- 2026-06-18 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 18.6.2026 Written question On 7 January 2026 the Commission renewed until 10 January 2031 anti-dumping duties on imports of mixtures of urea and ammonium nitrate (UAN) originating in Russia, Trinidad and Tobago, and the US [1] . A suspension under Article 14(4) of the basic Regulation [2] for an initial period of nine months, extendable for a further period not exceeding one year, would be possible upon demonstration that it is in the overall Union interest, that market conditions have temporarily changed so that injury to UAN Union producers would be unlikely to resume, and that the Union industry has been given an opportunity to comment, with those comments taken into account. Several other fertilisers imported from the US will benefit from a 0% duty when the 2025 EU-US Framework Agreement (‘Turnberry deal’) will enter into force. Moreover, imports of ammonia, urea and certain other nitrogen-based and mixed fertilisers from countries other than Russia and Belarus, now benefit from a tariff suspension [3] , within given quotas, for a period of one year, until 31 May 2027. The Commission does not consider that suspending the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) at this stage would be beneficial for EU strategic autonomy in fertilisers. However, recognising specific challenges for the fertiliser sector posed by elevated prices and import dependency, the Commission took action and a 1% mark-up is applied to default values for embedded emissions for fertilisers under CBAM [4] . This is notably lower than the mark-up applied to other CBAM sectors. Additionally, the Commission adopted a temporary state aid framework to enable Member States to support farmers in the current volatile market situation [5] . Following its November 2022 Communication [6] , the Commission is also monitoring the availability and affordability of fertilisers in the EU through the Fertiliser Market Observatory. On 19 May 2026, the Commission adopted the Fertiliser Action Plan [7] , setting out short- and long-term measures to improve fertiliser availability, affordability and resilience. Short term actions include the mobilisation and possible top-up of the agricultural reserve, liquidity support under the Common Agricultural Policy and greater flexibility for advance payments. Longer term measures focus on strengthening EU production capacity, supporting low carbon and renewable fertilisers, promoting circular nutrient sources, and reducing strategic dependencies on imports. All Member States, including Spain, used a possibility to express their positions on the availability and affordability of fertilisers during the discussion in the Agriculture and Fisheries Council. [1] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/65 of 6 January 2026 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of mixtures of urea and ammonium nitrate originating in Russia, Trinidad and Tobago and the United States of America following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council. [2] Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union. [3] http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2026/1181/oj. [4] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/2621 of 16 December 2025 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2023/956 of the European Parliament and the Council as regards the establishment of default values. [5] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_26_894/IP_26_894_EN.pdf. [6] Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Ensuring availability and affordability of fertilisers, COM/2022/590 final/2. [7] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1099.”
Use of fertilisers · Climate efforts
- 2026-06-18 “Minister Krajewski,
Vice-President Vigliotti,
Representatives of the European Investment Bank,
Dear young farmers, bankers, policymakers and all those helping shape Europe's future,
It is a pleasure to be with you today.
After welcoming many of you in Brussels in March, I am delighted to join you here in Warsaw.
And it is no coincidence that we are meeting in Poland.
More than 21% of Polish farmers are under the age of 40, nearly double of the EU average.
And 25% young farmers in Europe is Polish.
This is a success from which we can all learn.
These dialogues are indeed crucial to device new pathways - ensure that every young farmer across Europe has the means to invest, innovate and build viable businesses.
And guarantee that the needs of young farmers will be sufficiently backed up, in the coming National and Regional Partnership Plans and National Strategies for generation renewal in agriculture.
European agriculture operates in an increasingly complex environment, from market volatility to climate change and rising production costs.
In spite of these vulnerabilities, young farmers remain risk-takers in our farming community.
But when they invest, it is not for three or five but for ten, twenty or even thirty years.
And they need us to match this reality so to invest with confidence and receive the support to turn their ambition into reality.
This is why access to finance is at the heart of our agricultural agenda and a key pillar of the Generational Renewal Strategy adopted in October 2025.
The figures speak for themselves.
More than 4 out of 5 farms report significant increases in production costs.
The financing gap affecting young farmers is now estimated at €14.2 billion.
At the same time, the sector is evolving.
The share of farms using bank financing has increased from 1 in 6 to nearly 1 in 4.
The willingness to invest exists. The business spirit exists.
But access to finance has not kept pace.
More than 1 loan application out of 2 submitted by young farmers is refused.
This is not only a challenge for young farmers. It is a missed opportunity for Europe.
The good news is that we know solutions exist.
At European level, significant resources are already available to support investment in agriculture and rural areas.
Under the current CAP Strategic Plans, financial instruments amount to around €1 billion.
Under the last Rural Development Programmes), loans and guarantees - with EUR 447 million EAFRD contribution, - generated more than €2.1 billion in investments by the end of 2024.
This demonstrates the strong leverage effect that financial instruments can create.
And this is exactly the kind of leverage we need.
Financial instruments can successfully mobilise additional investment for farmers and rural businesses while easing pressure on both European and national budgets.
As Member States prepare their future National and Regional Partnership Plans, the challenge is not simply to make finance available.
It is to ensure that it is accessible, well targeted and adapted to the realities of farming.
This means reaching those who face the greatest barriers to investment, particularly young farmers.
It also means broadening the range of products available to support priorities such as sustainable agriculture, digitalisation, energy efficiency and innovation.
Ultimately, financial instruments only deliver results when they are used strategically, structured effectively and reflecting in their implementation, the realities of the agricultural business cycle.
This is why dialogue between farmers, bankers and managing authorities is so important.
In Brussels in March, we came together to diagnose the challenges.
Today, we are moving from dialogue to delivery.
Together with the EIB, the EIF and fi-compass, we are launching a package of practical tools, including a catalogue of lending schemes and financial products across Europe, as well as a practical toolkit on business planning and loan applications.
In the coming months, we will also launch an EU-wide survey on access to finance, helping Member States prepare future National and Regional Partnership Plans.
And under the future CAP, we are proposing a dedicated Starter Pack for young farmers, complemented by opportunities under InvestEU and the future European Competitiveness Fund.
Ultimately, what matters is impact on the ground.
Whether a young farmer secures a loan.
Whether a farm invests, modernises and grows.
Whether a new generation sees a future in European agriculture.
Together, we are turning good ideas into real opportunities.
And together, we can build a stronger future for European agriculture.
Thank you very much.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-06-10 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 10.6.2026 Written question In the short term, tensions in the Strait of Hormuz are unlikely to lead to shortages of fertilisers in the EU, notably due to limited direct import exposure and the existence of sufficient levels of commercial stocks. However, they have contributed to increased global price volatility for fertilisers and other inputs that will affect prices in the EU. The Commission is closely monitoring the fertiliser markets through the Fertiliser Market Observatory [1] , which met on 21 May 2026 to discuss recent developments. During the meeting, participants confirmed that fertiliser availability is currently not affected. To relieve pressure, the Commission adopted the Middle East temporary state aid Framework to support farmers and energy intensive industries [2] . In addition, imports of ammonia, urea and other nitrogen fertilisers will benefit from tariff suspension, within given quotas, for a period of one year. On 19 May 2026, the Commission adopted the Fertiliser Action Plan [3] to diversify import sources, reinforce EU production capacity and reduce dependencies on imported energy and feedstocks. Short term actions include the mobilisation and possible top up of the agricultural reserve, reinforced liquidity support under the CAP and flexibility for advance payments. Longer term measures focus on supporting low carbon and bio-based fertilisers, promoting circular and recycled nutrients, and supporting nutrient use efficiency, precision farming to reduce farmers’ exposure to fertiliser price volatility and production costs over time. [1] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/overviews/market-observatories/fertilisers_en. [2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/document/print/en/ip_26_894/IP_26_894_EN.pdf [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1099.”
Use of fertilisers
- 2026-06-10 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 10.6.2026 Written question The Commission is closely monitoring developments in the Strait of Hormuz and their impact on fertiliser markets through the EU Fertiliser Market Observatory [1] . While no immediate physical shortages of nitrogen fertilisers are expected in the EU, notably due to limited direct import exposure to the Gulf region and sufficient stock levels, recent geopolitical developments have increased global price volatility, which is already affecting EU fertiliser prices. To mitigate these pressures, the Commission has already taken targeted measures, including a reduced 1% Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) default value mark up for fertilisers and proposed the suspension of customs tariffs within quotas for ammonia, urea and other nitrogen fertilisers to support both farmers and the EU fertiliser industry. The Commission has also recently adopted a state aid Framework on the Middle East [2] to support both farmers and energy intensive industries affected by the current situation. On 19 May 2026, the Commission adopted the Fertiliser Action Plan [3] , setting out short- and long-term measures to improve fertiliser availability, affordability and resilience. Short term actions include mobilisation and possible reinforcement of the agricultural reserve, liquidity support under the Common Agricultural Policy, and flexibility for advance payments. Longer term measures focus on strengthening EU production capacity, supporting low carbon and circular fertilisers, promoting alternative nutrient sources, and reducing dependencies on imported energy and feedstocks. [1] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/overviews/market-observatories/fertilisers_en. [2] https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/state-aid/legislation/metsaf_en. [3] Commission presents plan to secure Europe's fertiliser supply and food security: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1099.”
Agricultural funding · Use of fertilisers
- 2026-06-10 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 10.6.2026 Written question The Commission is closely monitoring the impact of the current geopolitical situation on fertiliser markets, including through the EU Fertiliser Market Observatory [1] . The impact on the EU remains limited due to low direct reliance on Middle East imports, sufficient stocks and unaffected production in key supplier countries such as Egypt and Algeria. While no immediate shortages are expected for the 2026 harvest, increased global volatility is affecting fertiliser prices for farmers. To mitigate pressure, the Commission has already taken targeted measures, including a reduced 1% CBAM default value mark up for fertilisers. In addition, to support both farmers and the EU fertiliser industry, imports of ammonia, urea and other nitrogen fertilisers will benefit from duty suspension, within given quotas, for a period of one year. The Commission has also recently adopted a state aid Framework on the Middle East [2] , to support both farmers and energy intensive industries. On 19 May 2026, the Commission adopted the Fertiliser Action Plan [3] , setting out short- and long-term measures to improve fertiliser availability, affordability and resilience. Short term actions include the mobilisation and possible top-up of the agricultural reserve, liquidity support under the CAP and greater flexibility for advance payments. The Plan also supports biogas and biomethane projects to reduce energy and nutrient dependencies and foresees the possible activation of emergency tools under the internal market Emergency and Resilience Act [4] , if necessary. [1] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/overviews/market-observatories/fertilisers_en. [2] https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/state-aid/legislation/metsaf_en. [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1099. [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202402747.”
Use of fertilisers
- 2026-06-10 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 10.6.2026 Written question The Commission is closely monitoring developments in the Strait of Hormuz and their implications for fertiliser markets. In the short term, no immediate physical shortages of nitrogen fertilisers are expected in the EU, notably due to limited direct import exposure to this region of the world and recent increased imports in the EU. However, the events have contributed to increased global fertiliser price volatility, which is also reflected in EU markets. At this stage, no immediate risks to food availability in the EU are identified. In the medium term, sustained disruptions could further tighten global fertiliser supply, putting upward pressure on prices, including through higher energy costs affecting domestic production. Higher fertiliser prices also increase production costs for farmers and could, over time, contribute to increased food prices, depending on the duration of the disruption. The Commission is taking action through the Fertiliser Action Plan adopted on 19 May 2026 [1] , which includes measures to strengthen EU domestic fertiliser production capacity and reduce strategic dependencies on imported energy and fertiliser feedstocks. The Plan supports investment in low carbon, and bio-based fertilisers, promotes circular and recycled nutrients, and aims to diversify supply chains and improve resilience across the fertiliser value chain. The Commission is also supporting nutrient use efficiency to reduce dependency on imported mineral fertilisers over the longer term. [1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_1099.”
Use of fertilisers
- 2026-05-28 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 28.5.2026 Written question The Commission’s proposals for the 2028-2034 multiannual financial framework (MFF) [1] reaffirm the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) as a cornerstone of EU policy, providing a cohesive and robust framework to support farmers, consumers, and the environment. Flexibility rules are designed to complement — not compromise — the Policy’s common principles. Stringent EU-wide safeguards, including common definitions and common EU rules, including farm stewardship obligations and performance monitoring continue to apply. The Commission will also issue CAP national recommendations, steering Member States’ CAP interventions to support common EU priorities while being tailored to Member States’ specific needs and challenges. These measures ensure that Member States’ tailored solutions remain aligned with common EU economic, social and environmental objectives and support a level-playing field in the EU. The Commission also advocates a collaborative approach to developing the National and Regional Partnership (NRP) Plans, incorporating early dialogues with Member State to ensure that national and local needs align with overarching EU priorities. The Commission will rigorously assess Member States’ draft NRP Plans before submitting a proposal for approval by the Council to see if the common policy objectives are met. Crucially, the budget for farmers’ income support remains secure guaranteeing predictability. The new MFF [2] introduces a new method (‘deflator’) to handle inflation challenges. It keeps the annual price adjustment at 2% if EU inflation is between 1% and 3%. If inflation falls below 1% or rises above 3%, the adjustment matches the actual forecast rate. [1] https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/eu-budget-2028-2034_en. [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0571&qid=1753801194712.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-05-26 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 26.5.2026 Written question With the new Single Market Strategy, the Commission intends to strengthen the integration and efficiency of the internal market. This initiative primarily aims to dismantle unjustified barriers, reduce the administrative burden, stimulate investment, and ensure a level playing field within the Union. With the Wine Package [1] , the Commission is empowered to lay down rules for providing consumers with the list of ingredients and the nutrition declaration via electronic means on the label of wine bottles, with the aim to minimise costs and facilitate trade across the internal market. The Commission started discussing possible elements of a regulation in this regard within the Group of Experts on Wine and Spirits under the common organisation of the markets. In the context of the FISCALIS programme, and with the support of the Commission, experts from Member States have investigated potential solutions, based in part on a one-stop-shop for the payment of excise duty in the Member State of establishment of the seller. The Commission is currently examining these findings with a view to removing obstacles while considering risks of tax evasion. An ongoing study on excise simplification that will be completed by October 2026 will, among others, contain a detailed cost-benefit analysis of the proposed solution that will serve as a basis for potential further action in this field. [1] Regulation (EU) 2026/471 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 February 2026 amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, (EU) No 251/2014 and (EU) 2021/2115 as regards certain market rules and sectoral support measures in the wine sector and for aromatised wine products and Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 as regards certain labelling rules for spirit drinks, OJ L, 2026/471, 26.2.2026, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2026/471/oj.”
