Important legal notice

|

52009PC0570

Recommendation for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Community regarding the renegotiation of the Monetary Agreement with the Vatican City State  /* COM/2009/0570 final - CNB 2009/0158 */  Recommendation for a Council Decision on the position to be taken by the European Community regarding the renegotiation of the Monetary Agreement with the Vatican City State  /* COM/2009/0570 final - CNB 2009/0158 */

		ENBrussels, 16.10.2009COM(2009) 570 final2009/0158 (CNB)Recommendation for aCOUNCIL DECISIONon the position to be taken by the European Community regarding the renegotiation of the Monetary Agreement with the Vatican City StateEXPLANATORY MEMORANDUMThe Monetary Agreements were concluded between the European Community and Monaco, San Marino and Vatican in order to give legal continuity to the arrangements which existed between these countries on the one hand and France and Italy on the other before the introduction of the euro.Ten years after the euro replaced the legacy currencies of Italy and France used by Monaco, San Marino and Vatican, the Council invited the Commission to review the functioning of the Monetary Agreements [1]. The results of the assessment were adopted in the 'Commission Communication on the functioning of the Monetary Agreements with Monaco, San Marino and Vatican' [2]. The Commission concluded that the Monetary Agreements in their present form need to be amended with a view to ensuring a more consistent approach in the relations between the Community and the countries having signed the Agreements. The present draft Recommendation for a Council Decision defines the position to be taken by the Community in the renegotiation of the Agreement with the Vatican City State.The Commission proposes to renegotiate and amend the following provisions:· Transposition of relevant EC legislationThe obligations of Monaco, San Marino and Vatican stemming from their respective Monetary Agreements with the Community are very unequal. The Monetary Agreement with the Principality of Monaco comprises the biggest number of obligations. Contrary to the Agreement with Monaco, the Agreements with Vatican and San Marino do not entail any specific obligation to transpose EU legislation in the domain of protection of euro cash against counterfeiting and the ways of cooperation with the Community in this area. In order to create a level playing field and ensure appropriate protection of euro banknotes and coins against counterfeiting Vatican, together with San Marino, shall apply the relevant Community legislation.Since there is no proper banking sector in Vatican, there is no need to transpose the Community banking and financial legislation.· Follow-up mechanismsIn contrast with the procedure envisaged for the Agreement with Monaco, no provision was made for a follow-up procedure in the Agreements signed with Vatican and San Marino. In the absence of regular formal follow-up, Vatican and San Marino do not regularly report on the implementation of the Agreements and they are not properly informed of legislative developments in the fields covered by the Agreements. The Commission therefore proposes creating two new joint committees - similar to the one existing with the Principality of Monaco - with the Vatican City State and the Republic of San Marino.The Joint Committee with the Vatican City State would be composed of representatives of the Vatican City State, Italy, the European Commission and the European Central Bank. The Committee would be in charge of facilitating the implementation of the Agreement and discussing possible amendments to the list of the Community legislation to be applied by Vatican. It would also have a decision making power with regard to a limited number of issues conferred to it by the Monetary Agreement (e.g. approving the change of a Mint producing Vatican euro coins).· Ceiling for the issuance of euro coinsFor historical reasons, the ceilings for maximum yearly issuance of Monaco, San Marino and Vatican were fixed in two different ways (Monaco is currently authorised to issue a maximum of 1/500th of the quantity of coins minted in France while Vatican and San Marino have fixed quotas) leading to very different results.With a view to ensuring fair treatment to all countries with the Monetary Agreements, the Commission proposes to introduce a new uniform method for calculating the ceilings of euro coins issuance (i.e. to be also used in all future Agreements). The Commission also proposes to increase the ceilings of issuance of the countries having signed the Monetary Agreements with a view to allowing some circulation of their coins. Coins minted in low quantities are very demanded by coin collectors. As a consequence, the coins are not serving their original purpose of a payment instrument but are solely kept as collectors' items.The new ceilings would be composed of a fixed and a variable part:(1) The fixed part should aim at covering the demand of coin collectors. According to common estimates, a total value of around €2 100 000 should be sufficient to cover the demand of the collectors' market. [3](2) The variable part would be based, in the case of Vatican, on the average per capita issuance of Italy. The average number of coins per capita issued in Italy in (n-1) would be multiplied by the number of inhabitants of the Vatican City State.Using the new method, the ceiling of issuance of the Vatican City State would approximately double if compared with the current quota.· Rules for minting euro coinsThe current Monetary Agreements reserve the right to produce the euro coins of Vatican and San Marino to the national Mint of Italy. This rule was introduced for historical reasons, at a time when euro cash was not yet in circulation and nearly all the euro-area countries were minting euro coins only for their own needs. The situation has now evolved, with a number of euro-area countries today having their coins minted in another euro-area country. The Commission therefore proposes to open the possibility for Vatican and San Marino to order their euro coins in another EU Mint experienced in producing euro coins. The change of the Mint would however have to be approved by the Joint Committee.· Election of jurisdictionThe present Monetary Agreements have not given the Community any leverage in the event that the countries having signed the Monetary Agreements do not fulfil their obligations (e.g. do not transpose the relevant Community legislation in due time), apart from the ultimate – and therefore unlikely - possibility to withdraw unilaterally from the Agreement. The Commission therefore proposes to elect the European Court of Justice as the jurisdiction responsible for settling disputes which may arise from the application of the Monetary Agreements.2009/0158 (CNB)Recommendation for aCOUNCIL DECISIONon the position to be taken by the European Community regarding the renegotiation of the Monetary Agreement with the Vatican City StateTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 111.3 thereof,Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission [4],Having regard to the opinion of the European Central Bank [5],Whereas:(1) The Community has the competence for monetary and exchange rate matters as of the date of the introduction of the euro;(2) The Council is to determine the arrangements for the negotiation and conclusion of agreements concerning monetary or foreign exchange regime matter;(3) The Italian Republic, on behalf of the Community, concluded on 29 December 2000 a Monetary Agreement with the Vatican City State ;(4) The Council concluded on 10 February 2009 that the Commission should review the functioning of the existing agreements and consider possible increases in the ceilings for coin issuance;(5) The Commission concluded in the 'Communication on the functioning of the Monetary Agreements with Monaco, San Marino and Vatican' [6] that the Monetary Agreement with the Vatican City State in its present form needs to be amended with a view to ensuring a more consistent approach in the relations between the Community and the Countries having signed a monetary agreement;(6) The Monetary Agreement with Vatican should therefore be renegotiated as soon as possible so that the new regime enters into force on 1st January 2010, together with the new rules on the modalities of introduction of euro coins set by the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national side and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation, endorsed by the Council in its conclusions of 10 February 2009.HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:Article 1The Italian Republic shall notify the Vatican City State of the need to amend the existing Monetary Agreement between the Italian Republic, on behalf of the European Community, and the Vatican City State at the earliest possible date and offer renegotiation on the relevant provisions of the Agreement.Article 2The Community shall seek the following changes in the renegotiation of the Agreement with the Vatican City State:(a) The Agreement shall be concluded between the Community and the Vatican City State. The text of the agreement shall be a codified text of the current agreement with the amendments.(b) The Vatican City State shall undertake to adopt all appropriate measures, through direct transpositions or possibly equivalent actions, for the application of all relevant Community legislation on the prevention of money laundering, on the prevention of fraud and counterfeiting of cash and non-cash means of payment.(c) The method for determining the ceiling of issuance of Vatican euro coins shall be revised. The new ceiling shall be calculated using a method which will combine a fixed part aimed at avoiding excessive numismatic speculation on Vatican coins by satisfying the demand of the collector coin market and a variable part, calculated as the average per capita coin issuance of Italy in the year n-1 multiplied by the number of inhabitants of Vatican. Without prejudice to the issuance of collector coins, the Agreement shall set the minimum proportion of Vatican euro coins to be introduced at face value at 51%.(d) A Joint Committee shall be established in order to monitor the progress in the implementation of the Agreement. It shall be composed of representatives of the Vatican City State, the Republic of Italy, the Commission and the ECB. It shall have the possibility to revise each year the fixed part with a view to taking into account inflation and the evolution of the collector market. It shall adopt decisions unanimously. The Joint Committee shall adopt its own rules of procedure.(e) The euro coins of the Vatican City State shall be minted by the Instituto Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato. The Vatican City State shall however have the possibility to take another contractor among the EU Mints striking euro coins, with the agreement of the Joint Committee. The volume of coins issued by the Vatican City State shall be added to the volume of coins issued by the home country of the producing mint for the purpose of the ECB approval of the total volume of the issuance.(f) The Court of Justice of the European Communities shall be elected as the body in charge of settling disputes which may arise from the application of the Agreement.If the Community or the Vatican consider that the other Party has not fulfilled an obligation under the Monetary Agreement, it may bring the matter before the Court of Justice. The judgment of the Court shall be binding on the Parties, which will take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment within a period to be decided by the Court in its judgment. In case the Community or the Vatican fail to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment within the period, the other Party can terminate immediately the Agreement.Article 3The negotiations with the Vatican City State shall be conducted by the Italian Republic and the Commission on behalf of the Community. The European Central Bank shall be fully associated with the negotiations in its field of competence. The Italian Republic and the Commission shall submit the draft agreement to the Economic and Financial Committee for opinion.Article 4The Council shall conclude the agreement.This Decision is addressed to the Italian Republic and the Commission.Done at Brussels,For the CouncilThe President[1] Council Conclusions on 'Common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation', 2922nd ECOFIN Council meeting of 10 February 2009.[2] COM (2009)359 of 14 July 2009[3] San Marino has for instance concentrated on striking selected euro denomination coins with some success: these coins are now used at face value for transactions.[4] OJ C , , p. .[5] OJ C , , p. .[6] COM(2009)359--------------------------------------------------


