COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations (recast)
Date: 2021-11-25
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: EU financing, European legal status, European party, foundation, freedom of association, freedom of expression, party financing

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 25.11.2021  SWD(2021) 360 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council  on the statute and funding of European political parties and European political foundations (recast) {COM(2021) 734 final} - {SEC(2021) 577 final} - {SWD(2021) 359 final}  
 
 
Executive Summary Sheet  

Impact assessment on the revision of Regulation 1141/2014 on the statute and funding of European 
political parties and foundations.   

A. Need for action 

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?  

European political parties are transnational party alliances whose objective is to ‘contribute to forming 
European political awareness and express the will of citizens in the Union’ (Article 10(4) TEU). Their 
statute and funding is governed by Regulation 1141/2014. While the Regulation has been amended twice 
ahead of the 2019 European elections, there is room for improvement of:   

funding provisions 

- 
-  EU values, democracy and transparency 
- 
enforcement and administrative burden. 

What should be achieved? 

The revision’s main objectives are as follows: 

1.  Improve the legislative framework that enables European political parties and foundations to fulfil 
their mission in forming European political  awareness by ensuring the democratic principles laid 
down in Article 10 TEU. 

2.  Ensure European political parties and foundations’ higher level of compliance with the EU values 

enshrined in Article 2 TEU. 

3.  Better ensure European political parties and foundations’ sound financial management, ensure the 

Regulation’s appropriate enforcement and reduce the level of administrative burden. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level (subsidiarity)?  

The legal basis of the initiative is Article 224 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 
(TFEU) which provides that ‘the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the 
ordinary legislative procedure, shall lay down the regulations governing political parties at European level 
referred to in Article 10(4) of the Treaty on European Union and in particular the rules regarding their 
funding’. 

Since the Treaty provides for the establishment of the rules governing European political parties by way of 
a regulation, any change to the rules currently in place must be established at EU level in application of 
Article 224 TFEU. 

B. Solutions 

What are the various options to achieve the objectives? Is there a preferred option or not? If not, 
why? 

The baseline scenario (option 1) is to maintain the status quo and not revise Regulation 1141/2014 as last 
amended by Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2019/493. However, this policy option leaves the problems 
identified above unresolved and may not be fit for future developments. 

Option 2 focuses on the revision of the funding provisions in the Regulation. This option is strictly aligned 

1 

 
with the commitment President von der Leyen made in her political guidelines to put forward legislative 
proposals under the European Democracy action plan to ensure greater transparency on paid political 
advertising and clearer rules on the financing of European political parties1. This option would improve 
the financial viability of European political parties and foundations, create additional safeguards against 
foreign interference through donations and allow European political parties and foundations to engage in 
more meaningful relations with likeminded member parties from non-EU countries. 

Option 3 goes beyond the mere revision of the funding provisions to also include other parts of the text of 
the Regulation that, according to the Commission’s analysis and the input received from stakeholders, 
could benefit from targeted improvement. In addition to revising the funding provisions, this option 
includes reducing the administrative burden, strengthening enforcement and the sanctions regime, 
operationalising the verification mechanism for EU values and promoting gender equality. 

The impact assessment proposes going with option 3, as this option serves best the general objectives of 
the revision. 

What are different stakeholders' views? Who supports which option?  

European political parties, foundations, the Authority for European political parties and foundations and 
the European Parliament’s Authorising Officer agreed that Regulation 1141/2014 provided a useful legal 
framework for their activities and that the system created was not in need of an overhaul. During the 
informal consultations, they did, however, inform the Commission of a number of shortcomings and 
loopholes. 

These observations were confirmed in the draft report of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the 
European Parliament (AFCO). 

The Commission also organised an open public consultation between 30 March 2021 and 22 June 2021. 
Among the respondents were EU citizens, NGOs, Member States, a research organisation, a private 
company and other organisations. While the majority of the respondents found Regulation 1141/2014 
either useful or very useful, they considered that European political parties lacked visibility and were not 
equipped to fulfil their constitutional mission. 

In addition, the Commission also drew on the feedback received from the open public consultation on the 
European Democracy action plan (between 15 July 2020 and 15 September 2020) that showed broad 
support to the scope of the revision of Regulation 1141/2014, with a special regard to more transparency 
on financing and the affiliation between the national and European level.   

The Commission also engaged in a wide-ranging outreach exercise with the co-legislators, notably 
through the Member States’ representatives in the Council Working Party on General Affairs and AFCO 
Members and political groups’ coordinators in the Parliament.  

At these informal and formal consultations, stakeholders expressed their support to revise the legislation 
through targeted amendments to address all the problems that had been identified.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?                                     

Option 3 is the preferred option, as it tackles all the problems identified in a comprehensive manner and 

1 https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/political-guidelines-next-commission_en_0.pdf  

2 

 
                                                           
ensures maximum positive impact on all stakeholder groups. The measures envisaged under this proposed 
policy option would serve best the general objectives of the revision. It includes a combination of 
measures aimed at addressing the remaining loopholes in the funding provisions, promoting EU values, 
democracy and transparency, and strengthening enforcement and alleviating the administrative burden, 
thus helping the European political parties and foundations to fulfil their constitutional mission.  

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?  

Some measures aimed at consolidating the financial reporting system for European political parties and 
foundations could become more complex to integrate. This initial administrative burden would, however, 
be offset by the elimination of the double accounting system currently in the Regulation. 

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness?  

No significant impact. Due to the specific nature of the Regulation, namely that it has direct impact on 20 
organisations (10 European political parties and their 10 affiliated European political foundations), the 
Authority for European political parties and European political foundations and the Authorising Officer of 
the European Parliament, the policy options will have negligible environmental, economic and social 
impacts.  

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?  

Ditto. See above.  

Will there be other significant impacts?  

The impact assessment focuses on the options’ impacts in the area of fundamental rights and democracy, 
namely a stronger role for the European political parties and foundations, helping to create a European 
democratic space. At the same time, the European political parties and foundations would be subject to 
sounder financial management and increased transparency, which would ultimately benefit EU voters and 
allow them to make a better informed choice before the European elections.   

Proportionality?  

The proposal is proportionate, as it does not entail a complete overhaul of the system, but only targets the 
remaining loopholes, following the two previous revisions of this Regulation, as identified by the main 
stakeholders.  

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed?  

Article  38  of  the  Regulation  contains  a  revision  clause  stipulating  that  every  5  years  the  European 
Parliament has to publish a report on the application of this Regulation, after consulting the Authority for 
the European political parties and foundations. This report must indicate, where appropriate, any possible 
amendments that are to be made to the statute and funding systems. 
At the latest 6 months after publication of the Parliament’s report, the Commission must present its own 
report on this Regulation’s  application.  If appropriate, this report could  be accompanied by  a legislative 
proposal for further amendment of the Regulation. 

3