Amending Directives (EU) 2016/2341 and 2016/97 as regards the strengthening of the framework for occupational retirement provision

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 1d

Or. en

Justification

Paragraphs 1c and 1d transplant the MiFID II individual suitability framework into a collective occupational pension context where individual preference elicitation is operationally unworkable. Reflecting disaggregated member preferences within collective DB schemes conflicts with their fundamental structure. The definitions cross-reference SFDR provisions currently under revision, creating legal uncertainty.

Amendment 339

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 1d

Or. en

Justification

IORPs should remain free to decide how to gauge sustainability preferences, since this is not in all cases about individual investment choices (could also be collective).

Amendment 340

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 1d

Or. en

Justification

Participants, rather than regulators or IORP managers, should determine whether their pension savings may be used for green investments and the maximum permissible allocation. The approach respects participant choice without creating a compulsory green investment quota.

Amendment 341

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, René Repasi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 1d

Or. en

Amendment 342

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point b b (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 4

Or. en

(32016L2341)

Amendment 343

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Investment allocations should follow the prudent person principle and the circumstances of each pension scheme. Statutory quotas and privileged treatment for particular Union investment vehicles risk distorting portfolios and lowering returns.

Amendment 344

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 345

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The rule-making power should with Member States directly, not with NCAs.

Amendment 346

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 347

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. es

Amendment 348

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

Or. es

Amendment 349

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 – point ca

Or. en

Amendment 350

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 – point d

Or. en

Amendment 351

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directives (EU) 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2 – point d

Or. en

Amendment 352

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive 2016/2341

Article 19 – paragraph 6 – suparagraph 2 – point d a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 353

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Art 19 – paragraph 6a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 354

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point d – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Art 19 – paragraph 8

Or. en

Amendment 355

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point d b (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Art 19 – paragraph 8

Or. en

(32016L2341)

Amendment 356

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 22 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Art 19 a (new)

Or. en

Justification

The amendment establishes a clear hierarchy of duties. Pension returns and the interests of savers must prevail over political objectives.

Amendment 357

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Justification

Governance requirements should focus on sound management, internal controls, conflicts of interest and financial risk. Mandatory ESG consideration introduces political criteria into a prudential governance framework.

Amendment 358

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 359

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

The requirement for an effective internal control system is appropriately set as a principles-based outcome standard. Prescribing its specific components at Union level overrides the proportionality regime, under which governance architecture should reflect the size, nature, scale and complexity of each IORP.

Amendment 360

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 4a

Or. en

Amendment 361

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 7a (new)

Or. en

Justification

To strengthen trust of members and beneficiaries in IORPs, it is important that (the appearance of) conflicts of interest are avoided. One of the reasons that Member States find it difficult to develop funded pension systems and IORPs is because citizens often do not trust private entities with their money and pensions. Having a clear separation between the interests and persons that manage and supervise an IORP is therefore important, to safeguard that the interest of members and beneficiaries is indeed central in an IORP's governance.

Amendment 362

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 8

Or. en

Justification

The composition of an IORP’s management or supervisory body should be based on competence, experience, integrity and the arrangements agreed between social partners and sponsors. Mandatory gender objectives and public gender reporting create obligations unrelated to prudential soundness or pension outcomes.

Amendment 363

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 364

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 8 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Justification

Membership of unions is decreasing among employees, especially among younger people. It is thus important to safeguard that members and beneficiaries of an IORP keep being sufficiently represented in management and supervisory bodies.

Amendment 365

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 9

Or. en

Justification

The composition of an IORP’s management or supervisory body should be based on competence, experience, integrity and the arrangements agreed between social partners and sponsors. Mandatory gender objectives and public gender reporting create obligations unrelated to prudential soundness or pension outcomes.

Amendment 366

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 21 – paragraph 9

Or. en

Amendment 367

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i

Or. en

Justification

Individual fitness requirements for all persons who effectively run an IORP would exclude social partner representatives and disrupt established governance. Collective adequacy requirements should govern collegiate bodies.

Amendment 368

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 24 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 22 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

A requirement for "ongoing" assessment goes beyond supervisory oversight into operational management, creating legal uncertainty and disproportionate administrative burden for both NCAs and IORPs. Periodic reassessment at nationally determined intervals, calibrated to the size, nature and governance structure of the IORP, is sufficient and consistent with the principle of proportionality.

