# EUR-Lex - 52012DC0042 - EN

*|*

# 52012DC0042

**COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS A Simplification Agenda for the MFF 2014-2020 /* COM/2012/042 final */**

			*

			*

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO
THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

A Simplification Agenda for the MFF
2014-2020

1.
Introduction

On 29 June 2011, the European Commission presented
its vision of the EU's finances for the next Multiannual Financial Framework
(MFF) 2014-2020[1],
indicating the policy objectives and the means to finance them. By the end of
last year, the Commission tabled 57 specific legislative proposals, which establish
how, in practice, the EU's money will be directed to address the concerns of
its citizens as identified in the Europe 2020 Strategy[2], focusing on stimulating growth
and job creation in Europe.

In the context of the legislative challenge
to renew and improve the performance of EU spending programmes, cross-cutting
all European policies and engaging work of all the European Institutions and the
Member States, the Commission has sought to ease access to EU funding for its
citizens and businesses. At the same time the Commission has to ensure that the
EU money is spent in accordance with the principle of sound financial
management, which means that proportionate financial procedures and mechanisms
must be in place.

In its Communication on the MFF 2014-2020, the
Commission has seized the opportunity and decided to launch an agenda of ambitious
simplification across the whole future MFF, taking stock of all its efforts,
starting with the Financial Regulation, and complemented by the 57 proposed
legislative acts in the present Communication. This Communication builds on
public consultations[3]
and follows-up on the calls of Member States and the European Institutions[4] to reduce the administrative
burden on the beneficiaries and actors participating in the expenditure process
and speed up the delivery of the Union's financial support.

2.
Simplification process

The EU has the responsibility, through
robust controls and effective performance measurement, not only to ensure that
funds are well spent but also to take measures to respond to the need to
simplify its spending programmes in order to reduce the administrative burden
and costs for beneficiaries of funds and for all actors involved, in line with
the Commission's Smart Regulation agenda[5].
While progress has been made with current programmes[6], the Commission has proposed a
more ambitious simplification for the future. Prerequisites for simplification
include clarity of objectives and instruments, consistency of rules and legal
certainty, light and speedy administrative procedures and processes - from
application, through to implementation and reporting and auditing. To achieve
this, the Commission has proposed for the next MFF the rationalisation of
programmes and the use of simplified implementation mechanisms and
procedures.

Experience has shown that frequent changes
in rules can also reduce legal certainty for beneficiaries and create
instability for national and regional administrations. Learning and adjustment
requires time and resources. Hence many stakeholders who have called for
simplification have also pointed out that a radical overhaul of the legislative
framework could increase the complexity of management. Given the aim to ensure
a smooth transition from one programming period to the next, the Commission's
proposals focus on areas where practical simplification can be attained.

However, simplification is ultimately a
shared responsibility between the EU Institutions and Member States, which
means that combined efforts are required throughout the legislative process for
both the general rules of the Financial Regulation and the sector-specific
rules. Simplification efforts at the EU level will not be fully effective,
unless they are accompanied by parallel efforts at the national and
sub-national level, particularly for policy areas covered by shared management,
which account for the larger share of EU budget.

The simplification process does not end
with the adoption of legislation. The Commission will follow-up the
implementation of the final acts in order to monitor how the simplified rules
will function in practice and assess and quantify, if possible, the effects on
the ground, and to propose modification of agreed EU rules, if needed.

The simplification agenda is based on two
building blocks:

–
Financial Regulation

The Financial Regulation contains the
common financial rules and principles applicable to all sectors. As a first
building block of simplification, in May 2010[7],
the Commission launched a process of revision of the Financial Regulation. That
proposal (the main elements are presented in Annex) set out a clear general
implementation framework, covering all modes of management (including a common
framework for shared management), creating dedicated rules for innovative
financial instruments and prizes. In the field of grants directly managed by
the Commission, the proposal specifically promotes the use of simplified
methods to calculate costs (such as lump sums, flat rates and standard scales
of unit costs) in line with the profile of the population of beneficiaries and
of the actions concerned; it facilitates the acceptance of costs declared
according to the beneficiary's 'usual accounting practice' and introduces
lighter procedures for small grants.

It is of
the utmost importance to progress with negotiations and reach an agreement
between the European Parliament and the Council as soon as possible, given the
central role of Financial Regulation, serving as a reference for other
sector-specific legislation.

