Text · Amendment list
Establishing the conditions for the implementation of the Union support to the Common Agriculture Policy for the period from 2028 to 2034
Document AGRI-AM-790956 · COM(2025)0560 – 2025/0241(COD)
- Kind
- Amendment list AGRI-AM-790956
- Date
- 13 July 2026
- Committee
- Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development
- Dossier
- 2025-0241
More facts (2)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Reference
- COM(2025)0560 – 2025/0241(COD)
Text
The text as parsed from the official Word file. Every paragraph has a link (¶) and can be saved to a project as a passage.
Jump to an amendment (345)
- Amendment 2354
- Amendment 2355
- Amendment 2356
- Amendment 2357
- Amendment 2358
- Amendment 2359
- Amendment 2360
- Amendment 2361
- Amendment 2362
- Amendment 2363
- Amendment 2364
- Amendment 2365
- Amendment 2366
- Amendment 2367
- Amendment 2368
- Amendment 2369
- Amendment 2370
- Amendment 2371
- Amendment 2372
- Amendment 2373
- Amendment 2374
- Amendment 2375
- Amendment 2376
- Amendment 2377
- Amendment 2378
- Amendment 2379
- Amendment 2380
- Amendment 2381
- Amendment 2382
- Amendment 2383
- Amendment 2384
- Amendment 2385
- Amendment 2386
- Amendment 2387
- Amendment 2388
- Amendment 2389
- Amendment 2390
- Amendment 2391
- Amendment 2392
- Amendment 2393
- Amendment 2394
- Amendment 2395
- Amendment 2396
- Amendment 2397
- Amendment 2398
- Amendment 2399
- Amendment 2400
- Amendment 2401
- Amendment 2402
- Amendment 2403
- Amendment 2404
- Amendment 2405
- Amendment 2406
- Amendment 2407
- Amendment 2408
- Amendment 2409
- Amendment 2410
- Amendment 2411
- Amendment 2412
- Amendment 2413
- Amendment 2414
- Amendment 2415
- Amendment 2416
- Amendment 2417
- Amendment 2418
- Amendment 2419
- Amendment 2420
- Amendment 2421
- Amendment 2422
- Amendment 2423
- Amendment 2424
- Amendment 2425
- Amendment 2426
- Amendment 2427
- Amendment 2428
- Amendment 2429
- Amendment 2430
- Amendment 2431
- Amendment 2432
- Amendment 2433
- Amendment 2434
- Amendment 2435
- Amendment 2436
- Amendment 2437
- Amendment 2438
- Amendment 2439
- Amendment 2440
- Amendment 2441
- Amendment 2442
- Amendment 2443
- Amendment 2444
- Amendment 2445
- Amendment 2446
- Amendment 2447
- Amendment 2448
- Amendment 2449
- Amendment 2450
- Amendment 2451
- Amendment 2452
- Amendment 2453
- Amendment 2454
- Amendment 2455
- Amendment 2456
- Amendment 2457
- Amendment 2458
- Amendment 2459
- Amendment 2460
- Amendment 2461
- Amendment 2462
- Amendment 2463
- Amendment 2464
- Amendment 2465
- Amendment 2466
- Amendment 2467
- Amendment 2468
- Amendment 2469
- Amendment 2470
- Amendment 2471
- Amendment 2472
- Amendment 2473
- Amendment 2474
- Amendment 2475
- Amendment 2476
- Amendment 2477
- Amendment 2478
- Amendment 2479
- Amendment 2480
- Amendment 2481
- Amendment 2482
- Amendment 2483
- Amendment 2484
- Amendment 2485
- Amendment 2486
- Amendment 2487
- Amendment 2488
- Amendment 2489
- Amendment 2490
- Amendment 2491
- Amendment 2492
- Amendment 2493
- Amendment 2494
- Amendment 2495
- Amendment 2496
- Amendment 2497
- Amendment 2498
- Amendment 2499
- Amendment 2500
- Amendment 2501
- Amendment 2502
- Amendment 2503
- Amendment 2504
- Amendment 2505
- Amendment 2506
- Amendment 2507
- Amendment 2508
- Amendment 2509
- Amendment 2510
- Amendment 2511
- Amendment 2512
- Amendment 2513
- Amendment 2514
- Amendment 2515
- Amendment 2516
- Amendment 2517
- Amendment 2518
- Amendment 2519
- Amendment 2520
- Amendment 2521
- Amendment 2522
- Amendment 2523
- Amendment 2524
- Amendment 2525
- Amendment 2526
- Amendment 2527
- Amendment 2528
- Amendment 2529
- Amendment 2530
- Amendment 2531
- Amendment 2532
- Amendment 2533
- Amendment 2534
- Amendment 2535
- Amendment 2536
- Amendment 2537
- Amendment 2538
- Amendment 2539
- Amendment 2540
- Amendment 2541
- Amendment 2542
- Amendment 2543
- Amendment 2544
- Amendment 2545
- Amendment 2546
- Amendment 2547
- Amendment 2548
- Amendment 2549
- Amendment 2550
- Amendment 2551
- Amendment 2552
- Amendment 2553
- Amendment 2554
- Amendment 2555
- Amendment 2556
- Amendment 2557
- Amendment 2558
- Amendment 2559
- Amendment 2560
- Amendment 2561
- Amendment 2562
- Amendment 2563
- Amendment 2564
- Amendment 2565
- Amendment 2566
- Amendment 2567
- Amendment 2568
- Amendment 2569
- Amendment 2570
- Amendment 2571
- Amendment 2572
- Amendment 2573
- Amendment 2574
- Amendment 2575
- Amendment 2576
- Amendment 2577
- Amendment 2578
- Amendment 2579
- Amendment 2580
- Amendment 2581
- Amendment 2582
- Amendment 2583
- Amendment 2584
- Amendment 2585
- Amendment 2586
- Amendment 2587
- Amendment 2588
- Amendment 2589
- Amendment 2590
- Amendment 2591
- Amendment 2592
- Amendment 2593
- Amendment 2594
- Amendment 2595
- Amendment 2596
- Amendment 2597
- Amendment 2598
- Amendment 2599
- Amendment 2600
- Amendment 2601
- Amendment 2602
- Amendment 2603
- Amendment 2604
- Amendment 2605
- Amendment 2606
- Amendment 2607
- Amendment 2608
- Amendment 2609
- Amendment 2610
- Amendment 2611
- Amendment 2612
- Amendment 2613
- Amendment 2614
- Amendment 2615
- Amendment 2616
- Amendment 2617
- Amendment 2618
- Amendment 2619
- Amendment 2620
- Amendment 2621
- Amendment 2622
- Amendment 2623
- Amendment 2624
- Amendment 2625
- Amendment 2626
- Amendment 2627
- Amendment 2628
- Amendment 2629
- Amendment 2630
- Amendment 2631
- Amendment 2632
- Amendment 2633
- Amendment 2634
- Amendment 2635
- Amendment 2636
- Amendment 2637
- Amendment 2638
- Amendment 2639
- Amendment 2640
- Amendment 2641
- Amendment 2642
- Amendment 2643
- Amendment 2644
- Amendment 2645
- Amendment 2646
- Amendment 2647
- Amendment 2648
- Amendment 2649
- Amendment 2650
- Amendment 2651
- Amendment 2652
- Amendment 2653
- Amendment 2654
- Amendment 2655
- Amendment 2656
- Amendment 2657
- Amendment 2658
- Amendment 2659
- Amendment 2660
- Amendment 2661
- Amendment 2662
- Amendment 2663
- Amendment 2664
- Amendment 2665
- Amendment 2666
- Amendment 2667
- Amendment 2668
- Amendment 2669
- Amendment 2670
- Amendment 2671
- Amendment 2672
- Amendment 2673
- Amendment 2674
- Amendment 2675
- Amendment 2676
- Amendment 2677
- Amendment 2678
- Amendment 2679
- Amendment 2680
- Amendment 2681
- Amendment 2682
- Amendment 2683
- Amendment 2684
- Amendment 2685
- Amendment 2686
- Amendment 2687
- Amendment 2688
- Amendment 2689
- Amendment 2690
- Amendment 2691
- Amendment 2692
- Amendment 2693
- Amendment 2694
- Amendment 2695
- Amendment 2696
- Amendment 2697
- Amendment 2698
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The overall level of coupled income support shall remain limited and shall not exceed a proportionate share of direct payments, in line with the objective of maintaining the decoupled nature of income support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Such support shall be limited to what is strictly necessary to address those difficulties and to prevent the abandonment of agricultural production. It shall take into account the need to maintain a level playing field and to avoid distortions of competition within the internal market. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent, defined in accordance with Annex II. | Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent, defined in accordance with Annex II, or shall take the form of annual lump-sum payments. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent, defined in accordance with Annex II. | Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare, per animal or per animal equivalent or per quantity, defined in accordance with Annex II. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent, defined in accordance with Annex II. | Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent. |
The Commission has explained that the inclusion of Annex II is not the policy intention. Therefore, reference to Annex II (as well as Annex II) should be deleted.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent, defined in accordance with Annex II. | Coupled income support shall take the form of an annual payment per eligible hectare or per animal or per animal equivalent. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The Commission shall verify as part of the coherence and consistency check of the CAP-relevant NRP plans submitted for approval by the member states, whether the coupled supports proposed are: | |
| (i) in line with the EU single market; | |
| (ii) whether they constitute a level playing field; | |
| (iii) whether they are coherent with and respect relevant union law and environmental aquis; | |
| (iv) whether they Do No Significant Harm. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| In the case of apiculture products, Member States shall establish an animal equivalent coefficient on the basis of colonies (hives) registered and shall justify this calculation in their CAP plan. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted in the form of payment per hectare may include support for intermediate crops which can be used in a supplementary fashion to produce biofuels, including as secondary and cover crops, provided that they do not generate additional demand for land. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for intermediate crops for biofuel production, such as catch crops and cover crops, provided that the use of such intermediate crops does not trigger demand for additional land. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the tobacco and wine sectors. | Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the tobacco and wine sectors, neither to the breeding of 'toros de lidia'. |
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the tobacco and wine sectors. | Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the tobacco and wine sectors. | Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the wine sectors. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the tobacco and wine sectors. | Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the wine sector. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the tobacco and wine sectors. | Support granted as a payment per hectare may include support for short rotation coppice and grasses and other herbaceous forage. Support shall not be granted to the wine sector. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | deleted |
Coupled support is vital for sustaining certain European agricultural sectors of strategic interest, particularly those which are more exposed to volatility of output and input costs and which have limited bargaining power in the supply chain. It is an indispensable tool for tackling crises of a cyclical or systemic nature that occur within agriculture or regional systems of production. Coupled support should therefore be maintained, with greater flexibility in how it is used.
