opinion parliamentary committee, 20 March 2025
On the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law
Document ECON-AD-768176 · (COM(2022)0702 – C90410/2022 – 2022/0408(COD))
Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs · Rapporteur: René Repasi
AI:In short
The opinion proposes amendments to the directive on harmonising insolvency law, extending its scope to SMEs, strengthening worker protection, and adjusting avoidance actions and pre-pack rules.
Position. The committee proposes amendments to extend the directive's scope to SMEs, strengthen worker protection, and adjust various provisions on avoidance actions, pre-pack, and simplified proceedings.
Key points
- Extends the directive's scope to include SMEs in simplified winding-up proceedings and related provisions.
- Adds that employees can be regarded as creditors and requires representation of workers' interests in creditors' committees.
- Changes avoidance action rules: only actual knowledge (not constructive) of insolvency is required for voiding congruent coverages and other acts.
- Allows Member States to deem legal acts perfected before registration in public registers, and adds a definition for lease of goods contracts.
- Requires that pre-pack sales meet social standards and consider employment safeguarding in bid selection.
- Directors must take steps to avoid insolvency and only file for insolvency if it cannot be avoided, considering creditors' interests.
- In simplified proceedings, an insolvency practitioner may be appointed only if the debtor has an up-to-date balance sheet and has submitted annual statements.
- Excludes employees' claims from the stay on individual enforcement actions unless payment is guaranteed in preventive restructuring.
- Allows creditors' committee to be established only if general meeting decides and in accordance with national law; removes fixed size limits.
- Requires the Commission to support data reporting and produce annual reports on insolvency cases.
Who is affected
- Microenterprises and SMEs: gain access to simplified winding-up proceedings and protections.
- Employees: recognized as creditors and get representation in creditors' committees.
- Creditors: face stricter conditions for avoidance actions and get information in pre-pack sales.
- Directors of legal entities: have new duties to avoid insolvency and file only when necessary.
Figures and deadlines
Written by AI from the full text · every figure comes from the text · ¶ opens the paragraph · 4 Sept 2026 · Report a problem
Full text
Jump to an amendment (78)
- Amendment 1
- Amendment 2
- Amendment 3
- Amendment 4
- Amendment 5
- Amendment 6
- Amendment 7
- Amendment 8
- Amendment 9
- Amendment 10
- Amendment 11
- Amendment 12
- Amendment 13
- Amendment 14
- Amendment 15
- Amendment 16
- Amendment 17
- Amendment 18
- Amendment 19
- Amendment 20
- Amendment 21
- Amendment 22
- Amendment 23
- Amendment 24
- Amendment 25
- Amendment 26
- Amendment 27
- Amendment 28
- Amendment 29
- Amendment 30
- Amendment 31
- Amendment 32
- Amendment 33
- Amendment 34
- Amendment 35
- Amendment 36
- Amendment 37
- Amendment 38
- Amendment 39
- Amendment 40
- Amendment 41
- Amendment 42
- Amendment 43
- Amendment 44
- Amendment 45
- Amendment 46
- Amendment 47
- Amendment 48
- Amendment 49
- Amendment 50
- Amendment 51
- Amendment 52
- Amendment 53
- Amendment 54
- Amendment 55
- Amendment 56
- Amendment 57
- Amendment 58
- Amendment 59
- Amendment 60
- Amendment 61
- Amendment 62
- Amendment 63
- Amendment 64
- Amendment 65
- Amendment 66
- Amendment 67
- Amendment 68
- Amendment 69
- Amendment 70
- Amendment 71
- Amendment 72
- Amendment 73
- Amendment 74
- Amendment 75
- Amendment 76
- Amendment 77
- Amendment 78
Short justification 315 paragraphs
On 28 November 2023 the ECON opinion for the Committee on Legal Affairs (JURI) on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law was voted and adopted. Nevertheless, it has formally lapsed with the start of the new mandate and the Conference of Presidents has confirmed that ECON is still entitled to give an opinion under rule 57. Indeed, it remains important for ECON Committee to have impact on this key piece of legislation. Following internal consultations, it is deemed appropriate by a majority of the negotiation team to re-table the compromise achieved in the previous mandate. This was a carefully crafted compromise which brought together divergent perspectives on insolvency law harmonisation. Consequently, this document is identical to the opinion adopted in ECON and will be brought to a vote without changes. In any case, the ordinary procedure is followed, so formally a deadline for amendments will still be opened.