Avis juridique important

|

32000H0226

2000/226/EC: Council Recommendation of 13 March 2000 concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1995) (eighth EDF) for the financial year 1998

Official Journal L 071 , 18/03/2000 P. 0027 - 0027

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATIONof 13 March 2000concerning the discharge to be given to the Commission in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1995) (eighth EDF) for the financial year 1998(2000/226/EC)THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to the Fourth ACP-EC Convention, signed at Lomé on 15 December 1989, as amended by the agreement signed at Mauritius on 4 November 1995,Having regard to Council Decision 91/482/EEC of 25 July 1991 on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Economic Community(1), as revised in the interim by Decision 97/803/EC(2),Having regard to the Internal Agreement on the financing and administration of Community aid(3), signed in Brussels on 20 December 1995, and in particular Article 33(3) thereof,Having regard to the Financial Regulation of 16 June 1998 applicable to the eighth European Development Fund(4), and in particular Articles 69 to 74 thereof,Having examined the revenue and expenditure account and the balance sheet relating to the operations of the European Development Fund (1995) (eighth EDF) as at 31 December 1998 and the Court of Auditors' report relating to the financial year 1998 together with the Commission's replies(5),Whereas:(1) Pursuant to Article 33(3) on the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the management of the European Development Fund (1995) (sixth EDF) must be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on a recommendation from the Council.(2) The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the European Development Fund (1995) (eighth EDF) during the financial year 1998 has been satisfactory,HEREBY RECOMMENDS that the European Parliament give the Commission a discharge in respect of the implementation of the operations of the European Development Fund (1995) (eighth EDF) for the financial year 1998.Done at Brussels, 13 March 2000.For the CouncilThe PresidentJ. PINA MOURA(1) OJ L 263, 19.9.1991, p. 1.(2) OJ L 329, 29.11.1997, p. 50.(3) OJ L 156, 29.5.1998, p. 108 and corrigendum: OJ L 173, 18.6.1998, p. 54.(4) OJ L 191, 7.7.1998, p. 53.(5) OJ C 349, 3.12.1999, p. 181.


Avis juridique important

|

31978K1905

Commission Recommendation No 1905/78/ECSC of 28 July 1978 amending high authority Recommendation No 1-64 to the governments of the member states concerning an increase in the protective duty on iron and steel products at the external frontiers of the community

Official Journal L 217 , 08/08/1978 P. 0005 - 0009 Greek special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 9 P. 0231  Spanish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 8 P. 0065  Portuguese special edition Chapter 11 Volume 8 P. 0065

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION No 1905/78/ECSC  of 28 July 1978  amending High Authority recommendation No 1-64 to the Governments of the Member States concerning an increase in the protective duty on iron and steel products at the external frontiers of the Community  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, and in particular Articles 2 to 5, 8, 14, 57, 71, 74, 81 and 86 thereof and Annex I thereto,  Having regard to High Authority recommendation No 1-64 of 15 January 1964 to the Governments of the Member States concerning an increase in the protective duty on iron and steel products at the external frontiers of the Community (1), as amended by Commission Decision No 663/68/ECSC (2),  Having regard to the decisions of the representatives of the Governments of the Member States of the European Coal and Steel Community, meeting within the Council of 21 December 1971, 13 January 1975 and 20 December 1977, concerning the nomenclature of and rates of conventional duty on products covered by the ECSC Treaty, and the general rules governing the interpretation and application of the said nomenclature and duties,  Whereas, since the entry into force of High Authority recommendation No 1-64, a number of amendments have been made to the nomenclature and duties for iron and steel products listed in the Annex to that recommendation;  Whereas the abovementioned nomenclature and corresponding rate of duties should be interpreted and applied in accordance with the preliminary provisions of the Common Customs Tariff established by the European Economic Community (3);  Whereas it is therefore necessary to amend recommendation No 1-64,  HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:    Article 1 1. The Annex to recommendation No 1-64 is hereby replaced by the Annex hereto.  2. In Article 1 thereof, the following paragraph is added:  "The table and the rates indicated shall be interpreted and applied in accordance with the preliminary provisions of the Common Customs Tariff established by the European Economic Community."   Article 2 The Member States shall adopt all measures necessary to implement this recommendation.   Article 3 This recommendation shall be notified to the Member States and published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.  It shall enter into force for each Member State on 8 August 1978.     Done at Brussels, 28 July 1978.  For the Commission  Wilhelm HAFERKAMP  Vice-President  (1)OJ No 8, 22.1.1964, p. 99/64. (2)OJ No L 125, 5.6.1968, p. 7. (3)See the Annex headed "Common Customs Tariff" to Council Regulation (EEC) No 950/68 of 28 June 1968 (OJ No L 172, 22.7.1968), as last amended by Regulation (EEC) No 2500/77 (OJ No L 289, 14.11.1977).    ANNEX   >PIC FILE= "T0012868">    >PIC FILE= "T0012869">    >PIC FILE= "T0012870">    >PIC FILE= "T0012871">


Avis juridique important

|

31981H0076

81/76/EEC: Commission Recommendation of 8 January 1981 on accelerated settlement of claims under insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles

Official Journal L 057 , 04/03/1981 P. 0027 - 0027 Spanish special edition: Chapter 13 Volume 11 P. 0162  Portuguese special edition Chapter 13 Volume 11 P. 0162

