Avis juridique important

|

52004SC0798

Recommendation for a Council opinion in accordance with the third paragraph of Art. 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 - On the convergence programme of Estonia, 2004-2008  /* SEC/2004/0798 final */

Recommendation for a COUNCIL OPINION in accordance with the third paragraph of Art. 9 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997 - On the convergence programme of Estonia, 2004-2008(presented by the Commission)EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUMCouncil Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 on the strengthening of the surveillance of budgetary positions and the surveillance and coordination of economic policies [1] stipulates that non-participating Member States, that is, those which have not adopted the single currency, have to submit convergence programmes to the Council and the Commission for the purpose of multilateral surveillance at regular intervals under Article 99 of the Treaty.[1]  OJ L209, 2.8.1997. All the documents referred to in this text can be found at the following websiteIn accordance with Article 9 of this Regulation, the Council has to examine each convergence programme based on assessments prepared by the Commission and the Committee set up by Article 114 of the Treaty (the Economic and Financial Committee). On the basis of a recommendation from the Commission and after consulting the Economic and Financial Committee, the Council is required to deliver an opinion, following its examination of the programme. According to the Regulation, Member States need to submit annual updates of their convergence programmes, which may also be examined by the Council in accordance with these same procedures.The ten countries that joined the EU on 1 May 2004 have a derogation and thus do not yet participate in the single currency. They committed themselves to submitting their convergence programmes by 15 May 2004 and a first update thereof towards the end of 2004.Estonia's convergence programme covering the period 2004-2008 was submitted on 13 May 2004. The Commission services have carried out a technical evaluation of this programme, taking into account the results of the Spring 2004 forecasts and having regard to the Code of Conduct [2] and the principles laid down in the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament of 27 November 2002 on strengthening the co-ordination of budgetary policies [3]. This evaluation warrants the following assessment:[2]  Revised Opinion of the Economic and Financial Committee on the content and format of stability and convergence programmes, endorsed by the ECOFIN Council on 10.7.2001.[3]  COM (2002) 668 final, 27.11.2002.The first Estonian convergence programme incorporates the measures taken in the budget for 2004, and is consistent with the State Budget Strategy 2004-2008. It was formally adopted by the Council of Ministers and thus represents the country's official medium-term macro-economic framework. The policy measures are consistent with the medium-term economic outlook as presented in the 2003 pre-accession economic programme (PEP). The programme spells out Estonia's intention to join ERM II and adopt the euro 'as soon as possible'. It claims that Estonia will be able to meet the criteria for euro zone membership throughout the programme period, but cautiously raises a caveat on future inflation developments (at present inflation is below that of the euro zone) .The programme largely complies with the "Code of Conduct on the content and format of stability and convergence programmes" Following a revision of the National Accounts which was published shortly after submission of the programme, GDP figures for the 1993-2003 period were revised upwards. Consequently, some of the figures and tables of the programme are by now outdated. Nonetheless, the overall picture and the assessment of the scenarios as they stand are not affected, given that the underlying trends of the projections do not change substantially.A balanced government budget and the currency board arrangement are set to remain the anchors of macroeconomic stability in Estonia. The programme envisages steady real GDP growth between 5 and 6% p.a., driven by continued strong domestic demand and exports set to accelerate with the projected pick-up in external activity. Nonetheless, the net external contribution is expected to remain negative over the entire programme period. Both private consumption and investment are set to continue growing, albeit at a slowing pace. Unemployment would slowly abate to around 9.5% of the labour force. The envisaged recovery in the world economy and the resulting pick-up in export demand are expected to lead to a narrowing of the high current account deficit, which nonetheless is forecast to remain above 8% of GDP by 2008.The macro-economic scenario appears broadly plausible. For the years 2004 and 2005, expected GDP growth is marginally below the Commission Spring forecast, while inflation is projected slightly higher. As compared with the 2003 PEP, the macro-economic scenario is somewhat lower with regard to GDP growth, accommodating the delay to the international economic recovery that has since set in, while the inflation and the unemployment outlook have improved on the basis of a better-than-expected turnout in 2003. The upcoming upward adjustment of growth figures in the Estonian forecast, following the National Accounts revision of 20 May 2004, adds to the plausibility of the scenarios as presented in the programme. A high external account deficit will continue to be the major macro-economic imbalance in Estonia over the foreseeable future, given the strong investment needs in the economy. The programme deals with this issue in detail. With the general government budget forecast to remain in small surplus or balance throughout the programme period, the stance of budgetary policy is basically set to underpin the improvement in the current account, but to a considerably more limited extent than was the case in 2002 and 2003. Strict budgetary discipline, including the setting aside of possible 'surprise surpluses' will thus continue to be a crucial element to a sustainable correction of the external imbalance.The currency board system in place since the country's independence - with the kroon pegged first to the DM and, since 1999, to the euro -, has served the country well and provides for high credibility among market participants. The monetary targeting through a hard peg to a strengthening euro helped to disinflate the Estonian economy quite rapidly, to an annual CPI increase of just 1.3% in 2003, but that rate is set to rise to around 3% over the medium term. Estonian interest rates are at a historical low, mirroring developments in the euro area and favourable international country ratings. Estonia aims at joining ERM II at an early stage, with a standard fluctuation band, while maintaining a unilateral commitment to the present currency board system. Also adoption of the euro is envisaged 'as soon as possible'.The budgetary strategy as outlined in the programme is for the general government accounts to remain in surplus of 0.7% of GDP in 2004, and arrive at balanced budgets from 2005 onwards. This is slightly more optimistic than the 2003 PEP scenario which indicated no more surpluses already from 2004, and in line with the Commission forecast until 2005. On the whole, this implies a considerable fiscal easing as compared with the surprisingly high 2003 surplus. The programme contains a firm commitment to adhere to the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact, and to maintain the government accounts in balance or surplus over the entire programme period. An ongoing reform of the tax system aims at a stepwise reduction of the flat tax rates for both the corporate and personal income tax, which will be combined with higher social transfers and increased tax allowances. Strong growth, savings on the expenditure side, increased VAT and excise duty revenues, along with changes to the spending structure and improved tax collection are expected to finance these reforms. Overall, while nominal spending is expected to increase, the expenditure ratio would decline. While the central government and the social security funds are projected to remain in surplus over the programme period (despite considerable transfer payments to a private second pension pillar of up to 1% of GDP), local governments are expected to remain in deficit, even if the latter should narrow. Public debt corresponded to 5.8% of GDP in 2003 and is projected to further decline from to just 3.2% of GDP by 2008. It is entirely covered by public sector reserves and represents a negligible risk to the Estonian economy.The fiscal projections of the programme appear on the whole plausible, although the actual budgetary outcome may prove better than projected. This view is based in particular on a strong track record of prudent forecasting (and repeated overshooting of fiscal targets) in the past few years, a realistic growth forecast underpinning the programme's budget projections, possible further carry-over effects from the high 2003 surplus, slower-than-expected implementation of public investment spending based on EU transfers, but also the downward correction of deficit and debt ratios following the recent National Accounts revision. Downside risks, while not deemed acute from today's perspective, may nevertheless occur from a revenue shortfall due to the planned tax cuts, or adverse growth developments stemming from exogenous shocks. The swift melting of budgetary surpluses in 2004 and 2005 which would coincide with a projected acceleration of economic activity is likely to lead to a distinct pro-cyclical stance of the fiscal path envisaged in the programme. Furthermore, should an orderly and sequenced reduction of the external imbalance not materialise through a recovery of private domestic savings (as the programme suggests), a fiscal policy aiming at balanced budgets might not be sufficient to support the planned correction of the current account deficit.The programme clearly spells out the country's intention to comply with the goals of the Lisbon strategy by 2010. Employment ratios should be increased both by reforms to vocational training and a reduction of social and income taxes on labour. The need for a broadening of the supply base of the economy (and of the tax base at the same time) will be addressed through infrastructure improvements as well as measures in education in order to decrease the present skills mismatch on the labour market. The low level of productivity will be addressed through stimulating R&D both in the private and public sphere, in order to further enhance the economy's growth development. With regard to public finances, the programme aims at implementing structural reforms both to the expenditure and revenue side. The reforms on the expenditure side aim in particular at a better targeting of social transfers towards the needy and a strengthening of incentives to work. On the revenue side, the comprehensive tax reform that has started in 2004 will gradually lead to a further shift from direct to indirect taxation, while maintaining a simple tax system. The reforms, most of which are already underway, can reasonably be expected to strengthen incentives to work, to create new jobs and to discouraging tax evasion.Estonia is well placed to meet the projected budgetary costs of an ageing population. The considerable cost of implementing a fully funded private second pillar in the pension system is accounted for in the budgetary projections of the programme. A low government debt level, considerable government financial reserves and a medium-term budgetary strategy that is fully consistent with the objective of a close-to-balance or in surplus budgetary position together with the reforms of the pension and health care systems which are meant to stem budgetary pressures in the longer term should ensure that public finances remain on a sustainable footing.Table: Comparison of key macroeconomic and budgetary projections>TABLE POSITION>Based on this assessment, the Commission has adopted the attached recommendation for a Council Opinion on the convergence programme of Estonia and is forwarding it to the Council.Recommendation for a COUNCIL OPINION in accordance with the third paragraph of Art. 9 of  Council Regulation (EC) No 1466/97 of 7 July 1997  On the convergence programme of Estonia, 2004-2008THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,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 [4], and in particular Article 9(3) thereof,[4]  OJ L209, 2.8.1997, p. 1. The documents referred to in this text can be found at the following websiteHaving regard to the recommendation of the Commission,After consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,HAS DELIVERED THIS OPINION:On [5 July 2004] the Council examined the convergence programme of Estonia, which covers the period 2004 to 2008. The programme largely complies with the data requirements of the revised "Code of Conduct on the content and format of stability and convergence programmes".The budgetary strategy underlying the programme aims at maintaining sound public finances as defined by a budgetary position of close-to-balance or in surplus. To this end, after a surplus of 2.6% of GDP in 2003, the programme targets a small surplus of 0.7% in 2004 and balanced budgets from 2005 onwards, accompanied by a gradual reduction in both the revenue and expenditure ratio, following a rise in both ratios in 2004 in connection with EU accession. In particular, the programme incorporates reforms resulting in reduced direct taxes, combined with increased transfer payments and tax allowances. Strong growth, improved tax collection, savings on the expenditure side and changes to the spending structure along with increased VAT and excise duty revenues are projected to finance these reforms. The debt ratio, at 5.8% of GDP in 2003, is very low and set to decline further to 3.2% of GDP by 2008.On the basis of currently available information, the macro-economic scenario underlying the programme seems to reflect plausible GDP growth assumptions of between 5 and 6% over the programme period. The main sources of growth would be domestic demand (around 7% p.a.), and accelerating export growth of up to 10% annually. Private consumption is projected to grow at annual rates of 5 to 6%. Investment is set to stay lively, expanding at 7 to 9 % per year, albeit no longer at rates above 10% as was the case in recent years. The projection for inflation, which is set to increase to rates around 3% starting in 2004, after a record low of 1.3% in 2003, also appears realistic. The presently high current account deficit (13.7% of GDP in 2003) is projected to come down to levels around 8% of GDP by 2008.The risks to the budgetary projections appear broadly balanced. On the one hand, Estonia has established a track record of prudent forecasting and repeated overshooting of fiscal targets over the past few years. On the other hand, unexpected revenue shortfall from the planned tax cuts, or adverse impacts on growth from exogenous shocks cannot be excluded altogether. Therefore the budgetary stance in the programme seems sufficient to achieve the Stability and Growth Pact's medium-term objective of budgetary position of close-to-balance; it should also provide a sufficient safety margin against breaching the 3% of GDP deficit threshold with normal macroeconomic fluctuations. However, the rapid reduction of surpluses as from 2004 over a period of continued buoyant growth, as envisaged in the programme, is likely to imply a distinct pro-cyclical fiscal stance.At less than 6% of GDP, Estonia's debt-to-GDP ratio is almost the lowest in the EU and is expected to decline further by 2.6 percentage points over the programme period. The actual trend is likely to be even more favourable than projected given the recent National Accounts revision that will permanently increase GDP levels and thus the ratio's denominator.Estonia is well placed to meet the budgetary costs of an ageing population. A low government debt level, considerable government financial reserves and a medium-term budgetary strategy that is fully consistent with the objective of a close-to-balance or in surplus budgetary position together with the reforms of the pension and health care systems which are meant to stem budgetary pressures in the longer term should ensure that public finances remain on a sustainable footing.Key projections from the convergence programme of Estonia>TABLE POSITION>* These ratios do not take into account the National Accounts revision of 20 May 2004, which led statistically to a permanently higher GDP level. 2003 figures will be revised as follows: real GDP growth 5.1%, general government balance 2.4% of GDP, government gross debt 5.3% of GDP.