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Ton Diepeveen, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | deleted |
Coupled support plays a fundamental role in sustaining certain strategic sectors of European agriculture, particularly those that are more exposed than others to the volatility of output and input prices and which often have little bargaining power within their supply chains. It is an indispensable tool for addressing crises of a cyclical or structural nature at sectoral level or within regional production systems. Ensuring its continuity and greater flexibility in its application – both in terms of resources and the sectors concerned – is therefore of fundamental importance, particularly for certain major arable and livestock farming systems which, in addition to having absorbed substantial reductions in direct payments in recent years, are periodically affected by crises.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, reindeer, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. Support should prioritise grazing-based and extensive livestock systems. Bovine, ovine and caprine support shall not exceed the equivalent of 2.0 LU/ha according to the table in annex II to this regulation, and shall be coherent with the water framework directive. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to extensive farming producing beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat up to a number of 50 animals and shall be phased out after a transition period. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal or per animal equivalent shall be limited to the poultry, pork, beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal and pigmeat sectors, excluding intensive farming operations, and to the milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal and their products, milk and milk products, sheep and goat and their products, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
This should be included to not only account, e.g., for the „classic“ main products like milk and meat, but also for other products such as wool, aiming to further support diversification as well as other strategies such as bioeconomy.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal and their products, milk and milk products, sheep and goat and their products, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
This should be included to not only account, e.g., for the „classic“ main products like milk and meat, but also for other products such as wool, aiming to further support diversification as well as other strategies such as bioeconomy.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the pigs, beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the pigs, beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
Member States should have more flexibility when deciding which sectors should be supported. Due to great importance and difficulties of pigs breeding sector (difficulties related to ASF), the sector should be on the list of sectors that can be covered by coupled income support.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. | Support granted as a payment per animal shall be limited to the pigs, beef and veal, milk and milk products, sheep and goat meat, apiculture products and silkworms sectors. |
Adequate flexibility should be provided to allow the identification of sectors requiring targeted support, taking into account national and regional needs. Given their economic and social importance, as well as specific challenges such as African swine fever in the pigmeat sector, tobacco and pigmeat should be included among the sectors eligible for coupled income support.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Coupled support granted for livestock shall be be coherent with the water framework directive (WFD), animal health and welfare law, and relevant emission limits, so they may be eligible up to: | |
| (i) 2 LU/ha, or | |
| (ii) 170 KgN/ha according to the Nitrates directive or relevant limits in the WFD, including the drinking water directive, or | |
| (iii) the carrying capacity of the grazed ecosystem and if supported by justifying calculations provided by the member state in the CAP section of their NRP plan, including a capacity for a minimum of 70% on farm sourced fodder, | |
| If the Mmember sState chooses option (iii), carrying capacity calculations shall be based on water quality status, including surface and ground water and drinking water, relevant air and water emission quantifications, nutrient flows, and productivity of available pasture or fodder area. These shall be assessed by the Commission in the coherence and consistency verification stage before CAP recommendations are issued as per art.2 of this regulation and art.23(1) [NRP], or the plan, if deemded suitable, is published as an implementing act (art.22 NRP reg.). |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| If a Member State grants coupled income support for legumes, it shall be obliged to grant at least 60 % of this budgetary allocation to crops intended for direct human consumption. Member States shall ensure the transparency of producer prices through the compulsory forwarding of data on a weekly basis to the EU market observatories in order to avoid downstream buyers unduly obtaining this aid. |
The European Union still depends on soya imports to produce animal feed, and the current system of coupled support tends to increase this dependency. Moreover, in certain cases buyers may obtain support by lowering prices, which highlights the importance of market transparency. Finally, the development of legumes intended for direct human consumption creates opportunities that are typically more profitable for holdings.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| No coupled livestock payments shall be granted for intensive rearing or factory farming installations. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| No coupled livestock payments shall be issued for bulls intended for lethal bullfighting (corrida or tauromachia). |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. | 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income, animal welfare and agri-ecological needs, shall be limited to a maximum amount set up by the Member States to avoid funding concentration and intensive farming, and shall not incentivise an increase in livestock numbers or stocking density beyond the carrying capacity of the pasture and fodder area associated with it and shall remain in line with the WFD. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. | 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. Those criteria shall respect the principles of equality and fairness and may not exclude agricultural or livestock production that fulfils the relevant eligibility conditions and mandatory requirements by virtue of the nature or legitimate use of the production in question or the breed used. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. | 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs and shall not incentivise production, livestock numbers or stocking density beyond environmentally sustainable levels . |
Jérémy Decerle, Benoit Cassart, Laurence Farreng, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, Grégory Allione, Pascal Canfin
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. | 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. In the case of legume crops, Member States are not required to demonstrate the difficulties faced by the sector. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. | 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs or agri-environmental or climate problems. |
It should also be able to grant coupled support based on the need to address agri-environmental or climate problems.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, address additional income needs. | 2. The support referred to in paragraph 1 shall, on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, competitveness and address additional income needs. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of this paragraph, Member States shall be exempted to demonstrate the difficulties encountered in relation to protein crops. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Coupled income support shall not be granted where it leads to distortions of competition or has negative effects on the functioning of the internal market. | |
| Member States, the Commission and the Council shall ensure that any such support is consistent with maintaining a level playing field within the Union. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
This provision is not consistent with the objectives of coupled support as it includes an extraneous environmental ambition. In addition, the land-spreading limit in nitrate-vulnerable zones (170kg of nitrogen per hectare) effectively necessitates a limit of around two adult livestock units per hectare.
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Ton Diepeveen, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | deleted |
This provision is not in line with the objectives of coupled support, as it imposes environmental objectives that go beyond the nature of the support itself.Furthermore, in nitrate-vulnerable zones, the same spreading limit of 170 kg of nitrogen per hectare represents a limit on the number of LSU, amounting to approximately 2 LSU per hectare.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall ensure that such support does not lead to intensification of production and take into account impacts on the environment, animal health and animal welfare, including impacts on climate, water, soil, air quality and biodiversity, by setting a maximum livestock density of 2 LSU/ha and by favouring production systems with lower environmental pressure, such as extensive and pasture-based systems. |
| Member States shall demonstrate, in their NRP Plans, how such support avoids intensification of production as well as increases in stocking density, and associated environmental pressures. Member states shall set a maximum criteria in other parameters of water quality including other macro-nutrients, pharmaceuticals, pesticides/veterinary treatments and anti-microbials , ensuring that the water framework directive (WFD) is complied with. | |
| The Commission shall ensure during its verification stage check of the CAP -relevant part of the NRP plans, that, based on the information submitted by the member state, the action will be enough to ensure compliance with DNSH. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts and animal welfare, including methane emissions. They shall also set maximum livestock density criteria, which shall not exceed 2 LU/ha, and a minimum number of days of outdoor access per animal per year. Furthermore, Member States shall ensure that such support does not drive the intensification of production. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. Member States may take into account environmental impacts in accordance with national circumstances |
Livestock production systems differ considerably across the Union. Member States are best placed to determine appropriate measures to address environmental challenges in accordance with national and regional circumstances while preserving the viability of livestock farming.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts and animal welfare, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in all zones and by prioritising extensive systems with higher animal welfare standards. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For forms of support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account the employability and the socio-economic impact that those sectors have on rural areas. Such support must be applied under the European Commission’s administrative simplification criteria. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts. |
Coupled support may be used to compensate farmers for external pressures that negatively affect livestock farming, such as damages caused by wolf predation or the impacts of animal diseases like bluetongue. The objective should never be to subsidize production. Requiring Member States to set a maximum livestock density criterion in is therefore not relevant to the objective of the support and could unnecessarily restrict the ability of Member States to design targeted measures that address specific sectoral challenges.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts. |
Member States should have more flexibility when deciding in what way the environmental impact should be approached.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including impacts on climate, water, soil, air quality and biodiversity, among others by setting a maximum livestock density criteria. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall by additional rules defined in their NRPPs ensure that negative environmental impacts are prevented, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts in nitrate vulnerable zones. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo, Maria Noichl, Camilla Laureti, Heléne Fritzon
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental and animal welfare impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts, including by setting a maximum livestock density criteria in nitrate vulnerable zones. | 4. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account environmental impacts and provide targeted support to sustainable livestock systems. |
Limiting environmental criteria to maximum livestock density in nitrate vulnerable zones is too narrow, given that nitrate vulnerable zones designation varies widely across Member States and in some cases covers the entire national territory. Targeting support at sustainable livestock systems more directly rewards environmental performance, regardless of how nitrate vulnerable zones are mapped nationally.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of this Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 12% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of three percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 12% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock, agricultural areas facing permanent natural or other area-specific constraints, including mountainous areas, islands, areas affected by water scarcity or a high risk of desertification, or areas at risk of agricultural land abandonment, or agricultural areas at risk of abandonment of agricultural production, in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in paragraph 1, point (b) shall be limited to a maximum of 20% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (d), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 20% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Coupled income support shall be granted per eligible hectare ensuring uniform and low-bureaucracy implementation. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Coupled support granted for livestock proposed in the NRP plan as per art.22 of the [NRP reg.] shall be verified by the commission before the issuing of recommendations in art.2 of this regulation, and art.23(1) [NRP], to ensure that coupled support: | |
| (i) does not generate additional expenditure due to externalities, especially remedying of pollution using funds in one part of the NRP plan caused by activities funded by another; | |
| (ii) does not create an unlevel playing field or disrupt the single market. | |
| Where these criteria are not met, they shall be included in the CAP plan recommendation referred to in art.2 of this regulation, to be resolved before the proposal for a national NRP plan law (IA) is proposed. | |
| Member states, and the commission according to the process in art.2 of this regulation and articles 21-23 of the [NRP reg], shall stipulate conditions upon the granting of coupled payments to ensure budgetary efficiency, including maximum stocking densities, maximum levels of N, P and other macro-nutrients, water quality standards especially for drinking water, antimicrobial agents and resistance, and ensure coupled payments generally comply with the water framework directive (WFD) and the limit of 170 kg/N /ha in the nitrates directive and the drinking water directive, national emission ceilings, and animal welfare standards; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of this Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 15 % of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of five percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 15 % is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions and mountain regions, defined in the Plans. Mountain farming systems, including dairy farming, livestock production, grazing systems and grassland-based production systems, shall be considered sectors of particular economic, social and environmental importance. Member States may grant coupled income support to such systems. The level of coupled support shall be 50% higher then the support granted to comparable production systems outside mountain areas. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Art. 5 paragraph 1, point (b) of that Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 20% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 20% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. | |
| By way of derogation from the above sub-paragraph, Member States may choose to use up to EUR million per year for financing coupled income support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. When drawing up their NRCAP Plans, Member States may earmark as a sectoral flexibility envelope up to 50 % of the financial allocation intended for the coupled income support referred to in this Article. This envelope shall be distributed annually between eligible sectors according to their financial situation and their specific needs observed during the financial year in question. | |
| The annual distribution shall be based on objective, transparent and non-discriminatory criteria, in particular changes in agricultural incomes, market disturbances, changes in production costs or any other relevant indicator reflecting the economic challenges faced by the sectors in question. | |
| Member States shall define in their NRCAP Plans the governance arrangements, indicators and methodology used to determine this annual distribution. The distribution of the sectoral flexibility envelope shall not result in a breach of the applicable ceiling for coupled support laid down in paragraph 4a. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of that Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 30% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRCAP Plan for income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 30% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in areas with natural or other specific constrains as well as the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. |
Former NRP Art. 35(5): addition of "including protein crops" and "Member States shall not be required to demonstrate the difficulties encountered in relation to protein crops." in para 1. + percentage of financial allocation to coupled income support amended to 30%.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Art. 5 paragraph 1, point (b) of that Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 20% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 20% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Art. 5 paragraph 1, point (b) of that Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 20% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 20% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of this Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 23 % of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of seven percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 23 % is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income-support interventions as referred to in Article (5)(1)(b) shall not exceed 20 % of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in its NRP Plan for CAP income-support interventions referred to in Article 5(1), points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This rate may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points wherever the amount corresponding to the percentage above 20 % is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining crop and livestock production, vulnerable livestock sectors, apiculture, dried fruit, sunflowers, olive groves in areas with natural or other specific limitations, or agricultural areas at risk of agricultural abandonment, as defined in the NRP Plans. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions under this Article shall be limited to a maximum of 20% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in Article 5(1), points (a), (c), (f) and (g). That percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 30% is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production, in particular in the Eastern border regions. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of this Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 12 % of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of three percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 12 % is allocated to protein crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, as defined in the Plans. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. The financial allocation for coupled income support interventions referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of this Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 12 % of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the national reform programme (NRP) plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). This percentage may be increased by a maximum of three percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 12 % is allocated to protein crops and farmers combining the production of crops and livestock. |
Former Article 35(5) of the NRP Regulation, amended, 20 % replaced with 12 % and five percentage points replaced with three percentage points; deletion of ‘or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned.’