AMENDMENTS
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal Affaires, as the committee responsible, to take the following into account:
Amendment 1
Proposal for a directive
Recital 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (1) The objective of this Directive is to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and remove obstacles to the exercise of fundamental freedoms, such as the free movement of capital and freedom of establishment, which result from differences between national laws and procedures in the area of insolvency. | (1) The objective of this Directive is to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market and the Capital Markets Union and remove obstacles to the exercise of fundamental freedoms, such as the free movement of capital and freedom of establishment, which result from differences between national laws and procedures in the area of insolvency. |
Amendment 2
Proposal for a directive
Recital 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (2) The wide differences in substantive insolvency laws acknowledged by Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 create barriers to the internal market by reducing the attractiveness of cross-border investments, thus impacting the cross-border movement of capital within the Union and to and from third countries. | (2) The wide differences in substantive insolvency laws acknowledged by Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council32 and the stark divergence in the quality of domestic insolvency proceedings as measured by the World Bank32a create barriers to the internal market by reducing the attractiveness of cross-border investments, thus impacting the viability of economic operation and the cross-border movement of capital within the Union and to and from third countries. It also means that harmonisation of certain aspects of insolvency law may require considerable changes in some Member States. |
| 32 Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (OJ L 141 5.6.2015, p. 19). | 32 Regulation (EU) 2015/848 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 May 2015 on insolvency proceedings (OJ L 141 5.6.2015, p. 19). |
| 32a https://subnational.doingbusiness.org/en/data/exploretopics/resolving-insolvency/what-measured |
Amendment 3
Read the rest (303 paragraphs)
Proposal for a directive
Recital 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (3) Insolvency proceedings ensure the orderly winding down or restructuring of companies or entrepreneurs in financial and economic distress. These proceedings are key in financial investments, as they determine the final recovery value of such investments. Diverging rules among Member States have contributed to increasing legal uncertainty and unpredictability about insolvency proceedings’ outcome, so raising barriers especially for cross-border investments in the internal market. Large divergences in recovery value and time required to complete insolvency proceedings across the Union have negative repercussions on cost predictability for creditors and investors in cross-border situations in the internal market. | (3) Insolvency proceedings ensure the orderly winding down or restructuring of companies or entrepreneurs in financial and economic distress. These proceedings are key in financial investments, as they determine the final recovery value of such investments. Diverging rules among Member States have contributed to increasing legal uncertainty and unpredictability about the firms value and insolvency proceedings’ outcome, so raising barriers especially for cross-border investments in the internal market. This uncertainty acts as a disincentive which obstructs the freedom of establishment of undertakings and the willingness to entrepreneurship thus harming the proper functioning of the internal market. Small and medium-sized enterprises, in particular, often lack the necessary resources to assess risks related to cross-border activities. Large divergences in recovery value and time required to complete insolvency proceedings across the Union have negative repercussions on cost predictability for creditors and investors in cross-border situations in the internal market, which acts as a disincentive to investment and makes it more difficult to attract foreign capital into the Union. |
Amendment 4
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (4) The integration of the internal market in the area of insolvency laws pursued by this Directive is a key tool for a more efficient functioning of the capital markets in the European Union, including greater access to corporate financing. Therefore, it is necessary to set out minimum requirements in targeted areas of national insolvency proceedings, which have a significant impact on the efficiency and length of such proceedings, especially on cross-border insolvency proceedings. | (4) The integration of the internal market in the area of insolvency laws pursued by this Directive is a key tool for a more efficient functioning of the capital markets in the European Union, including greater access to corporate financing, diversification of portfolios and investment opportunities, while also preventing the build-up of non-performing loans (NPL). Therefore, it is necessary to set out minimum requirements in targeted areas of national insolvency proceedings, as well as creating heightened risks and costs for investors, which have a significant impact on the efficiency and length of such proceedings, especially on cross-border insolvency proceedings. |
Amendment 5
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (4a) The minimum standards laid down in this Directive aim to harmonise Member States’ insolvency law, in particular when it comes to maximisation of legal certainty about a firm’s value, improving efficiency of insolvency proceedings both in terms of costs and length (especially for microenterprises and SMEs), protecting employees and preserving jobs and improving predictability and fair distribution of value amongst creditors. It should be understood that employees, to whom a company ows a debt the moment they deliver their labour, can be regarded as creditors. |
Amendment 6
Proposal for a directive
Recital 4 b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (4b) Harmonisation of insolvency proceedings is associated with lower costs of credit, increased access to credit, improved creditor recovery and more effective protection of workers. At the same time one of the goals when completing the Capital Market Union is to stimulate more equity financing, and figures on how more debt financing through better protection of creditor rights will impact equity financing, are inconclusive. Therefore, a legal instrument to harmonise the legislative solutions for the debt-equity bias, without prejudice to the legitimate and effective use of debt instruments, is necessary in order to place debt and equity financing on an equal footing in the Union in parallel with this Directive. |
Amendment 7
Proposal for a directive
Recital 5 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (5a) Exceptionally, when the perfection of a legal act requires registration in a public register, e.g. the land register, the legal act may be deemed to be perfected before the registration takes place. |
Amendment 8
Proposal for a directive
Recital 8
