LeX-Ray

The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions entitled "The CAP towards 2020: Meeting the food, natural resources and territorial challenges of the future" examined potential challenges, objectives and orientations for the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) after 2013. In the light of the debate on that Communication, the CAP should be reformed with effect from 1 January 2014. That reform should cover all the main instruments of the CAP, including Council FCAP2R2 ( 2 ) . Experience derived from implementing that Regulation shows that certain elements of the financing and monitoring mechanism need to be adjusted. In view of the scope of the reform, it is appropriate to repeal FCAP2R2 and to replace it with a new text. The reform should also, as far as possible, harmonise, streamline and simplify its provisions.

In order to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of this Regulation, the power to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the accreditation of the paying agencies and coordinating bodies, the obligations of the paying agencies in relation to public intervention, as well as the rules on the content of the management and control responsibilities of those agencies, the measures to be financed by the general budget of the European Union (the Union's budget) under public intervention and the valuation of the operations in connection with public intervention. That empowerment should also cover derogations from the ineligibility of payments made by the paying agencies to the beneficiaries before the earliest or the latest possible date of payment and the compensation between expenditure and revenues under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD). In addition, that empowerment should cover the methods applicable to the commitments and the payment of the amounts if the Union's budget has not been adopted by the beginning of the financial year or if the total amount of the commitments scheduled exceeds the threshold laid down in Article 170(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 3 ) . Furthermore, that empowerment should cover the deferral of monthly payments by the Commission to Member States with regard to expenditure under the EAGF and the conditions governing the reduction or suspension by the Commission of interim payments to Member States under the EAFRD. That empowerment should additionally cover the suspension of monthly payments or interim payments for which the relevant statistical information has not been sent in time, the specific obligations to be complied with by Member States with regard to checks, the criteria and methodology for applying corrections in the context of the conformity clearance procedure and the recovery of debts. Moreover, that empowerment should cover requirements with respect to customs procedures, the withdrawals of aid and penalties in the case of non-compliance with the eligibility conditions and commitments or other obligations resulting from the application of sectoral agricultural legislation. Likewise, that empowerment should cover market measures for which the Commission may suspend monthly payments, rules on securities, on the functioning of the integrated administration and control system as well as the measures excluded from the scrutiny of transactions. Similarly, that empowerment should cover the modification of the sum of the receipts or payments below which the commercial document of undertakings should normally not be scrutinised pursuant to this Regulation, the penalties applied under cross-compliance, the control requirements in the wine sector and the rules on maintenance of permanent pasture. Lastly, that empowerment should cover the rules on the operative event and the exchange rate to be used by the Member States not using the euro, measures to safeguard the application of Union law if exceptional monetary practices related to national currency are likely to jeopardise it, in respect of the content of the common monitoring and evaluation framework of the measures adopted under the CAP and in respect of transitional measures. It is of particular importance that the Commission carry out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and Council.

The CAP consists of various measures, some of which relate to rural development. It is important to provide financing for those measures in order to contribute to the achievement of the objectives of the CAP. Since those measures have certain elements in common, but do also differ in a number of respects, the provisions on their financing should be dealt with in the same set of provisions. Where necessary those provisions should allow for different treatment. FCAP2R2 created two European agricultural funds, namely the EAGF, and the EAFRD (the "Funds"). Those Funds should be maintained.

Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 and the provisions adopted pursuant to it should apply to the measures set out in this Regulation. In particular, this Regulation lays down provisions related to the shared management with Member States based on the principles of sound financial management, transparency and non-discrimination, as well as provisions on the function of accredited bodies, the budgetary principles, provisions which should be respected in the framework of this Regulation.

In order to ensure consistency between the practices of Member States and harmonised application of the force majeure clause by Member States, this Regulation should provide, where appropriate, for exemptions in cases of force majeure and exceptional circumstances, as well as for a non-exhaustive list of possible cases of force majeure and exceptional circumstances to be recognised by the national competent authorities. Those authorities should take decisions on force majeure or exceptional circumstances on a case by case basis, on the basis of relevant evidence and applying the concept of force majeure in the light of Union agricultural law including the case law of the Court of Justice.

The Union's budget should finance CAP expenditure, including expenditure on rural development, through the Funds either directly or in the context of shared management with the Member States. The types of measures that can be financed using the Funds should be specified.

Provision should be made for the accreditation of paying agencies by Member States and for the establishment of the procedures for obtaining management declarations, and for obtaining the certification of management and monitoring systems and the certification of annual accounts by independent bodies. Moreover, in order to ensure the transparency of national checks, in particular as regards procedures for authorisation, validation and payment and to reduce the administrative and audit burden for the Commission and for the Member States where accreditation of each individual paying agency is required, the number of authorities and bodies to which those responsibilities are delegated should be restricted while respecting the constitutional arrangements of each Member State. In order to avoid unnecessary reorganisation costs, Member States should be allowed to maintain the number of paying agencies which have been accredited before the entry into force of this Regulation.

Where a Member State accredits more than one paying agency, it is important that it designates a single public coordinating body in order to ensure consistency in the management of funds, to provide liaison between the Commission and the various accredited paying agencies and to ensure that the information requested by the Commission concerning the operations of several paying agencies is made rapidly available. The public coordinating body should also take and coordinate actions with a view to resolving any deficiencies of a common nature and should keep the Commission informed of any follow-up. In addition, that body should promote and, where possible, ensure homogeneous application of common rules and standards.

Only when using paying agencies that have been accredited by the Member States is there reasonable assurance that the necessary checks have been carried out before granting Union aid to beneficiaries. It should, therefore, be explicitly laid down in this Regulation that only expenditure effected by accredited paying agencies can be reimbursed from the Union's budget.

