# Official Journal C 193/2014

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 193 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5724 June 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 193

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5724 June 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 193/01 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7185 — Agroenergi/ Neova Pellets/ JV) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2014/C 193/01

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case M.7185 — Agroenergi/ Neova Pellets/ JV) (
  1
  )

1

1

| | III   Preparatory acts |
| --- | --- |
| | European Central Bank |
| 2014/C 193/02 | Opinion of the European Central Bank of 5 February 2014 on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on interchange fees for card-based payment transactions (CON/2014/10) | 2 |

III   Preparatory acts

European Central Bank

2014/C 193/02

Opinion of the European Central Bank of 5 February 2014 on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on interchange fees for card-based payment transactions (CON/2014/10)

2

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2014/C 193/03 | Notice for the attention of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/137/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya | 19 |
| 2014/C 193/04 | Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/798/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/382/CFSP, and Council Regulation (EU) No 224/2014, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 691/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic | 20 |
| 2014/C 193/05 | Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria | 21 |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 193/06 | Euro exchange rates | 22 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2014/C 193/03

Notice for the attention of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/137/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

19

2014/C 193/04

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/798/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/382/CFSP, and Council Regulation (EU) No 224/2014, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 691/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic

20

2014/C 193/05

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria

21

European Commission

2014/C 193/06

Euro exchange rates

22

| | V   Announcements |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 193/07 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7267 — Sopra Group/Groupe Steria) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 23 |
| 2014/C 193/08 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7271 — Russian Machines/Fritzmeier/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  ) | 24 |

V   Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

2014/C 193/07

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7267 — Sopra Group/Groupe Steria) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

23

2014/C 193/08

Prior notification of a concentration (Case M.7271 — Russian Machines/Fritzmeier/JV) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (
  1
  )

1

24

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

II Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7185 — Agroenergi/ Neova Pellets/ JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 193/01

On 15 May 2014, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7185. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7185. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---

III Preparatory acts

European Central Bank

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/2

---

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 5 February 2014

on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on interchange fees for card-based payment transactions

(CON/2014/10)

2014/C 193/02

Introduction and legal basis

On 31 October 2013, the European Central Bank (ECB) received a request from the Council for an opinion on a proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on interchange fees for card-based payment transactions (1) (hereinafter the ‘proposed regulation’).

The ECB’s competence to deliver an opinion is based on Articles 127(4) and 282(5) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union since the proposed regulation contains provisions affecting the tasks of the European System of Central Banks (ESCB) to promote the smooth operation of payment systems and to contribute to the smooth conduct of policies relating to the stability of the financial system, as referred to in the fourth indent of Article 127(2), and Article 127(5) of the Treaty. In accordance with the first sentence of Article 17.5 of the Rules of Procedure of the European Central Bank, the Governing Council has adopted this opinion.

General observations

| 1. | The proposed regulation lays down uniform technical and business requirements for payment card transactions carried out within the European Union where both the payer’s and the payee’s payment service provider are established in the Union. The proposed regulation has two parts. The first part sets a cap on interchange fees (2) for consumer debit card transactions of no more than 0,20 % of the transaction value, and a cap for consumer credit card transactions of no more than 0,30 % of the transaction value, which will apply to domestic or cross-border (3) transactions after different transitional periods (4). Transactions with commercial cards, cards issued by three-party card schemes, as well as cash withdrawals at automatic teller machines are exempted from the requirements of the first part of the proposed regulation. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The proposed regulation lays down uniform technical and business requirements for payment card transactions carried out within the European Union where both the payer’s and the payee’s payment service provider are established in the Union. The proposed regulation has two parts. The first part sets a cap on interchange fees (2) for consumer debit card transactions of no more than 0,20 % of the transaction value, and a cap for consumer credit card transactions of no more than 0,30 % of the transaction value, which will apply to domestic or cross-border (3) transactions after different transitional periods (4). Transactions with commercial cards, cards issued by three-party card schemes, as well as cash withdrawals at automatic teller machines are exempted from the requirements of the first part of the proposed regulation.

| 2. | The second part of the proposed regulation lays down business rules and other technical requirements that will apply to all categories of card-based payment transactions. The most significant are a separation of the payment card schemes and the processing entities (5), changes in the application of the ‘Honour All Cards Rule’ (6) and a prohibition on rules hindering or preventing co-badging (7). There is also a new rule requiring licences delivered by payment card schemes for issuing or acquiring purposes to cover the entire Union territory, as well as rules to increase transparency in respect of charges for merchants (‘unblending’), and to prohibit ‘no-steering measures’ in licensing agreements (8). There are also new rules to improve the transparency of fee structures, such as prohibiting any rule that prevents merchants from disclosing to their customers the fees they pay to acquirers, and a requirement for acquiring payment service providers to provide, at a minimum, monthly statements of fees they charge to merchants, specifying the fees paid by merchants every month for each category of card and each individual brand for which the acquirer provides acquiring services. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The second part of the proposed regulation lays down business rules and other technical requirements that will apply to all categories of card-based payment transactions. The most significant are a separation of the payment card schemes and the processing entities (5), changes in the application of the ‘Honour All Cards Rule’ (6) and a prohibition on rules hindering or preventing co-badging (7). There is also a new rule requiring licences delivered by payment card schemes for issuing or acquiring purposes to cover the entire Union territory, as well as rules to increase transparency in respect of charges for merchants (‘unblending’), and to prohibit ‘no-steering measures’ in licensing agreements (8). There are also new rules to improve the transparency of fee structures, such as prohibiting any rule that prevents merchants from disclosing to their customers the fees they pay to acquirers, and a requirement for acquiring payment service providers to provide, at a minimum, monthly statements of fees they charge to merchants, specifying the fees paid by merchants every month for each category of card and each individual brand for which the acquirer provides acquiring services.

| 3. | The ECB welcomes the fact that the proposed regulation lays down common Union-wide rules on interchange fees and also uniform business rules and technical requirements for card-based payment transactions. The proposals are generally in line with existing Eurosystem positions. Payment cards are the most widely used electronic payment instruments for retail purchases and thus represent a large share of the payment transactions in the Union. Despite this, however, interchange fees are currently largely unregulated and, hence, very divergent across Member States. The introduction of common rules should contribute to completing the internal market for payments and support the establishment of a Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA). While the new rules have a strong competition-related aspect, they should also reduce market fragmentation and create a level playing field, which will make it easier for existing players to compete and for new providers to enter the market for card payments, thus leading to increased efficiency and a greater use of electronic payment instruments overall. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The ECB welcomes the fact that the proposed regulation lays down common Union-wide rules on interchange fees and also uniform business rules and technical requirements for card-based payment transactions. The proposals are generally in line with existing Eurosystem positions. Payment cards are the most widely used electronic payment instruments for retail purchases and thus represent a large share of the payment transactions in the Union. Despite this, however, interchange fees are currently largely unregulated and, hence, very divergent across Member States. The introduction of common rules should contribute to completing the internal market for payments and support the establishment of a Single Euro Payments Area (SEPA). While the new rules have a strong competition-related aspect, they should also reduce market fragmentation and create a level playing field, which will make it easier for existing players to compete and for new providers to enter the market for card payments, thus leading to increased efficiency and a greater use of electronic payment instruments overall.

Specific observations

1.   Defined terms

The definitions in the proposed regulation (9) have been aligned to some extent, but not fully, with those of the proposal for a second Payment Services Directive (hereinafter the ‘proposed PSD2’) (10) and Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council (11). There are benefits to having similar definitions of concepts that appear in closely-related Union legal acts, to avoid misperceptions and to facilitate citizens’ understanding of the legal framework. Therefore, the ECB considers that the definitions of a number of key terms such as that of ‘payment order’, ‘payment service provider’ and ‘payment transaction’ should be further aligned with those in the proposed PSD2. Furthermore, the proposed definititions of ‘card-based payment transaction’ and ‘payment card transaction’ are very similar. The ECB would therefore suggest merging them into one definition. The Annex to this opinion provides a number of further technical comments on the definitions.

2.   Other provisions

| 2.1. | The ECB welcomes the fact that there is increased clarity regarding interchange fees. If, however, the caps on cross-border interchange fees are introduced before the caps on national interchange fees, small national card acquirers could be put at a disadvantage, because they will not be able to compete with foreign acquirers that benefit from the resulting lower cross-border interchange fees. The ECB would therefore suggest introducing these caps simultaneously. |
| --- | --- |

2.1.

The ECB welcomes the fact that there is increased clarity regarding interchange fees. If, however, the caps on cross-border interchange fees are introduced before the caps on national interchange fees, small national card acquirers could be put at a disadvantage, because they will not be able to compete with foreign acquirers that benefit from the resulting lower cross-border interchange fees. The ECB would therefore suggest introducing these caps simultaneously.

| 2.2. | The ECB supports the proposal that the choice of brand in cases of more than one brand on a card (co-branding) should be made at the point of sale (12). At the same time, payers may have an incentive to choose card brands that provide them with additional benefits such as reward programmes, which might consequently lead to an increase in the use of expensive card brands. In this regard, the ECB suggests that the choice of a specific brand should be agreed upon jointly by the cardholder and the merchant at the point of sale. |
| --- | --- |

2.2.

