Source: EURLEX
Language: en
Format: md

|  |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 29.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 36/111 |

---

P7\_TA(2013)0094

Statute for a European mutual society

European Parliament resolution of 14 March 2013 with recommendations to the Commission on the Statute for a European mutual society (2012/2039(INL))

(2016/C 036/17)

The European Parliament,

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to Article 225 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to the Commission proposal for a Council Regulation on the Statute for a European mutual society (COM(1991)0273) and the amended proposal (COM(1993)0252), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to the Commission communication of 27 September 2005 on the outcome of the screening of legislative proposals pending before the Legislator (COM(2005)0462), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to the Commission communication of 13 April 2011 entitled ‘Single Market Act — Twelve levers to boost growth and strengthen confidence — Working together to create new growth’ (COM(2011)0206), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to the Commission communication of 25 October 2011 entitled ‘Social Business Initiative — Creating a favourable climate for social enterprises, key stakeholders in the social economy and innovation’ (COM(2011)0682), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to its resolution of 16 May 2006 on the outcome of the screening of legislative proposals pending before the Legislator[(1)](#ntr1-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0001), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to its resolution of 4 July 2006 on recent developments and prospects in relation to company law[(2)](#ntr2-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0002), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to its resolution of 19 February 2009 on Social Economy[(3)](#ntr3-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0003), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to its resolution of 23 November 2010 on civil law, commercial law, family law and private international law aspects of the Action Plan Implementing the Stockholm Programme[(4)](#ntr4-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0004), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to its declaration of 10 March 2011 on establishing European statutes for mutual societies, associations and foundations[(5)](#ntr5-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0005), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to its resolution of 14 June 2012 on the future of European company law[(6)](#ntr6-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0006), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to the European Added Value Assessment on a statute for European mutual societies, presented by the European Added Value Unit to the Committee on Legal Affairs on 21 January 2013[(7)](#ntr7-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0007), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to Rules 42 and 48 of its Rules of Procedure, |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| — | having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A7-0018/2013), |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| A. | whereas the Commission withdrew its draft proposal for a Regulation on the Statute for a European mutual society in March 2006; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| B. | whereas a Regulation on the Statute for a European Cooperative Society (SCE)[(8)](#ntr8-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0008) was adopted in 2003 and whereas on 8 February 2012 the Commission presented a proposal for a Council Regulation on the Statute for a European Foundation (FE); |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| C. | whereas the study commissioned by Parliament's Committee on Employment and Social Affairs in 2011 gave a clear presentation of the social, political and economic implications of an intervention by the Union in the field of mutual societies; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| D. | whereas in recent years Parliament has adopted several resolutions calling for the adoption of a regulation on the statute for a European mutual society; whereas it is regrettable that the Commission, having withdrawn its proposal for a statute for a European mutual society in 2006, has not brought forward any new proposals which would give mutual societies a suitable legal instrument to facilitate their cross-border activities; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| E. | whereas the Commission has undertaken to review some of the previous proposals on the statute for a European mutual society and to reconsider the need for legislative intervention with a view to a comprehensive impact assessment; whereas Parliament welcomes the study which the Commission has commissioned in this context on the current situation and prospects of mutual societies in the Union, which explores the difficulties confronting mutual societies on account of the lack of existing legal frameworks in certain Member States and the problems concerning the creation of new mutual societies due to capital requirements and the lack of solutions for grouping; whereas the Commission should propose adequate solutions to those problems in order to better recognise the contribution made by mutual societies to the social economy, including a statute; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| F. | whereas the Commission has laudably recognised the need for a statute and is committed to delivering better legislation for social economy organisations (including mutual societies), while stressing that mutual societies must be able to operate across borders as a contribution to the European effort to ‘boost growth and strengthen confidence’ in the European Economic Area[(9)](#ntr9-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0009); |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| G. | whereas it is to be hoped, therefore, that this European statute will be ambitious and innovative, with a view to protecting workers and their families when they move within the Union; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| H. | whereas mutual societies are voluntary groups of natural or legal persons whose purpose is to meet the needs of their members rather than to achieve a return on investment; whereas they operate according to the principles of voluntary and open membership and solidarity between members, and are managed according to democratic principles (such as the one member/one vote principle for mutual societies composed of individual persons), thereby contributing to responsible and sustainable management; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| I. | whereas, due to their diversity, mutual societies in Europe exist within a very diverse framework, as regards the services provided by them, or their dimension, or their mission, or their geographical impact; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| J. | whereas two main types of mutual societies exist in Europe, namely ‘mutual benefit’ (or ‘health providence’) societies and ‘mutual insurance’ societies; whereas ‘mutual benefit’ societies provide welfare coverage which is supplementary to, complementary to or integrated into statutory social protection systems; whereas ‘mutual insurance’ societies can cover all types of property and life risks, and whereas in some Member States mutual societies can even provide services in other fields, such as housing or credit; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| K. | whereas, despite their diversity, mutual societies organise