In order to help beneficiaries to become more aware of the relationship between agricultural practices and management of farms on the one hand, and standards relating to the environment, climate change, good agricultural condition of land, food safety, public health, animal health, plant health and animal welfare on the other, it is necessary for Member States to establish a comprehensive farm advisory system offering advice to beneficiaries. That farm advisory system should not, in any way, affect the obligation and responsibility of beneficiaries to respect those standards. Furthermore, a clear separation between advice and checks should be ensured by the Member States.

The farm advisory system should cover at least the obligations at farm level resulting from cross-compliance standards and requirements. That system should also cover the requirements to be respected in relation to the agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment and the maintenance of the agricultural area under Regulation 2013/1307 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 4 ) and measures at farm level provided for in rural development programmes aiming at farm modernisation, competitiveness building, sectoral integration, innovation, market orientation and promotion of entrepreneurship. That system should also cover the requirements imposed on beneficiaries by Member States in order to implement specific provisions of Directive 2000/60 of the European Parliament and the Council ( 5 ) and for implementing Article 55 of PPPPMR of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 6 ) , in particular requirements concerning the compliance with the general principles of integrated pest management as referred to in Article 14 of Directive 2009/128 of the European Parliament and the Council ( 7 ) .

Entry into the farm advisory system should be on a voluntary basis for beneficiaries. All beneficiaries, even farmers not receiving support under the CAP, should be allowed to participate in the system. It should, however, be possible for Member States to set priority criteria. Due to the nature of the system, it is appropriate for the information obtained during the advisory activity to be treated as confidential, except in the case of serious infringements of Union or national law. In order to ensure the efficiency of the system, advisors should be suitably qualified and regularly trained.

In respect of the EAGF, the financial resources required to cover the expenditure effected by the accredited paying agencies, should be made available to the Member States by the Commission in the form of reimbursements against the booking of the expenditure effected by those agencies. Until such reimbursements have been paid, in the form of monthly payments, financial resources are to be mobilised by the Member States depending on the needs of their accredited paying agencies. The administrative and personnel costs of the Member States and the beneficiaries involved in the implementation of the CAP should be borne by themselves.

The use of the agro-meteorological system and the acquisition and improvement of satellite images should provide the Commission with, in particular, the means to manage agricultural markets, to facilitate the monitoring of agricultural expenditure and to monitor agricultural resources in the medium and long term. Also, in the light of the experience gained with the application of Council CFBCRSCR ( 8 ) , some of its provisions should be incorporated in this Regulation and, consequently, CFBCRSCR should be repealed.

In the context of respecting budget discipline, it is necessary to define the annual ceiling for the expenditure financed by the EAGF by taking into account the maximum amounts laid down for that Fund under the multiannual financial framework provided for in Council Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 ( 9 ) .

Budget discipline also requires the annual ceiling for expenditure financed by the EAGF to be respected in all circumstances and at every stage of the budget procedure and of the execution of the budget. Consequently, it is necessary for the national ceiling for the direct payments per Member State set out in Regulation 2013/1307 to be regarded as a financial ceiling for such direct payments for the Member State concerned and for the reimbursement of those payments remain within this financial ceiling. Furthermore, budget discipline requires that all Union legal acts in the CAP field that are proposed by the Commission or adopted by the Union or by the Commission and that are financed by the EAGF comply with the annual ceiling for the expenditure financed by that Fund.

With a view to ensuring that the amounts for the financing of the CAP comply with the annual ceilings, the financial mechanism referred to in Council Regulation 2009/73 ( 10 ) by which the level of direct support is adjusted, should be maintained. Where the European Parliament and the Council do not fix them before 30 June of the calendar year in respect of which they apply, the Commission should be authorised to set those adjustments.

In order to support the agricultural sector in case of major crises affecting the agricultural production or distribution, a reserve for crises should be established by applying, at the beginning of each year, a reduction to direct payments through the financial discipline mechanism.

Article 169(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 provides that non-committed appropriations relating to the actions referred to in Article 4(1) of this Regulation may be carried over only to the following financial year and that such carryover may lead to an additional payment only to the final recipients who were subject, in the preceding financial year, to the adjustment of direct payments as referred to in Article 25 of this Regulation. Consequently, where appropriations are thus carried over to the following financial year, the national administrations would have to make payments to two populations of beneficiaries of direct payments in one financial year: on the one hand, reimbursing, from the unused amount of financial discipline carried-over, to farmers subject to financial discipline during the preceding financial year on the other hand, making the direct payments in financial year N to those farmers having claimed them. In order to avoid an excessive administrative burden for national administrations, a derogation from the fourth subparagraph of Article 169(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 should be provided for, allowing the national administrations to reimburse the amount carried over to financial year N to farmers subject to financial discipline in year N instead of to farmers who are subject to it in year N-1.

The measures taken to determine the financial contribution from the Funds in respect of the calculation of financial ceilings do not affect the powers of the budgetary authority designated by the TFEU. Those measures should therefore be based on the reference amounts fixed in accordance with the Interinstitutional Agreement of 19 November 2013 between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline, on cooperation in budgetary matters and on sound financial management and Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013.

Budget discipline also requires a continuous examination of the medium-term budget situation. The Commission, when submitting the draft budget for a given year, should therefore present its forecasts and analyses to the European Parliament and to the Council and should propose, if necessary, appropriate measures to the legislator. Furthermore, the Commission should make full use of its management powers at all times to ensure compliance with the annual ceiling and, if necessary, should propose appropriate measures to the European Parliament and to the Council or to the Council to redress the budget situation. If, at the end of a budget year, the annual ceiling cannot be complied with as a result of the reimbursements requested by the Member States, the Commission should be able to take measures allowing the provisional distribution of the available budget among the Member States in proportion to their as yet unpaid requests for reimbursement, as well as measures ensuring compliance with the ceiling fixed for the year concerned. Payments for that year should be charged to the following budget year and the total amount of Union financing per Member State should be definitively established, as should compensation between Member States in order to ensure that the established amount is complied with.