EU Single Market harmonisation · Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
- 2026-05-20 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 20.5.2026 Written question 1. A simpler and more flexible Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) will be delivered through national and regional partnership (NRP) plans [1] . In the context of multiple pressing EU priorities to address, the proposal guarantees a minimum ring-fenced amount of EUR 293.7 billion for farmers income support. This shows a recognition of the crucial role of farmers and the CAP to build an attractive, competitive and sustainable agri-food sector. 2. The guaranteed amount in the legislation ensures stability and predictability for the farming community. The amount can and will need to be complemented by Member States in accordance with their needs, by accessing the unallocated part of the NRP fund. The Commission suggested a rural target of 10% [2] to strengthen support for rural areas. In addition, to ensure further resources are accessible for Member States as of 2028 for addressing the needs of farmers and rural communities, the Commission has proposed that Member States will be able to access to up to two-thirds of the flexibility amount [3] in the plans, normally available for the stage of the midterm review. 3. The advantage of a simpler, more flexible CAP, delivered through NRP plans, is that it offers Member States increased flexibility, bringing policies together to deliver better results. The NRP plans are tailored to Member States’ needs, while ensuring predictability for long-term investment and support for farmers and regions, and increased flexibility in a fast-changing world . The NRP plans provide a harmonised planning and reporting framework that foster synergies and a leverage effect across different funding elements, while supporting EU common objectives and priorities. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0565&qid=1753801752960. [2] This translates into EUR 48.7 billion, or over EUR 63 billion if the Catalyst Europe loans are also included. Only the amounts dedicated by Member States towards rural areas beyond the ring-fenced amounts would count towards reaching this target (Proposal in the letter of the Commission President, November 2025) . [3] Amounting to around EUR 45 billion (Proposal in the letter of the Commission President, January 2026).”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-05-19 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 19.5.2026 Written question Promotion funding is intrinsically linked to the promotion of EU-origin. The general objective of the information provision and promotion measures under the EU promotion policy for agricultural products is to enhance the competitiveness of the EU agricultural sector (Article 2 Regulation (EU) 1144/2014 [1] ). Only EU-produced products are eligible for this funding. Products that are produced outside of the EU are not eligible. The information provision and promotion measures aim to increase consumers’ awareness of the merits of the EU agricultural products and production methods, and of its quality schemes; increase the competitiveness and consumption of EU agricultural products, raise their profile both inside and outside the EU and increase their market share. Furthermore, implementing Regulation [2] (EU) 2015/1831 establishes strict requirements for the mention of European origin in all information and promotional materials (Article 2). As in other sectors, origin is determined in accordance with the established non-preferential rules of origin. The indication of the country of origin of agricultural and food products is laid down in EU law, as reflected in Regulation (EU) 1308/2013, and further specified in relevant secondary legislation. As stipulated in Article 14 of Regulation (EU) 1144/2014, Member State authorities are responsible for the proper implementation of so called simple programmes (submitted by one or more organisations in a single Member State), including their monitoring and control. [1] Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on information provision and promotion measures concerning agricultural products implemented in the internal market and in third countries and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008. [2] Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1831 of 7 October 2015 laying down rules for application of Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on information provision and promotion measures concerning agricultural products implemented in the internal market and in the third countries.”
Export of EU agri-food products · EU framework for voluntary quality and sustainability terms in food marketing
- 2026-05-13 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 13.5.2026 Written question The Commission acknowledges the significant pressure that EU farmers face due to increased energy and fertiliser prices, exacerbated by the ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East which have constrained global supply chains, underscoring the critical need to bolster the EU’s strategic autonomy. The Commission is closely monitoring developments. Regarding fertilisers, work is accelerated on an Action Plan, to be presented in the coming weeks. This plan will elaborate short- and medium-term measures to strengthen the EU production capacity and reduce high-risk strategic dependencies, to ensure the availability, affordability and stability in the supply of fertilisers to EU farmers. Recent measures have already been implemented such as the adjustment of default Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism values applicable to fertilisers, applying a flat 1% mark-up, and the proposal to temporarily suspend most favoured nations (MFN) duties on imports of other than Russian and Belarussian origin of several key nitrogen fertilisers and inputs for their production (ammonia, urea) up to a certain volume of imports into the EU. The Commission remains committed to continuously assessing the situation and is ready to take action, including through the application of competition law instruments, where appropriate . The Commission is exploring whether additional support mechanisms are needed for farmers in the short term, drawing upon available instruments under the Common Agricultural Policy. Concerning state aid, the Commission adopted on 29 April 2026 a state aid framework [1] to enable Member States to support the sectors most affected by the Middle East crisis including agriculture. [1] https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/state-aid/legislation/metsaf_en.”
Use of fertilisers · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-05-11 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 11.5.2026 Written question The Commission welcomes the opinion of the Court of Auditors and appreciated the opportunity of discussing it with the EP Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. The proposed structure of the future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) builds on several pieces of legislation in force today and governing the current CAP [1] . It aims at fostering synergies across policies for the benefit of rural areas, investment in farming and bringing simplifications for farmers (such as an increased use of lump sums and incentives) while providing robust safeguards to guarantee that the EU taxpayer’s money is spent in an efficient, regular and transparent manner Discussions with co-legislators are ongoing concerning a transfer of certain Articles to the CAP and common market organisation regulation proposals pursuant to a letter of the President of the Commission of November 2025. The minimum ring-fenced budget for income support ensures fairness and continuity for the financing of the agricultural sector. The new degressivity mechanism should also improve the targeting. Regarding the balance between commonality and flexibility, the proposals [2] contain several guarantees. Commonality is safeguarded by common objectives, a stable toolbox, common protective practices, steering by the Commission via recommendations and a common assessment procedure. The approval process for the plans is framed by deadlines. The Council decision (to be adopted within 4 weeks of the Commission proposal) should not make the process disproportionately long since Member States are also very much interested in a swift approval and implementation of plans. Specificities of CAP payments regarding monitoring of expenditure have been mostly kept, while ensuring accountability. [1] These include beyond the Strategic Plan Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 2021/2115), the Horizontal Regulation (Regulation (EU) No 2021/2116, and the regulation on the Common organisation of the markets (Regulation (EU) 1308/2013). [2] See https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/eu-budget/long-term-eu-budget/eu-budget-2028-2034_en.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-05-08 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 8.5.2026 Written question Simplification of the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) was delivered by the Commission in 2024 [1] and 2025 [2] . The Commission’s proposal for the National and Regional Partnership (NRP) Plans [3] for 2028-2034, and the CAP proposal [4] reflect and build on that simplification. The proposals offer Member States flexibility to implement a tailored approach to address the needs of EU farming and rural communities, while also maximising complementarities across various funding instruments. The single rule book would reduce the need to navigate across different rules for similar types of support measures. Regarding the CAP, the proposed rules would translate into less burden for both farmers and Member States for example thanks to the abolishment of the entitlements’ system, a wider use of simplified form of payments for smaller farmers and of lump-sum payments, and an alignment of mandatory rules under the ‘Farm Stewardship’ system. The system of Good agricultural and environmental conditions (GAECs) has been removed. On the other hand, the proposal builds on what works well, for example the basic elements of the current administration and control system would be kept but simplified and streamlined, easing also reporting. Access to information and calls for proposals would be made easier through a single, user-friendly access portal (‘Single Gateway’), which would centralise funding information and data on recipients and supported operations. The Commission will closely work with Member States in the process of preparation and implementation of their national plans with the aim to maintain coherence of definitions and concepts and to minimise the administrative burden for farmers. [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1468&qid=1739377050554. [2] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32025R2649. [3] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0565&qid=1753801752960. [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0560&qid=1753798247771.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-05-08 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 8.5.2026 Written question 1. The suspension of inward processing would address a short-term market disturbance. The Commission is assessing whether further action may be warranted to address potential structural challenges in the sugar sector. The Commission is conducting a ‘health check’ of the key markets, including sugar, which will inform these reflections. 2. Since the end of the quota regime in 2017, the sector has adjusted to a more market-oriented organisation by improving competitiveness and better aligning supply to demand. Without jeopardising the market-oriented nature of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), where necessary to respond to market disturbances or imbalances, the Commission may adopt appropriate measures within the framework of the common market Organisation. To address other challenges, such as high production costs, the EU offers investment and coupled income support, which may be included in Member States’ CAP Strategic Plans to support sugar and sugar beet producers. 3. Under the future Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2027-2034, the proposed national and regional partnership (NRP) plans will continue to offer Member States the opportunity to support farmers depending on regional and national needs. Existing CAP policy instruments, such as income support, are maintained in the Commission proposal. In addition, the CAP and NRP Regulation proposals provide a complementary set of tools to alleviate pressure and reducing risk in farm operations. The EU facility under the NRP fund also provides a Unity Safety Net intended to help farmers cope with the impact of market disturbances.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-04-30 “E-000760/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission is actively advancing measures to harmonize honey authentication across the single market. The Honey Platform is explicitly tasked with gathering data to improve authenticity controls and providing formal recommendations on the creation of an EU reference laboratory for honey. First discussions highlighted the importance of avoiding overlaps with existing laboratories, ensuring financial viability, and maintaining coherence with the broader EU authenticity and integrity. The topic will be further discussed before any decision can be taken. 2. The system of sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) import controls is robust and capable of ensuring that only goods complying with EU requirements enter the Union. On 9 December 2025, the Commission announced a series of measures 1 aimed at further strengthening import controls through an increased number of audits and closer monitoring of non-compliant commodities and countries (with increased frequency of checks), support and additional training to Member States, and the establishment of a Task Force on Import Controls. 3. The Commission thoroughly evaluates the potential effects of trade agreements on EU agriculture through cumulative economic impact studies 2 . The specific vulnerabilities of the honey market were factored into the Mercosur negotiations leading to not granting unlimited access for honey but establishing a calibrated Tariff Rate Quota accompanied by a legally binding safeguard mechanism. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2979. 2 https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/7c386feb-bbfc-11ee-b164-01aa75ed71a1/language-en.”
Trade relations with Mercosur · Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2026-04-29 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 29.4.2026 Written question EU trade policy towards Israel and Palestine [1] may help address some of the issues raised in the Honourable Member’s question as far as goods exported to the EU are concerned. Trade preferences granted to Israel under the EU-Israel Association Agreement [2] do not apply to goods originating in Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT) or the Golan Heights. Conversely, the EU grants trade preferences to goods which are originating in Palestine in accordance with the EU-Palestine Interim Association Agreement [3] . The case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union has confirmed that goods originating in Israeli settlements in the OPT do not qualify for preferential treatment under the EU-Palestine Interim Association Agreement. As regards a temporary suspension of imports, Article 23 of the EU-Israel Association Agreement allows either party to adopt safeguard measures if a product is imported in such increased quantities and under such conditions as to cause serious disturbance to a sector of the economy, or serious difficulties in a region or market of the importing side. From the information provided it is however not possible to ascertain whether imports from Israel are causing such serious sectoral disturbances or regional difficulties. On 17 September 2025, following the military intervention of Israel in the Gaza Strip, the Commission adopted a proposal for a Council Decision regarding the suspension of certain trade-related provisions of the Association Agreement [4] . [1] This designation shall not be construed as recognition of a State of Palestine and is without prejudice to the individual positions of the Member States on this issue. [2] https://eeas.europa.eu/archives/delegations/israel/documents/eu_israel/asso_agree_en.pdf. [3] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/documents/treaties-agreements/agreement/?id=1997014. [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0890.”
