Arbitrator issues decision in Airbus subsidy dispute

https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news19_e/316arb_e.htm

On 2 October, a WTO arbitrator issued its decision on the level of countermeasures the United States may request with respect to the European Union and certain EU member states in “European Communities and Certain member States — Measures Affecting Trade in Large Civil Aircraft” (DS316).

“9.2. The United States may therefore request authorization from the DSB to take countermeasures with respect to the European Union and certain member States, as indicated in document WT/DS316/18, at a level not exceeding, in total, USD 7,496.623 million annually. These countermeasures may take the form of (a) suspension of tariff concessions and related obligations under the GATT 1994, and/or (b) suspension of horizontal or sectoral commitments and obligations contained in the United States’ services schedule with regard to all services defined in the Services Sectoral Classification List, except for financial services.

316arb_conc_e

Pubblicato in lawfare, trade, trade wars, WTO | Lascia un commento

Conference: EU Sanctions against the Russian Federation and the Islamic Republic of Iran in a comparative perspective

LOCANDINA A3

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

Call for Papers Research Forum CfP “Solidarity. The Quest for Founding Utopias of International Law” 23-24 April 2020, Catania. Deadline: 30 September 2019 –

Call for Papers Research Forum CfP “Solidarity. The Quest for Founding Utopias of International Law” 23-24 April 2020, Catania. Deadline: 30 September 2019

CATANIA_2020-ESIL-Research-Forum-Call-for-Papers

Pubblicato in Conferences and Workshops | Lascia un commento

Russia and Ukraine Swap Dozens of Prisoners

Pubblicato in Russia, sanctions, Ukraine | Lascia un commento

Launch of Judicial Counter-Terrorism Register at Eurojust

A Counter-Terrorism Register (CTR) has been launched at Eurojust to reinforce the judicial response in Member States to terrorist threats and to improve security for citizens. The CTR, which entered into force on 1 September, centralises key judicial information to establish links in proceedings against suspects of terrorist offences. The CTR is managed by Eurojust in The Hague on a 24-hour basis and provides proactive support to national judicial authorities. This centralised information will help prosecutors to coordinate more actively and to identify the suspects or networks that are being investigated in specific cases with potential cross-border implications.

http://www.eurojust.europa.eu/press/PressReleases/Pages/2019/2019-09-05.aspx

Pubblicato in natsec, Terrorismo | Lascia un commento

GOLDEN POWER: 5G

Il Consiglio dei Ministri, su proposta del Ministro dello sviluppo economico Stefano Patuanelli, a norma dell’articolo 1-bis del decreto-legge 15 marzo 2012, n. 21, ha deliberato:

l’esercizio dei poteri speciali in relazione alla informativa notificata dalla società LINKEM S.p.a. relativa a contratti o accordi aventi ad oggetto l’acquisto di beni e servizi relativi alla progettazione, alla realizzazione, alla manutenzione e alla gestione delle reti inerenti i servizi di comunicazione elettronica a banda larga su tecnologia 5G e acquisizione di componenti ad alta intensità tecnologica funzionali alla predetta realizzazione o gestione;
l’esercizio di poteri speciali, con condizioni e prescrizioni, in relazione all’operazione notificata dalla società Vodafone S.p.a. consistente in accordi aventi ad oggetto l’acquisto di beni e servizi per la realizzazione e la gestione di reti di comunicazione elettronica basate sulla tecnologia 5G;
l’esercizio dei poteri speciali in relazione all’informativa notificata dalla società TIM S.p.a. relativa agli accordi conclusi prima del 26 marzo relativi ad apparati e sistemi di comunicazione rispetto ai quali la tecnologia 5G può essere considerata una naturale evoluzione;
l’esercizio dei poteri speciali, con prescrizioni, in relazione all’informativa notificata dalla società Wind Tre S.p.a. circa gli accordi stipulati con la società Huawei, aventi ad oggetto l’acquisto di beni e servizi per la realizzazione e la gestione di reti di comunicazione elettronica basate sulla tecnologia 5G;
l’esercizio dei poteri speciali in relazione all’informativa notificata dalla società FASTWEB S.p.a. relativa all’acquisto dalla società ZTE Corporation degli apparati relativi alle componenti radio per la realizzazione dell’ultima tratta della rete 5G FWA.

