ddrg/super_eurlex huggingface dataset:
Annual Report on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) 866/2004 of 29 April 2004 and the situation resulting from its application

TABLE I:

Overview table summarising the monthly reports of the Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Commerce according to Article 8 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1480/2004 in EUR

Traded products January February March April May June July August September October November December Total Fixed vegetable oils, fluid, mixed, for technical or industrial uses - - - - - - - 9,130.00 - - - - 9,130.00 Building materials/articles of stone/ceramic products 38,182.80 55,185.38 45,046.75 54,767.19 55,074.52 58,329.20 39,320.79 44,206.74 29,634.74 64,058.79 52,065.62 37,202.87 573,075.39 Raw metal 7,650.00 43,250.00 40,150.00 47,210.00 82,750.00 35,902.90 38,100.00 45,800.00 44,943.75 23,750.00 31,599.50 125,150.00 566,256.15 Fresh Fish 35,258.50 69,131.50 66,043.50 63,438.00 56,615.00 77,015.00 65,936.00 54,038.00 57,884.00 85,396.00 72,394.60 55,709.00 758,859.10 Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof - - - - 1,629.00 - - - - - - - 1,629.00 Miscallenous Manufactured articles including furniture 24,963.86 27,406.55 35,932.98 46,002.25 20,566.30 43,697.84 59,613.98 54,618.18 26,946.40 23,137.15 27,877.13 25,742.37 416,504.98 Plastic products 108,208.41 96,311.20 147,721.94 157,883.07 149,198.43 158,325.33 144,992.51 127,447.50 140,290.89 127,133.61 123,234.10 133,544.18 1,614,291.17 Prepared foodstuffs; beverages, spirits and vinegar; tobacco 1,600.00 - - 800.00 - 1,200.00 - 400.00 - - 396.00 - 4,396.00 Chemical Products - 37.35 - - - - - - - - - - 37.35 Paper products 8,200.00 9,080.00 9,000.00 2,640.00 13,920.00 13,880.00 13,880.00 20,380.00 20,380.00 19,500.00 20,380.00 5,105.00 156,345.00 Textile articles 240.00 - 3,020.00 - 750.00 - - - - - - - 4,010.00 Fruits and vegetables other than potatoes 26,400.00 2,088.00 - - 4,800.00 76,600.00 15,200.00 3,000.00 3,250.00 6,000.00 3,450.00 57,100.00 197,888.00 Potatoes - 204,500.00 181,188.00 30,000.00 - - 23,106.00 80,202.40 164,500.00 - - - 683,496.40 Wood and articles of wood 1,450.00 2,625.00 2,285.00 2,728.00 3,342.00 2,375.00 3,580.00 1,612.48 4,213.00 2,121.00 2,605.00 2,859.00 31,795.48 Total 252,153.57 509,614.98 530,388.17 405,468.51 388,645.25 467,325.27 403,729.28 440,835.30 492,042.78 351,096.55 334,001.95 442,412.42 5,017,714.02

Source: Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Commerce

TABLE II:

Value of goods crossing the Green Line reported by the authorities of the Republic of Cyprus for 2016

Total

January 241,297 February 357,132 March 443,952 April 354,776 May 329,540 June 348,540 July 415,186 August 417,021 September 464,979 October 326,271 November 319,898 December 356,376 TOTAL 4,374,968.06

Source: table based on data received from Cyprus Customs and Excise Department

TABLE III:

Value of goods which crossed the Green Line and value of goods for which accompanying documents were issued by the Turkish Cypriot Chamber of Commerce

Source

- For the value of goods for which accompanying documents were issued: Turkish Cypriot Chamber of
What legislative and non-legislative policy options have been considered? Is there a preferred choice or not? Why? Maximum 14 lines

Three legislative options, cumulative in nature, have been considered whereas a self-regulatory approach has been discarded at an early stage. Non-legislative policy options have not been considered. The options are: 1) Generalisation of mature and widely available safety features 2) Introducing widely available and less commonly available safety features as standard equipment 3) Introduction of a full set of safety features boosting innovation All policy options consider various vehicle safety legislation items, each covering a specific safety issue, where option 1 addressed the least and option 3 the most safety areas and issues. Broadly speaking, the first option covers effective measures and technologies that are already widely available on a range of mainstream cars. The second option adds a specific focus on potential technologies that require vehicle manufacturers to go slightly beyond what is presently available on the market on non-entry level vehicles. The preferred choice for all categories is option 3. This option is expected to prevent the highest number of fatalities and severe injuries for vehicle occupants, pedestrians and cyclists, at an overall acceptable cost. It also ensures a consistent and non-discriminatory approach towards all vehicle categories.
on the reduction of the impact of certain plastic products on the environment

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council

The problem

The amount of plastic marine litter in the seas is growing, threatening ecosystems, biodiversity, human health as well as tourism, fisheries and shipping. The problem is transboundary.