Relations with Israel - Palestine · Due diligence in supply chains (environmental and human rights)
- 2026-04-29 “E-000658/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The proposed new common agricultural policy (CAP) ensures predictability for European farmers by proposing a minimum ring-fenced amount within the future national and regional partnership (NRP) plans for the period 2028-2034 as well as improving the current CAP toolbox. Fair distribution of support is central to the proposal, by proposing degressivity and capping of the future income support, with a focus towards those farmers most in need. In addition, the Commission would issue CAP national recommendations on all policy objectives with a view to guaranteeing a level-playing field. As regards the environmental ambition, the Commission proposes a minimum spending target of at least 43% at the level of the overall NRP Plans, including the CAP. Furthermore, Member States would be obliged to address soil and water quality via a set of protective practices as basic requirements for farmers to receive income support. Also in this case, the recommendations would guide Member States in the implementation of these basic requirements as well as additional measures like agri-environment climate actions tailored to local circumstances to reach EU objectives. The European Parliament, as co-legislator, will play a fundamental role in shaping the future NRP and CAP regulations. In November 2025, the President of the Commission suggested to the co-legislators to add a new annex on a new budgetary steering mechanism to the future interinstitutional agreement to specify the modalities of this mechanism, including in relation to the Parliament’s role. Transparency in monitoring the implementation of the CAP is strengthened via the proposed performance regulation 1 , including through a publicly accessible centralised website referred to as ‘Single Gateway’. 1 https://commission.europa.eu/publications/budget-expenditure-tracking-and-performance-framework_en.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-04-21 “P-000963/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Given the current situation on the milk market as described in reply to written question E000668/2026 1 , the Commission does not envisage at this stage mobilising market instruments financed by the agricultural reserve. The milk market situation in 2025 and at the beginning of 2026 is fundamentally different from that in 2016. The Commission will continue its close monitoring of developments in the milk market and stands ready to act in a responsible and proportionate manner, should circumstances so require. Milk producers will benefit from a recently agreed strengthening of the position of farmers in the food supply chain whereby contracts between dairy farmers and their buyers will need to be in written form (political agreement reached between the European Parliament and the Council on 5 March 2026 on a Commission proposal amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013 2 , (EU) 2021/2115 3 and (EU) 2021/2116 4 as regards the strengthening of the position of farmers in the food supply chain). In line with the amendment proposed by the European Parliament, such measures will also expand the scope of collective negotiations in the dairy sector and provide for stricter conditions on the statutes of producer organisations in the dairy sector, ensuring their democratic control. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/2024-05-25/eng. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj/eng?uri=CELEX:32021R2116.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
- 2026-04-15 “E-000668/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The year 2025 was marked by historically high raw milk prices which, together with increased output, resulted in the highest value of milk production ever recorded. This occurred against a backdrop of declining feed costs leading to the highest gross margin indexes on record. From August onwards, milk deliveries expanded rapidly in several major producing Member States. In parallel, prices for dairy commodities - which had remained at historically high levels during the first half of 2025 - started a downward correction from September 2025 onwards. This decline in commodity prices was transmitted to raw milk prices with a certain time lag and at a smaller magnitude. Domestic and global demand for dairy products has remained robust. The most recent data from dairy commodity markets point towards a stabilisation and gradual improvement in market prices. Against this backdrop, at present the Commission is not considering the introduction of a voluntary milk production reduction scheme. There are no specific indicators to trigger the introduction of exceptional market measures. The Commission acts on the basis of its ongoing monitoring of market developments, including milk and dairy prices, production trends, and trade flows. It also takes into account the views of experts, Member States, and stakeholders in the relevant fora.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-04-14 “E-000736/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. As announced in the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting on 26 January 2026, the Commission is considering suspending the use of inward processing in the sugar sector. The internal preparatory work is under way. The Commission’s decision will be based on the assessment of the impact of sugar imports under the inward processing procedure on the sugar market. 2. In line with Article 195 of Regulation 1308/2013 1 , such suspension must be aimed at addressing a market disturbance stemming from imports under these arrangements. In parallel, the Commission is discussing an update to the guidance for custom authorities on the use of inward processing for sugar with the aim to provide accurate recommendations on the implementation of the procedure. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p 671 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj).”
Import of agri-food products in the EU · EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports
- 2026-04-14 “E-000504/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Within the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) framework, all Member States, are obliged to ensure the effective protection of the financial interests of the Union, including, through the Area Monitoring System, required to be fully operational in all Member States since 2024 1 . IT tools available to Member States to this end, such as Arachne to score risks of irregularities, are used by the national authorities to prevent and report irregularities, including suspected or established fraud affecting CAP funds. Arachne will progressively be modernised and combine data from several databases. Member States must also perform systematic checks that target, inter alia, areas where the risk of errors is the highest 2 . Further investigations and additional checks should be conducted when warning signals or indicators pointing to possible irregularities, fraud or corruption are spotted. When the Commission becomes aware of any suspected case of fraud, corruption or any illegal activity affecting the EU budget, it informs the European Anti-Fraud Office and, if applicable, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office promptly. In recent years, the Commission has conducted numerous audits of the management and control system of the CAP expenditure in Greece, identifying several recurrent issues. Thus, the Commission requested the Greek authorities to put in place an action plan for the expenditure under the integrated administration and control system, which is currently being implemented. A second action plan addresses persistent non-compliances with the accreditation criteria 3 by the Greek Paying Agency, which was placed under probation in September 2024. One of the actions of that plan is the implementation of an effective antifraud strategy. 1 Art. 70 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116. 2 Art. 60.1 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116. 3 Annex 1 Point 1 (C) of Regulation (EU) 2022/127.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-04-14 “E-000360/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Honourable Member refers to the judgment in case T-399/23 ClientEarth et Collectif Nourrir v. European Commission (29 October 2025). The position summarised by the General Court in point 109 of the judgment concerns Article 118 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 1 which does not empower the Commission to prescribe to Member States how to design or implement certain interventions or elements of Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) Strategic Plans (SPs). The Commission’s role is to assess SPs designed by Member States, and if those SPs are compatible with that Regulation, approve them. The judgment does not provide any indication that the Commission would be ‘powerless’ as regards approval of the SPs. It states that the control by the Commission covers some specific requirements (point 112) and explains the basis for and the scope of the Commission approval of SPs. While the proposed delivery model for the next Multiannual Financial Framework grants flexibility to Member States to design their National Regional Partnership Plans, similar to the current CAP SPs, it is exercised within safeguards. The proposal lays down common EU objectives that cover food security, fair standard of living for farmers, and vibrant rural areas. Furthermore, through CAP national recommendations the Commission will steer Member States’ ambition to ensure attainment of common EU objectives. Rules related to certain ringfenced interventions that are fully financed by the EU will ensure, among others, a level playing field among Member States. This aims at ensuring stability, predictability and commonality when it comes to the income support, while allowing for tailored approaches to meet national and regional challenges and opportunities. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj/eng.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-04-14 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 14.4.2026 Written question The Commission attaches great importance to support competitiveness of farmers. It closely monitors the market and income developments in the EU agricultural sector. Besides, the Commission set up the Agri-Food Chain Observatory to improve the transparency in price formation and margins along the value chain. On 7 January 2026, together with the Cypriot Presidency, the Commission convened an extraordinary meeting of EU ministers of agriculture to discuss the situation following the farmers protest [1] . The outcome document lays out several concrete actions. The Commission recognises the strategic importance of agriculture by ensuring its continued support from the EU budget, with a budget of EUR 300 billion dedicated exclusively to farming, while providing Member States with the possibility to use additional resources to top up this secured allocation from non-ringfenced National and Regional Partnership funds [2] . To ensure affordability and availability of fertilisers, the Commission has adopted the temporary suspension of Most Favoured Nation tariffs, lowering of the mark-up for Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism from 30% to 1% and announced an Action Plan on Fertilisers for more medium-term solutions. The Commission also announced a ‘health check’ of the agricultural markets to identify their key challenges as well as opportunities for their further development. Simplification is a key objective of this Commission mandate. The Commission presented the Omnibus III proposal on the common agricultural policy with potential cost savings of up to EUR 1.6 billion annually for farmers [3] , which is in force since December 2025. Further measures have been proposed for the organic legislation [4] and in the Food and Feed Omnibus [5] . An implementation dialogue on the challenges of implementing environmental legislation was held on 18 February 2026 and feed reflections on possible solutions to the challenges identified. The Commission is pursuing a stronger alignment of standards for products imported into the EU. It has established the principle that the most hazardous pesticides are not allowed back to the EU, which has been already deployed in the case of three active substances, carbendazim, benomyl and thiophanate-methyl, and analysis is under way to inform future cases. The Commission has also announced reinforced import controls. The number of audits carried out on non-EU countries are increased by 50%, and those carried out on EU Border Control Posts are increased by 33% in 2026-27. [1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/read_26_50. [2] This includes the ringfenced allocation of EUR 293.7 billion and the Unity Safety Net of EUR 6.3 billion (both in the NRPP proposal). Additionally, the President of the Commission proposed in letters to the co-legislators sent on 09.11.2025 and 06.01.2026 a rural target introduced on the non-ringfenced budget equivalent to EUR 48,7 billion and the use of a frontloading amount of EUR 45 billion that can be immediately mobilised to support farmers from the amount that would normally be available for the midterm review. [3] Regulation (EU) 2025/2649 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2025 amending Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 as regards the conditionality system, types of intervention in the form of direct payment, types of intervention in certain sectors and rural development and annual performance reports and Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 as regards suspensions of payments, annual performance clearance and controls and penalties — https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202502649&qid=1767605831627. [4] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/media/news/organic-rulebook-fit-future-2025-12-17_en. [5] https://food.ec.europa.eu/horizontal-topics/simplification-legislation_en.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
- 2026-04-14 “E-000558/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission This measure was proposed in order to stimulate generational renewal in agriculture which is central to the future of farming and Europe’s long term food security. Agriculture has one of the oldest workforces in Europe, with more farmers over 65 than under 40 years 1 , creating the need for urgent action. The European Parliament 2 also identified this as a priority issue to be addressed. Delayed retirement of farm managers has an impact on succession planning and modernisation of the sector. The Commission proposed to encourage a transition for older farmers, by requiring Member States to gradually exclude from Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) degressive area-based income support (DABIS) by 2032 farmers who have reached a pension age under national legislation and who receive a retirement pension 3 . But this applies only to DABIS and not to other forms of support under the new CAP. These requirements would apply equally in all Member States. The Commission encourages Member States to ensure proper, fair and reliable pension schemes within their social protection systems. Beneficiaries of the simplified payment for small farmers would not be affected by the proposed provision. The Commission has no data on the number of farmers that receive a retirement pension. Given the strong demand for land and the support for a new generation of farmers through the CAP, it is the Commission view that would create opportunities for new and young farmers introducing a new dynamism in the sector. 1 Analytical Brief N°10: Young farmers in EU agriculture : https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/2789cbe3-01dd-41ca-bacdf96fc3a014ce_en?filename=analytical-brief-10-youngfarmers_en.pdf?pk_source=newsletter&pk_medium=link&pk_campaign=analytical%20brief%2010. 2 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0376_EN.html - Generational renewal in the EU farms of the future - 19 October 2023. 3 CAP Proposal (COM(2025) 560 final), Art. 6(6).”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-04-13 “P-001116/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has been working on marketing standards for cider for many years. In 2023, a Report 1 presented a situation in which all kinds of products identified as ciders co-exist on the EU market leading to confusion for consumers and unfair competition among producers, and an impact assessment 2 proposed options. Since 2024, the Commission has had several exchanges both in expert groups and on a bilateral basis on different proposals. From those exchanges emerged a clear will from the majority of Member States and of representatives of the sector to lay down a marketing standard for cider. On 5 February 2026, the Commission presented to the expert group a non-paper outlining an approach consisting in the definition of three categories (high, medium and low juice content) covering all ciders on the market in respect of the EU diversity, along with a few optional reserved terms aimed to valorise the high quality ciders. A large majority of Member States and representatives of the sector supported that approach. On that basis, the Commission will pursue discussions with all Member States to further explore options that can benefit the EU cider sector as a whole. While the proposal in the non-paper is not yet final and remains open to further discussion, the proposed standard would not apply to EU exports and would not require any reformulation of products, although some of them will have to be labelled in such a way as to inform consumers more accurately about the type of product they purchase. 1 https://eurlex.europa.eu/search.html?scope=EURLEX&text=COM%282023%29200&lang=en&type=quick&qid=1774271 284377. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/NL/ALL/?uri=CELEX:52023SC0097.”