Pubblicato in Golden Power, natsec | Lascia un commento

United States – INTERNATIONAL EMERGENCY ECONOMIC POWERS

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/chapter-35

The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) is a United States federal law authorizing the president to regulate international commerce after declaring a national emergency in response to any unusual and extraordinary threat to the United States which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States.

As part of an ongoing trade war with China, on August 24, 2019, Trump tweeted that he “hereby ordered” US companies to start looking at alternatives to China on the basis of claimed powers under IEEPA.

Trump, however, did not formally declare an emergency as required by IEEPA.

(On May 30, 2019, the White House announced that President Donald Trump would use IEEPA powers to introduce tariffs on Mexican exports in response to the national security threat of illegal immigration from Mexico into the United States.)

Pubblicato in lawfare, natsec, trade wars | Lascia un commento

Call for Proposals: International Economic Law And Security Interests Conference

The Amsterdam Center for International Law in collaboration with ESIL’s International Economic Law Interest Group invites scholars to submit proposals for the ‘International Economic Law And Security Interests Conference’ which will take place on 14 and 15 November 2019.

https://acil.uva.nl/content/events/conferences/2019/11/international-economic-law-and-security-interests-conference.html?1563816001462&1564526139614

Pubblicato in natsec | Lascia un commento

New sanctions regime in the field of cybersecurity

Council Regulation (EU) 2019/796 of 17 May 2019 concerning restrictive measures against cyber-attacks threatening the Union or its Member States

Council Decision (CFSP) 2019/797 of 17 May 2019 concerning restrictive measures against cyber-attacks threatening the Union or its Member States

CELEX32019D0797ENTXT

CELEX32019D0797ITTXT

CELEX32019R0796ITTXT

CELEX32019R0796ENTXT

Pubblicato in cyber, sanctions | Lascia un commento

Executive Order on Securing the Information and Communications Technology and Services Supply Chain

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-securing-information-communications-technology-services-supply-chain/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/message-congress-securing-information-communications-technology-services-supply-chain/

See also OFAC Sanctions Related to Significant Malicious Cyber-Enabled Activities

Pubblicato in natsec, sanctions, trade wars | Contrassegnato , | Lascia un commento

The period provided for in Article 50(3) TEU, as extended by the European Council Decision (EU) 2019/476, is hereby further extended until 31 October 2019. – Il termine previsto dall’articolo 50, paragrafo 3, TUE è ulteriormente prorogato fino al 31 ottobre 2019.

CELEX32019D0584ENTXT

CELEX32019D0584ITTXT

The period provided for in Article 50(3) TEU, as extended by the European Council Decision (EU) 2019/476, is hereby further extended until 31 October 2019.

This decision shall cease to apply on 31 May 2019 in the event that the United Kingdom has not held elections to the European Parliament in accordance with applicable Union law and has not ratified the Withdrawal Agreement by 22 May 2019.

Il termine previsto dall’articolo 50, paragrafo 3, TUE, quale prorogato dalla decisione (UE) 2019/476 del Consiglio europeo, è ulteriormente prorogato fino al 31 ottobre 2019.

La presente decisione cessa di applicarsi il 31 maggio 2019 nel caso in cui il Regno Unito non abbia tenuto le elezioni del Parlamento europeo conformemente al diritto dell’Unione e non abbia ratificato l’accordo di recesso entro il 22 maggio 2019.

Pubblicato in Brexit | Lascia un commento

Joint Statement UE – China Dichiarazione congiunta UE – Cina

euchina-joint-statement-9april2019

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato , | Lascia un commento

ART. XXI GATT – SECURITY EXCEPTION: DS512: Russia — Measures Concerning Traffic in Transit

https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/cases_e/ds512_e.htm

7.126. The Panel finds as follows:
a. As of 2014, there has existed a situation in Russia’s relations with Ukraine that constitutes an emergency in international relations within the meaning of subparagraph (iii) of Article XXI(b) of the GATT 1994; and
b. each of the measures at issue was taken in time of this emergency in international relations within the meaning of subparagraph (iii) of Article XXI(b) of the GATT 1994.