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Article 5(1), point (b), of this Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 10 % of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g). | |
| This percentage may be increased by a maximum of three percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 10 % is allocated to protein crops. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. For support granted as a payment per animal to the livestock sectors, Member States shall take into account impacts on the environment and on animal health and welfare, in particular by setting a maximum livestock density criterion and ensuring that this support does not result in an intensification of production. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Where justified by national circumstances, Member States may maintain coupled income support at the level applied under their CAP Strategic Plans for 2023–2027, in accordance with objective and non-discriminatory criteria. |
Couple income support should be maintained at least at the current level in the Member States, if they wish.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4b. 4a. The financial allocation to coupled income support interventions as referred to in Art. 5 paragraph 1, point (b) of that Regulation shall be limited to a maximum of 10% of the Union contribution set out by the Member State in the NRP Plan for CAP income support interventions referred to in paragraph 1, points (a), (c), (f) and (g), and if allocated to livestock then only to extensive livestock systems below 2 LSU/ha that can produce at least 70% of their feed by themselves or locally. This first percentage may be increased by a maximum of 5 percentage points, provided that the amount corresponding to the percentage exceeding 10% is allocated to leguminous crops, farmers combining the production of crops and livestock or agricultural areas at a risk of abandonment of agricultural production in particular in the Eastern border regions, defined in the Plans. For the purposes of this Article, Eastern border regions means Union NUTS2 regions bordering the Russian Federation, Belarus or the Ukraine, by land or sea, not covering the entire territory of the Member State concerned. (former NRP Art. 35(5)) |
Addition "and if allocated to livestock then only to extensive livestock systems below 2 LSU/ha that can produce at least 70% of their feed by themselves or locally. " Changed "protein" to "leguminous".
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4b. Member States shall establish a maximum ceiling on the number of animals or eligible area per beneficiary, in order to focus the support provided under the intervention on those beneficiaries with the greatest needs. In the case of a legal person, or a group of natural or legal persons, Member States may apply the maximum threshold at the level of the members of those legal persons or groups where national law provides for the individual members to assume rights and obligations comparable to those of individual farmers who have the status of a head of holding, in particular as regards their economic, social and tax status, provided that they have contributed to strengthening the agricultural structures of the legal persons or groups concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4b. By a way of derogation from paragraph 4a, Member States may choose to use up to EUR 3 milion per year for financing coupled income support. |
Stanislav Stoyanov, Ilia Lazarov, Ivaylo Valchev, Elena Yoncheva, Petar Volgin, Kristian Vigenin, Tsvetelina Penkova, Andrey Novakov, Andrey Kovatchev, Emil Radev, Eva Maydell, Taner Kabilov, Nikola Minchev, Radan Kanev, Ilhan Kyuchyuk
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article11a | |
| Crop-specific payment - Oil-bearing rose | |
| 1. The Republic of Bulgaria shall be entitled to grant a crop-specific payment for oil-bearing rose to farmers - rose producers cultivating oil-bearing rose of the species Rosa damascena Mill. and Rosa alba L. The Member State shall establish specific requirements to ensure a minimum level of production efficiency and quality of the harvested rose flowers. | |
| 2. The Member State referred to in paragraph 1 shall ensure that the supported production of rose flowers does not exert excessive pressure on natural resources such as water and soil. For this purpose, or for other environmental or socio-economic reasons, the Republic of Bulgaria may grant support only for the species of oil-bearing rose referred to in paragraph 1 in specific regions, or may lay down requirements related to agronomic practices. | |
| 3. The crop-specific payment for oil-bearing rose shall be granted per hectare of eligible oil-bearing rose area. | |
| 4. The national reference area shall amount to 4 578 ha: | |
| (a) Pazardzhik Region - 412 ha; | |
| (b) Plovdiv Region - 2 218 ha; | |
| (c) Stara Zagora Region - 1 948 ha. | |
| 5. The following fixed yield shall be established for the reference period: | |
| (a) Bulgaria: 1.5 tonnes/ha; | |
| 6. The amount of the crop-specific payment per hectare of eligible area shall be calculated by multiplying the yield referred to in paragraph 5 by the following reference amount - EUR 4 554.50. | |
| 7. Where, in a given year, the eligible area under oil-bearing rose does not exceed the reference area laid down in paragraph 4, the amount per hectare referred to in paragraph 6 may be increased either by a coefficient obtained by dividing the national reference area by the actual eligible area, or by 25 %, whichever is lower. | |
| 8. Where the eligible area exceeds the reference area, the amount per hectare shall be reduced in proportion to the excess of the reference area. |
The Bulgarian oil-bearing rose and Bulgarian rose oil are symbols of the country. Their significance has long extended beyond the borders of the region, becoming an iconic hallmark of Bulgaria itself and, since 2007, an emblem of the European Union. The cultivation of the oil-bearing rose and the annual rose harvest provide livelihoods for thousands of seasonal and permanent workers, making the sector a key economic pillar for entire regions of the country. The combination of economic, climatic, and geopolitical factors is placing significant pressure on producers and threatening the preservation of this product. Among the main challenges facing the rose-growing sector in Bulgaria are : low purchase prices for rose blossoms; high production costs; labor shortages and the labor-intensive nature of rose cultivation and harvesting; a decline in harvested acreage; reduced production of rose blossoms. Another important challenge is the strong and constantly increasing competition from third countries that not only cultivate oil-bearing roses but also produce rose oil at significantly lower production costs and under less stringent production standards.
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article11a | |
| Decommitments | |
| In the case of the interventions (h) to (s) in article 5(1) of Regulation (EU) 202X/XXXX [CAP Regulation], the deadline in article 15(1) of Regulation (EU) 202X/XXXX [NRPP Regulation] shall be 31 October of the second calendar year following the year of the budgetary commitments. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| – A European Agricultural Reinsurance Mechanism, financed through the Union budget, should be established to supplement the risk management tools under this Article. The Mechanism should cover the risks pertaining to national, regional or sectoral risk management tools, including those arising from extreme weather events, animal and plant diseases, serious market disruptions, sanitary or phytosanitary crises and other exceptional circumstances that have a significant impact on agricultural production or farmers’ incomes. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Elena Sancho Murillo, Camilla Laureti
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member State shall assign up to 3 % of the direct payments to be paid to a farmer for the farmer’s contribution to a risk management tool. Member States may provide a higher support rate for farmers implementing interventions or other preventive actions at farm level to reduce risks. |
| Member States may support the development of insurance premiums, income stabilisation mechanisms, mutual funds and risk management tools, including where developed by cooperatives and producer organisations. | |
| Member States may support the development of integrated business plans for risk management and mitigation, as well as the related training of farmers through advisory services, technical assistance, and awareness-raising measures. | |
| Member States shall establish an EU-level reinsurance scheme to provide greater stability and predictability for farmers. | |
| Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 10 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Support may take the form of contributions to insurance premiums, the establishment, functioning and development of mutual funds, income stabilization mechanisms and other risk management tools, including where managed by producer organisations or cooperatives. | |
| Member States may provide for higher aid intensities for collective instruments to encourage the development of risk management schemes based on mutualisation and risk sharing among farmers. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States may grant support to farmers, cooperatives and producer organisations to participate in risk management tools, including insurance, mutual funds, income-stabilisation instruments and other appropriate mechanisms for tackling losses resulting from adverse climate events, drought, flooding, fire, animal diseases, plant pests, human- or plant-health crises, severe market disruption, abnormal increases in production costs or geopolitical risks affecting the viability of holdings. Member States must involve the regions in the planning of the risk-management tools. Member States and their regions shall ensure that there is simple, agile access to such tools. |
The risks facing agricultural and livestock farmers are ever more extensive and complex. The CAP must allow for flexible tools that cover not only climate-related losses but also health crises, plant-health crises, cost-related crises, market crises or crises resulting from geopolitical tensions.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. In the case of small farms, farms in areas with natural constraints and farms engaged in or converting to organic or agro-ecological farming, Member States may reduce this threshold to 10 %. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools, including for risks due to energy and fuel price volatility, supply chain disruptions or geopolitical crises affecting agricultural production costs. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. Member States may apply a lower threshold in case of exceptional weather events or market-related disturbances in order to broaden coverage. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools, giving priority to collective mutual funds involving solidarity among farmers and other value chain actors over individual private insurance schemes. |
| Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools, including for risks due to climate, energy and fuel price volatility, supply chain disruptions or geopolitical crises affecting agricultural production costs. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States may provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools, taking into account that the design and implementation of such tools shall remain within the competence of Member States and regions. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States may grant support to farmers for participation in risk management tools, taking into account that the design and implementation of such tools shall remain within the competence of Member States and regions. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the annual average production or income of the farmer in the preceding three years, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools, taking into account national and regional specific contexts in the design and implementation of such tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
The provision of risk-management tools has been made mandatory for Member States to properly account for the economic, social and environmental risks at individual farm level, which are accumulating and have substantial impacts on the viability and development potential on farmers’ businesses. The development and design of such tools should be aligned with the territorial challenges of each Member State.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry, or an average calculated over a period not exceeding eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer, calculated on the basis of a period not exceeding eight years. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry, or an average based on a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
Variability in yields is a cross-crop issue, not limited to permanent crops. We therefore believe that it is appropriate to make it possible for all crops to opt for an 'eight-year Olympic average' for farmers, without requiring a specific justification for annual crops. If, in the light of the situation and the historical yields of the holding, it does not appear appropriate to use a five-year or three-year Olympic average, the farmer should be able to choose as an alternative an eight-year Olympic average. independently of the type of crop concerned and without having to provide any specific justification, which would otherwise generate significant administrative complexity.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States may provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. If insurance schemes are included in the risk management toolbox, Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
The provision of support for risk management tools should be based on the demand from the farmers in the individual member states. Consequently, the provision of risk management tools should be optional for the member states. Furthermore – if risk management tools are implemented – it should be voluntary for the member states to include insurance schemes in the toolbox.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States, the Commission and the European Investment Bank shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 15 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the area or livestock concerned or the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the area or livestock herd concerned or of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five years, excluding the lowest and highest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 15 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Member States shall provide support to farmers for participation in risk management tools. Member States shall ensure that support is granted only for losses which exceed a threshold of at least 20 % of the average annual production or income of the farmer in the preceding eight-year period, or an eight-year average based on the preceding ten-year period excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that farmers have effective access to appropriate risk-management tools, whether through interventions financed under this Regulation or through national, regional, public, private or mixed schemes that provide adequate cover for climate, health, plant-health, market or production-cost risks. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| This support may take different forms, including: insurance premiums, mutual funds, income stabilisation mechanisms and other risk management tools provided by the applicable legislation of the Member State, including public and private finance instruments. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for insurance premiums under CAP-funded schemes shall be conditional upon the adoption by beneficiaries of sustainable farming practices that actively contribute to climate resilience and risk prevention, going beyond baseline statutory management requirements and protective practices. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Risk management interventions shall include support for losses arising from animal disease, market disruption, extreme weather events and geopolitical crises affecting agricultural input costs. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may support the development of mutual funds and risk management tools, including when they are developed by cooperatives and producer organisations; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide equivalent or greater levels of risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Member States may also support the establishment or development of such risk management tools, including those devised by cooperatives and producer organisations. |
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of or planned national systems, schemes or programmes (either public or private) which provide risk coverage for farmers or the existence of specific national circumstances shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of or planned national systems, schemes or programmes (either public or private) which provide risk coverage for farmers or the existence of specific national circumstances shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems or of planned national systems, schemes or programmes, whether public or private, that provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