Amendment 369

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 23 – paragraph 3 – point h

Or. en

Justification

Remuneration policies should not be required to integrate sustainability risks or generate gender-related reporting and compliance requirements. A general prohibition of discrimination and a requirement for prudent remuneration are sufficient.

Amendment 370

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 23 – paragraph 3 – point h

Or. en

Amendment 371

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

(EU) 2016/2341

Art 23 – paragraph 3 – point h

Or. en

Amendment 372

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 23 – paragraph 3 – point h

Or. en

Amendment 373

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 23 – paragraph 3 – point i

Or. en

Amendment 374

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 23 – paragraph 3 – point i

Or. en

Justification

The principle of equal pay for equal work is enshrined in Article 157 TFEU and is directly applicable in all Member States without transposition through sectoral supervisory legislation.

Amendment 375

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 25

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 23 – paragraph 3 – point i

Or. en

Justification

Remuneration policies should not be required to integrate sustainability risks or generate gender-related reporting and compliance requirements. A general prohibition of discrimination and a requirement for prudent remuneration are sufficient.

Amendment 376

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 28 – point b – point ii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 28 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point k

Or. en

Justification

Consolidation of IOPRs should not be the aim of a risk-assessment.

Amendment 377

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 28 b (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 30 – paragraph 1

Or. en

(32016L2341)

Amendment 378

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 29

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 30 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Justification

The Commission text would require a separate Statement of Investment Policy Principles for every pension scheme operated by a multi-scheme IORP, regardless of whether the underlying investment strategies differ. For small sponsor-linked institutions administering multiple tariff generations under a single investment policy this creates disproportionate administrative duplication with no discernible benefit for members. The amendment corrects a drafting imprecision without altering any substantive obligation.

Amendment 379

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 31 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 380

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 30 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 31 – paragraph 7

Or. es

Amendment 381

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The mandatory appointment of a single custodian is superfluous for IORPs. Custody is already handled by custodians, and internal audit and external supervision cover the control functions. Moreover, large funds deliberately work with multiple specialized custodians; the requirement for a single custodian forces costly restructuring. This leads to ongoing, avoidable costs that increase wage costs via premiums.

Amendment 382

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

The mandatory appointment of a single custodian is superfluous for IORPs. Custody is already handled by custodians, and internal audit and external supervision cover the control functions. Moreover, large funds deliberately work with multiple specialized custodians; the requirement for a single custodian forces costly restructuring. This leads to ongoing, avoidable costs that increase wage costs via premiums.

Amendment 383

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 1– subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Some IORPs have arrangements with custodian banks, which already provide safekeeping of assets. Making a depository mandatory would create extra unnecessary burden.

Amendment 384

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The mandatory appointment of a depositary is unnecessary for IORPs. Pension funds differ fundamentally from retail investment products such as UCITS. UCITSs have daily inflows and redemptions, which require daily Net Asset Value calculations. Safekeeping of assets is already ensured through arrangements with custodian banks.

Amendment 385

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

IORPs should retain the flexibility to appoint more than one depositary, for example where different depositaries are used for different asset classes. This reflects existing practice in many Member States. In addition, where an IORP manages several pension schemes, it should be possible to use the same depositary arrangements across those schemes, particularly where assets are pooled or managed collectively.

Amendment 386

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Justification

The mandatory appointment of a single custodian is superfluous for IORPs. Custody is already handled by custodians, and internal audit and external supervision cover the control functions. Moreover, large funds deliberately work with multiple specialized custodians; the requirement for a single custodian forces costly restructuring. This leads to ongoing, avoidable costs that increase wage costs via premiums.

Amendment 387

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 388

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 389

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 3a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Recital 31 of the Commission proposal states that Member States should be able to maintain existing measures that provide a level of protection comparable to depositaries. However, this possibility is not reflected in the amended Article 33, which contains no exemption corresponding to the recital. A national waiver should therefore be included.

Amendment 390

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 31 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 33 – paragraph 3a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 391

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 33

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 35 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 392

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Art 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 393

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Or. en

Amendment 394

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

Or. en

Amendment 395

Marlena Maląg

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part

Or. en

Justification

This wording of the text ensures equal requirements for different types of entities.

Amendment 396

Martin Schirdewan

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 397

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, René Repasi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Members and beneficiaries must receive clear, accurate and transparent information that is adapted to the specific pension scheme. However, the Commission’s proposal moves towards a more detailed and centralised framework for information requirements at Union level, which is not in line with the flexible minimum harmonisation approach of the IORP II Directive. Information rules should remain principle-based and respect national pension systems, including schemes rooted in collective agreements and governed or negotiated by social partners.