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (8) In the context of avoidance actions, a distinction should be made between legal acts where the claim of the counterparty was due and enforceable and has been satisfied in the owed manner (congruent coverages) and those where performance was not entirely in accordance with the creditor’s claim (incongruent coverage). Incongruent coverages include, in particular, premature payments, the satisfaction with unusual means of payments, the subsequent collateralisation of a so far unsecured claim which was not already agreed upon in the original debt agreement, granting an extraordinary termination right or other amendments not provided for in the underlying contract, the waiver of legal defences or objections or the acknowledgement of disputable debts. In the case of congruent coverages, the avoidance ground of preferences can only be invoked if the creditor of the legal act that can be declared void knew, or should have known, at the time of the transaction that the debtor was insolvent. | (8) In the context of avoidance actions, a distinction should be made between legal acts where the claim of the counterparty was due and enforceable and has been satisfied in the owed manner (congruent coverages) and those where performance was not entirely in accordance with the creditor’s claim (incongruent coverage). Incongruent coverages include, in particular, premature payments, the satisfaction with unusual means of payments, the subsequent collateralisation of a so far unsecured claim which was not already agreed upon in the original debt agreement, granting an extraordinary termination right or other amendments not provided for in the underlying contract, the waiver of legal defences or objections or the acknowledgement of disputable debts. In the case of congruent coverages, the avoidance ground of preferences can only be invoked if the creditor of the legal act that can be declared void knew at the time of the transaction that the debtor was insolvent. |
Amendment 9
Proposal for a directive
Recital 25
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (25) In order to guarantee that the business is sold at the best market value during the pre-pack proceedings, Member States should either ensure high standards of competitiveness, transparency and fairness of the sale process conducted in the preparation phase, or provide that the court runs a brief public auction after the opening of the liquidation phase of the proceedings. | (25) In order to guarantee that the business is sold at the best market value during the pre-pack proceedings, Member States should either ensure high standards of competitiveness, transparency and fairness of the sale process conducted in the preparation phase, as well as access to independent valuation where required or provide that the court runs a brief public auction after the opening of the liquidation phase of the proceedings. |
Amendment 10
Proposal for a directive
Recital 28
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (28) The opening of insolvency proceedings should not result in the early termination of contracts under which the parties still have obligations to perform (executory contracts), which are necessary for the continuation of business operations. Such termination would unduly jeopardise the value of the business, or part thereof, to be sold in the pre-pack proceedings. It should, therefore, be ensured that those contracts are assigned to the acquirer of the business of the debtor or part thereof, even without the consent of the counterparty of the debtor to those contracts. Nonetheless, there are situations where the assignment of the executory contracts cannot be reasonably expected, such as when the acquirer is a competitor of the counterparty of the contract. Similarly, the court may come to the conclusion in an individual assessment of an executory contract that its termination would serve the interests of the business of the debtor better than its assignment, such as when the assignment of the contract would result in a disproportionate burden for the business. The court should not be allowed, however, to terminate executory contracts relating to licenses of intellectual and industrial property rights, as they are usually key components of the operations of the business being sold. | (28) The opening of insolvency proceedings should not result in the early termination of contracts under which the parties still have obligations to perform (executory contracts), which are necessary for the continuation of business operations. Such termination would unduly jeopardise the value of the business, or part thereof, to be sold in the pre-pack proceedings. It should, therefore, be ensured that those contracts are assigned to the acquirer of the business of the debtor or part thereof, after consultation of the counterparty of the debtor to those contracts. Nonetheless, there are situations where the assignment of the executory contracts cannot be allowed, such as when the acquirer is a competitor of the counterparty of the contract or when it binds employees to a contract partner they have not chosen. Similarly, the court may come to the conclusion in an individual assessment of an executory contract that its termination would serve the interests of the business of the debtor better than its assignment, such as when the assignment of the contract would result in a disproportionate burden for the business. The court should not be allowed, however, to terminate executory contracts relating to licenses of intellectual and industrial property rights, as they are usually key components of the operations of the business being sold. |
Amendment 11
Proposal for a directive
Recital 35
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (35) National insolvency rules are not always fit to treat insolvent microenterprises properly and in a proportionate manner. Taking into account the unique characteristics of microenterprises and their specific needs in financial distress, in particular the need for faster, simpler, and affordable procedures should be acknowledged, separate insolvency proceedings should be developed at national level in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. Although the provisions of this Directive concerning simplified winding-up proceedings only apply to microenterprises, it should be possible for Member States to extend their application also to small and medium-sized enterprises that are not microenterprises. | (35) National insolvency rules are not always fit to treat insolvent microenterprises and SMEs properly and in a proportionate manner. Taking into account the unique characteristics of microenterprises and SMEs and their specific needs in financial distress, in particular the need for faster, simpler, and affordable procedures should be acknowledged, separate insolvency proceedings should be developed at national level in accordance with the provisions of this Directive. |
Amendment 12
Proposal for a directive
Recital 38
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (38) In order to establish cost-effective and expeditious simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises, short deadlines should be introduced. Similarly, formalities for all procedural steps, including for the opening of the proceedings, the lodgement and the admission of claims, the establishment of the insolvency estate and the realisation of the assets should be minimised. A standard form should be used for submitting a request to open simplified winding-up proceedings and electronic means should be used for all communications between the competent authority, and where relevant, the insolvency practitioner, and the parties to the proceedings. | (38) In order to establish cost-effective and expeditious simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises and SMEs, short deadlines should be introduced. Similarly, formalities for all procedural steps, including for the opening of the proceedings, the lodgement and the admission of claims, the establishment of the insolvency estate and the realisation of the assets should be minimised. A standard form should be used for submitting a request to open simplified winding-up proceedings and electronic means should be used for all communications between the competent authority, and where relevant, the insolvency practitioner, and the parties to the proceedings. |
Amendment 13
Proposal for a directive
Recital 39