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION of 8 January 1981 on accelerated settlement of claims under insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles (81/76/EEC)    THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, and in particular Article 155 thereof,  Whereas motor vehicles are responsible for a significant proportion of accidents occurring in the Community;  Whereas, on 7 August 1980, the Commission presented to the Council a proposal for a second Directive on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles ; whereas that proposal is aimed at reducing certain disparities which continue to exist between the obligatory motor vehicle civil liability insurance schemes in the different Member States, in order to ensure that motor vehicle accident victims have equivalent cover in all Member States;  Whereas, however, that proposal does not deal with the procedures used to settle claims ; whereas it is not possible to establish a uniform procedure in all Member States for forwarding police reports, particularly in view of the effect in this area of principles of public policy governing the administration of justice;  Whereas the period elapsing between the occurrence of a road accident and the payment of compensation by the insurer of the person liable is occasionally extremely lengthy ; whereas such lengthy periods are undoubtedly prejudicial to accident victims;  Whereas such lengthy periods are largely attributable to the slowness of the legal procedures for determining liability and fixing compensation;  Whereas procedures have been introduced in some Member States enabling the parties concerned and their insurers to obtain more rapid access to police reports containing the particulars that are essential for settling claims ; whereas it is appropriate to encourage the extension of such arrangements,  HEREBY RECOMMENDS:      Article 1 The Member States shall take all the measures necessary to facilitate the communication to those concerned of police reports and other documents necessary for the payment of compensation by insurers covering against civil liability in respect of the use of motor vehicles.   Article 2 Member States shall inform the Commission of the measures they take on the basis of this recommendation.   Article 3  This recommendation is addressed to the Member States.      Done at Brussels, 8 January 1981.  For the Commission  Christopher TUGENDHAT  Member of the Commission


Avis juridique important

|

32000H0043

2000/43/EC: Commission Recommendation of 17 December 1999 concerning a coordinated Community monitoring programme for 2000 to ensure compliance with maximum levels of pesticide residues in and on cereals and certain products of plant origin, including fruit and vegetables (notified under document number C(1999) 4491) (Text with EEA relevance)

Official Journal L 014 , 20/01/2000 P. 0036 - 0041

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONof 17 December 1999concerning a coordinated Community monitoring programme for 2000 to ensure compliance with maximum levels of pesticide residues in and on cereals and certain products of plant origin, including fruit and vegetables(notified under document number C(1999) 4491)(Text with EEA relevance)(2000/43/EC)THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,Having regard to Council Directive 86/362/EEC of 24 July 1986 on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in and on cereals(1), as last amended by Directive 1999/71/EC(2), and in particular Article 7(2)(b) thereof,Having regard to Council Directive 90/642/EEC of 27 November 1990 on the fixing of maximum levels for pesticide residues in and on certain products of plant origin, including fruit and vegetables(3), as last amended by Directive 1999/71/EC, and in particular Article 4(2)(b) thereof,(1) Whereas Article 7(2)(b) of Directive 86/362/EEC and Article 4(2)(b) of Directive 90/642/EEC require the Commission to submit to the Standing Committee on Plant Health by 31 December each year a recommendation setting out a coordinated Community monitoring programme to ensure compliance for maximum levels of pesticide residues set out in the Annexes II to the said Directives;(2) Whereas the Commission should recommend a monitoring programme each year; whereas experience gained by the Commission and the Member States in establishing, carrying out and reporting on the three previous annual coordinated monitoring programmes indicates that multiannual programmes appear to be most effective and practical; whereas it appears appropriate to indicate in this recommendation the framework of future programmes;(3) Whereas the Commission should progressively work towards a system which would permit the estimation of actual pesticide dietary exposure, as provided for in the second paragraph of Article 7(3) of Directive 86/362/EEC and the second paragraph of Article 4(3) of Directive 90/642/EEC; whereas to facilitate examination of the feasibility of such estimations, data concerning the monitoring of residues of pesticides in a number of food products which constitute major components of European diets should be available; whereas in view of the resources available at national level for pesticide residue monitoring, Member States are only able to analyse samples of four to five products each year within a coordinated monitoring programme; whereas each pesticide should generally be monitored in 20 food products over a series of five-year cycles;(4) Whereas the residues recommended to be monitored in 2000 will allow examination of the feasibility of using the data concerning the pesticides acephate, the benomyl group, chlorpyriphos, iprodione and methamidophos as these compounds (identified as group A in Annex IA) have already been monitored between 1996 and 1999 for estimation of actual dietary exposure;(5) Whereas the residues recommended to be monitored in 2000 and 2001 will allow examination of the feasibility of using the data concerning the pesticides diazinon, metalaxyl, methidathion, thiabendazole and triazophos as these compounds (identified as group B in Annex IA) have already been monitored between 1997 and 1999 for estimation of actual dietary exposure;(6) Whereas the residues recommended to be monitored in 2000, 2001 and 2002 will allow examination of the feasibility of using the data concerning the pesticides chlorpyriphos-methyl, deltamethrin, endosulfan, imazalil, lambda-cyhalothrin, the maneb group, mecarbam, permethrin, pirimiphos-methyl and vinclozolin as these compounds (identified as group C in Annex IA) have already been monitored in 1998 and 1999 for estimation of actual dietary exposure;(7) Whereas a systematic statistical approach to numbers of samples to be taken in the specific coordinated exercise is necessary; whereas such an approach has been set out by the Commission of the Codex Alimentarius(4). Based on a binomial probability distribution it can be calculated that examination of a total sample number of 459 gives a 99 % confidence of detecting one sample containing pesticide residues above the LOD if it is anticipated that 1 % of products of plant origin will contain residues above the LOD; whereas the total number of samples to be taken by each Member State should be apportioned on the basis of population and consumer numbers, with a minimum of 12 samples per product and per year, and indicated in Annex IB;(8) Whereas draft guidelines concerning quality control procedures for pesticide residue analysis, published as Annex II(5) of the monitoring recommendation for 1999 have been discussed by the experts of the Member States at Oeiras, Portugal on 15 and 16 September 1997 and discussed and taken note of in the subgroup pesticide residues of the Working Group on Plant Health on 20 and 21 November 1997; whereas it is agreed that these draft guidelines should be implemented as far as possible by the analytical laboratories of the Member States and should be reviewed in the light of this experience;(9) Whereas Article 4(2)(a) of Directive 90/642/EEC requires Member States to specify the criteria applied in drawing up their national inspection programmes when sending to the Commission information on their implementation during the previous year; whereas such information should include the criteria applied in determining the numbers of samples to be taken and analyses to be carried out and the reporting levels applied and the criteria by which the reporting levels have been fixed; whereas details of accreditation under Directive 93/99/EEC of 29 October 1993 on the subject of additional measures concerning the official control of foodstuffs(6) of the laboratories carrying out analyses should be indicated;(10) Whereas information on the results of monitoring programmes is particularly appropriate for treatment, storage and transmission by electronic/informatic methods; whereas formats have been developed for supply in floppy disk form to the Member States by the Commission; whereas Member States should therefore be able to send their reports to the Commission in the standard format; whereas the further development of such a standard format is most effectively undertaken by the development of guidelines by the Commission;(11) Whereas the measures provided for in this recommendation are in accordance with the opinion of the Standing Committee on Plant Health,HEREBY RECOMMENDS THE MEMBER STATES TO:1. sample and analyse for the product/pesticide residue combinations set out in Annex IA, on the basis of the number of samples of each product allocated to each Member State in Annex IB, reflecting as appropriate, national, Community and third country share of the Member State's market; for at least one pesticide possibly posing an acute risk, one of the products will be subjected to individual analysis of the items in the composite sample: two samples of an appropriate number of items will be taken, where possible the produce of a single producer; if in the first, composite sample a detectable level of the pesticide is found, the items of the second sample will be analysed individually; in 2000 this will include the combination cucumbers/methamidophos and/or pears/chlormequat;2. by 31 August 2001 report the results for the part of the specific exercise allocated for 2000 in Annex IA, indicating the analytical methods used and reporting levels achieved, in accordance with the quality control procedures set out in the quality control procedures for pesticide residue analysis(7), in a format as set out in the document for guidance to the Member States with regard to implementation of the Commission Recommendations concerning coordinated Community monitoring programmes(8);3. by 31 August 2000, send to the Commission and to the Member States all the information as required by Article 7(3) of Directive 86/362/EEC and Article 4(3) of Directive 90/642/EEC concerning the 1999 monitoring exercise to ensure, at least by check-sampling, compliance with maximum pesticide residue levels including:3.1 the results of their national programmes concerning pesticides listed in the Annexes II of Directives 86/362/EEC and 90/642/EEC, in relation to harmonised levels and, where these have not yet been fixed at Community level, in relation to the national levels in force;3.2 information on their laboratories quality control procedures and, in particular, information concerning aspects of the guidelines concerning quality control procedures for pesticide residue analysis which they have not been able to apply or have had difficulty in applying;3.3 information on accreditation in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of Directive 93/99/EEC (including type of accreditation, accreditation body and copy of accreditation certificate) of the laboratories carrying out the analyses.This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States.Done at Brussels, 17 December 1999.For the CommissionDavid BYRNEMember of the Commission(1) OJ L 221, 7.8.1986, p. 37.(2) OJ L 194, 27.7.1999, p. 36.(3) OJ L 350, 14.12.1990, p. 71.(4) Codex Alimentarius, Pesticide residues in foodstuffs, Rome 1994, ISBN 92-5-203271-1; Vol. 2, page 372.(5) OJ L 128, 21.5.1999, p. 30, previously published as Commission document VI/7826/97.(6) OJ L 290, 24.11.1993, p. 14.(7) OJ L 128, 21.5.1999, p. 30.(8) OJ L 128, 21.5.1999, p. 48.ANNEX IAPesticide/product combinations to be monitored in the specific exercise set out in point 1 of the recommendation>TABLE>ANNEX IBNumber of samples of each product to be taken by each Member State, in the coordinated Community monitoring programme for 2000>TABLE>