512R

Pubblicato in natsec, Russia, Ukraine, WTO | Lascia un commento

European Council Decision (EU) 2019/476 taken in agreement with the United Kingdom of 22 March 2019 extending the period under Article 50(3)TEU – Decisione (UE) 2019/476 del Consiglio europeo adottata d’intesa con il Regno Unito, del 22 marzo 2019, che proroga il termine previsto dall’articolo 50, paragrafo 3, TUE

CELEX32019D0476ENTXT

CELEX32019D0476ITTXT

In the event that the Withdrawal Agreement is approved by the House of Commons by 29 March 2019 at the latest, the period provided for in Article 50(3) TEU is extended until 22 May 2019.
In the event that the Withdrawal Agreement is not approved by the House of Commons by 29 March 2019 at the latest, the period provided for in Article 50(3) TEU is extended until 12 April 2019. In that event, the United Kingdom will indicate a way forward before 12 April 2019, for consideration by the European Council.

Qualora l’accordo di recesso sia approvato dalla Camera dei Comuni entro il 29 marzo 2019, il termine previsto dall’articolo 50, paragrafo 3, TUE è prorogato fino al 22 maggio 2019.
Qualora l’accordo di recesso non sia approvato dalla Camera dei Comuni entro il 29 marzo 2019, il termine previsto dall’articolo 50, paragrafo 3, TUE è prorogato fino al 12 aprile 2019. In tal caso il Regno Unito indicherà prima del 12 aprile 2019 il percorso da seguire, in vista del suo esame.

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Regulation (EU) 2019/452 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 March 2019 establishing a framework for the screening of foreign direct investments into the Union – Regolamento (UE) 2019/452 del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio, del 19 marzo 2019, che istituisce un quadro per il controllo degli investimenti esteri diretti nell’Unione

CELEX32019R0452ENTXT

CELEX32019R0452ITTXT

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato , | Lascia un commento

Sovereignty in a globalised world

Speech by Mario Draghi, President of the ECB, on the award of Laurea honoris causa in law from Università degli Studi di Bologna, Bologna, 22 February 2019

Sovereignty in a globalised world

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

The EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement explained (slides).

The EU-UK Withdrawal Agreement explained (slides).

the_withdrawal_agreement_explained

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

The ECJ on the Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Libyia

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Third Chamber)
17 January 2019 – Case C?168/17
(Reference for a preliminary ruling — Common foreign and security policy — Restrictive measures adopted in view of the situation in Libya — A chain of contracts concluded with the aim of issuing a bank guarantee for the benefit of an entity on a list of entities whose funds are to be frozen — Payment of costs arising under counter guarantee agreements — Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 — Article 5 — Definition of ‘funds made available to an entity referred to in Annex III to Regulation No 204/2011’ — Article 12(1)(c) — Definition of ‘a claim under a guarantee’ — Definition of a ‘person or entity acting on behalf of a person referred to in Article 12(1)(a) or (b)’)

Lybia ECJ

Pubblicato in Libya, sanctions | Lascia un commento

The next move has to come from London. There is nothing else we can do from here at this stage. What matters at this stage … is that we know what to expect from the UK, and that we don’t know.

The next move has to come from London. There is nothing else we can do from here at this stage. What matters at this stage … is that we know what to expect from the UK, and that we don’t know.

Margaritis Schinas, the spokesman for the European commission.