This amendment adds wording to greater reflect the divergent in approaches / stages through which Member States currently manage risks in agriculture.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of private or public systems which provide risk coverage management tools for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate the existence of national systems – either public or private – which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NRP Plan the existence of effective national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide efficient risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NPR Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. | By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States that demonstrate in the NRCAP Plan the existence of national systems which provide risk coverage for farmers shall be exempt from the obligation to include in their NRCAP Plan interventions for risk management tools under this Article. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may support the development of mutual funds and risk management tools, including where developed by cooperatives controlled by farmers, group of farmers and producer organisations recognised by the competent authority of the Member State. | |
| Member States shall adopt rules for the establishment and management of mutual funds, which may intervene only in the event of a decrease of at least 20% in market prices and/or an increase in production costs in the sector concerned compared with the average recorded over the preceding three-year period, or compared with a three-year average calculated on the basis of the preceding five-year period, excluding the highest and the lowest values. Mutual funds may also provide coverage for administrative costs, damage assessment costs, and any reinsurance costs. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may support the development of mutual funds and risk management tools, including those devised by cooperatives and producer organisations. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may support the development of mutual funds and risk management tools, including where developed by cooperatives and producer organisations. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may support the development of mutual funds and risk management tools, including where developed by cooperatives and producer organisations. |
This amendment adds wording to greater reflect the divergent in approaches / stages through which Member States currently manage risks in agriculture.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Farmers who adopt the risk management tools covered by this article will be granted a premium in addition to the support referred to in Article 6 |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Within the framework of risk management tools, in view of the requirements set out in Article 22, sub-paragraph 2, letter f), iii) of COM(2025) 565 final, Member States may recognize general second-tier territorial IST (Income Stabilization Tool) funds, in order to strengthen farmers' income stability, agricultural system resilience, diversification, and cross-sectoral risk compensation. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. 1bis In their NRPs, Member States set out strategies coordinated with other measures to mitigate and manage risk, including instruments for risk-sharing and -transfer such as subsidised insurance policies, mutual funds for damage compensation, mutual funds for income stabilisation, and national mutual funds to cover catastrophic events. |
Member States are authorised to provide financial contributions under the CAP to collective crisis prevention and management schemes established and implemented on a voluntary basis by groups of farmers through mutual funds approved by the Member States. Such schemes will aim to prevent or at least mitigate the risk and impact of serious crises, whereas insurance and income stabilisation schemes are primarily designed to address the impact of risks and crises.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Support shall be granted to second-tier IST mutual funds, endowed with legal personality and financial independence, which pool recognized first-tier IST funds set up by farmers within the territorial scope designated by the Member State upon proposal of the local and regional authorities. Support shall be paid directly to the managing entity of the second-tier IST, which must take the form of an association of farmers, through the following modalities: | |
| a. contributions for the payment of financial compensation paid to first-tier funds voluntarily joined by farmers in the territorial area concerned; | |
| b. contributions to risk capital of the second-tier IST fund; | |
| c. contributions to insurance contracts stipulated at commercial rate by the second-tier IST to insure the loss of the capital risk; | |
| d. contributions to the administrative and set-up costs of the second-tier IST fund, degressive and spread over a maximum period of three years; | |
| e. contributions for the payment of interest on commercial loans contracted for the payment of compensation by the second-tier IST funds. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1c. Territorial mutualisation funds may benefit from support provided that they: | |
| a. are recognised by the competent authority in accordance with national law; | |
| b. apply a policy of transparency regarding incoming and outgoing financial flows; | |
| c. apply clear rules on the attribution of liability for debts. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1d. The funds referred to in this Article may also be financed by State aid, private contributions, or contributions from first-tier funds. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured. | Sectoral production risk management tools may calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned, related to the specific surface area insured, per hectare, per animal, or using other objective criteria that are appropriate for the nature of the sector in question. |
The calculation of losses must adapt to the reality in each sector. A system that is too rigid could exclude livestock production, permanent crops or sectors with specific production structures.
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured. | Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured, the hectares and/or number of animals concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured. | Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured, the hectares and/or number of animals concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured. | Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured or the number of animals concerned. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured. | Production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area or livestock. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Sectoral production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area insured. | Production risk management tools shall calculate the losses either at holding level, at the level of the holding’s activity in the sector concerned or related to the specific area or livestock herd. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | deleted |
Variability in yields is a cross-crop issue, not limited to permanent crops. We therefore believe that it is appropriate to make it possible for all crops to opt for an 'eight-year Olympic average' for farmers, without requiring a specific justification for annual crops. If, in the light of the situation and the historical yields of the holding, it does not appear appropriate to use a five-year or three-year Olympic average, the farmer should be able to choose as an alternative an eight-year Olympic average. independently of the type of crop concerned.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. Where exceptional natural disasters, adverse climatic events or other catastrophic events significantly distort the historical reference period, Member States adjust the reference period or the methodology for calculating losses, in order to ensure that the beneficiaries are not disadvantaged by such distortion and compensation reflects the actual losses suffered. |
Given the increasing frequency of extreme weather events, it is essential to adjust the loss calculation methodology; otherwise, the reference parameter against which losses are measured in the years following the occurrence of such events would be artificially low. The proposed amendment requires the Member State to adjust the distorted reference period or the calculation methodology.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | For permanent crops and in other justified cases, in particular natural disasters, adverse climatic events and other catastrophic events, for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | In other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the production or average annual income of the farmer and reflecting as closely as possible the agronomic situation of the holding. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Where the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may assess the losses on the basis of the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Ton Diepeveen, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| For permanent crops and in other justified cases for which the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may provide for a method for calculation of the losses based on the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. | Where the calculation methods referred to in the first subparagraph are not appropriate, Member States may assess the losses on the basis of the average annual production or income of the farmer over a period that does not exceed eight years, excluding the highest and lowest entry. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. For farmers carrying out on-farm processing, Member States may provide support for participation in risk management tools covering losses affecting both primary agricultural production and on-farm processing activities, including losses resulting from sanitary, phytosanitary or food safety incidents, mandatory public authority measures, contamination, product recalls or other exceptional events beyond the control of the farmer. |
An increasing number of farmers diversify their activities through on-farm processing in order to increase the added value of their production, strengthen local food systems and improve the economic resilience of their holdings. However, these activities expose farmers to additional risks linked to sanitary and food safety requirements, including contamination incidents, product recalls, mandatory sanitary measures and temporary suspension of processing activities.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. In the event of destruction of permanent crops, support shall cover not only the loss of current production but also the income lost until the farm's production capacity is fully restored. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers or in other appropriate cases, such as the introduction of new crops into a holding. Member States may also utilise, or offer to other categories of farmers, the option of using an additional appropriate alternative method of assessment for calculating losses, including methods based on turnover losses. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method and greater flexibility for the purposes of calculating the losses for young farmers, new farmers, certain vulnerable sectors and small-sized enterprises. Member States may establish criteria for granting incentives to farmers who take part in risk management tools. |
Under the CAP, Member States are allowed to provide funding contributions to collective crisis prevention and management tools devised and implemented by groups of farmers on a voluntary basis through mutual funds approved by the Member States. These schemes seek to prevent, or at least mitigate, the risk and effects of serious crises, while insurance and income stabilisation schemes are chiefly designed to address the impact of risks and crises.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method and greater flexibility for calculating the losses for young farmers, new farmers and for certain vulnerable sectors and small-scale enterprises. Member States may establish incentive criteria for farmers participating in risk management schemes. |
Member States are authorised to provide financial contributions under the CAP to collective crisis prevention and management schemes established and implemented on a voluntary basis by groups of farmers through mutual funds approved by the Member States. Such schemes will aim to prevent or at least mitigate the risk and impact of serious crises, whereas insurance and income stabilisation schemes are primarily designed to address the impact of risks and crises. In implementing CAP support measures, incentive mechanisms and priority access channels should be provided for agricultural enterprises that join subsidised risk management schemes, recognising these schemes as a strategic factor for the competitiveness and continuity of national agri-food supply chains
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Ton Diepeveen, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method and greater flexibility for the calculation of losses in vulnerable sectors and for small-scale economic operators.Member States may establish incentive criteria for farmers participating in risk management tools. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers, and new farmers or other appropriate cases, such as the new crops introduced on a farm. |
We consider it necessary to clarify that, for crops newly introduced by farmers, for which, as a matter of construction, no production history is yet available on their holding, the method of calculating losses must be adapted.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers, new farmers and farmers who consider it appropriate. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo, Maria Noichl, Camilla Laureti
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative and simplified method for calculating the losses for small farmers, including young and new farmers. |
With a view to ensuring greater simplification, in particular for small farmers, this amendment introduces the possibility of introducing simplified methods for the calculation of losses.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States shall apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. |
It has been specified that young and new farmers, being particularly vulnerable to exogenous shocks such as market disruptions, extreme weather events or pests and animal health diseases since they only set-up recently and liquidity at farm level is limited, should be eligible for a different calculation method of losses in their risk-management tools. Additionally, young farmers having set-up only recently do not have a history of income, which requires alternative and adapted methods for the calculation of losses.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for farmers who request it. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for all farmers who request it. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for young farmers and new farmers. | 3. Member States may apply an appropriate alternative method for calculating the losses for farmers that request it. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Member States may provide support for participation in collective prevention, crisis prevention and agricultural risk management tools to producer organisations, producer groups and entities representing other forms of cooperation constituted at the initiative of producers and controlled by them. Such forms of cooperation shall be identified by the competent authority of a Member State as producer groups for the duration of the programme. Support shall take the form of financial contributions to mutual funds whose objective is to prevent and manage climatic, biological, phytosanitary, environmental, market-related and other risks affecting agricultural production, agricultural income and the stability of agricultural value chains. Mutual funds may operate as second-tier fund recognised to manage risk at territorial level and may be combined with insurance schemes, income stabilisation tools of the first-tier funds, preventive measures, active protection measures and other agricultural risk management instruments supported under this Regulation. When providing the support, Member States shall approve the rules governing the constitution and management of the mutual funds. Those rules shall ensure transparent governance, sound financial management and equal treatment of participating farmers. Those rules shall further provide that mutual funds may intervene only where, as a result of a fall in market prices in the sector concerned or as a consequence of climatic, biological, phytosanitary, environmental or other agricultural risks, an economic loss of at least 20 % occurs compared with the average recorded over the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period, excluding the highest and lowest values. The calculation of the loss shall be carried out in accordance with the methodology established by the Member State pursuant to Article 12(4). Member States shall limit the support to one or more rates not exceeding 70 % of the contributions to the mutual fund, of the mutual fund’s administrative costs and, where relevant, of other eligible costs. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Without prejudice to paragraph 1, Member States shall provide support for participation in collective crisis prevention and risk management schemes to cooperatives, producer organisations, producer groups and entities representing other forms of cooperation that are constituted at the initiative of producers and controlled by them. These forms of cooperation shall be recognised by the competent authority of the Member State as producer organisations for the duration of the programme. Support may take the form of financial contributions to mutual funds whose objectives relate to the specific objectives set out in Article 6(1), points (a) and (c) of Regulation No 1308/2018, with the aim of preventing and dealing with market disturbances in the relevant sector, and including financial contributions to cover the administrative costs of setting up these funds. Support may also be granted for income stabilisation schemes, consisting of financial contributions to mutual funds for the purpose of providing financial compensation to farmers for a significant drop in income. | |