Avis juridique important

|

31978K1535

Commission Recommendation No 1535/78/ECSC of 21 June 1978 concerning the anti-dumping duties imposed on certain iron and steel products

Official Journal L 183 , 05/07/1978 P. 0001 - 0002 Greek special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 9 P. 0226

++++COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION NO 1535/78/ECSC  OF 21 JUNE 1978  CONCERNING ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES IMPOSED ON CERTAIN IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTS  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,  HAVING REGARD TO THE TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLES 74 AND 86 THEREOF ,  HAVING REGARD TO COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION 77/329/ECSC OF 15 APRIL 1977 ON PROTECTION AGAINST DUMPING OR THE GRANTING OF BOUNTIES OR SUBSIDIES BY COUNTRIES WHICH ARE NOT MEMBERS OF THE EUROPEAN COAL AND STEEL COMMUNITY ( 1 ) , AS AMENDED BY RECOMMENDATION NO 3004/77/ECSC ( 2 ) , AND IN PARTICULAR ARTICLES 15 , 17 AND 18 THEREOF ,  HAVING HEARD THE OPINIONS EXPRESSED WITHIN THE ADVISORY COMMITTEE PROVIDED FOR BY RECOMMENDATION 77/329/ECSC ,  WHEREAS SINCE THE BEGINNING OF 1978 THE COMMISSION HAS , BY RECOMMENDATION NOS 112/78/ECSC ( 3 ) , 117/78/ECSC ( 4 ) , 118/78/ECSC ( 5 ) , 119/78/ECSC ( 6 ) , 120/78/ECSC ( 7 ) , 121/78/ECSC ( 8 ) , 159/78/ECSC ( 9 ) , 160/78/ECSC ( 10 ) , 161/78/ECSC ( 11 ) , 245/78/ECSC ( 12 ) , 262/78/ECSC ( 13 ) , 263/78/ECSC ( 14 ) , 307/78/ECSC ( 15 ) , 359/78/ECSC ( 16 ) , 790/78/ECSC ( 17 ) , 811/78/ECSC ( 18 ) , 932/78/ECSC ( 19 ) AND 1006/78/ECSC ( 20 ) , IMPOSED A CERTAIN NUMBER OF PROVISIONAL OR DEFINITIVE ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ON IRON AND STEEL PRODUCTS ; WHEREAS CERTAIN OF THESE DUTIES HAVE MEANWHILE BEEN SUSPENDED AND/OR EXTENDED ;  WHEREAS THE AMOUNT OF THESE DUTIES IS EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT BY WHICH THE EFFECTIVE PRICES ( BASIC PRICE PLUS EXTRAS ) ESTABLISHED BY CONTRACT , FREE-AT-FRONTIER DUTY-PAID , ARE LOWER THAN THE EFFECTIVE PRICES ( BASIC PRICE PLUS EXTRAS ) PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSION ( 21 ) FOR THE PRODUCT IN QUESTION ;  WHEREAS BY COMMUNICATION DATED 21 JUNE 1978 THE COMMISSION HAS AMENDED THESE BASIC PRICES ;  WHEREAS , SINCE THEN , THE COMMISSION HAS RE-EXAMINED ITS DUMPING CALCULATIONS , DEFINITIVE OR PROVISIONAL ;  WHEREAS THIS RE-EXAMINATION HAS CONFIRMED THAT THE BASIC PRICES , IN THEIR NEW VERSION , ARE REASONABLE ;  WHEREAS IT IS NECESSARY , THEREFORE , TO PROVIDE THAT THE COLLECTION OF ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES SHALL HENCEFORTH BE CARRIED OUT ON THE BASIS OF THE AMENDED BASIC PRICES ,  HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION :  ARTICLE 1  1 . THE AMOUNT OF THE PROVISIONAL OR DEFINITIVE DUTIES IMPOSED BY RECOMMENDATION NOS 112/78/ECSC , 117/78/ECSC , 118/78/ECSC , 119/78/ECSC , 120/78/ECSC , 121/78/ECSC , 159/78/ECSC , 160/78/ECSC , 161/78/ECSC , 245/78/ECSC , 262/78/ECSC , 263/78/ECSC , 307/78/ECSC , 359/78/ECSC , 790/78/ECSC , 811/78/ECSC , 932/78/ECSC AND 1006/78/ECSC , SHALL HENCEFORTH BE EQUAL TO THE AMOUNT BY WHICH THE EFFECTIVE PRICE ( BASIC PRICE PLUS EXTRAS ) ESTABLISHED BY CONTRACT , FREE-AT-FRONTIER DUTY-PAID , IS LOWER THAN THE EFFECTIVE PRICE ( BASIC PRICE PLUS EXTRAS ) AS PUBLISHED BY THE COMMISSION ON 5 JULY 1978 ( 1 ) FOR THE PRODUCT IN QUESTION .  2 . THE OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ABOVEMENTIONED RECOMMENDATIONS SHALL REMAIN UNCHANGED .  ARTICLE 2  THIS RECOMMENDATION SHALL BE NOTIFIED TO THE MEMBER STATES AND PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES .  IT SHALL ENTER INTO FORCE ON 10 JULY 1978 .  DONE AT BRUSSELS , 21 JUNE 1978 .  FOR THE COMMISSION  ETIENNE DAVIGNON  MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION  ( 1 ) OJ NO L 114 , 5 . 5 . 1977 , P . 6 .  ( 2 ) OJ NO L 352 , 31 . 12 . 1977 , P . 13 .  ( 3 ) OJ NO L 17 , 21 . 1 . 1978 , P . 27 .  ( 4 ) OJ NO L 19 , 24 . 1 . 1978 , P . 2 .  ( 5 ) OJ NO L 19 , 24 . 1 . 1978 , P . 3 .  ( 6 ) OJ NO L 19 , 24 . 1 . 1978 , P . 5 .  ( 7 ) OJ NO L 19 , 24 . 1 . 1978 , P . 7 .  ( 8 ) OJ NO L 19 , 24 . 1 . 1978 , P . 9 .  ( 9 ) OJ NO L 23 , 28 . 1 . 1978 , P . 31 .  ( 10 ) OJ NO L 23 , 28 . 1 . 1978 , P . 33 .  ( 11 ) OJ NO L 23 , 28 . 1 . 1978 , P . 35 .  ( 12 ) OJ NO L 37 , 7 . 2 . 1978 , P . 13 .  ( 13 ) OJ NO L 39 , 9 . 2 . 1978 , P . 13 .  ( 14 ) OJ NO L 39 , 9 . 2 . 1978 , P . 15 .  ( 15 ) OJ NO L 45 , 16 . 2 . 1978 , P . 17 .  ( 16 ) OJ NO L 50 , 22 . 2 . 1978 , P . 13 .  ( 17 ) OJ NO L 106 , 20 . 4 . 1978 , P . 21 .  ( 18 ) OJ NO L 108 , 22 . 4 . 1978 , P . 26 .  ( 19 ) OJ NO L 120 , 4 . 5 . 1978 , P . 22 .  ( 20 ) OJ NO L 131 , 19 . 5 . 1978 , P . 8 .  ( 21 ) SEE THE COMMISSION COMMUNICATION OF 31 DECEMBER 1977 ( OJ NO L 353 , 31 . 12 . 1977 , P . 1 ) , AS AMENDED BY THE COMMUNICATIONS OF 1 . 4 . 1978 ( OJ NO L 87 , 1 . 4 . 1978 , P . 4 ) AND 13 . 5 . 1978 ( OJ NO L 126 , 13 . 5 . 1978 , P . 5 ) .  ( 22 ) SEE PAGE 3 OF THIS OFFICIAL JOURNAL .