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

UK Parliament reject Premier May’s Brexit plan by 432 by 202 – a majority of 230

MPs reject May’s Brexit plan by 432 by 202 – a majority of 230

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

The Sanctions (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019

2019 No. 26 EXITING THE EUROPEAN UNION
The Sanctions (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019

These Regulations are made in exercise of the powers conferred by section 8(1) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (c.16) in order to address failures of retained EU law to operate effectively and other deficiencies (in particular under section 8(2)(a) and (g) of that Act) arising from the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union.
These Regulations make amendments to legislation in the field of sanctions and, in particular, amend the existing EU Council Regulations that implement arms embargoes in respect of Afghanistan, the Central African Republic, Somalia and Sudan. They also amend the EU Council Regulations that prohibit claims being made in respect of historic sanctions regimes in relation to the following countries: Haiti, Iraq, Libya and Serbia and Montenegro.
An impact assessment has not been produced for this instrument as no, or no significant, impact on the private or voluntary sector is foreseen.

uksi_20190026_en

Pubblicato in Brexit, sanctions | Lascia un commento

Trade remedies if there’s no Brexit deal

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/trade-remedies-if-theres-no-brexit-deal/trade-remedies-if-theres-no-brexit-deal

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Avvocato generale Bobek: il gestore di un sito Internet che inserisce il plugin di un terzo, come il pulsante « Mi piace » di Facebook, il quale determina la raccolta e la trasmissione dei dati personali degli utenti, è corresponsabile di tale fase del trattamento dei dati

Conclusioni dell’avvocato generale nella causa C-40/17
Fashion ID GmbH & Co. KG / Verbraucherzentrale NRW eV

cp180206it

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

L’avvocato generale Kokott propone alla Corte di dichiarare che, avendo sospeso il governatore della banca di Lettonia dal suo incarico, la Repubblica di Lettonia è venuta meno ai suoi obblighi

cp180207it

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

Poland must immediately suspend the application of the provisions of national legislation relating to the lowering of the retirement age for Supreme Court judges

Order of the Court in Case C-619/18 R
Commission v Poland

cp180204en

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato , | Lascia un commento

The #Brexit saga continues: UK Prime Minister will seek to postpone a parliamentary vote on her proposal for Britain’s departure from the European Union

Brexit vote: What could happen next?

Brexit vote: What could happen next?

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

The United Kingdom is free to revoke unilaterally the notification of its intention to withdraw from the EU – Il Regno Unito è libero di revocare unilateralmente la notifica della sua intenzione di uscire dall’UE

Judgment in Case C-621/18
Wightman and Others v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union
December 10 2018

Such a revocation, decided in accordance with its own national constitutional requirements, would have the effect that the United Kingdom remains in the EU under terms that are unchanged as regards its status as a Member State

cp180191en

See also R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017]

Miller

“Conclusion

274. Shortly after the 1972 Act came into force, Lord Denning famously spoke of the European Treaty as “like an incoming tide. It flows into the estuaries and up the rivers. It cannot be held back …” (Bulmer Ltd v Bollinger [1974] Ch 401, 418F). That process is now to be reversed. Hydrologists may be able to suggest an appropriate analogy. On any view, the legal and practical challenges will be enormous. The respondents have done a great service in bringing these issues before the court at the beginning of the process. The very full debate in the courts has been supplemented by a vigorous and illuminating academic debate conducted on the web (particularly through the UK Constitutional Law Blog site). Unsurprisingly, given the unprecedented nature of the undertaking there are no easy answers. In the end, in respectful disagreement with the majority, I have reached the clear conclusion that the Divisional Court took too narrow a view of the constitutional principles at stake. The article 50 process must and will involve a partnership between Parliament and the Executive. But that does not mean that legislation is required simply to initiate it. Legislation will undoubtedly be required to implement withdrawal, but the process, including the form and timing of any legislation, can and should be determined by Parliament not by the courts. That involves no breach of the constitutional principles which have been entrenched in our law since the 17th century, and no threat to the fundamental principle of Parliamentary sovereignty.”

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Case C-621/18 shall be determined pursuant to the expedited procedure provided for in Article 105(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court. – Rito accelerato per il caso Wightman

Case C-621/18 shall be determined pursuant to the expedited procedure provided for in Article 105(1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Court.

