REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions

9.1.2019 - (COM(2018)0241 – C8-0167/2018 – 2018/0114(COD)) - ***I

Committee on Legal Affairs
Rapporteur: Evelyn Regner
Rapporteur for the opinion (*):
Anthea McIntyre, Committee on Employment and Social Affairs
      (*)  Associated committees – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions

(COM(2018)0241 – C8-0167/2018– 2018/0114(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2018)0241),

–  having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 50(1) and (2), of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C8-0167/2018),

–  having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

–  having regard to Rule 59 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on Legal Affairs and also the opinions of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs and the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (A8-0002/2019),

1.  Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2.  Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3.  Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment    1 Proposal for a directive Recital -1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(-1)  The administrative or management body should be responsible for managing the company in the interests of the company, and should accordingly, take account of the interests of the members, its employees and other stakeholders, with the objective of sustainable creation of value in the long-term.
Amendment    2 Proposal for a directive Recital 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1)  The Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council41 regulates cross-border mergers of limited liability companies. These rules represent a significant milestone in improving the functioning of the Single Market for companies and firms and to exercise the freedom of establishment. However, evaluation of these rules shows that there is a need for modifications in cross-border merger rules. Furthermore, it is appropriate to provide for rules regulating cross-border conversions and divisions.	(1)  The Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Counci2 regulates cross-border mergers of limited liability companies. These rules represent a significant milestone in improving the functioning of the Single Market for companies and firms and to exercise the freedom of establishment on the one hand and provide adequate protection for stakeholders, such as workers, creditors and minority shareholders, on the other. However, evaluation of these rules shows that there is a need for modifications in cross-border merger rules, especially with a view to ensuring adequate protection for workers, creditors and minority shareholders. Furthermore, it is appropriate to provide for rules regulating cross-border conversions and divisions, with a view to fostering cross-border company mobility, and so as to provide a clear, predictable, adequate up-to-date, inclusive and equitable Union legal framework regarding companies.
_________________	_________________
2 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (codification) (OJ L 169, 30.6.2017, p. 46).	2 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (codification) (OJ L 169, 30.6.2017, p. 46).
Amendment    3 Proposal for a directive Recital 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2)  Freedom of establishment is one of the fundamental principles of Union law. Under the second paragraph of Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), when read in conjunction with Article 54 of the TFEU, the freedom of establishment for companies or firms includes, inter alia, the right to form and manage such companies or firms under the conditions laid down by the legislation of the Member State of establishment. This has been interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union as encompassing the right of a company or firm formed in accordance with the legislation of a Member State to convert itself into a company or firm governed by the law of another Member State, provided that the conditions laid down by the legislation of that other Member State are satisfied and, in particular, that the test adopted by the latter Member State to determine the connection of a company or firm to its national legal order is satisfied.	(2)  Freedom of establishment is one of the fundamental principles of Union law. Under the second paragraph of Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), when read in conjunction with Article 54 of the TFEU, the freedom of establishment for companies or firms includes, inter alia, the right to form and manage such companies or firms under the conditions laid down by the legislation of the Member State of establishment. This has been interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union extensively beyond the literal meaning of the wording as encompassing the right of a company or firm formed in accordance with the legislation of a Member State to convert itself into a company or firm governed by the law of another Member State, provided that the conditions laid down by the legislation of that other Member State are satisfied and, in particular, that the test adopted by the latter Member State to determine the connection of a company or firm to its national legal order is satisfied. Moreover, it is particularly important to take account of additional elements, such as the existence of economic substance criteria , in order to avoid the misuse of that fundamental freedom for the purposes of fraud.
Amendment    4 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2a)  The freedom of establishment and the development of the internal market are not stand-alone principles or objectives of the Union. They should always be balanced with, in particular in the context of this Directive, the Union’s principles and objectives regarding social progress, the promotion of a high level of employment and the guarantee of adequate social protection, enshrined in Article 3 of the Treaty on the European Union (‘TEU’) and Article 9 of the TFEU. It is therefore clear that the development of the internal market should contribute to social cohesion and upward social convergence, and should not fuel competition between social systems, putting pressure on those systems to lower their standards.
Amendment    5 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2b)  While competition in the single market and freedom of establishment are key principles of the Union, the freedom of companies to move their registered office from one Member State to another is based on an undesireable system of competition between Member States fuelled by an unlevel playing field with different national provisions in social and fiscal policies. Abusive conversions, mergers or divisions constituting artificial arrangements or social dumping, but also reducing fiscal obligations or undercutting social rights of employees should therefore be avoided in order to respect Treaty principles and values. The case law of the European Court of Justice has regrettably resulted in a very far-reaching right to cross-border conversions, and the possibility for firms to move their registered office without moving core activities has in turn contributed to incomprehension and anti-European sentiments on the part of employees and other stakeholders as regards this problematic form of competition.
Amendment    6 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2c)  Union policy should also contribute to the promotion and reinforcement of social dialogue, in line with Article 151 TFEU. It is therefore also the objective of this Directive to secure employees’ information, consultation and participation rights, and to ensure that the cross-border mobility of companies can never lead to the lowering of such rights. Ensuring information, consultation and participation of employees is essential for cross-border mobility to succeed.
Amendment    7 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2d)  Moving towards a common and consolidated corporate tax system at Union level and ensuring minimum common social standards in all Member States should be a pre-condition for common rules on company mobility, in order to allow for fair competition and a level playing field that does not put Member States or stakeholders at a disadvantage.
Amendment    8 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 e (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2e)  The freedom of establishment should also in no way undermine the principles, regarding countering fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union, laid down in Article 310 TFEU.
Amendment    9 Proposal for a directive Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3)  In the absence of harmonisation of Union law, the definition of the connecting factor that determines the national law applicable to a company or firm falls, in accordance with Article 54 of the TFEU, within the competence of each Member State to so define. Article 54 of the TFEU places the factor of the registered office, the central administration and the principal place of business of a company or firm at the same degree of connection. Therefore, as clarified in case-law,42 where the Member State of new establishment, namely the destination Member State, requires only the transfer of the registered office as a connecting factor for the existence of a company under its national legislation, the fact that only the registered office (and not the central administration or principal place of business) is transferred does not as such exclude the applicability of the freedom of establishment under Article 49 of the TFEU. The choice of the specific form of company in cross-border mergers, conversions and divisions or the choice of a Member State of establishment are inherent in the exercise of the freedom of establishment guaranteed by the TFEU as part of a Single Market.	(3)  In the absence of harmonisation of Union law, the definition of the connecting factor that determines the national law applicable to a company or firm falls, in accordance with Article 54 of the TFEU, within the competence of each Member State to so define. Article 54 of the TFEU places the factor of the registered office, the central administration and the principal place of business of a company or firm at the same degree of connection. Given the contradictions arising from the freedom of establishment and the absence of a level playing field in the form of common coherent social and fiscal rules between Member States, it is crucial to strike a balance between companies’ right to converge, merge and divide and other Treaty principles. Cross-border conversions should be conditional on the company moving its registered office together with its head office in order to carry out a substantial part of its economic activity in the Member State of destination.
_________________
42 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 25 October 2017, Polbud – Wykonawstwo, C-106/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:804, paragraph 29.
Amendment    10 Proposal for a directive Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4)  These developments in the case-law have opened up new opportunities for companies and firms in the Single Market in order to foster economic growth, effective competition and productivity. At the same time, the objective of a Single Market without internal borders for companies must also be reconciled with other objectives of European integration such as social protection (in particular the protection of workers), the protection of creditors and the protection of shareholders. Such objectives, in the absence of harmonised rules specifically regarding cross-border conversions, are pursued by Member States through a number of multifarious legal provisions and administrative practices. As a result, whereas companies are already able to merge cross-border, they experience a number of legal and practical difficulties when wishing to perform a cross-border conversion. Moreover, the national legislation of many Member States provides for the procedure of domestic conversions without offering an equivalent procedure for converting cross-border.	(4)  These developments in the case-law have opened up new opportunities for companies and firms in the Single Market to step up their business activities in order to foster economic growth, effective competition and productivity. At the same time, in the absence of a level playing field in the form of coherent social and fiscal rules, those developments went hand-in-hand with the proliferation of letterbox companies and abusive practices, constituting artificial arrangements and circumventing fiscal and social security obligations as well as undercutting workers’ rights. The objective of a Single Market without internal borders for companies must be reconciled with other objectives of European integration such as social protection for all, in accordance with Article 3(3) of TEU as well as Articles 151 and 152 of the TFEU, the European Pillar of Social Rights and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the protection of workers' rights, the protection of creditors and the protection of shareholders, as well as the fight against attacks on financial interests of the Union via for example money laundering and tax evasion. In the absence of harmonised rules specifically regarding cross-border conversions, Member States have developed a number of multifarious legal provisions and administrative practices, creating an unsatisfactory climate in terms of legal certainty, adversely affecting both companies and stakeholders and Member States, as well as the fight against attacks on the financial interests of the Union via, for example, money laundering and tax evasion. Similarly, the Union committed to respecting the  Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. The freedom of establishment should in no way undermine other values and principles guaranteed by the TFEU, such as the promotion of a high level of employment and the guarantee of adequate social protection (Article 9), improved living and working conditions and dialogue between management and labour, the development of human resources with a view to lasting high employment, and the combating of exclusion (Article 151) or countering of fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union (Article 310). As a result, whereas companies are already able to merge cross-border, they experience a number of legal and practical difficulties when wishing to perform a cross-border conversion. Moreover, the national legislation of many Member States provides for the procedure of domestic conversions without offering an equivalent procedure for converting cross-border.
Amendment    11 Proposal for a directive Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6)  It is appropriate therefore to provide procedural and substantive rules on cross-border conversions which would contribute to the abolition of restrictions on freedom of establishment and provide at the same time adequate and proportionate protection for stakeholders such as employees, creditors and minority shareholders.	(6)  It is appropriate therefore to provide harmonised Union procedural and substantive rules on cross-border conversions which would further facilitate the abolition of restrictions on freedom of establishment and guarantee at the same time the right to adequate, uniform and proportionate protection for stakeholders such as employees, creditors and minority shareholders and, in particular, employees. It is essential that loopholes be closed and that opportunities for abuses related to tax, social security and the rights of different stakeholders, be prevented. It is therefore crucial that the direction taken by the Court of Justice be changed and that it be clarified that a company should not be able to move its registered office without moving its head office in order to carry out a substantial part of its economic activity in the member state of destination.
Amendment    12 Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(6a)  Further development of the internal market should be properly balanced, maintaining the essential values on which our societies are based and ensuring that all citizens benefit from economic development.
Amendment    13 Proposal for a directive Recital 6 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(6b)  This Directive should establish minimum requirements applicable throughout the Member States, while allowing and encouraging Member States to provide more favourable protection of employees.
Amendment    14 Proposal for a directive Recital 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7)  The right to convert an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors', minority shareholders' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such possible abuses, a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border conversion procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approach by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.	(7)  The right to convert an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State may not under any circumstances be used for abusive, fraudulent or criminal purposes such as for the evasion, avoidance or circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors', minority shareholders' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such possible abuses, a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border conversion procedures, in order to create artificial arrangements. Member States should also be required to ensure that cross-border conversions correspond to the actual pursuit of a genuine economic activity, including in the digital sector, through a fixed establishment in the destination Member State for an indefinite period, in order to avoid the setting up of ‘letterbox’ or ‘front’ companies with the purpose of evading, circumventing or infringing national and/or Union law. The fight against abuses must be based on an assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approach by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.
Amendment    15 Proposal for a directive Recital 8
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(8)  The carrying out of a cross-border conversion entails a change of legal form for a company without losing its legal personality. However, it should not lead to the circumvention of the requirements for incorporation in the destination Member State. Such conditions, including the requirements to have a head office in the destination Member State and those relating to the disqualification of directors, should be fully respected by the company. However, the application of such conditions by the destination Member State may not affect the continuity of the converted company's legal personality. A company may convert into any legal form which exists in the destination Member State, in accordance with Article 49 of the TFEU.	(8)  The carrying out of a cross-border conversion entails a change of legal form for a company without losing its legal personality and without the need for renegotiation of business contracts. However, it should not lead to the circumvention of the requirements for incorporation in the destination Member State. Such conditions, including the requirements to have a head office in the destination Member State and those relating to the disqualification of directors, should be fully respected by the company. However, the application of such conditions by the destination Member State may not affect the continuity of the converted company's legal personality. A company may convert into any regulated legal form which exists in the destination Member State, in accordance with Article 49 of the TFEU.
Amendment    16 Proposal for a directive Recital 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(8a)  Without prejudice to any fundamental rights, any relevant criminal or administrative records should be taken into account for the assessment of the good repute, honesty and integrity of directors of companies carrying out a cross-border conversion or merger. In this regard, the type of conviction or indictment, the role of the individual involved, the penalty received, the phase of the judicial process reached and any rehabilitation measures that have taken effect should be considered. The surrounding circumstances, including mitigating factors, the seriousness of any relevant offence or administrative or supervisory action, the time elapsed since the offence, the member’s conduct since the offence or action, and the relevance of the offence or action to the member’s role should be considered. Any relevant criminal or administrative records should be taken into account, considering periods of limitation in force in the national law. Without prejudice to the presumption of innocence applicable to criminal proceedings, and other fundamental rights, the following factors should at least be considered in the assessment: convictions or ongoing prosecutions for a criminal offence, in particular offences under laws governing banking, financial, securities or insurance activities; or concerning securities markets or financial or payment instruments, including laws on money laundering, corruption, market manipulation, or insider dealing and usury; offences of dishonesty, fraud or financial crime; tax offences and other offences under legislation relating to companies, including labour law, bankruptcy, insolvency, or consumer protection.
Amendment    17 Proposal for a directive Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedure governing a cross-border conversion, the company should disclose the draft terms of the cross-border conversion containing the most important information about the proposed cross-border conversion, including the envisaged new company form, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the conversion. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should be notified in order that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed conversion.	(10)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedure governing a cross-border conversion, the company which intends to carry out a cross-border conversion should draw up the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, together with, where provided for in national law and/or in accordance with national practice, board level employee representatives, and disclose those draft terms. Board level employee representatives should also be included in the decision on the draft terms. The draft terms should contain the most important information about the proposed cross-border conversion, including the envisaged new company form, total turnover and total taxable turnover of the converting company for the last reporting period, the amount of income tax paid by the converting company and its subsidiaries and branches, information on the location and, where relevant, date of the transfer of the head office of the company to the destination Member State, as well as information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets, the number of employees employed on a full-time equivalent basis, the likely repercussions of the cross-border conversion on employment, including the likely changes to the organisation of work, the wages, the location of specific posts and the expected consequences for the employees occupying such posts, including employees in subsidiaries and branches of the converting company that are located within the Union, and on the company level social dialogue including, where applicable, board level employee representation, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the conversion. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should be notified in order that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed conversion. Before the decision on the draft terms of a cross-border conversion is made, the representatives of the employees of the converting company or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented should be informed of and consulted on the proposed conversion. Similarly, where a body has been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, it should also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    18 Proposal for a directive Recital 11
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(11)  In order to provide information to its members, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should prepare a report. The report should explain and substantiate the legal and economic aspects of the proposed cross-border conversion, in particular the implications of the cross-border conversion for members with regard to the future business of the company and the management organ's strategic plan. It should also include potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border conversion. This report should also be made available to the employees of the company carrying our cross-border conversion.	(11)  In order to provide information to its members and employees, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should prepare a report, explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion. The report should explain and substantiate the legal and economic aspects of the proposed cross-border conversion, in particular the reasons for the cross-border conversion, the implications of the cross-border conversion for members with regard to the future business of the company and the management organ's strategic plan. It should also include potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border conversion. This report should also be made available to the employees of the company carrying our cross-border conversion. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion for the jobs of the employees, and for employee involvement, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them, whether there would be any material change in the employment relationships and the locations of the companies’ places of business, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the resulting converted company can be applied and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. This requirement should not however apply where the only employees of the company are in its administrative organ. Before the decision on the report is made, the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, if there are no representatives, the employees themselves, should be informed and consulted on the proposed conversion. Similarly, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC1a or 2001/86/EC of the European Parliament and the Council1b should also be informed and consulted accordingly. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to any other applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council1c or Directive 2009/38/EC.
	_______________
	1a Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (OJ L 122, 16.5.2009).
	1b Council Directive 2001/86/EC of 8 October 2001 supplementing the Statute for a European company with regard to the involvement of employees (OJ L 294, 10.11.2001).
	1c Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing or consulting employees in the European Community (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 29).
Amendment    19 Proposal for a directive Recital 11 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(11a)  Where the administrative or management body of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, or where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, the members should be informed thereof and that opinion should be appended to that report. The administrative or management body of the company which intends to carry out the cross-border conversion, should provide a motivated response on the opinion provided by the employee representatives, and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, before the date of the general meeting.
Amendment    20 Proposal for a directive Recital 11 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(11b)  In order to be enabled to conduct an analysis of the report, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should provide the employee representatives, the trade unions represented in the company and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC such financial and material resources necessary as to enable them to apply the rights arising from this Directive in an appropriate manner, such as for example access to a private and password-protected computer, a secure internet connection, meeting rooms, time off for meetings, the cost of organising meetings and if necessary, interpretation facilities, accommodation and travel expenses.
Amendment    21 Proposal for a directive Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12)  In order to provide information to its employees, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should prepare a report explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion for employees. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the employment relationships and the locations of the companies’ places of business and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. This requirement should not however apply where the only employees of the company are in its administrative organ. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council43 or Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council44 .	deleted
__________________
43 Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 29).
44 Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (Recast) (OJ L 122, 16.5.2009, p. 28).
Amendment    22 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12a)  Companies willing to make full use of the benefits of the internal market through cross-border conversions should in return adhere to an adequate level of transparency and good corporate governance. Public country by country reporting is an efficient and appropriate tool to increase the transparency of multinational enterprises activities and to enable the public to assess their impact on the real economy. It will also improve shareholders’ ability to properly evaluate the risks taken by companies, lead to investment strategies based on accurate information and enhance decision-makers ability to assess the efficiency and the impact of nationallaw. Therefore, a set of financial information should be published ahead of the cross-border operation ahead of its execution.
Amendment    23 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12b)  The freedom of establishment and the development of the internal market are not stand-alone principles or objectives of the Union. They should always be balanced with, in particular in the context of this Directive, the Union’s principles and objectives regarding social progress, the promotion of a high level of employment and the guarantee of adequate social protection, enshrined in Article 3 of the Treaty on the European Union and Article 9 of the TFEU. It is therefore clear that the development of the internal market should contribute to social cohesion and upward social convergence, and should not fuel competition between social systems, putting pressure on those systems to lower their standards.
Amendment    24 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12c)  Union policy should also contribute to the promotion and reinforcement of social dialogue, in line with Article 151 TFEU. It is therefore also the objective of this Directive to secure employees’ information, consultation and participation rights and to ensure that the cross-border mobility of companies can never lead to the lowering of these rights. Ensuring information, consultation and participation of employees is essential for all such actions to succeed.
Amendment    25 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12d)  The freedom of establishment should also in no way undermine the principles regarding countering fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union laid down in Article 310 TFEU.
Amendment    26 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 e(new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12e)  There is a need to ensure consistency for companies and employees in order to avoid duplication of existing Union legislation. Directive 2002/14/EC, Council Directive 2001/23/EC1a and Directive 2009/38/EC already include requirements on information and consultation of employees that apply in situations of cross border conversions, mergers and divisions. It is important that this Directive complement these existing Directives in order to avoid unnecessary administrative burdens by undermining the current provisions in place for information, consultation and participation of employees.
	______________________
	1a Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).
Amendment    27 Proposal for a directive Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13)  In order to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of conversion and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, an independent expert report should be required to be prepared in order to assess the proposed cross-border conversion. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. In this context, the expert report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority in the departure Member State to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-conversion certificate. To this end, the expert should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The expert should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the expert’s final report which itself would be publically available.	(13)  The competent national authorities should be able to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of conversion and in the report addressed to the members and employees. In this context, the report should contain all relevant information to enable the competent authority in the departure Member State to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-conversion certificate. To this end, the competent authority should be able to obtain all the relevant company information, such as net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States, and any documents needed to carry out the investigations necessary to gather the evidence required and to assess the proposed cross-border conversion with all necessary factual elements provided by the company. .However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the final report which itself would be publically available. The competent authority can have recourse to an independent expert. The expert should be appointed from a list that is drawn up by the competent authority, and should have no past or current link with the company concerned. The expert should have relevant expertise in particular in the fields of company law, taxation and fiscal law, social security and labour law.
Amendment    28 Proposal for a directive Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14)  With a view to avoiding disproportionate costs and burdens for smaller companies carrying out the cross-border conversion, micro and small enterprises, as defined in the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC45 , should be exempted from the requirement to produce an independent expert report. However, these companies can resort to an independent expert report to prevent litigation costs with creditors.	deleted
__________________
45 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment    29 Proposal for a directive Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15)  On the basis of the draft terms of conversion and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to convert is a collective one. In addition, members should also have the right to vote on any arrangements concerning employee participation, if they have reserved that right during the general meeting.	(15)  On the basis of the draft terms of conversion and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to convert is a collective one. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights should be respected in order for any opinion by the employee representatives to be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2002/14/EC, and, where applicable, Directives 2009/38/EC and 2001/86/EC. In addition, members should also have the right to vote on any arrangements concerning employee participation, if they have reserved that right during the general meeting.
Amendment    30 Proposal for a directive Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16)  It is appropriate that those members who held voting rights and who did not vote to approve the draft terms of conversion and those members without voting rights, who could not present their position, should be afforded the right to exit the company. Those members should be able to leave the company and receive cash compensation for their shares equivalent to the value of their shares. Furthermore, they should have a right to challenge the calculation and adequacy of that cash compensation offered before a court.	(16)  It is necessary that those members who held voting rights and who did not vote to approve the draft terms of conversion and those members without voting rights, who could not present their position, should be afforded the right to exit the company. Those members should be able to leave the company and receive adequate cash compensation for their shares equivalent to the value of their shares. Furthermore, they should have a right to challenge the calculation and adequacy of that cash compensation offered before a court.
Amendment    31 Proposal for a directive Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, creditors may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the departure Member State for the adequate the safeguards. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border conversion, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where an independent expert report concludes that there is no reasonable likelihood that the creditors would be prejudiced or where creditors are offered a right to payment against the converted company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of departure concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.	(18)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, creditors may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the departure Member State for the adequate the safeguards. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border conversion, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where creditors are offered a right to payment against the converted company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of departure concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.
Amendment    32 Proposal for a directive Recital 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(19)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border conversion, where the company carrying out the cross-border conversion is operating under an employee participation system in the departure Member State, the company should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of such participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory organ of the company in the destination Member State. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of the company to carry out a cross-border conversion with the employees' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply, mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversion, merger or division within three years.	(19)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border conversion, where the company carrying out the cross-border conversion is operating under an employee participation system in the departure Member State, the company should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of such participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory organ of the company in the destination Member State. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place. As soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of conversion, the company should take the necessary steps, including providing information about the identity of the participating companies, subsidiaries or establishments concerned, and the number of their employees, to start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees, or, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the conversion, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of the company to carry out a cross-border conversion with the employees' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply, mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversion, merger or division within three six years. Where an applicable threshold for employee participation laid down in the law of the departure Member State is exceeded in the six years following the cross-border conversion, the same level and elements of employee participation as would have been legally provided for had the company reached the relevant threshold in the departure Member State should apply and new negotiations should be initiated.
Amendment    33 Proposal for a directive Recital 19 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(19a)  The great diversity of rules and practices existing in the Member States as regards the manner in which employees' representatives are involved in decision-making within companies should be respected and acknowledged.
Amendment    34 Proposal for a directive Recital 19 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(19b)  Information and consultation procedures at national and transnational level should, nevertheless, be complied with by all companies resulting from the cross-border conversion or merger.
Amendment    35 Proposal for a directive Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border conversion, the company carrying out a conversion which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border conversion without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation.	(20)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border conversion, the company carrying out a conversion which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border conversion without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation. Member States should ensure that employee’s representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them.
Amendment    36 Proposal for a directive Recital 20 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(20a)  Following the conversion, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should continue to observe the terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreement on the same terms applicable to the company before the conversion under that agreement, until the date of termination or expiry of the collective agreement or the entry into force or application of another collective agreement, in accordance with Directive 2001/23/EC.
Amendment    37 Proposal for a directive Recital 21