When implementing the budget, the Commission should operate a monthly early-warning and monitoring system for agricultural expenditure so that, if there is a risk of the annual ceiling being exceeded, the Commission may at the earliest opportunity take the appropriate measures under the management powers at its disposal and propose other measures if those measures appear to be insufficient. A periodic report by the Commission to the European Parliament and to the Council should compare the evolution of the expenditure effected to date in relation to the profiles and should give an assessment of the foreseeable implementation for the remainder of the budget year.

The exchange rate used by the Commission when drawing up the budget documents should reflect the most recent information available, making allowances for the time lag between drafting and submission.

Regulation 2013/1303 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 11 ) lays down rules which apply to the financial support from the funds covered by that Regulation, including the EAFRD. Those rules also cover eligibility of expenditure, on financial management and the management and control systems. As regards the financial management of the EAFRD, for the sake of legal clarity and coherence between the Funds covered by this Regulation, reference should be made to the relevant provisions on the budget commitments, payment deadlines and decommitment of Regulation 2013/1303.

The rural development programmes are financed from the Union budget on the basis of commitments made in annual instalments. Member States should be able to draw on the Union funds provided for as soon as they begin the programmes. A suitably restricted prefinancing system is therefore needed, to ensure a steady flow of funds so that payments to beneficiaries under the programmes are made at the appropriate time.

Prefinancing apart, it is necessary to make a distinction between the payments by the Commission to the accredited paying agencies interim payments and the payment of balances, and to lay down detailed rules on their payment. The automatic decommitment rule should help speed up execution of programmes and contribute to sound financial management. The rules on the national frameworks of Member States with regional programmes as set out in EAFRD2 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 12 ) also provide a tool for Member States to ensure execution and sound financial management.

Union aid should be paid to beneficiaries in good time so that they may use it efficiently. A failure by the Member States to comply with the payment deadlines laid down in Union law might create serious difficulties for the beneficiaries and could jeopardise the Union's yearly budgeting. Therefore, expenditure made without respecting deadlines for payments should be excluded from Union financing. The principle of proportionality laid down in FCAP2R2 should be maintained and should apply to both the Funds. In order to respect the principle of proportionality, the Commission should be able to provide for exceptions to this general rule.

FCAP2R2 provides for reductions and suspensions of monthly or interim payments for the Funds. Despite the rather broad wording of those provisions, in practice they are used essentially to reduce payments for non-compliance with payment deadlines, ceilings and similar "accounting issues" which can readily be detected in the declarations of expenditure. Those provisions also allow reductions and suspensions in case of serious and persistent deficiencies in national control systems. The imposition of such reductions and suspensions are, however, made subject to rather restrictive substantive conditions for doing so and providing for a special, two-step procedure to be followed. The European Parliament and the Council have repeatedly asked the Commission to suspend payments to non-compliant Member States. For these reasons, it is necessary to clarify the system provided for in FCAP2R2 for reductions and suspensions and to merge the rules on reductions and suspensions for both the Funds into one single Article. The system of reductions for "accounting issues" should be maintained in line with the existing administrative practice. The possibility of reducing or suspending payments where there are significant and persistent deficiencies in national control systems should be reinforced in order to provide the Commission with the possibility of suspending payments rapidly when serious deficiencies are detected. That possibility should also be extended to include negligence in the system for recovery of irregular payments.

Sectoral agricultural legislation requires Member States to send information on the numbers of checks carried out and on their outcomes within specified deadlines. Those control statistics are used to determine the level of error at Member State level and, more generally, for the purposes of checking the management of the Funds. The control statistics are an important source of information for the Commission to satisfy itself as to the correct management of the Funds and are an essential element of the annual declaration of assurance. Given the vital nature of the control statistics and in order to ensure that Member States respect their obligation to send it in time, it is necessary to provide a deterrent for late provision of the data required which is proportionate to the extent of the data deficit. Therefore, provisions should be put in place to allow the Commission to suspend part of the monthly or interim payments in respect of which the relevant statistical information has not been sent in time.

In order to allow funds from the Funds to be reused, rules are needed on the assignment of specific sums. The list contained in FCAP2R2 should be completed by adding to it the sums relating to late payments and to the clearance of accounts as regards expenditure under the EAGF. Also, Council Regulation 1978/352 ( 13 ) laid down rules on the destinations of the sums resulting from forfeited securities. Those provisions should be harmonised and merged with the existing provisions on assigned revenue. Regulation 1978/352 should therefore be repealed.

Council IMRCAPR ( 14 ) and its implementing rules define the information measures relating to the CAP which may be financed under point (c) of Article 5 of FCAP2R2. IMRCAPR contains a list of those measures and their objectives and fixes the rules on their financing and on the implementation of the corresponding projects. Since the adoption of that Regulation, rules have been adopted by Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 on grants and procurement. Those rules should apply also to the information measures under the CAP. For reasons of simplification and coherence, IMRCAPR should be repealed while maintaining the specific provisions relating to the objectives and types of measures to be financed. Those measures should also take into account the need to ensure more efficiency in communication to the public at large and stronger synergies between the communication activities undertaken on the initiative of the Commission as well as of the need to ensure that the Union's political priorities are communicated effectively. Therefore, they should also cover information measures relevant to the CAP in the framework of the corporate communication as referred to in the Communication from the Commission: A Budget for Europe 2020 ("the Commission Communication on a Budget for Europe 2020") - Part II: Policy fiches.