The ECB supports the proposal that the choice of brand in cases of more than one brand on a card (co-branding) should be made at the point of sale (12). At the same time, payers may have an incentive to choose card brands that provide them with additional benefits such as reward programmes, which might consequently lead to an increase in the use of expensive card brands. In this regard, the ECB suggests that the choice of a specific brand should be agreed upon jointly by the cardholder and the merchant at the point of sale.

| 2.3. | While the ECB welcomes the fact that there is a prohibition on rules forcing merchants to accept all cards of a specific brand, the ECB is concerned by the derogation that states that merchants should be obliged to accept other payment instruments of the same brand and/or category that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee (13). The decision on whether to accept cards, as well as the particular brands or card products which may be accepted under a certain scheme, should be a commercial decision by the merchant. |
| --- | --- |

2.3.

While the ECB welcomes the fact that there is a prohibition on rules forcing merchants to accept all cards of a specific brand, the ECB is concerned by the derogation that states that merchants should be obliged to accept other payment instruments of the same brand and/or category that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee (13). The decision on whether to accept cards, as well as the particular brands or card products which may be accepted under a certain scheme, should be a commercial decision by the merchant.

| 2.4. | The ECB further suggests clarifying that payment card schemes should not discriminate against processing entities by implementing business rules that unduly restrict interoperability between processing entities. |
| --- | --- |

2.4.

The ECB further suggests clarifying that payment card schemes should not discriminate against processing entities by implementing business rules that unduly restrict interoperability between processing entities.

| 2.5. | In addition, payment card schemes may need some additional time to adapt to the new requirements. To this end, a transitional period for the separation requirement (14) could be considered. |
| --- | --- |

2.5.

In addition, payment card schemes may need some additional time to adapt to the new requirements. To this end, a transitional period for the separation requirement (14) could be considered.

| 2.6. | For efficiency reasons, the ECB would suggest one single competent authority being responsible for ensuring compliance with the regulation, however being aware that this might prove difficult in practice due to diverging national set ups. |
| --- | --- |

2.6.

For efficiency reasons, the ECB would suggest one single competent authority being responsible for ensuring compliance with the regulation, however being aware that this might prove difficult in practice due to diverging national set ups.

Where the ECB recommends that the proposed regulation is amended, specific drafting proposals are set out in the Annex accompanied by explanatory text to this effect.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 5 February 2014.

The President of the ECB

Mario DRAGHI

---

(1)  COM(2013) 550 final/2.

1

(2)  See Chapters II and III of the proposed regulation. Inter-change fees are inter-bank fees that usually apply between the card-acquiring payment service providers and the card-issuing payment service providers belonging to a certain card scheme. They are the main part of the fees that acquiring payment service providers charge to merchants for every card transaction.

2

(3)  Cross-border transactions are when consumers use their payment cards in another Member State, or when a retailer uses an acquiring payment service provider in another Member State.

3

(4)  The caps for cross-border transactions will enter into effect two months from the entry into force of the regulation. Two years after the entry into force of the regulation, these caps will also apply to domestic transactions.

4

(5)  Payment card schemes and entities processing card-based payments should be independent from each other in terms of legal form, organisation and decision making.

5

(6)  This rule pertains to card schemes or payment service providers that require merchants to accept all cards of a certain brand, meaning that merchants cannot limit acceptance to only a certain kind of card. Article 10 of the proposed regulation would allow merchants to accept only one card category of a particular brand by prohibiting the payment service provider or card scheme from requiring merchants to accept more or all categories of the same brand. In addition, the proposed regulation introduces a requirement that prevents merchants from discriminating between cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee, i.e. if merchants accept one debit card brand, they should also accept debit cards from all other brands.

6

(7)  In other words, placing two or more brands on a card-based payment instrument.

7

(8)  Merchants should not be prevented by their payment service provider or card scheme from steering consumers to the use of a preferred payment instrument, or from informing consumers about interchange fees or merchant services charges.

8

(9)  See Article 2 of the proposed regulation.

9

(10)  Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of on payment services in the internal market and amending Directives 2002/65/EC, 2013/36/EU and 2009/110/EC and repealing Directive 2007/64/EC (COM(2013) 547 final).

10

(11)  Regulation (EU) No 260/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 March 2012 establishing technical and business requirements for credit transfers and direct debits in euro and amending Regulation (EC) No 924/2009 (OJ L 94, 30.3.2012, p. 22).

11

(12)  See Article 8(5) of the proposed regulation.

12

(13)  Article 10(1) and recital 29 of the proposed regulation.

13

(14)  See Article 7 of the proposed regulation.

14

---

ANNEX

Drafting proposals

| Text proposed by the European Commission | Amendments proposed by the ECB (1) |
| --- | --- |
| Amendment 1 |
| Recitals 15 to 17 |
| ‘(15) | This Regulation follows a gradual approach. As a first step, it is necessary to take measures to facilitate cross-border issuing and acquiring of payment card transactions. Allowing merchants to choose an acquirer outside their own Member State (“cross border acquiring”) and imposing a maximum level of cross border interchange fees for cross border acquired transactions should provide the necessary legal clarity. In addition, licences for issuing or acquiring of payment instruments should be valid without geographic restrictions within the Union. These measures would facilitate the smooth functioning of an internal market for card, internet and mobile payments, to the benefit of consumers and retailers. |

Text proposed by the European Commission

Amendments proposed by the ECB (1)

Amendment 1

Recitals 15 to 17

‘(15)

This Regulation follows a gradual approach. As a first step, it is necessary to take measures to facilitate cross-border issuing and acquiring of payment card transactions. Allowing merchants to choose an acquirer outside their own Member State (“cross border acquiring”) and imposing a maximum level of cross border interchange fees for cross border acquired transactions should provide the necessary legal clarity. In addition, licences for issuing or acquiring of payment instruments should be valid without geographic restrictions within the Union. These measures would facilitate the smooth functioning of an internal market for card, internet and mobile payments, to the benefit of consumers and retailers.

| (16) | As a consequence of unilateral undertakings and commitments accepted in the framework of competition proceedings, many cross-border card payment transactions in the Union are already carried out respecting the maximum interchanges fees applicable to the first phase of this Regulation. Therefore, the provisions relating to those transactions should enter into force quickly, creating opportunities for retailers to seek cheaper acquiring services cross-border, and incentivising domestic banking communities or schemes to lower their acquiring fees. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

As a consequence of unilateral undertakings and commitments accepted in the framework of competition proceedings, many cross-border card payment transactions in the Union are already carried out respecting the maximum interchanges fees applicable to the first phase of this Regulation. Therefore, the provisions relating to those transactions should enter into force quickly, creating opportunities for retailers to seek cheaper acquiring services cross-border, and incentivising domestic banking communities or schemes to lower their acquiring fees.

| (17) | For domestic transactions, a transition period is necessary to provide payment services providers and schemes with time to adapt to the new requirements. Therefore, after a two year period following the entry into force of this Regulation and in order to provide for a completion of an internal market for card-based payments, the caps on interchange fees for consumer card transactions should be extended to cover all, cross-border and domestic payments.’ |
| --- | --- |

(17)

For domestic transactions, a transition period is necessary to provide payment services providers and schemes with time to adapt to the new requirements. Therefore, after a two year period following the entry into force of this Regulation and in order to provide for a completion of an internal market for card-based payments, the caps on interchange fees for consumer card transactions should be extended to cover all, cross-border and domestic payments.’

| ‘(15) | This Regulation follows a gradual approach. As a first step, it is necessary to take measures to facilitate cross-border issuing and acquiring of payment card transactions. Allowing merchants to choose an acquirer outside their own Member State (“cross border acquiring”) and imposing a maximum level of cross border interchange fees for cross border acquired transactions should provide the necessary legal clarity. In addition, and ensuring that licences for issuing or acquiring of payment instruments should be valid without geographic restrictions within the Union. These measures would facilitate the smooth functioning of an internal market for card, internet and mobile payments, to the benefit of consumers and retailers. |
| --- | --- |

‘(15)

This Regulation follows a gradual approach. As a first step, it is necessary to take measures to facilitate cross-border issuing and acquiring of payment card transactions. Allowing merchants to choose an acquirer outside their own Member State (“cross border acquiring”) and imposing a maximum level of cross border interchange fees for cross border acquired transactions should provide the necessary legal clarity. In addition, and ensuring that licences for issuing or acquiring of payment instruments should be valid without geographic restrictions within the Union. These measures would facilitate the smooth functioning of an internal market for card, internet and mobile payments, to the benefit of consumers and retailers.

| (16) | As a consequence of unilateral undertakings and commitments accepted in the framework of competition proceedings, many cross-border card payment transactions in the Union, as well as some national transactions in certain Member States, are already carried out respecting the maximum interchanges fees applicable to the first phase of
  in this Regulation. Therefore, the provisions relating to those transactions should enter into force quickly, creating opportunities for retailers to seek cheaper acquiring services crossborder, and incentivising domestic banking communities or schemes to lower their acquiring fees. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