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(21)  To ensure a proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border conversions, both the departure and the destination Member States should designate the appropriate competent authorities. In particular, the competent authorities of the departure Member States should have the power to issue a pre-conversion certificate without which the competent authorities in the destination Member State should not be able to complete the cross-border conversion procedure.	(21)  To ensure a proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border conversions, both the departure and the destination Member States should designate the appropriate court, notary or other competent authorities. In particular, the competent authorities of the departure Member States should have the power to issue a pre-conversion certificate without which the competent authorities in the destination Member State should not be able to complete the cross-border conversion procedure. Member States should ensure that competent authorities designated set up appropriate coordination mechanisms with other authorities and bodies in that Member State working in the policy fields concerned by this Directive and should, where appropriate, consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border conversion. The decision to issue a pre-conversion certificate by the competent authority of the departure Member State or any approval by the competent authority in the destination Member State should not preclude any subsequent procedures or decisions by authorities in the Member States in respect of other relevant fields of law.
Amendment    38 Proposal for a directive Recital 22
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(22)  The issue of the pre-conversion certificate by the departure Member State should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border conversion of the company. The competent authority of the departure Member State should decide on the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within one month of the application by the company, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically, but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis, where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months of informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.	(22)  The issue of the pre-conversion certificate by the departure Member State should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border conversion of the company. The competent authority of the departure Member State should decide on the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within two months of the reception of all the necessary documents and information unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement or that the conversion does not involve the actual pursuit of genuine economic activity. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically, but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis, where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. Whenever the competent authority makes an assessment on whether the conversion involves the actual pursuit of genuine economic activity, the competent authority should in particular verify whether the company has a fixed establishment in the destination Member State, which has the objective appearance of permanency, whether it has a management body, staff, equipment, premises and assets, and whether it is materially equipped to autonomously negotiate business with third parties, and should consider whether the company has chosen to delegate its management to directors, officers or legal representatives, hired from an independent third party through a service contractor. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within three months of informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.
Amendment    39 Proposal for a directive Recital 23
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(23)  After having received a pre-conversion certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements in the destination Member State are fulfilled, the competent authorities of the destination Member State should register the company in the business register of that Member State. Only after this registration should the competent authority of the departure Member State strike the company off its own register. It should not be possible for the competent authority of the destination Member State to challenge the accuracy of the information provided by the pre-conversion certificate. As a consequence of the cross-border conversion, the converted company should retain its legal personality, its assets and liabilities and all rights and obligations, including rights and obligations arising from contracts, acts or omissions.	(23)  After having received a pre-conversion certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements in the destination Member State are fulfilled, the competent authorities of the destination Member State should register the company in the business register of that Member State. Only after this registration should the competent authority of the departure Member State strike the company off its own register. It should not be possible for the competent authority of the destination Member State to challenge the accuracy of the information provided by the pre-conversion certificate. As a consequence of the cross-border conversion, the converted company should retain its legal personality, its assets and liabilities and all rights and obligations, including rights and obligations arising from contracts, acts or omissions. However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border conversion takes effect, new information concerning the cross-border conversion is brought to the attention of the competent authorities, suggesting there has been an infringement of any of the provisions in this Directive, the competent authorities should revise their assessment of the facts of the case and should be empowered to take effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    40 Proposal for a directive Recital 26
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(26)  The evaluation of the implementation of the cross-border merger rules in Member States has shown that the number of cross-border mergers in the Union has significantly increased. However, this evaluation has also revealed certain shortcomings in relation specifically to creditor protection and shareholder protection as well as to the lack of simplified procedures which impede the full effectiveness and efficiency of those cross-border merger rules.	(26)  The evaluation of the implementation of the cross-border merger rules in Member States has shown that the number of cross-border mergers in the Union has significantly increased. However, this evaluation has also revealed certain shortcomings in relation specifically to creditor protection, minority shareholder and employee protection, especially when it comes to the disclosure of details regarding mergers and the implications thereof, protection as well as to the lack of simplified procedures which impede the full effectiveness and efficiency of those cross-border merger rules,
Amendment    41 Proposal for a directive Recital 27 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(27a)  The right to merge an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State should not, under any circumstances, be used for abusive, fraudulent or criminal purposes such as for the evasion, avoidance or circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' rights, minority shareholders' rights or rules on employee participation. In order to combat such possible abuses, and respect a general principle of Union law, Member States should be required to ensure that companies do not use cross-border merger procedures, in order to create artificial arrangements. Member States should also be required to ensure that the cross-border merger corresponds to the actual pursuit of a genuine economic activity, including in the digital sector, through a fixed establishment in the Member State of the company resulting from the merger for an indefinite period, in order to avoid the setting up of ‘letterbox’ or ‘front’ companies with the purpose of evading, circumventing or infringing national and/or Union law. The fight against abuses should be based on an assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and takes account of the diversity of approaches by Member States, whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law, should be introduced into the merger procedure.
Amendment    42 Proposal for a directive Recital 27 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(27b)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedure governing a cross-border merger, the company involved in a cross-border merger should draw up the draft terms of the cross-border merger, together with, where provided for in national law and/or in accordance with national practice, board level employee representatives, and disclose those draft terms. Board level employee representatives should also be included in the decision on the draft terms. The draft terms should contain the most important information about the proposed cross-border merger, including the envisaged new company form, total turnover and total taxable turnover of each of the merging companies for the last reporting period, the amount of income tax paid by the merging companies and their subsidiaries and branches, information on the location and, where relevant, date of the transfer of the head office of the company to the Member State of the company resulting from the merger, as well as information on the management bodies and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets, the number of employees employed on a full-time equivalent basis, the likely repercussions of the cross-border merger on employment, including the likely changes to the organisation of work, the wages, the location of specific posts and the expected consequences for the employees occupying such posts, including employees in subsidiaries and branches of the merging companies located within the Union, and on the company level social dialogue including, where applicable, board level employee representation, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the merger. Members, creditors and employees of the company involved in the cross-border merger should be notified in order that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed merger. Before the decision on the draft terms of a cross-border merger is made, the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented should be informed of and consulted on the proposed merger. Similarly, where a body has been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, it should also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    43 Proposal for a directive Recital 28
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(28)  In order to further enhance the existing cross-border merger procedure, it is necessary to simplify those merger rules, where appropriate, whilst at the same time ensuring that stakeholders, and in particular employees, are adequately protected. Therefore, the existing cross-border merger rules should be modified in order to oblige the management or administrative organs of the merging companies to prepare separate reports detailing the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger for both members and for employees. The obligation on the management or administrative organ of the company to prepare the report for the members may however be waived, where those members are already informed about legal and economic aspects of the proposed merger. However, the report prepared for employees may only be waived where the merging companies and their subsidiaries do not have any employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ.	deleted
Amendment    44 Proposal for a directive Recital 28 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(28a)  Where each of the administrative or management bodies of the companies involved in cross-border merger receive, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, or where applicable, from the bodies established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, the members should be informed thereof and the opinions should be appended to each report. Each of the administrative or management bodies of the companies which intend to carry out the cross-border merger, should provide a motivated response on the opinion provided by the employee representatives, and, where applicable, the bodies established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, before the date of the general meetings.
Amendment    45 Proposal for a directive Recital 28 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(28b)  In order to be enabled to conduct an analysis of the report of each of the merging companies, each company involved in the cross-border merger should provide the employee representatives, the trade unions represented in the company and where applicable, any body thas been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC such financial and material resources necessary to enable them to apply the rights arising from this directive in an appropriate manner, such as for example access to a private and password-protected computer, a secure internet connection, meeting rooms, time off for meetings, the cost of organising meetings and if necessary, interpretation facilities, accommodation and travel expenses;
Amendment    46 Proposal for a directive Recital 28 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(28c)  The competent national authorities should be able to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of merger and in the reports addressed to the members and employees. In this context, each report should contain all relevant information to enable the competent authority in each Member State of the merging companies to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-merger certificate. To this end, the competent authorities of each Member State of the merging companies should be able to obtain all relevant company information, such as net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of its balance sheet, collected by the company for the purposes of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States, and any documents needed to carry out the investigations necessary to gather the evidence required, and to assess the proposed cross-border merger with all necessary factual elements provided by the companies. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the companies, such information should not form part of the final reports of each competent authority which itself should be publically available.
Amendment    47 Proposal for a directive Recital 28 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(28d)  On the basis of the draft terms of merger and the reports, each general meeting of the members of the companies involved in the cross-border merger should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to merge is a collective one. Before a decision is taken in each of the companies, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights should be respected in order for opinions by the employee representatives to be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2002/14/EC, and where applicable Directives 2009/38/EC and 2001/86/EC.
Amendment    48 Proposal for a directive Recital 29
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(29)  Furthermore, in order to enhance the protection afforded to the employees of the merging company or companies, employees or their representatives may provide their opinion on the company report setting out the implications of the cross-border merger for them. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Council Directive 2001/23/EC48 , Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC.	(29)  Furthermore, in order to enhance the protection afforded to the employees of the merging company or companies, employees or their representatives may provide their opinion on the company report setting out the implications of the cross-border merger for them. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Council Directive 2001/23/EC48, Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC. In order to further enhance the existing cross-border merger procedure, it is necessary to simplify those merger rules, where appropriate, whilst at the same time ensuring that stakeholders, and in particular employees, are adequately protected. Therefore, the existing cross-border merger rules should be modified in order to oblige each of the management or administrative bodies of the merging companies to prepare a report providing information to its members and employees, detailing the legal and economic aspects and explaining the implications of the cross-border merger for both members and for employees, in particular the reasons for the cross-border merger, the implications of the cross-border merger for members and employees with regard to the future business of the company and the management organ's strategic plan. It should also include potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border merger. The report of each merging company should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border merger for the jobs of the employees, and for employee involvement, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them, whether there would be any material change in the employment relationships and the locations of the companies’ places of business, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the company resulting from the merger can be applied and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. This requirement should not, however, apply where the only employees of the companies are in its administrative organ. Before the decision on each report is made, the representatives of the employees of the companies carrying out the cross-border merger or, if there are no representatives, the employees themselves, should be informed of and consulted on the proposed merger. Similarly, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC should also be informed and consulted accordingly. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to any other applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC. It should be possible, however, to waive the obligation on the management or administrative organ of the company to prepare the report for the members and employees where those members are already informed about the legal and economic aspects of the proposed merger. However, the report prepared for employees should only be waived where the merging companies and their subsidiaries do not have any employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ.
__________________	__________________
48 Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).	48 Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).
Amendment    49 Proposal for a directive Recital 29 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(29a)  Companies willing to make full use of the benefits of the internal market through cross-border mergers should in return adhere to an adequate level of transparency and good corporate governance. Public country by country reporting is an efficient and appropriate tool to increase transparency of multinational enterprises activities and to enable the public to assess their impact on the real economy. It will also improve shareholders ability to properly evaluate the risks taken by companies, lead to investment strategies based on accurate information and enhance decision-makers ability to assess the efficiency and the impact of national law. Therefore, a set of financial information should be published before the cross-border merger actually takes place.
Amendment    50 Proposal for a directive Recital 29 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(29b)  To prevent conflicts of interests between the members of the management body and the interests of the company, those members should not be allowed to benefit financially from the merger in the form of variable compensation, bonuses or rising share prices.
Amendment    51 Proposal for a directive Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31)  The lack of harmonisation of safeguards for members or creditors has been identified an obstacle for cross-border mergers by different stakeholders. Members and creditors should be offered the same level of protection regardless of the Member States in which the merging companies are situated. This is without prejudice to the Member States’ rules on protecting creditors or shareholders which are outside the scope of the harmonised measures, such as transparency requirements.	(31)  The lack of harmonisation of safeguards for employees, members or creditors has been identified an obstacle for cross-border mergers by different stakeholders. Employees, members and creditors should be offered at least the same level of protection regardless of the Member States in which the merging companies are situated. This is without prejudice to the Member States’ rules on protecting employees, creditors or shareholders which are outside the scope of the harmonised measures, such as transparency requirements.
Amendment    52 Proposal for a directive Recital 34
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(34)  Companies involved in a cross-border merger should propose adequate measures to protect their creditors in the common draft terms of merger. In addition, in order to strengthen the protection of those creditors in case of insolvency following the cross-border merger, Member States should be allowed to require the merging companies to make a declaration of solvency stating that they are not aware of any reason why the company resulting from the merger should not be able to meet its liabilities. In those circumstances, Member States should be able to make the members of the management organ personally liable for the accuracy of that declaration statement. As legal traditions vary amongst Member States with regard to the use of solvency declarations and their possible consequences, it should be up to Member States to draw appropriate consequences for inaccurate or misleading declarations, including effective and proportionate sanctions and liabilities in compliance with Union law.	(34)  Companies involved in a cross-border merger should propose adequate measures to protect their creditors in the common draft terms of merger. In addition, in order to strengthen the protection of those creditors in case of insolvency following the cross-border merger, Member States should be allowed to require the merging companies to make a declaration of solvency stating that they are not aware of any reason why the company resulting from the merger should not be able to meet its liabilities following the cross-border merger. In those circumstances, Member States should be able to make the members of the management organ personally liable for the accuracy of that declaration statement. As legal traditions vary amongst Member States with regard to the use of solvency declarations and their possible consequences, it should be up to Member States to draw appropriate consequences for inaccurate or misleading declarations, including effective and proportionate sanctions and liabilities in compliance with Union law.
Amendment    53 Proposal for a directive Recital 35
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(35)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border merger may apply to the competent administrative or judicial authority of each Member State of the merging companies for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border merger, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where an independent expert concludes that there is no reasonable likelihood that the creditors would be prejudiced or where creditors are offered a right to payment against the merged company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim.	(35)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border merger may apply to the competent administrative or judicial authority of each Member State of the merging companies for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border merger, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where creditors are offered a right to payment against the merged company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim.
Amendment    54 Proposal for a directive Recital 35 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35a)  To ensure a proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border mergers, each of the Member States involved, should designate the appropriate court, notary or other competent authority. In particular, each competent authority of the Member States should have the power to issue a pre-merger certificate without which the competent authority in the Member State of the company resulting from the merger should not be able to complete the cross-border merger procedure. Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated set up appropriate coordination mechanisms with other authorities and bodies in each Member State working in the policy fields concerned by this Directive and should where appropriate consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border merger. The decision to issue a pre-merger certificate by the competent authority of each Member State of the merging companies or any approval by the competent authority in the Member State of the company resulting from the merger should not preclude any subsequent procedures or decisions by authorities in the Member States in respect of other relevant fields of law.
Amendment    55 Proposal for a directive Recital 35 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35b)  The issue of the pre-merger certificate by each Member State of the merging companies should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border merger of the companies. Each competent authority of the Member State of the merging companies should decide on the issue of the pre-merger certificate within two months of the reception of all the necessary documents and information unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement or that the merger does not involve actual pursuit of genuine economic activity. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but rather on a case-by-case basis, where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors, laid down in this Directive, which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. Whenever the competent authority makes an assessment on whether the merger involves the actual pursuit of genuine economic activity, the competent authority should in particular verify whether the company has a fixed establishment in the Member State of the company resulting from the merger, which has the objective appearance of permanency, whether it has a management body, staff, equipment, premises and assets, and is materially equipped to autonomously negotiate business with third parties, and should consider whether the company has chosen to delegate its management to directors, officers or legal representatives, hired from an independent third party through a service contractor. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, such in-depth assessment should, in any event, be concluded within three months of informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.
Amendment    56 Proposal for a directive Recital 35 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35c)  After having received a pre-merger certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements in the Member State of the company resulting from the merger are fulfilled, the competent authorities of the Member State of the company resulting from the merger should register the company in the business register of that Member State. Only after this registration, should each competent authority of the Member State of the merging companies strike the company off its own register. It should not be possible for the competent authority of the Member State of the company resulting from the merger to challenge the accuracy of the information provided by the pre-merger certificate of each competent authority. As a consequence of the cross-border merger, the company resulting from the merger should retain its legal personality, its assets and liabilities and all rights and obligations, including rights and obligations arising from contracts, acts or omissions. However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border merger takes effect, new information concerning the cross-border merger is brought to the attention of the competent authorities, suggesting there has been an infringement of any of the provisions in this Directive, the competent authorities should revise their assessment of the facts of the case and should be empowered to take effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    57 Proposal for a directive Recital 35 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35d)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border merger, where a company involved in the cross-border merger is operating under an employee participation system in the Member State of the merging company, the company should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of such participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory body of the company in the Member State of the company resulting from the merger. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place. As soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of merger, each company concerned should take the necessary steps, including providing information about the identity of the participating companies, subsidiaries or establishments concerned, and the number of their employees, to start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees, or, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the merger, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of each company to carry out a cross-border merger with the employees' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply, mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the bespoke and agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company resulting from the merger should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversion, merger or division within three six years. Where, an applicable threshold for employee participation laid down in the law of a Member State involved in the merger is exceeded in the six years following the cross-border merger, the same level and elements of employee participation as would have been legally provided for had the company reached the relevant threshold in that Member State, should apply and new negotiations should be initiated.
Amendment    58 Proposal for a directive Recital 35 e (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35e)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border merger, a company carrying out a merger which is registered in a Member State which provides for employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border merger without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation. Member States should ensure that employee’s representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them.
Amendment    59 Proposal for a directive Recital 35 f (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(35f)  Following the merger, each company carrying out the cross-border merger should continue to observe the terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreement on the same terms applicable to the company before the merger under that agreement, until the date of termination or expiry of the collective agreement or the entry into force or application of another collective agreement, in accordance with Directive 2001/23/EC.
Amendment    60 Proposal for a directive Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40)  The right of companies to carry out a cross-border division may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' or members' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such abuses, as a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border division procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approaches by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.	(40)  The right of companies to carry out a cross-border division should not under any circumstances be used for abusive, fraudulent or criminal purposes such as for the evasion, avoidance or circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' or members' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such abuses, as a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border division procedure in order to create artificial arrangements. Member States are also required to ensure that the cross-border division corresponds to the actual pursuit of a genuine economic activity, including in the digital sector, through a fixed establishment in the Member States of the recipient companies for an indefinite period, in order to avoid the setting up of ‘letterbox’ or ‘front’ companies with the purpose of evading, circumventing or infringing national and/or Union law. The fight against abuses must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approaches by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.
Amendment    61 Proposal for a directive Recital 41
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(41)  Given the complexity of cross-border divisions and the multitude of the interests concerned, it is appropriate to provide for an ex-ante control in order to create legal certainty. To that effect, a structured and multi-layered procedure should be set out whereby both the competent authorities of the Member State of the company being divided and of the Member State of the recipient companies ensure that a decision on the approval of a cross-border division is taken in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory manner on the basis of all relevant elements and by taking into account all legitimate public interests, in particular the protection of employees, shareholders and creditors.	(41)  Given the complexity of cross-border divisions and the multitude of the interests concerned, it is appropriate to provide for an ex-ante and an ex-post control in order to create legal certainty. To that effect, a structured and multi-layered procedure should be set out whereby both the competent authorities of the Member State of the company being divided and of the Member State of the recipient companies ensure that a decision on the approval of a cross-border division is taken in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory manner on the basis of all relevant elements and by taking into account all legitimate public interests, in particular the protection of employees, shareholders and creditors.
Amendment    62 Proposal for a directive Recital 42
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(42)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account, the company being divided should disclose the draft terms of the division containing the most important information about the proposed cross-border division, including the envisaged the exchange ratio of securities or shares, the instruments of constitution of the recipient companies and the proposed timetable for the cross-border division. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division should be notified that they can submit comments with regard to the division.	(42)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account, the company being divided which intends to carry out a cross-border division should draw up the draft terms of the division, together with, where provided for in national law and/or in accordance with national practice, board level employee representatives, and disclose those draft terms . Board level employee representatives should also be included into the decision on the draft terms. The draft terms should contain the most important information about the proposed cross-border division, including the envisaged the exchange ratio of securities or shares, total turnover and total taxable turnover of the company being divided for the last reporting period, the amount of income tax paid by the company being divided and its subsidiaries and branches, information on the location and, where relevant, date of the transfer of the head office of the company to the Member State of the recipient companies, as well as information on the management bodies and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets, the number of employees on a full-time equivalent basis, the likely repercussions of the cross-border division on employment, including the likely changes to the organisation of work, the wages, the location of specific posts and the expected consequences for the employees occupying such posts, including employees in the subsidiaries and branches of the company being divided that are located within the Union, and oncompany level social dialogue including, where applicable, board level employee representation, the instruments of constitution of the recipient companies and the proposed timetable for the cross-border division. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division should be notified that they can submit comments with regard to the division. Before the decision on the draft terms of a cross-border division is made, the representatives of the employees of the company being divided or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented should be informed of and consulted on the proposed division. Similarly, where a body has been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, it should also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    63 Proposal for a directive Recital 43
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(43)  In order to provide information to its members, the company being divided should prepare a report. The report should explain and substantiate the legal and economic aspects of the proposed cross-border division, in particular explaining the implications of the cross-border division for members with regard to the future business of the company and the management organs’ strategic plan. It should also include explanations about the exchange ratio, where applicable, the criteria to determine the allocation of shares and potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border division.	(43)  In order to provide information to its members and employees, the company being divided should prepare a report, explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border division. The report should explain and substantiate the legal and economic aspects of the proposed cross-border division, in particular the reasons for the cross-border division, explaining the implications of the cross-border division for members with regard to the future business of the company and the management organs’ strategic plan. It should also include explanations about the exchange ratio, where applicable, the criteria to determine the allocation of shares and potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border division. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border division for the jobs of the employees, and for employee involvement, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them, whether there would be any material change in the employment relationships and the locations of the companies’ places of business, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the recipient companies can be applied and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. This requirement should not, however, apply where the only employees of the company are in its administrative organ. Before the decision on the report is made, the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division or, if there are no representatives, the employees themselves, should be informed of and consulted on the proposed division. Similarly, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC should also be informed and consulted accordingly. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to any other applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC .
Amendment    64 Proposal for a directive Recital 43 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43a)  Where the administrative or management body of the company being divided receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, or where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, the members should be informed thereof and that opinion should be appended to that report. The administrative or management body of the company which intends to carry out the cross-border division, should provide a motivated response on the opinion provided by the employee representatives, and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, before the date of the general meeting.
Amendment    65 Proposal for a directive Recital 43 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(43b)  In order to be enabled to conduct an analysis of the report, the company carrying out the cross-border division should provide the employee representatives, the trade unions represented in the company and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, such financial and material resources necessary to enable them to apply the rights arising from this directive in an appropriate manner, such as for example access to a private and password-protected computer, a secure internet connection, meeting rooms, time off for meetings, the cost of organising meetings and if necessary, interpretation facilities, accommodation and travel expenses.
Amendment    66 Proposal for a directive Recital 44
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(44)  In order to provide information its employees, the company being divided should prepare a report explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border division for employees. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border division on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the conditions of employment and the locations of the companies’ places of business, and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.	deleted
Amendment    67 Proposal for a directive Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45)  In order to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of division and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed division constitutes an artificial arrangement which could not be authorised, an independent expert report to assess the division plan should be required to be prepared. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. In this context, the expert report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-division certificate. To this end, the expert should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The expert should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the expert’s final report which itself would be publically available.	(45)  The competent national authorities should be able to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of division and in the report addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed division constitutes an artificial arrangement which could not be authorised, an independent expert report to assess the division plan should be required to be prepared. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. In this context, the expert report should contain all relevant information to enable the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-division certificate. To this end, the competent authority should be able to obtain all the relevant company information such as net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States, and any documents needed to carry out the investigations necessary to gather the evidence required and to assess the proposed cross-border division, with all necessary factual elements provided by the company. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the final report which itself would be publically available. The competent authority should be able to have recourse to an independent expert. The expert should be appointed from a list that is drawn up by the competent authority, and should have no past or current link with the company concerned. The expert should have relevant expertise, in particular, in the fields of company law, taxation and fiscal law, social security and labour law.