–
Sector-specific legislative proposals

The Commission's sector-specific
legislative proposals for the post 2013 develop and complete the simplification
exercise with rationalised spending programmes and instruments for all EU
policy areas. These proposals enhance the harmonisation of funding rules,
improve legibility and transparency of rules in order to increase legal
certainty and introduce a series of specific practical simplification measures,
including more proportionate control measures attuned to the risk environment
and aimed at providing reasonable assurance at a reasonable cost. Simplification
can take many forms: reduction in the diversity of rules across different
instruments, measures which simplify performance assessment, the possibility to
choose arrangements which are suitable for particular circumstances, more
proportionate control and reporting requirements, widespread use of
e-Governance tools.

In designing its proposals, the
Commission's has endeavoured to reduce the administrative burden and facilitate
access to funds by EU citizens and businesses, especially SMEs, given that this
will specifically contribute to growth and employment. The Commission's
proposals also include measures for a more modern, flexible and efficient
administration, which should have an impact on the attractiveness and improve
performance of the programmes. Therefore some proposals reduce the
administrative burden of beneficiaries, and others can limit the costs borne by
the administration at EU, national and regional level. Beyond that,
simplification can also serve to increase transparency and accountability and
contribute to increased assurance by reducing errors.

The
Commission has delivered on the calls for simplification made by users of EU
programmes, Member States and EU Institutions by presenting simplification
measures in its MFF general proposals and the related sector-specific legal
bases. In the course of the legislative process and subsequent implementation
of the programmes concerned, the Commission will be particularly vigilant in
ensuring that simplification measures remain a priority so that the benefits of
simplification ultimately accrue to beneficiaries. It is also important that
the impact of these simplification measures is assessed and, where possible,
quantified once they have taken full effect on the ground.

3.
Rationalisation of programmes

The European Union's policies and spending
programmes have developed progressively over the years in line with the
piecemeal evolution of the Union's responsibilities reflected in several
revisions of the Treaty. In designing the programmes, the focus in the past was
to respond to new political imperatives. This has led to the present, rather
patchy legislative structure characterised by multiple programmes, instruments
and procedures with increased complexity and sometimes differences between
programmes. The new financial framework is a unique opportunity to rationalise
the EU programmes receiving financial support from the budget. The
rationalisation measures referred to below should facilitate the submission and
the processing of applications for financial assistance and reduce the
administrative burden of applicants and beneficiaries.

3.1.
Reducing the number of programmes

To tackle this fragmented approach and in order
to move in the direction of more integrated programmes, the Commission has
proposed to simplify the structure of EU funding mechanisms in several policy
areas by systematically reviewing the need for separate programmes. This has
led to the number of proposed EU financial programmes being reduced by 22. Bringing
together the programmes and sub-programmes which are currently separate into
coherent packages should be conducive to greater efficiency and simplification,
both for the recipients of EU funding and for the administrations concerned.
This will allow a stronger focus on more concentrated activities and strengthen
synergies between the various programmes. The reduction in the number of
programmes and instruments should also facilitate streamlined implementing methods
and procedures and improve understanding of the rules, thus facilitating access
to programmes and speeding up their implementation for the benefit of citizens
and businesses.

This approach has been proposed by the
Commission in the following fields: research and innovation, maritime affairs
and fisheries, justice and fundamental rights, home affairs, education and
culture, employment and social affairs, customs and taxation and civil
protection.

3.2.
Enhancing coherence and clarity of rules

The complexity of programmes has been compounded
by the tendency to provide special provisions to accompany the different
instruments. As a consequence, legislative acts and management and control
systems have become increasingly complicated, creating uncertainty for
applicants and further slowing down the adoption and implementation processes. In
order to reverse this tendency, a return to a common set of basic principles
instead of a "tailor-made" approach in each sector is necessary. The
Commission's proposals show that this can be done without any negative impact
on the policy objectives. For example, in line with the Commission Anti-Fraud
Strategy, the Commission has proposed uniform anti-fraud provisions in all
spending programmes.

