondents believe that the euro will lead to higher inflation. This stands at odds with the ECB’s records, which show that annual inflation in the euro area has remained below 2.4 % since the introduction of the euro in 1999;
  • dual display of prices: for day-to-day purchases, a clear majority of citizens (57 %) calculate in euros, while one in five still count in their former national currency. However, for high-value purchases, such as a car or a house, a large proportion of citizens (40 %) calculate using their former national currency. The Commission repeats its recommendation of 2002 that any remaining dual display practice in the euro area – except in Slovenia – should be discontinued as soon as possible. Even if dual price display helps consumers in the early stages of the changeover to the euro, the practice becomes counterproductive if it continues for too long.

Continuous improvement of euro banknotes and coins

Euro banknotes and coins are the subject of continuous improvement in terms of their quality, reliability and user-friendliness. The European Central Bank started preparing the next series of banknotes shortly after the euro was brought into circulation, in order to ensure that the most up-to-date security features were used.

The number of counterfeit banknotes and coins that have been detected is very low compared with the numbers in circulation, and the European Commission emphasises that the number of counterfeit US-dollar banknotes is much higher.

Ensuring the coherence of the euro’s visual aspects

Euro coins have one common side, the same for all Member States in the euro area, and one national side, which differs from one Member State to another.

National side. In 2003 the Council of the European Union imposed a moratorium until the end of 2008 on changes to the national side of euro coins intended for circulation. Exceptions to this are made when a Head of State represented on a coin changes or when commemorative 2-euro coins are issued to celebrate particular events, subject to certain constraints concerning the quantity issued and how often this is done. Commemorative coins are intended for circulation, but have a different national side. To take an example, all Member States in the euro area agreed to issue a 2-euro commemorative coin to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaty of Rome on 25 March 2007.

Before the moratorium expires at the end of 2008, the Council must make a new decision as to the national sides of euro circulation coins. In 2007 the European Commission will carry out a survey among euro-area citizens in order to collect people’s opinions and preferences in this respect.

As a final point, Member States are authorised to issue collectable euro coins, for example coins minted in precious metals. These coins are only legal tender in the issuing country and are not intended for circulation.

Common side. The common side of euro coins bears a map of Europe depicting the Member States of the former EU-15. Enlargement on 1 May 2004 entailed 10 new Member States joining the EU. The Council therefore decided on 7 June 2005 [PDF ] [FR] that the common sides of the 10, 20 and 50 cent coins and the 1 and 2 euro coins should be changed, so that in the future they depict all EU Member States. The smallest denominations of 1, 2 and 5 cents are not affected by this change, as they show Europe’s position on a globe.

Slovenia was the first country to introduce coins with the new common side on 1 January 2007. The twelve euro-area countries which introduced euro banknotes and coins in January 2002 are currently preparing production of the new coins. Most of them are expected to switch to the current common-side design in 2007, with a few others joining them in 2008 at the latest.

Production and storage of banknotes and coins

Euro banknote production is organised on a decentralised basis with pooling, this means that the European Central Bank (ECB) allocates banknote production on an annual basis to the euro-area national central banks. Each denomination is thus produced by a limited number of printing works and each bank is responsible for providing only one or a few denominations. This increases efficiency by achieving economies of scale.

Logistical stocks and a common strategic stock of euro banknotes, the Eurosystem Strategic Stock, ensure the continuity of banknote supply. These reserves may, for example, be used to provide the initial quantity of euro banknotes necessary for the changeover in Member States joining the euro area, as was the case in Slovenia on 1 January 2007.

The ECB aims to establish a single Eurosystem tendering procedure for the procurement of banknotes, starting at the latest in 2012.

Euro coin production falls within the competence of Member States. Decisions are therefore taken on a decentralised basis, reducing the efficiency which is gained by pooling, in particular with respect to the coordination of production and/or storage of coins. For example, one country may decide to produce extra coins while another has excess stocks of the same denomination.

The Commission suggests that possible improvements should be considered, especially concerning the 1, 2 and 5 cent coins, which represent approximately 80 % of new coin production. These coins generate little monetary income and the production costs and related expenditure (transport, packaging, etc.) are relatively high compared with their face value. Since the different national sides to some extent prevent the exchange and/or transfer of coin stocks between countries, some Member States may be prepared to envisage the possibility of using low denomination coins with a ‘standard’ national side.

Finally, the European Commission suggests that the possibility of creating a specific EU budget line for euro coinage projects and activities of common interest should be considered.

Euro used in scriptural form (1999), introduction of coins and banknotes (2002)

On 1 January 1999, the euro became the single currency of eleven Member States, followed by Greece on 1 January 2001. Between 1999 and 2001, the euro could only be used in scriptural form, for example for cheques and bank transfers. Few initially made use of this possibility and in day-to-day life the introduction of the euro as the single currency passed relatively unnoticed, as consumers in the twelve countries concerned continued to use national banknotes and coins to carry out transactions. Euro coins and banknotes were introduced into circulation in twelve Member States on 1 January 2002. Since 1 January 2007, Slovenia has been a part of the euro area.

Production and issuing of euro banknotes are the exclusive responsibility of the European Central Bank. The Member States are responsible for the production and minting of euro coins. Both euro banknotes and coins are put into circulation by the national central banks in the euro area.