				|

		52014DC0403

			Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION on Bulgaria’s 2014 national reform programme and delivering a Council opinion on Bulgaria’s 2014 convergence programme /* COM/2014/0403 final */

Recommendation for a
COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
on Bulgaria’s 2014 national reform
programme
and delivering a Council opinion on Bulgaria’s 2014 convergence programme
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the
Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 121(2) and 148(4)
thereof,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No
1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary
positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies[1], and in particular
Article 9(2) thereof,
Having regard to Regulation (EU) No
1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on
the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances[2],
and in particular Article 6(1) thereof,
Having regard to the recommendation of the
European Commission[3],
Having regard to the resolutions of the
European Parliament[4],
Having regard to the conclusions of the
European Council,
Having regard to the opinion of the
Employment Committee,
Having regard to the opinion of the
Economic and Financial Committee,
Having regard to the opinion of the Social
Protection Committee,
Having regard to the opinion of the
Economic Policy Committee,
Whereas:
(1)
On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to
the Commission’s proposal to launch a new strategy for growth and jobs, Europe
2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies, which will focus on
the key areas where action is needed to boost Europe’s potential for
sustainable growth and competitiveness.
(2)
On 13 July 2010, the Council, on the basis of
the Commission's proposals, adopted a recommendation on the broad guidelines
for the economic policies of the Member States and the Union (2010 to 2014)
and, on 21 October 2010, adopted a decision on guidelines for the employment
policies of the Member States, which together form the ‘integrated guidelines’.
Member States were invited to take the integrated guidelines into account in
their national economic and employment policies.
(3)
On 29 June 2012, the Heads of State or
Government decided on a Compact for Growth and Jobs, providing a coherent
framework for action at national, EU and euro area levels using all possible
levers, instruments and policies. They decided on action to be taken at the
level of the Member States, in particular expressing full commitment to
achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy and to implementing the
country-specific recommendations.
(4)
On 9 July 2013, the Council adopted a
recommendation on Bulgaria’s national reform programme for 2013 and delivered
its opinion on Bulgaria’s updated convergence programme for 2012-2016.
(5)
On 13 November 2013, the Commission adopted the
Annual Growth Survey[5],
marking the start of the 2014 European Semester of economic policy
coordination. On the same day on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011, the
Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report[6],
in which it identified Bulgaria as one of the Member States for which an
in-depth review would be carried out.
(6)
On 20 December 2013, the European Council
endorsed the priorities for ensuring financial stability, fiscal consolidation
and action to foster growth. It underscored the need to pursue differentiated,
growth-friendly fiscal consolidation, to restore normal lending conditions to
the economy, to promote growth and competitiveness, to tackle unemployment and
the social consequences of the crisis, and to modernise public administration.
(7)
On 5 March 2014, the Commission published the
results of its in-depth review for Bulgaria[7],
under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011. The Commission's analysis
leads it to conclude that Bulgaria continues to experience macroeconomic
imbalances, which require monitoring and policy action. In particular, the
protracted adjustment of the labour market warrants policy actions, while the
correction of the external position and corporate deleveraging are progressing
well.
(8)
On 17 April 2014, Bulgaria submitted its 2014
national reform programme and its 2014 convergence programme. In order to take
account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the
same time.
(9)
The objective of the budgetary strategy outlined
in the 2014 Convergence Programme is to reach the medium-term objective of a
structural deficit of -1% of GDP by 2016. The medium-term objective is more
stringent than what the Stability and Growth Pact requires. Bulgaria has
benefited from the possibility of a temporary deviation from the medium-term
objective by 0.6% of GDP in 2013 and by 0.1% of GDP in 2014 allowed for jointly
financed projects. The programme plans a deterioration in the (recalculated)
structural balance by 0.3% of GDP in 2014, to -1.3% of GDP, and for an
improvement by 0.3% of GDP in 2015, to -1.0% of GDP, ensuring the return to the
medium-term objective. The growth rate of government expenditure would not
exceed the relevant reference medium-term expenditure benchmark in 2014-15. Therefore
the budgetary plans are in line with the requirement of the Stability and
Growth Pact. The debt ratio is well below 60% of GDP and, according to the
Convergence Programme, it is expected to increase only slightly to 20.6% of GDP
by the end of the Programme period. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning the
budgetary projections in the Convergence Programme is optimistic for the 2014-15
period, with annual growth expected to reach 2.1% in 2014 and 2.6% in 2015
instead of respectively 1.7% in 2014 and of 2.0% in 2015 projected in the
Commission 2014 spring forecast. According to the Commission forecast
Bulgaria's deviation from its medium-term objective in 2014 is larger than what
is allowed on the basis of the temporary deviation allowed for jointly financed
projects, and the required return to the medium-term objective would not be
achieved in 2015. Based on the assessment of the 2014 Convergence Programme and
the Commission forecast, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, the Council is
of the opinion that there is a risk of deviation from the medium-term objective
in 2014-15.
(10)
Tax compliance and the quality of the tax
administration remain central challenges in Bulgaria. Available estimates point
to a considerable size of the shadow economy, confirmed by data for undeclared
work in Bulgaria. The administrative costs of revenue collection and the
compliance costs of paying taxes are relatively high. Despite several measures
taken to respond to these challenges, Bulgaria still lacks a fully-fledged tax
compliance strategy, which would cover the work of all tax collection
authorities and include a prior analysis of the most significant risks to tax
collection as well as an evaluation of the measures already in place, including
simplification measures as well as improved controls.
(11)
In 2013, Bulgaria took a step back from past
commitments in the area of pension reform. Additional early retirement schemes
were introduced and the planned annual increase in the statutory retirement age
was postponed. No progress was made with regard to harmonising the retirement
age for men and women and no steps were taken to tighten eligibility criteria
and controls to limit abuse in the allocation of invalidity pensions. Bulgaria
has one of the most rapidly ageing populations in the EU, which has negative
implications for the labour market, for growth potential in the economy and for
the financing of its pension system. Bulgaria therefore needs to continue the
reform of its pension system. Bulgaria also faces important challenges in the
rationalisation and management of the hospital sector, including a lack of
transparency in hospital financing and insufficiently developed services for
out-patient care. Furthermore, the high level of formal and informal payments
borne directly by the patient effectively excludes certain segments of the
population from access to health-care. Health status indicators are weak in
comparison with other Member States, indicating that structurally higher public
expenditure on health may be required in the future.
(12)
The labour market has been underperforming in
recent years, thus limiting the adjustment capacity of the economy and
undermining its growth potential. Unemployment levelled off in 2013, but the
number of young and long-term unemployed has continued to rise. Bulgaria faces
one of the highest proportions of young people who are neither in employment,
education nor training, implying a severe underutilisation and underdevelopment
of human capital. There has been only very limited progress in strengthening
the capacity of the Employment Agency. There is also a need to extend the
coverage and efficiency of active labour market policies. Bulgaria lacks
effective measures to target the non-registered young people, including Roma,
in line with the objectives of a youth guarantee. Significant proportions of
the unemployed are not covered by the standard safety nets (unemployment
benefits and social assistance) but rely instead on family solidarity or
informal work. Bulgarians experience one of the highest risks of poverty and
social exclusion in the EU. Minimum thresholds for the payment of social
insurance contributions could prevent the low-skilled from participating fully
in the formal economy. Some analyses have been carried out to assess the
possible impact and these need to be assessed and followed up with appropriate
policy action. There are no clear guidelines for transparent minimum wage
setting in Bulgaria. Statutory minimum wages have been increased substantially