–
Financial Regulation

The common principles and rules are set out in
the Financial Regulation, as foreseen in Article 322 of the Treaty. The Financial
Regulation covers the whole process from budget planning and management to its
implementation and control. Ensuring consistency of sector-specific rules with
the overall framework of the Financial Regulation is in itself an important
form of simplification. In forging this coherence the Commission has proposed
in its sector-specific instruments:

·
In most cases, a simple reference to the
horizontal rules of the Financial Regulation, avoiding repetition which may
undermine the aim of harmonisation;

·
Limiting special rules to what is absolutely
essential, accompanied (where necessary) by proper justification of each
proposal for a different rule, as required by the Financial Regulation.

Adhering to these common rules and procedures
on issues such as eligibility conditions, reporting, monitoring and control,
deadlines or audit arrangements across funding programmes will facilitate
access to funding and contribute to reducing the administrative burden by
minimising the time that potential beneficiaries spend on familiarising
themselves with the requirements of application, and thus contribute to speed
up the to grant and time to pay.

–
Bringing the different instruments under a
single framework

Where it is not feasible to use only the
horizontal rules of the Financial Regulation, for example due to different
types of beneficiaries and delivery modes, provisions should be established in
a framework legislation for complementary common rules covering multiple
instruments and funding programmes. This will ensure greater cross-sector
consistency and coordination as well as potential synergies. Following this
approach, the Commission has proposed:

·
To bring together the three main sources of
funding for research and innovation and technological development (the current
7th Framework Programme, the innovation part of the current Competitiveness
and Innovation programme and the European Institute of Innovation and
Technology (EIT)) within a single Common Strategic Framework for Research
and Innovation in the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme, to which common
rules for participation and dissemination will apply.

·
To establish the Connecting Europe Facility
(CEF), a unique instrument for EU priority infrastructure investments that
applies a single set of rules to the funding of projects across transport,
energy and telecommunication networks.

·
To establish common rules which cover the
approach to strategic programming and coordination (including a single Common
Strategic Framework CSF)), eligibility rules, the set up of financial
instruments, community-led local development and several other areas for the European
Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF), the Cohesion
Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and the
future European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF

·
To establish a common instrument for the
Asylum and Migration Fund and all components of the Internal Security Fund, laying
down the principles of assistance, programming and the reporting mechanism, the
rules on financial management and control and the monitoring and evaluation
provisions applicable to both Funds.

·
To provide for a horizontal instrument
laying down common rules and procedures for the implementation of the Union's
instruments for external action

Under these proposals, stakeholders and
beneficiaries of EU support are offered a consistent set of complementary
programmes which allow "smart specialisation", instead of being confronted
with a multitude of partially overlapping schemes and differing rules. Greater
harmonisation of eligibility rules and coordination mechanisms will be an
important step towards a more integrated delivery of EU policies on the ground.

–
Mainstreaming

Mainstreaming priorities (such as resource
efficiency, climate change, environment and delivering energy security and energy
efficiency, SMEs) into different programmes is an effective approach, which
acknowledges that the same action can and should pursue different complementary
objectives at the same time. Mainstreaming promotes synergies in the use of
funds for various priorities and will result in greater consistency,
simplification and cost-efficiency in spending. This will allow for the primacy
of policy goals in areas such as climate action, environment and energy to be
re-prioritised within Union policies. For example, in order to attain the
Europe 2020 objectives, climate mitigation and adaptation actions will
be mainstreamed into all major EU programmes: cohesion, energy and transport
policies, research and innovation, agriculture (through the greening of direct
payments to farmers) and rural development policy. The tracking of
climate-related expenditure will be integrated into the methodology for
measuring performance used for EU programmes. Also, environmental policy
priorities will be mainstreamed in these same policies as well as in maritime
and fisheries EU funding instruments and external aid programmes. Close
monitoring of the delivery of results will ensure that the mainstreaming effort
in the various spending programmes is effective.

3.3.
Focusing on clear priority objectives and
indicators

Assessment of progress and of the impact of EU
policies is an area which is inherently complex, but which is essential to
ensure the sound financial management of EU Funds, transparency and
accountability. While planning, monitoring and evaluation are already an
integral part of the management of the EU Budget, assessment of the impact of
EU interventions has remained a challenge both at EU and national level.
Therefore the Commission has proposed a number of measures to facilitate these
tasks at all levels.

Clear priority objectives have been defined in
Commission proposals at two levels:

·
General Objectives describe the contribution of the
programme to the EU's priority objectives as defined in the Europe 2020
Strategy;

·
Specific Objectives, which are limited in
number, provide clarity and focus on interventions as well as increased
transparency in terms of the results to be achieved and tangible benefits for
European citizens.