Plastics makes up 85% of litter items on European beaches. Half is ‘single-use plastic’ used only once, for a short time, before being discarded. Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear (ALDFG) accounts for another 27%.

European policies on water, marine, waste, product and fisheries do not yet adequately address marine litter with many measures left to Member States' discretion, fragmenting the internal market.

Why should the EU act and what is the objective?

Joined-up and proportionate action at EU level can reduce marine litter while ensuring a single market and legal certainty for businesses.

The general objective is to reduce the environmental harm from certain plastic products, while promoting the transition to a circular economy with innovative and multi-use alternatives.

Policy options

The analysis focussed on fishing gear and the 10 most found single use plastics (around 86% of single-use plastic ): cigarette butts; drinks bottles and caps; cotton bud sticks; crisp packets; wet wipes; sanitary towels; cutlery; straws; stirrers; drinks cups; food containers as well as fishing gear.

A range of options were analysed against a baseline that includes the ongoing revision of the Fisheries Control Regulation and the Port Reception Facilities Directive as well as the Plastic Strategy and the reviewed waste legislation.

The preferred option

This option will significantly reduce the amount of marine litter. For single use plastics, measured by counts, the reduction is about half. It includes:

-Extended Producer Responsibility for the cost of prevention and cleaning up litter from cigarette filters, drinks bottles, crisp packets, wet wipes, sanitary towels, drinks cups, food containers, balloons and ensure proper waste management of damaged, end-of-life and fished-up fishing gear;

-Incentives for fishers to return damaged, end-of-life and fished-up gear delivered to the port;

-Product design measures to tether caps to drink bottles;

-Reduction targets for single-use plastic versions of drinks cups, wet wipes, and food containers;

-A ban of single-use plastic versions of cotton bud sticks, plastic balloon sticks, cutlery, straws and stirrers.

In 2030, for single-use plastic , this option would save 2.6 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent. It would avoid environmental damages (equivalent to €11 billion). There would be compliance costs for business (around €2 billion) and waste management (€510 million). Consumers would save money (around €6.5 billion), but face some inconvenience.
on the implementation of EU waste legislation, including the early warning report for Member States at risk of missing the 2020 preparation for re-use/recycling target on municipal waste

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

1.Introduction

This early warning report is part of the Commission's overall implementation report and aims to assist Member States at risk of failing to meet the 2020 target of 50 % preparation for re-use/recycling of municipal waste set out in Article 11(2)(a) of Directive 2008/98/EC. It builds on previous support provided by the Commission to help Member States comply with EU law in the area of municipal waste management. This resulted in country-specific roadmaps being drawn up for the relevant Member States.

The assessment underpinning the early warning report is based on a collaborative and transparent process involving the Member States concerned and an in-depth analysis of their most recent policy developments. This also involved extensive consultation with the authorities in charge of waste management.

The possible actions identified during this process are based on the existing best practices and aim to help Member States in meeting the 2020 municipal waste preparation for re-use/recycling target; they therefore focus on policy measures that can be taken forward in the short term. These actions should be seen as complementary to those recommended in the roadmaps that were drawn up as part of the preceding compliance promotion activities and to the recommendations made in the Environmental Implementation Review.

2.Key findings

In 2016, Hungary’s municipal waste recycling rate (including composting) reported to Eurostat was 35 %, while the landfilling rate was 51 %. Based on an analysis of existing and firmly planned policies in the area of waste management, Hungary is considered at risk of missing the 2020 target of 50 % preparation for re-use/recycling of municipal waste.

The assessment that underpins the early warning report concludes that despite the recent major reform of the waste management system in Hungary, the results of this shift in policy are not yet visible. The slow progress is due to a lack of incentives for households to participate in separate collection, and insufficient economic instruments to drive significant improvements in the sector.