As a consequence of unilateral undertakings and commitments accepted in the framework of competition proceedings, many cross-border card payment transactions in the Union, as well as some national transactions in certain Member States, are already carried out respecting the maximum interchanges fees applicable to the first phase of
  in this Regulation. Therefore, the provisions relating to those transactions should enter into force quickly, creating opportunities for retailers to seek cheaper acquiring services crossborder, and incentivising domestic banking communities or schemes to lower their acquiring fees.

| (17) | For domestic transactions, a transition period is necessary to provide payment services providers and schemes with time to adapt to the new requirements. Therefore, after a two year transitional period following the entry into force of this Regulation appears to be sufficient
  and in order to provide for a completion of an internal market for card-based payments, the caps on interchange fees for consumer card transactions should be extended to cover all, cross-border and domestic payments.’ |
| --- | --- |

(17)

For domestic transactions, a transition period is necessary to provide payment services providers and schemes with time to adapt to the new requirements. Therefore, after a two year transitional period following the entry into force of this Regulation appears to be sufficient
  and in order to provide for a completion of an internal market for card-based payments, the caps on interchange fees for consumer card transactions should be extended to cover all, cross-border and domestic payments.’

Explanation

Explanation

The proposed 22 months between the introduction of the caps on cross-border interchange fees and on national interchange fees, could put small national card acquirers at a disadvantage since they would not be able to compete with foreign acquirers benefiting from the lower cross-border interchange fees. Therefore, a common date for the introduction of the caps on interchange fees would be preferred; however the ECB remains neutral on the proposed timeline.

The proposed 22 months between the introduction of the caps on cross-border interchange fees and on national interchange fees, could put small national card acquirers at a disadvantage since they would not be able to compete with foreign acquirers benefiting from the lower cross-border interchange fees. Therefore, a common date for the introduction of the caps on interchange fees would be preferred; however the ECB remains neutral on the proposed timeline.

Amendment 2

Amendment 2

Recital 24

| ‘(24) | Consumers tend to be unaware of the fees paid by merchants for the payment instrument they use. At the same time, a series of incentivising practices applied by issuing payment service providers (such as travel vouchers, bonuses, rebates, charge backs, free insurances, etc.) may steer consumers towards the use of payment instruments generating high fees for issuing payment service providers. To counter this, the measures imposing restrictions on interchange fees should only apply to payment cards that have become mass products and merchants generally have difficulty refusing due to their widespread issuance and use (i.e. consumer debit and credit cards). In order to enhance effective market functioning in the non-regulated parts of the sector and to limit the transfer of business from the regulated to the non-regulated parts of the sector, it is necessary to adopt a series of measures, including separation of scheme and infrastructure, steering of the payer by the payee and enable selective acceptance of payment instruments by the payee.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(24)

Consumers tend to be unaware of the fees paid by merchants for the payment instrument they use. At the same time, a series of incentivising practices applied by issuing payment service providers (such as travel vouchers, bonuses, rebates, charge backs, free insurances, etc.) may steer consumers towards the use of payment instruments generating high fees for issuing payment service providers. To counter this, the measures imposing restrictions on interchange fees should only apply to payment cards that have become mass products and merchants generally have difficulty refusing due to their widespread issuance and use (i.e. consumer debit and credit cards). In order to enhance effective market functioning in the non-regulated parts of the sector and to limit the transfer of business from the regulated to the non-regulated parts of the sector, it is necessary to adopt a series of measures, including separation of scheme and infrastructure, steering of the payer by the payee and enable selective acceptance of payment instruments by the payee.’

| ‘(24) | Consumers tend to be unaware of the fees paid by merchants for the payment instrument they use. At the same time, a series of incentivising practices applied by issuing payment service providers (such as travel vouchers, bonuses, rebates, charge backs, free insurances, etc.) may steer consumers towards the use of payment instruments generating high fees for issuing payment service providers. To counter this, the measures imposing restrictions on interchange fees should only apply to payment cards that have become mass products and merchants generally have difficulty refusing due to their widespread issuance and use (i.e. consumer debit and credit cards). In order to enhance effective market functioning in the non-regulated parts of the sector and to limit the transfer of business from the regulated to the non-regulated parts of the sector, it is necessary to adopt a series of measures, including separation of the scheme and the processing infrastructure, steering of the payer by the payee and enable selective acceptance of payment instruments by the payee.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(24)

Consumers tend to be unaware of the fees paid by merchants for the payment instrument they use. At the same time, a series of incentivising practices applied by issuing payment service providers (such as travel vouchers, bonuses, rebates, charge backs, free insurances, etc.) may steer consumers towards the use of payment instruments generating high fees for issuing payment service providers. To counter this, the measures imposing restrictions on interchange fees should only apply to payment cards that have become mass products and merchants generally have difficulty refusing due to their widespread issuance and use (i.e. consumer debit and credit cards). In order to enhance effective market functioning in the non-regulated parts of the sector and to limit the transfer of business from the regulated to the non-regulated parts of the sector, it is necessary to adopt a series of measures, including separation of the scheme and the processing infrastructure, steering of the payer by the payee and enable selective acceptance of payment instruments by the payee.’

Explanation

Explanation

It is suggested to add this wording to clarify the context.

It is suggested to add this wording to clarify the context.

Amendment 3

Amendment 3

Recital 29

| ‘(29) | [...]
  However, to protect the consumer and his ability to use the payment cards as often as possible, merchants should be obliged to accept all cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee. Such a limitation would also result in a more competitive environment for cards with interchange fees not regulated under this Regulation, as merchants would gain more negotiating power as regards the conditions under which they accept such cards.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(29)

[...]

However, to protect the consumer and his ability to use the payment cards as often as possible, merchants should be obliged to accept all cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee. Such a limitation would also result in a more competitive environment for cards with interchange fees not regulated under this Regulation, as merchants would gain more negotiating power as regards the conditions under which they accept such cards.’

| ‘(29) | [...]

  However, to protect the consumer and his ability to use the payment cards as often as possible, merchants should be obliged to accept all cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee. Such a limitation would also result in a more competitive environment for cards with interchange fees not regulated under this Regulation, as merchants would gain more negotiating power as regards the conditions under which they accept such cards.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(29)

[...]

However, to protect the consumer and his ability to use the payment cards as often as possible, merchants should be obliged to accept all cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee. Such a limitation would also result in a more competitive environment for cards with interchange fees not regulated under this Regulation, as merchants would gain more negotiating power as regards the conditions under which they accept such cards.’

Explanation

Explanation

Merchants should be able to take commercial decisions themselves on which cards, schemes, brands or products to accept. Introducing mandatory acceptance of cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee seems to be unnecessarily broad.

Merchants should be able to take commercial decisions themselves on which cards, schemes, brands or products to accept. Introducing mandatory acceptance of cards that are subject to the same regulated interchange fee seems to be unnecessarily broad.

Amendment 4

Amendment 4

Article 2(1)

| ‘(1) | “acquirer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payee to process the payee’s payment transactions;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(1)

“acquirer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payee to process the payee’s payment transactions;’

| ‘(1) | “acquirer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payee to accept and process the payee’s payment transactions initiated by a payer’s payment instrument;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(1)

“acquirer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payee to accept and process the payee’s payment transactions initiated by a payer’s payment instrument;’

directly or indirectly

accept and

initiated by a payer’s payment instrument

Explanation

Explanation

This article requires amendment to capture some additional features of acquiring. The drafting suggestion is in line with the Eurosystem’s proposed definition of ‘acquiring of payment transactions’ in its opinion on the proposed PSD2.

This article requires amendment to capture some additional features of acquiring. The drafting suggestion is in line with the Eurosystem’s proposed definition of ‘acquiring of payment transactions’ in its opinion on the proposed PSD2.

Amendment 5

Amendment 5

Article 2(2)

| ‘(2) | “issuer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payer to initiate, process and settle the payer’s payment transactions;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(2)

“issuer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payer to initiate, process and settle the payer’s payment transactions;’

| ‘(2) | “issuer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payer
  providing the payer with a payment instrument to initiate, process and settle the payer’s payment transactions;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(2)

“issuer” means a payment service provider contracting directly or indirectly with a payer
  providing the payer with a payment instrument to initiate, process and settle the payer’s payment transactions;’

contracting

with a payer

providing the payer with a payment instrument

Explanation

Explanation

Amended to capture some additional features of issuing. The drafting suggestion is in line with the Eurosystem’s proposed definition of ‘issuing of payment instruments’ in its opinion on the proposed PSD2.

Amended to capture some additional features of issuing. The drafting suggestion is in line with the Eurosystem’s proposed definition of ‘issuing of payment instruments’ in its opinion on the proposed PSD2.