EU framework for voluntary quality and sustainability terms in food marketing
- 2026-04-10 “E-000569/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Grapevine Flavescence dorée phytoplasma (FD) is a Union quarantine pest 1 . Its main vector, Scaphoideus titanus, while not listed as such, is recognised as the main driver of FD spread in vineyards. Research and Innovation on FD and its vector can be supported under Horizon Europe, in particular Cluster 6 ‘Food, Bioeconomy, Natural Resources, Agriculture and Environment’, with dedicated opportunities in the Work Programme 2026-2027 2 . Under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 3 , Member States may support EIP-AGRI Operational Group (European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability) projects, financed through CAP Strategic Plans (2023-2027), to develop practice-oriented innovative solutions across a wide range of agricultural challenges. The Commissions has allocated around EUR 200 million in recent years for plant-healthrelated research and innovation under Horizon Europe. While no ongoing project focuses on FD and its vector, projects funded under the previous Framework programme for Research & Innovation – Horizon 2020 4 have addressed FD specifically, including VITISENS 5 (rapid in-field FD detection), TROPICSAFE 6 (diagnostic tools and resistance-related knowledge for grapevine yellows, including FD), and WINETWORK 7 (collection and sharing of scientific and practical knowledge). Several EIP-AGRI Operational Groups have directly targeted FD and S. titanus, such as RESISTO.FD 8 , FLAV.I.A 9 , MIDIFENDO 10 , Vacuum Bug 11 , FD.STOP 12 , GO Vite 13 , delivering improved detection and monitoring methods, decision‑support tools and integrated management strategies for vineyards. 1 Regulation (EU) 2019/2072 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/2072/oj. 2 European Commission Decision C(2025) 8493 of 11 December 2025: https://research-andinnovation.ec.europa.eu/document/download/44106caa-ed7a-42bf-ae57-aaab91778602_en. 3 Article 77, Regulation (EU) 2021/2115. 4 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-2020_en. 5 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/262032. 6 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/727459. 7 https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/652601. 8 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/projects/resistofd-control-and-management-flavescence-doree-traditionalstrategies-resistant_en. 9 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/projects/flavia-control-flavescence-doree-means-artificial-intelligence_en. 10 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/projects/midifendouse-microorganisms-activating-grapevine-defensestowards-flavescence-doree-attack_en. 11 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/projects/vacuum-bug-development-mechanical-process-adapted-vinescontributes-decrease-number-leaf_en. 12 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/projects/fdstop-creation-networks-virtuous-and-economically-sustainablemanagement-flavescence_en. 13 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/projects/innovative-strategies-sustainable-management-grapeviveyellows-govite_en.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-04-10 “P-000639/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) control framework under Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 1 ensures proper financial management and compliance with EU rules and relies on strong governance. The Commission acknowledges the complex issues faced by farms in cross-border or enclave areas. Under shared management, EU countries play a key role in implementing measures for territorial challenges, including the needs of cross-border or enclave areas when designing or amending their CAP Strategic Plans The Commission works closely with EU countries to address weaknesses in the governance systems. Under the Cohesion Policy, Interreg programmes support improved governance in cross-border areas. In particular, the Spain–France–Andorra programme (POCTEFA) finances the development of integrated territorial strategies in the area of Llivia and Cerdanya, which reinforce local institutional capacity to address cross-border administrative and legal obstacles. With the Commission proposal for the next financial framework, Member States will work on the basis of joint programming across policy areas falling under National and Regional Partnership Plans which will allow for greater synergies. 2. Under shared management, the implementation of the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) is the responsibility of the Member States. Therefore, based on Regulation (EU) No 2021/2116, Member States have the flexibility to implement the different elements of IACS to best fit their needs. In line with the principle of sincere cooperation 2 , Member States shall take the measures required for the proper establishment and operation of IACS, and, when requested by another Member State, shall give the mutual assistance needed. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj/eng. 2 Art. 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-03-24 “P-000443/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. Under the Common Agriculture Policy (CAP), through the 2023-2027 CAP Strategic Plan (CSP), Portugal has programmed support for the restoration of agricultural and forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events amounting to EUR 23.6 million of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) available for farmers and forest owners. In addition, following the recent Omnibus simplification, Member States can mobilise CSP funding for crisis payments that compensate for production losses due to such events. Furthermore, following a request from the Portuguese authorities to mobilise the agricultural reserve to support the agricultural sector affected by the storm, the Commission will examine the possibility to adopt exceptional measures under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 1 . 2. Restoration support provided for in the Portuguese CSP can already be implemented by national authorities. In order to make use of the possibility to provide crisis payments to farmers, Portugal would need to submit a CSP amendment request to the Commission. However, expenditure would be eligible as from the occurrence of the catastrophic event. National authorities may also grant, under certain conditions, support to farmers in line with EU State aid rules 2 . 3. Under the CSP, Member States already may combine support for risk management tools with crisis and restoration measures, ensuring complementarity between ex ante and ex post support. Increasing the uptake of risk management tools is essential to strengthen resilience at the farm level, and ex post support should be limited to crisis situations. The Commission remains ready to work closely with Portugal to make full use of the existing framework. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj/eng. 2 Without prior notification to the Commission under the Commission Regulation (EU) 2022/2472 of 14 December 2022 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 327, 21.12.2022, p. 1), or following a notification to the Commission under the Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas (OJ C 485, 21.12.2022, p. 1).”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-03-23 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 23.3.2026 Written question On 29 January 2026 the Commission received an official communication from the Tunisian authorities requesting a revision of the Protocol on agriculture of the Association Agreement with Tunisia. However, the Commission does not envisage additional trade concessions for agricultural products originating in Tunisia including olive oil. The Commission recognises the importance of a high level of protection of human health and the environment in the Vision for Agriculture and Food [1] . Food imported from third countries and food produced in the EU must comply with very strict sanitary requirements. The Commission committed to a stronger alignment of production standards applied to imported products and a strengthening of import controls [2] . The Commission launched an impact assessment [3] with a view to strengthening alignment of the EU's production standards on most hazardous pesticides with requirements applicable to imported products. The origin of extra virgin and virgin olive oils must be labelled pursuant to Article 8 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104 [4] . In particular, for such oils it is mandatory to inform consumers if the product comes from one of the Member States or from a third country, or if it is a mix of EU and non-EU oils. The inward processing regime does not affect this mandatory labelling. [1] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/overview-vision-agriculture-food/vision-agriculture-and-food_en. [2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2979. [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_25_2809. [4] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2104&qid=1769620624009.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU · EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports
- 2026-03-23 “E-000270/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission On 29 January 2026 the Commission received an official communication from the Tunisian authorities requesting a revision of the Protocol on agriculture of the Association Agreement with Tunisia. However, the Commission does not envisage additional trade concessions for agricultural products originating in Tunisia including olive oil. A recent special report of the European Court of Auditors 1 concludes that the EU framework system for olive oil controls is comprehensive but can be further improved. Following its recommendation, the Commission is engaging experts and national administrations to clarify certain rules and provide guidance on traceability checks of olive oil. The origin of extra virgin and virgin olive oils must be labelled pursuant to Article 8 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104 2 . In particular, for such oils it is mandatory to inform consumers if the product comes from one of the Member States or from a third country, or if it is a mix of EU and non-EU oils. The inward processing regime does not affect this mandatory labelling. 1 https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/publications/SR-2026-01. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32022R2104&qid=1769620624009.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2026-03-23 “E-000329/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The provisions of the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement (EMPA) will not modify the current situation with regard to the use of the term ‘Feta’ within the territory of the European Union but will only regulate the use of the term ‘Feta’ within the Mercosur countries. There is then no ‘exemption regime’ with regard to the ‘Feta’ within the EU but only a phasing out period of 7 years for the use of the term ‘Feta’ in the territory of Argentina, Brazil and Uruguay (under specific conditions also to avoid any misleading of consumers) after which the term ‘Feta’ will be fully protected.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU · Trade relations with Mercosur
- 2026-03-23 “Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 23.3.2026 Written question On 29 January 2026 the Commission received an official communication from the Tunisian authorities requesting a revision of the Protocol on agriculture of the Association Agreement with Tunisia . However, the Commission does not envisage additional trade concessions for agricultural products originating in Tunisia including olive oil . The Commission recognises the importance of a high level of protection of human health and the environment in the Vision for Agriculture and Food [1] . Food imported from third countries and food produced in the EU must comply with very strict sanitary requirements. The Commission committed to a stronger alignment of production standards applied to imported products and a strengthening of import controls [2] . The Commission launched an impact assessment with a view to strengthening alignment of the EU’s production standards on most hazardous pesticides with requirements applicable to imported products [3] . Finally, a task force [4] has recently been created to ensure imports meet EU standards, in particular on food and feed safety, pesticide residues and to coordinate monitoring of specific imported products. [1] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/overview-vision-agriculture-food/vision-agriculture-and-food_en. [2] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_2979. [3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/mex_25_2809. [4] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_207.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2026-03-19 “E-000440/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The EU-India Free Trade Agreement (FTA) represents an excellent achievement for the EU agri-food sector. It will remove or reduce often prohibitive tariffs on EU exports of agri-food products, creating huge new market opportunities for the EU, notably as regards table olives and olive oils. India will fully remove duties on table olives either at entry into force or after a transition period of seven years depending on the specific tariff line. Conversely, the EU will eliminate tariffs either at entry into force or over a period of up to five years depending on the specific tariff line. Olives are not a native crop in India and India’s production of olives is very limited. 2. The Commission is not aware of the actions taken by the Greek Government and invites the Honourable Member of Parliament to contact the relevant national authorities.”
Free trade agreements (FTAs) · Export of EU agri-food products
- 2026-03-19 “P-000663/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement 1 and the Interim Trade Agreement 2 will provide comprehensive protection of 344 EU geographical indications and will thus significantly improve the position for EU producers. The timely application of the agreements is the best and only insurance policy against abuse of EU geographical indications in Argentina and Mercosur in general. If the EU considers that Argentina failed to comply with obligations under the EU-Mercosur Partnership Agreement and the Interim Trade Agreement regarding protection of EU geographical indications, it will be able to resort to the dispute settlement mechanism established by the Dispute Settlement Chapter of these agreements. The Commission will ensure that the relevant provisions on geographical indications are effectively applied and respected and will not hesitate to take legal action. The Commission is further assessing all the implications of the recently announced US– Argentina agreement for EU trade interests, in constructive cooperation with the Argentinian authorities. 1 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12450-2025-INIT/en/pdf. 2 https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-12419-2025-INIT/en/pdf.”
Export of EU agri-food products · Trade relations with Mercosur
- 2026-03-19 “E-000436/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) investigation referred to by the Honourable Member is still on-going and the EPPO has not taken yet a decision about bringing the case before a competent national criminal court. As mentioned by the EPPO in its press release of 20 May 2025 related to this investigation: ‘All persons concerned are presumed innocent until proven guilty in the competent Greek courts of law’ 1 . 2. EU law requires paying agencies to respect specific accreditation criteria 2 in order to implement the Common Agricultural Policy. Among these criteria, the paying agency needs to respect specific human-resource standards and risk assessment standards, including measures to identify and manage fraud and any other illegal activity affecting the financial interests of the EU. The accreditation of the Greek paying agency is currently under probation and the Commission is specifically addressing the issues related to the compliance with the accreditation criteria under the on-going action plan presented by the Greek authorities. 1 https://www.eppo.europa.eu/en/media/news/greece-eppo-probes-opekepe-officials-over-alleged-organisedagricultural-subsidy-fraud. 2 Annex I of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/127: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2022/127/oj/eng.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget · Rule of law and democracy in the EU (political compass)
- 2026-03-13 “E-000159/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission’s legislative proposals for a Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2028-2034 promote an integrated approach to the development of rural areas. Moreover, the Commission suggested setting a ‘rural target’ of at least 10% of the resources of each National and Regional Partnership (NRP) Plan on top of amounts earmarked for the Common Agricultural Policy to support rural development, including the provision of social services which benefit women. As announced in the Vision for Agriculture and Food, the Commission will soon launch a platform for Women in Farming to attract more women to the sector. 2. Article 7 of the NRP 1 Plan proposal defines the applicable horizontal principles, such as the principle of non-discrimination and gender equality. Article 56 of the proposal requires the monitoring committee, inter alia, to ensure the application of the principle of gender equality. The proposal for a Budget tracking and Performance Regulation 2 introduces the single expenditure tracking and performance framework to measure the budget’s contribution to gender equality more accurately. This is expected to contribute to fostering gender equality including in farming and in rural areas. 3. The obligation for more targeted support for women under the proposal establishing the conditions for the implementation of the Union support to the Common Agriculture Policy for the period from 2028 to 2034 3 , set out in Article 6, together with the provisions on farm relief services in Article 17, and complemented by the NRP Plan proposal, provide a strong framework for advancing gender equality including in farming and rural areas and steering Member States in taking tailored actions. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A52025PC0565&qid=1770404542141. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:bb24b1ec-62fc-11f0-bf4e01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_4&format=PDF. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025PC0560.”
Gender roles, equality and inclusion · Agricultural funding
- 2026-03-12 “E-000306/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. One of the key principles of LEADER 1 approach is the local partnerships where the local action groups design the strategies and implement the operations. The responsibility for project selection and its assessment lies with the Member State and in particular with the LEADER local action group in the area, in line with their local development strategy, and the priorities defined by the local communities therein. The project selection criteria are defined in the strategy and contain not only economic but also social and environmental criteria. The Managing Authority (regional or national) may also set the eligibility conditions. The bottomup approach and local decision-making are a defining characteristic of LEADER and contributes to its success. The Commission is not involved in the project selection. 2. LEADER is implemented under shared management. The Commission does not evaluate each individual project before selection or assess its impact after the completion and does not collect such information on individual projects. Evaluations are done at the level of local development strategies and programmes. The Commission evaluates the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) instruments including LEADER, at the EU level. 3. LEADER can finance a broad range of actions for local development in line with the strategies developed by local communities in a participative manner. Projects of local recreational value are not excluded from eligibility at the EU level. Typically, LEADER provides a grant for investment but does not continue subsiding the operations, not least due to its limited budgets. 1 https://eu-cap-network.ec.europa.eu/networking/leader_en.”
Cohesion and rural funding
- 2026-03-12 “E-000286/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission notes that the EU beef market has experienced changes in production and trade dynamics in recent years. The latest data available 1 show that cattle numbers and beef production have declined compared to previous years, while exports decreased and imports increased. The self-sufficiency rate remains strong, and the trade balance positive both in volume and value. Firm internal demand has resulted in favourable conditions for producers, with prices reaching historically high levels and margins improving. In its Vision for Agriculture and Food 2 , the Commission recognises the vital role of livestock in EU agriculture, competitiveness and cohesion. To address identified challenges, the Commission will adopt a Livestock Strategy by June 2026 to guide and establish a long-term framework for an EU livestock sector that is resilient to crises, globally competitive, and sustainable across economic, social, and environmental dimensions, in full respect of Europe's territorial diversity. As part of its proposals for the future CAP post-2027, the Commission proposed to significantly increase coupled income support from current 13% + 2% to 20% + 5%, in order to give Member States an opportunity to support sectors such as livestock, depending on their needs. Regarding generational renewal, the Commission notes that Member States are required to allocate at least EUR 1.14 billion to attract and support young farmers in 2026, including young cattle breeders. This will be achieved through various forms of aid, such as area support, investment aid, and support for setting up new operations, helping to ensure the future sustainability of the sector. 1 Agri-food data portal : https://agridata.ec.europa.eu/extensions/DataPortal/beef.html. 2 COM/2025/75 final.”
Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-03-11 “E-000233/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Under the national Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Strategic Plans, beekeepers can benefit from specific apiculture support with an annual EU budget of EUR 60 million, which is at least doubled with national co-financing to support measures aimed at strengthening the sector in response to challenges including climate change. These include training and advisory services to adopt climate resilient practices, investments and actions to prevent damage caused by adverse weather and to adapt to climate change, restocking of beehives and bee breeding as well as cooperation for research. Under the Cypriot CAP Strategic Plan 2023-2027 1 , over EUR 1.69 million (public expenditure) have been earmarked to support beekeepers through targeted interventions for apiculture. In addition, rural development interventions in the plan can also support farmers, including beekeepers, for investments to mitigate the impact of events or restore productive potential from natural disasters. To enhance transparency and address honey adulteration, the Commission has strengthened official controls through coordinated actions, reinforced import requirements (including authenticity attestations 2 and listing of authorised establishments 3 ), and enhanced traceability rules. Following the 2024 revision of the Honey Directive 4 , the Commission will adopt – by 14 June 2028 – implementing acts laying down analytical methods to detect honey adulteration, and – by 14 June 2029 – delegated acts on methods and criteria to determine the place where honey has been harvested and Union-wide traceability requirements. All these measures aim to create fair conditions for EU producers. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/cap-my-country/cap-strategic-plans/cyprus_en. 2 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/36 of 11 January 2022 amending Annex III to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/2235 as regards model certificates for the entry into the Union of consignments of certain live aquatic animals and products of animal origin. C/2022/18 OJ L 8, 13.1.2022, p. 36–91 ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/36/oj. 3 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2023/2652 of 15 September 2023 amending and correcting Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2292. OJ L, 2023/2652, 28.11.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2023/2652/oj. 4 Directive (EU) 2024/1438 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 May 2024 amending Council Directives 2001/110/EC relating to honey, OJ L, 2024/1438, 24.5.202: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1438/oj/eng.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU · Agricultural funding
- 2026-03-11 “E-000022/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Coupled income support addresses structural difficulties that certain targeted sectors face; it does not address income losses due to severe meteorological events. Nevertheless, force majeure events may exempt a producer from certain legal consequences that would otherwise occur in an instance of non-compliance with coupled income support rules. For example, in accordance with Articles 59, 84 and 88 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 1 , no penalties are to be imposed and the beneficiary is to retain the right to receive common agricultural policy support where the non-compliance is due to force majeure or exceptional circumstances in accordance with Article 3 of the same Regulation. This is relevant in cases such as a severe natural disaster or severe meteorological event gravely affecting the holding. Whereas the application of force majeure is the responsibility of Member States, Member States should take the decision to apply force majeure based on relevant evidence and in light of Union agricultural law. Force majeure is an exception to the general rule of strict respect of obligations. Normally applied on a case-by-case basis, in cases of severe meteorological events that gravely affect a well-determined area, Member States may consider that a whole area is concerned, where it is clear that the farmers in the area are affected by an abnormal event whose consequences could not be prevented with all due care. Member States need, however, to determine the area at stake and the population affected by the event, in a manner that reasonably allows the presumption that the conditions of force majeure are individually met by the farmers concerned 2 . 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj/eng. 2 Communication from the Commission to the Council on force majeure and exceptional circumstances in Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy, COM(2024) 225 final - https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52024DC0225.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-03-10 “P-000188/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Under the shared management of the Common Agricultural Policy, it is for each Member State to ensure that support is correctly delivered to eligible beneficiaries and linked to the supported activity – in this specific case an agricultural activity. In that context, the Member States must, in accordance with Article 62 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 1 , take effective and proportionate measures in reaction to the circumvention of Union law requirements for payments under the CAP by artificially created conditions. The Commission became aware of the content of the Joint Ministerial Decision on the allocation of eligible pasture areas referred to by the Honourable Member after its publication and will examine its impact as part of its usual work on the functioning of the Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS). With reference to the way the above-mentioned Joint Ministerial Decision is going to be implemented by Greece, the Commission obtains assurance on the Member States’ compliance with Union law and on whether the Member States management and control systems effectively protect the Union financial interests through the audit work of the national Certification Bodies and its own risk-based audits. In case of non-compliances, the Commission can open a conformity procedure with the aim of determining a financial risk to the Union budget. The Commission is specifically addressing the issues concerning agricultural activity and artificial conditions under its current audit work and under the ongoing action plan presented by the Greek authorities for the IACS. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-03-02 “E-000272/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission conducts audits on the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) expenditure to gain assurance that the management and control system put in place by the Member State effectively protects the EU financial interests and that the expenditure complies with EU rules. Audits verify if the system put in place by the Member State ensures that CAP support is paid only for eligible animals that fulfil all eligibility conditions, including animal identification and registration, where applicable. The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), in its investigative role, is the EU’s independent body responsible for investigating matters related to fraud, corruption, and other offences affecting the EU’s financial interests. The European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) is the EU independent body responsible for investigating, prosecuting, and bringing to judgment criminal offences affecting the EU’s financial interests. Neither OLAF nor the EPPO have a supervisory or assistance role. Conversely, where Commission services become aware of issues that may fall within the competence of OLAF or the EPPO, the relevant information is transmitted to them without any delay. While the Commission has mechanisms to address non-compliances with the rules, the management of animal disease outbreaks, under the harmonised legal frameworks provided by the Animal Health Law 1 and the Official Controls Regulation 2 , and implementation of agricultural aid controls, remain primarily the responsibility of Member States. 1 Regulation (EU) 2016/429 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2016 on transmissible animal diseases and amending and repealing certain acts in the area of animal health (‘Animal Health Law’) OJ L 84, 31.3.2016, pp. 1–208. 2 Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2017 on official controls and other official activities performed to ensure the application of food and feed law, rules on animal health and welfare, plant health and plant protection products, amending Regulations (EC) No 999/2001, (EC) No 396/2005, (EC) No 1069/2009, (EC) No 1107/2009, (EU) No 1151/2012, (EU) No 652/2014, (EU) 2016/429 and (EU) 2016/2031 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Regulations (EC) No 1/2005 and (EC) No 1099/2009 and Council Directives 98/58/EC, 1999/74/EC, 2007/43/EC, 2008/119/EC and 2008/120/EC, and repealing Regulations (EC) No 854/2004 and (EC) No 882/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council, Council Directives 89/608/EEC, 89/662/EEC, 90/425/EEC, 91/496/EEC, 96/23/EC, 96/93/EC and 97/78/EC and Council Decision 92/438/EEC (Official Controls Regulation) (Text with EEA relevance) OJ L 95, 7.4.2017, pp. 1–142.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-02-24 “P-000408/2026 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The PoliRural was a Horizon 2020 funded project implemented between June 2019 and September 2022. It involved 38 beneficiary participants and aimed to support rural policy development. The Club of Ossiach (CoO) participated as beneficiary in accordance with the Horizon 2020 rules. During the grant preparation process, CoO fulfilled all applicable requirements and was subject to the same checks as other consortium members, including the verification of its legal existence and the submission of statutory documents. CoO contributed to several activities, including actions related to envisioning attractive rural areas, capacity building, communication and dissemination, etc. It participated in meetings and complied with reporting obligations. No performance-related issues were identified during project implementation. CoO received a total EU contribution of EUR 121 329,57. Records confirm that CoO’s activities during the project were related to rural development. Subsequent changes in the use of its internet domain in August 2024 are no relevant for the project. The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) conducts investigations where there are sufficient indications of fraud, corruption or other illegal activities affecting the EU’s financial interests. Decisions on opening investigations and on cooperation with national authorities fall within OLAF’s competence. The project was implemented under a Horizon 2020 grant agreement, which defines the rights and obligations of beneficiaries. At present, the Commission has no evidence that the CoO breached the grant agreement or misused EU funds. Consequently, no recovery procedure has been initiated.”
Accounting and auditing of EU budget · EU research funding
- 2026-02-16 “E-004388/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission closely monitors ethanol imports into the EU, particularly non-fuel imports from Pakistan, for which preferential treatment was removed on 21 June 2025. Products that were on their way to the EU on that date were still eligible to preferential treatment when entering the EU; this was the case for some imports in July and August 2025. It should be noted that imports of non-fuel ethanol from Pakistan can still occur if the Most Favoured Nation duties are paid, which actually happened these last four months based on the preliminary customs data available 1 . According to this data, between July and October 2025 non-fuel imports from Pakistan decreased by around 37% compared to the same period of 2024. Concerning fuel ethanol imports from Pakistan, which are not subject to safeguard measures, they are also currently lower than average. Customs authorities use risk criteria set at EU and national level to establish risk indicators and create risk profiles used to target their customs controls. Classification and origin of goods are among such risk criteria used by customs authorities to target controls on goods which are prone to customs duties circumvention, especially when goods are subject to a change in the rate of customs duties or to other trade measures. On 1 December 2025 the co-legislators reached a political agreement 2 on the new Generalised Scheme of Preferences rules that will apply from 2027 until 2036. The European Parliament and the Council did not alter the provisions in Article 30 as they considered that this instrument can properly address serious market disturbance in the agricultural sector. 1 Source: DG TAXUD Surveillance. 2 https://gsphub.eu/about-gsp/gsp-review.”
EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports · Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2026-02-12 “E-004602/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. The Commission recognises the importance of protecting geographical indications (GI), such as the ‘Piadina Romagnola PGI’, within its policy framework for agriculture and trade. Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 1 provides strengthened protection instruments for GIs within the internal market. The term ‘Piadina’, as a single term, is not protected under this Regulation. The competent authority in the Member State where a potentially infringing product is produced or marketed must take the necessary actions to stop unlawful use. The Commission can assist the Piadina Romagnola Consortium and other consortia by providing guidance on applying EU GI Regulations and facilitating cooperation among stakeholders to resolve disputes effectively. It can also explore ways to help consortia raise awareness about the importance of GIs and their role in preserving cultural heritage and promoting economic development. 2. To address the issue of homonymous trade mark registrations in third countries, the Commission engages with international partners to promote the recognition and protection of EU GIs. This includes the full use of existing bilateral trade agreements and multilateral frameworks, such as the Word Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 2 . This will involve enhanced monitoring, formal consultations, technical exchanges with trading partners in the framework of trade committees, enforcement actions and dispute settlement provisions. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1143/oj/eng. 2 https://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/treaties/details/231.”
EU framework for voluntary quality and sustainability terms in food marketing
- 2026-01-27 “E-004424/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) Strategics Plans (CSPs) 1 provide for interventions to address the specificities of the Member States concerned. The Greek CSP 2 was approved based on the identified needs and responds to the specifics of the Greek farmers. Proposals for the future CAP will allow Greece to design tailored measures to support certain sectors through reinforced instruments of coupled income support and incentives. The Commission has made clear that it is not compromising on its EU health and sanitary standards under trade negotiations. Such standards need to be fulfilled by all imported products, regardless of whether they enter the EU market under World Trade Organization (WTO) terms or under the terms of a bilateral agreement. In some cases, higher sustainability standards in third countries are applicable on imported products either through specific tariff conditionalities stipulated under trade agreements or via ad-hoc autonomous legislation. The Vision for Agriculture and Food makes a clear commitment to promoting fair competition, in line with international rules. The Commission will work towards raising global production standards in international standard-setting bodies in areas such as plant protection products and animal welfare, and it will intensify its economic diplomacy outreach to promote EU products. The Vision also stipulates that the Union will ensure domestically that ambitious EU standards do not lead to economic, environmental and social leakages, and that the European agri-food sector is not put at a competitive disadvantage without corresponding reciprocity. The work has started on delivering greater alignment in terms of production standards and strengthening EU import controls. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/cap-my-country/cap-strategic-plans_en. 2 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap-2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/.”
Agriculture (green) · Trade relations with Mercosur
- 2026-01-27 “E-004298/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Member States have the obligation to set up an Integrated Administration and Control system (IACS) as set out in Articles 65 and 66 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 1 and further detailed in Regulation (EU) 2022/1172 2 and Regulation (EU) 2022/1173 3 . The procedures on data sharing are established in Regulation (EU) 2022/1475 4 . Upon request of Member States, the Commission may provide technical support concerning digitalisation of control procedures and data sharing. Technical assistance to the Common Agricultural Policy Strategic Plan can be used as provided for in Articles 94 and 125 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 5 for that purpose. Greece is implementing an accreditation action plan set to be finalised by 12 March 2026 and an IACS action plan has to be finalised by the end of 2026. The Commission monitors on a regular basis the progress of the implementation of both action plans. In case of failure to comply with the proposed actions, including the quarterly reporting, the Commission may adopt implementing acts suspending the monthly or the interim payments as provided in Article 42(2) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116. However, this should not have an impact on the payments to farmers. The implementation of the action plans does not exclude the possibility of future audits aimed at ensuring that the control systems are functioning effectively and are aligned with the expected standards. 1 Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj. 2 Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/1172 of 4 May 2022 supplementing Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the integrated administration and control system in the common agricultural policy and the application and calculation of administrative penalties for conditionality, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2022/1172/oj. 3 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1173 of 31 May 2022 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to the integrated administration and control system in the common agricultural policy, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1173/oj. 4 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1475 of 6 September 2022 laying down detailed rules for implementation of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the evaluation of the CAP Strategic Plans and the provision of information for monitoring and evaluation, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1475/oj. 5 Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 2 December 2021 establishing rules on support for strategic plans to be drawn up by Member States under the common agricultural policy (CAP Strategic Plans) and financed by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Regulations (EU) No 1305/2013 and (EU) No 1307/2013, http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2115/oj.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-01-21 “E-004396/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission A free trade agreement with India would be an important element to strengthen the EU's trade relations with a key partner. The sensitivity of the EU sugar sector has long been recognised. In 2019, the High-Level Group (HLG) on Sugar recommended that sugar continue to be treated as a sensitive product in trade negotiations with major sugar-producing countries, in order to safeguard the competitiveness and resilience of the EU sugar sector. In 2023, the Commission conducted a ‘Trade Sustainability Impact Assessment (SIA)’, including a dedicated case study to analyse the impact of a future EU-INDIA Free Trade Agreement (FTA) on employment and respect for labour and environmental standards in agriculture, notably in the sugar sector. Moreover, the Commission updated in 2024 its study presenting the cumulative impact on the EU agricultural markets of a series of FTAs concluded or under negotiation between the EU and nine countries, including India 1 . The study emphasises the sensitivity of some products, such as sugar. EU sugar producers also expressed their serious concerns regarding the possible inclusion of sugar in the ongoing EU-India trade negotiations. Based on the conclusions and recommendations of the HLG on Sugar and the SIA, as well as the study on the cumulative impact, and the concerns raised by the sector, the Commission has given due care to the sensitivity of the sugar sector in line with its commitment to address the specific sensitivities of the EU sugar sector in all its FTA negotiations. 1 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_24_1001.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU · Free trade agreements (FTAs)
- 2026-01-19 “E-004290/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has not been made aware of specific issues related to the Evros silkworm farmers. The Commission monitors the payments made under the Common Agricultural Policy Strategic Plan (CSP) 1 . Amongst others, the CSP provides for coupled income support (CIS) for silkworms of EUR 321 195.00 per claim year. For claim years 2023 and 2024, the amounts of EUR 169 367.00 2 and EUR 161 862.50 3 were paid respectively as CIS for silkworm farmers. It is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure that payments are disbursed to the beneficiaries in full and within the payment deadlines as laid down by Union law 4 . Payments outside the deadlines lead to proportionate reductions from EU reimbursement to the Member States of up to 100%. The Commission does not have the competence to activate exceptional support measures or controls in areas affected by mismanagement or delays in payments. 1 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/egkrisi-2is-tropopoiisis-ss-kap/. 2 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/4i-synedriasi-epitropis-parakolouthisis-ss-kap-10-dekemvriou-2024-kavala/. 3 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/6i-synedriasi-epitropis-parakolouthisis-ss-kap-11-noemvriou-2025alexandroupoli/. 4 Article 38, Article 44 and Article 59 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 - http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-01-19 “E-004343/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Exceptional support under Article 219 of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 1 may be granted, at the request of the Member State concerned, to address market disturbances. No request to activate such provisions to support olive producers was submitted, to date, by the national authorities. The Commission stands ready to provide technical and administrative support upon request of the Member State. Specific support can be provided under Greece’s Strategic Plan 2023-2027 2 , amongst others for investments in irrigation and investments aiming at the restoration of agricultural potential following catastrophic events. It is up to the Managing Authority to allocate funding to such interventions. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/2024-11-08). 2 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap-2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/.”