The financing of measures and operations under the CAP in part involves shared management. To ensure that Union funds are soundly managed, the Commission should perform checks on the management of the Funds by the Member State authorities responsible for making payments. It is appropriate to define the nature of the checks to be performed by the Commission, to specify the terms of its responsibilities for implementing the budget and to clarify the Member States' cooperation obligations.

In order to allow the Commission to fulfil its obligation to check the existence and proper functioning of management and inspection systems for Union expenditure in the Member States, provision should be made, irrespective of the inspections carried out by Member States themselves, for checks by persons authorised by the Commission to act on its behalf who should be able to request assistance from the Member States in their work.

Information technology needs to be used as extensively as possible in order to produce the information to be sent to the Commission. When carrying out checks, the Commission should have full and immediate access to expenditure information recorded in both paper and electronic form.

In order to establish the financial relationship between the accredited paying agencies and the Union budget, the Commission should clear the accounts of those paying agencies annually (financial clearance of accounts). The decision of the clearance of accounts should cover the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the accounts but not the conformity of the expenditure with Union law.

The Commission is responsible for the implementation of the budget of the European Union in cooperation with Member States in accordance with Article 317 TFEU. The Commission is empowered to decide, by means of implementing acts, whether the expenditure effected by the Member States complies with Union law. Member States should be given the right to justify their decisions to make payments and should have recourse to conciliation where there is no common agreement between them and the Commission. In order to give Member States legal and financial assurances as to expenditure effected in the past, a maximum period should be set for the Commission to decide which financial consequences should follow from non-compliance. As regards the EAFRD, the conformity clearance procedure should be in line with the provisions on the financial corrections by the Commission as laid down in Part 2 of Regulation 2013/1303.

As regards the EAGF, sums recovered should be paid back to that Fund where the expenditure is not in conformity with Union law and no entitlement existed. In order to allow sufficient time for all the necessary administrative proceedings, including internal checks, Member States should request recovery from the beneficiary within 18 months after a control report or similar document, stating that an irregularity has taken place, has been approved and, where applicable, received by the paying agency or body responsible for the recovery. Provision should be made for a system of financial responsibility where irregularities have been committed and where the total amount has not been recovered. In this respect a procedure should be established enabling the Commission to safeguard the interests of the Union budget by deciding on partial charging to the Member State concerned of the sums lost as a result of irregularities and not recovered within a reasonable period. In certain cases of negligence by the Member State, it is also right to charge the full sum to the Member State concerned. However, subject to Member States complying with obligations under their internal procedures, the financial burden should be divided fairly between the Union and the Member State. The same rules should apply to the EAFRD, subject however, to the requirement that sums recovered or cancelled following irregularities should remain available to the approved rural development programmes of the Member State concerned as those sums have been allocated to that Member State. Provisions on the reporting obligation for Member States should also be established.

The recovery procedures used by the Member States may have the effect of delaying recovery for a number of years, with no guarantee that the outcome will actually be successful. The cost of implementing those procedures may also be disproportionate to the amounts which are or may be collected. Consequently, Member States should be permitted to halt recovery procedures in certain cases.

In order to protect the financial interests of the Union's budget, measures should be taken by Member States to satisfy themselves that transactions financed by the Funds are actually carried out and are executed correctly. Member States should also prevent, detect and deal effectively with any irregularities or non-compliance with obligations committed by beneficiaries. To this end, Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 ( 15 ) should apply. In cases of infringement of the sectoral agricultural legislation, where detailed rules on administrative penalties have not been laid down by Union legal acts, Member States should impose national penalties which should be effective, dissuasive and proportionate.

The funding, under the CAP, of activities which generate additional costs in other policy areas covered by the general budget of the European Union, especially environment and public health, should be avoided. In addition, the introduction of new payment systems, and related monitoring and penalty systems, should not result in unnecessary additional administrative procedures and red tape.

Rules relating to the general principles applicable to checks, to withdrawals of undue payments and to the imposition of penalties are contained in various sectoral agricultural regulations. Those rules should be collected in the same legal framework at a horizontal level. They should cover the obligations of the Member States as regards administrative and on-the-spot checks, the purpose of which is to check compliance with the provisions of the CAP measures, and should cover the rules on the recovery of aid, and the reduction and exclusion of aid. Rules on checks of obligations not necessarily linked to the payment of an aid should be laid down as well.

Various provisions of the sectoral agricultural legislation require that a security be lodged to ensure the payment of a sum due if an obligation is not met. In order to strengthen the framework for securities, a single horizontal rule should apply to all those provisions.

Member State should set up and operate an integrated administration and control system (the "integrated system") for certain payments provided for in Regulation 2013/1307 and in EAFRD2. In order to improve the effectiveness and monitoring of Union support, Member States should be authorised to make use of the integrated system for other Union support schemes.

The main elements of the integrated system and, in particular, the provisions concerning a computerised database, an identification system for agricultural parcels, aid applications or payment claims and a system for the identification and recording of payment entitlements should be maintained, whilst taking into account the evolution of the policy, in particular, by the introduction of payment for agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment and the ecological benefits of landscape features. With a view to reducing the administrative burden and ensuring efficient and effective controls, Member States should make appropriate use of technology when setting up those systems.

For the purpose of creating a reference layer in the identification system for agricultural parcels that is adapted to the ecological focus areas, Member States should be able to take account of specific information which may be required from farmers in their applications for claim years 2015 to 2017, such as the identification of those landscape features or other areas which may qualify as ecological focus areas and, where necessary, the size of such features and other areas.

Competent national authorities should make the payments provided for in Union support schemes covered by the integrated system to beneficiaries in full, subject to any reductions provided for in this Regulation, and within the prescribed periods. In order to render the management of direct payments more flexible, Member States should be allowed to make payments covered by the integrated system in up to two instalments per year.