The allocation of scarce resources calls for a responsible
choice of a limited number of policy priorities where the EU can ensure genuine
added value. Providing clear priority objectives thus helps to concentrate
resources on those priority areas where EU funds can actually deliver concrete
benefits for European citizens[8],
and avoiding overlap between EU programmes and actions made by Member States. Programmes
such as Horizon 2020 or the Connecting Europe Facility are
designed to deliver clear benefits at the European level in research and innovation
as well as in key European infrastructures, which are not addressed by national
programmes and which focus on areas which are key to Europe's competitiveness
and growth potential.

3.4.
Using simplified instruments for decision making

Simplification can be enhanced through the use
of flexible and easily adjustable instruments, such as delegated acts and
implementing acts, whilst at the same time ensuring legal certainty for all
stakeholders.

In line with the institutional balance
introduced by the Lisbon Treaty[9],
the Commission will be therefore empowered to adopt delegated acts to
supplement or amend non-essential elements of the legislative act establishing
the essential rules of the spending programmes and implementing acts for
their implementation, for example for the adoption of the annual work
programmes/financing decisions., These legal instruments allow the Commission
to adapt the implementation of programmes more easily to changing circumstances
and to respond more readily to the needs of beneficiaries, without affecting
the essential elements of the legislative act and with due respect to
safeguarding the rights of control of the Member States and the scrutiny of the
European Parliament.

The Commission has also streamlined the
instruments by choosing regulation instead of decision. Regulations provide
with uniform rules throughout the Union securing the same level of rights and
obligations for the beneficiaries.

4.
Simplified implementation mechanisms and
procedures
4.1.
Cost eligibility rules that are clear and
coherent

The simplification of cost eligibility rules
involves making concerted efforts both at the level of the Financial
Regulation, through provisions that are more suited to the usual practices of
the beneficiaries, and at the level of the spending programmes, by ensuring
consistency with the Financial Regulation and taking full advantage of the
measures it contains.

As regards the Financial Regulation,
priority has been given to stability and to compliance with the basic
principles applicable to Union funding, including sound financial management,
while taking greater account of the beneficiaries' perspective.

In case where financial benefits could be
outweighed by the administrative workload borne by beneficiaries, the
Commission proposes introducing corrective measures. As an example, the
interest generated by pre-financing paid to beneficiaries' bank accounts, as a
rule would no longer be due to the EU. With this measure, beneficiaries will
not be obliged to open and manage separate interest-bearing bank accounts for
EU funds. It is also proposed to allow beneficiaries to reach out, more easily
by means of sub-granting, to the final beneficiaries (e.g. scholars, refugees,
local NGOs), where this is the primary aim of the action, for example for
trans-national mobility actions, in line with the stated objectives of Union
programmes.

Moreover, the new Financial Regulation proposes
measures that will facilitate participation of networks, groupings or other
joint ventures in EU programmes, which in some cases make up most of their
target population. This is the case for example for clusters in the areas of
transport or innovation, where the costs incurred by affiliated entities will
be considered eligible for refund without imposing on cluster members all the
obligations of a beneficiary.

That is why the Commission, in presenting its
proposals, has paid particular attention to consistency and harmonisation by
ensuring that specific rules have been introduced in the proposals for new
programmes only in cases where they were already applicable (e.g. eligibility
of in-kind contributions under research programmes), and duly justified by the nature
of the actions or beneficiaries to be supported. Provisions that created
disproportionate obligations and administrative burden for the beneficiaries,
such as specific procurement rules for the implementation of contracts awarded
under the Lifelong Learning Programme, have been abandoned.

Where sector specific rules already exist, the
Commission has proposed clearer, simpler and more coherent eligibility rules,
for example the common rules for the CSF Funds and the rules on
participation in the area of research and innovation. Particular attention has
been given to the possibility to continue the current systems, to improve legal
certainty but also to improve harmonisation with existing EU and national
schemes

4.2.
Simplified forms of grants

The Commission proposes to build on the experience
gained in recent years with regard to simplified forms of grants (lump sums,
standard scales of unit costs, flat-rate financing) and to develop further these
funding schemes. These schemes actually have considerable potential to lessen
the administrative burden of all stakeholders by reducing the requirements of
financial reporting in the case of flat rates, or even replacing it by
reporting of outputs and results in the case of standard scales of unit costs
and lump sums. This should enable beneficiaries to focus on proper
implementation of the action. In order to widen the use of these simplified
forms of funding:

–
Rules which have a strong disincentive effects,
such as the EUR 25 000 ceiling for the unit value of lump sums and the
requirement to have the amounts established and updated every two years by
Commission decision, have been removed from the Financial Regulation. It is now
proposed that only the recourse to these simplified forms of funding and the
establishment of the calculation method, i.e. not the actual amounts, should be
decided at Commission level. No prior Commission decision is required for low
value, low risk grants, as this can be decided by the Authorising Officer by
Delegation.