EU policy on water management · Agricultural funding
- 2026-01-19 “E-004262/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The sales descriptions to be used for drinking milk are set out in Annex VII, Part IV, point III of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 1 . Food business operators can inform consumers on the use of , e.g., a ‘low and slow’ manufacturing process and its impact on the product under the condition that this information is not misleading, ambiguous or confusing for the consumer as to the characteristics of the food – in particular as to its nature, properties, composition or method of manufacture - and, where relevant, based on relevant scientific data (Articles 7 and 36 of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 2 ). In this respect, if milk producers intend to use a ‘low and slow’ milk label, they should specify on the label that ‘low and slow’ refer respectively to the lower pasteurisation temperature and the longer duration of pasteurisation, to avoid that the terms are misunderstood as referring to ‘low fat’ or another nutritional claim or as referring to specific environmental or sustainable characteristics. The EU promotion policy 3 offers possibilities for EU producers to promote their products in the Union and around the world. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2011/1169/oj/eng. 3 Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on information provision and promotion measures concerning agricultural products implemented in the internal market and in third countries and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 3/2008.”
EU framework for voluntary quality and sustainability terms in food marketing · Food labelling harmonisation at EU level
- 2026-01-19 “E-004411/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission As the Commission noted in its reply to written question E-001489/2025 1 , it is the responsibility of the Member States to ensure that payments are disbursed to the beneficiaries in full and within the payment deadlines as laid down by Union law 2 . Member States must ensure that the area and animal-based payments are made between 1 December and 30 June of the calendar year following the applications, after sufficient checks have been carried out by the national authorities. Payments outside the deadlines lead to proportionate reductions from EU contribution to Member States’ outlays of up to 100% 3 . This constitutes an incentive for Member States to pay farmers on time. The Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development is closely monitoring the execution of payments and is in contacts with the Greek authorities on a regular basis including during the monitoring committees 4 . The Commission does not give support, or advance payments to cover delays caused by administrative failures. Greece has benefited in the past from EU funding under the agricultural reserve to cover losses linked to natural disasters. In December 2023, the Commission allocated EUR 43 million emergency financial support for the agricultural sectors most impacted by wildfires and floodings, which affected Greece during August and September 2023 5 . Greece paid this amount to the beneficiaries almost in full by end May 2024. Moreover, under its Rural Development Programme, Greece is currently implementing measure 23 ‘Additional assistance to Member States affected by natural disasters’, for which EUR 142.8 million of Union financing was allocated. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/-ASW_EN.html. 2 Articles 38, 44 and 59 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 — http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/2116/oj. 3 Article 5(2) of Regulation (EU) 2022/127 — http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_del/2022/127/oj. 4 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/epitropi-parakolouthisis-sskap-2023-2027/synedriaseis-epitropiparakolouthisis-sskap-2023-2027/. 5 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2023/2820/oj.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2026-01-19 “E-004724/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission In 2018, the European Parliament and the Council agreed to list ‘Sea salt and other salts for food and feed’ in Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 1 and accordingly, since 1 January 2022 these products may be produced and labelled as organic under the conditions set out in that Regulation. Certain operators that are certified under Regulation (EU) 2018/848 have made the choice to produce and place on the EU market salts produced in accordance with Article 21(2) of that Regulation. In addition, certain Member States have established detailed national production rules covering the production of organic salts in accordance with the same provision. The Commission has adopted its proposal for a targeted amendment of Regulation (EU) 2018/848 and has not proposed the removal of ‘Sea salt and other salts for food and feed’ from Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 2 . Point 2.2.2(f)(i) of Part IV of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 3 related to the production of organic processed food allows for the use of iodine in organic salts provided that its use in food for normal consumption is ‘directly legally required’, in the meaning of being directly required by provisions of Union law or provisions of national law compatible with Union law, with the consequence that the food cannot be placed at all on the market as food for normal consumption if those minerals, vitamins, amino acids or micronutrients are not added. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2018/848/oj. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=COM%3A2025%3A780%3AFIN&qid=1765969819531. 3 Point 2.2.2 In the processing of food, the following products and substances may be used:[…] (f) minerals (trace elements included), vitamins, amino acids and micronutrients, provided that: (i) their use in food for normal consumption is ‘directly legally required’, in the meaning of being directly required by provisions of Union law or provisions of national law compatible with Union law, with the consequence that the food cannot be placed at all on the market as food for normal consumption if those minerals, vitamins, amino acids or micronutrients are not added.”
Food labelling harmonisation at EU level · EU policy on novel foods
- 2026-01-19 “E-004422/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), through its CAP Strategic Plans (CSPs) 1 provides for several tools to support farmers. The tools include direct payments to support income. To take preventive action and to build resilience, the Greek CSP 2 supports investments in farm modernisation and in the restoration of production potential, risk management tools, and sectoral interventions. In response to severe weather events, a new measure was introduced in the Rural Development Programmes to help farmers recover from damages. Greece has made use of this possibility (Measure 23) 3 . The Greek CSP allocates EUR 175 million per year to complementary redistributive income support for sustainability targeted at small and medium-sized farmers 4 . To strengthen farmers’ position in the value chain, the Greek CSP supports cooperation, innovation and training. The Greek CSP is based on the identified needs and responds to the specificities of Greek agriculture. At the request of Greece, funds may be reallocated or new interventions may be introduced subject to the Commission’s approval. The CAP allows a high degree of flexibility for use by Member States of different instruments to meet the needs of the diverse agriculture in the EU. Beyond the income support and rural development measures a specific scheme supports the agricultural sector in the Smaller Aegean Islands. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/cap-my-country/cap-strategic-plans_en. 2 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap-2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3242/oj/eng. 4 EUR 181 626 236,70 were paid for claim year 2023, EUR 170 million (provisional amount) were paid for claim year 2024 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/9i-grapti-diadikasia-epitropis-parakolouthisis-ss-kap/.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-01-15 “P-004414/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Member States have to develop integrated National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPP) to address their specific challenges while achieving the Fund’s objectives. This includes fostering the attractiveness of territories to support the right to stay, encompassing supporting strategies for the integrated development of urban and rural areas, generational renewal in farming, territorial services and infrastructure, and the creation of economic activities. The Common Agricultural Policy proposal contains instruments that contribute to maintaining the economic, demographic and territorial cohesion of rural areas. including in less favoured areas. In addition, the Commission President has sent a letter to the Parliament and Presidency of the Council suggesting a 10% rural target, to ensure continuity of investments in rural areas and to keep them viable and attractive. Furthermore, the formula in Annex 1 to the NRPP proposal, used to calculate national envelopes, factors in the ‘population at risk of poverty or social exclusion living in rural areas’, which is an important proxy to the elements referred to in the Honourable Member’s question. The partnership principle is central to the NRPPs. Additionally, the aforementioned letter provides for stronger provisions to ensure the meaningful involvement of regions throughout the design, implementation and evaluation phases, including an explicit right for them to directly exchange with the Commission when managing regional or territorial chapters. A ‘regional check’ would also require Member States to demonstrate how these authorities were involved, how representativeness was ensured, and how their contributions shaped the Plans, in line with the code of conduct on partnership.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2026-01-14 “E-004387/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The reviewed EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) is a balanced agreement. It allows the EU to continue supporting Ukraine in terms of trade opportunities while at the same time also addressing the sensitivities of EU farmers and stakeholders. The concessions given to Ukraine in this review are limited and, in many cases, far below the peaks of imports seen during the application of the autonomous trade measures in force between June 2022 and June 2025. Moreover, the Commission obtained further partial or full liberalisation of EU exports to Ukraine in several sectors of interest for European farmers, including products such as dairy or kiełbasas, so crucial for Poland. The reviewed DCFTA introduces a strong safeguard which can be activated in case imports as a result of the additional concessions would cause serious difficulties, either in the EU as a whole or on the market of one or several Member States. In addition, to address the concerns of EU producers and in line with Ukraine's EU accession process, Ukraine’s additional market access is contingent on its gradual alignment by the end of 2028 of its domestic legislation to important EU production standards in areas such as official controls, animal welfare, veterinary medicines, feed additives, and plant protection products.”
Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports · Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2026-01-13 “E-004376/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The EU has trade defence instruments at its disposal to address unfair trading practices and protect EU industries from unfair competition from imports. It currently applies more than 200 measures of which about two thirds concern imports from China, and which protect more than 600 000 jobs. Upon the reception of a valid complaint from an EU industry the Commission is obliged to launch an anti-dumping or anti-subsidy investigation to determine whether goods being imported into the EU are being sold at below the price in the producer country and, if so, how it affects the EU industry. In cases of a surge of imports, Member States may file a request for a safeguard investigation. The Commission imposes measures once an investigation has found that injurious dumping or subsidisation is taking place and it is in the EU interest to do so. Such measures can be subject to review and can be maintained for as long as necessary to ensure the protection of an industry from unfairly traded imports. Safeguard measures can also be reviewed and extended, but their maximum duration is 8 years. Outside of trade defence measures, various forms of support to agriculture and rural areas are available under the Common Agricultural Policy. These include support for investments and business development for farmers and rural businesses, and also support for cooperation, knowledge exchange and advisory services. Support for producer groups and producer organisations are also available for certain sectors, for example fruit and vegetables, thereby strengthening farmers’ position in the value chain. Regarding the broader trade relations with China, the Commission will continue to engage with China with a view to addressing imbalances and defending EU industry when necessary.”
Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports · Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2026-01-13 “E-004483/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has completed satisfactorily both the transposition check and conformity check for the unfair trading practices (UTP) Directive 1 in Austria. It has also published a report on the implementation of the UTP Directive in Member States 2 . Under the UTP Directive, the monitoring and enforcement of the rules are entrusted to national enforcement authorities. In Austria these are the ‘Fairness-Büro’ and the ‘Bundeswettbewerbsbehörde’. The Commission, together with Member States and their national competition authorities, pays close attention to behaviours risking impairing effective competition. EU competition rules, including their exceptions provided for by the Common Market Organisation (CMO) Regulation 3 for producer organisations, are enforced to maintain a level playing field, prevent abuses of dominance, and ensure that markets remain fair, dynamic and beneficial for consumers. To strengthen the position of farmers, the Commission has proposed in a targeted amendment to the CMO Regulation 4 , several measures, including mandatory written contracts and reinforced cooperation of farmers in producer organisations. To increase transparency concerning the transmission of remuneration for added value in the agri-food chain, the Commission has established an EU Agri-food chain observatory. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52024PC0576. 2 Implementing the prohibition of unfair trading practices to strengthen the position of farmers and operators in the agricultural and food supply chain – State of play, COM(2024)176 final. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/1308/oj/eng. 4 Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, (EU) 2021/2115 and (EU) 2021/2116 as regards the strengthening of the position of farmers in the food supply chain - COM(2024) 577 final.”
EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
- 2026-01-13 “E-004563/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the delays in the deployment of the IT tools necessary for the payment of applications financed with the contribution of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). It is important to keep in mind that the Member States alone are responsible for deploying these tools. It is also worth noting that these delays concern only payments for interventions not related to the agricultural area. There are no delays in payments for area-related interventions. As regards interventions not related to the agricultural area, the situation differs depending on the region and the tool chosen for processing the interventions. In its exchanges with the managing authorities, the Commission has stressed the importance of ensuring that the tools needed to pay the project developers become operational soon. During those exchanges, the managing authorities set out temporary solutions found in agreement with the Services and Payments Agency in order to be able to pay all or part of the amounts due. For example, several managing authorities of the outermost regions informed the Commission that they were processing and paying applications without using the management tool. We hope that these payment delays will be resolved in the short term thanks to these temporary solutions and once the development of the tools has been finalised. The Commission is aware of the issues and consequences and is closely monitoring the progress of the implementation of the tools through the regional monitoring committees and annual review meetings.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-01-13 “E-004429/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The 6 % proposed in the Strategy for Generational Renewal in Agriculture is an aspirational benchmark intended to double the current level of dedicated support for generational renewal. Its purpose is to urge Member States in prioritising young farmers support planned in the National and Regional Partnership (NRP) plans within their budgetary envelope and to promote coordinated action across policies and competences. The benchmark covers all Common Agricultural Policy expenditure contributing to generational renewal, including ring-fenced measures and other interventions that have a clear and demonstrable link to this objective, for example advisory schemes, knowledge-transfer actions or initiatives supporting succession. Member States will identify these measures in their NRP Plans. This requirement provides transparency on what each Member State counts towards the 6 % and ensures that budgetary choices can be assessed against the ambition to double current efforts. The Commission will oversee and guide the implementation of this target through the future steering mechanism, in particular common agricultural policy recommendations and approval process of NRP plans. This approach ensures that, even if aspirational, the benchmark acts as a concrete reference for national spending decisions and increases the likelihood that additional funding is effectively directed to young farmers.”
