Danuše NERUDOVÁ

Policy topics Danuše NERUDOVÁ is active on

What Danuše NERUDOVÁ has said (55)

• 2026-06-16 “(10:48:41 – 10:49:33): Dear colleagues, president Trump is selling us his new victory. Let's summarize it. Iran before the war, an Ayatollah dictator in power, brutal repression of human rights. The Strait Of Hormuz opened. Sanctions in force. Iran Afterwar, another Ayatollah dictator still in power. Human rights abuses still ongoing. The state of Hormuz reopened. Sanctions weakened and high energy prices for our citizens. Do you consider this as a victory? Me not. I consider this as a loss for Iranian people and for all of us. Thank you.”
  EU-Iran relations
• 2026-06-15 “Donald Trump is like a firefighter who starts the fire. Firstly, attacks Iran and then says that it is a historic accomplishment to achieve an agreement that Hormuz has been reopened, Hormuz that had worked from the time of Babylon. Great job, mister president. Tariffs, the same thing. 1st, you start an economic crisis, then the American consumers pay for it, then you partly save it. Don't get me wrong. The EU and, US deal has my support. We need stable conditions, but it is not a triumph of democracy, rather. It is cleaning up somebody else's mess and that somebody will continue sitting in the White House for the next 2 and a half years.”
  EU-US trade relations
• 2025-09-26 “E-003739/2025 E-003840/2025 E-003860/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission The Commission shares the growing concerns around e-Commerce imports of ultra-fast fashion. Several initiatives have already been adopted, and others are underway. The e-Commerce Communication 1 addresses the challenges posed by e-Commerce imports. It calls for strengthened cooperation among authorities to ensure that imported products via e-Commerce comply with EU rules. The Customs Reform package is currently under negotiation. The e-Commerce-related measures, such as the elimination of the EUR 150 de minimis threshold on imports and the introduction of a handling fee, would be the first to apply, if agreed by the co-legislators. These measures require the establishment of the EU Customs Authority and the launching of the EU Customs Data Hub to ensure efficient data processing and risk management. The application date of these measures is still under negotiations, the Commission has invited co-legislators to anticipate these dates compared to its initial proposal from 2028 to 2026. Stronger customs will also need to be matched by reinforced and more coordinated market surveillance. The Commission will put forward proposals to this effect in the European Product Act in Q3 2026. As announced in the Single Market Strategy 2 in May 2025, the Commission is working to create a Single Market for waste. Compliance, e.g. through Extended Producer Responsibility, will ensure the proper management of textiles waste without raising new market barriers. Upcoming eco-design requirements for textile apparel will set a minimum performance level on certain product aspects, below which products will not be allowed on the internal market. Once they have entered into force, on the social dimension, the Forced Labour Regulation 3 will ban products made with forced labour, while the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive 4 will ensure corporate policies on human rights and environmental due diligence are in place for larger companies. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0037. 2 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52025DC0500. 3 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=OJ:L_202403015. 4 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:02024L1760-20250417.”
  EU policy on labour exploitation in global supply chains · EU policy on custom fee on non-EU imports · Due diligence in supply chains (environmental and human rights)
• 2025-07-30 “P-003150/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission In compliance with Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the TFEU, the Commission will publish the full text of the decision adopted on 29 July 2025 in case SA.51501 (2021/C), once a non-confidential version is agreed with the Czech Republic. Furthermore, as regards the recovery of unlawful aid, the Commission publishes regularly the statistics 1 on recovery of unlawful aid including the names of the companies that are subject to recovery. The current State aid procedural rules provide for several instruments that aim to prevent the misuse of aid. This includes monitoring of existing aid schemes, the power of the Commission to initiate a formal investigation procedure and the right of interested third parties (such as competitors) to submit a complaint to the Commission. The Commission keeps its State aid rules under regular assessment, in order to ensure their efficient performance. 1 https://competition-policy.ec.europa.eu/state-aid/procedures/recovery-unlawful-aid_en.”
  EU fiscal rules and oversight of national budgets
• 2025-06-03 “P-002225/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Ribera on behalf of the European Commission The Commission is not aware of these alleged practices by vertically integrated pharmaceutical wholesalers in Czechia. The Commission recalls that, pursuant to Article 81 of Directive 2001/83/EC on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use 1 , wholesalers have a general duty to ensure appropriate and continued supply pharmaceutical products to pharmacies so that the needs of patients in the Member State in question are covered. The described conduct could theoretically violate Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which prohibits abuses of a dominant position. A refusal, by a vertically integrated pharmaceutical wholesaler, to supply independent pharmacies competing with its own pharmacy chain could, subject to the conditions of the Treaty and the applicable case law, constitute an exclusionary abuse of a dominant position. Such conduct could also theoretically infringe Article 101 TFEU if it involves anticompetitive agreements or concerted practices between several undertakings not to supply independent pharmacies. The Commission shares its powers to enforce EU competition law with national competition authorities, such as the Czech Office for the Protection of Competition. These authorities can be particularly well placed to investigate conduct limited to a single Member State, as may be the case here. Where, following an in-depth investigation, the Commission finds that an undertaking infringed Article 101 and/or 102 TFEU, it may, by decision, require the undertaking to bring such infringement to an end (Article 7 of Regulation (EC) 1/2003) and impose a fine (Article 23 of Regulation (EC) 1/2003). 1 Directive 2001/83/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 November 2001 on the Community code relating to medicinal products for human use (OJ L 311, 28.11.2001, p. 67, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/83/oj).”
  Pharmaceuticals regulation in EU · Public and private sectors role in healthcare services
• 2025-04-30 “E-001738/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Mînzatu on behalf of the European Commission In accordance with the Financial Regulation 1 , the Commission ensures that recipients of EU funds comply with legal provisions on the protection of EU financial interests. In case of breach of these obligations, the Commission may take several measures, as outlined in the grant agreement signed by the beneficiaries with the responsible National Agency (NA). These measures include grant reduction to payment suspension, suspension or termination of the grant agreement, and recovery of the paid grant amount. In the event of suspicion of an exclusion situation, the Commission flags the relevant entity in the Early Detection and Exclusion System. 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 and, where applicable, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO). Since the introduction of simplified cost options, the risk of irregularity has been reduced to under 2% of the overall annual amount implemented. Accreditation of grant beneficiaries and the reduction in the maximum number of applications per beneficiary have also help lower the overall error risk. NAs monitor Erasmus+ projects under the supervision of the Commission, which then analyses data from NAs to reinforce such monitoring mechanisms. Finally, the Commission also assists NAs in addressing recipients where there is greater financial or reputational risk, including via supervisory visits and audits. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/2509/oj/eng.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• 2025-04-02 “E-001357/2025 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Virkkunen on behalf of the European Commission Freedom of expression, media freedom and pluralism are essential as checks and balances of healthy democracies. These rights also form an essential part of the rule of law and are at the core of our democratic values. Article 11 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union guarantees the rights to freedom of expression and information. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (RFE/RL) is a well-established, independent media organisation, broadcasting news in 27 languages across 23 countries. It provides independent reporting to many countries where media freedom is threatened. Hence, the Commission is closely monitoring the impacts of the United States decisions concerning the future of RFE/RL, including for its journalists around the world and at its headquarters in Prague, and is working with partners to explore possible solutions. The Commission is fully committed to supporting and protecting independent media and journalists through legislative initiatives such as the European Media Freedom Act 1 and a range of support actions, notably through Creative Europe and Multimedia Actions 2 . Currently, an amount of approximately EUR 40-50 million is dedicated annually to supporting the news media sector. 1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32024R1083. 2 https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/news-initiative.”