–
The Commission is also suggesting the
introduction of an alternative tailor-made beneficiary-by-beneficiary
approach to determine simplified cost on the basis of the historical data
of the individual beneficiary instead of relying on statistical data per type
of action or broad categories of beneficiaries. This system, which may involve
more processing on the part of the Commission, should simplify maters
considerably for beneficiaries and should be better adapted to the needs of a
specific project. This method has already been successfully tested for
standardisation bodies, for which the simplification process is taken one step
further by adopting the general principle of paying grants in the form of lump
sums upon fulfilment of specific performance objectives.[10]

–
Prizes should be treated
under a separate dedicated title of the new Financial Regulation, in
recognition of their ultimate form of a simplified and output-based management
of Union funding focussing exclusively on results rather than on the control of
inputs.

–
The revised Financial Regulation will also allow
beneficiaries to declare costs in accordance with their usual cost accounting
practices, subject to minimum conditions which are designed to accommodate
most of them[11],
in line with the acceptance of average personnel costs already provided for
under earlier research framework programmes.

The Commission is committed to offering lighter
procedures to ensure that entities with high added-value for Union policies
are not deterred from applying for Union funding even where they have limited
administrative resources or financial capacity. This requires cutting red tape
not only during the implementation of the grants, but also at the calls for
proposals stage. The Commission will therefore keep to a minimum the number of
supporting documents needed to demonstrate that the applicant is not in a
situation of exclusion or, for low value grants, that it meets the Commission's
criteria in terms of legal status, operational and financial capacity.
Moreover, pre-financing guarantees, which are costly to obtain and manage,
would be only required in cases of substantiated risk. This will reduce the
administrative burden of applicants in some cases considerably, such as in the
case foreseen in the extended guarantee fund, (in Horizon 2020) which makes
pre-financing guarantees unnecessary in that programme.

Similarly, the requirement for a gradual
decrease in the number of operating grants and no-profit rules would be revised
so as to make Union funding more attractive, while still ensuring sound
financial management.

These general simplification measures will be
reflected in the proposed spending programmes, which will simply make a
reference to the general rules of Financial Regulation. Similar rules have been
specifically incorporated in the common rules for the CSF Funds, whilst
the general provisions applicable to the cohesion policy provide for a Joint
Action Plan, which constitutes an extension of the current system of simplified
cost and result-oriented tool. However, in order to be effective on the ground
for the purposes of administrations, implementing partners and beneficiaries,
some simplification measures will require further action to be taken either by
the Commission, or by the Member States. For instance, this is the case where
the use of simplified cost methods is not mandatory but optional.

4.3.
Streamlining of procurement procedures

The Commission proposal for the Financial Regulation
reduces the administrative burden for participants in a tender in two main
respects.

Firstly, the obligation to submit documentary
evidence (e.g. a balance sheet) may be waived if that evidence has already been
submitted for another procurement procedure.

Secondly, guarantees on pre-financing will no
longer be required above a given threshold, but will have to undergo a risk
assessment. This change addresses in particular the difficulties of SMEs in
obtaining bank guarantees, as banks often require SMEs to deposit an equivalent
amount of cash in a blocked account, which empties pre-financing of its purpose
to provide the contractor with a float of cash in addition to its current
assets in order to make it easier for him/her to start implementing the
contract. The Commission estimates that with this measure, fewer guarantees
will be required from beneficiaries, while the risks will be sufficiently
contained to ensure sound financial management.

4.4.
A move towards e-governance

The Financial Regulation already explicitly
allows grant proposals to be submitted electronically. Some basic acts go a
step further towards systematic electronic data exchange. The proposals for
cohesion policy, notably foresee the mandatory set up of electronic data
management and electronic data exchange between the administration and
beneficiaries[12],
which will alleviate the administrative burden on beneficiaries as it allows
them to submit the necessary documents only once.