Agricultural funding
- 2026-01-13 “E-004617/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) identified part of the Union financing under the first and second call for applications under the 2014-2020 IPARD II programme in Albania as ineligible, based on its regular investigation procedure. Following its investigation, OLAF recommended the Commission to follow up its findings, as appropriate 1 . As of July 2023, the Commission interrupted the payment deadline for reimbursing Albania for any spending under the IPARD II programme and put on hold the entrustment for implementing any measure under the 2021-2027 IPARD III programme. These preventive measures, taken to protect the financial interests of the Union, continue to apply until further notice. A bilateral procedure between the Commission and the Albanian authorities is ongoing to ensure that appropriate remedial actions are put in place by the authorities for the proper implementation of IPARD support in Albania. The Commission is closely monitoring and supporting Albania’s progress in the fight against fraud and corruption in the context of the accession negotiations. This includes efforts to streamline and harmonise the corruption prevention framework, notably through the adoption of key legislation, and to ensure its effective implementation. The Commission is assessing these laws to ensure alignment with European standards on transparency. 1 The OLAF report 2023: Investigative activities - OLAF’s investigative performance in 2023 - Protecting EU Funds - International Investigations: https://ec.europa.eu/olaf-report/2023/investigative-activities/protecting-eufunds/international-investigations_en.html#serious-misuse-of-eu-pre-accession-agricultural-funds.”
EU enlargement
- 2025-12-23 “E-004323/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission emphasizes the ‘shared management’ principle in EU funding programs, where national Managing Authorities play a crucial role in design, implementation, monitoring, reporting, financial management, control, and evaluation of programs. In Rheinland-Pfalz, the Ministry of Economy, Transport, Agriculture and Viticulture acts as the Managing Authority, providing information on project selection, implementation, and funding. Selection criteria, as per Article 49 of Regulation (EU) No. 1305/2013 1 , were applied with input from a Monitoring Committee, ensuring fair applicant treatment and resource optimization aligned with EU rural development priorities. As per Article 111 of Regulation (EU) No. 1306/2013 2 , Members States must publish beneficiary names, payment amounts, and measure descriptions for transparency. European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) beneficiaries must follow information and communication guidelines in Annex III, Part I, of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014 3 , including displaying the Union emblem, referencing EAFRD support, and detailing projects. Since the project beneficiary the Honourable Member refers to was a regional public entity, additional rules may apply. The Managing Authority evaluates Rural Development Programme implementation to assess the EAFRD support's contribution to rural development objectives, with an ex-post evaluation due by 31 December 2026. For project specifics, please contact the Rheinland-Pfalz Rural Development Programme's Managing Authority 4 . 1 Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005. 2 Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the financing, management and monitoring of the common agricultural policy and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 352/78, (EC) No 165/94, (EC) No 2799/98, (EC) No 814/2000, (EC) No 1290/2005 and (EC) No 485/2008. 3 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 808/2014 of 17 July 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). 4 Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr, Landwirtschaft und Weinbau des Landes Rheinland-Pfalz (https://mwvlw.rlp.de/)”
Agricultural funding · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
- 2025-12-22 “E-004219/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. Across the EU-27, the permanent grassland area slightly increased between 2015 and 2023, resulting in a net increase of 2 million hectares (+4.1%) – see enclosed table. This trend reflects both land abandonment and re-pastoralisation in extensive zones, and conversion to annual crops or temporary pastures elsewhere. 2. In 2025, the Commission proposed to simplify the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), among others by enabling Member States to extend the period for classification of agricultural area as permanent grassland from five to seven years and by introducing more flexibility through the monitoring of the share of permanent grassland. This should prevent unnecessary ploughing, and give farmers more freedom in the management of production of feed on their farms, therefore benefiting biodiversity. 3. In areas facing a decline in the livestock herd, concerns emerge in relation to the permanent grassland maintenance. Therefore, the Commission has proposed an incentive-based approach for the CAP post 2027. Rather than a national requirement to maintain a certain share of permanent grassland, Member States may provide incentives, for example in the form of ‘coupled income support’ for grass and forage under environmental safeguards. Member States are also encouraged to design environmental and climate actions supporting extensive systems or supporting farmers in their transition to resilient production systems, including through transition lump-sum payments. This shift towards more targeted territorial grassland management aims to maintain grasslands’ role in EU climate and biodiversity goals.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Nature protection and restoration in the EU
- 2025-12-22 “E-004324/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. LEADER is implemented in accordance with the shared management approach between the Member State and the Commission. One of the key principles of LEADER approach is the local partnerships where strategies are designed, and operations are implemented by the local action groups. The responsibility for project selection and its assessment lies with the Member State and in particular with the LEADER local action group in the area, in line with their local development strategy, and the priorities defined by the local communities therein. The project selection criteria are defined in the strategy and contain not only economic but also social and environmental criteria. The bottom-up approach and local decision-making is a defining characteristic of LEADER and contributes to its success. The Commission is not involved in the project selection. 2. The Commission does not evaluate each individual project. Evaluations are done at the level of local development strategies and programmes. Commission evaluates at EU level the relevance of Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) instruments including LEADER. 3. LEADER programmes can finance a variety of projects as defined in a bottom-up manner in local development strategies. This includes pilot actions and local innovations. The conditions for durability of investments financed from the CAP 2023-27 are defined by the Member States.”
Cohesion and rural funding
- 2025-12-22 “E-004430/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Under the revised EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA) that entered into force on 29 October 2025, the EU has liberalised the tariff lines contained previously under the import tariff quota of ‘Fermented milk’ (order number 09.6716 before the entry into force of the revised DCFTA). These tariff lines cover various types of flavoured and unflavoured yoghurts, as well as some buttermilk and kefir products 1 . In addition to these lines, the revised DCFTA provides for the liberalisation in the dairy sector of imports of certain processed milk and cream products, whole milk powder and other yoghurt, buttermilk and kefir products not listed above. There is no expected impact for farmers in the Union given the positive trade balance in these categories of products in favour of the Union. 1 The tariff lines in question are: 0403 20 51, 0403 20 53, 0403 20 59, 0403 20 91, 0403 20 93, 0403 20 99, 0403 90 71, 0403 90 73, 0403 90 79, 0403 90 91, 0403 90 93 and 0403 90 99. Please see for detailed descriptions the Combined Nomenclature as defined in Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature (OJ L 256, 7.09.1987) and on the Common Customs Tariff which are valid at the time of publication of this Regulation and mutatis mutandis as amended by subsequent legislation.”
Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports · Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2025-12-19 “E-004443/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Grapevine flavescence dorée phytoplasma is regulated as a Union quarantine pest listed in Annex II of Commission Implementing Regulation 2019/2072 1 . In the areas of the EU where the pest is present, eradication campaigns have to be carried out in the vineyards. Furthermore, certain parts of the Union territory are under containment, as eradication is not possible, with specific EU measures in place 2 . Therefore, the Commission is aware of the specific problems the pest can cause in Member States and the difficult fight against it once it is detected. On 4 December 2025, the co-legislators have reached a political agreement on the ‘wine package’ (Commission proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013 3 , (EU) 2021/2115 4 and (EU) No 251/2014 5 as regards certain market rules and sectoral support measures in the wine sector and for aromatised wine products (COM(2025) 137 final 6 ), which includes a provision to provide support to collective actions for monitoring, diagnostic, training, communication and research to prevent the spread of highly infectious pests, with Union financial assistance covering up to 100% of the eligible expenditure. Once in force, the new rules will allow Member States to add this new type of intervention in their strategic plan so that stakeholders can make use of the new possibilities offered. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2019/2072/oj/eng. 2 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/1630 of 21 September 2022 establishing measures for the containment of Grapevine flavescence dorée phytoplasma within certain demarcated areas: https://eurlex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2022/1630/oj/eng. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32013R1308&qid=1764315599918. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R2115&qid=1764315643439. 5 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32014R0251&qid=1764315675872. 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:52025PC0137.”
Agricultural funding
- 2025-12-19 “E-004445/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The 2026 Annual Work Programme for promotion of agricultural products provides for several dedicated amounts, one of which is to promote exclusively fresh fruit and vegetables. It amounts to EUR 15.6 million. Promotion campaigns are to highlight the benefits of consuming fresh fruit and vegetables in a balanced diet. Their objective is to increase the consumption of Union fresh fruit and vegetables by informing consumers about balanced and healthy dietary practices. The messages could notably focus on aiming at having at least five portions of a variety of fruit and vegetables each day; knowing the place of fruit and vegetables in the food pyramid and understanding the beneficial impact of fruit and vegetable consumption on health. This approach is based on ‘Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases: Report of a Joint World Health Organization (WHO)/Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) Expert Consultation’ 1 , according to which fresh fruit and vegetables contribute to cardiovascular health through the variety of phytonutrients, potassium and fibre they contain. Consequently, WHO and FAO recommend a daily intake of fresh fruit and vegetables in an adequate quantity (400-500 g per day). The promotion of preparations of vegetables, fruit or other parts of plants is eligible within other dedicated amount of the 2026 Annual Work Programme, which amounts in total to EUR 144.4 million. They support the promotion of agri-food products with different objectives such as increasing the recognition of Union and national quality schemes or highlighting the sustainability of Union agriculture. 1 Page 89: https://iris.who.int/server/api/core/bitstreams/c4f12939-5f55-4b75-b6f9-283024956b3f/content.”
Nutrition · EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.)
- 2025-12-19 “E-004412/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission As part of the review of the EU-Ukraine Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area, Ukraine committed to align by 31 December 2028 its domestic legislation to several EU standards pertaining to the production of agri-food products. These include in particular relevant EU legal acts on the official controls, animal welfare, use of plant protection products and of veterinary medicines. Ukraine must report every year on its progress towards this alignment and by the agreed deadline provide a final report demonstrating that the alignment condition has been met. If the Commission determines that Ukraine has not met this requirement, both Parties must promptly commence consultations. If after these consultations, the Commission still finds that Ukraine has not fulfilled its obligation, the EU may suspend all or part of the preferences granted under the review. These preferences may then be reinstated if Ukraine delivers additional information proving compliance. The Commission will keep the European Parliament and the Council simultaneously informed of Ukraine’s progress in alignment to the agreed production standards.”
EU policy on pesticides · Import of agri-food products in the EU · Agricultural trade: Ukraine imports
- 2025-12-12 “P-004370/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission In financial year 2024 (the latest available information), the average level of direct payments in Romania was about EUR 191/hectare (ha) compared to EUR 266/ha for the EU as a whole, as reported by Member States for calendar year 2023. This payment level results from the direct payments allocations based on the external convergence mechanism of the current Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) and the strategic choices made by Romania in their Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) strategic plan 2023-2027. The Commission’s proposal for the National and Regional Partnership (NRP) Plans takes into account the needs for addressing external convergence. It is factored into the formula determining the overall financial envelope for each Member State in Annex I of the NRP Regulation 1 . The allocation available for each Member States takes into account where payment per hectare is projected at a level below 90% of the EU average in 2027. Additionally, the proposed degressive area-based income support, which replaces several current direct payments interventions, requires all Member States to apply an average aid per hectare between EUR 130 and EUR 240, thus proposing further harmonizing of payment levels at EU level. Moreover, the proposed 2028-2034 CAP framework introduces significantly greater flexibility for Member States, empowering them to make strategic decisions regarding allocation and payment levels. This enhanced flexibility enables Member States to tailor interventions that best suit their unique agricultural contexts, ensuring a tailored approach to achieving further convergence and addressing the diverse needs of their rural sectors. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:0d5ded06-639d-11f0-bf4e01aa75ed71a1.0001.02/DOC_2&format=PDF”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2025-12-11 “P-004189/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission recently carried out an Information Systems Security (ISS) audit at the Slovak paying agency. The audit detected no immediate threat to payment continuity or to the protection of EU financial interest. The paying agency is taking adequate measures to mitigate risks linked to the potential change of IT contractor and to ensure continuity of operations. It is the responsibility of the Member State to set up the aid application system in line with the legal requirements and to ensure that payments are fully disbursed to beneficiaries within the deadlines set by Union law. When Member States pay farmers outside the deadlines, the Commission may reduce the reimbursement to the Member State of the EU financing by up to 100%. So far the Commission has not been informed of issues related to non-payment and procurement irregularities involving the IT provider. When the Commission becomes aware of any suspected cases of fraud, corruption or any other illegal activity affecting the EU budget, it informs the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) and, where applicable, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) without any delay.”
Agricultural funding
- 2025-12-05 “E-003706/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. A detailed list of actions to tackle sheep and goat pox (SGP) in every Member States is not currently available. Preventive measures can be supported through the publicly available Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) Strategic Plans (CSPs). Exceptional EU support 1 may also be granted to cover market losses incurred by farmers located in areas under movement restrictions by veterinary measures. Support can also be granted under the Agricultural de minimis Regulation 2 , under the Agricultural Block Exemption Regulation (ABER) 3 or the Agricultural State aid Guidelines 4 . 2. The Greek authorities communicated to the Commission under SA.118530 (2025/XA) a State aid scheme under the ABER 5 , based on the Ministerial Decision 59322/26923/5-3-2025 addressing also SGP 6 . Greece has not submitted related SGP requests for Measure 23 under the rural development programme or for exceptional market support measures under the Common Market Organisation. In addition, risk management, investments in biosecurity and agricultural restoration under the CSP, are tools that have not been used yet by Greece to tackle SGP. 3. To ensure effective and timely use of the above-mentioned instruments, the Commission is continuously providing guidance and technical support to Member States through regular communication. The Commission encourages Member States to make full use of the available financial and technical assistance available under the CSPs and the State aid rules, to protect the agricultural sector and prevent permanent production losses. However, the final decision on the allocation and implementation of these tools lies with the Member States. 1 Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671). 2 Commission Regulation (EU) No 1408/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid in the agriculture sector, as amended (OJ L 352, 24.12.2013, p. 9). 3 Commission regulation (EU) 2022/2472 of 14 December 2022 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 327 21.12.2022, p. 1). 4 Communication from the Commission Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas 2022/C 485/01, C/2022/9120, OJ C 485, 21.12.2022, p. 1–90, as amended by Communication from the Commission correcting the Guidelines for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas, C/2024/1902, OJ C 1902, 5.3.2024. 5 https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/cases/SA.118530. 6 Government Gazette 1011/B/2025.”