Amendment    68 Proposal for a directive Recital 46
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(46)  With a view to avoiding disproportionate costs and burdens for smaller companies carrying out cross-border division, micro and small enterprises as defined in the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 should be exempted from the requirement to have produce an independent expert.	deleted
Amendment    69 Proposal for a directive Recital 47
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(47)  On the basis of the draft terms of the cross-border division and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company being divided, should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that, the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to divide is a collective one.	(47)  On the basis of the draft terms of the cross-border division and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company being divided, should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that, the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to divide is a collective one. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights should be respected in order for an opinion by the employee representatives to be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2002/14/EC, and where applicable Directives 2009/38/EC and 2001/86/EC. In addition, members should also have the right to vote on any arrangements concerning employee participation, if they have reserved that right during the general meeting.
Amendment    70 Proposal for a directive Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border division, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border division may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the company being divided for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border division where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where an independent expert report concludes that there is no reasonable likelihood that the creditors would be prejudiced or where creditors are offered a right to payment against the company resulting from the division or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of the company being divided concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.	(50)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border division, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border division may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the company being divided for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border division where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where creditors are offered a right to payment against the company resulting from the division or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of the company being divided concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.
Amendment    71 Proposal for a directive Recital 51
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(51)  To ensure the proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border divisions, the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided should have the power to issue a pre-division certificate without which the authorities of the Member States of the recipient companies should not be able to complete the cross-border-division procedure.	(51)  To ensure the proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border divisions, both, the Member State of the company being divided and the Member States of the recipient companies should designate the appropriate court, notary or other competent authorities. In particular, the competent authority of the Member States of the company being divided should have the power to issue a pre-division certificate without which the authorities of the Member States of the recipient companies should not be able to complete the cross-border-division procedure. Member States should ensure that the competent authorities designated set up appropriate coordination mechanisms with other authorities and bodies in that Member State working in the policy fields concerned by this Directive and should, where appropriate, consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border division. The decision to issue a pre-division certificate by the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided or any approval by the competent authority in the Member States of the recipient companies should not preclude any subsequent procedures or decisions by authorities in the Member States in respect of other relevant fields of law.
Amendment    72 Proposal for a directive Recital 52
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(52)  The issue of the pre-division certificate by the Member State of the company being divided should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border division. The competent authority should decide whether to issue a pre-division certificate within one month of the application by the company has been submitted, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.	(52)  The issue of the pre-division certificate by the Member State of the company being divided should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border division. The competent authority should decide whether to issue a pre-division certificate within two months of the reception of all the necessary documents and information, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement or that the division does not involve the actual pursuit of genuine economic activity. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. Whenever the competent authority makes an assessment on whether the division involves the actual pursuit of genuine economic activity, the competent authority should in particular verify whether the company has a fixed establishment in all Member States of the recipient companies, which has the objective appearance of permanency, whether it has a management body, staff, equipment, premises and assets, and is materially equipped to autonomously negotiate business with third parties and should consider whether the company has chosen to delegate its management to directors, officers or legal representatives, hired from an independent third party through a service contractor. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.
Amendment    73 Proposal for a directive Recital 53
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(53)  After having received a pre-division certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements of the Member State of the recipient company or companies are fulfilled, the authorities of the Member States of the recipient companies should register the companies in the business registers of that Member State. Only after this registration should the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided strike the company off its own register. The accuracy of the information provided by the pre-division certificate cannot be challenged by the competent authorities of the Member States of the recipient companies.	(53)  After having received a pre-division certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements of the Member State of the recipient company or companies are fulfilled, the authorities of the Member States of the recipient companies should register the companies in the business registers of that Member State. Only after this registration should the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided strike the company off its own register. It should not be possible for the competent authority of the Member States of the recipient companies to challenge the accuracy of the information provided by the pre-division certificate. However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border division takes effect, new information concerning the cross-border division is brought to the attention of the competent authorities, suggesting there has been an infringement of any of the provisions in this Directive, the competent authorities should revise their assessment of the facts of the case and should be empowered to take effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    74 Proposal for a directive Recital 55
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(55)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border division where the company carrying out the cross-border division is operating under an employee participation system, the companies resulting from the division should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory organs of the companies. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of the company to carry out a cross-border division with the employees'' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversions, mergers or divisions within 3 years.	(55)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border division where the company carrying out the cross-border division is operating under an employee participation system, the companies resulting from the division should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory organs of the companies. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place. As soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of division, the company being divided should take the necessary steps, including providing information about the identity of the participating companies, subsidiaries or establishments concerned, and the number of their employees, to start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees, or where applicable the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directives 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the division, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of the company to carry out a cross-border division with the employees'' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversions, mergers or divisions within six years. Where, an applicable threshold for employee participation laid down in the law of the Member State of the dividing company is exceeded in the six years following the cross-border division, the same level and elements of employee participation as would have been legally provided for had the company reached the relevant threshold in the Member State of the dividing company, should apply and new negotiations should be initiated.
Amendment    75 Proposal for a directive Recital 56
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(56)  In order to prevent the circumvention of the employee participation rights by means of a cross-border division, the company carrying out a division which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border division without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation.	(56)  In order to prevent the circumvention of the employee participation rights by means of a cross-border division, the company carrying out a division which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border division without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation. Member States should ensure that employee’s representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them.
Amendment    76 Proposal for a directive Recital 56 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(56a)  Following the division, the company carrying out the cross-border division should continue to observe the terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreement on the same terms applicable to the company before the division under that agreement, until the date of termination or expiry of the collective agreement or the entry into force or application of another collective agreement, in accordance with Directive 2001/23/EC.
Amendment    77 Proposal for a directive Recital 58
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(58)  The provisions of this Directive do not affect the legal or administrative provisions, including the enforcement of tax rules in cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, of national law relating to the taxes of Member States, or its territorial and administrative subdivisions.	(58)  The provisions of this Directive do not affect the legal or administrative provisions, including the enforcement of tax rules in cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, of national law relating to the taxes of Member States, or its territorial and administrative subdivisions. For example, in certain cases, departure Member States tax unrealised capital gains at the time of the cross-border conversion of a company. In such cases, Member states should be able to (i) give the companys the option to choose between the immediate payment of the tax or deferral of payment until realization of the values, with a request to pay interest; (ii) request payment by instalments; and (iii) request the company to provide guarantees only upon prior assessment of a risk of non-recovery of the tax.
Amendment    78 Proposal for a directive Recital 61
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(61)  This Directive respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in particular by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.	(61)  This Directive ensures full respect for the fundamental rights and the principles recognised in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, including the right to establishment in any Member State (Article 15(2)), freedom to conduct a business (Article 16), workers’ right to information and consultation within the undertaking (Article 27), the right of collective bargaining and action (Article 28), the right to protection in the event of unjustified dismissal (Article 30), the right to fair and just working conditions (Article 31), the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial (Article 47) and the right to protection of personal data (Article 8).
Amendment    79 Proposal for a directive Recital 63
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(63)  The Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Directive. Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201652 that evaluation should be based on the five criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and value added and should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures.	(63)  The Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Directive. It should examine its impact on the economy, competitiveness and growth. Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201652 that evaluation should be based on the five criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and value added and should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures. In its assessment, the Commission should also take into account the level of protection afforded to employees, creditors and minority shareholders in the implementation of this Directive.
_________________	_________________
52 OJ L123, 12.5. 2016, p. 1.	52 OJ L123, 12.5. 2016, p. 1.
Amendment    80 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-1)  The following Article 1a is added:   Article 1a   Definitions   For the purposes of this Directive:   (1) 'limited liability company' in Chapter I, Chapter II and Chapter II, Title II referred to as "company", means;   (a) a company of a type listed in Annex II;   (b) if not included in Annex II for the purposes of Chapter II of Title II, a company with share capital and that has legal personality, possesses separate assets which alone serve to cover its debts and that is subject, under the national law governing it, to conditions concerning guarantees such as those provided for in Section 2 of Chapter II of Title I and Section 1 of Chapter III of Title I for the protection of the interests of members and others;   (2) 'cross-border conversion' means an operation whereby a company, without being dissolved, wound up or going into liquidation, converts the legal form under which it is registered in a departure Member State into the legal form of a company of a destination Member State and transfers at least its registered office to the destination Member State whilst retaining its legal personality;   (3) 'departure Member State' means a Member State in which a company is registered in its legal form prior to a cross-border conversion;   (4) 'destination Member State' means a Member State in which a company is registered as a result of a cross-border conversion;   (5) 'register' means the central, commercial or companies register referred to in Article 16(1);   (6) 'converted company' means the company formed in the destination Member State on the date the cross-border conversion takes effect;   (7) ‘merger by acquisition’ in Chapter I of Title II means an operation whereby one or more companies are wound up without going into liquidation and transfer to another company all their assets and liabilities in exchange for the issue to the shareholders of the company or companies being acquired of shares in the acquiring company and in certain cases also a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of the shares so issued or, where they have no nominal value, of their accounting par value. A Member State's laws may provide that merger by acquisition may also be effected where one or more of the companies being acquired is in liquidation, provided that this option is restricted to companies which have not yet begun to distribute their assets to their shareholders;   (8) ‘merger by the formation of a new company’ in Chapter I of Title II means an operation whereby several companies are wound up without going into liquidation and transfer to a company that they set up all their assets and liabilities in exchange for the issue to their shareholders of shares in the new company and, in certain cases, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of the shares so issued or, where they have no nominal value, of their accounting par value. A Member State's laws may provide that merger by the formation of a new company may also be effected where one or more of the companies which ceases to exist is in liquidation, provided that this option is restricted to companies which have not yet begun to distribute their assets to their shareholders;   (9) ‘merger’ in Chapter II of Title II means an operation whereby:   (a) one or more companies, on being dissolved without going into liquidation, transfer all their assets and liabilities to another existing company, the acquiring company, in exchange for the issue to their members of securities or shares representing the capital of that other company and, if applicable, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value, or, in the absence of a nominal value, of the accounting par value of those securities or shares; or   (b) two or more companies, on being dissolved without going into liquidation, transfer all their assets and liabilities to a company that they form, the new company, in exchange for the issue to their members of securities or shares representing the capital of that new company and, if applicable, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value, or in the absence of a nominal value, of the accounting par value of those securities or shares; or   (c) a company, on being dissolved without going into liquidation, transfers all its assets and liabilities to the company holding all the securities or shares representing its capital;"   (d) one or more companies, on being dissolved without going into liquidation, transfer all their assets and liabilities to another existing company, the acquiring company, without the issue of any new shares by the acquiring company, provided that one person holds directly or indirectly all the shares in the merging companies or the members of the merging companies hold their shares in the same proportion in all merging companies.";   (10) 'company being divided' means a company which is undergoing the process of cross-border division whereby it transfers all its assets and liabilities to one or more companies, or in case of a partial division it transfers part of its assets and liabilities to one or more companies;   (11) ‘division 'means an operation whereby either:   (a) a company being divided, which has been wound up without going into liquidation, transfers all its assets and liabilities to two or more newly formed companies (‘the recipient companies’),in exchange for the issue to the members of the company being divided of securities or shares in the recipient companies and, if any, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of those securities or shares or, where they have no nominal value, a cash payment not exceeding 10% of the accounting par value of their securities or shares ('full division');   (b) a company being divided transfers part of its assets and liabilities to one or more newly formed companies (‘the recipient companies’), in exchange for the issue to the members of the company being divided of securities or shares in the recipient companies or, in the company being divided, or in both the recipient companies and in the company being divided, and if any a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of those securities or shares, or, in the absence of a nominal value, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the accounting par value of their securities or shares (‘partial division’).   (12) "employees' representatives" means the employees' representatives provided for by national law and/or in accordance with national practice;   (13) "involvement of employees" has the same meaning as provided for by point (h) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC;   (14) ‘employee information‘ has the same meaning as provided for by point (f) of Article 2 of Directive 2009/38/EC;   (15) ‘employee consultation’ has the same meaning as provided for by Article 2 (g) of Directive 2009/38/EC;   (16) "employee participation" has the same meaning as provided for by point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC ;   (17) ‘artificial arrangement’ means an arrangement aiming at or leading to the evasion, avoidance or circumvention of companies’ obligations arising from Union and national law, including the legal and contractual rights of employees, creditors and members, or the avoidance of financial obligations, through, for example, a fictitious or provisional establishment not carrying out genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.
Amendment    81 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86a – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States may decide not to apply this Chapter to cross-border conversions involving a cooperative society even in the case where the latter would fall within the definition of a ‘limited liability company’ as laid down in Article 86a(1). deleted
Amendment    82 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86b deleted For the purposes of this Chapter:   (1)  'limited liability company' hereinafter referred to as "company", means a company of a type listed in Annex II;   (2)  'cross-border conversion' means an operation whereby a company, without being dissolved, wound up or going into liquidation, converts the legal form under which it is registered in a departure Member State into a legal form of a company of a destination Member State and transfers at least its registered office into the destination Member State whilst retaining its legal personality;   (3)  'departure Member State' means a Member State in which a company is registered in its legal form prior to the cross-border conversion;   (4)  'destination Member State' means a Member State in which a company shall be registered as a result of the cross-border conversion;   (5)  'register' means the central, commercial or companies register referred to in Article 16(1);   (6)  'converted company' means the newly formed company in the destination Member State from the date upon which the cross-border conversion takes effect.
Amendment    83 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that where a company intends to carry out a cross-border conversion, the departure and destination Member States verify that the cross-border conversion complies with the conditions laid down in paragraph 2. 1.  Member States shall ensure that where a company intends to carry out a cross-border conversion, the court, notary or other authority competent of the departure and destination Member States verify that the cross-border conversion complies with the conditions laid down in paragraph 2.
Amendment    84 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency; deleted
Amendment    85 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or minority members. 3.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines, after carrying out an assessment of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    86 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company which intends to carry out a cross-border conversion shall draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion. The draft terms of a cross-border conversion shall include at least the following: 1.  The administrative or management body, including, where provided for in national law and/or in accordance with national practice, board level employee representatives of the company which intends to carry out a cross-border conversion shall draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion and be included in the decision on those draft terms. The draft terms of a cross-border conversion shall include at least the following:
Amendment    87 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the legal form, name and registered office of the company in the departure Member State; (a)  the legal form, name and location of registered office of the company in the departure Member State;
Amendment    88 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on the location and date of the transfer of the head office of the company to the destination Member State, in the event that it is not already located there, as well as information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets;
Amendment    89 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point g
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (g)  the date from which the transactions of the company formed and registered in the departure Member State will be treated for accounting purposes as being those of the converted company; deleted
Amendment    90 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point h
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (h)  any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling organ of the converted company; (h)  any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling body of the converted company;
Amendment    91 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ha)  information on any incentive, subsidy or commitment received to remain in the departure Member State.
Amendment    92 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point i a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ia)  the number of employees on a full-time equivalent basis;
Amendment    93 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point j
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (j)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border conversion on employment (j)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border conversion on employment, including the likely changes to the organisation of work, the wages, the place of specific posts and the expected consequences for the employees occupying such posts, including employees in the subsidiaries and branches of the converting company located within the Union and the company level social dialogue including, where applicable, board level employee representation;
Amendment    94 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point k
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (k)  where appropriate, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the converted company are determined pursuant to Article 86l and on the possible options for such arrangements. (k)  information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to information, consultation and participation in the converted company are determined pursuant to Article 86l and on the possible options for such arrangements.
Amendment    95 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ka)  the name of the ultimate company and, where applicable, the list of all its subsidiaries, a brief description of the nature of their activities and their respective geographic allocation;
Amendment    96 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (kb)  total turnover and total taxable turnover of the converting company for the last reporting period;
Amendment    97 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point k c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (kc)  the amount of income tax paid by the converting company and its subsidiaries and branches,
Amendment    98 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   1a.  Before the management or administrative organ decides on the draft terms of a cross-border conversion, the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented shall be informed of and consulted on the proposed conversion in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC mutatis mutandis. Where a body has been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, it shall also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    99 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  In addition to the official languages of the departure and destination Member States, Member States shall allow the company carrying out the cross-border conversion to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. 2.  In addition to the official languages of the departure and destination Member States, Member States may indicate that the company shall allow the company carrying out the cross-border conversion to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion and all other related documents. Member States The company shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on those draft terms.
Amendment    100 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border conversion. 1.  The management or administrative body of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report for the members and employees explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border conversion, as well as explaining the implications of the cross-border conversion for employees.
Amendment    101 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-a)  the reasons for the cross-border conversion;
Amendment    102 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  the implications of the cross-border conversion for employment relationships and employee involvement, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them;
Amendment    103 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cb)  any material changes in the conditions of employment, laid down by law, collective agreements and transnational company agreements and in the location of the company’s places of business;
Amendment    104 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cc)  information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the resulting converted company can be applied in accordance with this Directive;
Amendment    105 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cd)  whether the factors set out in points (a) to (g) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company.
Amendment    106 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  Before the administrative or management body decides on the report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, if there are no representatives, the employees themselves, shall be informed and consulted on the proposed conversion in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC.Where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC shall also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    107 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members and to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i.
Amendment    108 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  However, that report shall not be required where all the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion have agreed to waive this requirement. 4.  However, that report shall not be required where all the members of the company and all the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, carrying out the cross-border conversion have agreed to waive this requirement.
Amendment    109 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  Where the administrative or management body of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, or where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.
Amendment    110 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4b.  The administrative or management body of the company which intends to carry out the cross-border conversion, shall provide a motivated response on the opinion provided by the employee representatives, and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i.
Amendment    111 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4c.  The national employees´ representative bodies, the trade unions represented in the company and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC shall have the means and resources required to exercise the rights arising from this Directive to conduct an analysis of the report. Paragraph 6 of Annex I to Directive 2009/38/EC shall apply mutatis mutandis to that end.
Amendment    112 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4d.  Paragraphs 1 to 4 of this Article shall be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC and 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    113 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86f
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86f deleted Report of the management or administrative organ to the employees   1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining the implications of the cross-border conversion for employees.   2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following:   (a)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan;   (b)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of employment relationships;   (c)  any material changes in the conditions of employment and in the location of the company’s places of business;   (d)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (b) and (c) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company.   3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. That report shall also be made similarly available to the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion.   4.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.   5.  However, where a company carrying out the cross-border conversion and its subsidiaries, if any, have no employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be required.   6.  Paragraphs 1 to 6 are without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    114 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Examination by an independent expert Assessment by the competent authority
Amendment    115 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the company carrying out the cross-border conversion applies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the reports referred to in Articles 86e and 86f, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. Member States shall ensure that the company carrying out the cross-border conversion applies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), for the assessment of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the report referred to in Article 86e.
Amendment    116 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The application for the appointment of an expert shall be accompanied by the following: The application for the assessment of the competent authority shall be accompanied by the following:
Amendment    117 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 86e and 86f. (b)  the reports referred to in Article 86e;
Amendment    118 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba)  where submitted, the comments formulated by members, employees and creditors regarding the draft terms and the report referred to in Article 86d and Article 86e;
Amendment    119 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (bb)  if the requirement for the report referred to in Article 86 e has been waived, the reasons for the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    120 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  The competent authority shall appoint an independent expert within five working days from the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and reports. The expert shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the departure Member State. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC. 2.  The competent authority shall start working on the application referred to in paragraph 1 within ten working days of the receipt of the documents and information referred to in points (a) to (d) of paragraph 1. If the competent authority has recourse to an independent expert this expert shall be appointed within one month on the basis of a pre-selected list. Member States shall ensure that the expert or the legal person on whose behalf the expert is operating, is independent and not performing or has not performed work, in whatever capacity, for the company applying for the conversion, or vice versa, in the five years prior to his or her appointment.
Amendment    121 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The expert shall draw up a written report providing at least: 3.  After, where necessary, consulting third parties with a legitimate interest in the conversion of the company, in particular taxation, labour and social security authorities, the competent authority shall draw up a written report providing at least:
Amendment    122 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border conversion; (a)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the draft terms, the reports and the information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border conversion in terms of both form and content;
Amendment    123 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 86n, including at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State. (b)  a description of all factual elements necessary to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 86n, including at a minimum the following:   (i)  the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets,   (ii)  the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location and the commercial risks assumed by the converting company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State,   (iii)  the number of employees, the habitual places of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, including, where relevant, the number of employees posted, sent or working simultaneously in different Member States in the year prior to the conversion, within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, and their countries of destination, the places where social contributions are due, the impact on occupational pensions of employees.
Amendment    124 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that the independent expert shall be entitled to obtain, from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, all relevant information and documents and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The expert shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. 4.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority is entitled to obtain, from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, all relevant information and documents, including any comments on the draft terms submitted in accordance with Article 86d(2), and carries out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or the report of the administrative or management body. The competent authority shall, furthermore, be able to, where necessary, put questions to the competent authority of the destination Member State, as well as be entitled to receive further comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, and also from the creditors and members of the company. These shall be attached to the report as appendices.
Amendment    125 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall ensure that information submitted to the independent expert can only be used for the purpose of drafting their report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the expert may submit a separate document containing any such confidential information to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) and that separate document shall only be made available to the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and not be disclosed to any other party. 5.  Member States shall ensure that information and comments submitted to the independent expert can only be used for the purpose of drafting their report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed in accordance with Union and national law Where appropriate, the competent authority may produce a separate document containing any such confidential information and that separate document shall only be made available to the company and, to employee representatives where provided for by Union or national law and in accordance with Union or national practice.
Amendment    126 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall exempt 'micro' and 'small enterprises' as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC (**) from the provisions of this Article. deleted
Amendment    127 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6a.  A company shall not be entitled to complete a cross border conversion, in cases where the company is subject to ongoing court proceedings, due to infringements of social, taxation, environmental and labour law, or concerning fundamental and human rights violations, if there is a risk that final damages would not be covered in the context of the Union measures for civil justice cooperation and the company has not provided a financial guarantee covering that risk.
Amendment    128 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 6 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6b.  Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the reports referred to in this Article, including in respect of any misconduct on its part in the performance of its duties.
Amendment    129 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 86ga   Civil liability of members of the administrative or management bodies of the company being converted   Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the members of the administrative or management bodies of that company in respect of misconduct on the part of members of those bodies in preparing and implementing the conversion towards the shareholders of the company being converted.
Amendment    130 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the independent expert report referred to in Article 86g, where applicable; (b)  the application for the assessment of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and of the report referred to in Article 86g(1) and where applicable, the report drawn up by the competent authority in accordance with Article 86g (3) without, however, disclosing any confidential information in accordance with national and Union law;
