Opinion of the European Central Bank of  1 December 2005  on a proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 on the introduction of the euro (CON/2005/51)
Date: 2005-12-01
Institutions: European Central Bank
Subjects: EU Member State, European Central Bank, European Monetary System, euro, euro area

13.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/25

EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

OPINION OF THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

of 1 December 2005

on a proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 974/98 on the introduction
of the euro

(CON/2005/51)

(2005/C 316/11)

On 10 November 2005 the European Central Bank (ECB)
received a request from the Council of the European Union for
an opinion on a ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation amending
Regulation (EC) No 974/98 on the introduction of the euro’
(COM(2005) 357 final) (1)
the ‘proposed regu-
lation’). The ECB's competence to deliver an opinion is based
on the third sentence of Article 123(4) of the Treaty estab-
lishing the European Community, which is the basis for the
proposed regulation. 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.

(hereinafter

1.

General remarks

1.1.

The proposed regulation seeks to establish an appro-
priate legal framework for the future introduction of the
euro in the Member States that have not yet adopted the
euro (hereinafter the ‘non-participating Member States’).
These Member States have a strong interest in ensuring
that a robust legal framework at Community level
is
adopted well in advance of their euro changeovers, in
order to facilitate timely domestic legislative and prac-
tical preparations for the introduction of the euro. The
EU in general and the Member States that have already
adopted the euro (hereinafter the ‘participating Member
States’) also have a strong interest in ensuring that any
future
implemented as
enlargement
smoothly and successfully as was the case for the adop-
tion of the euro by the original 11 participating Member
States and Greece, so that the enlargement of the euro
area will have a positive impact.
the ECB
considers that the successful introduction of the euro in
the existing participating Member States played a key
role in establishing the credibility of the euro, both
within the EU and on the broader international stage.

euro area

Indeed,

is

governed the introduction of the euro in the original 11
participating Member States and Greece, was based on
the approach endorsed by the European Council at its
meeting in Madrid in 1995 (hereinafter the ‘Madrid
scenario’). The Madrid scenario provided for a transi-
tional period between the introduction of the euro in
scriptural form and the introduction of euro banknotes
and coins and is the basis for the rules for the introduc-
tion of the euro currently contained in Regulation (EC)
No 974/98. For further introductions of the euro some
important practical aspects have changed substantially
since the first changeover, which began on 1 January
1999.
In particular, euro banknotes are now widely
available within the euro area and throughout the EU,
triggering the need for additional changeover scenarios
to the Madrid scenario.

2.1.2. Under

scenarios:

the proposed regulation the Council would
authorise Member States to follow one of three different
changeover
(a) a Madrid-style transitional
period,
i.e. a period of time during which the euro
would only legally exist as a scriptural currency, whilst
euro banknotes and coins, even if privately available and
usable, would not be officially recognised as having
domestic legal tender status; (b) a ‘big bang’ scenario, i.e.
a single-step transition to the euro under which the
dates for the introduction of the euro as a scriptural
currency and for the cash changeover would be the
same; or (c) a ‘big bang’ scenario with a phasing-out
period of up to one year during which reference could
continue to be made to the national currency unit in
instruments having legal effect (e.g. invoices, company
accounts and payslips).

2.

Specific remarks

2.1.

Establishment of three euro changeover scenarios

2.1.1. It is recalled that Council Regulation (EC) No 974/98 of
3 May 1998 on the introduction of the euro (2), which

(1) Version of 2 August 2005.
(2) OJ L 139, 11.5.1998, p. 1. Regulation as amended by Regulation

(EC) No 2596/2000 (OJ L 300, 29.11.2000, p. 2).

2.1.3. The basic objective of the proposed regulation, which is
clarified in its explanatory memorandum, is to establish
these three alternative changeover scenarios for future
Member States adopting the euro (3). In order to ensure

(3) See the explanatory memorandum to the proposed regulation, p. 3.

C 316/26

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.12.2005

a higher degree of transparency for EU citizens, and to
ensure consistency with the goals of the EU's better
regulation agenda, the ECB proposes that an explicit
provision be introduced into the proposed regulation
which would directly and more comprehensively reflect
the three different changeover scenarios that will apply
to the Member States concerned.