  EU-US relations · Disinformation & online freedoms
• 2024-11-20 “E-002590/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Fitto on behalf of the European Commission 1. The mid-term revision of the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 1 increased the allocation for the Solidarity and Emergency Aid Reserve by EUR 1.5 billion for the years 2024-2027. The EU Solidarity Fund (EUSF) 2 now has an annual budget of EUR 1 016 million 3 (in 2018 prices). A review of the scope of the Fund is not planned under the 20212027 MFF. In addition, thanks to the Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction (RESTORE) Regulation, entered into force on 24 December 2024 4 , Member States will be able to reprogramme (within the limits of its current scope of intervention) part of their European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund, and European Social Fund+ allocations for reconstruction and repair actions. Member States have six months from the entry into force to submit the corresponding programme amendments to the Commission. 2. Under the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), Member States committed close to EUR 9 billion in their recovery and resilience plans to finance measures related to natural disaster preparedness. The RRF Regulation allows Member States to request a targeted amendment of their plan if objective circumstances make it impossible for them to deliver on the previously agreed commitments. Natural disasters can constitute objective circumstances to justify the revision of recovery and resilience plans 5 . The Commission has recently also taken steps to simplify the process to amend the plans (when objective circumstances are invoked). 1 Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2024/765 of 29 February 2024 amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2093 laying down the MFF for 2021-27. 2 Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund (OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3) as amended by Regulation (EU) No 661/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council of 15 May 2014 (OJ L 189, 27.6.2014, p. 143) and by Regulation (EU) 2020/461 of the European Parliament and the Council of 30 March 2020 (OJ L 99, 31.3.2020, p. 9): https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalcontent/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:32002R2012 3 EUR 1 144.1 million in 2024 prices. 4 Regulation (EU) 2024/3236 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2024 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/1057 and (EU) 2021/1058 as regards Regional Emergency Support to Reconstruction (RESTORE), available at the following link: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3236/oj 5 This includes the possibility to shift RRF funds towards reforms and investments necessary to respond to natural disasters, or more generally to adjust previously agreed commitments to take account of the impact of such natural disasters on the plans’ implementation. The relevant guidance can be found at: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/3a3d5707-5adc-4f6a-a5b51d23f1a24235_en?filename=20240531_Draft_Guidance_on_recovery_and_resilience_plans.pdf”
  Cohesion and rural funding
• 2024-09-06 “E-001642/2024 Answer given by Executive Vice-President Séjourné on behalf of the European Commission While the Commission cannot comment on ongoing cases 1 before the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) nor prejudge the outcome of the Court’s pending proceeding, the Commission will continue to promote solutions that favour clean and healthy air as well as promote a predictable and implementable legal framework. Irrespective of the outcome of the CJEU judgement, the Commission will ensure with the Member States a proper follow up. In accordance with Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2018/858 2 , the Forum for Exchange of Information on Enforcement (composed of representatives from Member States type-approval and market surveillance authorities) provides for coordination of activities and exchange of best practices towards a uniform implementation of the applicable legislation across the EU. The spirit and letter of EU emissions legislation are well known. It was clarified in the CJEU judgment in case C-128/20 3 that the vehicles’ emission behaviour must comply with the standardised New European Driving Cycle test conditions 4 , as well as with Annex I of Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 5 and with implementing measures, as agreed by the colegislators, the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament. 1 C-251/23 and C-308/23, Mercedes-Benz Group. 2 OJ L 151, 14.6.2018, p. 1-218. 3 Judgment of 14 July 2022, GSMB Invest, C-128/20, EU:C:2022:570, paragraph 40. 4 Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 implementing and amending Regulation (EC) No 715/2007, OJ L 199, 28.7.2008, p. 1-136. 5 OJ L 171, 29.6.2007, p. 1-16.”
  Road transport environmental policy
• “Thank you. I would like to thank Commissioner Serafin for his proposal on own resources, but. Well, I have to say it directly. Also, it's difficult to comment the proposal if we do not have any further details. And I'm especially mentioning the position of the new corps. We don't have any details so that it's really difficult for us, and we only have the leaks from the press. And I think it's really extraordinary situation for this House not having this. Uh, I welcome that you are trying to find a way out from the years of blockage we are facing. I believe this proposal can be the basis for the negotiations, but we will need, as you can imagine, to have a sort of discussion, especially regarding, uh, the suggested corporate contribution. And I think that you can imagine that it's going to be really sort of discussion. I believe that our strategy during the negotiations should follow triple as principle. We would like to have own resources that are sufficient, stable, and enjoy strong political support. If even one of these three elements is missing. We will not be able to reach a compromise. But let's keep in mind that without proper new resources, we will not be able to finance our current and new priorities and repay the pandemic debts. And I would like to have two questions. First, regarding the characteristics of the revenues, which source constitutes genuine revenue source and would bring really additional money as opposed to member States contributions. And the other one is about rebates. What is with the with the rebates? Will they expire in 2027? Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you for the question. Actually, this was what I was speaking about in my speech, that we need to adjust what was already done before because it is causing obstacles to our industry.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “Yes. Thank you very much. Well, I have to admit that I am not assured that this project will, uh, will be able to introduce in the council because the arguments for the red flags for me are not enough. Uh, I think that if we are talking about the argument that the fee, the levy is 150,000, which is the yearly salary of of the management of the multinational corporation. Then honestly, it's peanuts, it's peanuts. And if you just mention the fact that it's aimed on multinational corporations and we do not have any courage to introduce digital digital tax, which would be aimed at really big, big companies not paying any taxes in, in Europe. And whether you put it into the position as a trade off between paying households or paying the companies. So why core is not proportionate like the percentage, why it is not really percentage from the turnover and is just a levy which is disproportionate. And in fact, those biggest companies are paying peanuts and it's not aimed on the biggest companies. It's aimed on small companies.”
