natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission cannot detect these errors before making the payment and has therefore put in place a control strategy and developed ex-post audits.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The corrective action taken is aimed at reducing the error rate.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Further corrective action has been initiated for FP7, in particular concerning audit certification.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission recovers any amount overpaid to the audited bene­ ficiaries.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.12.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission disagrees with the Court’s quantification of two cases, where work was performed, results of the work accepted and costs were incurred, therefore justifying a partial reimbursement.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
However the Court, based on its interpretation of ‘contractual agreement’ in these two cases, considered most of the declared costs ineligible.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
If the Commission’s assessment of the rate of error for these two cases is taken into account the overall error rate for this policy area would fall below 2 %.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
As can be seen in 1.3 of Annex 10.1, the most likely error rate for this policy group is mostly attributable to the errors found on FP6 payments.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Most of the errors concern the reimbursement by the Commission of overstated eligible costs declared by beneficiaries in their cost statements.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The errors found were due to: — inadequate or missing supporting evidence to justify the costs claimed (e.g. no invoice); — the use of budgeted figures or average costs which did not comply with the contractual requirements to use actual costs; — claiming costs incurred outside the eligibility period; — inclusion of various ineligible costs (e.g. costs incurred by a third-party) or non-existing costs; — incorrect calculation of the final grant amount by the Commission.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.14.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
38 % of the errors (5 of the 13) (all classified as other compliance issues) affected the policy area 20-Trade and were caused by the absence of documents which form part of the procurement procedures.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
This should have been detected by the Commission’s supervisory and control systems.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 10.13.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Court’s assessment is based on the audit of 80 trans­ actions, in which only five quantifiable errors were observed in payments under FP6.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Furthermore FP6 represents only 8 % of the payments (refer to table 10.2 — Main programmes of the policy group Economic and Financial Affairs).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
All findings concerning FP6 expenditure are similar to those in Chapter 7.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission is taking the necessary action to recover the amounts of funding relating to ineligible costs. — The Commission agrees that supporting evidence was not always available.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Nevertheless it considers that the errors have a financial impact lower than that considered by the Court.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Even though some costs were not fully supported by formal documents, the work had been carried out and there was proof of payment. — The Commission agrees with this finding, which is related to the specific risk mentioned by the Court in paragraph 10.11.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission has put in place a comprehensive ex-post control strategy aiming at reducing significantly the error rate. — The Commission agrees with this finding, which is related to the specific risk mentioned by the Court in paragraph 10.11.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission has put in place a comprehensive ex-post control strategy aiming at reducing significantly the error rate. — In two of the projects where errors were observed, the beneficiaries of the EU grant were SMEs with a complex legal structure.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Although no employment contracts were available, evidence was produced of a contractual relationship between the beneficiary and the people carrying out the work. — The control measures in place at the Commission are designed to avoid this type of situation.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission accepts the Court’s findings, but would draw attention to the fact that most of the errors noted by the Court relate to procurement procedures which took place in 2004 or 2005.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Since then control procedures have been significantly tightened up and the Commission would not expect such errors to recur.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
A recent audit on procurement procedures in DG TRADE carried out by the IAC confirmed this positive assessment.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
200 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2009 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS Effectiveness of systems 10.15.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission established various controls in order to mitigate the risk of irregular payments being made.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The main ones are: — ex-ante desk checks on payment requests; — audit certification of project cost statements; and — ex-post controls following interim or final payments carried out on a sample of beneficiaries.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.16.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The results of the Court’s assessment of the effec­ tiveness of the supervisory and control systems are summarised in Annex 10.1, Part 2.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The assessment focused on three policy areas which accounts for almost all of the sampled payments in 2008.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Ex-ante desk checks on payment requests 10.17.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The purpose of the ex-ante desk checks is to verify whether the operation is legal, regular and compliant with the principle of sound financial management.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
They also aim to ensure that all tasks were carried out correctly and in conformity with the requirements of the contract or the grant agreement, before the payment was made.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.18.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