in 2013 which may have a negative impact on employment and should, therefore,
be monitored.
(13)
Bulgaria has still not adopted the School
Education Act providing a framework for implementation of the necessary
comprehensive reforms of the school system, including the modernisation of
curricula and the improved training for teachers. There is a need to enhance
the quality of vocational education and training in Bulgaria and to integrate
it better into the general educational structures so as to allow for flexible
pathways, reduce early school leaving and improve access to lifelong learning.
Higher education, in turn, faces persisting challenges in responding better to
labour market needs. The low standard of quality certification contributes to
poor performance. A new strategy on higher education is being discussed,
calling for the restructuring of university management through the direct
involvement of interested stakeholders such as businesses and students, the
consolidation of universities, and a performance-based approach to better align
educational outputs with the demands of the labour market. A continuing
challenge concerns the access to education for disadvantaged children, in
particular Roma children. The two-year obligatory pre-school is a key measure
going in the right direction and should be strictly implemented, together with
measures to prevent early school leaving. There is a need to scale up existing
initiatives to improve the training of teachers and reduce de facto
segregation in schools. The rules linking the child allowance with
participation in education are not yet effectively implemented.
(14)
Broader efforts to modernise the public
administration have had a limited impact due to a fragmented approach and
insufficient commitment to in-depth reforms. Bulgaria needs a coordinated
strategy for public administrative reform to enhance the professionalism and
independence of the public administration and of its regulatory agencies,
including a merit-based system of appointments and career development for civil
servants and effective structures to address the risk of corruption. Continued
efforts are needed to improve the general business environment. Challenges
include the procedures for obtaining permits and registering businesses
Resolving insolvencies takes over three years on average and the recovery rate
is low. New rules on late payments were adopted in 2013 and need to be
implemented. The development of e-government has stalled, and coordination to
ensure interoperability of systems and creating a single point of contact is
insufficient, thus limiting the efforts to increase transparency and reduce
administrative burdens. In the area of public procurement a simple and codified
legal framework is lacking, resulting in a complicated legal and regulatory
landscape which creates uncertainty for operators. The independence of the
judiciary also remains a major concern affecting the business environment in
Bulgaria. Bulgaria has taken some steps to address corruption, but overall
progress has been limited and remains fragile, calling for more consistent
checks and dissuasive sanctions for conflicts of interest. There is also a need
to ensure better co-ordination among anti-corruption institutions and shield
them from political influence.
(15)
Competition in the electricity and gas sectors
remains limited. Areas of particular concern for improving the functioning of
the energy markets include the lack of electricity and gas exchanges and the
absence of a transparent wholesale market. The free market in electricity is
dominated by a sole supplier and its limited size means that competition cannot
fulfil its function of ensuring cost efficiency. The independence and
effectiveness of the national regulator remains limited. Dependency on imports
from a limited number of suppliers and lack of infrastructure development
create a risk of supply shocks. A comprehensive package of measures to improve
energy efficiency has been proposed for EU financing in the new programming
period 2014-2020.
(16)
In the context of the European Semester, the
Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Bulgaria’s economic
policy. It has assessed the convergence programme and the national reform
programme. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable
fiscal and socio-economic policy in Bulgaria but also their compliance with EU
rules and guidance, given the need to reinforce the overall economic governance
of the European Union by providing EU-level input into future national
decisions. Its recommendations under the European Semester are
reflected in recommendations (1) to (6) below.
(17)
In the light of this assessment, the Council has
examined Bulgaria's convergence programme, and its opinion[8] is reflected in
particular in recommendation (1) below.
(18)
In the light of the Commission's in-depth review
and this assessment, the Council has examined the national reform programme and
the convergence programme. Its recommendations under Article 6 of Regulation
(EU) No 1176/2011 are reflected in recommendations (3), (4) and (5) below.
HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Bulgaria take
action within the period 2014-2015 to:
1.
Reinforce the budgetary measures for 2014 in the
light of the emerging gap relative to the Stability and Growth Pact
requirements. In 2015, strengthen the budgetary strategy to ensure reaching the
medium-term objective and remain at it thereafter. Ensure the capacity of the
new fiscal council to fulfil its mandate. Implement a comprehensive tax strategy
to strengthen tax collection, tackle the shadow economy and reduce compliance
costs.
2.
Adopt a long-term strategy for the pension
system, proceeding with the planned annual increase in the statutory retirement
age and setting out a mechanism to link the statutory retirement age to life
expectancy in the long term, while phasing out early retirement options and
equalising the statutory retirement age for men and women. Tighten eligibility
criteria and procedures for the allocation of invalidity pensions, for example
by taking better account of the remaining work capacity of applicants. Ensure
efficient provision of healthcare including by improving transparency in
hospital financing, optimising the hospital network and developing out-patient
care.
3.
Improve the efficiency of the Employment Agency
by developing a performance monitoring system and better targeting the most vulnerable,
such as low-skilled and elderly workers, the long-term unemployed and Roma. Extend
the coverage and effectiveness of active labour market policies to match the
profiles of job-seekers, and reach out to non-registered young people who are
neither in employment, education or training, in line with the objectives of a
youth guarantee.
Improve the effective coverage of unemployment benefits
and social assistance and their links with activation measures. Take forward
the comprehensive review of minimum thresholds for social security
contributions so as to make sure that the system does not price the low-skilled
out of the labour market. Establish, in consultation with social partners,
transparent guidelines for the adjustment of the statutory minimum wages taking
into account the impact on employment and competitiveness. In order to
alleviate poverty, further improve the accessibility and effectiveness of
social services and transfers for children and older people.
4.
Adopt the School Education Act and pursue the
reforms of vocational and higher education in order to increase the level and
relevance of skills acquired at all levels, while fostering partnerships
between educational institutions and business with a view to better aligning
outcomes to labour market needs. Strengthen the quality of vocational education
and training institutions and improve access to life-long learning. Step up
efforts to improve access to quality inclusive pre-school and school education
of disadvantaged children, in particular Roma, and implement strictly the rules
linking the payment of child allowance to participation in education.
5.
Continue to improve the business environment, in
particular for SMEs, by cutting red tape, promoting e-government, streamlining
insolvency procedures and implementing the legislation on late payments.
Improve the public procurement system by enhancing administrative capacity,
strengthening the ex-ante checks performed by the Public Procurement Agency and
taking concrete steps for the implementation of e-procurement. Enhance the
quality and independence of the judiciary and step up the fight against
corruption.
6.
Scale up the reform of the energy sector in
order to increase competition, market efficiency and transparency, and energy
efficiency, in particular by removing market barriers, reducing the weight of
the regulated segment, stepping up efforts for the creation of a transparent
wholesale market for electricity and gas, phasing out quotas, and strengthening
the independence and administrative capacity of the energy regulator.
Accelerate interconnector projects with neighbouring Member States and
candidate countries and enhance the capacity to cope with disruptions.
Done at Brussels,
                                                                       For
the Council
                                                                       The
President
[1]               OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.
[2]               OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25.
[3]               COM(2014) 403 final.
[4]               P7_TA(2014)0128 and
P7_TA(2014)0129.
[5]               COM(2013) 800 final.
[6]               COM(2013) 790 final.
[7]               SWD(2014) 76 final.
[8]               Under Article 9(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No
1466/97.