Amendment    131 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments concerning the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1). (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves carrying out the cross-border conversion that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments regarding the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m (1).
Amendment    132 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 3 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (d)  details of the website where draft terms of the cross-border conversion, the notice and the expert report referred in paragraph 1 and complete information on the arrangements referred to in point (c) of this paragraph may be obtained online and free of charge. (d)  details of the website where draft terms of the cross-border conversion, the notice and the report drawn up by the competent authority referred in paragraph 1 and complete information on the arrangements referred to in point (c) of this paragraph may be obtained online and free of charge.
Amendment    133 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on the ultimate beneficial owners of the company before and after the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    134 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, Member States may, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority. However, Member States may, where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest in the prevention of fraud as regards the identity of the person representing the company carrying out a cross-border conversion, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 of this Article. Articles 13b a (new) and Article 13f (3) and (4) shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    135 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States may require, in addition to the disclosure referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, that the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, or the information referred to in paragraph 3 is published in their national gazette. In that instance, Member States shall ensure that the register transmits the relevant information to the national gazette. 5.  Member States may require, in addition to the disclosure referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, that the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, or the information referred to in paragraph 3 is published in their national gazette. In that instance, in accordance with the principle of the once-off transmission of information in the Union, Member States shall ensure that the register transmits the relevant information to the national gazette.
Amendment    136 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86i – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 86e, 86f and 86g, where applicable, the general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion shall decide, by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of the cross-border conversion. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) of the decision of the general meeting. 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 86e, 86f and 86g(3), where applicable, the general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion shall decide, by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of the cross-border conversion. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights shall be respected in order for an opinion by the employee representatives to be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2002/14/EC, and where applicable Directives 2009/38/EC and 2001/86/EC. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) of the decision of the general meeting.
Amendment    137 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86i– paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that the approval of any amendment to the draft terms of the cross-border conversion requires a majority of not less than two thirds but not more than 90 % of the votes attached either to the shares or to the subscribed capital represented. In any event the voting threshold shall not be higher than that provided for in national law for the approval of cross-border mergers. 3.  Member States shall ensure that the approval of or any amendment to the draft terms of the cross-border conversion requires a majority of not less than two thirds but not more than 90 % of the votes attached either to the shares or to the subscribed capital represented. In any event the voting threshold shall not be higher than that provided for in national law for the approval of cross-border mergers.
Amendment    138 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86i– paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  The general meeting shall also decide whether the cross-border conversion would necessitate amendments to the instruments of constitution of the company carrying out the conversion. 4.  Where applicable, the general meeting shall also decide on any amendments to the instruments of constitution of the company carrying out the conversion.
Amendment    139 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article– paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that the following members of a company carrying cross-border conversion have the right to dispose of their shareholdings under the conditions laid down in paragraphs 2 to 6: 1.  Member States shall ensure that the following members of a company carrying out cross-border conversion have the right to dispose of their shareholdings under the conditions laid down in paragraphs 2 to 6:
Amendment    140 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article– paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and who did not vote for the approval of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion; (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and who voted against or who did not attend the general meeting but expressed their intention before the meeting to vote against the approval of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and expressed their intention to make use of the exit right;
Amendment    141 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the members holding shares without voting rights. (b)  the members holding shares without voting rights, who, at the general meeting, expressed their intention to make use of the exit right.
Amendment    142 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that a company carrying out a cross-border conversion makes an offer of adequate compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion as specified in the Article 86d(1)(i) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer, which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. Member States shall further ensure that the company is able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by the company for that purpose. Member States shall ensure that a company carrying out a cross-border conversion makes an offer of adequate compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion as specified in the Article 86d(1)(i) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Without prejudice to the actual exercise of the exit right, members shall communicate their intention to make use of it before the general meeting. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. National law on the form and validity of contracts for the sale and transfer of shares in companies shall remain unaffected.
Amendment    143 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall provide that any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation referred to in paragraph 3 but who considers that the compensation has not been adequately set, is entitled to demand the recalculation of the cash compensation offered before a national court within one month of the acceptance of the offer. 5.  Member States shall provide that any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation referred to in paragraph 3, but who considers that the compensation has not been adequately set, is entitled to demand the recalculation of the cash compensation offered before a national court within 20 days of the acceptance of the offer.
Amendment    144 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall ensure that the law of the departure Member State governs the rights referred to in paragraphs 1 to 5 and that the courts of that Member State shall have jurisdiction. Any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation to acquire its shares shall be entitled to institute or to be a party to proceedings referred to in paragraph 5. 6.  Member States shall ensure that the law of the departure Member State governs the rights referred to in paragraphs 1 to 4 and that the courts of that Member State shall have jurisdiction. Any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation to acquire its shares shall be entitled to institute or to be a party to proceedings referred to in paragraph 4.
Amendment    145 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, as provided for in Article 86d(f), may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 86h. 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors, whose rights predate the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, as provided for in Article 86d(f), and who have lodged their objection before the cross-border conversion may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 86h.
Amendment    146 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  where the company discloses together with the draft terms of conversion an independent expert report, which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert should be appointed or approved by the competent authority and shall fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 86g(2); (a)  where the company discloses together with the draft terms of conversion an independent expert report, which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert shall be consulted by the competent authority as part of its assessment laid down in Article 86g;
Amendment    147 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  where creditors are offered a right to payment, either against a third party guarantor, or against the company resulting from the cross-border conversion of at least equivalent value to their original claim, which may be brought in the same jurisdiction as their original claim, and which is of a credit quality at least commensurate with the creditor's original claim immediately after the completion of the conversion. (b)  where creditors are offered a right to payment, either against a third party guarantor, or against the company resulting from the cross-border conversion of at least the actual value of their original claim, which may be brought in the same jurisdiction as their original claim, and which is of a credit quality at least commensurate with the creditor's original claim.
Amendment    148 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Employee participation Employee information, consultation and participation
Amendment    149 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph -1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   -1.  Where the administrative or management body of the company draws up a plan to carry out a conversion, they shall, as soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of conversion, take the necessary steps, including providing information about the identity of the participating companies, subsidiaries or establishments concerned, and the number of their employees, to, where applicable, start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the conversion.
Amendment    150 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  provide for at least the same level of employee participation as operated in the company prior to the conversion, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (a)  provide for at least the same level and elements of employee participation as operated in the company prior to the conversion, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or
Amendment    151 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  In the cases referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, the participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: 3.  The information, consultation and participation of employees in the company resulting from the cross-border conversion company and their involvement in the definition of such rights and in the cases referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, the participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be the subject of an agreement between the employees and the management of the converted company and shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC:
Amendment    152 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l– paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a),(b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4);
Amendment    153 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l– paragraph 3 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e)  the first subparagraph of Article 7(1); (e)  Article 7(1);
Amendment    154 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph 3 – point g
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (g)  point (a) of Part 3 of the Annex. (g)  the Annex, with the exception of points (a) and (b) of Part 3, instead of which the following shall apply as a minimum:   The employees of the company, its subsidiaries and establishments and/or the representative body shall have the right to elect and appoint a number of members of the administrative or supervisory body of the converted company equal to two representatives in companies having more than 50 employees, one third in companies having 250 to 1000 employees and parity in companies with more than 1000 employees.
Amendment    155 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   3a.  The level of employee participation agreed in accordance with paragraph 3 shall not be lower than the level applied in the company prior to the conversion or lower than the level that would apply in the destination Member State. That level shall be measured in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment    156 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l– paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States: 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, Member States shall ensure that any rules on employee participation that applied prior to the cross-border conversion continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC. (a)  shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the destination Member State;   (b)  may, in the case where, following prior negotiations, standard rules for participation apply and notwithstanding such rules, decide to limit the proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ of the converted company. However, if in the company carrying out the conversion employee representatives constituted at least one third of the administrative or supervisory board, the limitation may never result in a lower proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ than one third;   (c)  shall ensure that the rules on employee participation that applied prior to the cross-border conversion continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with point (a) of Part 3 of the Annex.
Amendment    157 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l– paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  The extension of participation rights to employees of the converted company employed in other Member States, referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2, shall not entail any obligation for Member States which choose to do so to take those employees into account when calculating the size of workforce thresholds giving rise to participation rights under national law. deleted
Amendment    158 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l– paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Where the converted company is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of three years after the cross-border conversion has taken effect, by applying mutatis mutandis the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6. 7.  Where the converted company is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected also in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of six years after the cross-border conversion has taken effect, by applying mutatis mutandis the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 3.
Amendment    159 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   7a.  Member States shall ensure, in accordance with Article 6 of Directive 2002/14/EC that employees’ representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them.
Amendment    160 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l– paragraph 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   8a.  Where, following the application of paragraph 3 in the case referred to in paragraph 2, an applicable threshold for employee participation laid down in the law of the departure Member State is exceeded in the six years following the cross-border conversion, new negotiations shall be initiated in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, mutatis mutandis. In such cases, the rules for employee participation shall provide for the same level and elements of employee participation as would have been legally provided for had the company reached the relevant threshold in the departure Member State.
Amendment    161 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 86la   Collective agreements   Following the conversion, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall continue to observe the terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreement on the same terms applicable to the company before the conversion under that agreement, until the date of termination or expiry of the collective agreement or the entry into force or application of another collective agreement, in accordance with Article 3(3) of Directive 2001/23/EC.
Amendment    162 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall designate the authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the departure Member State and to issue a pre-conversion certificate attesting compliance with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the departure Member State. 1.  Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the departure Member State and to issue a pre-conversion certificate attesting compliance with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the departure Member State.
Amendment    163 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m– paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 86e, 86f and 86g, as appropriate; (b)  the report referred to in Articles 86e and 86g, as appropriate, including the employees’ opinion and response of the management referred to in Article 86(4a) and (4b);
Amendment    164 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online application referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article and in the second subparagraph of Article 86h(4). Article 13f (3) and (4) shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    165 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 86l, the departure Member State shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border conversion, referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements. 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 86l, the departure Member State shall verify that the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the report, referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements.
Amendment    166 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 5 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  As part of the assessment of legality referred to in paragraph 1, the competent authority, shall examine the following: 5.  As part of the assessment referred to in Article 86g, the competent authority, shall examine the following:
Amendment    167 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 5 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    168 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 may consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border conversion. 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 set up appropriate coordination mechanisms with other authorities and bodies in that Member State working in the policy fields concerned by this Directive, and shall, where appropriate, consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    169 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within one month of the date of receipt of the information concerning the approval of the conversion by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes: 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within three months of the date of receipt of the information concerning the approval of the conversion by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes:
Amendment    170 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  where the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion falls within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive, that it complies with all the relevant conditions and that all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed, the competent authority shall issue the pre-conversion certificate; (a)  the competent authority shall issue the pre-conversion certificate where the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion falls within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive, that it complies with all the relevant conditions and that all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed
Amendment    171 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  where the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion does not fall within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive, the competent authority shall not issue the pre-conversion certificate and shall inform the company of the reasons for its decision. The same shall apply to the situations in which the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion does not meet all the relevant conditions or that not all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed and the company, after being invited to take the necessary steps, has failed to do so; (b)  the competent authority shall not issue the pre-conversion certificate and shall inform the company of the reasons for its decision where the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion does not fall within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive. The same shall apply to the situations in which the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion does not meet all the relevant conditions or that not all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed and the company, after being invited to take the necessary steps, has failed to do so;
Amendment    172 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement referred to in Article 86c(3), it may decide to carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 86n and shall inform the company about its decision to conduct such an assessment and of the subsequent outcome. (c)  the competent authority shall not issue a pre-conversion certificate and shall carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 86n, and shall inform the company about its decision and the outcome of the assessment, in one of the following cases:   (i) where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement   (ii) the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency or is subject to checks, inspections or investigations provided for in Chapter VI of Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council*, or in Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council**;   (iii) the company has been convicted in the last three years by a court or is subject to ongoing court proceedings due to infringements of social, taxation, environmental and labour law, or concerning fundamental and human rights violations;   ___________________   * Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 on services in the internal market (OJ L 376, 27.12.2006, p. 36).   ** Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the enforcement of Directive 96/71/EC concerning the posting of workers in the framework of the provision of services and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 on administrative cooperation through the Internal Market Information System ( ‘the IMI Regulation’ ) (OJ L 159, 28.5.2014, p. 11).
Amendment    173 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   7a.  The decision to issue a pre-conversion certificate by the competent authority of the departure Member State or any approval by the competent authority in the destination Member State shall not preclude any subsequent procedures or decisions by authorities in the Member States in respect of other relevant fields of law.
Amendment    174 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement within the meaning of Article 86c(3), that the competent authority of the departure Member State carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State. 1.  Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, that the competent authority of the departure Member State carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following:   (a)   the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the management body, the staff, sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, the tax residence, the premises, the assets and their location, the composition of the balance sheet and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State;   (b)   the number and habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, working in the country of destination, the number of employees working in another country grouped according to the country in which they work, the number of employees posted in the year prior to the conversion within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, and the number of employees working simultaneously in more than one Member State within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004;   (c)   the places where social contributions are due;   (d)   if the company has chosen to delegate its management to directors, officers or legal representatives, hired from an independent third party through a service contractor.
Amendment    175 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   1a.  Where necessary, the competent authority shall put questions to and receive information from the competent authority of the destination Member State. The competent authority shall ensure communication with other authorities in the Member State responsible for any of the areas concerned by this Directive.
Amendment    176 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that where the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 decides to carry out an in-depth assessment, it is able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 86h(1)(c) in accordance with national law. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within two months from the start of the in-depth assessment. 2.  Member States shall ensure that where the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 decides to carry out an in-depth assessment, it is able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 86h(1)(c) in accordance with national law. In particular, it shall enable the company to provide further information on an actual or fixed establishment and its pursuit of genuine economic activity in the destination Member State for an indefinite period. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within two months from the start of the in-depth assessment.
Amendment    177 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State does not issue a pre-conversion certificate for the cross-border conversion where it determines, after carrying out an in-depth assessment of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    178 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall designate an authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the destination Member State and to approve the cross-border conversion where the conversion complies with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the destination Member State. 1.  Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the destination Member State and to approve the cross-border conversion where the conversion complies with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the destination Member State.
Amendment    179 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. However, Member States may, where justified by the overriding reasons of the public interest to prevent fraud as regards the identity of the person representing the company carrying out a cross-border conversion, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Amendment    180 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online application referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in the second subparagraph of Article 86h(4). Article 13f (3) and (4) shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    181 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86t
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86t deleted Liability of the independent experts   Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the reports referred to in Articles 86g and 86k(2)(a), including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.
Amendment    182 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86u – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment A cross-border conversion which has taken effect in compliance with the procedures transposing this Directive may not be declared null and void. However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border conversion takes effect, new information concerning the cross-border conversion and suggesting there has been an infringement of any of the provisions in this Directive is brought to the attention of the competent authorities, the competent authorities shall revise their assessment of the facts of the case and shall be empowered to take effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of an artificial arrangement._
Amendment    183 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (5)   Article 120, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following : (5)   Article 120, paragraph 4 is deleted. "4. Member States shall ensure that this Chapter does not apply to the company or companies where:   (a) proceedings have been instituted for the winding-up, liquidation, or insolvency of that company or companies;   (b) the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency;   (c) the suspension of payments is on-going;   (d) the company is subject to resolution tools, powers and mechanisms provided for in Title IV of Directive 2014/59/EU;   (e) preventive measures have been taken by the national authorities to avoid the initiation of proceedings referred to in points (a), (b) or (d).";
Amendment  184 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point b a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 121 – paragraphs 2 a and 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba)   paragraphs 2a and 2b are added:   “ 2a. A company shall not be entitled to carry out a cross border merger in any of the following circumstances:   (a)  proceedings have been instituted for the winding-up, liquidation, or insolvency of that company or companies;   (b)  the suspension of payments is on-going;   (c)  the company is subject to resolution tools, powers and mechanisms provided for in Title IV of Directive 2014/59/EU;   (d)  preventive measures have been taken by the national authorities to avoid the initiation of proceedings referred to in points (a), (b) or (c).   2b. Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State does not authorise the cross-border merger where it determines, after carrying out an assessment of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement.”
Amendment    185 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point -a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Present text Amendment   (-a)   paragraph 1, introductory part is replaced by the following: The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up the common draft terms of a cross-border merger. The common draft terms of a cross-border merger shall include at least the following particulars: “1.   The administrative or management body, including, where provided for in national law and/or in accordance with national practice, board level employee representatives, of each of the merging companies, shall draw up and be included into the decision on the common draft terms of a cross-border merger. The common draft terms of a cross-border merger shall include at least the following particulars:”
Amendment    186 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point -a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-aa)   point (aa) is inserted:   “(aa)where appropriate, information on the location and date of the transfer of the head office of the company to the company resulting from the merger, as well as information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets;”;
Amendment    187 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point -a b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-ab)   point (ca) is inserted:   “(ca) the number of employees on a full-time equivalent basis;”;
Amendment    188 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point -a c (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – point d
Present text Amendment   (-ac)   point d is replaced by the following: (d) the likely repercussions of the cross-border merger on employment; “(d) the likely repercussions of the cross-border merger on employment; including the likely changes to the organisation of work, the wages, the location of specific posts and the expected consequences for the employees occupying such posts, including employees in the subsidiaries and branches of the merging companies located within the Union and the company level social dialogue including, where applicable, board level employee representation;”;
Amendment    189 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – point i
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)   point (i) is replaced by the following: (a)   point (i) is deleted. "(i) the instrument or instruments of constitution of the company resulting from the cross-border merger";
Amendment    190 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – point j
Present text Amendment   (aa)   point (j) is replaced by the following: (j) where appropriate, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the company resulting from the cross-border merger are determined pursuant to Article 133; “(j) information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to information, consultation and participation in the company resulting from the cross-border merger are determined pursuant to Article 133;”
Amendment    191 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – points j a, j b and j c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ab)   points ja, jb and jc are inserted:   “(ja)   the name of the company resulting from the merger and, where applicable, the list of all its subsidiaries, a brief description of the nature of their activities and their respective geographic allocation;   (jb)  total turnover and total taxable turnover of the merging companies for the last reporting period;   (jc)   the amount of income tax paid by the merging companies and their subsidiaries and branches,”
Amendment    192 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment "In addition to the official language of each Member State of the merging companies, Member States shall allow the merging companies to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance to draw up the common draft terms of a cross-border merger and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents."; "In addition to the official language of each Member State of the merging companies, Member States shall allow the merging companies to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance to draw up the common draft terms of a cross-border merger and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors of each merging company shall have the possibility to comment on the draft terms.";
Amendment    193 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraphs 1 a and 1 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca) the following paragraphs are added:   “1a. Before the management or administrative organ decides on the common draft terms of a cross-border merger, the representatives of the employees of each company involved in the cross-border merger, or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented shall be informed of and consulted on the proposed merger in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC mutatis mutandis. Where a body has been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, it shall also be informed and consulted accordingly.   1b. In addition to the official languages of the Member States involved, Member States may provide that companies carrying out the cross-border merger may use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of a cross-border merger and all other related documents. The companies shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees and creditors shall have the possibility to comment on those common draft terms.”
Amendment    194 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that the common draft terms of the cross-border merger are disclosed and made publically available in their respective national registers, referred to in Article 16, at least one month before the date of the general meeting which is to decide thereon. Those common draft terms shall also be accessible by means of the system referred to in Article 22. 1.  Member States shall ensure that the following documents of the cross-border merger are disclosed and made publically available in their respective national registers, referred to in Article 16, at least one month before the date of the general meeting which is to decide thereon. The following documents shall also be accessible by means of the system referred to in Article 22:   (a) the common draft terms of the cross-border merger; those common draft terms shall also be accessible by means of the system referred to in Article 22;   (b) the application for the assessment of the draft terms of the cross-border merger and of the report referred to in Article 124 and where applicable, the report drawn up by each competent authority in accordance with Article 125a, without however disclosing any confidential information;   (c) a notice informing the members, creditors and representatives of the employees of each company, or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves of each company carrying out the cross-border merger that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments regarding the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 127 (1).
Amendment    195 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 3 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (d)  details of the website where the common draft terms of the cross-border merger and complete information on the arrangements referred to in point (c) may be obtained free of charge. (d)  details of the website where the common draft terms of the cross-border merger and the report referred to in Article 125a complete information on the arrangements referred to in point (c) may be obtained free of charge.
Amendment    196 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on the ultimate beneficial owners of the company before and after the cross-border merger
Amendment    197 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, Member States may, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority. However, Member States may, where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest to prevent fraud as regards the identity of the persons representing the companies carrying out the cross-border merger based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority.
Amendment    198 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 123 a   Preventing conflicts of interest due to management compensation   To prevent a conflict of interest between the members of the management body or administrative organ and the interests of the company, in light of Article 1a (new) of this Directive, the members of the management body shall not be allowed to benefit financially from the merger, in the form of a rise of the share price of the share packages in their (variable) compensation or bonuses paid out in light of the merger. On any compensation paid out in shares of the company in the first year after the merger to the members of the management body or administrative organ, the rise in share prices due to the merger shall be deducted from the value paid to the management body. The share price on the day the merger was first made public will serve as the baseline.
Amendment    199 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the administrative or management body to the members and employees
Amendment    200 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger . 1.  The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up a report for the members and employees explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger as well as explaining the implications for employees.
Amendment    201 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-a)  the reasons for the cross-broder merger;
Amendment    202 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  the implications of the cross-border merger for employment relationships and employee involment, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them;
Amendment    203 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  any material changes in the conditions of employment, laid down by law, collective agreements and transnational company agreements and in the location of the company's places of business;
Amendment    204 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ec)  information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the resulting company can be applied in accordance with this Directive.
Amendment    205 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ed)  whether the factors set out in points (a) to (c) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company.
Amendment    206 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  Before the administrative or management body decides on the report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies or, if there are no representatives, the employees themselves, shall be informed of and consulted on the proposed merger in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC. Where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC shall also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    207 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The report shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of each of the merging companies not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies, or where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be made available, at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies. 3.  The report shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of each of the merging companies and to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border merger or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies, or where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be made available, at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies.