The Commission proposal for Horizon 2020
also includes the possibility of exchanging documents, including reports, and
even the signing of grant agreements via a single secure electronic system
provided by the Commission.

As far as public procurement is concerned the
proposal for the new directive on modernisation provides for an alleviation of
the current legal requirements on electronic submission of tenders (e-signature).
This possibility could greatly simplify the development of an electronic tender
submission system for the contracting authorities in Member States, beyond the
currently existing e-notices and online publication of tender documents.

4.5.
More proportionate and cost effective control

Sound financial management requires that the
control strategy built using the simplified elements described above leads
to controls which are more effective, economic and efficient. The
combination of the tools provided by the new legislation, along with a control
strategy that targets control on the areas where it is addressing the greatest
risk, should provide the assurance to the European taxpayer , while enabling
beneficiaries to concentrate on policy objectives.

In particular, the wider possibilities made
available by the revised Financial Regulation have enabled the Commission to
table proposals that are better adapted to beneficiaries and other stakeholders
than before, ensuring that EU funds can be disbursed in a way that is clear,
easy to understand, and simple to apply. One consequence of this approach is
that control is likely to be more proportionate and cost effective. For example:

–
In the Common Agricultural Policy, the proposed Small
Farmer's Scheme would relieve significant proportion of beneficiaries (up
to 30%) from the administrative burden of detailed requirements, without increasing
the financial risk to the Union. The reform proposal also foresees that the
number on-the-spot controls can be reduced on the condition that the control
system of the Member State concerned is functioning properly and that the error
rate at beneficiary level is sufficiently low.In the cohesion policy, operations
below €100,000 can only be audited once prior to rolling closure. Other
operations can only be audited once a year except for in cases of a specific
risk of irregularity and fraud. Audit bodies will be able to reduce their audit
work where systems are robust, and in turn the Commission may decide to limit
its audits if it can rely on the opinion of the audit body.

–
Specific provisions have been foreseen to
curtail the burden associated with audit and control for the smallest
beneficiaries and operations under cohesion policy, including restrictions on
repetitive audits and a risk based approach to controls that takes into account
the volume of EU funding involved.

–
Horizon 2020,
while also incorporating the above approaches, would benefit in particular from
the possibility for beneficiaries to use their normal accounting practices,
subject to minimum conditions that are meant to accommodate most of them thereby
significantly the proportion of the administrative burden of preparing cost
claims.

To ensure that simplification does not open the
door to an increased risk of error, the Commission has been mindful of the need
to propose balanced measures between the costs and benefits of control and the
expected level of non-compliance with regulatory requirements, as suggested by
the Court of Auditors in its Opinion 1/2010. In particular, the Commission has
delivered on the following challenges identified by the Court, namely: improvement
in the design of funding schemes to strengthen management and control
mechanisms, simplification of grant schemes whilst still achieving policy
objectives and appropriate benchmarks for assessing management of risk, which
take account of the costs and benefits of controls.

These elements are intended to allow the European
Parliament and the Council to consider the likely consequences of their
regulatory choices on these parameters and, subsequently, to enable the
Commission to better align its control systems with the risks identified. It is
expected that simplification will reduce the probability of errors are being made
due to confusion or misunderstanding over eligibility requirements or
accounting policies, which has frequently been the case in the past.

5.
Conclusions and next steps

Simplification and targeting of the use of the
EU funds constitute a necessary and effective approach to drive the Europe 2020
strategy forward and to use the EU budget as a means to deliver policies that
enhance growth and employment. In designing the proposals for the new
programmes for the period 2014-2020, the Commission has addressed the need for
prioritisation, added value, reduction of administrative burden and high
quality of spending. It has taken these concerns very seriously into
consideration, as they are uppermost in the minds of citizens and businesses against
a background of growing pressure on public spending. This approach should
unlock the full potential of the opportunities offered by EU funding, and boost
the efficiency of spending programmes. Detailed information on the proposed
measures is provided in the policy templates attached.

Over the coming months, the two branches of
the Legislative Authority – the European Parliament and the Council will enter
into inter-institutional negotiations on the Commission proposals, paving the
way to the adoption of the legislative acts. Throughout the legislative
process, the objective of simplification must remain a central principle, and
the right balance between the policy objectives, the means of delivery and the
cost of administration and control must be assured without increasing the risk
of error.