Avis juridique important

|

31983K0874

Commission Recommendation No 874/83/ECSC of 12 April 1983 amending recommendations No 811/78/ECSC and No 1006/78/ECSC concerning definitive anti-dumping duties on certain iron and steel products originating in the German Democratic Republic

Official Journal L 096 , 15/04/1983 P. 0010 - 0010 Spanish special edition: Chapter 11 Volume 28 P. 0131  Portuguese special edition Chapter 11 Volume 28 P. 0134

*****COMMISSION  RECOMMENDATION No 874/83/ECSC  of 12 April 1983  amending recommendations No 811/78/ECSC and No 1006/78/ECSC concerning definitive anti-dumping duties on certain iron and steel products originating in the German Democratic Republic  THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN  COMMUNITIES,  Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community,  Having regard to Commission recommendation No 3018/79/ECSC of 21 December 1979 on protection against dumped or subsidized imports from countries not members of the European Coal and Steel Communty (1), as last amended by recommendation No 3025/82/ECSC (2), and in particular Article 14 thereof,  After consultations within the Advisory Committee set up by the said recommendation,  Whereas by recommendation No 811/78/ECSC of 21 April 1978 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain sheets and plates, of iron or steel, originating in Bulgaria, the German Democratic Republic and Romania (3), as last amended by recommendation No 3140/78/ECSC (4), the Commission imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on sheets and plates, of iron or steel, other than electrical, not further worked than hot-rolled, of a thickness of 2 mm or more, originating in the German Democratic Republic; whereas the duties on imports of like products from Bulgaria and Romania have meanwhile been suspended;  Whereas by recommendation No 1006/78/ECSC of 18 May 1978 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on certain galvanized sheets and plates originating in the German Democratic Republic (5), as last amended by recommendation No 3140/78/ECSC, the Commission imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on zinc-coated (other than electrolytically) steel sheets and plates (galvanized) originating in the German Democratic Republic;  Whereas the amount of these duties is equal to the amount by which the effective price (basic price plus extras) established by contract, free-at-frontier, duty paid, is lower than the effective price (basic price plus extras) as published by the Commission on 30 December 1978 for the products in question; whereas since that date the effective prices published by the Commission have been amended to reflect changes in the lowest normal values in the supplying countries where normal conditions of competition prevail; whereas it is appropriate, therefore, to base these duties on the most recent effective prices published by the Commission for these products applicable at the time of their import,  HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:  Article 1  Article 1 (2) of recommendations No 811/78/ECSC and No 1006/78/ECSC is hereby replaced by the following:  '2. The amount of the duty shall be equal to the amount by which the effective price (basic price plus extras) established by contract, free-at-frontier, duty paid, is lower than the most recent effective price (basic price plus extras) published by the Commission which is applicable to the products concerned at the time of their entry for consumption in the Community.'  Article 2  This recommendation shall enter into force on the day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Communities.  Done at Brussels, 12 April 1983.  For the Commission  Wilhelm HAFERKAMP  Vice-President  (1) OJ No L 339, 31. 12. 1979, p. 15.  (2) OJ No L 317, 13. 11. 1982, p. 17.  (3) OJ No L 108, 22. 4. 1978, p. 26.  (4) OJ No L 372, 30. 12. 1978, p. 1.  (5) OJ No L 131, 19. 5. 1978, p. 8.


title: 2011/413/EU: Commission Recommendation of 11 July 2011 on the research joint programming initiative ‘More years, better lives — the potential and challenges of demographic change’

text:
               13.7.2011

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 183/28

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
   of 11 July 2011
   on the research joint programming initiative ‘More years, better lives — the potential and challenges of demographic change’
   (2011/413/EU)
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 181 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The number of Europeans aged over 65 is expected to rise significantly by 42 % from 87 million in 2010 to 124 million in 2030 (1). This continued increase in life expectancy is a major achievement of the recent past. However, at the same time it risks putting an additional strain on the economy, society and the sustainability of public finances.

               (2)

               As a consequence of ageing populations, the need for public provision of age-related transfers and services will increase. The fiscal impact of ageing is therefore projected to be substantial in almost all Member States. Overall, on the basis of current policies, age-related public expenditure is projected to increase on average by about 4¾ percentage points of GDP by 2060 in the EU, especially through pension, healthcare and long-term care spending (in the care sector further compounded by the shrinking and often insufficiently skilled workforce) (2).

               (3)

               The reduction of the working-age population by about 50 million people between 2010 and 2060 and the corresponding increase in dependency ratios, occurring to a large extent already before 2030, could cause a decline in GDP growth unless this can be compensated by rising participation and employment rates in all segments of the labour force and increased productivity growth (3).

               (4)

               Given the shrinking and ageing population there are large benefits to society by extending the active and healthy life of older people, by integrating them better in the economy and society and by helping them stay independent for longer, thereby increasing quality of life for older citizens and their carers, improving sustainability of social protection systems (pensions, healthcare and long-term care systems) and creating a large new market opportunity for innovative solutions for ageing well.

               (5)

               The Europe 2020 strategy has identified demographic ageing as both a challenge and an opportunity for smart, sustainable, and inclusive growth, and the flagship initiatives ‘A digital agenda for Europe’ (4), ‘Innovation Union’ (5), ‘An agenda for new skills and new jobs’ and ‘European platform against poverty’ where this topic has been addressed as a priority. Flexicurity policies within the European Employment Strategy recognise the necessity of a comprehensive approach in human resources policies and need for lifecycle approach to work in order to foster labour market participation and to remove existing obstacles.

               (6)

               The Commission proposed on 6 September 2010 to designate 2012 as European Year for Active Ageing which will seek to support Member States in their efforts to help older people to stay in the workforce and share their experience, keep playing an active role in society and live as healthy, independent and fulfilling lives as possible (6).

               (7)

               There is an urgent need to strengthen the knowledge base on the process of ageing itself and on effects of ageing for society and economy, in order to support evidence-based policymaking.

               (8)

               In order to address the abovementioned challenge and capitalise on the opportunities, a concerted action is needed to facilitate high quality research collaboration aimed at providing research evidence to underpin interventions.