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (39) All microenterprises should be able to commence proceedings to address their financial difficulties and obtain a discharge. Access to simplified winding-up proceedings should not depend on the microenterprise’s ability to cover the administrative costs of such proceedings. The laws of the Member States should introduce rules for covering the costs of administering simplified winding-up proceedings where assets and sources of revenue of the debtor are insufficient to cover those costs. | (39) All microenterprises and SMEs should be able to commence proceedings to address their financial difficulties and obtain a discharge. Access to simplified winding-up proceedings should not depend on their ability to cover the administrative costs of such proceedings. The laws of the Member States should introduce rules for covering the costs of administering simplified winding-up proceedings where assets and sources of revenue of the debtor are insufficient to cover those costs. |
Amendment 14
Proposal for a directive
Recital 40
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (40) In simplified winding-up proceedings, the appointment of an insolvency practitioner is usually unnecessary given the simple business operations carried out by the microenterprises that make their supervision by the competent authority possible and sufficient. Therefore, the debtor should remain in control of its assets and day-to-day operation of the business. At the same time, to ensure that simplified winding-up proceedings can be conducted effectively and efficiently, the debtor should, upon commencement of and throughout the proceedings, provide accurate, reliable and complete information relating to its financial position and business affairs. | deleted |
Amendment 15
Proposal for a directive
Recital 41
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (41) A microenterprise debtor should be able to benefit from a temporary stay of individual enforcement actions, in order to be able to preserve the value of the insolvency estate and ensure a fair and orderly conduct of the proceedings. Member States, however, may allow competent authorities to exclude certain claims from the scope of the stay, in well-defined circumstances. | (41) A microenterprise or SME debtor should be able to benefit from a temporary stay of individual enforcement actions, in order to be able to preserve the value of the insolvency estate and ensure a fair and orderly conduct of the proceedings. Member States, however, may allow competent authorities to exclude certain claims from the scope of the stay, in well-defined circumstances. |
Amendment 16
Proposal for a directive
Recital 42
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (42) Disputed claims should be dealt with in a way that does not unnecessarily complicate the conduct of simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises. If disputed claims cannot be quickly dealt with, the ability to dispute a claim may be used to create unnecessary delays. In deciding on the treatment of a disputed claim, the competent authority should be empowered to allow the continuation of the simplified winding-up proceedings with respect to undisputed claims only. | (42) Disputed claims should be dealt with in a way that does not unnecessarily complicate the conduct of simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises and for SMEs. If disputed claims cannot be quickly dealt with, the ability to dispute a claim may be used to create unnecessary delays. In deciding on the treatment of a disputed claim, the competent authority should be empowered to allow the continuation of the simplified winding-up proceedings with respect to undisputed claims only. |
Amendment 17
Proposal for a directive
Recital 50
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (50) Fair representation of creditors in the creditors’ committee is particularly important in relation to unsecured creditors that are micro, small or medium-sized enterprises, which in the case of insolvency of a debtor which is a large enterprise, if not paid promptly, are also exposed to insolvency (domino effect). Proper representation in the creditors’ committee of such creditors could ensure that in the course of the distribution of the recovered proceeds they receive their parts more expeditiously. | (50) Fair representation of creditors in the creditors’ committee is particularly important to employees, for whom the delay of wage payments regularly poses an existential threat, as well as to unsecured creditors that are micro, small or medium-sized enterprises, which in the case of insolvency of a debtor which is a large enterprise, if not paid promptly, are also exposed to insolvency (domino effect). Proper representation in the creditors’ committee of such creditors, including the representation of interests of employees through the appointment of a representatitive in the creditors’ committee, could ensure that in the course of the distribution of the recovered proceeds they receive their parts more expeditiously. |
Amendment 18
Proposal for a directive
Recital 53
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (53) Members of the creditors’ committee retain discretion in the organisation of the work, as long as the working methods are lawful, transparent and effective. Member States should therefore require that the creditors’ committee set out the working methods, specifying how meetings should be run, who could attend and vote, and how the impartiality and the confidentiality of the work of the committee is ensured. These working methods should be allowed to also set out a role for employers’ representatives or transparency towards other creditors. Creditors should be able to participate and vote electronically or delegate the voting right to a third person, provided this person is duly authorised. This possibility would be particularly beneficial for creditors resident in other Member States. | (53) Members of the creditors’ committee retain discretion in the organisation of the work, as long as the working methods are lawful, transparent and effective. Member States should therefore require that the creditors’ committee set out the working methods, specifying how meetings should be run, who could attend and vote, and how the impartiality and the confidentiality of the work of the committee is ensured. These working methods should be allowed to also set out a role for employers’ and employees’ representatives or transparency towards other creditors. Creditors should be able to participate and vote electronically or delegate the voting right to a third person, provided this person is duly authorised. This possibility would be particularly beneficial for creditors resident in other Member States. |
Amendment 19
Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point e
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (e) simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises; | (e) simplified winding-up proceedings for microenterprises and SMEs; |
Amendment 20
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q – subparagraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (q) ‘party closely related to the debtor’ means persons, including legal persons, with preferential access to non-public information on the affairs of the debtor. | (q) ‘party closely related to the debtor’ means persons, including legal persons, provided they have preferential access to non-public information on the affairs of the debtor. |
Amendment 21
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Where the debtor is a natural person, closely related parties shall include in particular: | Where the debtor is a natural person: |
Amendment 22
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q – subparagraph 3 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Where the debtor is a legal entity, closely related parties shall include in particular: | Where the debtor is a legal entity: |