Amendment    208 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the merging companies have agreed to waive this requirement. 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members and all the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, of the merging companies have agreed to waive this requirement.
Amendment    209 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  Where the administrative or management body of any of the merging companies receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, or where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.
Amendment    210 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4b.  The administrative or management body of each of the companies which intends to carry out the cross-border merger, shall provide a motivated response on the opinion provided by the employee representatives, and, where applicable, by the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126.
Amendment    211 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 4 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4c.  The national employees´ representative bodies, the trade unions represented in the merging companies and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, shall have the means and resources required to exercise the rights arising from this Directive to conduct an analysis of the report. Paragraph 6 of Annex I to Directive 2009/38/EC shall apply mutatis mutandis to that end.
Amendment    212 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 4 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4d.  Paragraphs 1 to 4c shall be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC and 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    213 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment [...] deleted
Amendment    214 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (10a)  The following article is inserted:   Article 124b   Examination by an independent expert   1.  Member States shall ensure that the companies carrying out the cross-border merger apply not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126 to the competent authorities of the Member States, to appoint two experts to examine and assess the draft terms of the cross-border merger and the reports referred to in this chapter, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. The application for the appointment of an expert shall be accompanied by the following:   (a) the draft terms of the cross-border merger;   (b) the company reports referred to in this chapter.   2.  The competent authorities, in coordination with each other, shall appoint two independent experts within one month of the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and reports. The experts shall be appointed on the basis of pre-selected lists in the Member States concerned, that were specifically established for the purpose of assessing cross-border mergers. The list shall include natural persons on the basis of their personal expertise. The fields of expertise to be reflected in the list shall include at least company law, taxation and fiscal law, social security and workers’ rights. Together, the two independent experts shall cover all of the fields of expertise mentioned in this paragraph. An expert may operate on his or her own behalf or on behalf of a legal person. Member States shall define fixed rates for the fees paid to the independent experts, which shall be paid by the companies applying for the merger.   The experts shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border merger. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the experts, the framework established in Articles 22 to 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC. In addition:   (a) the experts or the legal person on whose behalf he or she is operating, shall not have performed work, in whatever capacity, for the company applying for the merger in the five years prior to his or her appointment or vice versa; and   (b) the two experts appointed shall not operate on behalf of the same legal person.   3.  The experts shall draw up a written report within two months of their appointment, providing at least: (a) a detailed assessment of the accuracy of both the draft terms and the reports as well as information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border merger;   (b) a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authorities, designated, to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border merger constitutes an artificial arrangement, including as a minimum the following:   (i) the characteristics of the establishment in the different Member States, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss,   (ii) the number of employees working in the countries concerned, the number of employees working in another country grouped according to the country of work, the number of employees posted or sent in the year prior to the merger within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive96/71/EC, the number of employees working simultaneously in more than one Member State within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004,   (iii) the tax residence,   (iv) the assets and their location,   (v)the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees,   (vi) the places where social contributions are due,   (vii) the commercial risks assumed by the merged company in the Member States concerned,   (viii) the composition of the balance sheet and of the financial statement in the destination Member State and in all Member States in which the company operates in the last two fiscal years.   4.  Whenever relevant, the independent experts shall ask questions to and receive information from the competent authorities in the Member States concerned. The competent authorities shall ensure communication between the independent expert and other authorities in their Member State responsible for any of the areas covered by this Directive.   5.  Member States shall ensure that the independent experts shall be entitled to obtain from the company carrying out the cross-border merger all relevant information and documents, and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The expert shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, and also from the creditors and members of the company.   6.  Member States shall ensure that information submitted to the independent experts can only be used for the purpose of drafting their report.   6.   Member States may apply a lower independent expert fee for 'micro' and 'small enterprises' as defined in Commission Recommendation2003/361/EC (**).
Amendment    215 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 125 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (11a)  The following article is inserted:   Article 125a   Assessment by the competent authority   1.   Member States shall ensure that the companies carrying out the cross-border merger apply not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126 to each competent authority designated in accordance with Article 127, for the assessment of the common draft terms of the cross-border merger and the report referred to in Article 123.The application for the assessment of the competent authority shall be accompanied by the following:   (a) the common draft terms of the cross-border merger referred to in Article 122;   (b) the report referred to in Article 124;   (c) where submitted, the comments formulated by members, employees and creditors regarding the draft terms and the report referred to in Article 122 and Article 124;   (d) if the requirement for the report referred to in Article 124 is waived, the reasons for the cross-border merger.   2.   Each competent authority shall start working on the application referred to in paragraph 1 within ten working days of the receipt of the documents and information referred to in points (a) to (d) of paragraph 1;   3.   After, where necessary, consulting third parties with a legitimate interest in the merging of the companies, in particular taxation, labour and social security authorities, the competent authorities shall draw up a written report providing at least:   (a) a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the draft terms, the report and the information submitted by the companies carrying out the cross-border merger in terms of both form and content;   (b) a description of all factual elements necessary to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border merger constitutes an artificial arrangement, including as a minimum the following:   (i)   the characteristics of the establishment of the resulting company, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets.   (ii)   the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, and the commercial risks assumed by the each of the companies participating in the merger; the number of employees, the habitual places of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, including where relevant, the number of employees posted, sent or working simultaneously in different Member States in the year prior to the merger within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, and their countries of destination, the places where social contributions are due, and the impact on occupational pensions of employees.   4.   Member States shall ensure that the competent authority is entitled to obtain, from each of the companies involved in the cross-border merger, all relevant information and documents, including any comments on the draft terms submitted in accordance with Article 122, and that it carries out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or the report of the administrative or management body. Each competent authority shall furthermore be able to, where necessary, put questions to the competent authority of the Member States of the merging companies, as well as be entitled to receive further comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, and also from the creditors and members of each company. These shall be attached to each report as appendices.   5.   Member States shall ensure that information and comments submitted to the competent authority can only be used for the purpose of drafting their report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed in accordance with Union and national law. Where appropriate, the competent authority may produce a separate document containing any such confidential information and that separate document shall only be made available to the companies and to employee representatives where provided for by Union or national law and in accordance with Union or national practice.   6.   A company shall not be entitled to complete a cross border merger, in cases where any of the merging companies is subject to ongoing court proceedings due to infringements of social, taxation, environmental and labour law, or concerning fundamental and human rights violations, if there is a risk that final damages would not be covered in view of the Union measures for civil justice cooperation and the company has not provided a financial guarantee covering that risk.   7.   Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the reports referred to in Article 125, including in respect of any misconduct on its part in the performance of its duties.
Amendment    216 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 125 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (11b)  The following article is inserted:   Article 125 b   Civil liability of members of the administrative or management bodies of the companies to be merged   Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the members of the administrative or management bodies of each of the merging companies in respect of misconduct on the part of members of those bodies in preparing and implementing the merger towards the shareholders of the resulting company.
Amendment    217 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a Directive (EU) 2017/1132 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment "1.   After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 124, 124a and 125, as appropriate, the general meeting of each of the merging companies shall decide, by means of a resolution, on the approval of the common draft terms of the cross-border merger."; “1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 124 and 125, as appropriate, the general meeting of each of the merging companies shall decide, by means of a resolution, on the approval of the common draft terms of the cross-border merger. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights shall be respected in order for an opinion by the employee representatives to be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2002/14/EC, and where applicable Directives 2009/38/EC and 2001/86/EC. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 127 of the decision of the general meeting.”
Amendment    218 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and who did not vote for the approval of the common draft terms of the cross-border merger; (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and who voted against or who did not attend the general meeting but expressed their intention before the meeting to vote against the common draft terms of the cross-border merger and expressed their intention to make use of the exit right;
Amendment    219 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the members holding shares without voting rights. (b)  the members holding shares without voting rights who, at the general meeting, expressed their intention to make use of the exit right.
Amendment    220 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that each of the merging companies makes an offer of adequate cash compensation in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, as specified in Article 122(1)(m), to those members referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer, which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 126 or, in cases where the approval of the general meeting is not required, within two months after the disclosure of the common draft terms of merger referred to in Article 123. Member States shall further ensure that the merging companies are able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by those companies for that purpose. 3.  Member States shall ensure that each of the merging companies makes an offer of adequate cash compensation in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, as specified in Article 122(1)(m),to those members referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Without prejudice to the exercise of the exit right, members shall communicate their intention to make use of it before the general meeting. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer, which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 126 or, in cases where the approval of the general meeting is not required, within two months after the disclosure of the common draft terms of merger referred to in Article 123. Member States shall further ensure that the merging companies are able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by those companies for that purpose.
Amendment    221 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that the offer of cash compensation is conditional upon the cross-border merger taking effect in accordance with Article 129. Member States shall further establish the period within which the cash compensation is to be paid, which shall not in any event exceed one month after the cross-border merger takes effect. 4.  Member States shall ensure that the offer of cash compensation is conditional upon the cross-border merger taking effect in accordance with Article 129. Member States shall further establish the period within which the cash compensation is to be paid, which shall not in any event exceed 20 days after the cross-border merger takes effect.
Amendment    222 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126b – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors of the merging companies who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests as provided for in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, as provided for in Article 122(1)(n), may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 123. 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors of the merging companies, whose rights predate the draft terms of the cross-border merger and who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests as provided for in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, as provided for in Article 122(1)(n), and who have lodged their objection before the cross-border merger may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 123.
Amendment    223 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point a Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 127 – paragraph 1 – subparagraphs 1a, 1b, 1c and 1d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   "Member States shall ensure that the application for obtaining a pre-merger certificate by the merging companies is accompanied in particular by the following:   (a) the draft terms of merger referred to in Article 122;   (b) the reports referred to in Article 124 and Article 124a, as appropriate, including the employees’ opinion and response of the management referred to in Article 124(4a) and (4b);   (c) information on the resolution of the general meeting to approve the conversion referred to in Article.   Re-submission to the competent authority of the draft terms and report submitted shall not be required. Member States shall ensure that the application for obtaining a pre-merger certificate by the merging companies including submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. Member States shall ensure that the application referred to in the second subparagraph, including submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted.; However, where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest in the prevention of fraud as regards the identity of the person representing the companies carrying out the cross-border merger, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted.";
Amendment    224 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 127 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (aa)  the following paragraph is inserted:   “1a.   In each Member State concerned, the authority referred to in paragraph 1 shall issue, without delay to each merging company subject to that Member State's national law, a certificate conclusively attesting to the proper completion of the pre-merger acts and formalities.”
Amendment    225 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1 of this Article, each merging company shall submit to the authority referred to in that paragraph the common draft terms of cross-border merger, approved by the general meeting referred to in Article 126. 2. For the purpose of paragraph 1 of this Article, each merging company shall submit to the authority referred to in that paragraph:   (a)   the common draft terms of cross-border merger, approved by the general meeting referred to in Article 126;   (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 124, 125 and 125a, as appropriate, including the employees’ opinion and response of the management referred to in Article 124(4a) and (4b);   (c)  information on the resolution of the general meeting to approve the merger referred to in Article 126.   The common draft terms and report submitted under Article 125a do not have to be re-submitted to the competent authority.
Amendment    226 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (aa)  the following paragraph is added:   2a.  As part of the assessment referred to in Article 125a, each competent authority, shall examine the following:   (a)  the documents and information referred to in paragraph 2;   (b)  all comments and opinions submitted by interested parties in accordance with Article 123;   (c)  an indication by the company that the procedure referred to in Article 133 (3) and (4) has started, where relevant;   (d)  whether the cross-border merger constitutes an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    227 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ab)  the following paragraph is added:   2b.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 set up appropriate coordination mechanisms with other authorities and bodies in that Member State working in the policy fields concerned by this Directive and shall where appropriate consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border merger.
Amendment    228 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a c (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 2 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ac)  the following paragraph is added:   2c.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by each competent authority is carried out within three months of the date of receipt of the information concerning the approval of the merger by the general meeting of each company. It shall have one of the following outcomes:   (a)  each comnpetent authority shall issue the pre-merger certificate, where the competent authority determines that the cross-border merger falls within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive, that it complies with all the relevant conditions and that all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed;   (b)  the competent authorities shall not issue a pre-merger certificate and shall inform the companies of the reasons for their decision, where any competent authority determines that the cross-border merger does not fall within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive. The same shall apply to the situations in which the competent authority determines that the cross-border merger does not meet all the relevant conditions or that not all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed and the company, after being invited to take the necessary steps, has failed to do so;   (c)  a competent authority shall not issue a pre-merger certificate and shall carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 128a, and shall inform the company about its decision and the outcome of the assessment, in the following cases:   (i)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement   (ii)  the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency or is subject to checks, inspections or investigations provided for in Chapter VI of Directive 2006/123/E1a of the European Parliament and of the Council, or in Directive 2014/67/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council1b;   (iii)  any of the merging companies have been convicted in the last three years by a court or where they are subject to ongoing court proceedings due to infringements of social, taxation, environmental and labor law, or concerning fundamental and human rights violations.
Amendment    229 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point a d (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 2 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ad)  the following paragraph is added:   2d.  The decision to issue a pre-merger certificate by the competent authority shall not preclude any subsequent procedures or decisions by authorities in the Member States in respect of other relevant fields of law.
Amendment    230 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   However, Member States may take measures where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest in the prevention of fraud as regards the identity of the persons representing the companies carrying out the cross-border merger require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State in which the relevant information and documents are required to be submitted.
Amendment    231 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 128 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (15a)  The following article is inserted:   “Article 128a   In-depth assessment   1.   Member States shall ensure, in order to assess whether the cross-border merger constitutes an artificial arrangement, that the competent authorities carry out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and that they take into account at a minimum the following:   (a) the characteristics of the establishment in the resulting company, including the management body, the staff, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, the tax residence, the premises, the assets and their location, the composition of the balance sheet and the commercial risks assumed by each of the merging companies;   (b) the number and habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, working in each of the merging companies, the number of employees working in another country grouped according to the country in which they work, the number of employees posted in the year prior to the merger within the meanings of Regulation (EC)No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, and the number of employees working simultaneously in more than one Member State within the meaning of Regulation(EC) No 883/2004;   (c) the places where social contributions are due;   (d) if the companies have chosen to delegate the management of the resulting company to directors, officers or legal representatives, hired from an independent third-party through a service contractor. Those elements may only be considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and therefore shall not be considered in isolation.   2.   Where relevant, the competent authorities shall communicate with each other. The competent authorities shall also ensure communication with other authorities in their respective Member States responsible for any of the areas concerned by this Directive.   3.   Member States shall ensure that where the competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 decide to carry out an in-depth assessment, they are able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant to Article 123 in accordance with national law. In particular, it shall enable the company to provide further information on an actual or fixed establishment and its pursuit of genuine economic activity in the resulting company for an indefinite period. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-merger certificate within two months of the start of the in-depth assessment.   4.   Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of any Member State of the merging companies shall not issue a pre-merger certificate for the cross-border merger where it determines, after carrying out an in-depth assessment of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement.”
Amendment    232 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph -1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-a)   paragraph -1 is inserted:   “-1.   Where the administrative or management body of the merging company draws up a plan to carry out a merger, it shall as soon as possible after publishing the common draft terms of the cross-border merger take the necessary steps, including providing information about the identity of the participating companies, subsidiaries or establishments concerned, and the number of its employees, to, where applicable, start negotiations with the representatives of the company's employees on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company resulting from the cross-border merger.”;
Amendment    233 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 2
Present text Amendment   (-aa) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 2.  However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border merger has its registered office shall not apply, where at least one of the merging companies has, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border merger as referred to in Article 123, an average number of employees that exceeds 500 and is operating under an employee participation system within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to the company resulting from the cross-border merger does not: “2.   However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border merger has its registered office shall not apply, where at least one of the merging companies, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border merger as referred to in Article 123, an average number of employees equivalent to four fifths of the applicable threshold, laid down in the law of the Member State to whose jurisdiction the merging company is subject, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to the company resulting from the cross-border merger does not: (a)   provide for at least the same level of employee participation as operated in the relevant merging companies, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (a)   provide for at least the same level and elements of employee participation as operated in the relevant merging company or companies with the highest level of employee participation, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (b)   provide for employees of establishments of the company resulting from the cross-border merger that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by those employees employed in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border merger has its registered office. (b)   provide for employees of establishments of the company resulting from the cross-border merger that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by employees employed in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border merger has its registered office.”;
Amendment    234 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 3
Present text Amendment   (-ab) paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 3. In the cases referred to in paragraph 2, the participation of employees in the company resulting from the cross-border merger and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: “3. The information, consultation and participation of employees in the company resulting from the cross-border merger and in the cases referred to in paragraph 2, the participation of employees in the company resulting from the cross-border merger and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be the subject of an agreement between the employees and the management of the resulting company and shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: (a) Article 3(1), (2) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4) and Article 3(5) and (7); (a) Article 3(1), (2) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4) and Article 3(5) and (7); (b) Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (g) and (h) and Article 4(3); (b) Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (h) and Article 4(3); (c) Article 5; (c) Article 5; (d) Article 6; (d) Article 6; (e) Article 7(1), point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 7(2), the second subparagraph of Article 7(2) and Article 7(3). However, for the purposes of this Chapter, the percentages required by point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 7(2) of Directive 2001/86/EC for the application of the standard rules contained in Part 3 of the Annex to that Directive shall be raised from 25 to 33 1/3 %; (e) Article 7(1), (f) Articles 8, 10 and 12; (f) Articles 8, 9, 10 and 12; (h) point (b) of Part 3 of the Annex. (h) the Annex.3a.   The level of employee participation agreed in accordance with paragraph 3 shall not be lower than the level applied in the merging company or companies with the highest level of employee participation prior to the merger, or lower than the level in the Member State of the resulting company. That level shall be measured in accordance with paragraph 2.”
Amendment    235 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a c (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-ac) paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: 4. When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States: “4. When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that any rules on employee participation that applied prior to the cross-border merger continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC.” (a) shall confer on the relevant organs of the merging companies the right to choose without any prior negotiation to be directly subject to the standard rules for participation referred to in point (h) of paragraph 3, as laid down by the legislation of the Member State in which the company resulting from the cross-border merger is to have its registered office, and to abide by those rules from the date of registration;   (b) shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, including the votes of members representing employees in at least two different Member States, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the Member State where the registered office of the company resulting from the cross-border merger will be situated;   (c) may, in the case where, following prior negotiations, standard rules for participation apply and notwithstanding such rules, decide to limit the proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ of the company resulting from the cross-border merger. However, if in one of the merging companies employee representatives constituted at least one third of the administrative or supervisory board, the limitation may never result in a lower proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ than one third.
Amendment    236 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (aa)   the following paragraph 7a is inserted:   “7a. Member States shall ensure, in accordance with Article 6 of Directive 2002/14/EC1a that employee representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties, which have been assigned to them.”
Amendment    237 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba) the following paragraph 8a is added:   “8a. Where, following the application of paragraph 3 in the case referred to paragraph 2, an applicable threshold for employee participation laid down in the law of a Member State involved in the merger is exceeded in the six years following the cross-border merger, new negotiations shall be initiated in accordance with paragraphs 3 to 8, mutatis mutandis. In such cases, the rules for employee participation shall provide for the same level and elements of employee participation as would have been legally provided for, had the company reached the relevant threshold in a Member State involved in the merger.”
Amendment    238 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (18a)  The following article is inserted:   “Article 133a   Collective agreements   Following the cross-border merger, the resulting company shall continue to comply with the terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreements on the same terms as were applicable to the merging companies before the cross-border merger regardless of which law is otherwise applicable to that company under such agreements, until the date of termination or expiry of the collective agreement or the date of the entry into force or application of another collective agreement, in accordance with Article 3(3) of the Directive 2001/23/EC.”
Amendment    239 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 134 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (19a)  in Article 134, the following paragraph is added:   However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border merger takes effect, new information concerning the cross-border merger, and suggesting there has been an infringement of any of the provisions in this Directive is brought to the attention of the competent authorities, the competent authorities shall revise their assessment of the facts of the case, and shall be empowered to take effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of an artificial arrangement.”
Amendment    240 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 160b deleted Definitions   For the purposes of this Chapter:   (1)  ‘limited liability company’, hereinafter referred to as ‘company’, means a company as defined in Annex II ;   (2)  'company being divided' means a company which in a process of the cross-border division whereby it transfers all its assets and liabilities to one or more companies, or in case of a partial division it transfers part of its assets and liabilities to one or more companies;   (3)  ‘division’ means an operation whereby either:   (a)  a company being divided, which has been wound up without going into liquidation, transfers all its assets and liabilities to two or more newly formed companies (‘the recipient companies’), in exchange for the issue to the members of the company being divided of securities or shares in the recipient companies and, if any, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of those securities or shares or, where they have no nominal value, a cash payment not exceeding 10% of the accounting par value of their securities or shares ('full division');   (b)  a company being divided transfers part of its assets and liabilities to one or more newly formed companies (‘the recipient companies’), in exchange for the issue to the members of the company being divided of securities or shares in the recipient companies or, in the company being divided, or in both the recipient companies and in the company being divided, and if any a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the nominal value of those securities or shares, or, in the absence of a nominal value, a cash payment not exceeding 10 % of the accounting par value of their securities or shares (‘partial division’).
Amendment    241 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 160c deleted Further provisions concerning the scope   1.   Notwithstanding Article 160b(3), this Chapter shall also apply to cross-border divisions where the national law of at least one of the Member States concerned allows the cash payment referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 160b(3) to exceed 10 % of the nominal value or, in the absence of a nominal value, 10% of the accounting par value of the securities or shares representing the capital of the recipient companies.   2.  Member States may decide not to apply this Chapter to cross-border divisions involving a cooperative society even in the cases where the latter would fall within the definition of ‘limited liability company’ as laid down in Article 160b(1).   3.  This Chapter shall not apply to cross-border divisions involving a company the object of which is the collective investment of capital provided by the public, which operates on the principle of risk-spreading and the units of which are, at the holders’ request, repurchased or redeemed, directly or indirectly, out of the assets of that company. Action taken by such a company to ensure that the stock exchange value of its units does not vary significantly from its net asset value shall be regarded as equivalent to such repurchase or redemption.
Amendment    242 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that where a company intends to carry out a cross-border division, the Member State of the company being divided and of the recipient company or companies verify that the cross-border division complies with the conditions laid down in paragraph 2. 1.  Member States shall ensure that where a company intends to carry out a cross-border division, the court, notary or other authority competent of the Member State of the company being divided and of the recipient company or companies verify that the cross-border division complies with the conditions laid down in paragraph 2.
Amendment    243 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency; deleted
Amendment    244 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (d)  the company is subject to resolution tools, powers and mechanisms provided for in Title IV of Directive 2014/59/EU; (d)  the company is subject to resolution tools, powers and mechanisms provided for in Title IV of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council (*);
Amendment    245 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e)  the preventive measures have been taken by the national authorities to avoid the initiation of proceedings referred to in points (a), (b) or (d). (e)  the preventive measures have been taken by the national authorities to avoid the initiation of proceedings referred to in points (a) or (d).
Amendment    246 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The Member State of the company being divided shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the division when it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. 3.  The Member State of the company being divided shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the division when it determines, carrying out an assessment of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement
Amendment    247 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up the draft terms of cross-border division. The draft terms of cross-border division shall include at least the following: 1.  The administrative or management body including, where provided for in national law and/or in accordance with national practice, board level employee representatives of the company being divided shall draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and be included in the decision thereon. The draft terms of cross-border division shall include at least the following:
Amendment    248 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point -a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-a)  the legal form, name and location of registered office of the company being divided;
Amendment    249 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the legal form, name and registered office proposed for the new company or companies resulting from the cross-border division; (a)  the legal form, name and location of the registered offices proposed for the new company or companies resulting from the cross-border division;
Amendment    250 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  where applicable, detailed information on the location and date of establishment of the head office of the company to the Member State of the recipient company or companies, in the event that it is not already located there, as well as information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets;
Amendment    251 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point h
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (h)  details of any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling organ of the company being divided; (h)  details of any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling body of the company being divided;
Amendment    252 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ha)  any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling body of the dividing company;
Amendment    253 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point k a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ka)  the number of employees employed on a full-time equivalent basis;