               (9)

               At its meeting of 26 May 2010 (7), the Competitiveness Council identified and substantiated a set of potential joint programming initiatives (hereinafter JPIs), including ‘More years, better lives, the challenges and opportunities of demographic change’, as areas where joint research programming would provide a major added value to the current, fragmented efforts by Member States. It therefore adopted conclusions recognising the need to launch a joint programming initiative on the subject and inviting the Commission to contribute to its preparation.

               (10)

               Member States have confirmed their participation in such a JPI by the sending of formal commitment letters.

               (11)

               Joint programming of research on demographic change and population ageing would provide for coordination of research in this area, contributing significantly to construction of a fully operational ERA on ageing and strengthening Europe’s leadership and competitiveness of research in this field.

               (12)

               In order to achieve the goals set out by this recommendation, Member States should ensure cooperation and complementarity with major related initiatives — the Ambient assisted living joint programme (8) and the Active and healthy ageing innovation partnership, R & D supported by the framework programme, notably in the fields of ICT, health, social science, as well as other research initiatives such as SHARE ERIC (9), and ERA-AGE II (10).

               (13)

               In order for the Commission to be able to report to the European Parliament and to the Council, Member States should report regularly to the Commission on the progress made on this joint programming initiative,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

               1.

               Member States are encouraged to develop and maintain a common vision on how cooperation and coordination in the field of research at Union level can help meet the challenge of the demographic change and capitalise on the opportunities it presents.

               2.

               Member States are encouraged to develop a common strategic research agenda establishing medium to long-term research needs and objectives in the area of demographic change. The strategic research agenda should contain an implementation plan establishing priorities and timelines and specifying the action, instruments and resources required for its implementation.

               3.

               Member States are encouraged to include the following actions, as part of the strategic research agenda and of the implementation plan:

                           (a)

                           identifying and exchanging information on relevant national programmes and research activities;

                           (b)

                           reinforcing joint foresight exercise and technology assessment capacities;

                           (c)

                           exchanging information, resources, best practices, methodologies and guidelines;

                           (d)

                           identifying areas or research activities that would benefit from coordination or joint calls for proposals or pooling of resources;

                           (e)

                           defining the modalities for research to be undertaken jointly in the areas referred to in point (d);

                           (f)

                           considering the changing needs of elderly people as well as the needs of their formal and informal carers when defining the objectives for ageing research programmes;

                           (g)

                           sharing, where appropriate, existing research infrastructures or developing new facilities such as coordinated databanks or the development of models for studying ageing processes;

                           (h)

                           encouraging better collaboration between public and private sectors, as well as open innovation between different research activities and business sectors related to demographic change and population ageing;

                           (i)

                           exporting and diffusing knowledge, innovation and interdisciplinary methodological approaches;

                           (j)

                           creating networks between centres dedicated to demographic change and population ageing research.

               4.

               Member States are encouraged to maintain an efficient common management structure in the field of research on demographic change and population ageing, with a mandate to establish common conditions, rules and procedures for cooperation and coordination and to monitor the implementation of the strategic research agenda.

               5.

               Member States are encouraged to jointly implement the strategic research agenda via their national research programmes in accordance with the guidelines for framework conditions in joint programming developed by the Council high level group on joint programming.

               6.

               Member States are encouraged to cooperate with the Commission with a view to exploring possible Commission initiatives to assist Member States in developing and implementing the strategic research agenda and to coordinate the joint programme with other Union initiatives in this field such as the Active and healthy ageing European innovation partnership and the Ambient assisted living joint programme.

               7.

               Member States are encouraged to report regularly to the Commission on the progress made on this joint programming initiative through annual progress reports.

      Done at Brussels, 11 July 2011.

            For the Commission

         Neelie KROES

            Vice-President

      (1)  Europeans aged over 65 will almost double over the next 50 years — from 87 million in 2010 to 153 million in 2060 — Eurostat, Europop 2010 population projections.

      (2)  Ibidem.

      (3)  COM(2009) 180 final: Dealing with the impact of an ageing population in the EU (2009 Ageing Report)

      (4)  9981/1/10 REV 1.

      (5)  14035/10.

      (6)  Council conclusions (EPSCO December 2010) 18132/10.

      (7)  10246/10.

      (8)  Co-decision report, press release — http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?language=en&type=IM-PRESS&reference=20080121IPR19252

      (9)  http://www.share-project.org/t3/share/fileadmin/press_information/SHARE_ERIC-EN_upload.pdf

      (10)  http://futurage.group.shef.ac.uk/


title: Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/820 of 12 May 2017 on proportionate police checks and police cooperation in the Schengen area

text:
               13.5.2017

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 122/79

         COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2017/820
   of 12 May 2017
   on proportionate police checks and police cooperation in the Schengen area
   THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 292 thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               In an area without controls at internal borders, it is necessary to have a common response to cross-border threats affecting the public policy or internal security of that area. The proper functioning of such an area relies not only on the uniform application of the Union acquis, but also on the use of national competences with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security in line with the objectives of Schengen acquis. For the proper functioning of the Schengen area, it is important to consider not only how the Member States manage their external borders, but also how they exercise their police powers, across their entire territory as well as in the border areas.

               (2)

               In 2012, the Commission issued Guidelines for Member States concerning police measures in the internal border zones accompanying the First Bi-annual report on the functioning of the Schengen area (1). Based on the experience of the last three years, those guidelines should be reviewed. This Recommendation serves that purpose. This Recommendation builds upon the ‘lessons learnt’ over the last three years in addressing threats to public policy or internal security and good practice in exercising police powers and cross-border police cooperation, relevant case-law on the police checks, Schengen evaluations conducted so far in the field of police cooperation and new possibilities resulting from technological developments.

               (3)

               In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council (2), the absence of border controls at internal borders does not affect the exercise of police powers by competent authorities of the Member States under national law, insofar as the exercise of those powers does not have an effect equivalent to border checks. The exercise of police powers should not, in particular, be considered equivalent to the exercise of border checks when the police measures do not have border control as an objective, are based on general police information or experience regarding possible threats to public security and aim, in particular, to combat cross-border crime, are devised and executed in a manner clearly distinct from systematic checks on persons at the external borders, and are carried out on the basis of spot-checks. In light of the judgement of the Court of Justice in the Adil case (3), this is neither a cumulative nor an exhaustive list of criteria, meaning that these criteria should not be considered as prescribing the only set of possible police measures in border areas (4).

               (4)

               The provisions of Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 and the wording of Article 72 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union confirm that the abolition of internal border controls has not affected the prerogatives of the Member States with regard to the maintenance of law and order and the safeguarding of internal security.

               (5)

               Police powers applicable across the territory of a Member State are compatible with Union law. Accordingly, Member States may carry out police checks also in the border areas, including internal border areas, in the context of the police powers that exist under national law applicable to the entire territory.

               (6)

               In the current circumstances of threats related to public policy or internal security from terrorism and other serious cross-border crime and risks of secondary movements of persons who have irregularly crossed the external borders, the intensification of police checks in the entire territory of Member States, including in border areas and the carrying-out of police checks along the main transport routes such as motorways and railways, may be considered necessary and justified. The decision on such checks, their location and intensity remains fully in the hands of the Member States and should always be proportionate to the identified threats. Such checks may prove more efficient than internal border controls, notably as they are more flexible than static border controls at specific border crossing points and can be adapted more easily to evolving risks.

               (7)

               Border areas may have specific risks as regards cross-border crime and may also be more exposed to certain offences committed throughout the entire territory such as burglaries, vehicle theft, drugs trafficking, unauthorised secondary movement of third-country nationals, migrant smuggling or trafficking in human beings. The risks of breaches of the rules on the legality of residence within the territory might be also higher in border areas. Taking account of those risks, Member States may decide to carry out and intensify police checks in border areas, which are adapted to the specific risks of border areas, as long as those measures do not have an effect equivalent to border checks.

               (8)

               Modern technologies to monitor traffic flows, notably on motorways and other important roads determined by the Member States, can be instrumental in addressing threats to public policy or internal security. From that perspective, the use of monitoring and surveillance systems allowing for automatic number plate recognition for law enforcement purposes should therefore be encouraged, subject to the applicable rules concerning camera surveillance, including data protection safeguards. This could help the surveillance of the main European transport corridors, used by considerable numbers of travellers and vehicles to move across the Union, without a disproportionate impact to the traffic flow.

               (9)

               It is only in cases of police powers under national legislation which are specifically limited to border areas and imply identity checks even without concrete suspicion, that Member States have to provide for a specific framework to ensure that those police checks do not amount to measures equivalent to border controls. While in the Melki judgment (5) the Court of Justice recognised that Member States may establish such specific police powers for internal border areas allowing for enhanced identity checks only in those parts of the territory, it ruled that in those situations, Member States must provide specific provisions in relation to the intensity and frequency of such controls. In addition, if a check does not depend upon the behaviour of the person checked or on specific circumstances or information giving rise to a risk for public policy or internal security, Member States are to provide for the necessary framework to guide its practical application to avoid that such police measures have an effect equivalent to border controls.