Amendment 398

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 399

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Occupational pension information requirements are inseparable from national labour, social and tax law, which determine what information is meaningful to members in a given scheme context. EIOPA guidelines on Articles 41, 42 and 43 would progressively assimilate information standards across schemes, overriding distinctions that Member States are best placed to draw. Primary responsibility for pension information policy lies with Member States. This empowerment has no place in a minimum harmonisation directive and should therefore be deleted.

Amendment 400

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Several provisions introduce new tasks for EIOPA, such as the development of guidelines and/or technical standards. We do not support these proposals, as they are not consistent with the nature of a minimum harmonisation directive. Moreover, EIOPA is not always the most appropriate body to carry out these tasks.

Amendment 401

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Deleted in relation to the minimum-harmonisation nature of the IORP-directive.

Amendment 402

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 35 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 36 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 403

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 36

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37 – paragraph 1 – point g

Or. en

Amendment 404

Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 36 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37 – paragraph 4a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 405

Marlena Maląg

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a

Or. en

Justification

The requirement for Member States to ensure that competent authorities monitor and enforce compliance with this Article and take remedial action where IORPs do not provide complete, accurate or timely information is an excessive administrative burden for Member States.

Amendment 406

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Lara Wolters, Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Ensuring that all Member States establish pension tracking systems would give people easier access to clear and comprehensive information about their expected retirement income at the end of their working lives. This amendment supports broad coverage of IORPs over time, while preserving flexibility for Member States to adapt such systems to national pension structures, collective agreements and the role of social partners.

Amendment 407

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 408

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 409

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

Annual costs and charges can have a significant impact on the final value of pension savings over time. Including this information in pension tracking systems would improve transparency, comparability and members’ ability to understand the net value of their occupational pension entitlements.

Amendment 410

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37 a – point 2

Or. es

Amendment 411

Adnan Dibrani

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 2a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 412

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37 a – point 3

Or. es

Amendment 413

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 414

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 415

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directives (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – pragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 416

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 417

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 5a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Pension tracking systems improve transparency and give members and beneficiaries a clearer overview of their pension entitlements. In line with the IORP II Directive’s flexible minimum harmonisation approach, Member States with well-functioning national systems, including those reflecting collective agreements or social partner arrangements, should not be required to redesign their formats, structures or data transmission arrangements.

Amendment 418

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 419

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37 a – point 6

Or. es

Amendment 420

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 6

Or. en

Justification

Deleted in relation to the minimum-harmonisation nature of the IORP-directive.

Amendment 421

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, René Repasi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 6

Or. en

Amendment 422

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 37

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 37a – paragraph 6

Or. en

Amendment 423

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 424

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 3

Or. es

Amendment 425

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, René Repasi

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38b – paragraph 6

Or. en

Justification

The proposal risks introducing overly detailed EU-level PBS requirements, undermining IORP II’s flexible minimum harmonisation and increasing costs without clear benefits. EIOPA similarly advised that PBS format and structure should remain for Member States, as an EU-standardised PBS would be difficult to reconcile with national models and most citizens receive a PBS from only one Member State (EIOPA-BoS-23/341, pp. 125-126).

Amendment 426

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6

Or. es

Amendment 427

Marlena Maląg

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6

Or. en

Justification

Entrusting EIOPA with developing regulatory technical standards goes beyond minimum harmonization and introduces a degree of standardization that is inappropriate in the context of IORPs. It therefore fails to take into account the specificities of different types of pension plans, deeply rooted in their respective national contexts.

Amendment 428

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6

Or. en

Justification

We support the principle of a Pension Benefit Statement (PBS). However, we are concerned that harmonisation could make the PBS overly prescriptive and fail to take sufficient account of national specificities. We are also concerned that an EU-harmonised PBS with a uniform look and feel may encourage members to compare statements across countries. However, the amounts displayed are not harmonised in terms of their calculation methodology and are therefore not genuinely comparable. For this reason, we oppose the introduction of a standardised template based on an EIOPA mandate.

