On the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) 2021/694, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697, (EU) 2021/1153, (EU) 2023/1525 and 2024/795, as regards incentivising defence-related investments in the EU budget to implement the ReArm Europe Plan
BUDG-AD-774231
Committee on Budgets · Rapporteur: Christian Ehler
Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.
The Committee on Budgets' opinion on the proposal to amend EU regulations to incentivise defence-related investments under the ReArm Europe Plan concludes the proposal is compatible with the EU budget and financial rules, but raises concerns about human resources, lack of impact assessment, and potential negative effects on existing programmes.¶¶¶ It recommends safeguards to prevent double financing, maintain co-funding, and ensure clear definitions of defence and dual-use technologies, while calling for reports and evaluations on the redirected funds.¶¶¶
Committee position. The Committee on Budgets concludes the proposal is compatible with the EU budget and financial rules, but recommends amendments to address concerns on human resources, impact assessment, and safeguards.¶¶
Key points
- Determines the proposal is compatible with the multiannual financial framework and does not top up the EU budget.¶
- Doubts the Commission's assessment of human resources needs, given possible transfers of cohesion funds, and calls for information on impacts on Heading 7.¶
- Deplores the lack of an impact assessment and regrets missing estimates on the new strategic sector and increased pre-financing and co-financing rates.¶
- Welcomes the derogation for EIC pilot repayments as internal assigned revenues, but calls for safeguards to encourage national co-funding and prevent double financing.¶
- Warns of budgetary pressure on existing priorities and stresses the need for new own resources and clear definitions of 'defence technologies' and 'dual-use'.¶
- Stresses that Horizon Europe's principles must be maintained and defence funding should not undermine civilian research objectives.¶
- Requests timely reports on transfers and an ex post evaluation of the amended programmes' implementation by the end of the current MFF.¶
- Underlines that rule-of-law conditionality must apply to all EU funds and rejects reallocations that circumvent existing decisions.¶