2.1.4. In particular, a number of the Member States which
acceded to the EU on 1 May 2004 (1) have indicated
publicly that they have a preference for the euro to be
introduced in accordance with a ‘big bang’ scenario.
Under the current text of the proposed regulation the
concept of a ‘big bang’ euro changeover can only be
derived from the definition of the transitional period,
with the possibility of the euro adoption date and the
cash changeover date in the Annex to the proposed
regulation being two dates which coincide (2). Although
it is theoretically possible to conceive of the ‘big bang’
scenario as a transitional period lasting one split second,
it is suggested that the ‘big bang’ scenario could be more
transparently defined for the EU citizen as ‘a single-step
introduction of the euro under which the euro adoption
date and cash changeover date coincide’.

2.2.

Transitional period changeover scenario

‘transitional period’

2.2.1. Under the existing provisions of Regulation (EC) No
974/98,
is defined as a three-year
period beginning on 1 January 1999 and ending on 31
December 2001, except in the case of Greece, where the
transitional period is a one-year period beginning on 1
January 2001 and ending on 31 December 2001 (3). In
other words, the existing Regulation (EC) No 974/98
defines a fixed period of time during which transitional
provisions apply. By contrast, under the proposed regu-
lation the definition of
‘transitional period’ does not
establish any specific or maximum duration. Instead, the
length of the transitional period for each Member State
in the
will be established on a case-by-case basis
proposed Annex to Regulation (EC) No 974/98,
meaning that the length of the transitional period would
need to be completely renegotiated at the time of the
abrogation of
the derogation of each Member State
concerned (4).

2.2.2. The ECB strongly recommends explicitly establishing a
maximum length for the transitional period in the text
of the proposed regulation, and this maximum length
should be no longer than three years. In addition to this
overall limit, the ECB recommends that the recitals to
the proposed regulation clarify that
the transitional
period should be as short as possible, so as to encourage
the establishment of shorter transitional periods than
the maximum permissible three-year period. The argu-

(1) Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Slovakia and Slovenia.
(2) Proposed Article 1(h) of Regulation (EC) No 974/98 and the

proposed Annex thereto.

(3) Articles 1 and 2 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(4) Proposed Article 1(h) of Regulation (EC) No 974/98.

ments underlying the ECB's position regarding this point
are set out below for the Council's consideration.

2.2.3. First, the practical aspects of the euro changeover are
different today compared to the original euro change-
over which began on 1 January 1999, when the euro
banknotes and coins were not in existence. Given that
euro banknotes are now widely available not only
within the euro area but also throughout the whole EU,
it would not be credible if the citizens of the Member
States concerned had to wait longer than three years
after the introduction of the euro as the currency of
their Member States before euro banknotes and coins
became legal tender.

the Member

euro unit by

2.2.4. Second, the transitional period should not be too long
because the euro will have been legally declared the offi-
cial currency of the Member State concerned at the very
beginning of the transitional period (5). Consistent with
this, the ECB would formulate monetary policy for the
Member State concerned (6) and all monetary policy
operations would be carried out in the euro unit by the
national central bank (NCB) of
the Member State
concerned (7). New tradeable public debt would be
State
issued in the
concerned (8). It can be expected that there would be an
increased use of
in both domestic
the euro unit
payments and, especially, cross-border payments with
the Member State concerned (9). Also, the Member State
concerned would be able to take appropriate measures
to enable the change in the unit of account of their
operating procedures from a national currency unit to
the euro unit by organised markets and payment
systems (10). The experience of the original 11 partici-
pating Member States
the wholesale
banking sector and financial markets can be expected to
switch to the euro unit at the very beginning of the tran-
sitional period. Against this background, the ECB does
not consider it plausible for the transitional period
between the introduction of the euro as the currency of
the Member State concerned and the official introduc-
tion of the euro banknotes and coins to last longer than
three years.

suggests

that

2.2.5. Third, it is true that it was prudent to have provided for
a three-year transitional period during the first euro
changeover, given the unprecedented logistical challenge
involved in merging the currencies and legal tenders of
11 Member States into a single European currency.
However,
it is noted that Greece, which adopted the
euro two years later than the original 11 participating
Member States, successfully coped with a one-year tran-
sitional period. This suggests that if a Madrid-style tran-
sitional period is used for any further introductions of
the euro, the transitional period should be shorter than
three years.

(5) Proposed Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(6) Article 105(2) of the Treaty and the first paragraph of Article 12.1
of the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the
European Central Bank.

(7) Recital 9 to Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(8) Recital 14 to Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(9) Article 8(3) of and recital 13 to Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(10) Article 8(4) of Regulation (EC) No 974/98.