TheCourtassessedthefinancialcircuitsattheDirec­ torates-General charged with the implementation of the policy areas 01-Economic and Financial Affairs, 02-Enterprise and 20-Trade (6).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The consistent application of the financial circuit and the adequacy of the ex-ante desk checks were examined for each payment selected for these three DGs in the sample of the 80 payments mentioned in paragraph 10.7.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The additional sample of 120 payments was used to assess the effectiveness of the operation of the ex-ante controls in three programmes managed by DG Enterprise and Industry (7) and in 30 payments made by DG Trade. _____________ (6) The audit was confined to the two Directorates-General of the largest policy areas and to one of the small policy areas.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
(7) The three programmes managed by DG Enterprise and Industry were grants paid under FP6, the enterprise networks financed under MAP and grants paid for standardisation and approximation THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES of legislation.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
EN The Commission considers that the ex-ante checks on payments are effective.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The weaknesses observed by the Court, concerning the ticking of boxes in checklists have no significant impact on the effectiveness of the supervisory and control systems (see also paragraph 10.19). 10.16.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Court found that in the case of the 02-Enterprise policy area, checklists and calculation sheets were used aiming, amongst other things to identify and prevent errors on cost statements.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
However, the following weaknesses were noted: — sufficient details regarding the controls carried out by the ex-ante verification agents were not always provided (8); THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 10.19.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission is convinced that the control systems in place are cost-efficient and proportional and that the checklists are an essential tool for processing transactions.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The weaknesses noted do not have any implications for consistent application of the financial circuit and the adequacy of the ex-ante desk checks.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The primary purpose of the checklists is to ensure that all the necessary checks are carried out. — All controls are proportionate and relevant to the legality and regularity of the transaction.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The assessment of the Court applies to: (i) checklists where the second verification agent just signed and did not tick individual boxes and (ii) to five instances where the Court considered boxes had been ticked erroneously.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission does not consider any of these findings to have significant impact on the effectiveness of the supervisory and control systems.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
More specifically: (i) The design of checklists is the responsibility of the auth­ orising officer by delegation.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The signature of the verification agent confirms that the controls have been carried out.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Estab­ lishing checklists on which the controls are confirmed by ticks or a signature has no impact on the effectiveness of the ex-ante controls. (ii) In some cases boxes on checklists might not have been ticked correctly but there is no evidence that — beyond this formality with no financial impact — the checks were not performed correctly.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Further to all this, a reminder was made to all staff participating in workflows to ensure that all checklists are comprehensibly filled after checks have been made. — The audit certificates for each partner bound by the contract are already included in the file for ex-ante verification.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The checklist used to review the audit certificate summarises the verifications carried out.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Establishment of checklists corresponding to the level of risk involved is the responsibility of the authorising officer by delegation.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission does not consider it cost-effective to have a separate checklist for each individual audit certificate. — the checklist used to review the external audit certificates submitted by the beneficiaries did not include an overview of the work performed on each certificate examined; and _____________ (8) For instance, in the case of the standardisation and approximation of legislation payments, the checklist used did not provide a trace of the work performed by the ex-ante verification agent and in the case of FP6 payments, checks were indicated as performed, although on the basis of the available documentation, they could not have been carried out.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
EN 202 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2009 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS — two instances of insufficient ex-ante controls exercised over the transfer of funds to an EU Agency which led to financial corrections at a later stage.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.20.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
TheCourtalsonotedthat30%ofthepayments made under two programmes (9) were not made within the payment deadline specified in the Implementing Rules.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
In the case of the third programme examined no delays were noted.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.21.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Asregardsthegrantsandpaymentsexecutedfor policy areas 01-Economic and Financial Affairs and 20-Trade, no significant weaknesses were found in the operation of the ex-ante desk checks.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Audit certification of project cost statements 10.22.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Article 180 of the Implementing Rules (10), requires a certificate to be issued by an approved auditor for cost statements above a certain threshold, confirming the accuracy, occurrence and eligibility of the declared costs.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
These audit certificates are a key control for the Commission in projects financed under the policy area 02-Enterprise. _____________ (9) The two programmes are the FP6 and the standardisation and approximation of legislation.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
(10) Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implemen­ tation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities, as amended (OJ L 357, 31.12.2002, p.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
1).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES — The control measures in place at the Commission are designed to avoid this type of situation to the greatest possible extent.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