Amendment 6

Amendment 6

Article 2(4)

| ‘(4) | “debit card transaction” means an card payment transaction included with prepaid cards linked to a current or deposit access account to which a transaction is debited in less than or 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(4)

“debit card transaction” means an card payment transaction included with prepaid cards linked to a current or deposit access account to which a transaction is debited in less than or 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated.’

| ‘(4) | “debit card transaction” means a
  ancard payment transaction initiated with a debit card
  included with prepaid cards linked to a current or deposit access account to which a transaction is debited in less than or 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated. |
| --- | --- |

‘(4)

“debit card transaction” means a
  ancard payment transaction initiated with a debit card
  included with prepaid cards linked to a current or deposit access account to which a transaction is debited in less than or 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated.

a

an

initiated with a debit card

included with prepaid cards linked to a current or deposit access account to which a transaction is debited in less than or 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated.

| (4a) | “debit card” means a card that enables its holders to make purchases and/or withdraw cash, which are to be directly and immediately charged to their payment accounts, regardless of whether these are held with the card issuer.’ |
| --- | --- |

(4a)

(4a)

“debit card” means a card that enables its holders to make purchases and/or withdraw cash, which are to be directly and immediately charged to their payment accounts, regardless of whether these are held with the card issuer.’

“debit card” means a card that enables its holders to make purchases and/or withdraw cash, which are to be directly and immediately charged to their payment accounts, regardless of whether these are held with the card issuer.

Explanation

Explanation

It cannot be taken for granted that a debit card will be debited within 48 hours. The separation between debit and credit cards should therefore relate to the immediate debiting of the account (debit card) and debiting on pre-agreed dates (credit card). Moreover, the definition of debit card should also deviate from the definition of credit card (see below) as regards the aspect of benefits for the payee, so as to provide a non-arbitrary reasoning for the proposed difference of the respective interchange fee caps.

It cannot be taken for granted that a debit card will be debited within 48 hours. The separation between debit and credit cards should therefore relate to the immediate debiting of the account (debit card) and debiting on pre-agreed dates (credit card). Moreover, the definition of debit card should also deviate from the definition of credit card (see below) as regards the aspect of benefits for the payee, so as to provide a non-arbitrary reasoning for the proposed difference of the respective interchange fee caps.

Amendment 7

Amendment 7

Article 2(5)

| ‘(5) | “credit card transaction” means an card payment transaction where the transaction is settled more than 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(5)

“credit card transaction” means an card payment transaction where the transaction is settled more than 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated;’

| ‘(5) | “credit card transaction” means an card payment transaction initiated with a credit card
  where the transaction is settled more than 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated; |
| --- | --- |

‘(5)

“credit card transaction” means an card payment transaction initiated with a credit card
  where the transaction is settled more than 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated;

initiated with a credit card

where the transaction is settled more than 48 hours after the transaction has been authorised/initiated;

| (5a) | “credit card” means a card that enables cardholders to make purchases and/or withdraw cash up to a prearranged credit limit. The credit granted may be either settled in full by the end of a specified period, or settled in part, with the balance taken as extended credit, on which interest is usually charged. The scheme rules and the processing of the transaction, as well as the merchant’s card acceptance procedures, can be broader as compared to transactions with a debit card.’ |
| --- | --- |

(5a)

(5a)

“credit card” means a card that enables cardholders to make purchases and/or withdraw cash up to a prearranged credit limit. The credit granted may be either settled in full by the end of a specified period, or settled in part, with the balance taken as extended credit, on which interest is usually charged. The scheme rules and the processing of the transaction, as well as the merchant’s card acceptance procedures, can be broader as compared to transactions with a debit card.’

“credit card” means a card that enables cardholders to make purchases and/or withdraw cash up to a prearranged credit limit. The credit granted may be either settled in full by the end of a specified period, or settled in part, with the balance taken as extended credit, on which interest is usually charged. The scheme rules and the processing of the transaction, as well as the merchant’s card acceptance procedures, can be broader as compared to transactions with a debit card.

Explanation

Explanation

See explanation of Amendment 6.

See explanation of Amendment 6.

Amendment 8

Amendment 8

Article 2(7)

| ‘(7) | “card based payment transaction” means a service used to complete a payment transaction by means of any card, telecommunication, digital or IT device or software if this results in a payment card transaction. Card based payment transactions exclude transactions based on other kinds of payment services.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(7)

“card based payment transaction” means a service used to complete a payment transaction by means of any card, telecommunication, digital or IT device or software if this results in a payment card transaction. Card based payment transactions exclude transactions based on other kinds of payment services.’

| ‘(7) | “card based payment transaction” means a service used to complete a payment transaction initiated by means of any card, telecommunication, digital or IT device or software
  a card based payment instrument under the rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines of a card scheme
  if this results in a payment card transaction. Card based payment transactions exclude transactions based on other kinds of payment services
  that does not result in a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(7)

“card based payment transaction” means a service used to complete a payment transaction initiated by means of any card, telecommunication, digital or IT device or software
  a card based payment instrument under the rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines of a card scheme
  if this results in a payment card transaction. Card based payment transactions exclude transactions based on other kinds of payment services
  that does not result in a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012.’

service used to complete a

initiated

any card, telecommunication, digital or IT device or software

a card based payment instrument under the rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines of a card scheme

if this results in a payment card transaction. Card based payment transactions exclude transactions based on other kinds of payment services

that does not result in a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012

Explanation

Explanation

The Commission’s proposed definition of a ‘card based payment transaction’ is slightly wider than the definition of a ‘payment card transaction’ covering also transactions made without a physical card. Considering the rapid development in the area of cards and the increasing variety of payment solutions using the cards infrastructure, the ECB suggests merging the two definitions.

The Commission’s proposed definition of a ‘card based payment transaction’ is slightly wider than the definition of a ‘payment card transaction’ covering also transactions made without a physical card. Considering the rapid development in the area of cards and the increasing variety of payment solutions using the cards infrastructure, the ECB suggests merging the two definitions.

Amendment 9

Amendment 9

Article 2(8)

| ‘(8) | “cross-border payment transaction” means a card payment or card-based payment transaction initiated by a payer or by a payee where the payer’s payment service provider and the payee’s payment service provider are established in different Member States or where the payment card is issued by an issuing payment service provider established in a different Member State than that of the point of sale;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(8)

“cross-border payment transaction” means a card payment or card-based payment transaction initiated by a payer or by a payee where the payer’s payment service provider and the payee’s payment service provider are established in different Member States or where the payment card is issued by an issuing payment service provider established in a different Member State than that of the point of sale;’

| ‘(8) | “cross-border card payment transaction” means a card payment or card-based payment transaction initiated by a payer or by a payee where the payer’s payment service provider and the payee’s payment service provider
  issuer and acquirer of that transaction are established in different Member States or where the payment card acquirer is issued by an issuing payment service provider established in a different Member State than that of the point of sale;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(8)

“cross-border card payment transaction” means a card payment or card-based payment transaction initiated by a payer or by a payee where the payer’s payment service provider and the payee’s payment service provider
  issuer and acquirer of that transaction are established in different Member States or where the payment card acquirer is issued by an issuing payment service provider established in a different Member State than that of the point of sale;’

card

card payment or

payer’s payment service provider and the payee’s payment service provider

issuer and acquirer of that transaction

acquirer

issued by an issuing payment service provider

Explanation

Explanation

It is suggested that the wording of this definition can be simplified as indicated in the amendment above.

It is suggested that the wording of this definition can be simplified as indicated in the amendment above.

Amendment 10

Amendment 10

Article 2(9)

| ‘(9) | “interchange fee” means a fee paid for each transaction directly or indirectly (i.e. through a third party) between the payment service providers of the payer and of the payee involved in a payment card or a payment card-based transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(9)

“interchange fee” means a fee paid for each transaction directly or indirectly (i.e. through a third party) between the payment service providers of the payer and of the payee involved in a payment card or a payment card-based transaction;’

| ‘(9) | “interchange fee” means a fee paid for each
  per card-based payment transaction directly or indirectly (i.e. through a third party) between the payment service providers of the payer and of the payee involved in a payment card or a payment card-based
  issuer and the acquirer of that transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(9)

“interchange fee” means a fee paid for each
  per card-based payment transaction directly or indirectly (i.e. through a third party) between the payment service providers of the payer and of the payee involved in a payment card or a payment card-based
  issuer and the acquirer of that transaction;’

for each

per card-based payment

payment service providers of the payer and of the payee involved in a payment card or a payment card-based

issuer and the acquirer of that

Explanation

Explanation

It is suggested that the wording of this definition can be simplified by referring to the concepts of issuer and acquirer.

It is suggested that the wording of this definition can be simplified by referring to the concepts of issuer and acquirer.