Amendment    254 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point k b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (kb)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border division on employment, including the likely changes to the organisation of work, the wages, the place of specific posts and the expected consequences for the employees occupying such posts, including employees in the subsidiaries and branches of the company being divided located within the Union and on the company level social dialogue including, where applicable, board level employee representation;
Amendment    255 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point l
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (l)  where appropriate, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the recipient companies are determined pursuant to Article160n and on the possible options for such arrangements; (l)  information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to information, consultation and participation in the recipient companies are determined pursuant to Article160n and on the possible options for such arrangements;
Amendment    256 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point l a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (la)  the name of the ultimate company or companies and, where applicable, the list of all subsidiaries, a brief description of the nature of their activities and their respective geographic allocation;
Amendment    257 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point l b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (lb)  total turnover and total taxable turnover of the company being divided for the last reporting period;
Amendment    258 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point l c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (lc)  the amount of income tax paid by the company being divided and its subsidiaries and branches;
Amendment    259 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   3a.  Before the management or administrative body decides on the draft terms of a cross-border division, and the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented shall be informed and consulted on the proposed division in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC mutatis mutandis. Where a body has been established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, it shall also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    260 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In addition to the official languages of the Member States of the recipient companies and the one being divided, Member States shall allow the company to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in case of discrepancies among different linguistic versions of those documents. 4.  In addition to the official languages of the Member States of the recipient companies and the one being divided, Member States may provide that the company may use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and all other related documents. The company being divided shall specify which language will prevail in case of discrepancies among different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on those draft terms.
Amendment    261 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the administrative or management body to the members and employees
Amendment    262 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border division. 1.  The management or administrative body of the company being divided shall draw up a report for the members and employees explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border division, as well as explaining the implications of the cross-border division for employees.
Amendment    263 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point -a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-a)  the reasons for the cross-border division;
Amendment    264 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  the implications of the cross-border division for employment relationships and employee involvement, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them;
Amendment    265 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  any material changes in the conditions of employment, laid down by law, collective agreements and transnational company agreements and in the location of the company’s places of business;
Amendment    266 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ec)  information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the recipient companies can be applied in accordance with the provisions of this Directive;
Amendment    267 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ed)  whether the factors set out in points (a) to (i) also relate to any subsidiaries of the dividing company.
Amendment    268 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  Before the administrative or management body decides on the report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division or, if there are no representatives, the employees themselves, shall be informed and consulted on the proposed division in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC. Where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC it shall also be informed and consulted accordingly.
Amendment    269 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of the company being divided not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company being divided or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of the company being divided and to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or2001/86/EC, not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k.
Amendment    270 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the company being divided have agreed to waive this document. 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the company being divided and all the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation, in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, have agreed to waive this document.
Amendment    271 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  Where the administrative or management body of the company being divided receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, or where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation, in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.
Amendment    272 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4b.  The administrative or management body of the company being divided, shall provide a motivated response on the opinion provided by the employee representatives and, where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC, before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k.
Amendment    273 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4c.  The national employees´ representative bodies, the trade unions represented in the company and where applicable, the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC shall have the means and resources required to exercise the rights arising from this Directive to conduct an analysis of the report. Paragraph 6 of Annex I to Directive 2009/38/EC shall apply mutatis mutandis to that end.
Amendment    274 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160 g – paragraph 4 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4d.  Paragraphs 1 to 4c shall be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC and 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    275 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160 h
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment [...] deleted
Amendment    276 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160h a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 160 ha   Civil liability of members of the administrative or management bodies of the company being divided   Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the members of the administrative or management bodies of that company towards the shareholders of the company being divided, in respect of misconduct on the part of the members of those bodies in preparing and implementing the division.
Amendment    277 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Examination by an independent expert Assessment by the competent authority
Amendment    278 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the company being divided applies to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k, to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of cross-border division and the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160h, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. Member States shall ensure that the company being divided applies to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k, for the assessment of the draft terms of cross-border division and the report referred to in Articles 160g.
Amendment    279 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The application for the appointment of an expert shall be accompanied by the following: The application for the assessment of the competent authority shall be accompanied by the following:
Amendment    280 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160h. (b)  the report referred to in Article 160g;
Amendment    281 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba)  where submitted, the comments formulated by members, employees and creditors regarding the draft terms and the report referred to in Article 160c and Article 160g;
Amendment    282 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (bb)  if the requirement for the report referred to in Article 160g has been waived, the reasons for the cross-border division.
Amendment    283 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  The competent authority shall appoint an independent expert within five working days of the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and reports. The expert shall be independent from the company being divided and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the Member State concerned. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC. 2.  The competent authority shall start working on the application referred to in paragraph 1 within ten working days following the receipt of the documents and information referred to in points (a) to (d) of paragraph 1. If the competent authority has recourse to an independent expert, that expert shall be appointed within one month on the basis of a pre-selected list that was specifically established for the purpose of assessing cross-border divisions. Member States shall ensure that the expert, or the legal person on whose behalf the expert is operating, is independent and not performing or has not performed work, in whatever capacity for the company applying for the division, or vice versa, in the five years prior to his or her appointment.
Amendment    284 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The expert shall draw up a written report providing at least: 3.  After, where necessary, consulting third parties with a legitimate interest in the division of the company, in particular taxation, labour and social security authorities within the company, the competent authority shall draw up a written report providing at least:
Amendment    285 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company; (e)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the draft terms, the report and information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border division in terms of both form and content;
Amendment    286 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (f)  a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 160p, at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishments in the Member States concerned of the recipient companies, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member States of the recipient companies. (f)  a description of all factual elements necessary, to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 160p, including at a minimum the following:   (i) the characteristics of the establishments in the Member States concerned of the recipient companies, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, information on the management body and, where applicable, staff, equipment, premises and assets.   (ii) the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided and the companies resulting from the cross-border division in all Member States concerned.   (iii) the number of employees, the habitual places of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, including where relevant, the number of employees posted, sent or working simultaneously in different Member States in the year prior to the division within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive96/71/EC, and their countries of destination, the places where social contributions are due, the impact on occupational pensions of employees;
Amendment    287 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that the independent expert shall be entitled to obtain from the company being divided all relevant information and documents and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The independent expert shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. 4.  Member States shall ensure that competent authority is entitled to obtain from the company being divided all relevant information and documents including any comments on the draft terms submitted in accordance with Article 160c (2), and that it carries out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or the report of the administrative or management body. The competent authority shall furthermore be able to, where necessary, put questions to the competent authority of the Member States of the recipient companies, as well as be entitled to receive further comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, employees themselves and where applicable, from the body established for the purposes of transnational information and consultation in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC or 2001/86/EC and also from the creditors and members of the company. These shall be attached to the report as appendices.
Amendment    288 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall ensure that information submitted to the independent expert can only be used for the purpose of drafting the report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the expert may submit a separate document containing confidential information to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1) and that separate document shall only be made available to the company being divided and not be disclosed to any third party. 5.  Member States shall ensure that information and comments submitted to the competent authority can only be used for the purpose of drafting the report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed in accordance with Union and national law. Where appropriate, the competent authority may produce a separate document containing any such confidential and that separate document shall only be made available to the company being divided to employee representatives where provided for by Union or national law and in accordance with Union or national practice.
Amendment    289 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6a.  A company shall not be entitled to complete a cross border division, in cases where the company is subject to ongoing court proceedings due to infringements of social, taxation, environmental and labour law, or concerning fundamental and human rights violations, if there is a risk that final damages would not be covered in the context of the Union measures for civil justice cooperation and the company has not provided a financial guarantee covering that risk.
Amendment    290 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 6 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6b.  Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the reports referred to in this Article, including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.
Amendment    291 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the independent expert report referred to in Article 160i, where applicable; (b)  the application for the assessment of the draft terms of the cross-border division and of the report referred to in Article 160g(1) and , where applicable, the report drawn up by the competent authority in accordance with Article 160g(3), without however disclosing any confidential information in accordance with national and Union law;
Amendment    292 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and employees of the company being divided that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting comments concerning the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1). (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves of the company being divided that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting comments regarding the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1).
Amendment    293 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 3 – point d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (d)  details of the website where the draft terms of the cross-border division, the notice and the expert report referred in paragraph 1 and complete information on the arrangements referred to in point (c) of this paragraph may be obtained online and free of charge. (d)  details of the website where the draft terms of the cross-border division, the notice and the report drawn up by the competent authority referred in paragraph 1 and complete information on the arrangements referred to in point (c) of this paragraph may be obtained online and free of charge;
Amendment    294 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on the ultimate beneficial owners of the company before and after the cross-border division.
Amendment    295 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, Member States may in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority. However, Member States may where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest to prevent fraud as regards the identity of the person representing the company carrying out a cross-border division, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Amendment    296 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Articles 13ba and 13f(3) and (4) of Directive [on digitaql tools in company law] shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    297 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States may require in addition to the disclosure referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, that the draft terms of the cross-border division, or the information referred to in paragraph 3, is published in their national gazette. In that instance, Member States shall ensure that the register transmits the relevant information to the national gazettes. 5.  Member States may require in addition to the disclosure referred to in paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, that the draft terms of the cross-border division, or the information referred to in paragraph 3, is published in their national gazette. In that instance, in accordance with the principle of the once-off transmission of information in the Union, Member States shall ensure that the register transmits the relevant information to the national gazettes.
Amendment    298 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6a.  Member States shall ensure that confidential information, including business secrets, are not disclosed, other than, where applicable under Union and national law, to employee representatives.
Amendment    299 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160k – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.   After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 160g, 160h and 160i, where applicable, the general meeting of the company being divided shall decide by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of cross-border division. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1) of the decision of the general meeting. 1.   After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 160g, and 160i, where applicable, the general meeting of the company being divided shall decide by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of cross-border division. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights shall be respected in order for an opinion by the employee representatives to be taken into account in accordance with Directive 2002/14/EC, and where applicable Directives 2009/38/EC and 2001/86/EC. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1) of the decision of the general meeting.
Amendment    300 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160k – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  The general meeting shall also decide whether the cross-border division would necessitate amendments to the instruments of constitution of the company being divided. 4.  Where applicable, the general meeting shall also decide on any amendments to the instruments of constitution of the company being divided.
Amendment    301 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160l – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and, who did not vote for the approval of the draft terms of the cross-border division; (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and, who voted against or who did not attend the general meeting but expressed their intention before the meeting to vote against the draft terms of the cross-border division and expressed their intention to make use of the exit right;
Amendment    302 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160l – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the members holding shares without voting rights. (b)  the members holding shares without voting rights, at the general meeting, expressed their intention to make use of the exit right.
Amendment    303 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160l – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (3)   Member States shall ensure that a company being divided makes an offer of adequate cash compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border division as specified in Article 160e(1)(q) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. Member States shall further ensure that a company is able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by the company for that purpose. (3)   Member States shall ensure that a company being divided makes an offer of adequate cash compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border division as specified in Article 160e(1)(q) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Without prejudice to the actual exercise of the exit right, members shall communicate their intention to make use of it before the general meeting. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. National law on the form and validity of contracts for the sale and transfer of shares in companies shall remain unaffected.
Amendment    304 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160m – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors, who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border division, as provided for in Article 160e, may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 160j. 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors, whose rights predate the draft terms of the cross-border division and who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border division, as provided for in Article 160e, and who have lodged their objection before the cross-border division may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article160j.
Amendment    305 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160m – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  where creditors are offered a right to payment, either against a third party guarantor, or against the recipient companies, or in case of a partial division against the recipient company and a company being divided, of at least equivalent value to their original claim, which may be brought in the same jurisdiction as their original claim, and which is of a credit quality at least commensurate with the creditor’s original claim immediately after the completion of the division. (b)  where creditors are offered a right to payment, either against a third party guarantor, or against the recipient companies, or in case of a division against the recipient company and a company being divided, of at least the actual value of their original claim, which may be brought in the same jurisdiction as their original claim, and which is of a credit quality at least commensurate with the creditor’s original claim.
Amendment    306 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Employee participation Employee information, consultation and participation
Amendment    307 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph -1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   -1.  Where the administrative or management body of the company draws up a plan to carry out a cross-border division, they shall as soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of the cross-border division take the necessary steps, including providing information about the identity of the participating companies, subsidiaries or establishments concerned, and the number of their employees, to, where applicable, start negotiations with the representatives of the company's employees on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the companies resulting from the cross-border division.
Amendment    308 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  provide for at least the same level of employee participation as operated in the company being divided prior to the division, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (a)  provide for at least the same level and elements of employee participation as operated in the company being divided prior to the division, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or
Amendment    309 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  In the cases referred to in paragraph 2, the participation of employees in the companies resulting from the cross-border division and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: 3.  The information, consultation and participation of employees in the companies resulting from the cross-border division and their involvement in the definition of such rights and in the cases referred to in paragraph 2, the participation of employees in the companies resulting from the cross-border division and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be the object of agreements between the employees and the management of the companies and shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC:
Amendment    310 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (b)  Article4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4);
Amendment    311 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/ Article 160n – paragraph 3 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e)  the first subparagraph of Article 7(1); (e)  Article 7(1);
Amendment    312 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 3 – point g
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (g)  point (a) of part 3 of the Annex. (g)  the Annex, with the exception of points (a) and (b) of Part 3, instead of which the following shall apply as a minimum:   The employees of the company, its subsidiaries and establishments and/or the representative body shall have the right to elect and appoint a number of members of the administrative or supervisory body of the converted company equal to two representatives in companies having more than 50 employees, one third in companies having 250 to 1000 employees and parity in companies with more than 1000 employees.
Amendment    313 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   3a.  The level of employee participation agreed in accordance with paragraph 3 shall not be lower than the level applied in the company prior to the division or lower than the level that would apply in the Member States of the recipient companies. That level shall be measured in accordance with paragraph 2.
Amendment    314 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States: 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States shall ensure that any rules on employee participation that applied prior to the cross-border division continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC. (a)  shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the Member States of each of the recipient companies;   (b)  may, in the case where, following prior negotiations, standard rules for participation apply and notwithstanding such rules, decide to limit the proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ of the recipient companies. However, if in the company being divided the employee representatives constituted at least one third of the administrative or supervisory board, the limitation may never result in a lower proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ than one third;   (c)  shall ensure that the rules on participation that applied prior to the cross-border division continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with point (a) of Part 3 of the Annex.
Amendment    315 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  The extension of participation rights to employees of the recipient companies employed in other Member States, referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2, shall not entail any obligation for Member States which choose to do so to take those employees into account when calculating the size of workforce thresholds giving rise to participation rights under national law. deleted
Amendment    316 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Where the company resulting from the cross-border division is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of three years after the cross-border division has taken effect, by applying, mutatis mutandis, the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6. 7.  Where the company resulting from the cross-border division is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected also in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of six years after the cross-border division has taken effect, by applying, mutatis mutandis, the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 3.
Amendment    317 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   7a.  Member States shall ensure, in accordance with Article 6 of Directive 2002/14/EC that employee representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties, which have been assigned to them.
Amendment    318 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   8a.  Where, following the application of paragraph 3 in the case referred to in paragraph 2, the applicable threshold laid down in the law of the Member State of the company being divided is exceeded in the six years following the cross-border division, new negotiations shall be initiated in accordance with the procedure provided for in paragraphs 3 to 8, mutatis mutandis. In such cases, the rules for employee participation shall provide for the same level and elements of employee participation as would have been legally provided for, had the company reached the relevant threshold in the Member State of the dividing company.
Amendment    319 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 160 na   Collective agreements   Following the cross-border division, the companies resulting from the cross-border division shall continue to observe the terms and conditions agreed in any collective agreements on the same terms as were applicable to the company before the division under such agreement, until the date of termination or expiry of the collective agreement or the date of the entry into force or application of other collective agreements, in accordance with Article 3(3) of Council Directive 2001/23/EC.
Amendment    320 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall designate the national authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards the part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the Member State of the company being divided, and to issue a pre-division certificate attesting compliance with all relevant conditions, and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in that Member State. 1.  Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards the part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the Member State of the company being divided, and to issue a pre-division certificate attesting compliance with all relevant conditions, and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in that Member State.
Amendment    321 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 160g, 160h and 160i, as appropriate; (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 160g, 160h and 160i, as appropriate including the employees’ opinion and response of the management referred to in Article 160g(4a) and (4b);
Amendment    322 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. However, where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest in the prevention of fraud as regards the identity of the person representing the company carrying out a cross-border division, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted.
Amendment    323 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the on-line disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Articles 13ba and 13f(3) and (4) shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    324 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 160n, the Member State of the company being divided shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border division referred to in Article 160e include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements. 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 160n, the Member State of the company being divided shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border division referred to in Article 160e and the report in Article 160n include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements.
Amendment    325 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 5 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  whether the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    326 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 may consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border division. 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 set up appropriate coordination mechanisms with other authorities and bodies in that Member State working in the policy fields concerned by this Directive and shall, where appropriate, consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border division.
Amendment    327 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within one month of the receipt of the information concerning the approval of the cross-border division by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes: 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within three months of the receipt of the information concerning the approval of the cross-border division by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes:
Amendment    328 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 7 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement referred to in Article 160d(3), it may decide to carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 160p and shall inform the company about its decision to conduct such an assessment and the subsequent outcome. (c)  the competent authority shall not issue a pre-division certificate and carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 86n, and shall inform the company about its decision and the outcome of the assessment, in any of the following cases:   (i) where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement;   (ii) the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency, or is subject to checks, inspections or investigations provided for in Chapter VI of Directive 2006/123/EC, or in Directive 2014/67/EU;   (iii) the company has been convicted in the last three years by a court, or where the company is subject to ongoing court proceedings due to infringements of social, taxation, environmental and labour law, or concerning fundamental and human rights violations.
Amendment    329 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   7a.  The decision to issue a pre-division certificate by the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided, or any approval by the competent authority in the Member States of the company or companies resulting from the cross-border division, shall not preclude any subsequent procedures or decisions by authorities in the Member States in respect of other relevant fields of law.
Amendment    330 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160p – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.   Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement within the meaning of Article 160d(3) of this Directive, the competent authority of the company being divided shall carry out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the Member States concerned, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member State of that company and Member States of recipient companies. 1.   Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement , the competent authority of the company being divided carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following:   (a) the characteristics of the establishments in the Member State of the recipient company or companies concerned, including the management body, the staff, the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, the tax residence, the premises, the assets and their location, the composition of the balance sheet and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided and the recipient companies;   (b) the number and the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, working in the country of recipient company or companies, the number of employees working in another country grouped according to the country of in which they work, the number of employees posted in the year prior to the division, within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, and the number of employees working simultaneously in more than one Member State, within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004;   (c) the place where social contributions are due;   (d) if the company has chosen to delegate its management to directors, officers or legal representatives, hired from an independent third party through a service contractor.   Those elements may only be considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and therefore shall not be considered in isolation.
Amendment    331 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160p – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   1a.  Where relevant, the competent authority shall put questions to and receive information from the competent authority of the Member States of the recipient company or companies. The competent authority shall ensure communication with other authorities in that Member State responsible for any of the areas concerned by this Directive.
Amendment    332 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160p – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not issue a pre-division certificate for the cross-border division where it determines, after carrying out an in-depth assessment of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    333 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall designate an authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards that part of the procedure which concerns the completion of the cross-border division governed by the law of the Member States of the recipient companies and to approve the cross-border division where it complies with all the relevant conditions and all the procedures and formalities in that Member State have been properly completed. 1.  Member States shall designate a court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards that part of the procedure which concerns the completion of the cross-border division governed by the law of the Member States of the recipient companies and to approve the cross-border division where it complies with all the relevant conditions and all the procedures and formalities in that Member State have been properly completed.
Amendment    334 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State where relevant information and documents are required be submitted. However, where justified by the overriding reason of the public interest in the prevention of fraud as regards the identity of the person representing the company carrying out a cross-border division Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Amendment    335 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online application referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and in the second subparagraph of Article 86h(4). Article 13f (3) and (4) shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    336 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160v
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 160v deleted Liability of the independent experts   Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Articles 160i and 160m(2)(a), including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.
Amendment    337 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160w – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment A cross-border division which has taken effect in compliance with the procedures transposing this Directive may not be declared null and void. A cross-border division which has taken effect in compliance with the procedures transposing this Directive may not be declared null and void.
Amendment    338 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160w – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border division takes effect, new information concerning the cross-border division, and suggesting there has been an infringement of any of the provisions in this Directive is brought to the attention of the competent authorities, the competent authorities shall revise their assessment of the facts of the case and shall be empowered to take effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties in the event of an artificial arrangement.
Amendment    339 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1.  The Commission shall, no later than five years after [OP please insert the date of the end of the transposition period of this Directive], carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a Report on the findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of that report, in particular by providing data on the number of cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, their duration and related costs.	1.  The Commission shall, no later than three years after [OP please insert the date of the end of the transposition period of this Directive], carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a Report on the findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of that report and legislative proposal, in particular by providing data on the number of cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, their duration and related costs as well as their impact on employment, and on employee information, consultation and participation. They shall also provide data on the number and types of artificial arrangements that were detected and that prevented a cross-border activity from happening.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Background of the proposed Directive