| Member States may make provision for higher support intensities for collective schemes in order to encourage the use of risk management systems based on pooling of resources and risk-sharing between farmers. | |
| When support is granted, Member States shall adopt rules on the creation and administration of mutual funds. | |
| These rules shall provide that mutual funds may only intervene if market prices or incomes in the relevant sector fall by at least 20 % as compared with the average over the preceding three-year period, or an average calculated for three of the last five years, excluding the highest and lowest figures. | |
| Member States shall limit the support to one or more percentages not exceeding 70 % of the contributions to the mutual fund, of the mutual fund’s administrative costs and, where relevant, of other eligible costs. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Member States may provide support for participation in collective crisis prevention and risk management tools for producer organisations, producer groups and bodies representing other forms of cooperation established and run by producers. For the purposes of this Article, such forms of cooperation shall be designated by the competent authority of a Member State as producer groups for the duration of the programme. These forms of support may take the form of a financial contribution for mutual assistance funds, including the administrative costs involved in setting them up, with a view to preventing and tackling market disruptions in the sector concerned, the objectives of which correspond to the specific objectives set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. When providing support, Member States shall adopt rules on the establishment and management of mutual assistance funds, which may only be triggered in the event of a decrease in market prices of at least 20 % and/or an increase in production costs in the sector concerned in comparison to the average of the previous three years, or a three-year average over the previous five years, excluding the highest and lowest values. The funds may also be used to cover the respective costs of management, damage assessment and reinsurance, where applicable. Member States shall limit support to one or multiple percentage rates not exceeding 70 % of the contributions to the mutual assistance fund, the administrative costs of the fund and, where relevant, other eligible costs. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
Under the CAP, Member States are allowed to provide funding contributions to collective crisis prevention and management tools devised and implemented by groups of farmers on a voluntary basis through mutual funds approved by the Member States. These schemes seek to prevent, or at least mitigate, the risk and effects of serious crises, while insurance and income stabilisation schemes are chiefly designed to address the impact of risks and crises.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may grant support for participation in collective crisis-prevention and risk-management tools to producer organisations, producer groups and entities representing other forms of cooperation that are constituted at the initiative of and controlled by producers. The competent authority of a Member State shall consider such forms of cooperation as producer groups while the programme is in force. Support shall take the form of financial contributions to mutual funds whose objectives relate to the specific objectives set out in Article 6(1), points (a) and (c) of Regulation 1308/2018, with the aim of avoiding and dealing with disturbances in the markets of the sector in question, and shall include financial contributions for the administrative costs of constitution. When granting the support, Member States shall approve the rules for the constitution and management of the mutualisation funds. Those rules shall provide that the mutualisation funds may only intervene in the event of a fall of at least 20 % in the market prices in the sector in question, compared to the average price recorded over the preceding three-year period, or compared to a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period, excluding the highest and lowest values. Member States shall limit the support to one or more rates not exceeding 70 % of the contributions to the mutual fund, of the mutual fund’s administrative costs and, where relevant, of other eligible costs. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk-management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. 3 Bis. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may provide support for participation in collective crisis prevention and risk management schemes to producer organisations, producer groups and entities representing other forms of cooperation established on the initiative of producers and controlled by them. Such forms of cooperation shall be identified by the competent authority of a Member State as producer groups for the duration of the programme. The support shall take the form of a financial contribution to mutual aid funds, including the administrative costs of setting them up, aimed at preventing and addressing market disturbances in the sector concerned, the objectives of which are linked to the specific objectives set out in Annex I to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. When providing support, Member States shall adopt rules for the establishment and management of mutual aid funds, which may only be activated in the event of a fall of at least 20 per cent in market prices and/or an increase in production costs in the sector concerned compared with the average recorded over the previous three-year period, or a three-year average based on the previous five-year period, excluding the highest and lowest values. The funds may also intervene to cover management and damage assessment costs, as well as any reinsurance costs. Member States shall limit support to one or more percentages not exceeding 70 % of contributions to the mutual aid fund, the fund’s administrative costs and, where applicable, other eligible costs. Member States shall ensure that any over-compensation resulting from the combination of the measures referred to in this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
Member States are authorised to provide financial contributions under the CAP to collective crisis prevention and management schemes established and implemented on a voluntary basis by groups of farmers through mutual funds approved by the Member States. Such schemes will aim to prevent, or at least mitigate, the risk and impact of serious crises, whereas insurance and income stabilisation schemes are primarily designed to address the impact of risks and crises. The increasing frequency of extreme weather events, plant health emergencies and market crises makes it necessary to strengthen risk management in agriculture and, in particular, the role of collective instruments. Agricultural co-operatives and producer organisations are particularly effective in promoting mutual aid schemes and sharing risk amongst farmers.The amendment therefore aims to explicitly recognise these bodies as beneficiaries of support and to incentivise collective approaches through higher levels of aid, not least in view of the benefits they generate in terms of resilience and the stability of agricultural income.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may provide support for participation in collective crisis prevention and risk management tools to producer organisations, producer groups and entities representing other forms of cooperation that are constituted at the initiative of producers and controlled by them. Such forms of cooperation shall be identified by the competent authority of a Member State as producer groups for the duration of the programme. Support shall take the form of financial contributions to mutual funds whose objectives relate to the specific objectives set out in Article 6(1), points (a) and (c) of Regulation 1308/2018, with the aim of avoiding and dealing with disturbances in the markets of the relevant sector, and including financial contributions for the administrative costs of setting up. When providing the support, Member States shall approve the rules for the constitution and management of the mutual funds. Those rules shall provide that mutual funds may only intervene in the event of a fall of at least 20 % in market prices in the sector concerned compared with the average recorded over the preceding three-year period, or a three-year average based on the preceding five-year period, excluding the highest and lowest values. Member States shall limit the support to one or more rates not exceeding 70 % of the contributions to the mutual fund, of the mutual fund’s administrative cost and, where relevant, of other eligible costs. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. | 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and the triggering factors for compensation. Those methodologies shall not apply to insurance policy schemes for which such methodologies are established by the insurance companies. In other cases they shall be defined in a clear and operational manner that ensures efficient administrative implementation. They do not need to be detailed specification in the NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. | 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and the triggering factors for compensation. Those methodologies shall be defined in a clear and operational manner that ensures efficient administrative implementation. They do not need to be set out in detail in the National Recovery Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. | 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Once the eligible compensation amount has been established, Member States shall ensure that the relevant compensation is paid without undue delay. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. | 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that compensation is paid without undue delay. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and triggering factors for compensation in their NRP Plan. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. | 4. Member States shall establish the methodology for the calculation of losses and the triggering factors for compensation. Member States shall ensure that any overcompensation resulting from the combination of the interventions under this Article with other public or private risk management schemes is avoided. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. In the event of recognition of a natural disaster by the competent Member State, an advance payment of at least 50 % of the estimated compensation is mandatory within thirty (30) days from the completion of the first recording of the damage. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. At least 20 % of the funds allocated to risk management shall be directed to preventive action, such as anti-hail systems, frost protection, smart irrigation systems, monitoring networks, early warning systems and flood protection projects. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Eligible climate risks shall include, among others, prolonged drought, marine heatwaves, extreme rainfall, floods, frost, hail, forest fires, strong winds, as well as any new phenomenon scientifically linked to climate change. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Member States may, through their NRP Plans, establish comprehensive risk management systems incorporating crop and livestock insurance, farming income stabilisation funds and instruments allowing the rapid mobilisation of financial support in response to natural disasters, adverse climatic events, infectious diseases in animals and extraordinary market disturbances. The support should encourage farmers to implement risk prevention measures and strengthen the resilience of agricultural holdings. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Member States shall ensure that support granted under this Article is linked to the implementation by beneficiaries of appropriate risk management and risk-preventive measures aimed at reducing exposure to climate-related risks. Such measures shall include practices and investments contributing to adaptation to climate change and shall be implemented in accordance with the principle of do no significant harm. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Member States may grant additional support to encourage the participation of farmers in risk management tools, where participation contributes to increasing the resilience of the agricultural sector . Member States may provide differentiated rates of public support in order to encourage participation in risk management tools, in particular for first-time participants. |
In order to encourage farmers' participation in risk management tools, the amendment provides that Member States may grant additional support, such as differentiated levels of public support, in particular for new participants in such tools and collective schemes, provided that such differentiation is based on objective, non-discriminatory and sound financial management criteria.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Member States may benefit from enhanced risk management funding if they ensure availability and uptake of preventive measures in other parts of the CAP NRP plan that mitigate or reduce the likely occurrence of those risks. Member States shall encourage uptake and participation in prevention schemes using the advisory services and AKIS. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4b. In the chapter regarding CAP in the NRP plans, Member States shall be encouraged to combine risk management cover with preventative practices that reduce the likelihood of those risks manifesting. Such combinations may benefit from 100% EU co-financing rates. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 12a | |
| Union Agricultural Trade Adjustment Reserve | |
| By 31 December 2028, the Commission shall submit a legislative proposal establishing a Union Agricultural Trade Adjustment Reserve, additional to the financial allocations available under this Regulation, to provide financial compensation to farmers affected by serious market disturbances resulting directly from the implementation of international trade agreements concluded by the Union.The Reserve shall not reduce or replace the financial allocations available to Member States under this Regulation. Financial compensation shall be available, in particular, where serious market disturbances affect sensitive agricultural sectors following the application of tariff concessions or other market access commitments under international trade agreements concluded by the Union. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers and beneficiaries operating in the forestry sector, and investments in processing and irrigation infrastructure for other beneficiaries |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo, Maria Noichl, Heléne Fritzon
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers and forest holders to enhance competitiveness, sustainability and resilience |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers, food processors and forest holders and the resilience of rural areas |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers, forest holders, cooperatives and producer organisations |
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Csaba Dömötör, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments to enhance resilience, sustainability and competitiveness |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments to enhance resilience, sustainability and competitiveness |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo, Maria Noichl, Heléne Fritzon
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers, forest holders and their cooperatives |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers, cooperatives and forest holders |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Support for investments for farmers and forest holders | Support for investments for farmers |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including agroforestry, wetland and peatland restoration, natural water-retention measures, high-diversity landscape features, nutrient recycling systems, local processing facilities and short supply-chain infrastructure. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support and shall ensure that investments with negative environmental impacts, including unsustainable irrigation and water-storage projects, are not supported. |