Amendment 11

Amendment 11

Article 2(10)

| ‘(10) | “merchant service charge” means a fee paid by the payee to the acquirer for each transaction comprising the interchange fee, the payment scheme and processing fee and the acquirer margin;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(10)

“merchant service charge” means a fee paid by the payee to the acquirer for each transaction comprising the interchange fee, the payment scheme and processing fee and the acquirer margin;’

| ‘(10) | “merchant service charge” means a fee paid by the payee to the acquirer for each
  card-based payment transaction comprising the interchange fee, the payment scheme and processing fee and the acquirer margin
  services provided by the acquirer;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(10)

“merchant service charge” means a fee paid by the payee to the acquirer for each
  card-based payment transaction comprising the interchange fee, the payment scheme and processing fee and the acquirer margin
  services provided by the acquirer;’

each

card-based payment

comprising the interchange fee, the payment scheme and processing fee and the acquirer margin

services provided by the acquirer

Explanation

Explanation

It is suggested not to limit the definition of the merchant service charge to the items listed.

It is suggested not to limit the definition of the merchant service charge to the items listed.

Amendment 12

Amendment 12

Article 2(13)

| ‘(13) | “payment card scheme” means a single set of rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines for the execution of payment transactions across the Union and within Member States, and which is separated from any infrastructure or payment system that supports its operation;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(13)

“payment card scheme” means a single set of rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines for the execution of payment transactions across the Union and within Member States, and which is separated from any infrastructure or payment system that supports its operation;’

| ‘(13) | “payment card scheme” means a single single set of rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines for the execution of payment transactions initated by a card-based payment instrument
  across the Union and within Member States, and which is separated from any infrastructure or payment system thatsupports its operation;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(13)

“payment card scheme” means a single single set of rules, practices, standards and/or implementation guidelines for the execution of payment transactions initated by a card-based payment instrument
  across the Union and within Member States, and which is separated from any infrastructure or payment system thatsupports its operation;’

single

initated by a card-based payment instrument

across the Union and within Member States, and which is separated from any infrastructure or payment system thatsupports its operation

Explanation

Explanation

Amended to incorporate the element of initiation; references to the Union and the Member States should be deleted as they are not necessary.

Amended to incorporate the element of initiation; references to the Union and the Member States should be deleted as they are not necessary.

Amendment 13

Amendment 13

Article 2(14)

| ‘(14) | “four party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme in which payments are made from the payment account of a cardholder to the payment account of a payee through the intermediation of the scheme, a payment card issuing payment services provider (on the card holder’s side) and an acquiring payment services provider (on the payee’s side), and card based transactions based on the same structure;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(14)

“four party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme in which payments are made from the payment account of a cardholder to the payment account of a payee through the intermediation of the scheme, a payment card issuing payment services provider (on the card holder’s side) and an acquiring payment services provider (on the payee’s side), and card based transactions based on the same structure;’

card based

| ‘(14) | “four-party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme where issuing and acquiring services are provided by entities other than the entity governing the card scheme
  in which payments are made from the payment account of a cardholder to the payment account of a payee through the intermediation of the scheme, a payment card issuing payment services provider (on the card holder's side) and an acquiring payment services provider (on the payee's side), and card based transactions based on the same structure;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(14)

“four-party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme where issuing and acquiring services are provided by entities other than the entity governing the card scheme
  in which payments are made from the payment account of a cardholder to the payment account of a payee through the intermediation of the scheme, a payment card issuing payment services provider (on the card holder's side) and an acquiring payment services provider (on the payee's side), and card based transactions based on the same structure;’

where issuing and acquiring services are provided by entities other than the entity governing the card scheme

in which payments are made from the payment account of a cardholder to the payment account of a payee through the intermediation of the scheme, a payment card issuing payment services provider (on the card holder's side) and an acquiring payment services provider (on the payee's side), and card based

Explanation

Explanation

It is suggested not to distinguish between three-party and four-party card schemes on the basis of the provision of issuing and acquiring services.

It is suggested not to distinguish between three-party and four-party card schemes on the basis of the provision of issuing and acquiring services.

Amendment 14

Amendment 14

Article 2(15)

| ‘(15) | “three party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme in which payments are made from a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the cardholder to a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the payee, and card based transactions based on the same structure. When a three party payment card scheme licenses other payment service providers for the issuance and/or the acquiring of payment cards, it is considered as a four party payment card scheme;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(15)

“three party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme in which payments are made from a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the cardholder to a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the payee, and card based transactions based on the same structure. When a three party payment card scheme licenses other payment service providers for the issuance and/or the acquiring of payment cards, it is considered as a four party payment card scheme;’

card based

| ‘(15) | “three-party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme where both the issuing and the acquiring of payment transactions under the scheme’s brand are performed by the entity governing the card scheme
  in which payments are made from a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the cardholder to a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the payee, and card based transactions based on the same structure.When
  If a three party payment card scheme licenses other payment service providers for the issuance of its card based payment instruments and/or the acquiring of payment cards
  its card based payment transactions, it is considered as a four party payment card scheme;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(15)

“three-party payment card scheme” means a payment card scheme where both the issuing and the acquiring of payment transactions under the scheme’s brand are performed by the entity governing the card scheme
  in which payments are made from a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the cardholder to a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the payee, and card based transactions based on the same structure.When
  If a three party payment card scheme licenses other payment service providers for the issuance of its card based payment instruments and/or the acquiring of payment cards
  its card based payment transactions, it is considered as a four party payment card scheme;’

where both the issuing and the acquiring of payment transactions under the scheme’s brand are performed by the entity governing the card scheme

in which payments are made from a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the cardholder to a payment account held by the scheme on behalf of the payee, and card based

If

of its card based payment instruments

payment cards

its card based payment transactions

Explanation

Explanation

See explanation of Amendment 13.

See explanation of Amendment 13.

Amendment 15

Amendment 15

Article 2(16)

| ‘(16) | “payment instrument” means any personalised device(s) and/or set of procedures agreed between the payment service user and the payment service provider and used by the payment service user, or in its behalf, in order to initiate a payment order;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(16)

“payment instrument” means any personalised device(s) and/or set of procedures agreed between the payment service user and the payment service provider and used by the payment service user, or in its behalf, in order to initiate a payment order;’

| ‘(16) | “payment instrument” means any personalised device(s) and/or set of procedures agreed between the payment service user and the payment service provider and used by the payment service user, or in its behalf, in order to initiate a payment order;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(16)

“payment instrument” means any personalised device(s) and/or set of procedures agreed between the payment service user and the payment service provider and used by the payment service user, or in its behalf, in order to initiate a payment order;’

by the payment service user, or in its behalf,

Explanation

Explanation

This definition should be aligned with the proposed PSD 2.

This definition should be aligned with the proposed PSD 2.

Amendment 16

Amendment 16

Article 2(17)

| ‘(17) | “card-based payment instrument” means any payment instrument, including a card, mobile phone, computer or any other technological device containing the appropriate application, used by the payer to initiate a payment order which in not a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012.;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(17)

“card-based payment instrument” means any payment instrument, including a card, mobile phone, computer or any other technological device containing the appropriate application, used by the payer to initiate a payment order which in not a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012.;’

| ‘(17) | “card-based payment instrument” means any payment instrument, including a card, or any other payment instrument providing similar features to a payment card, mobile phone, computer or any other technological device containing the appropriate application,
  accepted by the payee to receive a payment and used by the payer to initiate a payment order which in does not result in a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(17)

“card-based payment instrument” means any payment instrument, including a card, or any other payment instrument providing similar features to a payment card, mobile phone, computer or any other technological device containing the appropriate application,
  accepted by the payee to receive a payment and used by the payer to initiate a payment order which in does not result in a credit transfer or a direct debit as defined by Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 260/2012;’

any payment instrument, including

or any other payment instrument providing similar features to a payment card

mobile phone, computer or any other technological device containing the appropriate application,

accepted by the payee to receive a payment and

order

does

result in

Explanation

Explanation

This definition should be aligned with the drafting suggestion for ‘card based payment transaction’ in Amendment 8.

This definition should be aligned with the drafting suggestion for ‘card based payment transaction’ in Amendment 8.

Amendment 17

Amendment 17

Article 2(18)

| ‘(18) | “payment application” means a computer software or equivalent loaded on a device enabling card-based payment transactions to be initiated and allowing the payer to issue payment orders;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(18)

“payment application” means a computer software or equivalent loaded on a device enabling card-based payment transactions to be initiated and allowing the payer to issue payment orders;’

| ‘(18) | “card-based payment application” means a computer software or equivalent loaded on a device or accessed remotely enabling card-based payment transactions to be initiated and allowing
  by the payer to issue payment orders;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(18)

“card-based payment application” means a computer software or equivalent loaded on a device or accessed remotely enabling card-based payment transactions to be initiated and allowing
  by the payer to issue payment orders;’

card-based

or accessed remotely

and allowing

by

to issue payment orders

Explanation

Explanation

It is suggested to incorporate the element of remote access within this defined term.

It is suggested to incorporate the element of remote access within this defined term.