The Commission proposal for a Directive as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions was published at the end of April 2018. It was presented together with the Directive as regards the use of digital tools and processes in company law, as the since 2017 awaited „Company Law Mobility package“, amending Directive (EU) 2007/1132 relating to certain aspects of company law. The initiatives to revise the Mergers’ Directive, to enable cross-border divisions and to consider rules for the transfer of a companies’ registered office, were envisaged in the 2012’s Commission Action Plan "European Company law and corporate governance - a modern legal framework for more engaged shareholders and sustainable companies“[1]. Since certain aspects of company law were codified and merged 2017 by the Directive (EU) 2017/1132, the proposal introduces a new chapter on cross-border conversions, amends the chapter on cross-border mergers and includes a new chapter on cross-border divisions. While measures for cross-border mergers and division were already foreseen in the Commission Work Programme 2017[2], the ECJ - ruling Polbud-Wykonastwo (C-106/16) made it necessary to reconsider and adapt the Company Law Package in order to include legislation on cross-border conversions. The latest case law settled that the freedom of establishment also includes the right to convert cross-border into another national company law form of another Member State. The European Parliament has called several times to propose a directive for the transfer of a companies’ registered office or seat in then past.[3]

European Court of Justice case law

For 30 years, the European Court of Justice has been ruling through case law corporate mobility of companies, defining whether and to which extend corporate cross-border operations are covered by the freedom of establishment (Art 49, 54 TFEU). With the ground-breaking judgements Daily Mail and General Trust plc (C-81/87), followed by Centros (C-212/91), Überseering (C-208/00), Inspire Art (C-167/01), Cadburry Schweppes (C-196/04), Sevic (C-411/03), Cartesio (C-201/06), VALE (C-210/06), National Grid Indus (C-371/10) the ECJ interpreted in absence of any harmonization of the applicable law and any further secondary law defining rules for cross-border operations, the freedom of establishment. The extensive interpretation led to the result that companies enjoy the freedom to move to another Member State by registration of its firm (letterbox) in another Member States’ register, even if they don’t have any economic activity in this respect Member State and only do it for the purpose of enjoying the benefit of more favorable legislation.

The need to establish clear rules for cross-border corporate operations/movement of companies

Companies are facing difficulties when exercising their rights provided by the freedom of establishment. With regard of corporate mobility, the lack of regulation, clear processes and proper protection of stakeholders has created legal uncertainty for decades, the EU-legislators have been inactive and the ECJ has ruled in the past instead.

The level of harmonization of company law in Europe has been in general low. Member States follow their own national company law approach and the involved Member States don’t have appropriate tools to control and evaluate a cross-border operation or safeguard the main stakeholder’ interests by their national law when it comes to corporate cross-border mobility. Due to the cross-border nature, strong safeguards and protection for stakeholders need to go along with the rights of companies to move abroad.

The tax scandals of the latest years, since Swiss Leaks and Lux Leaks, followed by the revelations with Panama-Papers, Bahama Leaks and Paradise Papers, have visualized how companies create cross-border operations and „reconstructing“ measures corporate constructions including artificial arrangements in order to avoid or circumvent national tax law. The creation of artificial arrangements, so-called „letterbox-companies“, „shell-companies“ or „front subsidies“ needs to be prevented. Letterbox-companies are artificial creatures of company law, which is therefor the appropriate and best place to tackle their formation as such. They are established by registration in a Member State while conducting its business in other Member states, with the aim to avoid national tax laws, social security contributions, collective agreements, employee participation laws or other national laws affected. In some sectors, e.g. the road transport sector, letterbox-companies with no or very little economic activity in the country of establishment are used frequently with its main objective of sending workers abroad, sometimes even falsely called ‚posted‘.

With the registration of the registered office in another Member State not only the nationality of a company, but also the applicable law and by-laws are changing. Company reconstructing and relocation have an enormous impact on workers’ rights, their job situation and contractual rights. Their basis of existence depend on their jobs, which are put in danger when companies restructure and relocate their business. Employees are the most worth protecting stakeholders. They have a genuine interest of sustainability and long-term success of the companies as their jobs depend on the companies’ success. In the light of the European Pillar of Social Rights, laws must upheld and strengthen the position and protection of workers and employees.

It is for the co-legislators to act now and set clear procedures and binding rules for cross-border operations of companies with strong safeguards for all stakeholders and protection of employees and their rights.

Main points of the proposed Directive:

The proposed directive complements the fragmented picture of cross-border mobility within the European Single Market. The Commission proposed two new chapters for cross-border company mobility, providing at the same time protection for stakeholders, namely employees, creditors and minority shareholders. Both involved Member States (departure and destination Member State) are involved in the cross-border operation. While the departure Member State will have to issue a pre-conversion or pre-division certificate in order to scrutinize the cross-border operation, the departure Member States are empowered to scrutinize the legality of the cross-border operation with regard to the part of procedure governed by its national laws.

Conversions

Following Polbud-Wykonastwo (C-106/16), the proposal includes a new chapter on cross-border conversion which introduces the procedure for companies to convert across the border into another company law form of this Member State. New rules allow companies to move their seat from the departure Member State to another (destination) Member State within the EU, without losing legal personality, keeping their contracts and exercise their freedom of establishment to move within the internal market. The procedure to convert is accompanied by safeguards for Member States in order to protect the public interest, which includes protection of employees, creditors and minority shareholders.

Mergers

The chapter on cross-border mergers is revised and updated in order to have the same safeguards for creditors and minority shareholders as foreseen for conversions and divisions. Contrarily to cross-border conversions and divisions, workers’ involvement rights are untouched and in the result on a lower level as for conversions and divisions.

Divisions

A new chapter for cross-border divisions is proposed which covers the procedure of cross-border divisions of companies which wish to split up into two or more newly created companies. Other divisions are excluded. According to the proposal, stakeholders of the dividing company will enjoy the same rights and protection as foreseen for conversions.

Main points of the rapporteurs’ changes:

Avoid artificial arrangements, the so-called „Letterbox-companies“

The most efficient and sustainable way to avoid artificial arrangements is to require genuine economic activity at the place of registration of the company. Therefore, the rapporteur introduces the requirement of genuine economic activity in the Member State where the company moves to. Also the ECJ considered in Cadburry Schweppes (C-196/04) that freedom of establishment requires a stable and continuing basis in the economic life of a Member State other than the state of origin. Therefore, a company cannot invoke freedom of establishment in another Member State for the sole purpose of benefiting from more advantageous legislation unless the establishment in the other member state is intended to carry on genuine economic activity. According to the ECJ a restriction of freedom of establishment is therefore possible in cases of a ‘letterbox’ or ‘front’ subsidiary. This directive needs to prevent any „Delaware effect“ and regime arbitrage within the Union. Company mobility should not lead to forum shopping by companies while the effects potentially create tensions between the Member States. Unless, there is no agreement on the real seat approach, where the registered office and the headquarter have to be on the same place, your rapporteur is of the opinion that a requirement of genuine economic activity in the destination Member States can prevent the creation of a letterbox-company through a cross-border operation.

Strengthen Employee involvement

In order to protect employees’ interests, especially worker’ board level representation, existing under national laws in 17 Member States in different forms, the rapporteur proposes stronger protection of employee participation, information and consultation rights and complements the correct references on the basis of Directive (EC) 2157/200 and Directive (EC) 2002/14 and others. A cross-border operation of a company should not lead to the loss of acquired rights of workers in Europe.

Simplify the procedure and lower the costs for companies

In respect of the companies’ economic interests, the procedures to convert and merge needs to be clear and simple. The competent national authority is responsible to decide on the cross-border operation. It is in its own discretion to require more information and consult an independent expert. The requirement to do so in any case would overload the directive, therefor, the rapporteur is deleting the requirement to consult an independent expert when doing an in-depth assessment and strengthens the information flow between the national authorities.

No added value for divisions

The proposal is only applicable to a small amount of cross-border divisions. Therefore, your rapporteur suggests to delete the chapter on cross-border divisions. In the absence of rules for transferring the seat of a company cross-border, companies made use of national divisions combined with a cross-border merger. Given to create clear rules for cross-border conversions, the added value for a separate chapter for divisions is not proofed.

Clarify of terms and definitions

In order to set legally certain rules and to create a clear procedure for all cross-border conversions and mergers in Europe, the rapporteur clarifies interpretative terms and complements the relevant definitions.

• [1]  COM(2012) 740 final.
• [2]  COM(2016) 710 final.
• [3]  Lehne - Report with recommendations to the Commission on the cross-border transfer of the registered office of a company(2008/2196(INI)); Regner - Report with recommendations to the Commission on a 14th company law directive on the cross-border transfer of company seats (2011/2046(INI)).

OPINION of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (21.11.2018)

for the Committee on Legal Affairs

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions
(COM(2018)0241 – C8‑0167/2018 – 2018/0114(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion (*): Anthea McIntyre

(*)  Associated committee – Rule 54 of the Rules of Procedure

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The Company Law package which includes this proposed Directive on cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions is a welcome step towards clear rules for companies seeking to move within the internal market.

Currently legislation varies across Member States which contributes to legal uncertainty and discourages business from engaging in cross-border operations. To combat this, it is important to bring a level of consistency in legislation across Member States, especially when dealing with cross-border mergers.

The Rapporteur believes that these rules should be simple, uniform, clear and easily enforceable to facilitate mobility while protecting company stakeholders including employees’ rights. Rules that are unclear or difficult to enforce are likely to lead to Member States interpreting rules differently as well as reduce the effectiveness of their enforcement, thereby risking the fragmentation of the internal market. Rules that are unclear are hard to enforce effectively and do not lead to better protection for employees.

Protection for company stakeholders including employees are necessary, including measures to combat the establishment of letterbox companies throughout the internal market. However, such protections must be reasonable and proportionate and not act as a deterrent preventing the honest entrepreneur from expanding their business across borders.

The procedure for cross-border conversions is extremely complex and lengthy for both the involved companies and the relevant authorities. In addition to this, there are also issues around business sensitive information, unpredictability and principles of legal certainty that need to be taken into account.

The Rapporteur welcomes and supports specific measures contained within the proposal that ensure, that in the case of conversions, Member States can require or perform an in-debt assessment of the company if there are strong suspicions that a company is deliberately seeking to avoid or breach a particular law (letter-box companies). In this context, the Rapporteur’s proposals avoid putting companies in a situation where they have to prove that they are not trying to circumvent or abuse the law in place. Instead, the proposal includes a requirement that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines that the company in question is seeking to abuse or deliberately circumvent legislation.

The Rapporteur has also proposed that the Commission develops common guidelines for Member States, which would help competent authorities determine situations in which a deeper analysis of the company operation could be required.

With regard to management reports and reports in the case of cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, the Rapporteur advocates for simpler rules on employees’ involvement and stresses that the proposed directive should not generate additional administrative burden for companies. In this regard, the Rapporteur has brought this proposal in line with existing well-functioning Union legislation on information and consultation, in particular, Directive 2002/14 on a general framework for informing and consulting employees; Directive 2001/23/EC on transfers and undertakings; and Directive 2009/38/EC on European Works Council.