Recommendation of 28 July 1959 to the Governments of Member States of the Community concerning measures of commercial policy on imports of coal from third countries /* Unofficial English translation */


Avis juridique important

|

52001HB0017

Recommendation of the European Central Bank of 6 December 2001 regarding the abrogation of participating Member States' provisions limiting the amount of coins denominated in a national currency unit that can be used in any single payment (ECB/2001/17)

Official Journal C 356 , 14/12/2001 P. 0009 - 0010

Recommendation of the European Central Bankof 6 December 2001regarding the abrogation of participating Member States' provisions limiting the amount of coins denominated in a national currency unit that can be used in any single payment(ECB/2001/17)(2001/C 356/05)THE GOVERNING COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community (hereinafter referred to as the "Treaty"), and in particular to the last sentence of Article 105(4), Article 106 and the third indent of Article 110(1) thereof,Having regard to the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank (hereinafter referred to as the "Statute"), and in particular to Article 4(b) and Article 34.1 thereof,Whereas:(1) The status of legal tender of banknotes denominated in euro has been laid down in Article 106(1) of the Treaty, as well as in Article 16 of the Statute and Article 10 of Council Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of 3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro(1).(2) Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98 establishes the legal tender status of coins denominated in euro and limits the obligation to accept coins denominated in euro in any single payment to the amount of 50 coins.(3) Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98 states that after the end of the transitional period the references made in legal instruments to the national currency units shall be read as references to the euro unit according to the respective conversion rates.(4) Some of the Member States which have adopted the euro in accordance with the Treaty have legal provisions in force limiting the amount of coins denominated in a national currency unit that can be used in any single payment. Such national provisions may give rise, after these coins lose their legal tender status, to an ambiguous state of affairs and jeopardise the clarity and certainty of the law. Given the wording of Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98, parties may be unclear about the legal limits on the amount of coins that can be used to discharge pecuniary debts. In particular, parties might continue to apply the limits established by national legal provisions to coins denominated in euro after the end of the dual circulation period or, in the absence of such a period, of the transitional period.(5) Legal clarity and certainty could be jeopardised if participating Member States insert clauses or wording referring to national provisions that limit the amount of coins denominated in a national currency unit that can be used in any single payment, where these provisions have not been abrogated, in their future contractual arrangements with national central banks for the issue of coins denominated in euro by them.(6) The European Central Bank (ECB) may submit recommendations in its field of competence to the appropriate Community institutions or bodies or to national authorities. In the process of the issue of legal tender coins by the participating Member States approval by the ECB of the volume of the issue must be granted. In order to avoid any misunderstanding of the scope of the legal tender status of euro coins issued by the participating Member States and approved by the ECB, the ECB considers it necessary to address a recommendation to participating Member States on national provisions, which may still be in force, limiting the amount of coins denominated in a national currency unit that can be used in any single payment,HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:Article 1DefinitionsFor the purposes of this recommendation:- "participating Member States" shall mean all Member States which have adopted the single currency in accordance with the Treaty,- "national currency unit" shall mean each unit of the currencies of participating Member States, as that unit was defined on the day before the start of the third stage of economic and monetary union or, as the case may be, on the day before the euro has been substituted for the currency of a Member State which has adopted the euro at a later date.Article 2Abrogation of national provisions limiting the amount of coins used in any single payment1. Participating Member States should expressly abrogate any legal provision which may still be in force in their respective legal orders limiting the amount of coins denominated in a national currency unit that a party is obliged to accept in any single payment.2. Participating Member States should seek to abrogate the legal provisions referred to in paragraph 1 so that they are no longer in force when coins denominated in a national currency unit lose their legal tender status in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 974/98 and the relevant national cash changeover legislation.Article 3Final provisionsThis recommendation is addressed to participating Member States.This recommendation shall be published in the Official Journal of the European Communities.Done at Frankfurt am Main, 6 December 2001.The President of the ECBWillem F. Duisenberg(1) OJ L 139, 11.5.1998, p. 1.


Avis juridique important

|

31975H0367

75/367/EEC: Council Recommendation of 16 June 1975 on the clinical training of doctors

Official Journal L 167 , 30/06/1975 P. 0021 - 0021 Greek special edition: Chapter 06 Volume 1 P. 0213  Spanish special edition: Chapter 06 Volume 1 P. 0204  Portuguese special edition Chapter 06 Volume 1 P. 0204

COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION  of 16 June 1975  on the clinical training of doctors  (75/367/EEC) The Council notes that in most of the Member States, after university medical training proper, the requirement of clinical training is imposed as being a condition for acquiring the unrestricted right to practise medicine.  As it is considered desirable that the possibility should exist of acquiring such clinical training in Member States other than that in which the candidate underwent his university training, the Council hereby recommends to the Member States that admission to such clinical training posts be afforded to nationals of the other Member States.  Done at Luxembourg, 16 June 1975.  For the Council  The President  R. RYAN


Avis juridique important

|

52004SC0820

Recommendation for a Council Recommendation to Hungary with a view to bringing an end to the situation of an excessive government deficit  /* SEC/2004/0820 final */

Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION TO HUNGARY with a view to bringing an end to the situation of an excessive government deficit(presented by the Commission)EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUMOn 7 April 2004, the Commission published its Spring 2004 forecasts [1]. According to these forecasts, which took into consideration data reported by Hungary in March 2004, the general government deficit in Hungary decreased from 9.3% of GDP in 2002 to 5.9% of GDP in 2003 (largely due to the disappearing of the one-off effects which contributed to the increase in the 2002 deficit by about 3% of GDP), thus exceeding the 3% of GDP Treaty reference value.[1]  The Commission Spring 2004 forecast is available at the following website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/publications/european_economy/2004/ee204en.pdf.Based on this prima facie evidence, the Commission initiated the excessive deficit procedure for Hungary on 12 May 2004, with the adoption of the report foreseen in Article 104(3) of the Treaty [2]. On 14 May 2004, the Commission received the convergence programme of Hungary, which confirmed a deficit figure of 5.9% of GDP for 2003.[2]  The full text of this report is available at the following website: http://europa.eu.int/comm/economy_finance/about/activities/sgp/procedures_en.htm.The application of the excessive deficit procedure (EDP) is governed by Article 104 of the Treaty and by Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 "on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure", which is part of the Stability and Growth Pact [3]. Countries that joined the EU on 1 May 2004 are Member States with a derogation and are to avoid excessive deficits, but sanctions according to Article 104 (9) and (11) cannot be imposed on them.[3]  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997.The Commission report according to Article 104(3) of the Treaty concluded that the excess of the Hungarian deficit in 2003 over the 3% of GDP Treaty reference value did not result from an unusual event outside the control of the Hungarian authorities, nor was it the result of a severe economic downturn in the sense of the Stability and Growth Pact, as real GDP growth reached 2.9% in 2003. Concerning developments in 2004, the report concluded that the general government deficit is likely to decrease but remain above 3% of GDP. In particular, the Commission Spring 2004 forecast is for a general government deficit of 4.9% of GDP in 2004, which is above the 4.6% of GDP projected by the Hungarian authorities in the convergence programme. Based on the Commission Spring 2004 forecasts, the Commission report also concluded that the debt-to-GDP ratio, which had reached 59% of GDP in 2003, would remain slightly below the 60% reference value of the Treaty in 2004 at roughly 59%, as also projected by the Hungarian authorities in the convergence programme.Article 104(4) of the Treaty states that "the Committee provided for in Article 114 (i.e. the Economic and Financial Committee) has to formulate an opinion on the report of the Commission". The Committee issued its opinion on 24 May 2004, subscribing to the assessment made by the Commission in its report. In particular, the Committee concluded that the budgetary situation in Hungary indicated the existence of an excessive deficit under the first of the two criteria foreseen by Article 104(2) for the identification of such deficits. Consideration of other relevant factors, in particular the medium-term budgetary position and the public investment ratio, did not change the assessment based on the criteria themselves. The Committee also considered as likely that the general government deficit would continue to exceed the Treaty reference value in 2004, and that general government gross debt would remain below the Treaty reference value of 60% of GDP in 2004.The Commission, having examined the relevant factors taken into account in its report and having regard to the opinion of the Committee, is of the opinion that an excessive deficit exists in Hungary. This opinion, adopted by the Commission on 24 June 2004, has been addressed to the Council, according to Article 104(5) of the Treaty. The Commission has recommended that the Council shall decide accordingly, in conformity with Article 104(6). In addition, the Commission is herewith submitting to the Council a recommendation for a Council recommendation to be addressed to Hungary with a view to bringing the situation of an excessive deficit to an end, according to Article 104(7) of the Treaty. The monitoring of the implementation of action taken by Hungary may demand that the Council makes further recommendations according to Article 104(7), given the non-applicability of Article 104(9) to Member States with a derogation.Recommendation for a COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION TO HUNGARY with a view to bringing an end to the situation of an excessive government deficitTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 104(7) thereof;Having regard to the recommendation from the Commission;Whereas:(1) According to Article 104 of the Treaty, Member States are to avoid excessive government deficits;(2) The Stability and Growth Pact is based on the objective of sound government finances as a means of strengthening the conditions for price stability and for strong sustainable growth conducive to employment creation;(3) The Council has decided on [5 July] 2004, in accordance with Article 104(6), that an excessive deficit exists in Hungary;(4) Having decided on the existence of an excessive deficit in Hungary, the Council, in accordance with Article 104(7) of the Treaty and Article 3 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97, is required to make at the same time recommendations to the Member State concerned with a view to bringing that situation to an end within a given period;(5) According to Article 3(4) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97, this recommendation should specify that effective action is to be taken by the Member State concerned within four months at most and that the correction of the excessive deficit should be completed in the year following its identification unless there are special circumstances. Such special circumstances are present in the case of Hungary namely because the general government deficit upon EU accession was significantly above the reference value and because of the ongoing structural shift in the economy;(6) The existence of special circumstances authorises the Council to allow the correction of the excessive deficit in a medium-term framework. It is appropriate to consider the convergence programme submitted by Hungary in May 2004, and its subsequent updates, and the Council Opinions thereof as providing the adjustment path for the correction of the excessive deficit. The convergence programme of May 2004 plans to complete the correction of the excessive deficit by 2008, with the following annual targets for the general government deficit: 4.6% of GDP in 2004, 4.1% of GDP in 2005, 3.6% in 2006, 3.1% in 2007 and 2.7% of GDP in 2008. The adjustment path is based on a macro-economic scenario which, according to the Council Opinion of [5 July] 2004 on the convergence programme, reflects rather favourable growth assumptions in the outer years of the programme.(7) In the view of the Council, budgetary consolidation measures should secure a lasting improvement in the general government balance, while being geared towards enhancing the quality of the public finances and reinforcing the growth potential of the economy.HEREBY RECOMMENDS:- the Hungarian authorities to put an end to the present excessive deficit situation as rapidly as possible;- the Hungarian authorities to take action in a medium-term framework in order to bring the deficit below 3 % of GDP by 2008 in a credible and sustainable manner, in accordance with the path for deficit reduction as specified in the Council Opinion of 5 July 2004 on the convergence programme submitted in May 2004;- the Hungarian authorities to implement with vigour the measures envisaged in the May 2004 convergence programme, in particular to stand ready to introduce additional measures, if necessary, with a view to achieving the general government deficit target for 2004;- the Hungarian authorities to take effective action by 5 November 2004 regarding the measures envisaged to achieve the 2005 deficit target.In addition, the Council invites the Hungarian authorities:- to seize every opportunity to accelerate the fiscal adjustment;- to undertake the envisaged reforms of the public administration, health and education systems to ensure the foreseen reduction of the expenditure ratio and to improve the long-term sustainability of the public finances;- to ensure that planned tax cuts are adequately financed and make their implementation conditional upon the achievement of the deficit targets.This recommendation is addressed to the Republic of Hungary.Done at Brussels, [5 July 2004].For the CouncilThe Presidentxxxxxx


title: Council Recommendation of 11 July 2017 on the 2017 National Reform Programme of Malta and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Stability Programme of Malta

text:
               9.8.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 261/75

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 11 July 2017
   on the 2017 National Reform Programme of Malta and delivering a Council opinion on the 2017 Stability Programme of Malta
   (2017/C 261/17)
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Articles 121(2) and 148(4) thereof,
   Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies (1), and in particular Article 5(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation of the European Commission,
   Having regard to the resolutions of the European Parliament,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Social Protection Committee,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Economic Policy Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 16 November 2016, the Commission adopted the Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the 2017 European Semester for economic policy coordination. The priorities of the Annual Growth Survey were endorsed by the European Council on 9-10 March 2017. On 16 November 2016, on the basis of Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the Commission adopted the Alert Mechanism Report, in which it did not identify Malta as one of the Member States for which an in-depth review would be carried out. On the same date, the Commission also adopted a recommendation for a Council Recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area, which was endorsed by the European Council on 9-10 March 2017. On 21 March 2017, the Council adopted the Recommendation on the economic policy of the euro area (‘Recommendation for the euro area’) (3).

               (2)

               As a Member State whose currency is the euro and in view of the close interlinkages between the economies in the economic and monetary union, Malta should ensure the full and timely implementation of the Recommendation for the euro area, as reflected in recommendation (2) below.