This shifts investment support towards long-term resilience and avoids subsidising harmful infrastructure.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including agroforestry, wetland and peatland restoration, natural water-retention measures, high-diversity landscape features, nutrient recycling systems, local processing facilities and short supply-chain infrastructure. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support and shall ensure that investments with negative environmental impacts, including unsustainable irrigation and water-storage projects, are not supported. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience and sustainability of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, biodiversity restoration, animal welfare improvements, local protein storage and processing, and the conversion of buildings or infrastructure away from intensive livestock production. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support, especially taking into consideration the different methods of production which require different needs, such as organic farming. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Camilla Laureti
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to the resilience and competitiveness of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including water management. Member States shall provide incentives to encourage the pooling of productive investments among active farmers. Member States shall explain in their NRCAP Plans how they plan to grant such support, taking into account the specific requirements arising from distinct types of production, such as organic, and geographical specificities. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments that aim to finance the modernisation, improvement and transition of agricultural and livestock holdings and agricultural facilities making an appropriate overall contribution to the resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas and to their climate and water resilience, including investments in cooperatives and producer organisations that will strengthen the competitiveness of agricultural farmers, livestock farmers and rural areas. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, animal health and welfare, biodiversity, prioritising nature-based solutions over large infrastructure projects. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support, especially considering different methods of production which require different needs, such as organic farming. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, animal health and welfare, biodiversity, prioritising nature-based solutions over large infrastructure projects. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support, especially considering different methods of production which require different needs, such as organic farming. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments supporting the competitiveness, productivity, food security, resilience and modernisation of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, including investments in processing, storage, marketing and local value chains, as well as irrigation, water retention and hydro-melioration infrastructure, including infrastructure beyond individual agricultural holdings. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
The CAP should support investments that strengthen the long-term competitiveness, productivity and resilience of European agriculture while reinforcing Union food security. In addition to primary agricultural production, investments in processing, storage, marketing, local value chains and strategic water infrastructure are essential to increase the added value of agricultural products, improve climate resilience and strengthen rural economies.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, or improving animal health and welfare. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support, taking into account in particular the differing needs of various methods of production, such as organic farming. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall give priority to measures that contribute to sustainable outcomes and methods of production, also taking into consideration improvements to animal health and welfare. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems and rural areas, in particular climate, environment, improvement of animal health and welfare, water and eco-system resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support, in particular taking into account the different needs associated with different production methods, such as organic farming. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience including investments in conservation agriculture technologies, such as no-till, strip-till, direct seeding and other soil-conserving cultivation systems. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. They may provide incentives encouraging the pooling of productive investments between active farmers. Member States shall explain in their NRCAP Plans how they plan to grant such support, where applicable. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to transformative resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, prioritizing nature-based solutions, including protection and restoration of ecosystems, including forests and peatlands. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience and sustainability of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, animal health and welfare, biodiversity, and the transition towards higher animal welfare production systems, including phasing out cages and close confinement systems for all farmed species. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including regional, local and mobile processing facilities, food hubs, and short supply chain infrastructure”Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including the abstraction, storage and management of water for irrigation purposes, as well as precision water management tools. Member States shall explain how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience including water capture and management (irrigation), including precision water management tools. Member States shall explain in their CAP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
Taking into account the scope of the CAP Regulation, the decision to provide the CAP with an autonomous budget, the experience gained with the current CAP national strategic plans, and with a view to simplification and improved administrative management, the CAP national and regional plans should be drawn up by the Member States within the framework of this Regulation without creating any additional administrative burdens.
Raffaele Stancanelli, Isabella Tovaglieri, Gilles Pennelle, Valérie Deloge, Barbara Bonte, Mireia Borrás Pabón, Csaba Dömötör, Tomáš Kubín, Vilis Krištopans
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including water capture and management (irrigation), including precision water management tools Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including water capture and management (irrigation), including precision water management tools Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience and food security, farm competitiveness, labour efficiency and generational renewal. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to the resilience and competitiveness of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, digital infrastructure, and improved resource efficiency. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience and sustainability of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, biodiversity, animal welfare and animal health. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments as well as food processing investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, including livestock housing, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, including water capture and precission water management tools. Member States shall explain in their NRPCAP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments in tangible and intangible assets making an appropriate overall contribution to the competitiveness and resilience of agriculture, the agri-food sector, irrigation infrastructure, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support |
Jérémy Decerle, Benoit Cassart, Laurence Farreng, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, Grégory Allione, Pascal Canfin
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience and the prevention of climate- and health-related risks. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to the competitiveness and resilience of agriculture, food systems, irrigation infrastructure, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments by farmers, food processors and forest holders making an appropriate overall contribution to the resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support to farmers and may grant support to forest holders under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience, and may also grant such support for forestry. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, territorial agri-food value chains, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience or improving animal welfare. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry, pastoral, and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
Collective pastoral investments (summer pastures, access trails, water supply systems, communal fences, and fire prevention equipment) can only be carried out by collective bodies that do not fall under the strict definition of “farmer” or “forest holder.”
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States may grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
Whether investment support is the most effective instrument depends on national circumstances and on the other funding sources available. Member States should retain the discretion to decide whether, and to what extent, to deploy this intervention, so that limited resources flow to the measures with the strongest contribution to the CAP objectives.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems, forestry and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. | 1. Member States shall grant support under this Article for productive and non-productive investments making an appropriate overall contribution to resilience of agriculture, food systems and rural areas, in particular climate and water resilience. Member States shall explain in their NRP Plans how they plan to grant such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall give priority to investments directly linked to the main agricultural activity of active farmers, in particular investments in precision farming, digital technologies, robotics, artificial intelligence, water efficiency technologies and low-emission production technologies. Such investments shall aim to strengthen agricultural productivity, competitiveness, input efficiency, farm resilience and food production. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall favour investments that support sustainable agricultural practices and contribute to more efficient use of natural resources and agricultural inputs, including irrigation, fertigation and precision farming, nursery production, propagation facilities, protected cultivation, mother plants, phytosanitary infrastructure and certified planting material. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall favour investments that support sustainable agricultural practices and contribute to more efficient use of natural resources and agricultural inputs, including irrigation, fertirrigation, precision farming and the use of risk management tools. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall favour investments that support sustainable agricultural practices and contribute to more efficient use of natural resources and agricultural inputs, including irrigation, fertigation and precision farming. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Irrigation investments shall be coherent with the Water Framework Directive, and shall not be granted if the quality of the surface or ground water would diminish as a result of the project being funded. In particular, water retention in the soil and landscape shall be prioritised for investments in water resilience, including in natural and semi-natural habitats such as wetlands and peatlands, the fixing of broken hydrological systems, water use efficiency and updating old and wasteful irrigation systems. Member States shall carry out cumulative hydrological evaluations on a drainage basin level for each new landscape level project applied for, with the aim of ensuring infiltration, through-flow and groundwater recharge, and assuring the ecological flow of the river and maintenance of the water table and sustenance of habitats and ecosystems dependent on it, to prevent their desiccation and carbon release. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Water shall be recognised as a common good whose management shall not be subject to a private appropriation approach or reserved for a limited group of users, to the detriment of the general interest or ecosystems. No direct or indirect funding shall be granted under this Regulation for the construction, expansion or modernisation of artificial water storage facilities for agricultural purposes with a capacity of over 50 000 m3, including ‘substitution’ reservoirs. This provision shall be without prejudice to the funding of low-capacity hillside storage reservoirs which are managed directly by beneficiary holdings, which are fed primarily by rainwater or run-off and which are intended to support agro-ecological practices which meet the needs of local holdings. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States shall ensure that the investments supported under this Article do not lead to any deterioration in the level of animal welfare or support the maintenance, expansion or introduction of infrastructure or equipment used for keeping animals in cages or other systems characterised by cramped accommodation. However, investments needed to support the conversion to cage-free farming practices and systems without cramped accommodation shall remain eligible. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States may grant this aid to legal persons or groups where individual members aree farmers, and national law provides for the individual members to assume rights and obligations comparable to those of individual farmers who have the status of a head of holding, in particular as regards their economic, social and tax status, provided that they have contributed to strengthening the agricultural structures of the legal persons or groups concerned |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States shall ensure that investments supported under this Article do not lead to a deterioration of animal welfare conditions and do not maintain, expand or introduce infrastructure or equipment for keeping animals in cages or other close confinement systems; investments necessary to convert to cage-free and close-confinement-free systems shall remain eligible. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. In the outermost regions, Member States may, under this Article, provide increased support for investments necessary to maintain local agricultural production, especially in the areas of irrigation, storage, processing, logistics and adaptation to specific geographical constraints. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States shall give priority to investments that enable farmers to transition to higher animal welfare systems, including by providing more space, outdoor access, enriched environments, improved housing design, better climate and air quality in animal housing, reduced stocking densities, and systems reducing the need for mutilations and antimicrobial use. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. 1 Member States may grant support for the business development of undertakings that process or market agricultural products grown or reared within their territory, the supply of which is governed by supply chain contracts in which the price of the product is determined on the basis of the farmer’s production costs. |
The revitalisation and vitality of rural areas are pursued through the synergistic integration of productive sectors and the development of local agri-food supply chains. To this end, the provisions of this measure promote local processing based on the predominant use of locally sourced produce. The economic sustainability of these processes is guaranteed by the obligation to enter into supply chain contracts that provide for pricing sufficient to fully cover production costs and safeguard agricultural added value.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. When defining support under this Article, Member States shall give particular consideration to invest ments that promote innovation and sust ainabl e practices across agriculture, inclu ding solutions that improve the manag emen t and viability of livestock farming and contribute to the effective use of agricultural land. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Support for investments under this Article may include investments that are linked to organic production that is certified in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848 or other agricultural systems that are recognised as sustainable by the Member States and their regions. |