Amendment 18

Amendment 18

Article 2(19)

| ‘(19) | “payment order” means any instruction by a payer to his payment service provider requesting the execution of a payment transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(19)

“payment order” means any instruction by a payer to his payment service provider requesting the execution of a payment transaction;’

| ‘(19) | “payment order” means any instruction by a payer or payee to his payment service provider requesting the execution of a payment transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(19)

“payment order” means any instruction by a payer or payee to his payment service provider requesting the execution of a payment transaction;’

or payee

Explanation

Explanation

Payment orders for card payments could also be initiated by the payee. Additionally, the amendment aligns the definition with the proposed PSD 2.

Payment orders for card payments could also be initiated by the payee. Additionally, the amendment aligns the definition with the proposed PSD 2.

Amendment 19

Amendment 19

Article 2(20)

| ‘(20) | “payment card transaction” means a payment transaction made with a payment card or using the infrastructure of a payment card transaction and based on the business rules of a payment card transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(20)

“payment card transaction” means a payment transaction made with a payment card or using the infrastructure of a payment card transaction and based on the business rules of a payment card transaction;’

| ‘(20) | “payment card transaction” means a payment transaction made with a payment card or using the infrastructure of a payment card transaction and based on the business rules of a payment card transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(20)

‘(20)

“payment card transaction” means a payment transaction made with a payment card or using the infrastructure of a payment card transaction and based on the business rules of a payment card transaction;’

payment card transaction” means a payment transaction made with a payment card or using the infrastructure of a payment card transaction and based on the business rules of a payment card transaction;’

Explanation

Explanation

The definition is very similar to the definition of ‘card based payment transaction’. The two definitions could usefully be merged.

The definition is very similar to the definition of ‘card based payment transaction’. The two definitions could usefully be merged.

Amendment 20

Amendment 20

Article 2(21)

| ‘(21) | “payment service provider” means natural or legal persons authorized to provide the payment services provider listed in the annex of Directive 2007/64/EC. A payment service provider can be an issuer or an acquirer or both;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(21)

“payment service provider” means natural or legal persons authorized to provide the payment services provider listed in the annex of Directive 2007/64/EC. A payment service provider can be an issuer or an acquirer or both;’

| ‘(21) | “payment service provider” means natural or legal persons authorized to provide the payment services provider listed in the annex of Directive 2007/64/EC. A payment service provider can be an issuer or an acquirer or both
  any of the bodies referred to in Article 1(1) of the proposed PSD2 (2) COM(2013)547/3 and legal and natural persons benefiting from the waiver under Article 27 of the proposed PSD2;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(21)

“payment service provider” means natural or legal persons authorized to provide the payment services provider listed in the annex of Directive 2007/64/EC. A payment service provider can be an issuer or an acquirer or both
  any of the bodies referred to in Article 1(1) of the proposed PSD2 (2) COM(2013)547/3 and legal and natural persons benefiting from the waiver under Article 27 of the proposed PSD2;’

natural or legal persons authorized to provide the payment services provider listed in the annex of Directive 2007/64/EC. A payment service provider can be an issuer or an acquirer or both

any of the bodies referred to in Article 1(1) of the proposed PSD2 (2

Explanation

Explanation

To be aligned with the proposed PSD2.

To be aligned with the proposed PSD2.

Amendment 21

Amendment 21

Article 2(23)

| ‘(23) | “payment transaction” means an action, initiated by the payer or on his behalf or by the payee of transferring funds, irrespective of any underlying obligations between the payer and the payee;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(23)

“payment transaction” means an action, initiated by the payer or on his behalf or by the payee of transferring funds, irrespective of any underlying obligations between the payer and the payee;’

| ‘(23) | “payment transaction” means an action, initiated by the payer or on his behalf or by the payee of placing, transferring or withdrawing funds, irrespective of any underlying obligations between the payer and the payee;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(23)

“payment transaction” means an action, initiated by the payer or on his behalf or by the payee of placing, transferring or withdrawing funds, irrespective of any underlying obligations between the payer and the payee;’

placing

or withdrawing

Explanation

Explanation

To be aligned with the proposed PSD2.

To be aligned with the proposed PSD2.

Amendment 22

Amendment 22

Article 2(24)

| ‘(24) | “processing” means the performance of payment transaction processing services in terms of the actions required for the handling of a payment instruction between the acquirer and the issuer;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(24)

“processing” means the performance of payment transaction processing services in terms of the actions required for the handling of a payment instruction between the acquirer and the issuer;’

| ‘(24) | “processing” means the performance of payment transaction processing services in terms of the actions required for the handling of a payment instruction between the acquirer and the issuer
  any automatic data processing effected for the issuer or acquirer in the context of a card-based payment transaction;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(24)

“processing” means the performance of payment transaction processing services in terms of the actions required for the handling of a payment instruction between the acquirer and the issuer
  any automatic data processing effected for the issuer or acquirer in the context of a card-based payment transaction;’

the performance of payment transaction processing services in terms of the actions required for the handling of a payment instruction between the acquirer and the issuer

any automatic data processing effected for the issuer or acquirer in the context of a card-based payment transaction

Explanation

Explanation

Amended to further clarify what payment transaction processing services provided by payment service providers entail.

Amended to further clarify what payment transaction processing services provided by payment service providers entail.

Amendment 23

Amendment 23

Article 2(25)

| ‘(25) | “processing entity” means any natural or legal person providing payment transaction processing services;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(25)

“processing entity” means any natural or legal person providing payment transaction processing services;’

| ‘(25) | “processing entity” means any technical service provider of
  natural or legal person providing payment transaction processing services;’ |
| --- | --- |

‘(25)

“processing entity” means any technical service provider of
  natural or legal person providing payment transaction processing services;’

technical service provider of

natural or legal person providing

Explanation

Explanation

Amended to emphasise the technical nature, i.e. involving IT processing of the payment services being provided.

Amended to emphasise the technical nature, i.e. involving IT processing of the payment services being provided.

Amendment 24

Amendment 24

Articles 3 and 4

‘Article 3

‘Article 3

Interchange fees for cross-border consumer debit or credit card transactions

Interchange fees for cross-border consumer debit or credit card transactions

| 1. | With effect from two months after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment services providers shall not offer or request for cross-border debit card transactions a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction. |
| --- | --- |

1.

With effect from two months after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment services providers shall not offer or request for cross-border debit card transactions a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction.

per transaction

| 2. | With effect from two months after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment services providers shall not offer or request for cross-border credit card transactions a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction. |
| --- | --- |

2.

With effect from two months after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment services providers shall not offer or request for cross-border credit card transactions a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction.

per transaction

Article 4

Article 4

Interchange fees for all consumer debit or credit card transactions

Interchange fees for all consumer debit or credit card transactions

| 1. | With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction for any debit card based transactions. |
| --- | --- |

1.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction for any debit card based transactions.

per transaction

| 2. | With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction for any credit card based transactions.’ |
| --- | --- |

2.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction for any credit card based transactions.’

per transaction

‘Article 3

‘Article 3

Interchange fees for cross-border consumer debit or credit card transactions

Interchange fees for cross-border consumer debit or credit card transactions

| 1. | With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction for any debit card based transactions. |
| --- | --- |

1.

1.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction for any debit card based transactions.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction

| 2. | With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction for any credit card based transactions.’ |
| --- | --- |

2.

2.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction for any credit card based transactions.’

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction

Article 4

Article 4

Interchange fees for all consumer debit or credit card transactions

Interchange fees for all

| 1. | With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction for any debit card based transactions. |
| --- | --- |

1.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,2 % of the value of the transaction for any debit card based transactions.

per transaction

| 2. | With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction for any credit card based transactions.’ |
| --- | --- |

2.

With effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation, payment service providers shall not offer or request a per transaction interchange fee or other agreed remuneration with an equivalent object or effect of more than 0,3 % of the value of the transaction for any credit card based transactions.’

per transaction

Explanation

Explanation

See explanation of Amendment 1.

See explanation of Amendment 1.

Amendment 25

Amendment 25

Article 7(3)

and Article 7(5) and (6) (new) (3)

3

| ‘3. | Any territorial discrimination in processing rules operated by payment card schemes shall be prohibited. |
| --- | --- |

‘3.

Any territorial discrimination in processing rules operated by payment card schemes shall be prohibited.

[...]’

| ‘3. | Any territorial discrimination relating to the choice of processing entity in the
  processing rules operated by payment card schemes shall be prohibited. |
| --- | --- |

‘3.

Any territorial discrimination relating to the choice of processing entity in the
  processing rules operated by payment card schemes shall be prohibited.

relating to the choice of processing entity

the

processing

[...]

| 5. | Payment card schemes should have a fair and transparent procedure to ensure that other processing entities are not unduly discriminated against and that technical interoperability with independent processing entities is not restricted. |
| --- | --- |

5.

5.

Payment card schemes should have a fair and transparent procedure to ensure that other processing entities are not unduly discriminated against and that technical interoperability with independent processing entities is not restricted.

Payment card schemes should have a fair and transparent procedure to ensure that other processing entities are not unduly discriminated against and that technical interoperability with independent processing entities is not restricted.

| 6. | This Article shall apply with effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.’ |
| --- | --- |

6.

6.