C-621/18 order of the President of the ECJ0

Case C-621 Wightman (Judgment 10th December at 09:00 CET) has been dealt with using the ECJ’s expedited procedure at the request of the Court of Session “[i]n light of the urgency of the issue in terms of parliamentary consideration and voting” #Brexit

Il signor Andy Wightman, parlamentare scozzese, e altri politici e parlamentari scozzesi, britannici ed europarlamentari, si sono rivolti alla Court of Session, Inner House, First Division (Scozia) per conoscere se e a quali condizioni il Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union (segretario di Stato per la Brexit) potrebbe revocare la notificazione dell’intenzione del Regno Unito di ritirarsi dall’Unione europea.

In virtù della legge britannica sul ritiro dall’UE (European Union Withdrawal Act), l’accordo che potrebbe essere concluso tra il Regno Unito e l’UE deve essere ratificato con l’approvazione del Parlamento britannico. In assenza di approvazione, se nessun’altra proposta viene formulata, l’uscita del Regno Unito dall’Unione sarà comunque effettiva dal 29 marzo 2019.

In questo contesto, con domanda pregiudiziale pervenuta alla Corte di giustizia il 3 ottobre 2018, il tribunale scozzese ha chiesto alla Corte di interpretare l’art. 50 del Trattato. In particolare, il giudice remittente chiede se, quando, ai sensi di tale norma, uno Stato membro ha notificato al Consiglio europeo la propria intenzione di ritirarsi dall’Unione, il diritto dell’Unione permetta a tale Stato di revocare unilateralmente la propria notificazione prima della fine del termine di due anni previsto nello stesso art. 50.

Su richiesta del tribunale scozzese, il Presidente della Corte ha disposto la procedura accelerata prevista all’art. 105 del regolamento di procedura della Corte, stante l’urgenza della domanda e tenuto conto dell’importanza fondamentale che riveste la corretta interpretazione e applicazione dell’art. 50 TUE sia per il Regno Unito sia per l’ordine costituzionale dell’Unione nel suo complesso.

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Brexit: Long-term economic analysis

Long-term economic analysis

Long-term economic analysis

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Publication of the Attorney General’s legal advice to Cabinet on the Withdrawal Agreement and the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland.

Following the Motion passed on 4 December in the House of Commons, the Government has published the Attorney General’s legal advice to Cabinet on the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland and made this available to Parliament. This is the full, final advice that the Attorney General provided to Cabinet on 14 November on the legal effect of the Withdrawal Agreement. The release of this advice does not set a precedent for any future release of Law Officers’ advice.
This document has been made available to Parliament through a Written Ministerial Statement from the Attorney General.

Attorney_General_s_legal_advice_to_Cabinet

Exiting the EU: Publication of Legal Advice:Written statement – HCWS1142 – UK Parliament

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/exiting-the-european-union-publications

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona proposes that the Court of Justice should declare that Article 50 TEU allows the unilateral revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU

Advocate General Campos Sánchez-Bordona proposes that the Court of Justice should declare that Article 50 TEU allows the unilateral revocation of the notification of the intention to withdraw from the EU

cp180187en

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

ECHR grants interim measure in new inter-State case brought by Ukraine against Russia concerning events in the Kerch Strait

Today, the European Court of Human Rights decided to indicate to the Russian Government by way of interim measure that, in the interests of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before it, they should ensure that appropriate medical treatment be administered to those captive Ukrainian naval personnel who required it, including in particular any who might have been wounded in the naval incident that took place in the Kerch Strait on 25 November 2018.
The Government of Ukraine submitted an urgent request under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court in the context of a new inter-State application lodged against the Russian Federation under Article 33 (Inter-State cases) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The inter-State application was lodged on 29 November 2018 and registered under application no. 55855/18, Ukraine v. Russia (VIII).
In its decision today, the Court also maintained its request for factual information, as formulated in its letter to the Russian Government on 29 November 2018. See press release of 30 November 2018.
***
The Court may, under Rule 39 of its Rules of Court, indicate interim measures to any State party to the Convention. Interim measures are urgent measures which, according to the Court’s well- established practice, apply only where there is an imminent risk of irreparable harm. Such measures are decided in connection with proceedings before the Court, without prejudging any subsequent decisions on the admissibility or merits of the case in question

ECHR puts questions in new inter-State case brought by Ukraine against Russia

ECHR grants Rule 39 in new inter-State case Ukraine v. Russia concerning events in the Kerch Strait

Pubblicato in Russia, Ukraine | Contrassegnato , , | Lascia un commento

Il Tribunale respinge in quanto irricevibile l’impugnazione della decisione di apertura dei negoziati relativi alla Brexit – The application for annulment of the decision authorising the opening of Brexit negotiations is inadmissible.