Scrutiny of the commercial documents of undertakings that are receiving or making payments can be a very effective means of surveillance of transactions forming part of the system of financing by the EAGF. The provisions on the scrutiny of the commercial documents are laid down in Council Regulation 2008/485 ( 16 ) . That scrutiny supplements other checks already carried out by the Member States. Furthermore, where national provisions relating to scrutiny are more extensive than those provided for in that Regulation, they are not affected by it.

Under Regulation 2008/485, Member States should take the measures necessary to ensure effective protection of the financial interests of the Union budget, and in particular, in order to check the genuineness and compliance of operations financed by the EAGF. In the interests of clarity and rationalisation, the relevant provisions should be integrated into the same act. Regulation 2008/485 should therefore be repealed.

The documents used as a basis for such scrutiny should be determined in such a way as to enable a full scrutiny to be carried out. The undertakings to be scrutinised should be selected on the basis of the nature of the transactions carried out under their responsibility and the breakdown per sector of the undertakings receiving or making payments should be selected according to their financial importance in the system of financing by the EAGF.

The powers of the officials responsible for scrutiny and the obligations on undertakings to make commercial documents available to such officials for a specified period, as well as to supply such information as may be requested by them, should be defined. It should be possible for commercial documents to be seized in certain cases.

Having regard to the international structure of agricultural trade and in the interest of the functioning of the internal market, it is necessary to organise cooperation among the Member States. It is also necessary to set up a centralised documentation system at Union level concerning undertakings receiving or making payments established in third countries.

While it is the responsibility of the Member States to adopt their scrutiny programmes, it is necessary for those programmes to be communicated to the Commission so that it can assume its supervisory and coordinating role, in order to ensure that the programmes are adopted on the basis of appropriate criteria and to guarantee that the scrutiny is concentrated on sectors or undertakings where the risk of fraud is high. It is essential that each Member State has a special department responsible for monitoring the scrutiny of commercial documents provided for in this Regulation or for coordinating that scrutiny. Those special departments should be organised independently of the departments carrying out scrutiny prior to payment. Information collected during that scrutiny should be protected by professional confidentiality.

Council Regulation 2003/1782 ( 17 ) , which was replaced by Regulation 2009/73, established the principle that the full payment to beneficiaries of some supports under the CAP should be linked to compliance with rules relating to land management, agricultural production and agricultural activity. That principle was subsequently reflected in Council EAFRD ( 18 ) and Council CMO ( 19 ) . Under the resulting 'cross-compliance' system Member States are to impose penalties in the form of the reduction or exclusion of support received under the CAP in whole or in part.

That cross-compliance system incorporates in the CAP basic standards concerning the environment, climate change, good agricultural and environmental condition of land, public health, animal health, plant health and animal welfare. Cross-compliance aims to contribute to the development of sustainable agriculture through better awareness on the part of beneficiaries of the need to respect those basic standards. It aims also to contribute to make the CAP more compatible with the expectation of society through improving consistency of that policy with the environment, public health, animal health, plant health and animal welfare policies. The cross-compliance system forms an integral part of the CAP and should therefore be maintained. Its scope, however, which consists so far in separate lists of statutory management requirements and standards of good agricultural and environmental condition of land should be streamlined so that consistency of the cross-compliance system is ensured and made more visible. For this purpose, the requirements and standards should be organised in a single list and grouped by areas and issues. Experience has also shown that a number of the requirements within the scope of cross-compliance are not sufficiently relevant to farming activity or the area of the holding or concern national authorities rather than beneficiaries. Consequently, that scope should be adjusted. Provision should furthermore be made for the maintenance of permanent pasture in 2015 and 2016.

Statutory management requirements need to be fully implemented by Member States in order to become operational at farm level and ensure the necessary equal treatment of farmers.

According to Article 22 of Directive 2000/60, Council Directive 1980/68 ( 20 ) is to be repealed on 23 December 2013. In order to maintain the same cross-compliance rules relating to protection of groundwater as those laid down in Directive 1980/68 as at the last day of the validity of that Directive, it is appropriate to adjust the scope of cross-compliance and to define a standard of good agricultural and environmental condition that encompasses the requirements of Articles 4 and 5 of that Directive.

The cross-compliance system implies certain administrative constraints for both beneficiaries and national administrations since record keeping has to be ensured, checks have to be carried out and where necessary penalties have to be applied. Those penalties should be proportionate, effective and dissuasive. Such penalties should be without prejudice to other penalties laid down under Union or national law. For the sake of consistency, it is appropriate to merge the relevant Union provisions into one single legal instrument. For farmers participating in the small farmers scheme referred to in Title V of Regulation 2013/1307, the efforts to be made under the cross-compliance system might be considered to exceed the benefit of keeping those farmers under that system. For reasons of simplification, those farmers should therefore be exempted from cross-compliance and in particular from its control system and from the risk of cross-compliance penalties. However, that exemption should be without prejudice to the obligation to respect the applicable provisions of the sectoral law or to the possibility to be checked and to be imposed penalties under that law.

Regulation 2003/1782 established a framework of standards of good agricultural and environmental condition of the land within which Member States are to adopt national standards taking account of the specific characteristics of the areas concerned, including soil and climatic conditions and existing farming systems (land use, crop rotation, farming practices) and farm structures. Those standards of good agricultural and environmental condition of the land aim to contribute to preventing soil erosion, maintaining soil organic matter and soil structure, ensuring a minimum level of maintenance, avoiding the deterioration of habitats and protecting and managing water. The wider scope of the cross-compliance system as laid down in this Regulation should therefore include a framework within which Member States are to adopt national standards of good agricultural and environmental condition. The Union framework should also include rules to better address water, soil, carbon stock, biodiversity and landscape issues as well as minimum level of maintenance of the land.