This Article shall apply with effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.’

This Article shall apply with effect from two years after the entry into force of this Regulation.

An amendment to paragraph 3 is suggested to increase the clarity of the current wording, which, as it currently stands, could be interpreted in a way that would not leave room for country risk management at different stages of the processing, i.e. at authorisation.

An amendment to paragraph 3 is suggested to increase the clarity of the current wording, which, as it currently stands, could be interpreted in a way that would not leave room for country risk management at different stages of the processing, i.e. at authorisation.

A new paragraph 5 is suggested to avoid the possibility of payment card schemes discriminating against processing entities by implementing business rules that unduly restrict interoperability between processing entities.

A new paragraph 5 is suggested to avoid the possibility of payment card schemes discriminating against processing entities by implementing business rules that unduly restrict interoperability between processing entities.

Finally, a new paragraph 6 is suggested. The payment industry might need some additional time to implement the separation of the scheme and the processing infrastructure. It is therefore suggested that this article should not apply until two years after the Regulation has entered into force.

Finally, a new paragraph 6 is suggested. The payment industry might need some additional time to implement the separation of the scheme and the processing infrastructure. It is therefore suggested that this article should not apply until two years after the Regulation has entered into force.

Amendment 26

Amendment 26

Article 8(3) and (5)

| ‘3. | Payment card schemes shall not impose reporting requirements, obligations to pay fees or other obligations with the same object or effect on card issuing and acquiring payment services providers for transactions carried out with any device on which their brand is present in relation to transactions for which their scheme is not used. |
| --- | --- |

‘3.

Payment card schemes shall not impose reporting requirements, obligations to pay fees or other obligations with the same object or effect on card issuing and acquiring payment services providers for transactions carried out with any device on which their brand is present in relation to transactions for which their scheme is not used.

[...]

| 5. | Where a payment device offers the choice between different brands of payment instruments, the brand applied to the payment transaction at issue shall be determined by the payer at the point of sale.’ |
| --- | --- |

5.

Where a payment device offers the choice between different brands of payment instruments, the brand applied to the payment transaction at issue shall be determined by the payer at the point of sale.’

| ‘3. | Payment card schemes shall not impose reporting requirements, obligations to pay fees or other obligations with the same object or effect on card issuing and acquiring payment services providers for transactions carried out with any device on which their brand is present in relation to transactions for which their scheme is not used, apart from reporting requirements imposed by regulators, supervisory authorities or central banks. |
| --- | --- |

‘3.

Payment card schemes shall not impose reporting requirements, obligations to pay fees or other obligations with the same object or effect on card issuing and acquiring payment services providers for transactions carried out with any device on which their brand is present in relation to transactions for which their scheme is not used, apart from reporting requirements imposed by regulators, supervisory authorities or central banks.

, apart from reporting requirements imposed by regulators, supervisory authorities or central banks

[...]

| 5. | Where a payment device offers the choice between different brands of payment instruments, the brand to be applied to the payment transaction at issue shall be agreed
  determined by the payer and the payee at the point of sale.’ |
| --- | --- |

5.

Where a payment device offers the choice between different brands of payment instruments, the brand to be applied to the payment transaction at issue shall be agreed
  determined by the payer and the payee at the point of sale.’

to be

agreed

determined

and the payee

For oversight purposes, central banks require card schemes to report card fraud statistics. It would be a substantial burden if reporting requirements were modified to cover a larger number of providers. Therefore, as a solution to this, it is proposed to impose reporting requirements that will provide information that is actually needed by regulators, supervisory authorities or central banks.

For oversight purposes, central banks require card schemes to report card fraud statistics. It would be a substantial burden if reporting requirements were modified to cover a larger number of providers. Therefore, as a solution to this, it is proposed to impose reporting requirements that will provide information that is actually needed by regulators, supervisory authorities or central banks.

The choice of a specific brand should be jointly agreed upon by the cardholder (i.e. the payer) and the merchant (payee). If the choice lies solely with the payer, there is a risk that the payer will choose an expensive brand, which, while providing him with additional benefits, would lead to higher costs for the merchant which, ultimately, could lead to higher prices for all the merchant’s customers.

The choice of a specific brand should be jointly agreed upon by the cardholder (i.e. the payer) and the merchant (payee). If the choice lies solely with the payer, there is a risk that the payer will choose an expensive brand, which, while providing him with additional benefits, would lead to higher costs for the merchant which, ultimately, could lead to higher prices for all the merchant’s customers.

Amendment 27

Amendment 27

Article 10(1)

| ‘1. | Payment schemes and payment service providers shall not apply any rule that may oblige payees accepting cards and other payment instruments issued by one issuing payment service provider within the framework of a payment instruments scheme to also accept other payment instruments of the same brand and/or category issued by other issuing payment service providers within the framework of the same scheme, except if they are subject to the same regulated interchange fee.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘1.

Payment schemes and payment service providers shall not apply any rule that may oblige payees accepting cards and other payment instruments issued by one issuing payment service provider within the framework of a payment instruments scheme to also accept other payment instruments of the same brand and/or category issued by other issuing payment service providers within the framework of the same scheme, except if they are subject to the same regulated interchange fee.’

| ‘1. | Payment schemes and payment service providers shall not apply any rule that may oblige payees accepting cards and other payment instruments issued by one issuing payment service provider within the framework of a card
  payment instruments scheme to also accept other brands, payment instruments or products of the same brand and/or categoryissued by other issuing payment service providers within the framework of the same scheme, except if they are subject to the same regulated interchange fee.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘1.

Payment schemes and payment service providers shall not apply any rule that may oblige payees accepting cards and other payment instruments issued by one issuing payment service provider within the framework of a card
  payment instruments scheme to also accept other brands, payment instruments or products of the same brand and/or categoryissued by other issuing payment service providers within the framework of the same scheme, except if they are subject to the same regulated interchange fee.’

by one issuing payment service provider

card

payment instruments

brands,

or products

issued by other issuing payment service providers within the framework of the same scheme, except if they are subject to the same regulated interchange fee.

Explanation

Explanation

The decision on whether to accept cards, as well as which schemes, brands or products to accept, or which cards under a certain scheme to accept, should be a commercial decision taken by the merchant. Allowing schemes and providers to apply rules forcing upon payees the mandatory acceptance of cards which are subject to the same regulated interchange fee, seems to be unnecessarily broad. The additional amendments aim to simplify the requirements set out in this paragraph. According to recital 29, the goal of this paragraph is to remove the ‘Honour All Products’ element of the ‘Honour All Cards’ rule. The conditions on issuers are not necessary in order to reach this objective.

The decision on whether to accept cards, as well as which schemes, brands or products to accept, or which cards under a certain scheme to accept, should be a commercial decision taken by the merchant. Allowing schemes and providers to apply rules forcing upon payees the mandatory acceptance of cards which are subject to the same regulated interchange fee, seems to be unnecessarily broad. The additional amendments aim to simplify the requirements set out in this paragraph. According to recital 29, the goal of this paragraph is to remove the ‘Honour All Products’ element of the ‘Honour All Cards’ rule. The conditions on issuers are not necessary in order to reach this objective.

Amendment 28

Amendment 28

Article 10(5) new

No text

| ‘5. | Merchants may decide not to accept all cards or other payment instruments if they provide a low level of security and if the acquirer does not guarantee the full payment of authorised transactions.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘5.

5.

Merchants may decide not to accept all cards or other payment instruments if they provide a low level of security and if the acquirer does not guarantee the full payment of authorised transactions.’

Merchants may decide not to accept all cards or other payment instruments if they provide a low level of security and if the acquirer does not guarantee the full payment of authorised transactions.

Explanation

Explanation

Merchants should be allowed not to accept cards with lower security features, e.g. cards without a micro-chip, since payment where such cards were used would not be guaranteed, thus exposing them to greater financial risk.

Merchants should be allowed not to accept cards with lower security features, e.g. cards without a micro-chip, since payment where such cards were used would not be guaranteed, thus exposing them to greater financial risk.

---

(1)  Bold in the body of the text indicates where the ECB proposes inserting new text. Strikethrough in the body of the text indicates where the ECB proposes deleting text.

1

(2)  COM(2013) 547/3.

2

(3)  Please note that the references in this opinion mirror the paragraph numbering scheme in COM(2013) final 550/2.

3

---

IV Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/19

---

Notice for the attention of persons and entities subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/137/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya

2014/C 193/03

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons and entities designated in Annex II to Council Decision 2011/137/CFSP (1), as amended by Council Decision 2014/380/CFSP (2), and in Annex III to Council Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 689/2014 (4) implementing Article 16(2) of Regulation (EU) No 204/2011, concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Libya.

The Council of the European Union, after having reviewed the list of persons and entities designated in the above-mentioned Annexes, has determined that the restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2011/137/CFSP and in Regulation (EU) No 204/2011 should continue to apply to those persons and entities.

The attention of the persons and entities concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex IV to Regulation (EU) No 204/2011, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 7 of the Regulation).