  EU taxation policy (political compass)
• “(16:27:39 – 16:29:26): Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the presentation. As mentioned by Miss Ragion, we need to complete the single market and remove all the existing obstacles. I think this would be a far more powerful push for competitiveness than any amount of money alone. In this sense, I must say I find it rather striking to hear some members of the far right here criticizing the EU for a lack of competitiveness when they are often the first to defend narrow national privileges and shield fragmented markets. Dear colleagues, you cannot call for competitiveness while simultaneously blocking the very integration that makes it possible. A deep and fully functioning single market is what creates jobs for Europeans, ensures low prices, and strengthens our Union. From your opinion, should we therefore consider in some form conditioning EU funds on progress in removing single market obstacles? In other words, applicants from member states that maintain artificial barriers could face greater difficulty in accessing these funds. And as Ms Levy rightly referred to, we must avoid competitiveness gaps. These gaps exist not only across sectors but also across regions. The data are clear: European research and innovation funding continues to concentrate in a small number of countries, particularly in Western Europe. Spreading excellence must therefore be a core priority. As experts, what concrete actions can we take to avoid repeating the same mistakes with the ECF and to ensure that excellence is generally spread across all the member states, from Paris to Riga, from Prague to Athens? Thank you.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “A woman shouldn't earn less simply because she is a woman. In Europe today, women a 12% less than men. And then if they retire, their pensions are 25% lower. This gap does not appear overnight. It builds over the lifetime. Lower pay carrier breaks fewer opportunities. As an economist who worked on pension reform. I know one thing. Unfair pension starts with unfair pay. If we want equal pensions, we need equal careers. That means pace, transparency, better childcare and real opportunities for women in high value sectors. Because gender equality is not just social policy, it is Europe's economic strength. Thank you.”
  Gender pay transparency
• “Um, we thank the court for its careful review of the plastic based own resource. I think it's an important step as it's the first new own resource since 1980s. This plastic levy is not just a budgetary tool. It's a specially green own resource designed to support EU environmental goals. That is why it is crucial that this tool works well, is reliable and is seen as far and legitimate, a fair and legitimate. If successful, it could serve as a model for future own resources linked to EU priorities. But it's not the only resource we were expecting that will that will become the most reliable and ensure stable revenues for the EU budget. Its revenue will decrease over the time and it is also based on GNI. Qui monte Group proposed a range of own resources. The Commission presented concrete legislation and yet we are still here, completely stuck with only one new own resource introduced in more than four years. That said, we welcome the court's effort to identify ways to improve the plastic levy. These discussions in the batch committee are important to address any concerns openly on recommendations. We support the recommendations put forward by the court. They provide a solid foundation for strengthening the credibility and functionality of the plastic based own resource.”
  Own resources (plastics)
• “Thank you, dear chair. Dear colleagues, I am pleased to present the opinion of the Committee on Budgets on the new Single Market and Customs Program. This proposal brings together several existing programs into one. This is a good step. A stronger and more unified single market is essential, especially in today's difficult global context. The need to reduce barriers, support growth, and make sure our rules are properly enforced. However, there are some important concerns. First, the proposed budget of EUR €6.2 billion is too low. The challenges we face are growing. E-commerce is increasing very quickly, leading to more imports and more pressure on customs authorities. If we want proper control and fair competition, we need more resources.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Thank you. Chair. I would like to thank all the experts who are taking part on this hearing. And for that, they will exchange their views with us on this important subject today. Unfortunately, I sometimes feel that own resources are the little forgotten brother of MFF. We keep talking a lot about the expenditures, but not so much about the revenues. But let's not forget that from the January 1st, 2028, the EU will start to repay both the principal and the interest of the pandemic. Debt €24 Billion euros per year, which means 149 million just for 20, 28 and 20 until 2030. So there is clearly pressure to move fast and reach an agreement because the alternative is cuts to current EU funds. But beyond that repayment, Parliament has always pushed for new own resources to strengthen the EU budget, respond to crisis and avoid increasing GNI based contributions. This fits with our long standing position of moving away from a structure logic on focusing on EU value. Value added. That said, it's important that we study together with you, the experts, in detail the proposals that are currently on the table. I'm really looking forward to discussing each of these proposals with you. I think this hearing is also very important for the whole Budget Committee and our shadows for my side. I am particularly interested in the core proposal where I think we need to dig deeper, as there are still some clarifications to be made based on today's debate. My co-rapporteur and I can clearly enrich our work and in the end deliver a strong opinion report. But the end game should not just be writing reports. We need to actually adapt own resources. This is where things often do not work and we end where we have been stuck for years. If we want to succeed this time, we need to be 100% sure that the new proposals are politically viable, but also that they do not contain hidden loopholes, do not undermine the competitiveness of our companies, and are compatible with our other political objectives. We have. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “(15:42:22 – 15:44:39): You, chair dear colleagues. I would like to thank the rapporteur for, his very good draft report. EU heavy industry faces a genuine transition gap. Rising carbon cost at a moment when the capital intensive investment needed to decarbonize cannot yet be recovered from the market. The temporary decarbonization fund is, in principle, the answer. At the same time, we should be realistic about the scale of the instrument. The available resources will remain relatively limited compared with the challenges that the heavy industry is facing today. Jobs are clearly at risk in our regions, and citizens and families in the region will not have the necessary support because the commission decided to discontinue the Just Transition Fund. From the budgetary perspective, I welcome the overall architecture of the proposal. Using part of CBEM revenues at EU level creates a direct link between climate policy and industrial support. This is also why the treatment of any remaining revenues matters. Resources left after the full disbursement of support and the payment of administrative costs should not supply, sorry, should not simply disappear. They should remain dedicated to the decarbonization of energy intensive industries. I also welcome the rapporteur's proposal to bring forward the operational start of the fund to 2027, including the optional first call linked to production in 2026. At the same time, the commission should closely assess the implementation of the first calls to determine whether the available amounts are sufficient. If demand clearly exceeds the available budget, the commission should be ready to come forward with a proposal to extend the financial envelope so that eligible operators receive adequate support. In short, the fund can be a useful bridge instrument, but it must be timely, targeted, transparent, and workable for European industry. Thank you.”
  Carbon leakage support
• “Mr. Commissioner, next week our shared priorities will become reality. But without proper revenues it will remain just empty promises. That is why we need our own resources package that is politically viable, financially sufficient and stable. As Tom Cruise might say, it may look like a mission impossible after so many years of blockage. We must deliver. There is no other alternative, and if we are serious about introducing new revenue streams, we must be also serious about how we manage the budget. We need to avoid fragmentation and we must protect the European value added. That means governments of the budget are based on genuine partnership with all relevant actors around the table. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you my dear rapporteur for this presentation. I think that we all agree that Erasmus+ is one of the EU's most successful programs and precisely for this reason, our level of ambition should match that success. On the budget, I have to say I'm not fully convinced. 40.8 billion sounds like an increase, but in reality, Erasmus+ is shrinking as a share of the EU budget from 2.5 to 2% and this demand continuing to grow. This is simply not enough even to meet our own targets. We would need at least 60 billion. That should be our reference point. At the same time, predictability matters. University students and national agencies need to be able to plan ahead. This is why clear sector allocations are important to ensure quality and access across the whole programme period. In this context, maintaining a strong share for higher education is essential. Second, on scholarships, if one scholarship equals the cost of 25. Mobilities. We need to make sure they truly support innovative and interdisciplinary programs. This is how we build the skills for competitive Europe. At the same time, Erasmus+ cannot carry every policy objective on its own. If we want to address skills shortages in strategic sectors, this should be co-financed, especially through the European Competitiveness Fund, where I have tabled amendments to enable synergies, as well as with horizon and other instruments. We should also encourage direct engagement of business in the programme in a shifting geopolitical context. Erasmus+ is a strategic tool. It builds Partnership trusts and long term influence. With stronger support from global Europe, we could significantly expand this role and position Europe as a leading hub for academic cooperation. So overall, the program is strong, but the proposal needs more ambition both financially and strategically. Thank you.”