13.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/27

2.2.6. Fourth,

implies

that Member States

two principles are considered important

for
guiding the adoption of the euro: the principles of equal
treatment and facilitation. While the principle of equal
joining later
treatment
should not be confronted with additional hurdles, nor
should they be allowed to join on looser terms, the prin-
ciple of facilitation suggests that there is a need to be
flexible in implementing the changeover. While equal
treatment implies that Member States joining later are
entitled to use the same maximum overall time specified
in the Madrid scenario for the original participating
Member States, they should be allowed, in line with the
to complete the changeover
principle of
more quickly, should this prove feasible and appropriate.
Thus, establishing a maximum of three years for the
transitional period would be consistent with the prin-
ciple of equal treatment, taking account of the three-
year transitional period applicable to the original 11
participating Member States under Regulation (EC) No
974/98. At the same time, providing for the possibility
to shorten this three-year
transitional period would
satisfy the principle of facilitation.

facilitation,

2.2.7. Fifth, establishing a maximum length for the transitional
period would be consistent with the legal
technique
used for defining other periods relevant to the different
euro changeover scenarios, such as the phasing-out
period and the dual circulation period. The proposed
regulation sets a maximum length of one year for the
phasing-out period (1). Regulation (EC) No 974/98 estab-
the dual circulation
lishes the maximum length of
period as six months (2).

2.2.8. To sum up, the ECB considers that, from the perspective
the euro changeover
of ensuring the credibility of
fostering legal certainty and increasing effi-
process,
ciency,
there is a compelling case for establishing a
maximum length for the transitional period of no more
than three years in the text of the proposed regulation.
In order to encourage the establishment of shorter tran-
sitional periods than the maximum permissible three-
year period, the ECB also recommends that the recitals
to the proposed regulation clarify that the transitional
period should be as short as possible. Finally, it is noted
that such a clear-cut provision establishing a maximum
length for the transitional period would avoid any
further discussions upon any future abrogation of the
derogations of the Member States concerned and the
subsequent amendments to Regulation (EC) No 974/98,
thus making the euro changeover process more predict-
able.

2.3.

Phasing-out changeover scenario

2.3.1. As a general matter, the ECB understands the reasons
for combining a ‘big bang’ scenario with a phasing-out
period of up to one year during which there would be

(1) Proposed Article 9a of Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(2) Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98. It is noted that all 12
existing participating Member States shortened the dual circulation
period to no longer than two months.

scope for the continued usage of the national currency
unit in specific legal instruments, such as, according to
the explanatory memorandum,
invoices or company
books (3). While it might be arguable whether invoices
or company books constitute legal instruments within
the meaning of the proposed regulation, the ECB under-
stands that the concept of a phasing-out period is also
intended to allow for the continued use of the national
currency unit in new legal instruments such as standard-
form contracts generated by electronic means (e.g. car
rental contracts).

2.3.2. While the explanatory memorandum suggests that the
phasing-out period would leave only ‘certain scope for
the usage of
the national currency in specific legal
instruments’ (4), the provisions of the proposed regu-
lation do not contain any limitation on the types of new
instruments which may continue to refer to the
legal
national currency unit during the phasing-out period (5).
The ECB notes that this approach allows a considerable
degree of flexibility and subsidiarity to Member States in
the application of the phasing-out period to different
kinds of legal instruments.

2.3.3. One point which the ECB wishes to emphasise is that
under the proposed regulation, acts performed under
legal instruments containing references to the national
currency unit during the phasing-out period are required
to be performed only in the euro unit (6). This may
prevent parties from referring to national currency units
in payment instruments since such payment instruments
would have to be performed in the euro unit rather than
in the relevant national currency unit. However, insofar
as payment instruments such as cheques and payment
orders would be denominated in the national currency
unit, this may create some inconvenience for payment
operators as they would need to ensure that conversion
from the national currency unit to the euro unit takes
place before a transaction is performed. Furthermore,
since payment
instruments may potentially circulate
outside the Member States which are applying a
phasing-out period, it is important from an operational
perspective to exclude the possibility of cross-border use
of payment instruments denominated in the relevant
national currency units. This can be achieved by
the provisions on the
restricting the application of
phasing-out period to legal instruments to be performed
in the Member State concerned (i.e. only in the Member
State with the phasing-out period). Such an approach
would encourage flexibility regarding the implementa-
tion of the provisions on the phasing-out period and
limit it to the domestic level.