               (10)

               Over the past three years a number of Member States have intensified police checks in the border areas in the context of the increased threats to public policy or internal security (namely, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, France, Italy, Slovenia, and Switzerland). Those checks sometimes focused on specific means of transport, for instance, trains, or specific border areas. The use of technological means is also increasing in this context. The Commission has not contested any of those cases. Some of those cases set examples of good practice in addressing persistent, increased threats to public policy or internal security.

               (11)

               Pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the temporary reintroduction of border controls may be used only in exceptional circumstances, as a last resort measure. In this context Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/246 (6) explicitly encouraged the Member States to assess whether police checks would not achieve the same results as temporary internal border controls, before introducing or prolonging such controls.

               (12)

               While in some circumstances it may be clear from the outset that police checks alone are not sufficient to address the identified threats to public policy or internal security (for example, searching for specific suspects following a terrorist attack), in other cases, similar objectives as those of reintroduced border controls may be pursued by means of enhanced police checks in border areas. Therefore, on the one hand, the decision on the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders should be in principle preceded by the assessment of other alternative measures. In particular in case of decisions on the temporary reintroduction of border controls at internal borders due to foreseeable events Member States should demonstrate that such assessment has been carried out. On the other hand in specific cases of urgent and serious threats to public policy or internal security at the level of the area without internal border control or at national level, the temporary reintroduction of internal border controls may be necessary immediately.

               (13)

               This Recommendation encourages Member States to better use their police powers and to give precedence to police checks before deciding on the temporary reintroduction of internal border controls.

               (14)

               Whichever measures a Member State takes to address a specific threat to its public policy or internal security, it should ensure that the implementation of the measure does not lead to obstacles to the free movement of persons and goods which would not be necessary, justified by and proportionate to those threats to public policy or internal security and that it fully respects fundamental rights and in particular the principle of non-discrimination.

               (15)

               The area without internal border control also relies on the effective and efficient application by the Member States of accompanying measures in the area of cross-border police cooperation. The Schengen evaluations conducted so far in the field of police cooperation have highlighted that even though Member States are generally legally compliant with the Schengen acquis, a number of obstacles hamper the practical use of some of the cross-border police cooperation tools available to Member States. Member States should therefore be encouraged to tackle these obstacles to better address cross-border threats.

               (16)

               Joint police patrols and other existing tools of operational police cooperation contribute to internal security in the area without internal border controls. Joint patrols on board of cross-border trains e.g. clearly enhance security, by preventing situations where the lack of symmetry in controls undermines the efforts taken on one side of the border only. A number of Member States have established practices which facilitate or allow for joint police operations to take place (for instance, the joint police stations which Germany and Poland have established at their border focussing on joint patrolling and other operations, or the micro-teams established for joint investigations at the Austrian-Czech border, joint train patrols in Austria, Germany, France, Italy, and Hungary, or the recruitment by German police of nationals from other Member States, in particular for patrolling in the border regions). Other Member States should be encouraged to follow these best practices.

               (17)

               Joint threat analysis and cross-border information exchange between Member States sharing border regions can help in designing efficient police checks to address the identified threats. Such cooperation can cover the risks on specific cross-border traffic routes, as well as specific means of transportation often used in criminal activities, in order to allow for targeted police checks ahead of border areas. Such police checks can provide a joint tool to address the threats to public policy or internal security faced by the Member States concerned. For this reason it is important to encourage Member States to further develop cross-border cooperation.

               (18)

               To reinforce cross-border police cooperation, Member States may request the support from the Commission in the implementation of this Recommendation. Such support can contribute for instance to facilitate the exchange of best practices among practitioners and decision makers of the Member States and enhance the cooperation between Member States and the relevant agencies (Europol and the European Border and Coast Guard). It can contribute also to further enhance cross-border cooperation structures such as the Police Customs Cooperation Centres. In addition, the Commission will support the updating, based on input from Member States, the 2011 ‘Schengen catalogue’ (7), which identifies, among others, best practices in the field of operational cross-border police cooperation, and the National Fact Sheets of the ‘Manual on cross-border operations’ (8).

               (19)

               As demonstrated by the recent migratory crisis, uncontrolled secondary movements of irregular migrants may pose a serious threat to public policy or internal security. The proper application of the bilateral readmission agreements in accordance with Article 6(3) of Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (9), can be instrumental in addressing secondary movements of illegally staying third-country nationals. The bilateral agreements may also help in achieving similar results as targeted border controls at internal borders in terms of addressing the threats to public policy or internal security, while limiting the impact on the movement of bona fide travellers. It is therefore important that Member States apply the bilateral readmission agreements efficiently while respecting the Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/432 (10).

               (20)

               The Commission considers that this Recommendation needs a reasonable time to be implemented; therefore the Commission recommends that it should be implemented as soon as possible and at the latest within 6 months.

               (21)

               This Recommendation should be implemented in full respect of fundamental rights.

               (22)

               This Recommendation should be addressed to all Schengen States bound by Title III of Regulation (EU) 2016/399,

         HAS ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION:

      More effective use of police checks

               (1)

               To adequately remedy the threats to public policy or internal security within the Schengen area, Member States should, where needed and justified in accordance with national law:

                           (a)

                           intensify police checks across the entire territory, including in border areas;

                           (b)

                           carry out police checks on main transport routes, including in border areas;

                           (c)

                           adapt the police checks in border areas on the basis of continuous risk assessment, while ensuring that those police checks do not have border control as an objective;

                           (d)

                           make use of modern technologies in order to monitor vehicles and traffic flows.

      Giving precedence to police checks in case of a serious threat to internal security or public policy

               (2)

               Where in a situation of a serious threat to public policy or internal security, Member States consider applying chapter II of Title III of the Regulation (EU) 2016/399, they should first assess whether the situation can be adequately addressed by way of stepping up police checks within the territory, including in border areas.

      Strenghtening cross-border police cooperation

               (3)

               To strengthen cross-border police cooperation in addressing threats to public policy or internal security, Member States should:

                           (a)

                           re-assess the extent to which they currently use all available cross-border police operational cooperation tools such as joint patrols, joint operations, joint investigation teams, cross-border hot pursuits, or cross-border surveillances, Police and Customs Cooperation centers;

                           (b)

                           work jointly with their neighbouring Member States to remove legal or operational barriers to the full use of all cross-border operational police cooperation tools;

                           (c)

                           develop and implement, as appropriate, joint threat analysis and cross-border information exchanges with their neighbouring Member States to support joint actions to address threats to public policy or internal security in shared internal border areas, including through coordinated police checks in their internal border areas;

                           (d)

                           assess the need for technical investments to enhance joint operations, notably for surveillance and detection.

      Effective use of bilateral readmission agreements or arrangements between Member States

               (4)

               To ensure that police checks and police cooperation can lead to the effective countering of unauthorised secondary movements where those movements pose a specific threat to public policy or internal security, Member States should:

                           (a)

                           in accordance with Article 6(3) of Directive 2008/115/EC, take back third-country nationals who transited their territory before being apprehended in another Member State, under the provisions of bilateral agreements or arrangements existing on the date of entry into force of that Directive (13 January 2009), in particular among neighbouring Member States;

                           (b)

                           take all necessary measures, including establishing operational practices between competent authorities and facilitating the exchange of information among them, to ensure that procedures under such bilateral agreements or arrangements are finalised swiftly by the Member States concerned, to ensure that the transfer is carried out as soon as possible;

                           (c)

                           ensure that, where a Member State decides not to apply the provisions of a bilateral readmission agreement or arrangement or where the third-country nationals concerned are taken back by another Member State, return procedures are launched in accordance with Directive 2008/115/EC and in line with Recommendation (EU) 2017/432.

      Done at Brussels, 12 May 2017.

            For the Commission

         Dimitris AVRAMOPOULOS

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  COM(2012)230, Report covering period 1 November 2011 — 30 April 2012.
   http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0230:FIN:EN:PDF

      (2)  Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on a Union Code on the rules governing the movement of persons across borders (Schengen Borders Code) (OJ L 77, 23.3.2016, p. 1).

      (3)  Judgement of the Court of Justice of 19 July 2012, Adil, ECLI:EU:C:2012:508, C-278/12 PPU.

      (4)  Judgement Adil, ECLI:EU:C:2012:508, point 65.

      (5)  Judgment of the Court of Justice of 22 June 2010, Melki and Abdeli, joined cases C-188/10 and C-189/10, ECLI:EU:C:2010:363, points 73 and 74.

      (6)  Council Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/246 of 7 February 2017 setting out a Recommendation for prolonging temporary internal border control in exceptional circumstances putting the overall functioning of the Schengen area at risk (OJ L 36, 11.2.2017, p. 59).