  Public funding for education
• “Colleagues, I believe it is essential that we provide industry with stable and predictable conditions in which it can grow, innovate and invest. To do that, we must look honestly at how the market actually works and at the real figures, not only at political ambitions in the EU. Hybrid vehicles and plug in hybrids now account for over 44% of new car registrations, and registrations growing rapidly year by year. This growth shows that consumers are already choosing a range of technologies. Alternative solutions can contribute to emission reductions and help bridge the gap where full electrification is not yet feasible for all regions or sectors or users. We need a framework that supports innovation rather than prescribing a single technological path. This is why I support the Commission's pragmatic review of 2035 regulation and placing technological neutrality at its core to ensure a realistic, inclusive and economically sustainable transition for Europe. Thank you.”
  Road transport environmental policy
• “A woman shouldn't earn less simply because she is a woman. In Europe today, women a 12% less than men. And then if they retire, their pensions are 25% lower. This gap does not appear overnight. It builds over the lifetime. Lower pay carrier breaks fewer opportunities. As an economist who worked on pension reform. I know one thing. Unfair pension starts with unfair pay. If we want equal pensions, we need equal careers. That means pace, transparency, better childcare and real opportunities for women in high value sectors. Because gender equality is not just social policy, it is Europe's economic strength. Thank you.”
  Gender pay transparency
• “You are. A loser. Nobody likes you. You are fat. Not nice. Right? I know, trust me, I was there. Imagine being 14 and opening your favorite app to screen full of messages, attacking your looks, your identity, everything that makes you, you. It follows you everywhere, every day, every night. Bullying stays with you for years. 16% of young Europeans face that same pain online and it's heavier. Anxiety, depression. Isolation that can last for years. But let's be honest, we cannot ask young people to solve this alone. First, we must regulate the platforms that host this content. Only then we can educate and empower users to navigate the digital world responsibly. It's time for the Commission to regulate the platforms. Just as teachers wouldn't let children be bullied in a classroom, platforms cannot let it happen online because behind every screen there is a child, a young adult, and behind every statistic, there is a human being whose mental health and future is at stake. Let's do something about it. Thank you.”
  Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content
• “Thank you. Honorable minister. Citizens, not only in my country are worried about the prices of the energies. Czech Republic and France has initiated a qualifying majority of 18 members in the council to support a call for strengthening price control mechanism within ETS two. How is the Danish presidency um, going to reflect this initiative and take leadership in achieving those demands? And another question, as my colleagues have hinted It. Uh, you would like to reach an agreement regarding the climate targets 2040 by September. And my question is if this will not be possible. Do you have any plan B?”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “Thank you very much for very nice presentations. Well, I think that we are still living in the old paradigm that we have to tax everything while the water is moving. I think that the magic word, the Draghi report, has been mentioned several times here and I really do welcome the verdicts of Doctor Sousa because he was the only one who was talking about the creation of the environment for the business in Europe. Because ladies and gentlemen, I do not think that we are talking about profit shifting anymore. We are talking about shrinking of the tax basis in Europe and this is what we have to avoid. And my question is in this connection, my question is about the implications of the custom tariffs imposed by US on China because the European market is very sensitive. My country belongs to one of the fewest countries which are much more sensitive on the tariffs between US and China than the tariffs between US and Europe and we are really facing very, our companies are facing very hard competition due to our orientation on export and very close ties with Germany. And I am asking and it, my question especially on DG TAXUD because the regulator is always one step behind and it seems to me that now is the situation we are like two or three steps behind. Do we need the new fiscal tools to support? Do we need further international tax coordination to avoid the spillover effect of this trade war between US and China on the European companies on the internal market? And I don't want to hear that we need more regulations because we are regulating. We created such a complex tax environment in the world that in fact there are obstacles for the businesses in the tax world because of the BEPS, because of Pillar One, because of Pillar Two. And I'm not talking about big companies, I'm talking about small and medium sized companies because they really face the barriers on the internal market due to the tax complexity which is currently in force in Europe and in the world. Thank you. **Kira Marie Peter-Hansen (Denmark, Greens/EFA) @Chair: Thank you very much and I think it was directed to Mr. Angell and if the others would like to respond let me know but I hand the floor back to you.”
  Overall simplification of regulation in the EU
• “(09:24:56 – 09:29:06): Colleagues let me be very clear from i fully support the proposal of the commission on msr ets two revision it's a result of an important initiative of nineteen member states that will improve allowance price stability we should implement it as soon as possible however as a parliament our voice needs to be heard we have demonstrated this in the past and succeeded for example with the rule of law due diligence and other key reg regulations we cannot be merely a schambardan registroman of the council otherwise we would need elect otherwise why we would need elect parliament in brussels my proposals are built on two main pillars which i believe reflect the core aspirations of this house the need to push for the carbonization to protect our planet by also ensuring social fairness and a secure affordable energy supply for our citizens for that very reason my amendments which do not alter the main provisions in the context of the proposed revision ask to reflect more to ensure environmental but also social safeguards first strong funding has to be secured for decarbonization we are already witnessing a decline in green investments since the pandemic as the ecb has highlighted if we are serious about delivering on our objectives we must guarantee that the financial means match our political commitments further we need robust impact assessment to safeguard our climate ambitions and to avoid negative social impact of the system i believe that the commission should reflect on solutions to protect citizens from the potential negative impact of this system otherwise we risk significant social unrest in several european countries as we witnessed with the yellow vest in france for example in this context various options are on the table from stronger caps and better compensation mechanism to allowing member states to temporarily exempt residential buildings by ensuring the achievement of effort sharing targets i'm not saying that all of these measures must be implemented rather they represent a list of possibilities that the commission should carefully consider if we want to preserve social peace in europe and importantly recent geopolitical developments show why we should also reflect on an emergency break which would secure affordable energy supply for the citizens even in times of crisis the escalation of conflict involving iran and related disruptions to lng supply has already triggered sharp price spike spy spikes in european gas and lng markets wholesale gas prices have surged by over twenty five percent and freight rates jams more than forty percent with prolonged disruption potentially driving prices even higher in this context it's prudent to include in the recitals a clear reference to a temporary stronger price ceilings that the commission can activate in case of energy shortage energy crisis or blackout this safeguard is not a retreat from climate ambition it is a political necessity to ensure system resilience and protect households and businesses during systemic shocks colleagues to sum up my amendments protect the core of the proposal on the table in order to reach a swift agreement with the council while also using this opportunity to call for stronger safeguards on both decarbonization energy supply and social justice thereby ensuring that all citizens are on board this should be our primary goal as elected parliamentarians and i believe my report can be a good basis serving this key objective thank you”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “(09:24:56 – 09:29:06): Colleagues let me be very clear from i fully support the proposal of the commission on msr ets two revision it's a result of an important initiative of nineteen member states that will improve allowance price stability we should implement it as soon as possible however as a parliament our voice needs to be heard we have demonstrated this in the past and succeeded for example with the rule of law due diligence and other key reg regulations we cannot be merely a schambardan registroman of the council otherwise we would need elect otherwise why we would need elect parliament in brussels my proposals are built on two main pillars which i believe reflect the core aspirations of this house the need to push for the carbonization to protect our planet by also ensuring social fairness and a secure affordable energy supply for our citizens for that very reason my amendments which do not alter the main provisions in the context of the proposed revision