The table below lists possible actions to support Hungary’s efforts to improve its waste management.
on the implementation of EU waste legislation, including the early warning report for Member States at risk of missing the 2020 preparation for re-use/recycling target on municipal waste

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

1.Introduction

This early warning report is part of the Commission's overall implementation report and aims to assist Member States at risk of failing to meet the 2020 target of 50 % preparation for re-use/recycling of municipal waste set out in Article 11(2)(a) of Directive 2008/98/EC. It builds on previous support provided by the Commission to help Member States comply with EU law in the area of municipal waste management. This resulted in country-specific roadmaps being drawn up for the relevant Member States.

The assessment underpinning the early warning report is based on a collaborative and transparent process involving the Member States concerned and an in-depth analysis of their most recent policy developments. This also involved extensive consultation with the authorities in charge of waste management.

The possible actions identified during this process are based on the existing best practices and aim to help Member States in meeting the 2020 municipal waste preparation for re-use/recycling target; they therefore focus on policy measures that can be taken forward in the short term. These actions should be seen as complementary to those recommended in the roadmaps that were drawn up as part of the preceding compliance promotion activities and to the recommendations made in the Environmental Implementation Review

2.Key findings

In 2016, the recycling rate (including composting) reported to Eurostat was 21 %. The rate of municipal waste landfilling was 77 %, making it among the highest in the EU. Based on an analysis of existing and firmly planned policies in the area of waste management, Croatia is considered at risk of failing to meet the 2020 target of 50 % preparation for re-use/recycling for municipal waste.

The assessment that underpins the early warning report concludes that:

·the separate collection of recyclables, including bio-waste, is not yet being carried out effectively;

·economic incentives for citizens and municipalities are yet to be implemented;

·the extended producer responsibility schemes in Croatia do not fully cover the costs of separate collection; and

·more investment is needed in projects higher up the waste hierarchy that go beyond the treatment of residual waste.

The table below lists possible actions to support Croatia's efforts to improve its performance in waste management.
Several legislative and non-legislative options were considered. Some options were discarded at an early stage: The creation of a separate legal entity was discarded since it would be disproportionate compared to the limited tasks that would be given to the entity. In addition, the use or development of an alternative system were discarded mainly since the current e-CODEX solution proved to be very effective and efficient for the procedures for which it is already used and it is reasonable to expect a return on the 24 million EUR invested in creating e-CODEX. Also, a commercial solution would raise issues regarding long term sustainability and the confidentiality and integrity of the data exchanged, as the owner of the solution could in theory have access to the data transferred using its solution. Handing over e-CODEX to a Member State or a consortium of Member States could not be considered since Member States have clearly rejected this possibility. Their preference, as expressed in several Council conclusions, is to have eu-LISA ensure the further evolutive maintenance of e-CODEX. Under these conditions, two options were assessed against the baseline scenario, i.e. that no permanent maintenance is provided leading to the expiry of e-CODEX. Among these the option of handing over e-CODEX to an Agency was considered most appropriate. The alternative option to have the Commission ensure the maintenance of e-CODEX was deemed less favourable since it would be more difficult to ensure Member State involvement in the governance of the system – which is something Member States consider important in order to guarantee the independence of the judiciary. An agency could also be a more flexible solution allowing to better take into account the input from stakeholders. Among the existing agencies, the European Agency for the operational management of large-scale IT systems in the area of freedom, security and justice (eu-LISA) is the only one with relevant experience in managing large-scale IT systems and should therefore be given the task to manage e-CODEX. In order to allow for the adoption of a legal basis for e-CODEX, as well as to ensure an adequate handover process, the current Member State consortium or a new entity would need to continue maintaining e-CODEX in the 2021-2023 period.
Three comprehensive approaches addressing all identified problems have been envisaged: Option 1 - to adopt only soft law measures, together with the Schengen Strategy (soft law measures). Option 2 – to propose a targeted amendment of the Schengen Borders Code, accompanied by some soft law measures (mixed option). In particular, a new procedure of contingency planning would be proposed concerning border checks at internal borders being reintroduced in response to threats affecting several or all Member States at the same time. The guidance and recommendations adopted in response to COVID-19 would contribute to ‘mitigating measures’ which would need to be taken into account whenever a reintroduction of border checks is inevitable. In order to limit the use of border checks as the most intrusive measure, the concept of the ‘measure of last resort’ already contained in the Schengen Borders Code would be developed to include a reference to measures available to Member States to compensate for the absence of border checks. Furthermore, the Commission would receive better tools to monitor why the Member States want to reintroduce border checks and how they carry them out. Finally, adopting an ‘entry ban’ to the EU in the case of a threat to public health would receive a solid legal basis, to ensure uniformity at the external borders. Option 3 - is more ambitious in terms of amending the existing rules. It would require the decision on reintroducing controls to be taken at EU level, with approval from one of the EU institutions or would simply remove the current possibility to reintroduce border checks at internal borders by unilateral decision of a Member State and impose using compensatory measures instead. Following a detailed assessment of the impact of all policy options and consultation of all stakeholders involved, Option 2 is the preferred policy option. This choice is based on the fact that this option scores, overall, best as regards effectiveness, efficiency and proportionality. It draws on lessons from the past and, at the same time, is sufficiently ambitious. It respects the views of the Member States concerning the role of border checks in addressing serious threats while at the same time respecting the legitimate expectations of EU citizens and other persons benefiting from the absence of border checks at internal borders.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION

Brussels, 21.12.2022

SWD(2022) 432 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT



IMPACT ASSESSMENT



Accompanying the document

Commission Implementing Regulation

laying down a list of specific high-value datasets and the arrangements for their publication and re-use

















{C(2022) 9562 final}

{SWD(2022) 431 final}

{SWD(2022) 433 final}

{SEC(2022) 450 final}
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— for PSA: PSA is an operator of shipping terminals. It is mainly active in the provision of stevedoring services at ports, with a particular focus on providing terminal services for containerised liner ships,

— for TIL: TIL is a terminal operating company indirectly jointly controlled by MSC Mediterranean Shipping Company Holding SA and certain financial investment vehicles managed by Global Infrastructure Management, LLC. TIL invests in, develops and manages container terminals around the world, often in joint ventures with other major terminal operators,

— for PSA DGD: PSA DGD operates a container terminal in the Deurganck dock in the Port of Antwerp. It is a pre-existing company currently solely controlled by Kranji.
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— for WIG: manufacture and sale of pipes and pipe systems designed for the transport of water (drainage, sewage, irrigation and potable pressure water) and, to a limited extent, for industrial use within various types of plants. WIG is active globally,

— for Amiantit: manufacture and sale of pipes and pipe systems, sale of pipe technologies and the manufacture and supply of polymer products. Amiantit is active globally. Amiantit's European business is active in the production and sale of glass fiber reinforced plastic (GRP) pipes and pipe systems,

— for Hobas Europe: manufacture and sale of GRP pipes and pipes systems in Europe.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 218/16

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8467 — BNP Paribas/Commerz Finanz)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 218/06)

On 29 June 2017, 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 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 electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8467. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 230/23

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8526 — CPPIB/BTPS/Milton Park)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 230/02)

On 7 July 2017, 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 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 electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8526. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— PSA: a publicly listed company headquartered in France, active worldwide in the development, manufacturing and distribution of automotive vehicles under three brands - Peugeot, Citroën and DS. Through its wholly owned subsidiary Banque PSA Finance, it offers loans and leases for the purchase of PSA-branded vehicles and loans to PSA car dealers,

— BNPP: a publicly listed company headquartered in France, active worldwide in the retail banking and services as well as in the corporate and institutional banking. Through its wholly owned subsidiary BNPP Personal Finance, it offers a full range of personal credit products at points of sale, car dealerships and directly to consumers as well as insurance and savings offers in some countries,

— the Fincos: 23 entities in France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland which constitute the financing business of Opel and Vauxhall, and offer automotive financing solutions and related services, mainly to car dealers and customers of Opel/Vauxhall-branded vehicles.
8.

The Advisory Committee (11 Member States) agrees with the Commission’s analysis of the Commitments of 27 February 2017 and in particular that these commitments, submitted on day 80 of the procedure, do not fulfil the legal standard for late commitments and would not unambiguously and fully resolve competition concerns identified in the markets for ATS traded and CCP cleared triparty and non-triparty repos and clearing of bonds where the transaction leads to de facto monopolies. A minority of Member States (1 Member State) abstains.
EN Official Journal of the European Union C 232/1

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8532 — Blackstone Group/Sponda)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 232/02)

On 10 July 2017, 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 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 electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8532. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

(1) OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.
The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

— for CVC: The CVC Group provides advice to and manages investment funds and platforms,

— for Arzignanese and Pasubio (‘Pasubio Group’): The Pasubio Group is active in the tanning of leather and the production of finished leather products for use in various sectors, including automotive interiors, furniture and luxury goods.