In one of the two instances the error was detected immediately after payment, which demonstrates that sufficient controls are already in place to ensure an adequate control environment.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Corrective action had been taken before the Court started to analyse the file.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
There was no financial risk, as these were pre-financing payments and as EU agencies reimburse, year by year, any amounts received in excess of their expenditure.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission has significantly reduced payment delays and continues working towards reducing late payments even more.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The payments in the sample to which the Court refers were made by Enterprise and Industry DG, which has achieved again a marked improvement in the first half of 2009 (only 6 % of payments delayed) compared with the results of 2008 (13 % delayed) and 2007 (34 % delayed).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
This achievement was possible only after a wide range of measures were put in place to include clearer and fully revised procedures, efficient ex-ante controls and simplified workflows.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
In 71 % of the cases (5 out of 7) for which an unqualified opinion had been issued by the approved auditor, the Court detected quan­ tifiable errors (11).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
This finding is consistent with the previous year’s results(12) and with the results of Chapter 7, and shows that audit certificates are only partially reliable.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Ex-post controls 10.24.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Primarilyduetothehighnumberofpayments,the Directorates-General in charge of the implementation of the policy areas 01-Economic and Financial Affairs and 02-Enterprise have established ex-post control functions.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.25.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Regardingpolicyarea01-EconomicandFinancial Affairs, the Court found that no work programme for ex-post controls had been established for 2008.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Most of the resources used for ex-post controls were dedicated to only one specific, but nonetheless important, control and consequently there is a backlog of pending controls.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 10.23.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission shares the Court’s concern about the correctness of the FP6 audit certificates which do not fully provide the additional assurance initially expected regarding the legality and regularity of cost declarations.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
It is, however, clear that this instrument has made a major contribution to prevention and early correction of errors, resulting in a significant decrease in the error rates in FP6 compared with FP5.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.24.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
As far as Directorate-General in charge of the implemen­ tation of the policy area 02-Enterprise is concerned, ex post control functions were put in place because they are a necessary element of the integrated internal control framework if a significant part of expenditure is based on grants in the research domain.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Part of the backlog was cleared in 2008 and the rest should be cleared during 2009.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
A revised work programme endorsed by the Internal Control Management Group of DG ECFIN in July 2007 set out the priorities ahead, the first of which were the checks on the additionality requirements in the SME Guarantee Facility involving large amounts.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
This revised work programme stressed the uncertainties regarding the timeframe of the controls.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
At the end of 2007, these top-priority checks were still pending for various reasons relating to the complexity of the issues at stake.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Consequently, as the priorities set in July 2007 were still valid, the agreed strategy was to complete the 2007 programme.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Concerning the backlog, the specific control referred to by the Court was extremely important and has led to significant improvements in the integrated control structure in place for the successor programme.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Additional control work was carried out concerning the Business and Consumers Surveys and the PRINCE Programme. _____________ (11) The errors related to the incorrect calculation of eligible costs (e.g. over declared personnel costs) and ineligible costs (e.g. expenditure not supported by invoices).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
These errors should have been identified by the approved auditors.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
(12) See Annual Report concerning the financial year 2007, paragraphs 10.27 to 10.30 (OJ C 286, 10.11.2008).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
EN 204 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2009 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS 10.26. Regardingpolicyarea02-Enterprise,thecornerstone of the supervisory and control system for research expenditure is its programme of ex-post (i.e. after reimbursement) financial audits at beneficiaries.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The audits are performed by Commission auditors and by external audit firms under the supervision of the Commission.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The purpose of ex-post audits is to detect and correct errors which have not been prevented or detected by earlier controls.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Court reports on the ex-post audits on projects financed under FP6 in paragraphs 7.28 to 7.34 of Chapter 7.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Conclusions and recommendations Conclusions 10.27.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Based on its audit work, the Court concludes that, except for the payments made under the Sixth Framework Programme for research and technological development (FP6) (13), the payments for the year ended 31 December 2008 for policy group Economic and Financial Affairs were free from material error.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.28.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
While two were assessed as effective, one was assessed as only partially effective (14) in ensuring the legality and regu­ larity of payments.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Recommendations 10.29.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
TheCommissionshouldintensifyitsactionswith the aim of reducing the errors arising as a result of the declaration of ineligible costs in the beneficiaries’ cost statement under the Sixth and Seventh Framework Programmes for research and technological development. _____________ (13) The payments of the Sixth Framework Programme for research and technological development account for almost 8 % of the policy group’s total operational expenditure.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