Amendment 429

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6

Or. en

Amendment 430

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 431

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 432

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 433

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 434

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 435

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 436

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 437

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 438

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 439

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6 – subparagraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 440

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 38 – point b a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 38 – paragraph 6a (new)

Or. en

Justification

In many Member States, a lack of trust of citizens in private entities managing their money and pensions is an important obstacle to the development of supplementary pension systems and IORPs. People prefer to rely on guaranteed (national) pensions rather than having their savings invested on capital markets. In addition, they need to be sure that any measures affecting their entitlements are justified and understandable. By including in the directive that benefit entitlements in the Pension Benefit Statement should be accurate and reliable (even if invested on capital markets), and facilitate financial planning for retirement, citizens will be more likely to support the establishment of IORPs and occupational pension schemes.

Amendment 441

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point a

Directive EU (2016/2341)

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point b a

Or. en

Amendment 442

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point b a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point f a (new)

Or. en

Justification

The financial implications for pension scheme participants of reducing their working hours, for example to achieve a better work–life balance, and consequently reducing their pension contributions, should be clear and transparent.

Amendment 443

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point g

Or. es

Amendment 444

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1– point g – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 445

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point g – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 446

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1– point g – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 447

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point g – point i

Or. es

Amendment 448

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point g – point ii

Or. es

Amendment 449

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point d

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1– point i

Or. en

Amendment 450

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point d

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point i

Or. en

Amendment 451

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point d

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1– point i

Or. en

Amendment 452

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point d

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1– point j

Or. en

Amendment 453

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point d

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – point j

Or. en

Amendment 454

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point d

2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1– point j

Or. en

Amendment 455

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 39 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 4a

Or. en

Amendment 456

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 39 – point e a (new)

Article 39 – paragraph 2a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 457

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 41 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 458

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a

Or. en

Justification

Supervisor-set benchmarks cannot capture scheme-specific investment strategies, liability structures, or demographic profiles. Deviations from a uniform benchmark do not indicate poor governance; they reflect legitimate long-term choices. The provision creates index-hugging incentives that discourage exactly the illiquid and long-term investments the SIU seeks to promote. Existing supervisory powers under Articles 30, 30a and 49 already provide adequate tools to address genuine underperformance.

Amendment 459

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a

Or. en

Justification

We are concerned that the proposal disincentives allocations to alternatives. Allocations to these asset classes increase the likelihood of deviation from the benchmark (both outperformance and underperformance, which can be exacerbated by valuation lags). Moreover, the short timeframe also penalises investments with a long investment horizon such as venture capital investments and infrastructure. The proposal therefore undermines the purported objective of the review to increase allocations to these asset classes and the aim of the Savings and Investment Union. Given the counterproductive effects on uniform benchmarks on investments in private and alternative assets, we propose removing the entire article from the proposal.

Amendment 460

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a

Or. en

Justification

Benchmark-based underperformance rules are ill-suited to occupational pensions, as schemes differ in objectives, liabilities, risk profiles, strategies and time horizons. Such benchmarks could encourage short-term investment behaviour rather than long-term value for members and beneficiaries. Pension quality and performance should instead be assessed through national supervisory frameworks and, where relevant, social partner arrangements.

Amendment 461

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a

Or. en

Amendment 462

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

‘Article 41a

Or. es

Amendment 463

Marlena Maląg

on behalf of the ECR Group

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a

Or. en

Justification

The EC proposal introduces benchmarks within IORPs, intended to serve as measurement tools (in the case of low performance, they may lead to the development of a corrective action plan at the request of the supervisory authority).However, the design and application of benchmarks face significant methodological challenges in this sector. A key reason for this is the significant differences between IORPs in terms of i) design, ii) investment strategies, iii) member profiles, and iv) institutional conditions. Furthermore, there is insufficient evidence that the introduction of benchmarks will contribute to greater investment efficiency in the sector. The opposite effect is possible: they may lead to overly conservative policies.

Amendment 464

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The idea of using benchmarks to reliably monitor the performance of an IORP is not a bad idea, but too rigid and one-size-fits-all benchmarks should be avoided. As a solution, competent authorities could develop multiple (qualitative) guidelines based on specific principles that should inform the performance measurement by IORPs. In addition, IORPs should measure their performance in relation to their original investment objectives. The principle-based guidelines could be adapted to specific types of IORPs. IORPs could then align their benchmarks. This would avoid the risk of bias in IORPs assessing their own performance, while still providing adaptability for competent authorities.