Barry Cowen, Asger Christensen, Emma Wiesner, Charles Goerens, Christine Singer, Elsi Katainen, Jérémy Decerle
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. When defining support under this Article, Member States shall give particular consideration to investments that simultaneously support innovation and sustainable practices across agriculture, and solutions that improve the management and viability of livestock farming. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Elena Sancho Murillo
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States shall grant support under this Article for investments in nursery production, propagation facilities, protected cultivation, mother plants, irrigation systems, phytosanitary infrastructure, and the production of certified planting material. |
The nursery sector forms an integral part of European agriculture, supplying the plant reproductive material that underpins food production, horticulture, viticulture, forestry, agroforestry, landscape restoration and urban greening. Despite this strategic importance, nursery production is not explicitly recognised under the Regulation, resulting in divergent interpretations of eligibility across Member States, particularly as regards container-grown production and protected cultivation systems.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States shall support investments that support sustainable agricultural practices and contribute to more efficient use of natural resources and agricultural inputs, including irrigation, fertigation and precision farming. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Member States may favour investments that support sustainable agricultural practices and contribute to more efficient use of natural resources and agricultural inputs, including irrigation, fertigation and precision farming. |
Member States should retain flexibility to design investment support in line with their national and regional needs. Investments in resource efficiency, including irrigation, fertigation and precision farming, can play an important role in improving resilience and sustainability where appropriate. However, such investments should remain targeted options rather than uniform obligations.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Incentives shall be put in place to encourage the pooling of productive investments amongst several active farmers, such as a higher support rate and priority being given when applications are assessed |
Machinery accounts for a significant proportion of European farms’ operating costs and is often their largest item of expenditure. In several Member States, given the soaring cost of agricultural machinery, the pooling of equipment can generate substantial savings. Encouraging the pooling of investments is therefore a practical means of supporting competitiveness, reducing debt and facilitating the takeover of farms and the setting up of new farmers
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. The maximum rate of support available for investments in the outermost regions referred to in Article 349 TFEU shall be at least 85 % of eligible public expenditure. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1a. Investments in animal housing, slurry storage, water infrastructure, renewable energy, precision agriculture and farm safety shall be eligible expenditure. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. If investments relate to animal husbandry or livestock farming systems, Member States shall specify animal welfare criteria and indicators in their national reform and strategic plans. Where appropriate, these shall include, in particular, requirements relating to livestock density, space allowances, access to exercise enclosures, behavioural enrichment opportunities for animals, animal-based animal welfare indicators, mortality rates, injury frequencies and the use of antimicrobials. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Member States and their regions shall promote investments in the modernisation of sustainable irrigation, the re-use of water for agricultural purposes, and storage, fertigation, digitalisation and precision-farming systems. | |
| They shall also support stimulus measures for agricultural infrastructure that will improve biosecurity, animal and plant health and fire prevention in rural areas. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Member States shall favour investments that support sustainable agricultural practices and contribute to more efficient use of natural resources and agricultural inputs, including irrigation, fertigation and precision farming, nursery production, propagation facilities, protected cultivation, mother plants, phytosanitary infrastructure and certified planting material. |
The nursery sector is an integral part of European agriculture, supplying the plant reproductive material that underpins food production, horticulture, viticulture, forestry, agroforestry, landscape restoration and urban greening. Despite its strategic importance, nursery production is not explicitly recognised within the proposed Regulation, resulting in divergent interpretations of eligibility across Member States, particularly for container-grown and protected cultivation systems.
Explicitly including nursery production within the definitions of "farmer", "agricultural activity" and "beneficiary", together with a harmonised definition of "nursery stock", would provide legal certainty, ensure equal treatment of nursery operators throughout the Union, and facilitate consistent implementation of the CAP. This amendment is fully consistent with the objectives of the CAP 2028–2034 to strengthen competitiveness, enhance climate resilience, support biodiversity, and secure the sustainable supply of high-quality plant material essential for the green transition and the resilience of European agriculture.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Member States shall give priority to investments that enable farmers to transition to higher animal welfare systems, including by providing more space, outdoor access, enriched environments, improved housing design, better climate and air quality in animal housing, reduced stocking densities, and systems reducing mutilations and the need for antimicrobial use. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Member States may consider a higher level of support for investments in mountainous areas, areas with permanent natural handicaps and the outermost regions, taking into account the additional costs associated with the geographical, natural and logistical constraints specific to those territories. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Where investments concern animal housing or livestock production systems, Member States shall define animal welfare criteria and indicators in their NRP Plans, including, where relevant, space allowance, access to outdoor areas, enrichment, animal-based welfare indicators, mortality rates, prevalence of injuries, and antimicrobial use. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Member States shall grant support under this Article to farmers and may do likewise for forest holders and associations thereof. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1b. Member States provide enhanced investment support for family farms, young farmers, women farmers and holdings located in Areas of Natural Constraints. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1c. Where investments concern animal housing or livestock production systems, Member States shall define animal welfare criteria and indicators in their NRP Plans, including, where relevant, space allowance, access to outdoor areas, enrichment, animal-based welfare indicators, mortality rates, prevalence of injuries, and antimicrobial use. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1c. Member States shall favour investments contributing to the creation and retention of added value in rural areas, including investments linked to Union quality schemes and territorial agri-food value chains. |
Union quality schemes, in particular geographical indications, contribute to increasing the added value retained by farmers and rural territories by supporting collective investment, local processing, product differentiation and stronger territorial value chains. Explicitly recognising these investments within the CAP would improve coherence with the objectives of the Vision for Agriculture and Food, which identifies geographical indications as a key instrument for valuing food and supporting the "right to stay" in rural areas.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the European Commission´s Guidelines on Closer-to-Nature Forest Management and Guidelines on Biodiversity-Friendly Afforestation, Reforestation and Tree Planting1a. |
| No support under this article shall be granted for forests of the characteristics of primary and old-growth forests as provided in Commission Guidelines for Defining, Mapping, Monitoring and Strictly Protecting EU Primary and Old-Growth Forests. | |
| 1a COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Guidelines on Biodiversity-Friendly Afforestation, Reforestation and Tree Planting (SWD(2023)61), available at: https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/documents-register/detail?ref=SWD(2023)61〈=en |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | 2. Support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the Commission’s closer to nature forest management guidelines 1a, to ensure climate adaptiveness, pest and disease resilience and assurance of future success of the investment. Support shall not be granted for the replacement of diverse native multi-age, multi-species communities by species-poor communities, monocultures or exotics. Member States shall ensure that small-scale forest holders have access to support for drafting plans. |
| 1a Published 23 July 2023: https://environment.ec.europa.eu/publications/guidelines-closer-nature-forest-management_en |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests, including its economic, environmental and social dimensions, as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | 2. 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their PAC Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. |
Taking into account the scope of the CAP Regulation, the decision to provide the CAP with an autonomous budget, the experience gained with the current CAP national strategic plans, and with a view to simplification and improved administrative management, the CAP national and regional plans should be drawn up by the Member States within the framework of this Regulation without creating any additional administrative burdens.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States in their NRP Plans, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. | 2. For holdings above a certain size, to be determined by Member States, support for the forestry sector shall be conditional on the presentation of the relevant information from a forest management plan or equivalent instrument in accordance with the sustainable management of forests as defined in the most recent version of Forest Europe’s General Guidelines for the Sustainable Management of Forests in Europe. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | deleted |
Implementation would be too complex, and defining the respective percentages would be highly complicated; therefore, the paragraph should be deleted.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Access to support for small investments, of up to EUR 20 000, shall be subject to a simplified approval and disbursement procedure with proportionate administrative requirements, as determined by each Member State in its NRRP, with proof of successful implementation of the investment being deemed sufficient. Access to support for small investments responds particularly to the need articulated by women farmers who, even for minor investments, find it harder to easily access funding for setting up or strengthening their businesses. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events, pests, epizootic diseases, emerging diseases, zoonoses or animal diseases and catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. Member States shall apply simple, agile criteria when granting and paying out such support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Access to support for small investments, up to EUR 100 000, shall be subject to a simplified approval and disbursement procedure with proportionate administrative requirements, as determined by each Member State in their NRPP, with a proof of successful implementation of the investment deemed to be sufficient. Access to support for small investments responds particularly to the need articulated by women farmers who, even for minor investments, find it harder to easily access funding for setting up or strengthening their businesses. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events including those caused by animal and plant diseases, shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential as defined by the Member States or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events, including animal and plant diseases, shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential, as determined by the Member State, or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events, including those caused by animal and plant diseases, shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events, including those caused by animal and plant diseases, shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events including those caused by animal and plant diseases shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo, Maria Noichl
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, including quarantine pests and epizotic outbreaks, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural or livestock production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events, catastrophic events or animal and plant diseases shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 20 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events, catastrophic events, animal diseases or pest infestations shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
Animal diseases and pest infestations can do serious and long-lasting damage to the production potential of agriculture and forests. Support for investment in the restoration of production potential should therefore explicitly cover these phenomena.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Access to support for small investments, up to EUR 20 000, shall be subject to a simplified approval and disbursement procedure with proportionate administrative requirements, as determined by each Member State in their NRPP, with a proof of successful implementation of the investment deemed to be sufficient |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 20 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 30 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 20 % of the forestry production potential. | 3. Support for investments in the restoration of agricultural or forestry production potential damaged by natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events shall be granted only when the event concerned has caused the destruction of at least 20 % of the agricultural production potential or at least 15 % of the forestry production potential. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Access to support for small investments, up to EUR 20 000, shall be subject to a fast-track approval and disbursement procedure with significantly lower bureaucratic requirements, as determined by each Member State in their NRPP, with a proof of successful implementation of the investment deemed to be sufficient. Access to support for small investments responds particularly to the need articulated by women farmers who, even for minor investments, find themselves in a structurally challenging position to easily access funding for setting up or strengthening their businesses. |
As assessed through a study carried out by copa-cogeca with n=894 women farmers across Europe, women farmers currently face several difficulties in accessing funding. While, for sure, support for small investments up to EUR 20 000 does not allow to implement major changes on a farm, it gives fast and easy access to money for acquiring equipment and diversifying a farm without undergoing burdensome procedures. Such small investments can be the one crucial step for women farmers to be able to start up a business and, at a later point, access more money. The suggested approach can be more effective for well-targeted female empowerment in agriculture than area-based differentiation and top-ups, which would, particularly on small- and medium-sized holdings that are most common among women farmers, not bring enough financial benefits to boost their business. At the same time, while being of particular use for women farmers, the fast-track investment support does not discriminate men. In addition, young farmers who have not yet submitted an application, can benefit from the same increased amount granted under the fast-track approval and disbursement procedure, as the simplified process enables easier and faster access to investment support. This also applies to investment support for diversification activities.