Beneficiaries should understand their compliance obligations clearly in relation to the rules on cross-compliance. For that purpose, all requirements and standards forming part of those rules should be communicated by Member States in an exhaustive, understandable and explanatory way, including, where possible, by electronic means.

An effective implementation of cross-compliance requires verification that obligations are respected at the level of beneficiaries. Where a Member State decides to make use of the option not to apply a reduction or exclusion where the amount concerned is less than EUR 100, the competent control authority should, for a sample of beneficiaries in the following year, verify that the non-compliance concerned has been remedied.

To ensure harmonious cooperation between the Commission and the Member States regarding the financing of CAP expenditure and, more particularly, to allow the Commission to monitor the financial management by the Member States and to clear the accounts of the accredited paying agencies, it is necessary for certain information to be communicated by the Member States or to be kept available to the Commission.

For the purposes of compiling the data to be sent to the Commission, and to allow the Commission to have full immediate access to expenditure data in both paper and electronic form, suitable rules on the presentation and transmission of data, including rules on time limits, need to be laid down.

As personal data or business secrets might be involved in the application of the national control systems and the conformity clearance, the Member States and the Commission should guarantee the confidentiality of the information received in that context.

In the interests of sound financial management of the Union's budget and impartiality of treatment at both Member State and beneficiary level, rules on the use of the euro should be laid down.

The rate of exchange of the euro into national currencies may vary in the course of the period during which an operation is carried out. Therefore, the rate applicable to the amounts concerned should be determined taking into account the event through which the economic objective of the operation is achieved. The rate of exchange applied should be that applicable for the date on which that event occurs. It is necessary to specify this operative event or to waive its application, whilst complying with certain criteria and in particular those concerning the rapidity with which currency movements are passed on. Those criteria are laid down in Council EAAER ( 21 ) and they complete similar provisions of FCAP2R2. In the interests of clarity and rationalisation, the relevant provisions should be integrated into the same act and EAAER should therefore be repealed.

Special rules should be laid down for dealing with exceptional monetary situations arising either within the Union or on the world market and requiring immediate action to ensure that the arrangements established under the CAP operate effectively.

Member States that have not adopted the euro should have the option of making payments for expenditure resulting from the CAP legislation in euro rather than in national currency. Specific rules are needed to ensure that this option does not lead to any unjustified advantage for parties making or receiving payment.

Each measure under the CAP should be subject to monitoring and evaluation in order to improve its quality and to demonstrate its achievements. In this context a list of indicators should be determined and the performance of the CAP should be assessed by the Commission in relation to the policy objectives of viable food production, the sustainable management of natural resources and climate action and balanced territorial development. In assessing, in particular, the performance of the CAP in relation to the objective of viable food production, all relevant factors, including the evolution of input prices, should be taken into account. The Commission should set up a framework for a common monitoring and evaluation system ensuring inter alia that relevant data, including information from Member States is available on a timely manner. In so doing it should take account of the data needs and of the synergies between potential data sources. Moreover, the Commission Communication on A Budget for Europe 2020 - Part II stated that the climate related expenditure in the overall Union budget should increase to at least 20 %, with contributions from different policies. The Commission should therefore be able to assess the impact of the Union's support within the framework of the CAP, for climate objectives.

Union law concerning the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data is applicable, in particular Directive 1995/46 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 22 ) and Regulation 2001/45 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 23 ) .

In its judgment of 9 November 2010 in Joined Cases C-92/09 and 93/09 ( 24 ) Volker und Markus Schecke GbR and Hartmut Eifert v Land Hessen the Court of Justice of the European Union declared point (8b) of Article 42 and Article 44a of FCAP2R2 and Commission EAGF ( 25 ) to be invalid in so far as, with regard to natural persons benefiting from the European agricultural funds, those provisions imposed an obligation to publish personal data relating to each beneficiary without drawing a distinction based on relevant criteria such as the periods during which those persons have received such aid, the frequency of such aid or the nature and amount thereof.

Following that judgment and pending the adoption of new rules taking account of the objections expressed by the Court, EAGF was amended by Commission Implementing EAGF2 ( 26 ) in order to expressly lay down that the obligation to publish the information is not to apply to natural persons.

In September 2011, the Commission organised a consultation of stakeholders that brought together representatives of professional agricultural and trade organisations, representatives of the food industry and workers, as well as representatives of civil society and Union institutions. In the course of that consultation different options were put forward concerning the publication of data of natural persons benefiting from Union agricultural funds and concerning respect for the principle of proportionality when making relevant information available to the public. That conference discussed the need to publish the names of natural persons in order to respond to the objective of better protection of the Union's financial interests, to enhance transparency and to highlight the achievements of beneficiaries in providing public goods while ensuring that that publication does not go beyond what is necessary for achieving these legitimate aims.

In its judgment in Volker und Markus Schecke GbR and Hartmut Eifert v Land Hessen , the Court did not contest the legitimacy of the objective of reinforcing public control of the use of the money from the Funds. However, the Court did emphasise the need to consider methods of publishing information relating to the beneficiaries concerned which are consistent with the objective of such publication while at the same time causing less interference with those beneficiaries' right to respect for their private life in general and to protection of their personal data in particular.

The objective of reinforcing public control in respect of individual beneficiaries should be analysed in the light of the new financial management and control framework to be applied from 1 January 2014 and in the light of experience gained in Member States. Within that new framework, it is not possible for the controls by the national administrations to be exhaustive, in particular, since for almost all schemes, only a limited part of the population can be checked on-the-spot. Moreover, that new framework provides that, subject to certain conditions, Member States may reduce the number of on-the-spot checks. A sufficient increase of the minimum control rates would, in the present context, put such an additional financial and administrative burden on the national administrations that those administrations would be unable to cope.