      (7)  Council Document 15785/3/10 Rev 3.

      (8)  Council Document 10505/4/09 Rev 4.

      (9)  Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals (OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98).

      (10)  Commission Recommendation (EU) 2017/432 of 7 March 2017 on making returns more effective when implementing the Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 66, 11.3.2017, p. 15).


title: Commission Recommendation of 29 March 2005 on the provision of leased lines in the European Union — Part 2 — pricing aspects of wholesale leased lines part circuits (notified under document number C(2005) 951)Text with EEA relevance

text:
               1.4.2005

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 83/52

      COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION

   of 29 March 2005
   on the provision of leased lines in the European Union — Part 2 — pricing aspects of wholesale leased lines part circuits
   (notified under document number C(2005) 951)
   (Text with EEA relevance)
   (2005/268/EC)
   THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
   Having regard to Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (1) (the framework Directive), and in particular Article 19(1) thereof,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               New entrants (or other authorised operators) often have to rely on the incumbent to provide a short-distance leased circuit to link the customer’s premises to the new entrant’s network (a leased line part circuit).

               (2)

               (Under Directive 97/33/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 June 1997 on interconnection in telecommunications with regard to ensuring universal service and interoperability through application of the principles of open network provision (ONP) (2) and Council Directive 92/44/EEC of 5 June 1992 on the application of Open Network Provision to leased lines (3), that have now been repealed (4), certain organisations operating leased lines services were obliged to provide their leased line services (including leased lines part circuits) under the principles of non-discrimination and cost orientation.

               (3)

               In accordance with Article 27 of the Framework Directive and Article 16(1) of Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and user’s rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (5) (the universal service Directive) and Article 7 of Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (6) (the access Directive), the former obligations are therefore maintained until such time as the relevant markets have been reviewed in accordance with Article 16 of the framework Directive and Article 16(3) of the universal service Directive.

               (4)

               In accordance with Article 16(4) of the framework Directive, where a national regulatory authority (NRA) determines that a relevant market is not effectively competitive, it shall identify undertakings with significant market power and shall impose appropriate specific regulatory obligations on such undertakings, or maintain or amend such obligations where they already exist. In accordance with Article 18(1) of the Universal Service Directive, where an NRA determines that the market for the minimum set of leased lines is not effectively competitive, it shall identify undertakings with significant market power and impose obligations regarding the provision of the minimum set and the conditions for such provision. Hereinafter undertakings with obligations under any of the abovementioned directives are referred to as ‘notified operators’.

               (5)

               On 11 February 2003, the Commission adopted a recommendation on relevant product and service markets (7) defining the relevant markets within the electronic communications sector that NRAs must analyse under the provisions of Article 15 of the framework Directive. The list includes wholesale terminating segments of leased lines and wholesale trunk segments of leased lines.

               (6)

               The supply of leased lines part circuits is included in the market of wholesale terminating segments of leased lines and for sufficient line lengths also in the market for wholesale trunk segments of leased lines referred to in the Recommendation of the Commission of 11 February 2003. It is a matter for the NRA to decide what constitutes a terminating segment depending on the network topology specific to their national market.

               (7)

               Without prejudice to the market reviews and market power assessments by NRAs in accordance with Articles 15 and 16 of the framework Directive and Article 16(3) of the universal service Directive, information provided by Member States reveals a persistent pattern of worsening problems with the level of prices for leased line part circuits given by notified operators and confirms problems with the variation of such prices.

               (8)

               Where, in accordance with Article 13 of the Access Directive or Article 18 of the universal service Directive, a national regulatory authority imposes obligations for cost orientation with regard to leased line part circuits, it may take into account the fact that the cost information received from the operator concerned may not fully reflect the costs of an efficient operator deploying modern technologies. It may also take into account prices available in comparable competitive markets with regard to mandated cost recovery mechanisms or pricing methodologies.

               (9)

               In these circumstances, the publication of recommended price ceilings for leased line part circuits should inform and guide NRAs as to how to apply the best current practices in leased line provision, when devising regulatory remedies for leased line markets that are not effectively competitive in their territory. In so doing, it would contribute to the development of an internal market by improving EU-wide consistency in application of the regulatory framework and thereby underpin the creation of a more competitive and cost-efficient market for leased lines.

               (10)

               The derivation of price ceilings in this recommendation takes account of average prices in those Member States that allow notified operators price flexibility in different geographical areas.

               (11)

               As provided in Article 13(3) of the access Directive, NRAs may require a SMP-designated undertaking to provide full justification for its prices, and may, where appropriate, require prices to be adjusted.

               (12)

               The Commission shall consider the need to review this recommendation no later than 31 July 2006 in order to take account of changing technologies and of markets.

               (13)

               The Communications Committee has been consulted in accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 22(2) of the framework Directive,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS:

               1.

               For the purpose of this recommendation, the following definitions shall apply:

                           (a)

                           a ‘leased line part circuit’ (LLPC) means the dedicated link between the customer premises and the point of interconnection of the other authorised operator at (or close to) the network node of the notified operator, and should be regarded as a particular type of a wholesale leased line which can be used by the other authorised operator to provide services to retail users, other operators or for its own use such as, but not limited to, leased lines, connections to the switched telephone network, data services or broadband access;

                           (b)

                           ‘line length’ means the radial distance between the locations of the two ends of the line, i.e. from the point of interconnection to the customer premises;

                           (c)

                           ‘customer’ means customer of the other authorised operator.

               2.

               When imposing or maintaining an obligation for cost orientation of prices under Article 13(1) of Directive 2002/19/EC (the access Directive) with regard to operators providing leased line part circuits, national regulatory authorities should:

                           (a)

                           ensure that the prices associated with the provision of a leased line part circuit reflect only the costs of the underlying network elements and the services being requested including a reasonable rate of return. In particular, the tariff structure may include one-off connection prices covering the justified initial implementation costs of the service being requested (e.g. specific equipment, line conditioning, testing and human resources), and monthly prices covering the on-going cost for maintenance and use of equipment and resources provided;

                           (b)

                           ensure that any of the price ceilings listed in Annex I for leased line part circuits based on the price data and methodology given in the Commission services working document are respected unless there is reliable evidence from cost accounting analysis as approved by the national regulatory authority that the recommended ceiling would result in a price level below the efficient costs of the underlying network elements and the services being requested including a reasonable rate of return.
                           The methodology used to calculate recommended price ceilings, as described in the associated Commission Staff working document (8), is considered to be appropriate to cover recognised cost differences between different operators in different Member States;

                           (c)

                           use their rights under Article 13 of the access Directive to request full justification of the proposed charges, and if appropriate, to require these charges to be adjusted.

               3.

               This Recommendation is addressed to the Member States.

      Done at Brussels, 29 March 2005.

            For the Commission

         Viviane REDING

            Member of the Commission

      (1)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33.

      (2)  OJ L 199, 26.7.1997, p. 32. Directive as amended by Directive 98/61/EC, OJ L 268, 3.10.1998, p. 37).

      (3)  OJ L 165, 19.6.1992, p.27. Directive as last amended by Commission Decision 98/80/EC, OJ L 14, 20.1.1998, p. 27).

      (4)  These Directives were repealed by Article 26 of the framework Directive with effect on 24 July 2003.

      (5)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 51.

      (6)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 7.

      (7)  C(2003) 497, OJ L 114, 8.5.2003, p. 45.

      (8)  ‘Commission staff working document — Methodology, reference configuration and data of leased lines in Member States related to the Commission recommendation on the provision of leased lines in the European Union — Part 2 — Pricing aspects of wholesale leased line part circuits’ — http://europa.eu.int/information_society/topics/ecomm/useful_information/library/commiss_serv_doc/index_en.htm

      ANNEX

                  (EUR)

                  Capacity

                  Ceiling for the sum of the monthly price and 1/24 of the one-off connection price for a circuit length of up to 2 km

                  Ceiling for the sum of the monthly price and 1/24 of the one-off connection price for a circuit length of up to 5 km

                  Ceiling for the sum of the monthly price and 1/24 of the one-off connection price for a circuit length of up to 15 km

                  Ceiling for the sum of the monthly price and 1/24 of the one-off connection price for a circuit length of up to 50 km

                  Ceiling for the One-off connection price

                  64 kbit/s

                  61

                  78

                  82

                  99

                  542

                  2 Mbit/s

                  186

                  248

                  333

                  539

                  1 112

                  34 Mbit/s

                  892

                  963

                  1 597

                  2 539

                  2 831

                  155 Mbit/s

                  1 206

                  1 332

                  1 991

                  4 144

                  3 144


title: Council Recommendation of 10 July 2012 on the National Reform Programme 2012 of Portugal and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Portugal, 2012-16

text:
               24.7.2012

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               C 219/69

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION
   of 10 July 2012
   on the National Reform Programme 2012 of Portugal and delivering a Council opinion on the Stability Programme of Portugal, 2012-16
   2012/C 219/20
   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 conclusions of the European Council,
   Having regard to the opinion of the Employment Committee,
   After consulting the Economic and Financial Committee,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               On 26 March 2010, the European Council agreed to the Commission’s proposal to launch a new strategy for jobs and growth, Europe 2020, based on enhanced coordination of economic policies, which focuses 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 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 (2), 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 12 July 2011, the Council adopted a recommendation (3) on Portugal’s National Reform Programme for 2011.