(3) See the explanatory memorandum to the proposed regulation, p. 3.
(4) See the explanatory memorandum to the proposed regulation, p. 3.
(5) Proposed Article 1(i) and proposed Article 9a of Regulation (EC) No

974/98.

(6) Third sentence of the proposed Article 9a of Regulation (EC) No

974/98.

C 316/28

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.12.2005

2.3.4. The ECB notes that the earlier part of the phasing-out
period (of up to one year after the cash changeover
date) would overlap with the dual circulation period (of
up to six months) during which both euro and national
currency banknotes and coins would be permitted as
legal tender within the territorial limits of the Member
State concerned (1). The ECB notes that there is a discre-
pancy between the provision according to which acts
performed under new legal instruments containing refer-
ences to the old national currency unit during the
phasing-out period are required only to be performed in
the euro unit, and the fact that national currency bank-
notes and coins will remain legal tender within their
territorial limits during the dual circulation period. This
discrepancy can be addressed by means of an amend-
ment
the proposed regulation, under
which the abovementioned provision would operate
without prejudice to the provisions of Article 15 of
Regulation (EC) No 974/98 (i.e. the provisions on the
dual circulation period).

to the text of

2.4. Name of the euro

be

and

properly

consistently

the name of

2.4.1. The ECB understands that one Member State has entered
a linguistic reservation relating to identification of the
name of the single currency as the ‘euro’ in that Member
State's language version of the proposed regulation. In
this regard, the ECB would emphasise that the name
‘euro’ must
used
throughout all language versions of the proposed regu-
lation, in accordance with the requirement under Regu-
the single
lation (EC) No 974/98 that
currency be the same in all the official languages of the
European Union, taking into account the existence of
different alphabets (2). As noted by the ECB in a recent
opinion on a draft Lithuanian law on the adoption of
the euro (3), the relevant provisions of Regulation (EC)
No 974/98 ‘make it clear that the name of the single
currency is the “euro” and that this name should be
identical
in legal acts published in all Community
languages […] The Community, as the exclusive holder
of competence in monetary matters, determines alone
the name of the single currency. As a single currency,
the name of the euro needs to be identical in the nomi-
native singular case in all Community languages to
ensure that its singleness is apparent.’

2.4.2. Consistent with the foregoing,

the euro banknotes
which the ECB has authorised to be issued by the ECB
and the NCBs of participating Member States since 1
January 2002 only identify the name of
the single
currency as the ‘EURO’ and the ‘ΕΥΡΩ’, i.e. the name of
the currency in the Roman and Greek alphabets (4). For

(1) Article 15 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98.
(2) Article 2 of and recital 2 to Regulation (EC) No 974/98. See also
paragraph 10 of ECB Opinion CON/2005/21 of 14 June 2005 at
the request of Lietuvos bankas on a draft law on the adoption of the
euro; available on the ECB's website at www.ecb.int.

(3) Paragraph 10 of Opinion CON/2005/21.
(4) Article 1(2) of Decision ECB/2003/4 of 20 March 2003 on the
denominations, specifications, reproduction, exchange and with-
drawal of euro banknotes (OJ L 78, 25.3.2003, p. 16).

reasons of legal certainty, the ECB recommends that the
text of
the proposed regulation incorporates in its
normative part a provision confirming that ‘the spelling
of the name of the euro shall be identical in the nomina-
tive singular case in all the official
languages of the
European Union, taking into account the existence of
different alphabets’.

2.5.

Specific drafting suggestions

In addition, the ECB has a number of specific drafting
suggestions.

2.5.1. First, Regulation (EC) No 974/98 permits each Member
State which opts for a Madrid-style transitional period to
take measures which may be necessary to enable the
change of the unit of their operating procedures from a
national currency unit to the euro unit by markets for
the regular exchange, clearing and settlement of any
instrument listed in Section B of the Annex to Council
Directive 93/22/EEC of 10 May 1993 on investment
services in the securities field (5) (hereinafter the ‘ISD’)
and of commodities (6). Given that the ISD has been
repealed by the Markets in Financial Instruments Direc-
tive (7)
the reference to the
instruments listed in Section B of the Annex to the ISD
should be replaced by a reference to the instruments
listed in Section C of Annex I to the MiFID, which
contains a more detailed and sophisticated list of finan-
cial
instruments than the ISD, including, for example,
commodity, credit and weather derivatives.