Shindler v Council

Brexit: non è ricevibile la domanda di tredici cittadini britannici, residenti in Stati dell’UE diversi dal Regno Unito, di annullare la decisione che autorizza l’avvio dei negoziati sulla Brexit

cp180184it

Brexit: the application for annulment of the decision authorising the opening of Brexit negotiations, brought by thirteen British citizens who live in EU Member States other than the UK, is inadmissible

cp180184en

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration

Following endorsement by leaders at November European Council on 25 November, as required under Section 13(1)(a) of the EU (Withdrawal Act) 2018, the Government has laid before Parliament: (i) a statement that political agreement has been reached; (ii) a copy of the negotiated withdrawal agreement, and (iii) a copy of the framework for the future relationship.

26 November Statement that political agreement has been reached

26 November Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community

26 November Political Declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/withdrawal-agreement-and-political-declaration

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/withdrawal-agreement-and-political-declaration-laid-before-parliament-following-political-agreement?utm_source=a65d3de6-8ca7-49b4-9b22-2a64ea283246&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Special meeting of the European Council (Art. 50) (25 November 2018) – Conclusions

1.The European Council endorses the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community. On this basis, the European Council invites the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council to take the necessary steps to ensure that the agreement can enter into force on 30 March 2019, so as to provide for an orderly withdrawal.

2. The European Council approves the Political Declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The European Council restates the Union’s determination to have as close as possible a partnership with the United Kingdom in the future in line with the Political Declaration. The Union’s approach will continue to be defined by the overall positions and principles set out in the previously agreed European Council’s guidelines. The European Council will remain permanently seized of the matter.

3. The European Council thanks Michel Barnier for his tireless efforts as the Union’s chief negotiator and for his contribution to maintaining the unity among EU27 Member States throughout the negotiations on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union.

25-special-euco-final-conclusions-en

Pubblicato in EULaw | Lascia un commento

Opinions on the Draft Budgetary Plans of euro area Member States: ITALY – Pareri sui documenti programmatici di bilancio degli Stati membri della zona euro

Opinions on the Draft Budgetary Plans of euro area Member States

The Commission has also adopted Opinions on whether the 2019 Draft Budgetary Plans (DBPs) of euro area Member States comply with the Stability and Growth Pact.

Preventive arm of the Stability and Growth Pact
In the case of Italy, having assessed the revised DBP presented on 13 November, the Commission confirms the existence of a particularly serious case of non-compliance with the Recommendation addressed to Italy by the Council on 13 July 2018. The Commission had already adopted an Opinion on 23 October 2018 identifying a particularly serious non-compliance in the initial DBP presented by Italy on 16 October 2018.
For ten Member States – Germany, Ireland, Greece, Cyprus, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Austria, and Finland –, the DBPs are found to be compliant with the Stability and Growth Pact in 2019.
For three Member States – Estonia, Latvia and Slovakia –, the DBPs are found to be broadly compliant with the Stability and Growth Pact in 2019. For these countries, the plans might result in some deviation from the country’s medium-term budgetary objective (MTO) or the adjustment path towards it.
For four Member States – Belgium, France, Portugal and Slovenia –, the DBPs pose a risk of non-compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact in 2019. The DBPs of these Member States might result in a significant deviation from the adjustment paths towards the respective medium-term budgetary objective.