               (4)

               On 23 November 2011, the Commission adopted the second Annual Growth Survey, marking the start of the second European Semester of ex ante and integrated policy coordination, which is anchored in the Europe 2020 strategy.

               (5)

               The European Parliament has been duly involved in the European Semester, in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 1466/97, and, on 15 February 2012, adopted a resolution on employment and social aspects in the Annual Growth Survey 2012 and a resolution on the contribution to the Annual Growth Survey 2012.

               (6)

               On 2 March 2012, 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 2 March 2012, the European Council also invited the Member States participating in the Euro Plus Pact to present their commitments in time to be included in their Stability or Convergence Programmes and in their National Reform Programmes.

               (8)

               On 2 May 2012, Portugal submitted its Stability Programme covering the period 2012-16 and on 7 May 2012, its 2012 National Reform Programme.

               (9)

               On 17 May 2011, the Council adopted Implementing Decision 2011/344/EU (4) to make available to Portugal medium-term financial assistance for a period of three years, from 2011 to 2014, in accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 407/2010 of 11 May 2010 establishing a European financial stabilisation mechanism (5). The accompanying Memorandum of Understanding, also signed on 17 May 2011, and its successive supplements lay down the economic policy conditions on the basis of which the financial assistance is disbursed.

               (10)

               Portugal has made good progress on a number of fronts, but significant challenges remain. Achieving the fiscal targets remains essential if the Government is to regain full market access within the Economic Adjustment Programme period. To limit the risks to the 2012 fiscal targets, rapid and determined implementation of the structural-fiscal measures of the Economic Adjustment Programme is paramount. At the same time, the Government needs to proceed with the reforms that address Portugal’s competitiveness challenges. The 2012 budget does not pursue earlier plans of a ‘fiscal devaluation’. This makes it all the more important to adopt rapidly additional structural reforms in the labour and product markets with a view to reducing unit labour costs, increasing flexibility and lowering entry barriers. Perseverance and resolve on the part of the Government will be required to overcome strong vested interests that stand in the way of reforms.

               (11)

               Overall, the third review of the Economic Adjustment Programme has concluded that Portugal’s implementation of the conditionality set out in the Memorandum of Understanding of 17 May 2011 remains on track. In particular, the fiscal deficit target for 2011 (5,9 % of GDP) has been overachieved by resorting to a transfer of banks’ pension funds to the state amounting to 3½ % of GDP. Despite this one-off operation, the structural consolidation in 2011 was large and amounted to 3½ % of GDP. Banks are on track to meet the capital requirements under the Economic Adjustment Programme by the end of 2012 but capital positions have to improve further in 2012 in line with the requirements of that Programme and as a result of the European Banking Authority’s requirement to cater for sovereign exposures, the special on-site inspection programme and the planned transfer of banks’ private pension plans. In early June 2012, the Government announced that it would provide public funds to three major banks that would allow the capital requirements under the Economic Adjustment Programme to be met. The fourth review at staff level of the Economic Adjustment Programme, which was concluded in early June 2012, confirmed the results of the third review that the Programme remains on track.

               (12)

               The decline of GDP in 2011 was less marked than forecast, as exports and consumption performed better than foreseen. However, the fourth quarter of 2011 and the beginning of 2012 showed weak domestic demand, a sharp rise in unemployment and low business confidence. According to the Commission services’ 2012 spring forecast, the outlook for 2012 has deteriorated and GDP is now projected to fall by 3,3 %. Economic growth in 2013 will be more limited than originally expected. While the external adjustment has so far been remarkably fast, with Portuguese exports increasing their market share outside the Union and imports falling considerably, its persistence is still uncertain. Given the large external debt Portugal has accumulated, very substantial further adjustment of a structural nature is required.

               (13)

               The budget for 2012 targets a government deficit of 4,5 % of GDP, which is in line with the Economic Adjustment Programme requirements and with the Council recommendations to Portugal under the excessive deficit procedure. Medium-term fiscal consolidation plans presented in the Stability Programme are also consistent with the Economic Adjustment Programme’s deficit headline targets and a deficit-to-GDP ratio of 3 % of GDP is expected by 2013. The 2012 budget includes consolidation measures amounting to more than 5 % of GDP, which are made up of permanent structural measures. Two thirds of the measures are on the expenditure side and include a significant cut of public sector wages and pensions, a reduction in the number of government employees by 2 % (full-time equivalent) and a rationalisation of state-owned enterprises. On the revenue side, the budget envisages a reduction in tax exemptions, an increase in the number of goods and services taxed at the standard VAT rate, higher personal income and corporate taxes, an increase in excise taxes and enhanced efforts to fight tax evasion and fraud. The deficit is expected to decrease further to 1,8 % of GDP in 2014 and to 1 % of GDP in 2015. The main risks to the budgetary targets are mainly related to the state-owned enterprise sector and local and regional governments. In terms of the structural balance, the fiscal structural adjustment is expected to be over 7 percentage points of GDP in 2011-12. The medium-term budgetary objective of – 0,5 % of GDP adequately reflects the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact. As regards public debt, it is expected to peak at 115,7 % of GDP in 2013 and gradually decline thereafter. The fourth review at staff level of the Economic Adjustment Programme confirmed that the fiscal deficit target for 2012 remains within reach, as budgetary execution in the first four months of 2012 was consistent with the expectations and as downside risks stemming from a steeper increase in unemployment and a less tax-friendly growth composition as compared with budget projections are being addressed by savings in other parts of the budget.

               (14)

               Noticeable progress has been made until now and the complete success of the Economic Adjustment Programme depends crucially on the implementation of a wide range of structural reforms that will remove the rigidities and bottlenecks that underlie the economy’s decade-long stagnation. The far-reaching and ambitious reform agenda is on track in the areas of the labour market, healthcare, housing, judiciary and the insolvency and regulatory framework including competition. Also, privatisations so far have been highly successful. In network industries, progress has been more mixed. In particular, in the energy sector a comprehensive strategy to eliminate the sector’s rising debt by tackling excessive rents has been presented and will have to be implemented over the coming months.

               (15)

               A strategic reprogramming of the Structural Funds is underway, with a focus on support to youth employment and competitiveness (in particular small and medium-sized enterprises). The new measures strengthen actions in the areas of the employment passport, training and professional qualifications and access to finance for small and medium-sized enterprises.

               (16)

               Portugal has made a number of commitments under the Euro Plus Pact. The commitments, and the implementation of the commitments presented in 2011, relate to improving competitiveness, the employment rate and the sustainability of public finances, while strengthening financial sustainability,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Portugal take action within the period 2012-13 to:
   Implement the measures as laid down in Implementing Decision 2011/344/EU and further specified in the Memorandum of Understanding of 17 May 2011 and its subsequent supplements.

      Done at Brussels, 10 July 2012.

            For the Council

            The President

         V. SHIARLY

      (1)  OJ L 209, 2.8.1997, p. 1.

      (2)  Maintained for 2012 by Council Decision 2012/238/EU of 26 April 2012 on guidelines for the employment policies of the Member States (OJ L 119, 4.5.2012, p. 47).

      (3)  OJ C 216, 22.7.2011, p. 1.

      (4)  OJ L 159, 17.6.2011, p. 88.

      (5)  OJ L 118, 12.5.2010, p. 1.


title: Council Recommendation (EU) 2015/1184 of 14 July 2015 on broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and of the European Union

text:
               18.7.2015

               EN

               Official Journal of the European Union

               L 192/27

         COUNCIL RECOMMENDATION (EU) 2015/1184
   of 14 July 2015
   on broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and of the European Union
   THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
   Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 121(2) thereof,
   Having regard to the recommendation from the European Commission,
   Having regard to the conclusions of the European Council,
   Whereas:

               (1)

               The Treaty provides that Member States are to regard their economic policies as a matter of common concern and coordinate them within the Council. The Treaty further provides that broad economic policy guidelines and employment guidelines are to be adopted by the Council to guide Member State and Union policies.

               (2)

               In accordance with the Treaty, the Union has developed and implemented policy coordination instruments for fiscal policy and macro-structural policies. The European Semester combines the different instruments in an overarching framework for integrated multilateral economic and budgetary surveillance. The streamlining and strengthening of the European Semester, as set out in the Commission's 2015 Annual Growth Survey, should further improve its functioning.