ask to reflect more to ensure environmental but also social safeguards first strong funding has to be secured for decarbonization we are already witnessing a decline in green investments since the pandemic as the ecb has highlighted if we are serious about delivering on our objectives we must guarantee that the financial means match our political commitments further we need robust impact assessment to safeguard our climate ambitions and to avoid negative social impact of the system i believe that the commission should reflect on solutions to protect citizens from the potential negative impact of this system otherwise we risk significant social unrest in several european countries as we witnessed with the yellow vest in france for example in this context various options are on the table from stronger caps and better compensation mechanism to allowing member states to temporarily exempt residential buildings by ensuring the achievement of effort sharing targets i'm not saying that all of these measures must be implemented rather they represent a list of possibilities that the commission should carefully consider if we want to preserve social peace in europe and importantly recent geopolitical developments show why we should also reflect on an emergency break which would secure affordable energy supply for the citizens even in times of crisis the escalation of conflict involving iran and related disruptions to lng supply has already triggered sharp price spike spy spikes in european gas and lng markets wholesale gas prices have surged by over twenty five percent and freight rates jams more than forty percent with prolonged disruption potentially driving prices even higher in this context it's prudent to include in the recitals a clear reference to a temporary stronger price ceilings that the commission can activate in case of energy shortage energy crisis or blackout this safeguard is not a retreat from climate ambition it is a political necessity to ensure system resilience and protect households and businesses during systemic shocks colleagues to sum up my amendments protect the core of the proposal on the table in order to reach a swift agreement with the council while also using this opportunity to call for stronger safeguards on both decarbonization energy supply and social justice thereby ensuring that all citizens are on board this should be our primary goal as elected parliamentarians and i believe my report can be a good basis serving this key objective thank you”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Thank you. Chair. Colleagues. This week you can read in the newspapers that our American friends are a little bit impatient about the implementation of the agreement, but let me give one number from the budgetary assessment to buy a trade peace with Donald Trump. European citizens will actually lose €4 billion every year in the budget. 4 billion. That's roughly the annual costs of entire Erasmus programme. Let's be clear no tariffs means less revenue into EU budget and less revenue means less money for our shared priorities. So when we make these kind of concessions, we must ask ourselves each time, does it strengthen the EU position? Does it not significantly destabilize our public finances? That is why the transparency is essential. We need to monitor the estimates of forgone custom revenues and assess how we will counter the loss, because our budget is already under significant strain. This is the moment to reform the EU's revenue system, to create genuine own resources, to make us less dependent on volatile custom income and national contributions. Finally, the United States aggressive protectionism means also more Chinese products on our market and our French colleague could talk about this, which could hurt European sectors and regions, forcing more reliance on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and again putting more pressure on our already limited budget. Trade peace is important, but it shouldn't come at the expense of Europe's financial stability. This is the main message of this budgetary assessment and I am looking forward to the discussion.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you. And thank you, Commissioner, for your words. I have to say that sometimes I do feel that the own resources are kind of little forgotten brother of MFF, because this hearing is taking place only three months after, uh, after the proposal was published. And the truth is that, as you said several times, own resources are the key part of the budget because without them, we are not able to complete the budget. And we all know that there is a heated discussion about national expenditures in the national parliaments and also here in the European Parliament. I would dream of having such a heated discussion with the member states here. Uh, they are having about the expenditures. I would like to have this discussion also about, uh, about, uh, new own resources. But unfortunately, we are still facing the situation that some member states refuse to have such an open debate on own resources issues, even though the leaders themselves committed to a roadmap to adopt new own resources when negotiating the current MFF. Mf. We all know that we are operating in a highly challenging and uncertain context, with growing political priorities and constrained national budgets. Yet we also expect more from the EU budget on defence, competitiveness, education and so on. It must be made very clear and strongly emphasised that there cannot be a higher and more ambitious MFF without new sources of revenue for the EU budget.”
  Own EU resources
• “Madam chair. Madam Minister, dear colleagues, how can an ordinary family make it to the end of the month when they need 15 annual salaries to buy an apartment? How can a young person survive when housing costs are rising by a quarter year after year? There is one issue fuelling populism everywhere the housing crisis in the Netherlands. The far right one under promise to fix the housing shortage in Portugal. The far right gained power by pledging to fight soaring home prices. The reality is that the housing market is really going crazy. We need a clear plan on how to boost construction and fight inflation, but we don't need another empty declaration. This is my concrete call to all the leaders today and to you, Madam Minister. Thank you.”
  EU housing policy
• “Thank you. Chair. Um, big thanks to, uh, to Co-rapporteur, Siegfried and Carla for really very strong texts and report on MFF. I really do appreciate that you also added a chapter five paragraphs on new own resources, uh, which I consider also very strong text because we are clearly or you are clearly stating that we need a sustainable and resilient new own resources for EU budget and that they should be introduced without any further delay. And I especially welcome the paragraph regarding demanding that in case there is not going to be, um, uh, consent on some of the new own resources, we have something else in the basket, which is called digital service tax. To replace one of those resources, there will not be able to reach the consent. And let me one small remark to Mrs. Fury, I'm, um, I am a bit surprised that you are against the taxation of big tech American companies because your name is Patriots for Europe. So I'm asking myself whether it shouldn't be the Patriots for Elon Musk.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you both presenters, for very interesting presentation. Um, regarding, uh, core, I'm pretty surprised by the fact that there are more than 4000 companies which are running close, and even they are running close. In fact, they would be paying, uh, they would be paying. Cor, uh, I think it goes against the competitiveness. And my question is, uh, whether you think I know that the Cor is based on the turnover, but whether whether Veronica thinks that those companies should be excluded from cor and also, uh, it was very interesting the, the information about the cumulative burden, uh, even though we have been many times told by the Commission that there is no danger of accumulation. So I'm very surprised that there are 20% of of the groups which in fact are facing, uh, that they are paying this fee more for more than 21 times. Um, so could you elaborate more on this, how to, um, how to get rid of of this accumulation in in drafting of core. And regarding, um, Margit, I have the question. Um, in the way ahead, you have been mentioning tax on cryptocurrencies. And my question is, uh, what do you think about, uh, gambling tax as a possible source of the EU budget? Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “22:41 – 10:23:39): Yeah, thanks again. Thank you, colleagues, for your constructive comments. I believe we all want to move swiftly with this file in order to ensure the price stability, but we shouldn't miss the opportunity to also make the Parliament voice heard. A number of colleagues mentioned the social aspects. I believe my report already focuses strongly on this challenge, but I'm very happy to work further with you on the file. At the same time, we need to keep the text as balanced as possible. We know that many member states would prefer to implement the system without changes as they have already moved very quickly in decarbonization. And again, this file is about safeguards in ETS 2. This is my responsibility as a reporter. I want to build a strong majority and succeed in the end and to deliver to our citizens. Thank you.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “A woman shouldn't earn less simply because she is a woman. In Europe today, women a 12% less than men. And then if they retire, their pensions are 25% lower. This gap does not appear overnight. It builds over the lifetime. Lower pay carrier breaks fewer opportunities. As an economist who worked on pension reform. I know one thing. Unfair pension starts with unfair pay. If we want equal pensions, we need equal careers. That means pace, transparency, better childcare and real opportunities for women in high value sectors. Because gender equality is not just social policy, it is Europe's economic strength. Thank you.”