(hereinafter the ‘MiFID’),

2.5.2. Second, it is suggested to simplify the first paragraph of
the proposed Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98
to provide that ‘with effect from the respective cash
the ECB and the national central
changeover dates,
banks of the participating Member States shall put into
circulation banknotes denominated in euro in the parti-
cipating Member States.’

2.5.3. Third, regarding the helpful reference to ‘the provisions
of any agreement under Article 111 of
the Treaty
concerning monetary matters’ contained in the proposed
Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98 (which
addresses the legal tender status of euro coins issued by
third countries such as Monaco, San Marino and Vatican
City), the ECB would suggest that, consistent with some
language versions (e.g. German) of the proposed regu-
lation, the reference to Article 111 of the Treaty could
be narrowed to paragraph 3 thereof, as this is the only
paragraph of Article 111 referring to agreements
concerning monetary matters (i.e. Article 111(3)).

(5) OJ L 141, 11.6.1993, p. 27. Directive as last amended by Directive
2002//87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L
35, 11.2.2003, p. 1).

(6) Subparagraph (a) of the second indent of Article 8(4) of Regulation

(EC) No 974/98.

(7) Directive 2004/39/EC of the European Parliament and the Council
instruments amending
of 21 April 2004 on markets in financial
Council Directives 85/611/EEC and 93/6/EEC and Directive
2000/12/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and
repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC (OJ L 145, 30.4.2004, p. 1).

13.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/29

2.5.4. Fourth, regarding the proposed obligation for ‘banks’ to
exchange their customers' national banknotes and coins
for euro banknotes and coins free of charge up to speci-
fied ceilings pursuant to the proposed Article 15(3) of
Regulation (EC) No 974/98, the ECB notes that, from a
strict drafting perspective, the term ‘credit institutions’ is
the term usually used to describe banks under both the
Treaty and secondary Community law. Therefore, if the
reference to ‘banks’ is replaced by a reference to ‘credit
institutions’, as defined in the Consolidated Banking
Directive, account needs to be taken of the fact that
some ‘credit’
institutions included within the scope of
that Directive are not involved in cash operations (e.g.
electronic money institutions) (1) while others, exempted
from the scope of the Directive (e.g. post office giro
institutions), have proven important for the euro chan-
geover in the past.

In view of the foregoing, it would be sensible to leave a
certain discretion to the Member States concerned with
regard to defining the other institutions that may need
to be covered by this obligation to exchange banknotes
and coins free of charge.

2.6. Drafting proposals

2.6.1. Where the above recommendations would lead to
changes in the proposed regulation, drafting proposals
are enclosed in the annex hereto.

Done at Frankfurt am Main, 1 December 2005.

The President of the ECB

Jean-Claude TRICHET

(1) Articles 1(1) and 2(3) of Directive 2000/12/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 20 March 2000 relating to the
taking up and pursuit of the business of credit institutions (OJ L
126, 26.5.2000, p. 1). Directive as last amended by Directive
2005/1/EC (OJ L 79, 24.3.2005, p. 9).

C 316/30

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.12.2005

ANNEX

Drafting proposals

Text proposed by the Commission (1)

Amendments proposed by the ECB (2)

Amendment 1

Recitals to the proposed regulation

[No current proposal]

The spelling of the name of the euro needs to be iden-
tical
in the nominative singular case in all official
languages of the EU, to ensure that its singleness is
apparent.

Justification — See paragraphs 2.4.1-2.4.2 of the opinion

Amendment 2

Recital 4 to the proposed regulation

In order to prepare a smooth changeover to the euro,
Regulation (EC) No 974/98 provides for an obligatory
transitional period between the substitution of the euro for
the currencies of the participating Member States and the
introduction of the euro banknotes and coins.

In order to prepare a smooth changeover to the euro,
Regulation (EC) No 974/98 provides for an obligatory
transitional period between the substitution of the euro for
the currencies of the participating Member States and the
introduction of the euro banknotes and coins. Given that
euro banknotes and coins are widely available to the
public, such a transitional period should in future be
as short as possible.

Justification — See paragraphs 2.2.1-2.2.8 of the opinion

Amendment 3

Proposed Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

[No current proposal]

‘“big bang” scenario’ shall mean a single-step introduc-
tion of the euro under which the euro adoption date
and cash changeover date coincide.