               (3)

               The financial and economic crisis revealed and emphasised important weaknesses in the economy of the Union and its Member States. It has also underscored the close interdependence of the Member States' economies and labour markets. Moreover, the strong increase in public debt levels has created risks for fiscal sustainability. Moving the Union to a state of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and job creation is the key challenge faced today. This requires coordinated and ambitious policy action at both Union and national levels, in line with the Treaty and Union economic governance. Combining supply and demand side measures, that policy action should encompass a boost to investment, a renewed commitment to structural reforms and exercising fiscal responsibility.

               (4)

               Member States and the Union should also address the social impact of the crisis and aim at building a cohesive society in which people are empowered to anticipate and manage change, and can actively participate in society and the economy. Access and opportunities for all should be ensured and poverty and social exclusion reduced, in particular by ensuring an effective functioning of labour markets and social welfare systems and removing barriers to labour market participation. Member States should also make sure that the benefits of economic growth reach all citizens and all regions.

               (5)

               Action in line with the integrated guidelines for the economic and employment policies of the Member States is an important contribution to reaching the goals of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth (‘Europe 2020 strategy’). The Europe 2020 strategy should be underpinned by an integrated set of European and national policies, which Member States and the Union should implement in order to achieve the positive spillover effects of coordinated structural reforms, an appropriate overall economic policy mix and a more consistent contribution from European policies to the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, and in order to ensure the smooth functioning of the Economic and Monetary Union. The broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and of the European Union, annexed to this Recommendation, and the relevant guidelines for employment policies form together the integrated guidelines for implementing the Europe 2020 strategy (‘Europe 2020 integrated guidelines’).

               (6)

               While the Europe 2020 integrated guidelines are addressed to Member States and the Union, they should be implemented in partnership with all national, regional and local authorities, closely involving parliaments, as well as social partners and representatives of civil society.

               (7)

               The broad guidelines for economic policies give guidance to the Member States on implementing reforms, reflecting interdependence between the Member States. They are in line with the Stability and Growth Pact. Such guidelines should form the basis for country-specific recommendations that the Council may address to the Member States,

         HEREBY RECOMMENDS that Member States and, where relevant, the Union take into account in their economic policies the guidelines set out in the Annex, which form part of the Europe 2020 integrated guidelines.

      Done at Brussels, 14 July 2015.

            For the Council

            The President

         P. GRAMEGNA

      ANNEX

         Broad guidelines for the economic policies of the Member States and of the European Union

         Part I of the Europe 2020 integrated guidelines

         Guideline 1: Promoting investment

      Increasing the level of productive investment in Europe is key to boosting demand and improving competitiveness and long-term growth potential in Europe. Efforts should focus on mobilising finance for viable investment projects, making finance reach the real economy and improving the investment environment. Macroeconomic and financial stability, as well as regulatory predictability and openness and transparency of its financial sector, are critical for keeping the Union attractive for private sector investment, including foreign investment.
      The potential of Union funds, including the European Fund for Strategic Investments and structural funds, and national funds to finance growth enhancing investments in key areas should be fully exploited. The result-oriented management of funds as well as an increased use of innovative financial instruments, where appropriate, are crucial elements in that regard.
      Making finance reach the real economy calls for increasing transparency and information provision, in particular through the implementation of a European investment advisory hub under the auspices of the European Investment Bank and the establishment of a transparent pipeline of projects. Close cooperation with all relevant stakeholders is key, in order to ensure a smooth carrying out of operations, adequate risk taking and maximum added value.

         Guideline 2: Enhancing growth through Member States' implementation of structural reforms

      Ambitious implementation of structural reforms by Member States in both product and labour markets, social welfare and pension systems is crucial to strengthen and sustain the economic recovery and ensure sustainable public finances, improve competitiveness, prevent and correct harmful macroeconomic imbalances in line with the macroeconomic imbalance procedure, and increase the growth potential of the Union economies. This would also help achieve higher economic and social cohesion. Competition-enhancing reforms, in particular in the non-tradable sector, a better functioning of the labour markets, and an improved business environment contribute to removing obstacles to growth and investment and increasing the adjustment capacity of the economy. Member States shall regard their economic policies as a matter of common concern, and coordinate them in order to enhance positive synergies and avoid negative spillovers.
      Labour market and social system reforms need to be pursued in order to promote growth and employment, while ensuring access for all to high quality, affordable and sustainable social services and benefits. Action in the area of labour market reforms, for example wage setting mechanisms and an increase in participation rates, should be pursued in line with the more detailed guidance set out in the employment guidelines.
      Further efforts are needed to make the Union an attractive destination for talent and skills. The process of reforming and further integrating product markets should be continued to ensure that Union consumers and businesses benefit from lower prices and a wider choice of goods and services. Better-integrated markets give companies access to a substantially larger market than their own domestic market, thus providing them with more opportunities for expansion. More competitive and better-integrated product markets will also boost innovation and can help increase the speed of adjustment and resilience to economic shocks in individual Member States and for the Union as a whole.
      Efforts should continue to be made in order to improve the regulatory environment in which enterprises operate, to support in particular small and medium sized enterprises, and should include modernisation of public administration, a reduction in administrative burdens, greater transparency, the fight against corruption, tax evasion and undeclared work, the improvement of the independence, quality and efficiency of judicial systems, alongside with contract enforcement and well-functioning insolvency procedures.
      Information and communication technologies and the digital economy are important drivers of productivity, innovation and growth in all sectors of the economy. Promoting private investment in research and innovation should be accompanied by in-depth reforms to modernise the research and innovation systems, to enhance cooperation between public institutions and the private sector, and to improve the broader framework conditions for companies to become more knowledge-intensive. Raising the quality and efficiency of public investments in research and innovation will continue improving the quality of public finances and could improve the long-term sustainability of public finances.

         Guideline 3: Removing key barriers to sustainable growth and jobs at Union level

      Further integrating the single market, including removing remaining barriers, increasing competition and improving the business environment is key to Europe remaining an attractive location for businesses, both domestic and foreign. In order to move Europe's productivity frontier, it is necessary to increase innovation and human capital formation and to ensure an integrated well-functioning digital single market. Increasing the uptake of information and communication technologies by both consumers and businesses can contribute to creating a borderless digital Europe and increasing productivity.
      A well-functioning financial sector is key to a smooth functioning of the economy. The strengthened regulatory and supervisory provisions, and consumer protection rules in the area of financial markets and financial institutions, should be fully implemented. Measures need to be taken in order to build a sustainable market for securitisation in Europe, which will help improve the effective funding capacity of Union banks. A genuine capital markets Union needs to be established, building on the achievements of the single market for financial services and capital.
      Delivering a strong energy Union should ensure affordable, secure and sustainable energy for businesses and households. A cost-effective implementation of the 2030 climate and energy framework and transition to a competitive, resource efficient low carbon economy should be pursued, including through both demand and supply side reforms, while promoting green jobs, green technologies and innovative solutions. In that regard, the energy and transport sectors continue to require particular attention, including with respect to interconnections and infrastructure.
      Union legislation should focus on those issues that are best dealt with at European level, and should be designed taking into account their economic, environmental and social impact. Creating a level playing field across borders with greater regulatory predictability and in full compliance with competition rules will further attract investment. A better and more predictable business environment is particularly important in network industries characterised by long investment horizons and large-scale initial investments. The external dimension of the internal market should be further developed.

         Guideline 4: Improving the sustainability and growth-friendliness of public finances

      Sound public finances are key for growth and job creation. Fiscal sustainability is vital to secure investor confidence and the fiscal space necessary to counter unexpected developments and maximise the positive contribution of public finances to the economy. This also creates the appropriate conditions for supporting growth and investment. Member States should secure long-term control over the deficit and debt levels. Fiscal policies must be conducted within the Union rules-based framework, in particular the Stability and Growth Pact, complemented by sound national budgetary arrangements. Fiscal policies should reflect the economic conditions and sustainability risks at Member State level, while ensuring a good coordination of economic policies. Euro area Member States are invited to continue monitoring closely and discussing the aggregate fiscal situation of the euro area, including the fiscal stance.
      In designing and implementing budgetary consolidation, strategies should prioritise growth-enhancing expenditure items within areas such as education, skills and employability, research and development, and innovation and investment in networks with positive impacts on productivity. Expenditure reforms should target efficiency gains in public administration; such reforms can be prepared in particular by spending reviews, with a view to securing long-term sustainability.
      Expenditure reforms that promote efficient resource allocation to support growth and employment while preserving equity should be complemented by the modernisation of revenue systems, where necessary. A common consolidated corporate tax base should continue to be explored. Shifts towards more growth-friendly taxes, while ensuring compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact, can help correct market inefficiencies and lay foundations for sustained growth and job creation. At the same time, it is important to consider the distributional effects in any change in taxation. The efficiency of the tax system could be enhanced by broadening tax bases, such as removing or reducing the use and generosity of exemptions and preferential regimes, verifying the scope and efficiency of tax expenditures and strengthening the tax administration, simplifying the tax system, and combating tax fraud and aggressive tax planning.