services and provisions in the interest of their members on a basis of solidarity and in a collectively financed manner; whereas they organise themselves democratically and use the surplus from their activities for the benefit of their members; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| L. | whereas the Union, with the objective of ensuring equal terms of competition and of contributing to its economic development, should provide mutual societies, which are a form of organisation recognised in most Member States, with adequate legal instruments capable of facilitating the development of their cross-border activities and allowing them to benefit from the internal market; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| M. | whereas mutual societies play a major role in the Union's economy by providing health care, social services and affordable insurance services to more than 160 million European citizens; whereas they represent more than EUR 180 billion in insurance premiums and employ over 350 000 people; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| N. | whereas mutual societies facilitate access to care and social inclusion and participate fully in the provision of services of general interest within the Union; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| O. | whereas in 2010 some 12,3 million European citizens, or 2,5 % of the Union’s active population, were working in another Member State; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| P. | whereas in some Member States statutory health insurance funds are prohibited from operating as private-sector companies; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Q. | whereas mutual societies represent 25 % of the insurance market and 70 % of the total number of undertakings in the industry; whereas mutual societies cannot continue to be forgotten by the single market[(10)](#ntr10-C_2016036EN.01011101-E0010) and should be given a European statute to place them on an equal footing with other forms of undertaking in the Union; whereas the diversity of forms of entrepreneurship is an asset that should be fully recognised and encouraged; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| R. | whereas mutual societies play or should play an important role in the Member States' economies, given that they contribute to the Union's strategic objectives — confirmed by demographic trends — of ensuring inclusive growth with access to basic resources, to social rights and services for all, and to adequate health and long-term care, on the basis of solidarity, affordability, non-discrimination and non-exclusion and the guarantee that the need of elderly persons for additional care will not lead them into poverty and financial dependency; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| S. | whereas mutual societies are particularly active in the areas of health, long-term care, pensions and social services including the needs of an ageing population; whereas the involvement of mutual societies as major stakeholders is crucial for the long-lasting future of social protection, given that population ageing currently poses major challenges in Europe, placing a particular strain on national budget balances and risking putting public expenditure on social protection under pressure; and whereas mutual societies, whilst able to play an important role in proposing socially responsible pension schemes in the private sector, cannot replace a strong first pillar of the pension system; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| T. | whereas the private sector is called upon to contribute in finding solutions to the challenges of the reform of the Union's welfare systems and the social economy; whereas, more specifically, mutual societies have a natural role to play as stakeholders in the attainment of this goal; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| U. | whereas mutual societies, with their core values of solidarity, democratic governance and an absence of shareholders, operate for the benefit of their members and hence, by their nature, in a socially responsible way; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| V. | whereas the values of mutual societies correspond to the fundamental principles of the European social model; whereas, as well as being based on values of solidarity, mutual societies are major operators in the social market economy of the Union and should be given greater recognition, particularly by establishing a European statute; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| W. | whereas the increase in expenditure on health care and pensions could have significant consequences for the continuity and cover of the current social protection schemes; whereas mutual societies promote key values of the welfare state such as solidarity, non-discrimination, equal access and high quality of social services in the private sector; whereas the enhancement of mutual societies’ contribution to the European social market economy should not take place at the expense of Member States’ action on social protection; whereas, however, that voluntary social protection must not replace statutory social security; whereas the diversity of social protection systems, some of them borne fully by the state, some by the mutual societies and some on a shared basis between the two, should be respected; whereas the statute for a European mutual society is essential but must not be used to make up for Member States’ deficiencies in terms of social protection; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| X. | whereas it is to be hoped that it will be made easier for all workers, in particular workers in small businesses, to join a mutual society, and that they will be encouraged to do so; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Y. | whereas it is to be hoped that, in that case, a worker’s membership of a system of mutual societies will be encouraged by exemptions from social security contributions or by tax relief; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Z. | whereas mutual societies, given the challenges which governments face in relation to social protection, could help to provide an affordable safety net for those at risk; whereas mutual societies offer additional and affordable opportunities for Union citizens; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Aa. | whereas certain mutual societies have a very strong voluntary component and whereas this volunteer ethos must be preserved and facilitated; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ab. | whereas in some Member States, alongside insurance services, mutual societies provide low- or zero-interest loan services to their members; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ac. | whereas the added value of mutual societies compared to their commercially driven counterparts will be even stronger at the Union level, taking into account their economic weight and the positive impact of a Union-wide playing field; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ad. | whereas the social economy — and mutual societies in particular — plays an essential role in the Union economy, by combining profitability with solidarity, creating high-quality jobs and local jobs, strengthening social, economic and regional cohesion, generating social capital and promoting active citizenship, solidarity-based social welfare and a type of economy with democratic values which puts people first and supports sustainable development and social, environmental and technological innovation; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ae. | whereas mutual societies have a role to play in meeting these challenges alongside the private sector and must, in order to do so, be able to compete on equal terms with other forms