               (3)

               The 2017 country report for Malta was published on 22 February 2017. It assessed Malta’s progress in addressing the country-specific recommendations adopted by the Council on 12 July 2016, the follow-up given to the country-specific recommendations adopted in previous years and Malta’s progress towards its national Europe 2020 targets.

               (4)

               Malta submitted its 2017 National Reform Programme on 18 April 2017 and its 2017 Stability Programme on 2 May 2017. In order to take account of their interlinkages, the two programmes have been assessed at the same time.

               (5)

               Relevant country-specific recommendations have been addressed in the programming of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) for the 2014-2020 period. As provided for in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council (4), where it is necessary to support the implementation of relevant Council recommendations, the Commission may request a Member State to review and propose amendments to its Partnership Agreement and relevant programmes. The Commission has provided further details on how it would make use of that provision in guidelines on the application of the measures linking effectiveness of the ESI Funds to sound economic governance.

               (6)

               Malta is currently in the preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact. In its 2017 Stability Programme, the Government plans to maintain a surplus in headline terms over 2017-2020. The medium-term budgetary objective — a balanced budgetary position in terms of GDP — continues to be met with a positive margin throughout the programme period. According to the Stability Programme, the general government debt-to-GDP ratio is expected to remain below the 60 %-of-GDP Treaty reference value and to gradually decline from 58,3 % of GDP in 2016 to 47,6 % in 2020. The macroeconomic scenario underpinning those budgetary projections is plausible for 2017 and cautious for 2018-2020. At the same time, there are possible implementation risks related to budgetary execution.

               (7)

               On 12 July 2016, for 2017 the Council recommended Malta to achieve an annual fiscal adjustment of 0,6 % of GDP towards the medium-term budgetary objective. Outturn data indicate that Malta already reached its medium-term budgetary objective in 2016. Based on the Commission 2017 spring forecast, the structural balance is forecast to increase from a surplus of 0,4 % of GDP in 2017 to 0,7 % of GDP in 2018, remaining above the medium-term budgetary objective. Overall, the Council is of the opinion that Malta is projected to comply with the provisions of the Stability and Growth Pact in 2017 and 2018.

               (8)

               Notwithstanding the achievement of the medium-term objective three years ahead of the target, expenditure increases outpaced potential output growth. If sustained further, this poses a challenge to the sustainability of public finances, especially in the case of unanticipated shocks to revenues. The Maltese authorities carried out spending reviews in some areas of public spending particularly relevant in terms of sustainability — healthcare, education and training and social security. Timely and effective implementation of the ensuing recommendations will determine their effectiveness in achieving their goal. In addition, Malta’s public finances continues to face sustainability risks in the long term due to the projected costs linked to population ageing, such as healthcare, long-term care and pensions. The steep increase in projected age-related expenditure is mainly due to pension expenditure, which is estimated to increase by 3,2 percentage points of GDP by 2060 according to the 2015 Ageing Report. Some of the recently introduced measures are likely to generate savings. However, these savings are unlikely to be sufficient to offset mounting spending pressures and decisively improve long-term sustainability. Further measures could, therefore, be necessary.

               (9)

               Malta has put forward several measures to address the dual challenge of sustainability and ensuring adequate retirement incomes posed by the pension system. Measures introduced in the 2017 budget are expected to moderately lower the poverty risk for older people and improve somewhat the net replacement rate of the guaranteed minimum pension. Overall, pension adequacy indicators still indicate considerable room for improvement, including on reducing the high gender coverage gap.

               (10)

               Road traffic congestion has become a barrier to business, and its external (economic and environmental) costs have been estimated at EUR 274 million per year and are projected to increase. In addition, emissions of greenhouse gases from traffic continue growing and Malta is likely to fail to reach its 2020 emission targets. Malta has adopted an ambitious National Transport Strategy with a 2050 horizon and an Operational Transport Master Plan to 2025. They include a diverse set of measures to rationalise the use of private cars, promote alternative mobility solutions and make more efficient use of multimodal and collective transport systems. While those measures are projected to make significant improvements, congestion is still projected to rise and greenhouse gas emissions from transport to decrease only modestly until 2030.

               (11)

               The financial system is characterised by a significant number of foreign institutions attracted, among other factors, by the favourable tax environment. Malta is the only Member State utilising the full imputation system of company taxation and it offers a refundable tax credit scheme. It has an extensive network of double taxation treaties, and it has an attractive tax residency status for individuals. The supervision of the internationally-oriented business, however, is challenging. The financial sector carries out most of its activities outside Malta. In this context, Malta has invited the IMF and the World Bank to conduct a Financial Sector Assessment Programme by the end of 2018. In addition, Malta is party to the January 2017 EIOPA Decision on the collaboration of the insurance supervisory authorities. The ECB, based on its own assessment and on the draft decision by the Malta Financial Services Authority, has recently decided to withdraw the banking licence of a small internet banking provider that collects deposits also outside Malta.

               (12)

               Despite progress, further improvements in the efficiency of the justice system remain necessary. Although new measures on second chance and insolvency have been proposed by the Government, lengthy insolvency and discharge procedures harm the quality of the business environment in Malta. Moreover, the framework of debt discharge does not provide for a time limit, thus it lacks legal certainty. To address the shortcomings, an amendment to the Companies Act introduced considerable changes to the legal framework on insolvency, such as the possibility of mediation. The impact of these changes remains to be analysed.

               (13)

               Labour shortages are emerging across the skills spectrum and the adjustment of skills supply to labour market needs is still incomplete. A substantial share of the Maltese labour force still has low qualifications. While educational attainment is increasing, the rate of early school leaving remains high. Basic skills attainment among young people is still weak. Access and participation in lifelong learning — with the involvement of employers — is improving, including for the low-skilled; but, given the extent of the challenge, efforts need to be sustained. Significant investments in the education and training system are expected to bear fruit, especially if the measures are maintained and improved in the future. Employment rates are steadily improving and the unemployment rate has dropped below 5 %. However, labour market participation is still among the lowest in the Union, in particular for older and low-skilled women, which also points to remaining social exclusion risks for those who are not equipped to adjust to a fast-changing economy. Therefore, current policy investments should continue to be sustained, in particular through the recently established National Skills Council, and further developments are to be closely monitored.

               (14)

               In the context of the 2017 European Semester the Commission has carried out a comprehensive analysis of Malta’s economic policy and published it in the 2017 country report. It has also assessed the 2017 Stability Programme, the 2017 National Reform Programme and the follow-up given to the recommendations addressed to Malta in previous years. It has taken into account not only their relevance for sustainable fiscal and socioeconomic policy in Malta, but also their compliance with Union rules and guidance, given the need to strengthen the Union’s overall economic governance by providing Union-level input into future national decisions.

               (15)

               In the light of this assessment, the Council has examined the 2017 Stability Programme and its opinion (5) is reflected in particular in recommendation (1) below,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Malta take action in 2017 and 2018 to:

               1.

               Expand the scope of the ongoing spending reviews to the broader public sector and introduce performance-based public spending.

               2.

               Ensure the effective national supervision of internationally oriented business by financial institutions licensed in Malta by strengthening cooperation with the host supervisors in the countries where they operate.

      Done at Brussels, 11 July 2017.

            For the Council

            The President

         T. TÕNISTE

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  Regulation (EU) No 1176/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 November 2011 on the prevention and correction of macroeconomic imbalances (OJ L 306, 23.11.2011, p. 25).

      (3)  OJ C 92, 24.3.2017, p. 1.

      (4)  Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 320).

      (5)  Under Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1466/97.