Amendment 23
Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point q a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (qa) ‘contract for the lease of goods’ means a contract under which one party, the lessor, undertakes to provide the other party, the lessee, with a temporary right of use of goods in exchange for rent without the parties having agreed that ownership will be transferred after a period with right of use. The rent may be in the form of money or other value. |
Amendment 24
Proposal for a directive
Article 4 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may adopt or maintain rules according to which exceptionally a legal act which in order to be perfected must be registered in a public register is deemed to be perfected before the registration takes place. |
Amendment 25
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| This Directive is without prejudice to workers’ rights to be informed and consulted in accordance with Union and national law on insolvency plans or elements of insolvency plans which may impact on terms and conditions of employment, structure of the undertaking, probable development and production and sales, substantial changes concerning organisation, introduction of new working methods or production processes, transfers of production, mergers, cut-backs or closures of undertakings or important parts thereof, and collective redundancies. |
Amendment 26
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) that creditor knew, or should have known, that the debtor was unable to pay its mature debts or that a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings has been submitted. | (b) that creditor knew that the debtor was unable to pay its mature debts or that a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings has been submitted. |
Amendment 27
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ca) where relevant, in line with national law, legal acts that serve as satisfaction or collateralisation of claims of social security authorities. |
Amendment 28
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that where payments on bills of exchange or cheques are concerned as referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b), the amount paid on the bill or cheque shall be restituted by the last endorser or, if the latter endorsed the bill on account of a third party, by such party if the last endorser or the third party knew or should have known that the debtor was unable to pay its mature debts or that a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings has been submitted at the moment of endorsing the bill or having it endorsed. This knowledge is presumed if the last endorser or the third party was a party closely related to the debtor. | Member States shall ensure that where payments on bills of exchange or cheques are concerned as referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b), the amount paid on the bill or cheque shall be restituted by the last endorser or, if the latter endorsed the bill on account of a third party, by such party if the last endorser or the third party knew that the debtor was unable to pay its mature debts or that a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings has been submitted at the moment of endorsing the bill or having it endorsed. This knowledge is presumed if the last endorser or the third party was a party closely related to the debtor. |
Amendment 29
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that legal acts by which the debtor has intentionally caused a detriment to the general body of creditors can be declared void where both of the following conditions are met: | Member States shall ensure that legal acts by which the debtor has intentionally caused a detriment to the general body of creditors can be declared void by court order where it is deemed just and equitable to do so where both of the following conditions are met: |
Amendment 30
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) the other party to the legal act knew or should have known of the debtor’s intent to cause a detriment to the general body of creditors. | (b) the other party to the legal act knew of the debtor’s intent to cause a detriment to the general body of creditors. |
Amendment 31
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that the rights laid down in Article 9 are enforceable against an heir or another universal successor of the party which benefitted from the legal act that has been declared void. | 1. Member States shall ensure that the rights laid down in Article 9 are enforceable against an heir or another universal successor of the party which benefitted from the legal act that has been declared void, unless the acquisition was in good faith. |
Amendment 32
Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) the successor knew or should have known the circumstances on which the avoidance action is based. | (b) the successor knew the circumstances on which the avoidance action is based. |
Amendment 33
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that pre-pack proceedings are composed of the following two consecutive phases | 1. Member States may introduce pre-pack proceedings in situations where the debtor is in a situation of likelihood of insolvency or is insolvent in accordance with national law. Member States shall ensure that pre-pack proceedings are composed of the following two consecutive phases: |
Amendment 34
Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. This Directive shall not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining provisions relating to pre-pack proceedings where such provisions provide a greater protection of workers or their representatives than those set out in this Title. |
Amendment 35
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall provide that, upon request of the debtor, the court appoints a monitor. | Member States shall provide that, upon request of the debtor, the court appoints a monitor where it is appropriate to do so. |
Amendment 36
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (aa) carries out its tasks in consultation with creditors, where reasonable; |
Amendment 37
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a b (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ab) may have recourse to an independent valuation where appropriate in order to satisfy requirements related to achieving market value; |
Amendment 38
Proposal for a directive
Article 22 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point d a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (da) ensures participation of a creditors’ committee; |
Amendment 39
Proposal for a directive
Article 23 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall include the obtaining of the services of an independent valuation practitioner as a means of gauging a fair market price. |
Amendment 40
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that the sale process carried out during the preparation phase is competitive, transparent, fair and meets market standards. | 1. Member States shall ensure that the sale process carried out during the preparation phase is competitive, transparent, fair and meets market and social standards, and aims to achieve fair value for the purchase. |
Amendment 41
Proposal for a directive
Article 24 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Where the sale process only produces one binding offer, that offer shall be deemed to reflect the business market price. | 2. Where the sale process only produces one binding offer, that offer shall be deemed to reflect the business market price, unless it can be demonstrated otherwise. |
Amendment 42