Agricultural funding · Animal diseases prevention and management in the EU
- 2025-12-05 “E-003742/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission As part of the proposal for the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034, the Commission intends to establish National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRP Plans) 1 . The NRP Plans will promote economic, social and territorial cohesion and support sustainable agriculture and food security, rural development, fisheries, maritime and migration policies. The proposal dedicates Title VI to the outermost regions. Pursuant to it, the relevant Member States must include dedicated measures to support outermost regions in their NRP Plans through investments, reforms and compensatory schemes, which may be presented in a separate chapter. The proposal recognises the outermost regions’ unique constraints and enables them to combine resources across all policies covered by it. This includes a range of areas listed in Article 46 of the NRP Plans proposal, such as food security, housing, water and waste management, energy, education and skills, etc. This framework allows for dedicated measures for fisheries or transport as well. Moreover, even if the name ‘POSEI 2 ’ is no longer used, the proposal maintains the instruments of current POSEI toolbox – support for local production and specific supply arrangements - as mandatory measures under the new framework established with the NRP Plans. The Commission Work Programme 2026 includes a strategy for the outermost regions, to be complemented by a subsequent regulatory simplification package. This territorial approach is intended to enable outermost regions to address their specific needs and challenges, focusing on strengthening resilience, competitiveness, and the valorisation of the regions’ unique assets. 1 COM(2025) 565 final. 2 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy/market-measures/outermost-regions-and-smallaegeanislands/posei_en#:~:text=Through%20the%20POSEI%20scheme%2C%20the%20EU%20aims%20to%3A,proce ssing%20and%20marketing%20of%20local%20crops%20and%20products.”
Funding for OCTs and outermost regions
- 2025-12-05 “E-004188/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is aware of the information referred to by the Honourable Member, which first appeared at the end of 2024 in a number of local Tunisian media outlets. However, the Commission has no competence to verify or intervene as regards the related domestic Tunisian issues. The Commission constantly monitors olive oil markets in the EU 1 . Imports from Tunisia up to August 2025 stand at 131 000 tonnes, an increase by 11% compared to marketing year 2023/24 and by 7.3% compared to the last 5-year average. On average, 58% of these imports are re-exported from the EU to third countries. The average price of Tunisian imports decreased from EUR 5.48/kg in November 2024 to EUR 3.48/kg in August 2025. This average price decline is in line with general trends in olive oil prices in Spain or Greece, as the global availability of olive oil has improved over the last marketing year 2024/25. Member States carry out very frequent controls on the quality and authenticity of olive oils imported and marketed in the EU. These controls are based on a risk analysis, including price and country of origin aspects. 1 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/data-and-analysis/markets/price-data/price-monitoring-sector/olive-oil_en.”
Import of agri-food products in the EU
- 2025-12-01 “E-003524/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the concerns over water scarcity, especially in regions most acutely affected. As outlined in the Vision for Agriculture and Food 1 , a steady and safe water supply is key for future-proofing the agri-food sector. The European Water Resilience Strategy 2 reiterates that access to clean, affordable water is a human right, while recognising the need to curb demand and over-abstractions and to improve water efficiency and reuse to avoid supply disruptions. The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 3 supports Member States with a range of tools, including investments, for efficient irrigation and climate adaptation measures, with the Greek CAP Strategic Plan 2023-2027 4 allocating EUR 1.4 billion for environmental and climate objectives including contributing to water savings and improving infrastructure 5 . Day-to-day management of CAP-financed investments, including water infrastructure projects, falls under the responsibility of national authorities. The CAP proposal for the period 2028-2034 6 requires Member States to continue to support farmers for climate change adaptation, water resilience and soil health, with tools such as investments in more efficient irrigation, water reuse and storage, rainwater harvesting and digital tools. The latest update 7 of Greece’s Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) 8 , continues to support irrigation network infrastructure, while Cohesion Policy 9 supports Member States to improve public water infrastructure. In addition, Horizon Europe 10,11 financially supports research and innovation for water resilience in agriculture 12 . 1 Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, A Vision for Agriculture and Food Shaping together an attractive farming and agri-food sector for future generations, COM/2025/75 final. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/topics/environment/water-resilience-strategy_en. 3 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/common-agricultural-policy_en. 4 Union contribution for interventions P3-73-1.1 and P3-73-1.4 https://www.agrotikianaptixi.gr/category/sskap2023-2027/sskap-egkrisi-tropopoiiseis/. 5 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/b13e3e86-2c12-45e5-965935f0384c76b2_en?filename=csp-at-a-glance-greece_en.pdf. 6 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/media/news/next-chapter-cap-2025-07-17_en. 7 https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/372bdb38-3fd1-47f6-80478e21a8a38533_en?filename=COM_2025_367_1_EN_annexe_proposition_cp_part1_v3.pdf. 8 https://commission.europa.eu/business-economy-euro/economic-recovery/recovery-and-resiliencefacility/country-pages/greeces-recovery-and-resilience-plan_en#repowereu-measures-in-greeces-plan. 9 https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/2021-2027_en. 10 https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/horizon-europe_en. 11 https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-opencalls/horizon-europe_en. 12 https://rea.ec.europa.eu/funding-and-grants/eu-mission-soil-deal-europe_en, https://research-andinnovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eumissions-horizon-europe/restore-our-ocean-and-waters_en, https://research-andinnovation.ec.europa.eu/funding/funding-opportunities/funding-programmes-and-open-calls/horizon-europe/eu-”
Cohesion and rural funding
- 2025-11-28 “E-003957/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Ensuring that farmers receive a fair revenue is a priority for the Commission, as outlined in the Vision for Agriculture and Food (‘the Vision’) 1 and the President of the Commission’s 2025 State of the Union Address 2 . The proposed ringfenced allocations under the National and Regional Partnership (NRP) Plans are a minimum of the funds that must be allocated to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). Member States can increase this amount by tapping into the rest of their NRP Fund, to design the CAP approach that responds best to the needs of their farmers and rural areas. With its proposal of 10 December 2024 to strengthen the position of farmers in the food supply chain 3 , the Commission took an important step to enhance farmers’ bargaining power through, for instance, enhanced cooperation and transparent and reliable transaction conditions via mandatory written contracts that include certain essential elements, such as clear and transparent price formulas or a mandatory review clause. These measures help ensure that farmers are not merely price takers and can negotiate better terms, thus resisting external pressures to sell below their production costs. In addition, the Commission will publish end of 2025 its report on the first evaluation of the Unfair Trading Practices (UTP) Directive, together with a study on fair remuneration assessing the impact of certain national measures on farmers’ revenues. As announced in the Vision, the Commission will propose further initiatives, including a revision of the UTP Directive, to address, the principle that that farmers should not be forced to systematically sell below their production costs. The consultation process will be organised until Spring 2026. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0075. 2 https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/state-union/state-union-2025_en#the-speech. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52024PC0577.”
Agricultural funding · EU policy on farmer–buyer relations in the agri-food supply chain
- 2025-11-20 “E-004117/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission The Commission has received an official request from Finnish authorities to amend Commission Implementing Decision C(2016)1752 1 , including a proposal to increase the maximum amounts for the two categories of measures, for which available funds have been regularly fully used, namely, for investment aid and maintenance of traditional production systems for reindeer, and for compensation for damages caused by large carnivores. After analysis of the request, the Commission intends to proceed with adoption of the new Decision in the last quarter of 2025. 1 Commission Implementing Decision C(2016)1752 of 31 March 2016 authorising national payments for the production and marketing of reindeer and reindeer products.”
Agricultural funding · Large Carnivores
- 2025-11-17 “E-003909/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014 1 supports the promotion of EU farm products and emphasises agricultural practices focusing on food safety, traceability, authenticity, and sustainability. Programme proposals must substantiate all claims made about the benefits of production methods for the environment with supporting evidence. During the campaigns, beneficiaries must ensure that communication or dissemination activities contain factually accurate information (covered by a provision in the grant agreement). The granting authority can intervene in case of concerns regarding certain messages. Promotion campaigns must be aligned with Member States’ Food Based Dietary Guidelines. Furthermore, since 2019, successive annual work programmes have contributed to Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan, with enhanced support for healthy and balanced diets, prioritising the promotion of organic production methods and fresh fruit and vegetables – the only product category with a specific, ring-fenced budget. The promotion policy 2 invests in long-term competitiveness, resilience and sustainability of the agricultural and food sector, offering opportunities to all eligible products without discrimination. Policy framework is important for providing incentives for farmers to move towards higher animal welfare standards and more sustainable production methods. The Vision for Agriculture and Food 3 recalls that ‘sustainable livestock is crucial for the EU economy, viability of rural areas and preservation of the environment and of rural landscapes’. The ‘Buy European Food’ campaign will align with these policies, highlighting the EU’s dedication to its agricultural heritage and sustainability objectives. 1 http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2014/1144/oj. 2 Regulation (EU) No 1144/2014. 3 COM/2025/75 final, 19.2.2025, p.16.”
EU measures on lifestyle-related behaviours (smoking, drinking, eating, etc.) · Nutrition
- 2025-11-14 “E-003453/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. Building on the Vision for Agriculture and Food, the Commission’s proposal for a future Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 1 emphasises further simplification, directing support to farmers who need it most and finding the right balance between obligations and incentives, investments and additional sources of financing. Agriculture and rural areas also stand to gain from funding opportunities and synergies with other policy areas, with the CAP integrated into the National and Regional Partnership Plans (NRPP). These elements go in the right direction to make the CAP fit for an enlarged Union. 2. The amount identified for the CAP is EUR 300 billion for 2028-2034, including at least EUR 293.7 billion ring-fenced for income support and an allocation of EUR 6.3 billion to address market disturbances through the Unity Safety Net. Each Member State can increase its contribution to agriculture by tapping into the unallocated amounts in their overall allocation under the NRPP. The proposal for 2028-2034 2 includes a clause for revision when the timing of enlargement is known. 3. To support farmers from enlargement countries and help countries prepare for the implementation of the CAP, the EU focuses on gradual alignment, technical assistance, and financial support. Key elements of this include strengthening the administrative capacity of their authorities, promoting sustainable agricultural practices, and fostering economic diversification in rural areas. For the period post 2027, the Commission proposal establishing ‘Global Europe’ 3 provides a significant increase in EU funding for the Europe pillar, including enlargement countries, to accelerate their alignment with EU values, laws, rules, standards, policies and practices. 1 COM(2025)560 final of 16.7.2025. 2 COM(2025)571 final of 16.7.2025. 3 COM(2025)551 final of 16.7.2025.”
Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1) · Agricultural funding
- 2025-11-14 “E-003260/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission Agriculture as an economic sector has one of the eldest workforces in the EU, with more farmers over 65 than under 40, putting at risk the continuity of farming and affecting food security. Postponing retirement hinders succession planning and modernisation. Young farmers face unique challenges to access land or high start-up costs. Generational renewal in agriculture is instrumental to vibrant rural areas, enabling innovation, investments in resilience, and safeguarding future food security. The European Parliament has identified this as an issue 1 and the Commission, on 21 October 2025, has adopted a strategy concerning generational renewal in agriculture 2 . For these reasons, the Commission has proposed that farmers, who have reached the pension age and receive a retirement pension, would not be eligible for Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) degressive area-based income support by 2032. Member States may lay down a transition period. Given the strong demand for land and for support for a new generation of farmers, the Commission estimates that this approach will create opportunities for new and young farmers and enhance innovation, without leading to land abandonment or food security challenges. The proposal provides Member States with a robust set of tools to support intergenerational cooperation, including on farm succession, to ensure adequate support for elderly farmers. To note that the provision referred to in the question does not apply to the other CAP income support interventions. In particular, access to the payment for small farmers is maintained (pensioners remain eligible) which allows Member States to maintain or reinforce such income for small farms which on average belong to the most vulnerable category of farms. 1 https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-9-2023-0376_EN.html - Generational renewal in the EU farms of the future - 19 October 2023. 2 https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/document/download/a4574611-30d7-4f48-bfaf58559edffdc0_en?filename%E2%80%A6.”
Agricultural funding · Direct payments to farmers (pillar 1)
- 2025-11-14 “E-003540/2025 Answer given by Mr Hansen on behalf of the European Commission 1. In 2014-2027, the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is supporting the investments in the forest of the mainland Portugal, with more than EUR 588 million to farmers, and private and public forest holders. Moreover, the Portuguese Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP) allocates over EUR 600 million to forest management. Among its key investments is ‘Means to Prevent and Combat Rural Fires’ (EUR 89 million), funding the enhancement of infrastructure and equipment for both the Portuguese Air Force and the Institute for Nature Conservation and Forests (ICNF). This investment funds acquisition of firefighter helicopters and building construction (EUR 70 million), vehicles, machinery, equipment, and upgrades to the meteorological radar network (together EUR 19 million). Additionally, the ‘Landscape Transformation in Vulnerable Forest Areas’ (EUR 270 million) is a crucial preventive investment, backing initiatives like land management changes, vegetation adaptation, and ecosystem restoration. 2. The RRP also supports Portugal’s civil protection system with funding for the National Internal Security Network project (EUR 17 million), IT systems updates and a new data centre for national security. It also funds the State Emergency Communications Network (SIRESP) project (EUR 37 million), including ground infrastructure and a Disaster Recovery Centre. Finally, to support Member States under the EU Civil Protection Mechanism, the Commission can coordinate peer reviews of disaster risk management and civil protection systems 1 . The Commission is also providing financial support for projects, exchanges of experts or technical assistance which can support policies and investments for wildfire prevention and preparedness. 1 https://civil-protection-knowledge-network.europa.eu/disaster-prevention-and-risk-management/ucpm-peerreview-programme.”
Management of EU forests · Agricultural funding · EU policy on infrastructure for preventing climate-related disasters (floods, droughts, extreme weather etc.)