Amendment 465

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 466

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 467

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 468

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 469

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 4 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 470

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 471

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 472

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 5

Or. en

Justification

Several provisions introduce new tasks for EIOPA, such as the development of guidelines and/or technical standards. We do not support these proposals, as they are not consistent with the nature of a minimum harmonisation directive. Moreover, EIOPA is not always the most appropriate body to carry out these tasks.

Amendment 473

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 42

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 41a – paragraph 5a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 474

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 475

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 476

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point a

Or. en

Amendment 477

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive |(EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point b

Or. en

Amendment 478

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c

Or. en

Justification

Requiring IORPs to advise members on the criteria for assessing the suitability of pay-out options for their individual situation is bordering on providing personal financial advice. IORPs are not authorised investment advisers; imposing this obligation creates liability exposure without a corresponding regulatory framework and risks blurring the regulatory boundary between information provision and regulated advice.

Amendment 479

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c

Or. en

Amendment 480

Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 481

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 42 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Justification

The amendments to Article 42 simplify pre-retirement information and ensure that members receive clear, relevant and useful information. A more principle-based requirement avoids information overload, unnecessary administrative costs and overly detailed Union-level rules, while preserving transparency and allowing Member States and, where relevant, social partners to adapt information to their national context.

Amendment 482

Sirpa Pietikäinen

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 43

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Art 42 – paragraph 3 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 483

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Mandatory annual disclosure to pay-out phase beneficiaries is disproportionate where pension benefits are fixed or change only marginally over time. A five-year cycle is proportionate and consistent with review cadences applied to comparable obligations elsewhere in the directive.

Amendment 484

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 485

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 486

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 43 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 487

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 44 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 43 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 488

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive EU (2016/2341)

Article 44a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

We are concerned that a broadly worded general duty of care constitutes an open-ended obligation that risks increasing supervisory intensity, reporting requirements and compliance costs. A general duty of care functions as a catch-all norm, creating legal uncertainty for IORPs.

Amendment 489

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 490

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 491

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 492

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44a – paragraph 2a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Occupational pension schemes serve a long-term retirement purpose and should not be used as a channel for marketing or cross-selling other financial products or services. Clear separation is necessary to avoid conflicts of interest and to ensure that members’ decisions on occupational pensions are not unduly influenced by short-term commercial advantages linked to other products. This strengthens the protection of members and beneficiaries and safeguards the long-term purpose of occupational retirement provision.

Amendment 493

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

Or. en

Amendment 494

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 495

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Or. en

Amendment 496

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 497

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 498

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 499

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 2 – introductory part

Or. en

Justification

The amendments to Article 44b clarify that IORPs cannot be required to assess, adapt or take responsibility for elements of a pension scheme determined by national law, collective agreements, scheme rules or social partners. In such systems, the IORP may have a limited administrative role and lack legal power to alter the scheme’s structure or design. The amendment preserves the IORP’s responsibility for proper administration within its mandate, while respecting national social and labour law.

Amendment 500

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 2a – introductory part

Or. en

Amendment 501

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44b – paragraph 2a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Members are required to manage longevity risk individually without the actuarial tools to do so. This amendment ensures that at least one regular-income option is available to restore a basic insurance logic without prescribing the product. The free-choice and free-change rule prevents predatory product design and lock-in.

Amendment 502

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

2016/2341

Article 44c – paragraph 7a (new)

Or. en

Justification

Member States should be able to maintain effective national redress mechanisms, including those involving social partners, where they provide equivalent protection. The new requirements should not create unnecessary duplication or administrative burden.

Amendment 503

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directives (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44c – paragraph 7a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 504

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44d – paragraph 2a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 505

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directives (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44d – paragraph 3 (new)

Or. en

Amendment 506

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 45

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 44e (new)

Or. en

Justification

In many Member States, a lack of trust of citizens in private entities managing their money and pensions is an important obstacle to the development of supplementary pension systems and IORPs. People prefer to rely on guaranteed (national) pensions rather than having their savings invested on capital markets. In addition, they need to be sure that any measures affecting their entitlements are justified and respect the essence of their rights. By explicitly including in the directive that citizens can be assured that their entitlements are protected, they will be more likely to support the establishment of IORPs and occupational pension schemes.