  Gender roles, equality and inclusion
• “Thank you very much, chair. Uh, regarding the digital, uh, digital service tax, um, uh, this proposal already has been in the air, but it never fly. So my question in this context is whether you know, the latest state of play in the OECD at OECD level with the inclusive framework. What is happening? And, uh, regarding, uh, Mr. Desiderio, you've mentioned that, um, wealth tax and polluter pays. In that context, I would like to ask regarding, uh, fossil fuels contribution or tax, wouldn't this undermine the brand new ETS scope? We have a carbon price already. Don't um, and all polluters pay. Thank you.”
  Wealth taxation
• “Dear Mr. Commissioner, dear colleagues. The major priority of the European Union must be security for our citizens. Without security, there is no growth, no social justice. All EU policies, including cohesion, must contribute to this goal. And today we have achieved a good result. A text that enables stronger investment in defence. I welcome the changes to national allocation rules, and I am glad that the rule of law has been safeguarded. But this question is not settled. Some governments will try to lower our ambition. Let me be clear. Parliament will remain a watchdog of the rule of law, especially in the next long term budget. Thank you.”
  Defence spending
• “In particular, as we move towards the introduction of additional new own resources, it's imperative that we take the lessons from the first experience seriously, especially regarding the reliability, accuracy, and comparability of data across Member States. The harmonization of definitions is a fundamental without a shared understanding of key terms and reporting standards. Comparisons across member states become difficult and trust in the system may erode. We also recognize that member states need consistent and structured support in implementing the Packaging Waste Directive. Effective. Effective implementation in the national level is essential to the success of the resource at union level. One issue that deserves particular attention is the export of plastic waste. We must ensure that exported waste is not used as a loophole to evade proper recycling, or to misrepresent progress toward waste reduction targets. In this context, we would support a continued refinement and sharpening of tertiary legislation as needed to clarify its responsibility, close loopholes, and enhance enforcement mechanisms. Finally, we must ensure that recycling is done in a genuine and verifiable manner, not just on paper, but in practice. This is the very essence of the circular economy model we aspire to. It's not just about recycling, it's about doing so with integrity and long term impact. Thank you.”
  Own resources (plastics)
• “Colleagues, the Union reacted swiftly and effectively to the pandemic. We stood united, supported businesses and protected jobs in a moment of deep crisis. We show that the EU is not a bureaucratic machine. It is a political community capable of real action. The recovery fund, of course, was not perfect. There were delays in implementation and the use of cross-border projects and ongoing issues with transparency. And despite the scale of the effort, only 13 countries requested loans, leaving billion unused. So the question becomes urgent. What do we do with the unused funds and the bonds already issued? I believe we should invest in our society, especially in defense. I welcome the Commission's recent proposals because without security, there can there can be no long term growth on this continent. But we cannot ignore the elephant in the room. We do not have enough revenue to pay our debts. It's like asking a bank for a loan without no plan to pay back. How would any bank react in two years? We face 30 billion in repayments annually. That's nearly one fifth of EU budget. There is only one sustainable solution. New own resources for the EU member states must act. The clocks are ticking. Let's give the unions the tools it needs for a stable and secure future. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources · Defence spending
• “Okay. Second, we must not forget human resources. Without enough staff, even the best program will not work. Customs and market surveillance authorities need the capacity to do their job effectively. At the same time, we are seeing a strong increase in imports in particularly from e-commerce platforms. This trend is putting additional pressure on customs authorities. Recent policy changes, including the introduction of handling fees for low value consignments, also require proper administrative capacity to be implemented effectively. Third, we are concerned about transparency. The proposal does not clearly explain how the budget will be divided. This could reduce the role of Parliament. We believe there should be clear budget lines and stronger safeguards. Fourth, monitoring and evaluation must be improved. We need clear and reliable indicators that focus on real results, not just activities. Finally, cooperation with other EU programs is important, but it must be well coordinated. We must avoid double funding and make sure spending remains transparent. In conclusion, we support the goals of this program, but to succeed, it needs stronger budget, better governance and proper oversight. Thank you.”
  Accounting and auditing of EU budget
• “That is correct. Is it a correct understanding? So aren't you concerned with example that eliminating the solidarity adjustment mechanism in ETS could create even greater resistance from the most carbon intensive states? And allow me also the last question, which is rather technical but very important for us for new, there is a set end date for the loan program. However, for the new crisis loan mechanism proposed by the Commission in the next MFF, there does not appear to be one, if I am correct. Are you not concerned that this could create even greater and uncontrolled pressure on the EU budget? We can already see that we are struggling to adapt new own resources to repay ng EU. And a last question. Um, uh, the proposal on the own Resources Directive provides adjustment on traditional own resources, including the clarification that the amounts related to e-commerce as established under the Union Customs code, the handling fee, fall into the category of traditional own resources. However, the initial communication from the Commission on E-commerce classified the handling fee as other revenue for the EU budget. Could you provide a reason that justify this change on the classification of handling fee? Thank you very much.”