Dario Nardella, André Franqueira Rodrigues, Cristina Maestre, Eric Sargiacomo, Stefano Bonaccini, Claire Fita, Marko Vešligaj, Elena Sancho Murillo
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Member States may grant support for investments in the processing and/or marketing of agricultural products. Such support shall be granted where the investment concerns activities involving products: | |
| (a) the supply of which is governed by supply chain contracts in which the price of the product is determined on the basis of the farmer's production costs; | |
| (b) primarly grown or reared locally. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. Access to support for small investments, up to EUR 20 000, shall be subject to a fast-track approval and disbursement procedure with significantly lower bureaucratic requirements, as determined by each Member State in their NRPP, with a proof of successful implementation of the investment deemed to be sufficient. |
Fast-track support for small investments up to EUR 20 000 can improve access to finance, particularly for women farmers, who often face structural difficulties in obtaining funding. While such investments do not allow major farm changes, they can enable the purchase of equipment, diversification or business start-up without burdensome procedures. The measure provides targeted support without excluding men and also benefits young farmers through simpler and faster access.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3b. Member States may, in duly justified cases, provide for lower thresholds where justified by exceptional regional or sectoral circumstances. |
The proposed investment provisions are more restrictive than the current framework under Article 73 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115. Member States should therefore retain sufficient flexibility to adapt investment support to specific regional or sectoral needs. In duly justified cases, lower thresholds should be possible where exceptional circumstances require a more targeted and practical approach.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (aa) investment resulting in a net increase of the irrigated area affecting a given body of ground or surface water body which has been identified as less than good in the relevant river basin management plan for reasons related to water quantity or located in a river basin district with significant water abstraction and hydrological alteration pressures where a new investment in combination with existing competing uses could pose risk to ecological flows; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ab) investments in infrastructure or equipment intended for keeping animals in cages or other close confinement systems; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ac) Investments to support intensive animal rearing in areas with high nutrient pollution, except investment to extensification of the activities. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) purchase of land for an amount exceeding 10 % of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, with the exception of land purchase for environmental conservation and carbon-rich soil preservation; | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) purchase of land for an amount exceeding 10 % of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, with the exception of land purchase for environmental conservation and carbon-rich soil preservation; | deleted |
Acquisition of land should not be applicable for investment support, as it strongly intervenes in the land market and could also lead to an increase in the land prices.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) purchase of land for an amount exceeding 10 % of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, with the exception of land purchase for environmental conservation and carbon-rich soil preservation; | (b) purchase of land; |
Acquisition of land should not be applicable for investment support, as it strongly intervenes in the land market and could also lead to an increase in the land prices.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) purchase of land for an amount exceeding 10 % of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, with the exception of land purchase for environmental conservation and carbon-rich soil preservation; | (b) purchase of land for an amount exceeding 30% of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, the purchase of land by young farmers and women can reach 40% of the eligible expenditure |
if we want to keep farmers on the land we need to provide grants to buy lands. This is especially important for women and young farmers. We cannot just talk about helping the installment of new farmers and young farmers we need to provide them grants to buy lands that is the most problematic aspect of attracting people
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ba) replacement of diverse native multi-age, multi-species forest communities by monocultures or exotics |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (bb) forest roads |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (bc) investments associated with increasing or continuing intensive animal rearing operations, notably in nutrient pollution hotspots, unless the investment will lead to a substantial reduction in animal numbers and translate into a substantial reduction in nitrogen and methane emissions. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (bd) hydrologically damaging or maladaptive investments not in line with WFD, that inter alia prevent infiltration and percolation, lower water tables, or rely on pumping groundwater |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (be) Investment to support practices which use pesticides beyond natural low-risk pesticides and are not part of a transition to ambitiously reduce/phase out harmful pesticides and/or which use particularly harmful pesticides (such as Candidates for Substitution, banned pesticides and other particularly harmful pesticides (Carcinogens-Mutangens-Reprotoxins, endocrine disruptors, PMT, PBT, vPvM, vPvB) |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) purchase of animals, and purchase of annual plants and their planting for a purpose other than: | (c) purchase of animals, and purchase of annual plants or woody plants and their planting for a purpose other than: |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential, the latter by introduction of indigenous basic material, following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; |
Benoit Cassart, Christine Singer, Michael McNamara, Barry Cowen, Jérémy Decerle, Ciaran Mullooly, Asger Christensen
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events including those caused by animal and plant diseases; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural, livestock or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events, zoonoses or catastrophic events; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (i) restoring agricultural or forestry potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; | (i) restoring agricultural potential following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ia) afforestation in line with Guidelines on Biodiversity-Friendly Afforestation, Reforestation and Tree Planting or rejuvention of traditional agro-forestry systems; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ii) protecting livestock against large predators or being used in forestry instead of machinery; | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the resilience and animal welfare of livestock herds, including by selecting for traits linked to hardiness, resistance to disease, lifespan or behavioural robustness, or to preserve rare or local breeds; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals to improve the resilience and animal welfare of livestock herds, in particular through the selection of characteristics such as robustness, disease resistance, longevity and behavioural stability, or to preserve rare or local breeds. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding, recognised by associations of those breeders, to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare, local or autochthonous breeds; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, pigs, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, pig, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; |
Pigs of e.g. raza ibérica are both of high genetic value and their breeding help preserve the heritage landscape of dehesas therefore their inclusion is justified .
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals to preserve rare or local breeds to improve the robustness and genetic diversity of livestock; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iv) rearing of bovine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; | (iv) rearing of bovine, porcine, sheep or goat pure-bred animals of high genetic value for breeding to improve the quality and productivity of livestock herds or to preserve rare or local breeds; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (iva) transitioning to breeding of slower broiler breeds; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ca) Investments in infrastructure or equipment for keeping animals in cages or other close confinement systems; investments necessary to convert to cage-free and close-confinement-free systems shall remain eligible. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) investments that lead to an increase in livestock density or production intensity that could harm the health or well-being of animals, such as the construction of stalls for the keeping of livestock, if a stocking density of 2 LU/ha is exceeded. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) investments aimed at the construction of large-capacity artificial reservoirs for irrigation or the establishment, expansion or consolidation of intensive livestock operations whose production capacities exceed the thresholds laid down in Directive 2010/75/EU. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) investments in infrastructure or equipment for keeping animals in close confinement systems including cages; investments necessary to convert to cage-free and close-confinement-free solutions are not ineligible. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) investment in irrigation in areas where ground and surface water bodies are in a less than good status for either quantity or quality reasons, or which may jeopardise existing good conditions; |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) investments that increase stocking density or create new capacity for intensive livestock production shall not be eligible for support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) investments in infrastructure or equipment intended for animal housing systems based on cages or comparable close-confinement systems |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) (e)new the purchase of second-hand machinery and equipment, except where such items are of recent manufacture. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) purchase of used machinery and equipment, except in the case of recently manufactured equipment. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) purchases of second-hand machinery and equipment, unless recently manufactured. |
This amendment does not seek to altogether discourage the use of second-hand machinery – but it must be technologically sound.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (db) investments in renewable energy installations that create significant negative harm and trade-offs with food production, biodiversity or ecosystem services, including large-scale photovoltaic installations on productive agricultural land and biogas plants based predominantly on dedicated energy crops rather than agricultural residues or waste streams. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (db) investments that install, maintain, expand, modernise, refurbish, replace or prolong the use of infrastructure or equipment for keeping animals in cages or other close confinement systems shall not be eligible for support. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (db) investments in infrastructure or equipment for caged livestock production systems or other farming systems in which animals have limited freedom of movement |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. Subject to the conditions of their CAP plans, Member States may grant support to promote the development of small agricultural undertakings with a view to facilitating digitalisation and innovation. This support shall be granted in the form of lump sums or financial instruments – or a combination of the two – and shall not exceed EUR 75 000. |
As with the last simplification agenda, a simplified regime should be introduced for small businesses in an effort to encourage digitalisation and innovation.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 4a. 4bis Member States may grant support for the business development of small agricultural holdings under the conditions set out in their respective CAP plans aimed at promoting digitalisation and innovation. The support is granted in the form of lump sums, financial instruments or a combination of both, and is limited to a maximum amount of up to EUR 75 000. |
As was the case in the last simplification process, to introduce a simplified scheme for small businesses aimed at promoting the uptake of digitalisation and innovation.
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b) and (c), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. | deleted |
The implementation of this derogation would make the provisions more complex; therefore, the paragraph should be deleted
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b) and (c), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b) and (c), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b) and (c), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b) and (c), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. | deleted |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b) and (c), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. | 5. 5. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, points (a), (b),(c) and (e), that requirement shall not apply where the support is provided through financial instruments. |
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 5a. By way of derogation from paragraph 4, point (b), Member States may provide that, for investments undertaken by young farmers referred to in Article 14 and by new farmers as defined in Article 2, where the investment concerns an agricultural holding located in areas referred to in Article 8, the purchase of land may be eligible for support up to 50% of the total eligible expenditure for the operation concerned, provided that such purchase is necessary for the establishment, development or long-term viability of the holding. |
Connections
The dossier, the decisions on this text and its other versions.
No connections found for this item.
Sources & citation
Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.
- Data source
- Licensed CC BY 4.0.
- Retrieved
- 25 September 2026
Cite as
European Parliament (2026). “AMENDMENTS 2354 - 2698 - Draft report Establishing the conditions for the implementation of the Union support to the Common Agriculture Policy for the period from 2028 to 2034”. Text, 13 July 2026. docId AGRI-AM-790956. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/AGRI-AM-790956 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/AGRI-AM-790956 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-agri-am-790956,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{AMENDMENTS 2354 - 2698 - Draft report Establishing the conditions for the implementation of the Union support to the Common Agriculture Policy for the period from 2028 to 2034}},
year = {2026},
date = {2026-07-13},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/AGRI-AM-790956}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/AGRI-AM-790956},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId AGRI-AM-790956. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}