Amendment 507

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 52 – point a – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 48 – paragraphs 1a and 1b

Or. es

Amendment 508

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 52 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 48 – paragraph 1a

Or. es

Amendment 509

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 52 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 48 – paragraph 1b

Or. es

Amendment 510

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 52 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 48 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b

Or. es

Amendment 511

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point a – point i – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 512

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point a – point i

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – first subparagraph

Or. es

Amendment 513

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point a – point i

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 514

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point a – point i a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

(032016L2341)

Amendment 515

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1a

Or. es

Amendment 516

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1b

Or. es

Amendment 517

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1b

Or. en

Amendment 518

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1b

Or. en

Amendment 519

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1b

Or. en

Justification

A uniform three-year cycle disregards major differences between national markets. Developed IORP markets already have established supervisory practices and should determine the appropriate frequency themselves. More frequent dialogue is justified temporarily in markets that are still developing.

Amendment 520

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1b

Or. en

Justification

Competent authorities should have some leeway to determine an appropriate frequency for the supervisory dialogue taking into account the risks, nature, scale, and complexity of the activities of the IORP concerned.

Amendment 521

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point b a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 1c (new)

Or. en

(32016L2341)

Justification

A uniform three-year cycle disregards major differences between national markets. Developed IORP markets already have established supervisory practices and should determine the appropriate frequency themselves. More frequent dialogue is justified temporarily in markets that are still developing.

Amendment 522

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 53 – point e

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Or. es

Amendment 523

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

‘Article 49a

Or. es

Amendment 524

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54 – introductory part

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Articles 49a and 49b

Or. en

Amendment 525

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a

Or. en

Justification

In the Netherlands, such dialogues are already common practice. We believe that an assessment of the viability and adequacy of the pension scheme should be made by the Board of the IORP as well as the social partners that manage the scheme on behalf of members and beneficiaries. We believe supervisors should remain focused on supervisory activities. Most Dutch IORPs have significant scale, meaning that the mandatory nature of these conversations creates an unnecessary administrative burden.

Amendment 526

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a

Or. en

Amendment 527

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a

Or. en

Amendment 528

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 529

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Justification

The text of the directive should not be too prescriptive on the details of the supervisory dialogue.

Amendment 530

Martin Schirdewan

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 531

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Justification

The text of the directive should not be too prescriptive on the details of the supervisory dialogue.

Amendment 532

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 533

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2 – point a

Or. en

Amendment 534

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2 – point b

Or. en

Amendment 535

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2 – point c

Or. en

Amendment 536

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2 – point d

Or. en

Amendment 537

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 2 – point e

Or. en

Amendment 538

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 539

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4

Or. en

Amendment 540

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4– subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 541

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4 – subpagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 542

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 543

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Consequential deletion following the proposed deletion of Article 41a.

Amendment 544

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 545

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 546

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 54

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 49a – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 547

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph -1

Or. es

Amendment 548

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point a

Directive EU (2016/2341)

Article 50 – paragraph –1a – point b

Or. en

Amendment 549

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point a

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph -1b and -1c

Or. en

Justification

The differentiated frequency of supervisory dialogue should also be reflected in the associated information requests. Otherwise, mature markets would continue to face a de facto harmonised reporting cycle despite being allowed to determine the frequency of the dialogue itself.

Amendment 550

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point i

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point d – point vii (new)

Or. en

Amendment 551

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point ii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point g

Or. es

Amendment 552

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point ii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point g

Or. en

Amendment 553

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point ii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 1 – point g

Or. en

Amendment 554

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 555

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 2

Or. es

Amendment 556

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 557

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 3

Or. en

Amendment 558

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 4

Or. es

Amendment 559

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

While we agree with the proposed annual report by IORPs on costs and investment returns, we do not support the introduction of EIOPA technical standards. Such standards would interfere with the well-established and well-functioning reporting practices developed over decades.

Amendment 560

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Deleted in relation to the minimum-harmonisation nature of the IORP-directive.

Amendment 561

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

We do not support the introduction of EIOPA technical standards. Such standards would interfere with well-functioning reporting practices that have been developed in close cooperation with the sector.

Amendment 562

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters, Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Comparable data on IORPs’ investment allocation is needed to assess how retirement savings are invested across the Union, whether they support good outcomes for members and beneficiaries, and how they contribute to productive long-term investment. Such data can help identify improvements in investment practices. Reporting should be proportionate, channelled through competent authorities and used by EIOPA for aggregated analysis, without duplication or disclosure of sensitive portfolio data. It should not impose reporting beyond what is necessary for policy analysis.

Amendment 563

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 5

Or. es

Amendment 564

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 565

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 566

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 5

Or. en

Justification

While we agree with the proposed annual report by IORPs on costs and investment returns, we do not support the introduction of EIOPA technical standards. Such standards would interfere with the well-established and well-functioning reporting practices developed over decades.