Two cumulative conditions must be met to
achieve any meaningful simplification in the use of EU funding:

–
It requires combined efforts from all EU Institutions
to work towards an ambitious and timely review of the horizontal rules of the
Financial Regulation and the sector-specific rules. These efforts should
include the necessary coordination within the EU Institutions, given the
importance and the number of legislative proposals.

–
Furthermore, the simplification efforts at Union
level will only produce their full effect if they are properly accompanied by
parallel efforts at national and sub-national level, in particular in the policy
areas under shared management. Experience shows that national implementing
rules often leave considerable scope for simplification. The Commission has
already proposed that Member States provide in their Partnership Contracts
under cohesion, rural development and maritime and fisheries policies a summary
of the actions planned at national level to achieve reduction of administrative
burden for beneficiaries. This measure should be supported and extended to
other policy areas as appropriate.

Simplification is therefore a common
challenge and a shared responsibility for the EU Institutions and the Member
States. The Commission is open to endorse other measures
not included in its proposals provided that they safeguard sound financial
management.

The Commission therefore intends to:

–
Rigorously defend the proposals for
simplification as identified in this Communication throughout the legislative
process.

–
Regularly monitor progress made in the current
Simplification Agenda via a dedicated Scoreboard, which tracks simplification
measures proposed by the Commission as well as those proposed by the
Legislative Authority.The Scoreboard will identify measures not accepted by the
Legislative Authority and will assess the additional administrative burden for
beneficiaries generated by new measures which may be introduced in the legal
acts. This Scoreboard will be made regularly available to the European
Parliament and the Council. The final edition of the Scoreboard concerning the
legal acts as they are finally adopted by the co-legislators will be made
available to the EU Institutions, the national Parliaments and the public.

–
Take steps to assess, in association with the
Member States, the impact of the measures on the ground following the adoption
of the legislation.

The Commission calls upon the European Parliament
and Council to deliver robust simplification in the context of the MFF and
counts on the support of the two Institutions as well as that of the Member
States to succeed in its efforts.

Annexes

1.
List of proposals

2.
Elements of simplification in the Financial
Regulation

3.
List of identified simplification measures per
policy area

[1]               COM (2011) 500final

[2]               COM (2010) 2020

[3]               See for example, the details on the consultation
process on the EU budget review, http://ec.europa.eu/budget/reform/issues/read.en.html

[4]               See, for example, European Council Conclusions of
4.02.2011,European Parliament Resolution
of 8.06.2011 "Investing in the future: a new Multiannual Financial
Framework (MFF) for a competitive, sustainable and inclusive Europe", European Court of Auditors Opinion No 1/2010,
"Improving the financial management of the European Union budget: Risks
and challenges", a common letter of 23 European affairs Ministers of 13.04.2011
addressed to Commissioner J. Lewandowski

[5]               COM(2010)543

[6]               For example in the 7th research Framework
Programme, where dedicated simplification measures were introduced in 2011 and
the time to grant has fallen by nearly 30 days.

[7]               COM(2010) 815 final

[8]               In order to ensure that these
identified policy priorities are communicated effectively and that the benefits
resulting from EU action are
known to citizens, the Commission will implement a corporate communication
approach, exploiting synergies between various communication activities of the
Commission. (COM(2011)500final, part II, p.8)

[9]               Regulation EU N° 182/2011 of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 16/2/2011 laying down the rules and general principles
concerning mechanisms for control by Member States of the Commission's exercise
of implementing powers (OJ.55/13 of 28.02.2011)

[10]             See Article 13(4) of the Proposal for a Regulation of
the European Parliament and of the Council on European Standardisation and
amending Council Directives 89/686/EEC and 93/15/EEC and Directives 94/9/EC,
94/25/EC, 95/16/EC, 97/23/EC, 98/34/EC, 2004/22/EC, 2007/23/EC, 2009/105/EC and
2009/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (COM(2011) 315 final)

[11]             Recurrent beneficiaries willing to obtain assurance
that their accounting practices comply with the conditions set out by the
Commission and that the amounts so declared will not be challenged ex post may
request, on a voluntary basis, approval of the method they intend to follow.

[12]             See Article 112(3) of the Proposal for a Regulation of
the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the
European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion
Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European
Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and
laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the
European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No
1083/2006 (COM(2011) 615 final)