  Own EU resources
• “(09:24:56 – 09:29:06): Colleagues let me be very clear from i fully support the proposal of the commission on msr ets two revision it's a result of an important initiative of nineteen member states that will improve allowance price stability we should implement it as soon as possible however as a parliament our voice needs to be heard we have demonstrated this in the past and succeeded for example with the rule of law due diligence and other key reg regulations we cannot be merely a schambardan registroman of the council otherwise we would need elect otherwise why we would need elect parliament in brussels my proposals are built on two main pillars which i believe reflect the core aspirations of this house the need to push for the carbonization to protect our planet by also ensuring social fairness and a secure affordable energy supply for our citizens for that very reason my amendments which do not alter the main provisions in the context of the proposed revision ask to reflect more to ensure environmental but also social safeguards first strong funding has to be secured for decarbonization we are already witnessing a decline in green investments since the pandemic as the ecb has highlighted if we are serious about delivering on our objectives we must guarantee that the financial means match our political commitments further we need robust impact assessment to safeguard our climate ambitions and to avoid negative social impact of the system i believe that the commission should reflect on solutions to protect citizens from the potential negative impact of this system otherwise we risk significant social unrest in several european countries as we witnessed with the yellow vest in france for example in this context various options are on the table from stronger caps and better compensation mechanism to allowing member states to temporarily exempt residential buildings by ensuring the achievement of effort sharing targets i'm not saying that all of these measures must be implemented rather they represent a list of possibilities that the commission should carefully consider if we want to preserve social peace in europe and importantly recent geopolitical developments show why we should also reflect on an emergency break which would secure affordable energy supply for the citizens even in times of crisis the escalation of conflict involving iran and related disruptions to lng supply has already triggered sharp price spike spy spikes in european gas and lng markets wholesale gas prices have surged by over twenty five percent and freight rates jams more than forty percent with prolonged disruption potentially driving prices even higher in this context it's prudent to include in the recitals a clear reference to a temporary stronger price ceilings that the commission can activate in case of energy shortage energy crisis or blackout this safeguard is not a retreat from climate ambition it is a political necessity to ensure system resilience and protect households and businesses during systemic shocks colleagues to sum up my amendments protect the core of the proposal on the table in order to reach a swift agreement with the council while also using this opportunity to call for stronger safeguards on both decarbonization energy supply and social justice thereby ensuring that all citizens are on board this should be our primary goal as elected parliamentarians and i believe my report can be a good basis serving this key objective thank you”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “22:41 – 10:23:39): Yeah, thanks again. Thank you, colleagues, for your constructive comments. I believe we all want to move swiftly with this file in order to ensure the price stability, but we shouldn't miss the opportunity to also make the Parliament voice heard. A number of colleagues mentioned the social aspects. I believe my report already focuses strongly on this challenge, but I'm very happy to work further with you on the file. At the same time, we need to keep the text as balanced as possible. We know that many member states would prefer to implement the system without changes as they have already moved very quickly in decarbonization. And again, this file is about safeguards in ETS 2. This is my responsibility as a reporter. I want to build a strong majority and succeed in the end and to deliver to our citizens. Thank you.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “For too long, digital giants have profited from our European market without contributing fairly to our public finances or moderating hateful content. You deserve to die. You and your son. This is what I sometimes receive on my social media. I use social platforms every day. My children do too. I always believed that they should connect people and inspire creativity, but today, too often they do the opposite. Instead of dialogue, we see VC hate instead of VC disinformation Russian trolls, anti-Semitism, homophobia. This is not the digital European space we stand for. We must recreate this space. A space for people with values, a space for respect, a space for democracy. And platforms must take responsibility for moderation, while at the same time paying their fair share in taxes. These are the sides of the same coin. Social platforms must go back to what they promised us to connect people, not divide them. To inform. Not to poison. To serve democracy. Not to undermine it. Let's make sure they do.”
  Digital platforms liability for harmful and illegal content
• “Do you know how we call a person who forms a relationship with another purely to extract money from them? A gold digger? And in Europe, we all know who that is. Viktor Orban blackmails us at every single summit when we want to strengthen our security. He says no. When we want to support a country that has been unjustly invaded, he says no. But when he wants European money for him and his oligarchs, he says yes. That last leaders summit show that Europe is finally taking responsibility for its own defence. We are establishing new defence loans, making national budgets more flexible and ensuring that every unused euro in the EU budget is redirected towards this effort. But we must go further. It's time to break the taboos. It's time to end Orban's veto over EU foreign and defence policy. We need a stronger long term EU budget and a significantly larger European Defence fund, and we must be ready to deliver. And we need to say no to this gold digger. Thank you.”
  EU competences on defence
• “Only with a solid mix of new own resources, will the Union be able to deliver on its commitments and meet the expectations of the citizens. Therefore, allow me to have some questions. First, how does the Commission plan to convince all member States that this proposal is the right one? Many attempts have already failed in the past and the first public reactions. You already mentioned that core is kind of a red flag. So the discussion is not very reassuring in that point. Some member states are also fighting with ETS revenue because they would like to have it the part of their own national budget. So are you considering possible adjustments to the basket if there is a significant opposition? Secondly, you already mentioned that that the red flag is core, but what is going to be your story for the capitals, because you mentioned several times that it's a package, and core is the part which is criticized widely across the EU member states. So what is going to be the story for the politicians to be able to advocate for in the capitals? Third, could you also elaborate more on the correction mechanism? We see all the rebates have been removed.”
  Own EU resources
• “The recent energy crisis has shown how vulnerable our societies are, especially amid global instability such as the war in the Middle East. We are seeing sudden prices spikes almost every day. We cannot always control geopolitics, but we can control our own policies, our regulations and taxes. And as politicians, we must recognize that we can sometimes be part of the problem. Energy taxes account for about a quarter of the price households pay varies. The energy connection across the union still remain, even though it would help to lower the prices. We do not have enough instruments to counter price volatility of energies, and we are not supporting enough energies that ensure an independent and secure supply, including nuclear energy. The European Union should help the citizens. This is why this mandate must focus more on the social impact of the transition. I therefore welcome the Commission's proposal of this package. **Nicolae ȘTEFĂNUȚĂ @Chair: Mr. Molnar is next.”
  EU approach to electricity market and prices
• “Very much. And thank you, Mrs. Rapporteur, for your presentation. At a time when boosting the competitiveness of European companies is a priority for both the new commission and the parliament. It is also essential to address the complexity of the systems within the EU. Today's fragmented taxation national systems discourages cross-border investment within the European Union and place European businesses at a competitive disadvantage compared to companies operating elsewhere in the world. This is why the proposal is so important. As Parliament, we should be strong supporters of this legislative initiative and I am pleased that Rapporteur Wagner has taken the lead in advancing this file and restarting the negotiations. Again, the timing is also significant, particularly in light of the international context, most notably the decision by the United States to withdraw from the OECD tax agreement. That said, we must be realistic. The key decisions lie primarily with the council. I believe we should adopt a pragmatic stance, as we currently lack the necessary leverage to compel member states to fully align with our position. In this context, I would caution against overburdening the proposal. Specifically, I do not believe that changing the threshold and making it obligatory is a viable solution. Lowering the threshold so significantly would have a substantial impact on businesses, and would run counter to our goal of enhancing competitiveness. I also have reservations regarding the proposed introduction of formally apportionment in the report, as well as the definition of the digital percent of presence of companies. I also believe we should further assess the proposal on depreciation rules and adapt them to today's priorities, particularly in the area of defence. I will promise amendments in this regard. I also do not believe that multiplying delegated delegated acts in the proposal is the right approach. Companies need stability, and leaving such an important tax related decisions solely to the Commission may create further blockages and is even less democratic because Parliament is already put aside. To conclude, I firmly believe that our priority must be to make it workable for companies. We need to ensure that benefit leads to simplification, not to the opposite. Otherwise, we risk missing our primary objective. Thank you.”