Steps under the Stability and Growth Pact
The Commission has also taken a number of steps under the Stability and Growth Pact.
For Italy, the Commission has carried out a new assessment of the prima facie lack of compliance with the debt criterion. At 131.2% of GDP in 2017, the equivalent of €37,000 per inhabitant, Italy’s public debt exceeds the 60% of GDP reference value of the Treaty. This new assessment was necessary because Italy’s fiscal plans for 2019 represent a material change in the relevant factors analysed by the Commission last May. The analysis presented in this new report under Article 126(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union includes the assessment of all relevant factors and notably: (i) the fact that macroeconomic conditions, despite recently intensified downside risks, cannot be argued to explain Italy’s large gaps to compliance with the debt reduction benchmark, given nominal GDP growth above 2% since 2016; (ii) the fact that the government plans imply a marked backtracking on past growth-enhancing structural reforms, in particular the past pension reforms; and above all (iii) the identified risk of significant deviation from the recommended adjustment path towards the medium-term budgetary objective in 2018 and the particularly serious non-compliance for 2019 with the recommendation addressed to Italy by the Council on 13 July 2018, based on both the government plans and the Commission 2018 autumn forecast. Overall, the analysis suggests that the debt criterion as defined in the Treaty and in Regulation (EC) No 1467/1997 should be considered as not complied with, and that a debt-based Excessive Deficit Procedure is thus warranted.

italy_1263_may2018

Pareri sui documenti programmatici di bilancio degli Stati membri della zona euro
La Commissione ha anche adottato pareri in cui valuta la conformità al patto di stabilità e crescita dei documenti programmatici di bilancio degli Stati membri della zona euro per il 2019.
Braccio preventivo del patto di stabilità e crescita
Per quanto concerne l’Italia, dopo aver valutato il documento programmatico di bilancio rivisto presentato il 13 novembre, la Commissione conferma l’esistenza di un’inosservanza particolarmente grave della raccomandazione rivolta all’Italia dal Consiglio il 13 luglio 2018. Il 23 ottobre 2018 la Commissione aveva già adottato un parere in cui riscontrava un’inosservanza particolarmente grave nel documento programmatico di bilancio iniziale presentato dall’Italia il 16 ottobre 2018.
Per dieci Stati membri (Germania, Irlanda, Grecia, Cipro, Lituania, Lussemburgo, Malta, Paesi Bassi, Austria e Finlandia), i documenti programmatici di bilancio sono stati ritenuti conformi al patto di stabilità e crescita nel 2019.
Per tre Stati membri (Estonia, Lettonia e Slovacchia), i documenti programmatici di bilancio sono risultati sostanzialmente conformi al patto di stabilità e crescita nel 2019. Per questi paesi i documenti programmatici potrebbero comportare una certa deviazione dal rispettivo obiettivo di bilancio a medio termine o dal percorso di aggiustamento a tale obiettivo.
Per quattro Stati membri (Belgio, Francia, Portogallo e Slovenia), i documenti programmatici di bilancio presentano un rischio di non conformità al patto di stabilità e crescita nel 2019. I documenti programmatici di questi Stati membri potrebbero determinare una deviazione significativa dal percorso di aggiustamento verso i rispettivi obiettivi di bilancio a medio termine.

La Commissione ha inoltre preso una serie di misure nell’ambito del patto di stabilità e crescita.
La Commissione ha effettuato una nuova valutazione della presunta non conformità dell’Italia con il criterio del debito. Il debito pubblico dell’Italia, che nel 2017 era pari al 131,2% del PIL, l’equivalente di 37 000 euro per ogni abitante, supera il valore di riferimento del 60% stabilito dal trattato. Questa nuova valutazione si è resa necessaria poiché i piani di bilancio dell’Italia per il 2019 modificano in maniera sostanziale i fattori significativi analizzati dalla Commissione lo scorso maggio. L’analisi presentata nella nuova relazione a norma dell’articolo 126, paragrafo 3, del trattato sul funzionamento dell’Unione europea comprende la valutazione di tutti i fattori pertinenti, in particolare: i) il fatto che le condizioni macroeconomiche, nonostante il recente intensificarsi dei rischi di revisione al ribasso, non possono essere invocate per spiegare gli ampi divari dell’Italia rispetto al parametro di riduzione del debito, data una crescita del PIL nominale superiore al 2 % dal 2016; ii) il fatto che i piani del governo implicano un notevole passo indietro sulle passate riforme strutturali volte a stimolare la crescita, in particolare sulle riforme delle pensioni adottate in passato; e, soprattutto, iii) il rischio di deviazione significativa dal percorso di aggiustamento raccomandato verso l’obiettivo di bilancio a medio termine nel 2018 e l’inosservanza particolarmente grave per il 2019 della raccomandazione rivolta all’Italia dal Consiglio il 13 luglio 2018, stando ai piani del governo e alle previsioni d’autunno 2018 della Commissione. Nel complesso l’analisi indica che il criterio del debito stabilito dal trattato e dal regolamento (CE) n. 1467/1997 dovrebbe essere considerato non soddisfatto e che è quindi giustificata una procedura per i disavanzi eccessivi basata sul debito.