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that the acquirer of the debtor’s business or part thereof is assigned the executory contracts which are necessary for the continuation of the debtor’s business and the suspension of which would lead to a business standstill. The assignment shall not require the consent of the debtor’s counterparty or counterparties. | Member States shall ensure that the acquirer of the debtor’s business or part thereof is assigned the executory contracts which are necessary for the continuation of the debtor’s business. The assignment shall not require the consent of the debtor’s counterparty or counterparties. |
Amendment 43
Proposal for a directive
Article 27 – paragraph 3 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3a. This Article is without prejudice to the rights and obligations laid down in Directive 2001/23/EC and the right of an employee to object to the transfer of her or his employment contract under national law. |
Amendment 44
Proposal for a directive
Article 30 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that the criteria to select the best bid in the pre-pack proceedings are the same as the criteria used to select between competing offers in winding-up proceedings. | Member States shall ensure that the criteria to select the best bid in the pre-pack proceedings include the safeguarding of employment and are the same as the criteria used to select between competing offers in winding-up proceedings. |
Amendment 45
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) other parties to the sale process receive adequate information on the existence of parties closely related to the debtor and their relation to the latter; | (b) other parties to the sale process, including creditors, receive adequate information on the existence of parties closely related to the debtor and their relation to the latter; |
Amendment 46
Proposal for a directive
Article 32 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States may provide that where it is proved that the disclosure duty referred to in the first subparagraph, point (a), was breached, the court revokes the benefits referred to in Article 28. | Member States may provide that where it is proved that the disclosure duty referred to in the first subparagraph, point (a) and the duty to inform referred to in the first subparagraph, point (b), were breached, the court revokes the benefits referred to in Article 28. |
Amendment 47
Proposal for a directive
Article 36 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that, where a legal entity becomes insolvent, its directors are obliged to submit a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings with the court no later than 3 months after the directors became aware or can reasonably be expected to have been aware that the legal entity is insolvent. | Member States shall ensure that, where a legal entity is likely to become insolvent, its directors are obliged to take steps to avoid insolvency, and where insolvency can not be avoided, take all possible measures to avoid bankruptcy. In doing so, the directors shall have regard to: |
| (a) the interests of the creditors; and | |
| (b) the need to avoid deliberate or grossly negligent conduct that threatens the viability of the business of the company. | |
| Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, Member States shall ensure that directors of an insolvent legal entity submit a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings with the court without undue delay after the directors became aware or can reasonably be expected to have been aware that the legal entity is insolvent. |
Amendment 48
Proposal for a directive
Article 37 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to national rules on civil liability for the breach of the duty of directors to submit a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings as set out in Article 36 that are stricter towards directors. | 2. Paragraph 1 shall be without prejudice to national rules on civil liability for the breach of the duty of directors to avoid insolvency or bankruptcy and to submit a request for the opening of insolvency proceedings as set out in Article 36 that are stricter towards directors. |
Amendment 49
Proposal for a directive
Title VI – title
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| WINDING-UP OF INSOLVENT MICROENTERPRISES | RULES ON WINDING-UP OF MICROENTERPRISES AND SMES |
Amendment 50
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – title
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Rules on winding-up of microenterprises | Rules on winding-up of microenterprises and SMEs |
Amendment 51
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that microenterprises, when insolvent, have access to simplified winding-up proceedings that comply with the provisions laid down in this Title. | 1. Member States shall ensure that microenterprises and SMEs, when insolvent, have access to simplified winding-up proceedings that comply with the provisions laid down in this Title. |
Amendment 52
Proposal for a directive
Article 38 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. A microenterprise shall be deemed insolvent for the purposes of simplified winding-up proceedings when it is generally unable to pay its debts as they mature. Member States shall set out the conditions under which a microenterprise is deemed to be generally unable to pay its debts as they mature and ensure that these conditions are clear, simple and easily ascertainable by the microenterprise concerned. | 2. A microenterprise or an SME shall be deemed insolvent for the purposes of simplified winding-up proceedings when it is generally unable to pay its debts as they mature. Member States shall set out the conditions under which a microenterprise or an SME is deemed to be generally unable to pay its debts as they mature and ensure that these conditions are clear, simple and easily ascertainable by the microenterprise or SME concerned. |
Amendment 53
Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that in simplified winding-up proceedings an insolvency practitioner may only be appointed if both of the following conditions are met: | Member States shall ensure that in simplified winding-up proceedings the debtor, a creditor or a group of creditors may request that an insolvency practitioner is not appointed provided that the microenterprise or SME has an up-to-date current balance sheet. The request shall demonstrate that the microenterprise or SME has submitted its most recent required annual statement to the relevant national authorities. |
| (a) the debtor, a creditor or a group of creditors requests such an appointment; | |
| (b) the costs of the intervention of the insolvency practitioner can be funded by the insolvency estate or by the party that requested the appointment. |
Amendment 54
Proposal for a directive
Article 39 – paragraph 1 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| The lack of funding by the insolvency estate or by the party that requested the appointment shall not constitute a reason for requesting that an insolvency practitioner is not appointed. |
Amendment 55
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that insolvent microenterprises can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings to a competent authority. | 1. Member States shall ensure that insolvent microenterprises and SMEs can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings to a competent authority. |
Amendment 56
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. Member States shall ensure that any creditor of an insolvent microenterprise can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings against the microenterprise to a competent authority. The microenterprise concerned shall be given the opportunity to respond to the request, by contesting or consenting to it. | 2. Member States shall ensure that any creditor of an insolvent microenterprise or SME can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings against the microenterprise or SME to a competent authority. The microenterprise or SME concerned shall be given the opportunity to respond to the request, by contesting or consenting to it. |