Justification — See paragraph 2.1.4 of the opinion

Amendment 4

Proposed Article 1(h) of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

‘transitional period’ shall mean the period beginning at
00.00 on the euro adoption date and ending at 00.00 on
the cash changeover date;

‘transitional period’ shall mean a maximum period of
three years beginning at 00.00 on the euro adoption date
and ending at 00.00 on the cash changeover date;

Justification — See paragraphs 2.2.1-2.2.8 of the opinion

13.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 316/31

Text proposed by the Commission (1)

Amendments proposed by the ECB (2)

Amendment 5

Proposed Article 1a of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

The euro adoption date, the cash changeover date, and the
phasing-out period,
for each participating
Member State shall be as set out in the Annex.

if applicable,

Each participating Member State shall adopt the euro
in accordance with a scenario based on a transitional
period or a ‘big bang’ scenario or a ‘big bang’ scenario
combined with a phasing-out period. The euro adoption
date, the cash changeover date, and the end date of the
phasing-out period,
for each participating
Member State shall be as set out in the Annex to this
Regulation.

if applicable,

Justification — See paragraph 2.1.3 of the opinion

Amendment 6

Proposed Article 2 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

With effect from the respective euro adoption dates, the
currency of the participating Member States shall be the
euro. The currency unit shall be one euro. One euro shall
be divided into one hundred cent.

With effect from the respective euro adoption dates, the
currency of the participating Member States shall be the
euro. The currency unit shall be one euro. One euro shall
be divided into one hundred cent. The spelling of the
name of the euro shall be identical in the nominative
singular case in all the official languages of the Euro-
pean Union, taking into account the existence of
different alphabets.

Justification — See paragraphs 2.4.1-2.4.2 of the opinion

Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 974/98 (not currently subject to any amendment in the proposed regulation)

Amendment 7

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, each
participating Member State may take measures which
may be necessary in order to:
— […],
— enable the change of the unit of account of their
operating procedures from a national currency unit to
the euro unit by:
(a) markets for the regular exchange, clearing and
settlement of any instrument listed in section B of
the Annex to Council Directive 93/22/EEC of 10 May
1993 on investment services in the securities field and
of commodities; and

(b) systems for

the regular exchange, clearing and

settlement of payments.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 1, each
participating Member State may take measures which
may be necessary in order to:
— […],
— enable the change of the unit of account of their
operating procedures from a national currency unit to
the euro unit by:
(a) markets for the regular exchange, clearing and
settlement of any instrument listed in Section C of
Annex I to Directive 2004/39/EC of the Euro-
pean Parliament and of the Council of 21 April
instruments
2004 on markets
amending Council Directives 85/611/EEC and
93/6/EEC and Directive 2000/12/EC of the Euro-
pean Parliament
and
and of
repealing Council Directive 93/22/EEC and of
commodities; and

the Council

in financial

(b) systems for

the regular exchange, clearing and

settlement of payments.

Justification — See paragraph 2.5.1 of the opinion

C 316/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

13.12.2005

Text proposed by the Commission (1)

Amendments proposed by the ECB (2)

Proposed Article 9a, first paragraph, third sentence, of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

Amendment 8

The acts performed under these legal instruments shall be
performed only in the euro unit.

Without prejudice to Article 15, the acts performed
under these legal instruments shall be performed only in
the euro unit.

Justification — See paragraph 2.3.4 of the opinion

Proposed Article 10, first paragraph, of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

Amendment 9

With effect from 1 January 2002 the ECB shall put into
circulation banknotes denominated in euro. The central banks
of the participating Member States shall put into circula-
tion banknotes denominated in euro from the respective cash
changeover date.

With effect from the respective cash changeover dates,
the ECB and the national central banks of the partici-
pating Member States shall put into circulation banknotes
denominated in euro in the participating Member
States.

Justification — See paragraph 2.5.2 of the opinion

Proposed Article 11, second sentence, of Regulation (EC) No 974/98

Amendment 10

[…]

[…]

Without prejudice to Article 15 and to the provisions of
any agreement under Article 111 of the Treaty concerning
monetary matters, those coins shall be the only coins
tender in participating
which have the status of
Member States. […]

legal

Without prejudice to Article 15 and to the provisions of
any agreement under Article 111(3) of
the Treaty
concerning monetary matters, those coins shall be the only
coins which have the status of legal tender in participating
Member States. […]

Justification — See paragraph 2.5.3. of the opinion

Italics in the body of the text indicate where the ECB proposes deleting text.

(1)
(2) Bold in the body of the text indicates new text proposed by the ECB.