WRITTEN QUESTION E-1350/03 by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission. Cross-border investment.
Date: 2003-04-10
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU investment, Economic and Monetary Union, direct investment, economic situation, economic statistics, euro area, financial statistics, investment abroad

C 84 E/8

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

A recovery order means that an authorising department has discovered the existence of a claim
4.
against one of the Commission’s debtors that is certain, of a fixed amount and due. The recovery order
does not necessarily mean the contract was performed unsatisfactorily by the debtor. It may, for example,
relate to the recovery of an advance (pre-financing) paid for a service that was originally planned but
ultimately abandoned.

Recovery orders have been issued against:

(cid:1) Coopers and Lybrand (United Kingdom) for EUR 43 892,66, which was paid by offsetting the amount

against other claims (order 3240014022 of 1997, offset in 1999);

(cid:1) Deloitte and Touche (Greece) for EUR 26 145,53 (order 3240402821 of 2003), which will be offset;

(cid:1) Ernst and Young (United Kingdom) for EUR 103 346,41 (order 3240016239 of 1999), which has

been paid.

5.
The use of selected management consultants is a way of enlisting the services of specialists who have
in-depth expertise and have also probably performed comparable tasks in similar public or private
organisations. Their combination of skills enables them to contribute a new and different perspective,
which is both useful and necessary for dealing with specific dossiers.

As a Member of the Budgetary Control Committee of the Parliament, the Honourable Member may be also
aware of the tight staffing situation in the Commission.

(1) According to the terms of the White Paper (Action 74 Contracts Database) [Part II, cf. COM(2000) 200 final,
volume II]:
‘A central database will bring together all contracts and financing agreements concluded by the
Commission. It will be a precondition of any proposal to undertake financial commitments that the data related to
the envisaged contractor have been entered in the database. The database will contain all relevant information on
indirect beneficiaries) and
the beneficiaries
the object of
implementation’.

(including major

the contractor,

the contract,

(2004/C 84 E/0008)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1350/03

by Christopher Huhne (ELDR) to the Commission

(10 April 2003)

Subject: Cross-border investment

Is the Commission of the view that the introduction of the euro has boosted cross-border investment for
the participating Member States? Will it update those figures given in previous parliamentary answers to
me that showed a sharp increase in cross-border investment in the euro area that was an order of
magnitude greater than the increase for the EU members not participating in the euro? Will it also give the
figures individually for the five largest Member States of the EU?

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(22 May 2003)

Data on Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) inflows for EU-15, split between Eurozone and EU-15/non-
Eurozone countries, together with shares of each aggregate in the total EU-15 are sent direct to the
Honourable Member and to Parliament’s Secretariat. Data for the Eurozone are available as from 1997.
Annual rates of growth are also shown (First set of tables).

Data for the five bigger Member States in terms of FDI inflows, the share of the United Kingdom in EU 15
and annual growth rates are also given (Second set of tables).

Available data for Foreign Direct Investment indicate that the introduction of the euro had a favourable
effect on cross-border investment for the participating Member States.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/9

FDI data compiled by Eurostat show a much larger increase of FDI inflows in 1999 and 2000 for the euro
area than for other Member States. This can be interpreted as an evidence of a positive impact of the
Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) on cross-border direct investment. Nevertheless, it is important to
bear in mind that EMU is only one of the factors that have affected euro-area FDI flows in recent years.
In particular, FDI fluctuations have been clearly dominated by cyclical factors in the past two years.
In 2001, the slowdown in merger activity and depressed economic conditions entailed a sharp drop in FDI
inflows for both the euro area and other Member States.

(2004/C 84 E/0009)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1595/03

by Helena Torres Marques (PSE) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject: Cross-border payments in euro

With reference to written question P-0327/03 (1) of 31 January 2003, the Commission’s answer to which
was unclear, the questioner once again seeks clarification as to whether an electronic card which serves as
both a credit card and a debit card in Portugal can only be used as a credit card in the other euro
countries.

More precisely, can a card which is used to withdraw cash from ATMs free of charge in Portugal be used
for the same purpose in the other countries in the euro zone or might the withdrawal, without prior
warning, be considered as a cash advance with the charges that entails?

Similarly, can the Commission say what it means by ‘deferred debit cards’ mentioned in point 23 of
Commission Decision 2002/914/EC (2) of 24 July 2002 and what the advantages are for consumers?

(1) OJ C 78 E, 27.3.2004, p. 354.
(2) OJ L 318, 22.11.2002, p. 17.

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2003)

According to Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001 of the Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2001
on cross-border payment in euro (1), since 1 July 2002 the cost for cardholders withdrawing euro cash at
automated teller machines (ATMs) should be the same, regardless of whether the ATM is located in the
country where the card is issued or in another Member State.

In Article 3 of the Regulation, the principle of equality of charges applies to ‘corresponding payments’.

For payment cards combining both a debit and a credit function (so-called ‘multi-functional cards’) (2), this
means the following:

(cid:1) when the debit function is used for euro cash withdrawals outside the country of issuance of the card
in the Union, any charges applied should be the same as when the same function is used in euro cash
withdrawals within the country of issuance of the card (3);

(cid:1) similarly, when the credit function (4) is used, the charges should be the same as for the same function

in the country of issuance.

The case referred to by the Honourable Member relates to a multi-functional card issued in Portugal.

On the basis of information provided by several entities, the Commission has the following understanding
of the facts:

(cid:1) Holders of such multi-functional cards have a choice between withdrawing money at ATMs using the
debit function (immediate debit on the account, no charge) or the credit function (cash advance,
meaning deferred debit on the account and charges of 4 % in average) as long as the cards are used in
Portugal.