Amendment 57
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States shall ensure that microenterprises can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings using a standard form. | 3. Member States shall ensure that microenterprises and SMEs can submit a request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings using a standard form. |
Amendment 58
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) if the microenterprise is a legal person, the debtor’s name, registration number, registered office or, if different, postal address; | (a) if the microenterprise or SME is a legal person, the debtor’s name, registration number, registered office or, if different, postal address; |
Amendment 59
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point b
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (b) if the microenterprise is an entrepreneur, the debtor’s name, registration number, if any, and postal address or, where the address is protected, the debtor's place and date of birth; | (b) if the microenterprise or SME is an entrepreneur, the debtor’s name, registration number, if any, and postal address or, where the address is protected, the debtor's place and date of birth; |
Amendment 60
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point c
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (c) a list of the assets of the microenterprise; | (c) a list of the assets of the microenterprise or SME; |
Amendment 61
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point d
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (d) name, address or other contact details of creditors of the microenterprise, as known to the microenterprise at the time of the submission of the request, | (d) name, address or other contact details of creditors of the microenterprise or SME, as known to the microenterprise or SME at the time of the submission of the request, |
Amendment 62
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point e
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (e) the list of the claims against the microenterprise and, for each claim, its amount specifying the principal and, where applicable, interest and the date on which it arose and the date on which it became due, if different; | (e) the list of the claims against the microenterprise or SME and, for each claim, its amount specifying the principal and, where applicable, interest and the date on which it arose and the date on which it became due, if different; |
Amendment 63
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (ea) a list with all commercial transactions in the period of six months preceding the request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings; |
Amendment 64
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 4 – point f
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (f) if security in rem or a reservation of title is alleged in respect of a certain claim and, if so, what assets are covered by the security interest. | (f) if security in rem or a reservation of title exists in respect of a certain claim and, if so, what assets are covered by the security interest. |
Amendment 65
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 6
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 6. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor, and the microenterprise expressed its consent to the opening of the proceedings, the microenterprise is required to submit the information listed in paragraph 4 together with the response referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, where available. | 6. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor, and the microenterprise or SME expressed its consent to the opening of the proceedings, the microenterprise or SME is required to submit the information listed in paragraph 4 together with the response referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, where available. |
Amendment 66
Proposal for a directive
Article 41 – paragraph 7
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 7. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor and the competent authority opens such proceedings despite the microenterprise contesting or not responding to the request the microenterprise is required to submit the information listed in paragraph 4 of this Article no later than two weeks following the receipt of the notice of opening. | 7. Member States shall ensure that when the request for opening simplified winding-up proceedings is submitted by a creditor and the competent authority opens such proceedings despite the microenterprise or SME contesting or not responding to the request the microenterprise or SME is required to submit the information listed in paragraph 4 of this Article no later than two weeks following the receipt of the notice of opening. |
Amendment 67
Proposal for a directive
Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point a
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| (a) the debtor is not a microenterprise; | (a) the debtor is not a microenterprise or an SME; |
Amendment 68
Proposal for a directive
Article 42 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States shall ensure that the microenterprise, or any creditor of the microenterprise may challenge before a court the decision on the request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings. The challenge has no suspensive effect on the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings and shall be dealt with promptly by the court. | 3. Member States shall ensure that the microenterprise, SME or any creditor of the microenterprise or SME may challenge before a court the decision on the request for the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings. The challenge has no suspensive effect on the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings and shall be dealt with promptly by the court. |
Amendment 69
Proposal for a directive
Article 44 – paragraph 2 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2a. Paragraph 1 shall not apply to employees’ claims. | |
| By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, Member States may apply paragraph 1 to employees’ claims if, and to the extent that, Member States ensure that the payment of such claims is guaranteed in preventive restructuring frameworks at a similar level of protection. |
Amendment 70
Proposal for a directive
Article 48 – paragraph 2
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 2. The assets of the insolvency estate shall include assets in the possession of the debtor at the time of the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings, assets acquired after the submission of the request for opening of such proceedings and assets recovered through avoidance actions or other actions. | 2. The assets of the insolvency estate shall include assets in the possession of the debtor at the time of the opening of simplified winding-up proceedings, assets acquired after the submission of the request for opening of such proceedings and assets recovered through avoidance actions or other actions. This paragraph is without prejudice to assets that are temporarily in possession of the debtor in execution of a contract for the lease of goods. |
Amendment 71
Proposal for a directive
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that in simplified winding-up proceedings once the insolvency estate has been established and the list of claims against the debtor has been determined, the competent authority: | 1. Member States shall ensure that in simplified winding-up proceedings once the insolvency estate has been established and the list of claims against the debtor has been determined, the competent authority, or where appointed, the insolvency practitioner: |
Amendment 72
Proposal for a directive