Amendment 567

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 55 – point b – point iii

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50 – paragraph 5a (new)

Or. es

Amendment 568

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50a – paragraph 1 – point b

Or. en

Amendment 569

Fernando Navarrete Rojas

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50a – paragraph 1 – point c

Or. en

Amendment 570

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 571

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 56

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 50a – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Or. en

Amendment 572

Isabel Benjumea Benjumea

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 51 – paragraph 4

Or. es

Amendment 573

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 51 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Public comparison of raw costs and returns is only meaningful where members bear investment risk and can act on the information. Applied indiscriminately to defined benefit and guaranteed schemes, it produces misleading rankings that ignore guarantees, biometric cover and sponsor funding obligations, and risks penalising precisely the schemes offering the strongest member protection.

Amendment 574

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 51 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 575

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 51 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1

Or. en

Justification

Alternatively, this paragraph may be deleted.

Amendment 576

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 51 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 – point b

Or. en

Amendment 577

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 57 – point c

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 51 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4

Or. en

Justification

In occupational pension systems where schemes are linked to employment, sectors or collective agreements, members may have limited possibilities to choose or switch schemes. Transparency requirements should therefore avoid creating misleading product comparisons and should take account of existing national frameworks that already provide relevant and accessible information.

Amendment 578

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 58

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 55a

Or. en

Justification

The existing provisions already provide adequate legal bases for information exchange, NCA coordination, EIOPA mediation, and joint on-site inspections in respect of cross-border IORPs. Article 55a adds no operational capacity; it transfers institutional authority to EIOPA without demonstrated need.

Amendment 579

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 58

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 55a – paragraph 1

Or. en

Amendment 580

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 58 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 55a – paragraph 1a (new)

Or. en

Justification

EIOPA’s resources and enhanced coordination powers should be focused on markets where occupational pensions and national supervision are still developing or where concrete supervisory deficiencies have previously been identified. Mature and effectively supervised markets should remain primarily under national supervision, in accordance with subsidiarity and proportionality.

Amendment 581

Auke Zijlstra, Mireia Borrás Pabón

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 59

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 59 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

Social and labour law is a national competence, which therefore does not belong to the remit of EIOPA.

Amendment 582

Anouk Van Brug, Engin Eroglu, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 59

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 59 – paragraph 4

Or. en

Justification

This appears to suggest that EIOPA would undertake assessments of national social and labour law. As social and labour law fall within national competence, we do not see the added value of an EIOPA report in this area.

Amendment 583

Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 59 a (new)

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 60a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 584

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 60

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 62 – paragraph 1 – point aa (new)

Or. en

Amendment 585

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 60

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 62 – paragraph 1 a (new) and 1b (new)

Or. en

Amendment 586

Damian Boeselager

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 60

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 62 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 587

Jonás Fernández, César Luena

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 60

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 62 – paragraph 1a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 588

Dirk Gotink

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 61

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 64a

Or. en

Amendment 589

Markus Ferber, Andrea Wechsler

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 61

Directive (EU) 2016/2341

Article 64a – paragraph 3

Or. en

Justification

To be read in conjunction with the proposed deletion of Article 17(7).

Amendment 590

Martin Schirdewan

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive (EU) 2016/97

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 19

Or. en

Amendment 591

Auke Zijlstra

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Directive (EU) 2016/97

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 20

Or. en

Amendment 592

Adnan Dibrani, Niels Fuglsang, Thomas Bajada, Lara Wolters

Compromise Amendment replacing Amendment(s): null

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/97

Article 22 – paragraphs 6a and 6b (new)

Or. en

Justification

In several Member States, social partners play a central role in determining both the content and the delivery of information to members and beneficiaries. This role is already recognised in Article 20(2) of the IORP II Directive for pension schemes managed by IORPs. Where insurance distributors are made subject to IORP II information requirements, the IDD framework should likewise allow national arrangements involving social partners to be taken into account.

Amendment 593

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b

Directive (EU) 2016/97

Article 22 – paragraph 6a (new)

Or. en

Amendment 594

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive (EU) 2016/97

Article 22a – paragraph 5

Or. en

Amendment 595

Arba Kokalari

Proposal for a directive

Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3

Directive (EU) 2016/97

Article 22a – paragraph 6

Or. en