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union; Joint Statement and outline of the Political Declaration on the future relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union, as agreed at negotiators’ level.

1) Joint Statement: State of Play of the negotiations under article 50 TEU on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union

2) The political declaration setting out the framework for the future relationship between the European Union and the United Kingdom

3) 14 November Draft Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Draft budgetary plan submitted by Italy for 2019 – Italia, documento programmatico di bilancio per il 2019

The European Commission has identified in the draft budgetary plan submitted by Italy for 2019 a particularly serious non-compliance with the fiscal recommendation addressed to Italy by the Council on 13 July 2018.

IP-18-6174_EN

La Commissione europea ha riscontrato nel documento programmatico di bilancio presentato dall’Italia per il 2019 un’inosservanza particolarmente grave della raccomandazione in materia di bilancio che il Consiglio ha rivolto al paese il 13 luglio 2018.

IP-18-6174_IT

MEMO-18-6175_IT

MEMO-18-6175_EN

REgulation (EU) n. 473/2013

Regolamento (UE) n. 473/2013

Documents/Documenti

Commission letter to Italy – 23 October 2018
Commission opinion on the 2019 Draft Budgetary Plan of Italy – 23 October 2018
Italy – reply to Commission – 22 October 2018
Commission letter to Italy – 18 October 2018
Draft budgetary plan Italy 2019
Commission letter to Italy – 5 October 2018

2019_dbp_it_it
it_letter_in_it
lettera_ministro_tria_alla_commissione_22-10-2018_0
2019_dbp_opinion_it_it
2019_dbp_commission_letter_it_20181023_it
2019_dbp_commission_letter_it_20181023_en
2019_dbp_opinion_it_en
letter_to_vd_and_pm_-_22-10-2018
18_10_18_commission_letter_to_italy_en_0_1
2019_dbp_it_en_0
com_reply_minister_tria_0

La Commissione Ue chiede chiarimenti sul debito 30 ottobre 2018

Vademecum on the Stability and Growth Pact – 2018

Public finances in Euro Area Member States: selected indicators 2018

macroeconomic imbalances in the eu

Lettera del Governo italiano del 13 novembre 2018 NEW

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Aiuti di Stato: la Corte annulla la decisione con cui la Commissione ha rinunciato a ordinare il recupero di aiuti illegali concessi dall’Italia sotto forma di esenzione dall’imposta comunale sugli immobili.

I concorrenti direttamente interessati dei beneficiari di aiuti di Stato hanno il diritto di rivolgersi ai giudici dell’Unione per chiedere l’annullamento di una simile decisione

(Sentenza nelle cause riunite C-622/16 P, Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori Srl / Commissione, C-623/16 P, Commissione / Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori Srl, e C-624/16 P, Commissione / Pietro Ferracci)

CP180166IT_Recupero aiuti illegali concessi dall’Italia sotto forma di esenzione dall’ICI

Pubblicato in EULaw | Contrassegnato | Lascia un commento

Protetto: 29-31 October

Il contenuto è protetto da password. Per visualizzarlo inserisci di seguito la password:

Pubblicato in EULaw | Inserisci la tua password per visualizzare i commenti.