of undertaking in the Union; whereas the existing European statutes, such as those for the European cooperative (SCE) or the European company (SE), are not suitable for mutual societies due to the differences between their governance models; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Af. | whereas the gap in Union legislation is regrettable, as mutual societies are not specifically mentioned in the treaties and respect for their business models is not covered by any secondary legislation, which refers only to public and private enterprises, thereby undermining the status of mutual societies, their development and the establishment of cross-border groups; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ag. | whereas the European statute for a mutual society is essential for achieving better integration in the single market, for enhancing awareness of the specific qualities of mutual societies and for enabling them to make a greater contribution to achieving the growth and employment objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy; whereas a European statute would also facilitate the mobility of European citizens by enabling mutual societies to provide services in several Member States and thus create greater continuity and coherence in the single market; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ah. | whereas the European statute for mutual societies would provide a way of promoting the mutualist model throughout an enlarged Union, especially in the new Member States, where it is not covered by some legal systems; whereas a Union regulation, which would naturally be applicable throughout the whole of the Union, would have the dual advantage of providing those countries with a European reference statute and of contributing to the status and public profile of this kind of undertaking; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ai. | whereas the statute could provide opportunities for mutual societies to create economies of scale in order to maintain competitiveness in the future and would increase recognition of the value of mutual societies within Union policy making; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Aj. | whereas mutual societies are solid and sustainable organisations which have well withstood the financial crisis in all economies and have contributed to a more resistant, diversified market, particularly in the area of insurance and social protection; whereas mutual societies are particularly active in the area of population ageing and social needs; whereas the involvement of mutual societies in the area of pensions offers additional opportunities for Union citizens and whereas they have a role to play in preserving the European social model; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ak. | whereas mutual societies have no shares but are owned jointly, their surpluses being reinvested rather than distributed to the members; whereas this has helped mutual societies to resist the crisis better than other private-sector entities; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Al. | whereas a European statute would be a voluntary tool additional to existing national legal provisions applying to mutual societies, and would thus not affect the already existing statutes but would rather be a ‘28th’ system making it easier for mutual societies to engage in cross-border activities; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Am. | whereas the Commission should take into account the specific characteristics of mutual societies so as to ensure a level playing field, with a view to avoiding additional discrimination and ensuring that any new legislation is proportionate, as well as guaranteeing a fair, competitive and sustainable market; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| An. | whereas the plea for diversification in the insurance sector is growing, thus emphasising the role that mutual societies can play compared to their stock-holding counterparts in making the sector as a whole more competitive, less risky and more resilient to changing financial and economic circumstances; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ao. | whereas mutual societies are subject to intense and growing competition, especially in the insurance sector, and whereas some of them are shifting towards demutualisation and financialisation; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ap. | whereas in at least six Member States of the Union and the European Economic Area, it is legally impossible to create a mutual-type organisation; whereas this creates market distortions; whereas a European statute could remedy this and could inspire the creation of mutual societies in those Member States; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Aq. | whereas mutual societies lack the necessary legal instruments to facilitate their development and their cross-border activities within the internal market; whereas, given the availability of European statutes for other corporate forms, mutual societies are still at a disadvantage; whereas, in the absence of a European statute, mutual societies are often obliged to make use of inadequate legal instruments for their cross-border activities, leading to their demutualisation. |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Ar. | whereas national laws on mutual societies vary considerably within the Union and whereas the European statute could allow the creation of transnational mutual societies, thereby strengthening the European social protection model; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| As. | whereas mutual societies themselves should spread the idea of mutuality as their core value, and convince future members that this is a cost-effective and sustainable alternative to commercial service providers; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| At. | whereas mutual societies must be prevented from taking steps, in order to remain competitive, to become lookalikes of their commercial counterparts, for instance by introducing risk selection or stricter criteria for membership, or even by issuing shares to increase their solvency margins; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Au. | whereas mutual societies, especially medium-sized ones, might be forced to become part of larger organisations, even joint-stock companies (by way of demutualisation), thereby increasing the distance between the organisation concerned and the policyholders; |

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Av. | whereas the lack of a statute continues to impede cross-border cooperation and mergers of mutual societies; |

|  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | 1. | In the light of the outcome of the recent study on the situation of mutual societies in the Union, and bearing in mind the clear preference expressed on several occasions by Parliament for a statute for a European mutual society, requests the Commission swiftly to submit, following the detailed recommendations set out in the Annex hereto, on the basis of Article 352 or, possibly, Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, one or more proposals allowing mutual societies to act on a European and cross-border scale; |

|  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | 2. | Confirms that the recommendations respect fundamental rights and the principle of subsidiarity; |

|  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | 3. | Considers that the financial implications of the requested proposal should be covered by appropriate budget allocations; |

|  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- |
|  | 4. | Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the accompanying detailed recommendations to the Commission and the Council. |

---

[Top](#document1)