Against that background, the publication of the name of the beneficiaries of the Funds provides a means of reinforcing the public control of the use of the Funds and, therefore, is a useful addition to the existing management and control framework and is necessary to ensure an adequate level of protection of the Union's financial interest. That is achieved partly by the preventive and deterrent effect of such publication, partly by discouraging individual beneficiaries from irregular behaviour and also partly by reinforcing the personal accountability of the farmers for use of public funds received.

In this context the role played by civil society, including by the media and non-governmental organisations and their contribution to reinforcing the administrations' control framework against fraud and any misuse of public funds, should be properly recognised.

The publication of the relevant information is also consistent with the approach as set out in Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012.

Alternatively, the objective of reinforcing public control in respect of individual beneficiaries could be served by providing for an obligation on Member States to ensure public access to the relevant information upon request, without publication. This would however be less effective and run the risk of creating unwanted divergencies in implementation. Consequently, national authorities should be enabled to rely on the public control in respect of individual beneficiaries through the publication of their names and other relevant data.

If the objective of the public control of the use of the money from the Funds is to be achieved, a certain level of information about beneficiaries needs to be brought to the attention of the public. That information should include data on the identity of the beneficiary, the amount awarded and the fund from which it comes and the purpose and the nature of the measure concerned. The publication of that information should be made in such a way as to cause less interference with the beneficiaries' right to respect for their private life, in general, and to their right to protection of their personal data, in particular, both rights which are recognised in Articles 7 and 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

In order to ensure that this Regulation complies with the principle of proportionality, the legislator has explored all the alternative means of attaining the objective of public control of the use of the money from the Funds, as analysed in a memorandum set out in the Annex to Council document 6370/13, and has chosen the one which would cause the least interference with the individual rights concerned.

Publishing details about the measure entitling the farmer to receive aid or support and about the nature and the purpose of the aid or support provides the public with concrete information on the subsidised activity and the purpose for which the aid or support was granted. This would also contribute to the preventive and deterrent effect of the public control in the protection of the financial interest.

In order to strike a balance between the objective of the public control of the use of the money from the Funds, on the one hand, and the beneficiaries' right to respect for their private life, in general, and to protection of their personal data, in particular, on the other hand, the importance of the aid should be taken into account. Following extensive analysis and consultation with the stakeholders it appears that, in order to reinforce the effectiveness of such publication and to limit the interference with the beneficiaries' rights, it is necessary to set a threshold expressed in terms of the amount of aid received, below which the name of the beneficiary should not be published.

That threshold should be de-minimis and should reflect and be based on the level of the support schemes set up within the framework of the CAP. As the structures of the Member States' agricultural economies vary considerably and may differ significantly from the average Union farm structure, the application of different minimum thresholds that reflect the particular situation of the Member States should be allowed. Regulation 2013/1307 sets out a simple and specific scheme for small farms. Article 63 of that Regulation lays down criteria for calculating the amount of aid. For reasons of consistency, in the case of Member States applying the scheme, the threshold to be taken into account should be set at the same level as the amounts fixed by the Member State as referred to in the second subparagraph of Article 63(1) or the second subparagraph of Article 63(2) of that Regulation. In the case of Member States deciding not to apply that scheme, the threshold to be taken into account should be set at the same level as the maximum amount of aid possible under the scheme, as provided for in Article 63 of Regulation 2013/1307. Below that specific threshold 1307the publication should contain all the relevant information, except for the name, in order to allow the taxpayers to have an accurate image of the CAP.

Making that information accessible to the public, in combination with the general information to the public provided for in this Regulation, enhances transparency regarding the use of Union funds in the CAP, thus contributing to the visibility and better understanding of that policy. It enables citizens to participate more closely in the decision-making process and guarantees that the administration enjoys greater legitimacy, and is more effective and is more accountable to the citizen. It also brings concrete examples of the provision of "public goods" by farming to the attention of citizens, thereby underpinning the legitimacy of state support for the agricultural sector.

Therefore it must be considered that providing for the general publication of the relevant information does not go beyond what is necessary in a democratic society in view of the need to protect the Union's financial interests as well as, the overriding weight of the objective of the public control of the use of the money from the Funds.

In order to comply with the data protection requirements, beneficiaries of the Funds should be informed of the publication of their data before that publication takes place. They should also be informed that that data may be processed by auditing and investigating bodies of the Union and Member States for the purpose of safeguarding the Union's financial interests. Furthermore, the beneficiaries should be informed about their rights under Directive 1995/46 and the procedures applicable for exercising these rights.

Consequently, after having conducted an in-depth analysis and assessment of the most appropriate way to observe the right to protection of personal data of the beneficiaries, based, moreover, on the information provided by the Commission during the negotiations of this Regulation, new rules on the publication of information on all beneficiaries of the Funds should be laid down in this Regulation.

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission.

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of this Regulation, implementing powers should be conferred on the Commission relating to: the procedures for the issuing, withdrawing and reviewing accreditation of paying agencies and coordinating bodies as well as for the supervision of the accreditation of paying agencies; the rules on the work and checks underlying the management declaration of the paying agencies, the functioning of the coordinating body and the notification of information to the Commission by that coordinating body; the rules concerning the tasks of the certification bodies, including the checks, and on the certificates and the reports, together with the documents accompanying them, to be drawn up by those bodies. Those implementing powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation 2011/182 of the European Parliament and of the Council ( 27 ) .

The implementing powers of the Commission should also cover: the audit principles on which the opinions of the certification bodies are based, including an assessment of the risks, internal controls and the level of audit evidence required, the audit methods to be used by the certification bodies, having regard to international standards on auditing to deliver their opinions, including, where appropriate, the use of a single integrated sample for each population and, where appropriate, the possibility of accompanying paying agencies when they carry out on-the-spot checks.