  EU competences on taxation
• “Dear Commissioner, dear colleagues, I want to have a strong relationship with the United States, but not at any cost. This deal will cost us €4 billion per year. This is the size of Erasmus program. Still, I believe it's worth it because we need the access to the US market. But we need clear conditions. We all see that the current occupant of the white House changes minds almost every day. One day he wants to impose 40% tariffs. The next day he talks about occupying European territory. This is why we need a clear clause. We implement this deal only if United States respects it. And if our territory is threatened again, the deal must be suspended immediately. So yes, I support the deal, but only if both sides, both sides respect it fully.”
  EU-US trade relations
• “22:41 – 10:23:39): Yeah, thanks again. Thank you, colleagues, for your constructive comments. I believe we all want to move swiftly with this file in order to ensure the price stability, but we shouldn't miss the opportunity to also make the Parliament voice heard. A number of colleagues mentioned the social aspects. I believe my report already focuses strongly on this challenge, but I'm very happy to work further with you on the file. At the same time, we need to keep the text as balanced as possible. We know that many member states would prefer to implement the system without changes as they have already moved very quickly in decarbonization. And again, this file is about safeguards in ETS 2. This is my responsibility as a reporter. I want to build a strong majority and succeed in the end and to deliver to our citizens. Thank you.”
  Extension of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme
• “Europe is not short of savings. It is short of investments. Every year, billions of euros leave Europe because our capital markets remain fragmented. At the same time, our companies struggle to access the financing they need. We need deeper market integration, fewer national barriers, and smarter regulation that actually unlocks the capital. That also means looking seriously at the role of the pension funds, properly deregulated and unable to invest more broadly across the borders. They can become powerful long term investors in Europe's economy. Europe's savings should finance Europe's future, our innovation, our transition and our competitiveness. The capital is here in the European Union. Now we must remove the barriers that prevent it from working for our Europe. Thank you.”
  EU Single Market harmonisation
• “Dear colleagues, let me now use my other task as a rapporteur on budgetary assessment and explaining the position of Budget Committee on this important file. The Budget Committee has long supported initiatives such as CDB Digital Service Tax and OECD pillar one approach. The main objective of the proposed framework is to improve transparency and reduce revenue leakage in corporate taxation, and important issue from a budgetary perspective. In this context, it is important to recall that the Interinstitutional Agreement roadmap explicitly includes the introduction of a corporate tax based on resource, as a part of a broader reform of EU revenue. Our budgetary assessment focuses particularly on this dimension, as it is expected to play a key role in defining a workable and harmonised tax base for such a new own resource. Defeat could provide a viable and stable long term source of revenue for the EU budget, which is especially relevant given the current pressure from debt repayment obligations and growing financial needs linked to emerging priorities. At the same time, it is crucial to ensure that any new own resource does not result in an increased tax burden for companies or for citizens. The main goal of Bfit should be to help to create a unified set of corporate taxation rules for companies acting on the single market. The responsibility now lies with the Member States to agree on and to adapt new own resources, which are urgently needed to finance the repayment of next generation EU debt and to secure the long term sustainability of EU policies. Thank you.”
  Own EU resources
• “All together. Thank you. So sorry to be a bit bit longer. Thanks a lot for for wonderful presentations. Um first I have some questions on Mr. Darvas, and the first one is regarding the Regressivity having the academic background now being the politician. I think there is a kind of discrepancy between what we do consider as regressivity as the economists and what we see as the politician blocking as the blocking factor in, in the council. Um, I don't think that it's really true that green own resources penalizes poorer states, while poorer states are poorer in green transition. Therefore they are the bigger the bigger polluters than than, uh, than the other states. My question is what could be the narrative, how to unblock the situation and how to get rid of this narrative in the Council? This this the regressivity. Then I have a question on. Very interesting, very interesting. New own possible resource, uh, defense spending shortfall levy. Whether you could elaborate more on this topic. And then I have a question. I think it was slide seven. Um, it was about the the blockage in the council. And you have mentioned the complexity and the administrative burden. Well, I think we have common challenges, channels through which we do collect taxes. So could you elaborate more on this? Because I do not see any excessive administrative burden, because we already have the channels and we do pay into the EU budget. So I can't imagine any other structure which could which should be needed for, for, um, for collecting any new own resource regarding, um, Mrs. Christie, created for a very interesting presentation.”
  Own EU resources
• “Thank you, Madam President. Ladies and gentlemen, these are unprecedented times. Our security hangs by a thread and our industry is in trouble with the EPP colleagues. We've demonstrated that we're a pragmatic force, and we put forward specific proposals. We have a clear plan to get the European automotive industry out of a tight spot. And the European Commission listened to us. Thank you. It has taken exactly the course that we put forward technological neutrality and limits on the emissions penalties imposed on the industry. That's a first step towards increasing the competitiveness of European industry. That's a first step. We need to continue down this path. I hope we will succeed. Ladies and gentlemen, we are delivering on our promises. If we are active, constructive and ambitious, we can change Europe.”
  Industrial emissions directive (IED)
• “Mr. Commissioner. Dear colleagues, Europe is losing ground. Years of investment shortfalls and excessive regulation are costing us our global competitiveness. The same goes for defense. This war once again on our continent. We must be able to ensure security for our citizens. These are the challenges we face. And yes, we need more funding, but not at any cost. We need clear, simple and transparent rules in the EU budget. Today, too many from local mayors to leading researchers struggle to access EU funds, they face a wall of bureaucracy and that must change. We also need stable new sources of revenue with sufficient budgetary reserve in order to be prepared for what comes next. But above all, managing the EU budget must remain a shared responsibility. How can national governments alone decide how to spend EU money in our regions without even asking what those regions need, and without Parliament's oversight? Mr. Orban will channel even more EU money to his pro-government friends, and if Mr. Babish returns to power, he will have even more free rein to continue his old games with EU funds. Mr. Commissioner, we need a government that includes all actors and not to give all the keys to the national governments. Thank you.”
  Conditions to access EU budget
• “Thank you, dear Commissioner. Dear colleagues. From the very beginning of this mandate, we stand with you, Commissioner, in support of your willingness to come forward with the solutions on own resources And help us move beyond the current stalemate. But based on our past experience, we know that some proposals will face negative reactions in the council. We already know that some member states have concerns about core while the others oppose ETS. At the end of the day, we all know that everything will never be perfect for everyone. But the alternative is massive cuts to the budget. The very same member states complaining about new own resources will also complain when they will face severe cuts to agriculture, cohesion, competitiveness and research funding. So as Parliament, we have also come forward with possible solutions in case some proposals in the package are dropped. First, digital levy already agreed by leaders in 2020. It is a matter of fairness and would primarily affect the large digital giants. Second, attacks on crypto assets. We all know that a significant amount of money circulating in crypto also comes from illicit activities, so this would also contribute to greater transparency. And finally, as Parliament, we believe we can also explore a gambling tax. Let us find a way forward together because otherwise we will be cutting investments in our future simply because we acted irresponsibly as politicians by adopting the European Union and the future generations. Thanks.”
  Own EU resources