The persons and entities concerned may submit a request to the Council before 15 March 2015, together with supporting documentation that the decision to include them on the above-mentioned list should be reconsidered to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| e-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

e-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council’s next review, pursuant to Article 12(2) of Decision 2011/137/CFSP and Article 16(6) of Regulation (EU) No 204/2011, of the list of designated persons and entities.

---

(1)  OJ L 58, 3.3.2011, p. 53.

(2)  OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 52.

(3)  OJ L 58, 3.3.2011, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 1.

---

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/20

---

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/798/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/382/CFSP, and Council Regulation (EU) No 224/2014, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 691/2014 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic

2014/C 193/04

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons that appear in the Annex to Council Decision 2013/798/CFSP (1), as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/382/CFSP (2), and in Annex I to Council Regulation (EU) No 224/2014 (3), as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 691/2014 (4) concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in the Central African Republic.

On 9 May 2014, the Sanctions Committee established pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 2127 (2013) included three persons on the list of persons and entities subject to the measures imposed by paragraphs 30 and 32 of Resolution 2134 (2014).

The persons concerned may submit at any time a request to the UN Committee established pursuant to Resolution 2127 (2013), together with any supporting documentation, for the decisions to include them in the UN list to be reconsidered. Such request should be sent to the following address:

| Focal Point for De-listing |
| --- |
| Security Council Subsidiary Organs Branch |
| Room DC2 0853B |
| United Nations |
| New York, N.Y. 10017 |
| UNITED STATES OF AMERICA |
| Tel. +1 9173679448 |
| Fax +1 2129631300 |
| E-mail: delisting@un.org |

Focal Point for De-listing

Security Council Subsidiary Organs Branch

Room DC2 0853B

United Nations

New York, N.Y. 10017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Tel. +1 9173679448

Fax +1 2129631300

E-mail: delisting@un.org

See for more information at: http://www.un.org/sc/committees/2127/

Further to the UN decision, the Council of the European Union has determined that the persons designated by the UN should be included in the lists of persons and entities which are subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Decision 2013/798/CFSP and Regulation (EU) No 224/2014. The grounds for listing of the persons concerned appear in the relevant entries in the Annex to the Decision and in Annex I to the Regulation.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated in the websites in Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 224/2014, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 7 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council, together with supporting documentation, that the decision to include them on the abovementioned lists should be reconsidered, to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

E-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council’s decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 352, 24.12.2013, p. 51.

(2)  OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 57.

(3)  OJ L 70, 11.3.2014, p. 1.

(4)  OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 6.

---

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/21

---

Notice for the attention of the persons subject to the restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP and in Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria

2014/C 193/05

The following information is brought to the attention of the persons designated in Annex I to Council Decision 2013/255/CFSP, as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2014/387/CFSP (1), and in Annex II to Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, as implemented by Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 693/2014 (2), concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria.

The Council of the European Union has decided that the persons that appear in the above mentioned Annexes should be included in the list of persons and entities in Annex I to Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Annex II to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012. The grounds for designation of those persons appear in the relevant entries in those Annexes.

The attention of the persons concerned is drawn to the possibility of making an application to the competent authorities of the relevant Member State(s) as indicated on the websites in Annex IIa to Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, in order to obtain an authorisation to use frozen funds for basic needs or specific payments (cf. Article 16 of the Regulation).

The persons concerned may submit a request to the Council before 31 March 2015, together with supporting documentation that the decision to include them on the abovementioned list should be reconsidered to the following address:

| Council of the European Union |
| --- |
| General Secretariat |
| DG C 1C |
| Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175 |
| 1048 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| e-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu |

Council of the European Union

General Secretariat

DG C 1C

Rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 175

1048 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

e-mail: sanctions@consilium.europa.eu

Any observations received will be taken into account for the purpose of the Council’s next review, pursuant to Article 34 of Decision 2013/255/CFSP and Article 32(4) of Regulation (EU) No 36/2012, of the list of designated persons and entities.

The attention of the persons concerned is also drawn to the possibility of challenging the Council’s decision before the General Court of the European Union, in accordance with the conditions laid down in Article 275, second paragraph, and Article 263, fourth and sixth paragraphs, of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 72

(2)  OJ L 183, 24.6.2014, p. 15

---

European Commission

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/22

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

23 June 2014

2014/C 193/06

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,3596 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 138,46 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4549 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,79940 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1283 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2167 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,3240 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,458 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 305,25 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1498 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,3969 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,9044 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4405 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4594 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,5385 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5573 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,6972 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 385,25 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 14,4086 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,4643 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5766 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 297,11 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3691 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 59,606 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 46,5038 |
| THB | Thai baht | 44,131 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,0261 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 17,6486 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 81,7874 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,3596

JPY

Japanese yen

138,46

DKK

Danish krone

7,4549

GBP

Pound sterling

0,79940

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1283

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2167

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,3240

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,458

HUF

Hungarian forint

305,25

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1498

RON

Romanian leu

4,3969

TRY

Turkish lira

2,9044

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4405

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4594

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,5385

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5573

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,6972

KRW

South Korean won

1 385,25

ZAR

South African rand

14,4086

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,4643

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5766

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 297,11

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3691

PHP

Philippine peso

59,606

RUB

Russian rouble

46,5038

THB

Thai baht

44,131

BRL

Brazilian real

3,0261

MXN

Mexican peso

17,6486

INR

Indian rupee

81,7874

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---

V Announcements

PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMPETITION POLICY

European Commission

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/23

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.7267 — Sopra Group/Groupe Steria)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 193/07

| 1. | On 16 June 2014, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Sopra Group (‘Sopra Group’, France) acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, control of the whole of Groupe Steria SCA (‘Groupe Steria’, France) by way of a public exchange offer filed on 10 June 2014. |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 16 June 2014, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Sopra Group (‘Sopra Group’, France) acquires, within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation, control of the whole of Groupe Steria SCA (‘Groupe Steria’, France) by way of a public exchange offer filed on 10 June 2014.

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
  —   Sopra Group: IT services and software publishing,
  —   Groupe Steria: IT system transformation and management services and business process transformation services. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   Sopra Group: IT services and software publishing,

—   Groupe Steria: IT system transformation and management services and business process transformation services.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Merger Regulation (2), it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Merger Regulation (2), it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit to it their observations on the proposed operation.
  Observations must reach the Commission no later than 10 days following the date on which this notification is published. They can be sent to the Commission under reference number M.7267 — Sopra Group/Groupe Steria by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit to it their observations on the proposed operation.

Observations must reach the Commission no later than 10 days following the date on which this notification is published. They can be sent to the Commission under reference number M.7267 — Sopra Group/Groupe Steria by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---

| 24.6.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 193/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 193/24

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.7271 — Russian Machines/Fritzmeier/JV)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

2014/C 193/08

| 1. | On 17 June 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Russian Machines RM (‘Russian Machines’ of the Russian Federation), ultimately controlled by Basic Element (of the Russian Federation) and Fritzmeier Auslandsholding GmbH & Co. KG (‘Fritzmeier’ of Germany), ultimately controlled by the Fritzmeier Group (of Germany), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control over a newly created joint venture (‘JV’, Russian Federation). |
| --- | --- |

1.

On 17 June 2014, the Commission received a notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1) by which Russian Machines RM (‘Russian Machines’ of the Russian Federation), ultimately controlled by Basic Element (of the Russian Federation) and Fritzmeier Auslandsholding GmbH & Co. KG (‘Fritzmeier’ of Germany), ultimately controlled by the Fritzmeier Group (of Germany), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation joint control over a newly created joint venture (‘JV’, Russian Federation).

| 2. | The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:
  —   for Russian Machines: active in the Russian Federation as manufacturer of a broad range of civilian machines and equipment,
  —   for Fritzmeier: active worldwide in manufacturing driver’s cabs, system parts and components for the vehicle industry and for agriculture,
  —   for JV: will be active, in the Russian Federation and possibly other CIS countries, in the design, engineering, testing, manufacturing, assembly, marketing and selling of cabs to be used in construction equipment, agricultural machinery, forklifts and other vehicles. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for Russian Machines: active in the Russian Federation as manufacturer of a broad range of civilian machines and equipment,

—   for Fritzmeier: active worldwide in manufacturing driver’s cabs, system parts and components for the vehicle industry and for agriculture,

—   for JV: will be active, in the Russian Federation and possibly other CIS countries, in the design, engineering, testing, manufacturing, assembly, marketing and selling of cabs to be used in construction equipment, agricultural machinery, forklifts and other vehicles.

| 3. | On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice. |
| --- | --- |

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved. Pursuant to the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (2) it should be noted that this case is a candidate for treatment under the procedure set out in the Notice.

| 4. | The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.
  Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7271 — Russian Machines/Fritzmeier/JV to the following address:





  European Commission |
| --- | --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. Observations can be sent to the Commission by fax (+32 22964301), by email to COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu or by post, under reference number M.7271 — Russian Machines/Fritzmeier/JV to the following address:

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

Merger Registry

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

(2)  OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5.

---