They should also cover: rules for the uniform implementation of the farm advisory system, the determination of the EAGF monthly payments to the Member States; the setting of the amounts for the financing of public intervention measures; rules relating to the financing of the acquisition by the Commission of the satellite images required for the checks and the measures taken by the Commission through remote-sensing applications used for the monitoring of agricultural resources; the procedure for the carrying out of the acquisition by the Commission of those satellite images and the monitoring of agricultural resources, the framework governing the acquisition, enhancing and utilisation of satellite images and meteorological data, and the applicable deadlines.

They should also cover: in the context of the financial discipline procedure, the adjustment rate for the direct payments as well as its adaptation as well as the terms and conditions applicable to appropriations carried over in accordance with Article 169(3) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 in order to finance the direct payments; in the context of the budget discipline procedure, the provisional setting of the amount of the payments and the provisional distribution of the available budget among the Member States.

Furthermore, the implementing powers of the Commission should cover: the setting of the period within which the accredited paying agencies must establish and forward, to the Commission, intermediate declarations of expenditure relating to rural development programmes; the reduction or suspension of the monthly or interim payments to Member States; details on the keeping of separate accounts by the paying agencies; specific conditions applying to the information to be booked in the accounts kept by the paying agencies; rules on the financing and accounting of intervention measures in the form of public storage, and other expenditure financed by the Funds, the terms and conditions governing the implementation of the automatic decommitment procedure, the procedure and other practical arrangements for the proper functioning of the suspension of payments by the Commission to Member States in the case of late submission of information by Member States.

Moreover, the implementing powers of the Commission should cover: the procedures relating to the specific obligations which the Member States have to comply with in relation to checks; the procedures relating to the cooperation obligations to be complied with by the Member States as regards the on-the-spot checks carried out by the Commission and access to information; the procedures and other practical arrangements relating to the obligation to report irregularities and fraud, the conditions under which the supporting documents relating to payments made and documents relating to the performance of the administrative and physical checks required by the Union law must be kept; the clearance of accounts and the conformity clearance, the exclusion from Union financing of sums charged to the Union's budget, the procedures for the recovery of undue payments and interest and the forms of notification and communication to be made by the Member States to the Commission in relation to irregularities.

The implementing powers of the Commission should also cover: rules aiming at reaching a uniform application of Member States' obligations regarding the protection of the financial interests of the Union, the necessary rules aiming at reaching a uniform application of checks in the Union, the application and calculation of the partial or total withdrawal of payments or payment entitlements; the recovery of undue payments and penalties as well as in respect of unduly allocated payment entitlements and the application of interest. They should also cover: the application and the calculation of the administrative penalties, the detailed rules for identifying a non-compliance as minor, the rules identifying the cases in which, due to the nature of the penalties, Member States may retain the penalties recovered; and the suspension of monthly payments in specific cases covered by COMIAPR.

The implementing powers of the Commission should cover: the form of the securities to be lodged and the procedure for lodging the securities, for accepting them, and for replacing the original securities; the procedures for the release of securities and the notification to be made by Member States or by the Commission in the context of securities; They should also cover: rules which are both necessary and justifiable in an emergency in order to resolve specific problems in relation to payment periods and the payment of advances; rules on the aid applications and payments claims, the applications for payment entitlements, including the final date for submission of applications, the requirements as to the minimum amount of information to be included in the applications, provisions for amendments to or the withdrawal of aid applications, exemption from the requirement to submit aid applications and provisions which allow Member States to apply simplified procedures or to correct obvious errors.

Likewise, the implementing powers of the Commission should cover: rules on the carrying out of checks in order to verify compliance with obligations, and the correctness and completeness of the information provided in the aid application or payment claim, including rules on measurement tolerances for on-the-spot checks, technical specifications needed for the purpose of the uniform implementation of the integrated administration and control system; rules on situations of transfer of holdings accompanied by the transfer of any obligation concerning eligibility in respect of the aid in question which still needs to be fulfilled; and rules on the payment of advances. They should also cover: rules aiming at ensuring a uniform application of the rules on the scrutiny of commercial documents; the procedures relating to Member States' own databanks and to the analytical databank of isotopic data that will help detect fraud; the procedures relating to cooperation and assistance between control authorities and bodies, rules for performing the checks for compliance with marketing standards, rules on the authorities responsible for performing the checks, as well as on the content, the frequency and the marketing stage to which those checks are to apply.

The implementing powers of the Commission should also cover: in the context of the checks related to designation of origin and geographical indications and protected traditional terms, the communications to be made by the Member States to the Commission; the rules on the authority responsible for the verification of compliance with the product specification, including where the geographical area is a third country, the actions to be implemented by the Member States to prevent the unfaithful use of protected designations of origin, protected geographical indications and protected traditional terms, the checks and verifications to be carried out by Member States, including testing. They should also cover: rules on the carrying out of checks in order to verify compliance with the cross-compliance obligations; detailed procedural and technical rules concerning the calculation and application of administrative penalties for non-compliance with cross-compliance requirements; rules pertaining to communication of information by Member States to the Commission as referred to in Article 104; and measures to safeguard the application of Union law if exceptional monetary practices related to national currency are likely to jeopardise it;.

Furthermore, the implementing powers of the Commission should cover: the set of indicators specific to the monitoring and evaluation of the CAP; rules on the information to be sent by the Member States to the Commission for the purposes of the monitoring and evaluation of the CAP; rules on the form and the calendar of the publication of the beneficiaries of the Funds, the uniform application of the obligation to inform the beneficiaries that their data will be made public, and the cooperation between the Commission and Member States in the context of the publication of the beneficiaries of the Funds.