Article 49 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States shall ensure that, where the competent authority proceeds with the realisation of the debtor’s assets as referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), the competent authority also specifies the means of realisation of the assets. Other means than the sale of the debtor’s assets through an electronic public auction may only be selected, if their use is deemed more appropriate in light of the nature of the assets or the circumstances of the proceedings. | 3. Member States shall ensure that, where the competent authority proceeds with the realisation of the debtor’s assets as referred to in paragraph 1, point (a), the competent authority, or where appointed, the insolvency practitioner also specifies the means of realisation of the assets. Other means than the sale of the debtor’s assets through an electronic public auction may only be selected, if their use is deemed more appropriate in light of the nature of the assets or the circumstances of the proceedings. |
Amendment 73
Proposal for a directive
Article 58 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that a creditors’ committee is established only if the general meeting of creditors so decides. | 1. Member States shall ensure that a creditors’ committee is established only if the general meeting of creditors so decides and in accordance with national law. |
Amendment 74
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 1. Member States shall ensure that the members of the creditors’ committee are appointed either at the general meeting of creditors or by decision of the court, within 30 days from the date of the opening of the proceedings as referred to in Article 24(2), point (a) of Regulation (EU) 2015/848. | 1. Member States shall ensure that the members of the creditors’ committee are appointed either at the general meeting of creditors or by decision of the court, without undue delay from the date of the opening of the proceedings as referred to in Article 24(2), point (a) of Regulation (EU) 2015/848. |
Amendment 75
Proposal for a directive
Article 59 – paragraph 3
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| 3. Member States shall ensure that the appointed members of the creditors’ committee fairly reflect the different interests of creditors or groups thereof. | 3. Member States may ensure that the appointed members of the creditors’ committee fairly reflect the different interests of creditors or groups thereof. |
Amendment 76
Proposal for a directive
Article 61 – paragraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that the number of members composing the creditors’ committee is at least 3 and does not exceed 7. | deleted |
Amendment 77
Proposal for a directive
Article 64 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Member States shall ensure that the creditors’ committee’s function is to ensure that in the conduct of the insolvency proceedings the creditors’ interests are protected and individual creditors are involved. | Member States shall ensure that the creditors’ committee’s function is to ensure that in the conduct of the insolvency proceedings the workers’ and creditors’ interests are protected and individual creditors as well as including employees or their representatives are involved. |
Amendment 78
Proposal for a directive
Article 69 a (new)
| Text proposed by the Commission | Amendment |
|---|---|
| Article 69a | |
| Data reporting | |
| 1. The Commission, in consultation with the European Banking Authority, shall offer support to Member States to enhance and harmonise data reporting in order to allow for a regular assessment of the effectiveness of national insolvency proceedings. | |
| 2. By … [two years from the entry into force of this Directive] and every year thereafter, the Commission shall, in cooperation with the European Banking Authority, draw up an annual report on insolvency cases under the relevant insolvency regulation so that the effectiveness of the system established can be assessed. |
Annex: entities or persons from whom the rapporteur has received input 4 paragraphs
Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for the opinion received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion, prior to the adoption thereof in committee:
| Entity and/or person |
| Verband Insolvenzverwalter und Sachwalter DeutschlandsConseil national des administrateurs judiciaires et des mandataires judiciaires |
| Deutsche Sozialversicherung Arbeitsgemeinschaft Europa |
| Hanbury Strategy and Communications Limited |
| Leaseurope |
| CENTR - Council of European Top Level Domain Registries |
| Deutscher Gewerkschaftsbund |
| Kreditschutzverband von 1870 |
| Bundesnotarkammer K.d.ö.R. |
| German Bar Association |
| Dutch Federation of Pension Funds |
| European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC) |
| SMEunited |
The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for the opinion.
Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for the opinion declares that he has submitted to the concerned natural persons the European Parliament's Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.
Procedure pages
How the committees handled the text, and how their members voted on it.
Procedure – committee asked for opinion 1 paragraph
| Title | Harmonising certain aspects of insolvency law | |
| References | COM(2022)0702 – C9-0410/2022 – 2022/0408(COD) | |
| Committee(s) responsible | JURI | |
| Opinion by Date announced in plenary | ECON 26.1.2023 | |
| Rapporteur for the opinion Date appointed | René Repasi 12.9.2024 | |
| Discussed in committee | 20.2.2025 | |
| Date adopted | 19.3.2025 | |
| Result of final vote | +: –: 0: | 43 0 7 |
| Members present for the final vote | Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Francisco Assis, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Stefan Berger, Damian Boeselager, Giovanni Crosetto, Fabio De Masi, Engin Eroglu, Markus Ferber, Jonás Fernández, Dirk Gotink, Michalis Hadjipantela, Eero Heinäluoma, Billy Kelleher, Kinga Kollár, Tomáš Kubín, Aurore Lalucq, Marlena Maląg, Jorge Martín Frías, Fulvio Martusciello, Siegfried Mureşan, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Denis Nesci, Luděk Niedermayer, Ľudovít Ódor, Nikos Papandreou, Gaetano Pedulla’, Lídia Pereira, Kira Marie Peter-Hansen, Pierre Pimpie, Evelyn Regner, Jussi Saramo, Paulius Saudargas, Ralf Seekatz, Irene Tinagli, Johan Van Overtveldt, Lara Wolters, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin, Roberts Zīle | |
| Substitutes present for the final vote | Matthias Ecke, Fernand Kartheiser, Martine Kemp, Morten Løkkegaard, Tsvetelina Penkova | |
| Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote | Valérie Devaux, Sebastian Kruis, Jana Nagyová, Stanislav Stoyanov, Flavio Tosi |
Final vote by roll call by the committee asked for opinion 3 paragraphs
43 · For
- ECR
- Giovanni Crosetto, Fernand Kartheiser, Marlena Maląg, Denis Nesci, Johan Van Overtveldt, Roberts Zīle
- EPP
- Georgios Aftias, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Stefan Berger, Markus Ferber, Dirk Gotink, Michalis Hadjipantela, Martine Kemp, Kinga Kollár, Fulvio Martusciello, Siegfried Mureşan, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Luděk Niedermayer, Lídia Pereira, Paulius Saudargas, Ralf Seekatz, Flavio Tosi
- Renew
- Valérie Devaux, Engin Eroglu, Billy Kelleher, Morten Løkkegaard, Ľudovít Ódor, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin
- S&D
- Francisco Assis, Matthias Ecke, Jonás Fernández, Eero Heinäluoma, Aurore Lalucq, Nikos Papandreou, Tsvetelina Penkova, Evelyn Regner, Irene Tinagli, Lara Wolters
- The Left
- Gaetano Pedulla', Jussi Saramo
- Greens
- Rasmus Andresen, Damian Boeselager, Kira Marie Peter-Hansen
0 · Against
7 · Abstained
- ESN
- Stanislav Stoyanov
- No group
- Fabio De Masi
- Patriots
- Sebastian Kruis, Tomáš Kubín, Jorge Martín Frías, Jana Nagyová, Pierre Pimpie