(14) This is mostly due to the supervisory and control systems of the Sixth Framework Programme for research and technological devel­ opment.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES Because FP6 represents only 8 % of the payments (refer to table 10.2 Main programmes of the policy group Economic and Financial Affairs) the Commission considers that the overall trans­ action error rate in this policy area, which taken as a whole, is free of material error.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
As far as FP6 payments are concerned the findings and conclusions of the Court in this chapter are similar to those in Chapter 7.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission considers that the systems of control in place are adequate and that the checklists contribute to the essential control in the processing of transactions.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The weaknesses noted do not have an implication on the consistent application of the financial circuit and the adequacy of the ex-ante desk checks.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.29.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The Commission will check which further action can be taken to reduce errors, taking into account cost-benefit considerations.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
In general, the Commission agrees on the general need for more in depth action and asks the legislator to support the adaptations to the legal basis that would be necessary in this respect for preparation of the 8th Framework Programme.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
FP7 has brought about a number of significant simplifications already and the Commission is continuing to work on simplification of the cost reimbursement system. 10.27.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
EN 10.11.2009 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 205 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS 10.30. Two of the main reasons for errors in cost statements are: a) the persistent failure of the beneficiaries to understand the eligibility rules and b) the fact that these rules are not strictly applied.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
In this respect, the Commission should: — increase its information efforts to raise the beneficiaries’ awareness of the eligibility rules; and — actively disseminate to the certifying auditors a typology of most frequent errors in order to raise their awareness and improve the reliance that can be placed on the audit certificates.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.31.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Inaddition,theCommissionshouldfurtherimprove the application of its supervisory and control systems, in particular by further enhancing the quality of its ex-ante procedures.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
RESULTS OF THE AUDIT OF THE GUARANTEE FUND FOR EXTERNAL ACTIONS 10.32.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
ThepurposeoftheGuaranteeFundforExternal Actions (15) (the Fund), which guarantees loans to third countries, is to reimburse the Community’s creditors (16) in the event of a beneficiary’s defaulting on a loan and to avoid direct calls on the Community budget.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The adminis­ trative management of the Fund is carried out by the Direc­ torate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN) while the European Investment Bank (EIB) is responsible for its treasury management. _____________ (15) Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2728/94 of 31 October 1994 establishing a Guarantee Fund for external actions (OJ L 293, 12.11.1994, p.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
1), as last amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 89/2007 (OJ L 22, 31.1.2007, p.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
(16) Principally the EIB, but also Euratom external lending and EC macro financial assistance (MFA) loans to third countries. THE COMMISSION’S REPLIES 10.30.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
EN 206 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanUnion 10.11.2009 THE COURT’S OBSERVATIONS 10.33.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
At 31 December 2008, the Fund’s total resources were 1 091 million euro, compared with 1 152 million euro at 31 December 2007.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The decrease in the Fund’s total resources is mainly due to the Fund’s repayment of 126 million euro to the Community budget.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The repayment was the result of the value of the Fund at 31 December 2006 being more than the target amount (17).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
No guarantee calls were made to the Fund in the year under review.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.34.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The return on the Fund’s portfolio in 2008 amounted to 6,4 %, compared with a benchmark return of 7,5 %.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
The EIB attributes this relative underperformance of 1,1% to the fact that the financial instruments included in the benchmark were less affected by the financial crisis.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.35.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
TheCourtidentifiedweaknessesinthecontrols performed by DG ECFIN on the investment restrictions set by the management agreement.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
However, in the cases reviewed there was no impact on the results of the compliance controls.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
10.36.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Overall, the Court considers that the Guarantee Fund was managed during 2008 in a satisfactory manner and that appropriate actions have been taken to monitor the impact of the financial crisis on the Fund’s portfolio.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
RESULTS OF THE AUDIT OF THE ECSC IN LIQUIDATION 10.37.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
After the expiry of the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community on 23 July 2002, the assets and liabilities of the ECSC were transferred to the European Community (18).
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Their net worth, referred to as the European Coal and Steel Community in Liquidation (ECSC i.L.), is allocated to research in the coal and steel industry. _____________ (17) The target amount is set at 9 % of the outstanding loans to third countries granted or guaranteed by the Community plus unpaid interest due.
BG 10.11.2009 г. 
Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 89/2007 states that any surplus between the target amount and the value of the Fund’s net assets in year n-1 shall be paid to the general budget of the European Union in year ‘n+1’.