With regard to employees’ participation, the Rapporteur has also sought to bring this proposal in line with existing legislation on Mergers (Directive 2017/1132) thereby ensuring that in the case of conversions and divisions the same rules apply. This in order to avoid the creation of new complicated rules for companies.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Employment and Social Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment    1 Proposal for a directive Recital -1 (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(-1)  Companies play a crucial role in promoting economic growth, creating jobs and attracting investment in the European Union. They help deliver greater economic as well as social value for society at large. To better achieve their potential they should be able to take advantage of the possibilities the Single Market can offer them to develop and grow across national borders. Directive 2005/56/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on cross-border mergers of limited liability companies has had a profound impact on the cross border merger activity between Member States by providing a unified general framework for mergers with simplified procedures involving lower costs and shorter times. These advantages should be carried over to the field of cross-border conversions and divisions, too.
Amendment    2 Proposal for a directive Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3)  In the absence of harmonisation of Union law, the definition of the connecting factor that determines the national law applicable to a company or firm falls, in accordance with Article 54 of the TFEU, within the competence of each Member State to so define. Article 54 of the TFEU places the factor of the registered office, the central administration and the principal place of business of a company or firm at the same degree of connection. Therefore, as clarified in case-law42, where the Member State of new establishment, namely the destination Member State, requires only the transfer of the registered office as a connecting factor for the existence of a company under its national legislation, the fact that only the registered office (and not the central administration or principal place of business) is transferred does not as such exclude the applicability of the freedom of establishment under Article 49 of the TFEU. The choice of the specific form of company in cross-border mergers, conversions and divisions or the choice of a Member State of establishment are inherent in the exercise of the freedom of establishment guaranteed by the TFEU as part of a Single Market.	(3)  In the absence of harmonisation of Union law, the definition of the connecting factor that determines the national law applicable to a company or firm falls, in accordance with Article 54 of the TFEU, within the competence of each Member State to so define.
__________________	__________________
42 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 25 October 2017, Polbud – Wykonawstwo, C-106/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:804, paragraph 29.
Amendment    3 Proposal for a directive Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4)  These developments in the case-law have opened up new opportunities for companies and firms in the Single Market in order to foster economic growth, effective competition and productivity. At the same time, the objective of a Single Market without internal borders for companies must also be reconciled with other objectives of European integration such as social protection (in particular the protection of workers), the protection of creditors and the protection of shareholders. Such objectives, in the absence of harmonised rules specifically regarding cross-border conversions, are pursued by Member States through a number of multifarious legal provisions and administrative practices. As a result, whereas companies are already able to merge cross-border, they experience a number of legal and practical difficulties when wishing to perform a cross-border conversion. Moreover, the national legislation of many Member States provides for the procedure of domestic conversions without offering an equivalent procedure for converting cross-border.	(4)  These developments in the case-law have opened up new opportunities for companies and firms in the Single Market in order to foster economic growth, effective competition and productivity. At the same time, in the absence of a level playing field in the form of coherent social and fiscal rules, these developments went hand-in-hand with the proliferation of letterbox companies and abusive practices, constituting artificial arrangements and circumventing fiscal and social security obligations as well as undercutting workers’ rights. The objective of a Single Market without internal borders for companies must be reconciled with other objectives of European integration such as social protection for all, the protection of workers’ rights, the protection of creditors and the protection of shareholders, as well as the fight against attacks on financial interests of the Union via for example money laundering and tax evasion. In the absence of harmonised rules specifically regarding cross-border conversions, Member States have developed a number of multifarious legal provisions and administrative practices. As a result, whereas companies are already able to merge cross-border, they experience a number of legal and practical difficulties when wishing to perform a cross-border conversion. Moreover, the national legislation of many Member States provides for the procedure of domestic conversions without offering an equivalent procedure for converting cross-border.
Amendment    4 Proposal for a directive Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6)  It is appropriate therefore to provide procedural and substantive rules on cross-border conversions which would contribute to the abolition of restrictions on freedom of establishment and provide at the same time adequate and proportionate protection for stakeholders such as employees, creditors and minority shareholders.	(6)  It is appropriate therefore to provide procedural and substantive rules on cross-border conversions which would contribute to the abolition of restrictions on freedom of establishment and provide at the same time adequate and proportionate protection for stakeholders such as creditors and minority shareholders and, in particular, employees.
Amendment    5 Proposal for a directive Recital 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(6a)  The definition of consultation needs to take account of the aim of expressing an opinion which will be useful to the decision-making process, which implies that the consultation must take place at such time, in such fashion and with such content as are appropriate.
Amendment    6 Proposal for a directive Recital 6 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(6b)  This Directive establishes minimum requirements applicable throughout the Member States while allowing and encouraging Member States to provide more favourable protection of employees.
Amendment    7 Proposal for a directive Recital 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7)  The right to convert an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors', minority shareholders' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such possible abuses, a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border conversion procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approach by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.	(7)  The right to merge, divide or convert an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State should never be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors', minority shareholders' rights or rules on employees participation, as this is the case for example of letterbox companies. In order to combat such possible abuses, a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border conversion, merger or division procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed, solely or partially, at obtaining tax or social security advantages or at prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. The fight against abuses must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A common procedural and substantive framework which sets out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down, whilst describing, where strictly necessary, the margin of discretion allowed for Member States.
Amendment    8 Proposal for a directive Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedure governing a cross-border conversion, the company should disclose the draft terms of the cross-border conversion containing the most important information about the proposed cross-border conversion, including the envisaged new company form, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the conversion. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should be notified in order that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed conversion.	(10)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedure governing a cross-border conversion, the company should disclose the draft terms of the cross-border conversion containing the information about the proposed cross-border conversion, including the envisaged new company form, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the conversion. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should be notified and be given this information in due time in order that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed conversion.
Amendment    9 Proposal for a directive Recital 12
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(12)  In order to provide information to its employees, the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should prepare a report explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion for employees. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the employment relationships and the locations of the companies’ places of business and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. This requirement should not however apply where the only employees of the company are in its administrative organ. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council43 or Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council44 .	(12)  In order to provide information to its employees, this report should also explain the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion for employees and/or their representatives. In order to avoid duplications, companies may decide to combine this report with the report addressed to the members. It should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the employment relationships, on the application of collective agreements and the locations of the companies’ central administration or places of business and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. The requirement for certain specific information should not however apply where the only employees of the company are in its administrative organ and should be delivered in a timely manner. The provision of the report should not create unnecessary administrative requirements or duplication of existing requirements and should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council43 or Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council44 .
__________________	__________________
43 Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 29).	43 Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community (OJ L 80, 23.3.2002, p. 29).
44 Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (Recast) (OJ L 122, 16.5.2009, p. 28).	44 Directive 2009/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on the establishment of a European Works Council or a procedure in Community-scale undertakings and Community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees (Recast) (OJ L 122, 16.5.2009, p. 28).
Amendment    10 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12a)  The freedom of establishment and the development of the internal market are no stand-alone principles or objectives of the Union. They should always be balanced with, in particular in the context of this Directive, the Union’s principles and objectives regarding social progress, the promotion of a high level of employment and the guarantee of adequate social protection, embedded in Article 3 of the Treaty on the European Union and Article 9 of the TFEU. It is therefore clear that the development of the internal market should contribute to social cohesion and upward social convergence, and should not fuel competition between social systems, putting pressure on those systems to lower their standards.
Amendment    11 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12b)  Union policy should also contribute to the promotion and reinforcement of social dialogue, in line with Article 151 TFEU. It is therefore also the objective of this Directive to secure employees’ information, consultation and participation rights and to ensure that any cross-border mobility of companies can never lead to the lowering of these rights. Ensuring information, consultation and participation of employees is essential for all such actions to succeed.
Amendment    12 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12c)  The freedom of establishment should also in no way undermine the principles regarding the countering fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union included in Article 310 TFEU.
Amendment    13 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12d)  There is a need to ensure consistency for companies and employees in order to avoid duplication of existing Union legislation. Directive 2002/14/EC, Directive 2001/23/EC1a and Directive 2009/38/EC already include requirements on information and consultation of employees that apply in situations of cross border conversions, mergers and divisions. It is important that this Directive complements these existing directives in order to avoid unnecessary administrative burdens by undermining the current provisions in place for information, consultation and participation of employees.
	__________________
	1a Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).
Amendment    14 Proposal for a directive Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13)  In order to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of conversion and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, an independent expert report should be required to be prepared in order to assess the proposed cross-border conversion. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. In this context, the expert report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority in the departure Member State to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-conversion certificate. To this end, the expert should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The expert should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the expert’s final report which itself would be publically available.	(13)  In order to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of conversion and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, an independent expert report should be required to be prepared in order to assess the proposed cross-border conversion. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. The appointment of the independent experts should be based on objective criteria to ensure their independence. In this context, the expert report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority in the departure Member State to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-conversion certificate. To this end, the expert should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The expert should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the expert’s final report which itself would be publically available.
Amendment    15 Proposal for a directive Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14)  With a view to avoiding disproportionate costs and burdens for smaller companies carrying out the cross-border conversion, micro and small enterprises, as defined in the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC45 , should be exempted from the requirement to produce an independent expert report. However, these companies can resort to an independent expert report to prevent litigation costs with creditors.	deleted
__________________
45 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment    16 Proposal for a directive Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15)  On the basis of the draft terms of conversion and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to convert is a collective one. In addition, members should also have the right to vote on any arrangements concerning employee participation, if they have reserved that right during the general meeting.	(15)  On the basis of the draft terms of conversion and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to convert is a collective one.
Amendment    17 Proposal for a directive Recital 19 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(19a)  The great diversity of rules and practices existing in the Member States as regards the manner in which employees' representatives are involved in decision-making within companies should be respected and acknowledged.
Amendment    18 Proposal for a directive Recital 19 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(19b)  Information and consultation procedures at national and transnational level should nevertheless be ensured in all companies resulting from the cross-border conversion or merger.
Amendment    19 Proposal for a directive Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border conversion, the company carrying out a conversion which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border conversion without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation.	(20)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border conversion, the company carrying out a conversion which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border conversion without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives.
Amendment    20 Proposal for a directive Recital 26
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(26)  The evaluation of the implementation of the cross-border merger rules in Member States has shown that the number of cross-border mergers in the Union has significantly increased. However, this evaluation has also revealed certain shortcomings in relation specifically to creditor protection and shareholder protection as well as to the lack of simplified procedures which impede the full effectiveness and efficiency of those cross-border merger rules.	(26)  The evaluation of the implementation of the cross-border merger rules in Member States has shown that the number of cross-border mergers in the Union has significantly increased. However, this evaluation has also revealed certain shortcomings in relation specifically to employee, creditor and shareholder protection as well as to the lack of simplified procedures which impede the full effectiveness and efficiency of those cross-border merger rules. While no available data could conclusively establish that the employee participation procedure was inefficient, the evaluation revealed that companies considered it too complex and leading to unnecessary costs and delays within the merger.
Amendment    21 Proposal for a directive Recital 28
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(28)  In order to further enhance the existing cross-border merger procedure, it is necessary to simplify those merger rules, where appropriate, whilst at the same time ensuring that stakeholders, and in particular employees, are adequately protected. Therefore, the existing cross-border merger rules should be modified in order to oblige the management or administrative organs of the merging companies to prepare separate reports detailing the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger for both members and for employees. The obligation on the management or administrative organ of the company to prepare the report for the members may however be waived, where those members are already informed about legal and economic aspects of the proposed merger. However, the report prepared for employees may only be waived where the merging companies and their subsidiaries do not have any employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ.	(28)  In order to further enhance the existing cross-border merger procedure, it is necessary to simplify those merger rules, where appropriate, whilst at the same time ensuring that shareholders, creditors and in particular employees, are adequately protected. Therefore, the existing cross-border merger rules should be modified in order to oblige the management or administrative organs of the merging companies to prepare a detailed report on the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger for both members, especially minority shareholders, and for employees in full respect of the autonomy of the social partners. The obligation on the management or administrative organ of the company to provide certain specific information for the members may however be waived, where those members are already informed about legal and economic aspects of the proposed merger. However, the requirement to provide certain specific information related to employees may only be waived where the merging companies and their subsidiaries do not have any employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ.
Amendment    22 Proposal for a directive Recital 29
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(29)  Furthermore, in order to enhance the protection afforded to the employees of the merging company or companies, employees or their representatives may provide their opinion on the company report setting out the implications of the cross-border merger for them. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Council Directive 2001/23/EC48 , Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC.	(29)  Furthermore, in order to enhance the protection afforded to the employees of the merging company or companies, employees or their representatives may provide, prior to the merge, their opinion, to be included in the report, on the implications of the cross-border merger for them. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Council Directive 2001/23/EC48 , Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC.
__________________	__________________
48 Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).	48 Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).
Amendment    23 Proposal for a directive Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31)  The lack of harmonisation of safeguards for members or creditors has been identified an obstacle for cross-border mergers by different stakeholders. Members and creditors should be offered the same level of protection regardless of the Member States in which the merging companies are situated. This is without prejudice to the Member States’ rules on protecting creditors or shareholders which are outside the scope of the harmonised measures, such as transparency requirements.	(31)  The lack of harmonisation of safeguards for employees, members or creditors has been identified an obstacle for cross-border mergers by different stakeholders. Employees, members and creditors should be offered at least the same level of protection regardless of the Member States in which the merging companies are situated. This is without prejudice to the Member States’ rules on protecting employees, creditors or shareholders which are outside the scope of the harmonised measures, such as transparency requirements.
Amendment    24 Proposal for a directive Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40)  The right of companies to carry out a cross-border division may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' or members' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such abuses, as a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border division procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approaches by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.	(40)  The right of companies to carry out a cross-border division may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' or members' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such abuses, as a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border division procedure in order to abuse the law or to commit a fraudulent act. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approaches by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.
Amendment    25 Proposal for a directive Recital 41
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(41)  Given the complexity of cross-border divisions and the multitude of the interests concerned, it is appropriate to provide for an ex-ante control in order to create legal certainty. To that effect, a structured and multi-layered procedure should be set out whereby both the competent authorities of the Member State of the company being divided and of the Member State of the recipient companies ensure that a decision on the approval of a cross-border division is taken in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory manner on the basis of all relevant elements and by taking into account all legitimate public interests, in particular the protection of employees, shareholders and creditors.	(41)  Given the complexity of cross-border divisions and the multitude of the interests concerned, it is appropriate to provide for an ex-ante and an ex-post control in order to create legal certainty. To that effect, a structured and multi-layered procedure should be set out whereby both the competent authorities of the Member State of the company being divided and of the Member State of the recipient companies ensure that a decision on the approval of a cross-border division is taken in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory manner on the basis of all relevant elements and by taking into account all legitimate public interests, in particular the protection of employees, shareholders and creditors.
Amendment    26 Proposal for a directive Recital 43
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(43)  In order to provide information to its members, the company being divided should prepare a report. The report should explain and substantiate the legal and economic aspects of the proposed cross-border division, in particular explaining the implications of the cross-border division for members with regard to the future business of the company and the management organs’ strategic plan. It should also include explanations about the exchange ratio, where applicable, the criteria to determine the allocation of shares and potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border division.	(43)  In order to provide information to its members and employees, the company being divided should prepare a report in full respect of the autonomy of the social partners. With regard to the interests of members, and especially minority shareholders, the report should explain and substantiate the legal and economic aspects of the proposed cross-border division, in particular explaining the implications of the cross-border division for members with regard to the future business of the company and the management organs’ strategic plan. It should also include explanations about the exchange ratio, where applicable, the criteria to determine the allocation of shares and potential remedies available to members, where they do not agree with the decision to carry out a cross-border division.
Amendment    27 Proposal for a directive Recital 44
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(44)  In order to provide information its employees, the company being divided should prepare a report explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border division for employees. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border division on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the conditions of employment and the locations of the companies’ places of business, and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.	(44)  The report should also explain the implications of the proposed cross-border division for employees. It should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border division on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the conditions of employment including the conditions laid down in law and collective agreements and the locations of the companies’ places of business, and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC while not causing any duplication of reporting requirements.
Amendment    28 Proposal for a directive Recital 52
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(52)  The issue of the pre-division certificate by the Member State of the company being divided should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border division. The competent authority should decide whether to issue a pre-division certificate within one month of the application by the company has been submitted, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.	(52)  The issue of the pre-division certificate by the Member State of the company being divided should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border division. The competent authority should decide whether to issue a pre-division certificate within one month of the application by the company has been submitted, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an intention to abuse the law or to commit a fraudulent act. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.
Amendment    29 Proposal for a directive Recital 56
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(56)  In order to prevent the circumvention of the employee participation rights by means of a cross-border division, the company carrying out a division which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border division without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation.	(56)  In order to prevent the circumvention of the employee participation rights by means of a cross-border division, the company carrying out a division which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border division without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to the national threshold in case of SMEs, or to four fifths of this threshold in case of other companies for triggering such employee participation.
Amendment    30 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-1)  in Title I, Chapter I, the following Article is inserted:   “Article 1a   Definitions   For the purposes of this Directive:   (1)  "employees' representatives" means the employees' representatives provided for by national law and/or practice;   (2)  "involvement of employees" means any mechanism, including information, consultation and participation, through which employees' representatives may exercise an influence on decisions to be taken within the company;   (3)  "information" means the informing of the representative of the employees and/or employees' representatives by the competent organ of the company on questions which concern the company itself and any of its subsidiaries or establishments situated in another Member State or which exceed the powers of the decision-making organs in a single Member State at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees' representatives to undertake an in-depth assessment of the possible impact and, where appropriate, prepare consultations with the competent organ of the company;   (4)  "consultation" means the establishment of dialogue and exchange of views between the body representative of the employees and/or the employees' representatives and the competent organ of the company, at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees' representatives, on the basis of information provided, to express an opinion on measures envisaged by the competent organ which may be taken into account in the decision-making process within the company;   (5)  "participation" means the influence of the body representative of the employees and/or the employees' representatives in the affairs of a company by way of: the right to elect or appoint some of the members of the company's supervisory or administrative organ, or the right to recommend and/or oppose the appointment of some or all of the members of the company's supervisory or administrative organ;
Amendment    31 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   1a.  The Member State of destination may require a company which is transferring its registered office to its territory to simultaneously relocate its central administration, where this requirement is laid down in national legislation for undertakings established in their territory.
Amendment    32 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86b – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (6a)  "information" means the transmission by the employer to the employees and/or employees' representatives at the relevant level, of data which concern the company itself and any of its subsidiaries or establishments situated in another Member State, in order to enable them to acquaint themselves with the subject matter and to examine it. This shall take place at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees and representatives to undertake an in-depth assessment of the possible impact and, where appropriate, prepare consultations with the competent organ of the company;
Amendment    33 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86b – paragraph 1 – point 6 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (6b)  'employee participation' means the influence of the employees and/or the employees´ representatives in the affairs of a company by way of the right to elect or appoint some of the members of the company´ supervisory or administrative organ;
Amendment    34 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86b – paragraph 1 – point 6c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (6c)  ‘head office’ means the place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the company’s business as a whole are in substance made;
Amendment    35 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86b – paragraph 1 – point 6d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (6d)  ‘artificial arrangement means an arrangement put in place for the essential aim of circumventing companies’ obligations arising from the legal and contractual rights of employees, creditors, or minority shareholders, the avoidance of social security payments, or profit shifting to reduce the corporate tax obligations and that at the same time does not carry out a substantive or genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.
Amendment    36 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  disciplinary of administrative action or criminal sanctions and decisions have been taken involving fraudulent practices which are directly relevant to the companies´ competences or reliability.
Amendment    37 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  the company has a backlog in tax or social security payments;
Amendment  38 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or minority members. 3.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement or has a strong suspicion that it constitutes such an arrangement.   The company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall prove, on the basis of ascertainable objective factors, that it pursues actual establishment and substantive and genuine economic activity in the destination Member State for an indefinite period.   The company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall not be presumed to have an actual establishment and to pursue genuine economic activity in the destination Member State unless it transfers the central administration or principal place of business to the destination Member State and its operations there generate value and are materially equipped with staff, equipment, assets and premises.
Amendment    39 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86d
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86 d Article 86 d Draft terms of cross-border conversion Draft terms of cross-border conversion 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company which intends to carry out a cross-border conversion shall draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion. The draft terms of a cross-border conversion shall include at least the following: 1.  The management or administrative organ, including employee board level representatives, of the company which intends to carry out a cross-border conversion shall draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. If the company is subject to board level employee representation, this board shall be included into the decision on the draft terms in accordance with national law and practice. The draft terms of a cross-border conversion shall include at least the following: (a)  the legal form, name and registered office of the company in the departure Member State; (a)  the legal form, name and location of the registered office, of the company in the departure Member State; (b)  the legal form, name and location of its registered office proposed for the company resulting from the cross-border conversion in the destination Member State; (b)  the legal form, name and location of its registered office proposed for the company resulting from the cross-border conversion in the destination Member State; (c)  the instrument or instruments of the constitution of a company in the destination Member State; (c)  the instrument or instruments of the constitution of a company in the destination Member State; (d)  the proposed timetable for the cross-border conversion; (d)  the proposed timetable for the cross-border conversion; (e)  the rights conferred by the converted company on members enjoying special rights or on holders of securities other than shares representing the company capital, or the measures proposed concerning them; (e)  the rights conferred by the converted company on members enjoying special rights or on holders of securities other than shares representing the company capital, or the measures proposed concerning them; (f)  details of the safeguards offered to the creditors; (f)  details of the safeguards offered to the creditors; (g)  the date from which the transactions of the company formed and registered in the departure Member State will be treated for accounting purposes as being those of the converted company; (g)  the date from which the transactions of the company formed and registered in the departure Member State will be treated for accounting purposes as being those of the converted company; (h)  any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling organ of the converted company; (h)  any special advantages granted to members of the administrative, management, supervisory or controlling organ of the converted company; (i)  details of the offer of cash compensation for the members opposing the cross-border conversion in accordance with Article 86j; (i)  details of the offer of cash compensation for the members opposing the cross-border conversion in accordance with Article 86j;   (ia)  the consequences of the cross-border conversion for the employees; (j)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border conversion on employment (j)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border conversion on employment (k)  where appropriate, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the converted company are determined pursuant to Article 86l and on the possible options for such arrangements. (k)  where appropriate, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the converted company are determined pursuant to Article 86l and on the possible options for such arrangements.   1a.  Before the management or the administrative organ decides on the draft terms of a cross-border conversion, the European Works Council and the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, the employees themselves and the trade unions represented shall be informed and consulted on the proposed transfer in accordance with Article 4 of Directive 2002/14/EC. 2.  In addition to the official languages of the departure and destination Member States, Member States shall allow the company carrying out the cross-border conversion to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. 2.  In addition to the official languages of the departure and destination Member States, Member States shall allow the company carrying out the cross-border conversion to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of a cross-border conversion and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on these draft terms. The comments shall be included in the final report and be made public.
Amendment    40 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86e deleted Report of the management or administrative organ to the members   1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border conversion.   2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following :   (a)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan;   (b)  the implications of the cross-border conversion for members;   (c)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the conversion in accordance with Article 86j.   3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves.   4.  However, that report shall not be required where all the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion have agreed to waive this requirement.
Amendment    41 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86f
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86f Article 86f Report of the management or administrative organ to the employees Report of the management or administrative organ to the members and to the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border conversion. 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a single report in respect of Directive 2002/14/EC and Directive 2001/23/EC justifying to members the legal and economic aspects of the cross border conversion and explaining to the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves the implications of the cross-border conversion for them. 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: (a)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan; (a)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan;   (aa)  the implications of the cross-border conversion for members;   (ab)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the conversion in accordance with Article 86j;   (ac) the reasons for the cross-border conversion; (b)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of employment relationships; (b) the implications of the cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of employment relationships; (c)  any material changes in the conditions of employment and in the location of the company’s places of business; (c)  any material changes in the conditions of employment including the conditions laid down in law and collective agreements and in the location of the company’s places of business; (d)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (b) and (c) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company. (d) whether the factors set out in points (a), (b) and (c) also relate to any subsidiaries, branches or controlled undertakings according to Article 3 of Directive 2009/38/EC of the company. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. That report shall also be made similarly available to the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members and to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. 4.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report. 4.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report. 5.  However, where a company carrying out the cross-border conversion and its subsidiaries, if any, have no employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be required. 5.  However, where a company carrying out the cross-border conversion and its subsidiaries, if any, have no employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ and where all the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion have agreed to waive this requirement, the report referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be required. 6.  Paragraphs 1 to 6 are without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC. 6.  Paragraphs 1 to 6 are without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC, while not causing any duplication of reporting requirements.   6a.  Member States shall provide, in specific cases and within the conditions and limits laid down by national legislation, that the company is not obliged to communicate information when the nature of that information is such that, according to objective criteria, it would seriously harm the functioning of the undertaking or establishment or would be prejudicial to it.
Amendment    42 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Examination by an independent expert Examination by the competent authority
Amendment    43 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the company carrying out the cross-border conversion applies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the reports referred to in Articles 86e and 86f, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. Member States shall ensure that the company carrying out the cross-border conversion applies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) for an assessment of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the report referred to in Articles 86f, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article.
Amendment    44 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The application for the appointment of an expert shall be accompanied by the following: The application to the competent authority shall be accompanied by the following:
Amendment    45 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  The competent authority shall appoint an independent expert within five working days from the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and reports. The expert shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the departure Member State. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC. 2.  If it considers it necessary, the competent authority shall be free to seek the assistance of an independent expert within five working days from the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and report. The expert shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the departure Member State. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC.
Amendment    46 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The expert shall draw up a written report providing at least: 3.  Where there is reasonable doubt as to the real reason for a cross-border conversion, the competent authority shall draw up a written report providing at least:
Amendment    47 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that the independent expert shall be entitled to obtain, from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, all relevant information and documents and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The expert shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. 4.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority is entitled to obtain, from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, all relevant information and documents and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The competent authority shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company.
Amendment    48 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall ensure that information submitted to the independent expert can only be used for the purpose of drafting the report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the expert may submit a separate document containing any such confidential information to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) and that separate document shall only be made available to the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and not be disclosed to any other party. 5.  Member States shall ensure that information gathered by the competent authority can only be used for the purpose of drafting its report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the competent authority may submit a separate document containing any such confidential information to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) and that separate document shall only be made available to the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and not be disclosed to any other party.
Amendment    49 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments concerning the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1). (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and employees and/or trade unions which have members in the company carrying out the cross-border conversion that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments concerning the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1).
Amendment    50 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall ensure that information regarding the publication of the notice referred to in point (c) is also made available by a general announcement in a suitable place in the company carrying out the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    51 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86i – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 86e, 86f and 86g, where applicable, the general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion shall decide, by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of the cross-border conversion. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) of the decision of the general meeting. 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 86f and 86g, where applicable, the general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion shall decide, by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of the cross-border conversion. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights have to be met in such a way and at such a time that an opinion by the employee representatives can be taken into consideration. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) of the decision of the general meeting.
Amendment    52 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 1 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights and who did not vote for the approval of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion; (a)  the members holding shares with voting rights who voted against the approval of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion;
Amendment    53 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that the members referred to in paragraph 1, may dispose of their shareholdings, in consideration of adequate cash compensation paid, once the cross-border conversion has taken effect in accordance with Article 86r, to one or more of the following: 2.  Member States shall ensure that the members referred to in paragraph 1, may dispose of their shareholdings, in consideration of appropriate cash compensation paid, once the cross-border conversion has taken effect in accordance with Article 86r, to one or more of the following:
Amendment    54 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that a company carrying out a cross-border conversion makes an offer of adequate compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion as specified in the Article 86d(1)(i) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer, which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. Member States shall further ensure that a company is able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by the company for that purpose. 3.  Member States shall ensure that a company carrying out a cross-border conversion makes an offer of adequate compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion as specified in the Article 86d(1)(i) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Members must express their intention to avail themselves of their exit right before the general meeting. Member States shall further ensure that a company is able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by the company for that purpose.
Amendment    55 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, as provided for in Article 86d(f), may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 86h. 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, as provided for in Article 86d(f), and who have lodged their objection before the cross-border conversion may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 86h.
Amendment    56 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86l
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86l Article 86l Employee participation Employee information, consultation and participation   -1. It is a fundamental principle and stated aim of this Article to secure employees´ participation rights. Therefore, in the company resulting from the cross border restructuring, at least the same level of employee participation rights shall apply as before the conversion, as will all the elements of employee participation that applied before it. This level shall be measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees, or if applicable, amongst the management group which covers the profit units of the company. 1.  Without prejudice to paragraph 2, the company resulting from the cross-border conversion shall be subject to the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the destination Member State. 1.  Where the management or administrative organs of the participating companies draw up a plan to carry out a conversion, they shall as soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of conversion take the necessary steps to start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the conversion. 2.  However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the destination Member State shall not apply, where the company carrying out the conversion has, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion as referred to in Article 86d of this Directive, an average number of employees equivalent to four fifths of the applicable threshold, laid down in the law of the departure Member State, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law of the destination Member State does not:   (a)  provide for at least the same level of employee participation as operated in the company prior to the conversion, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or   (b)  provide for employees of establishments of the company resulting from the conversion that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by those employees employed in the destination Member State.   3.  In the cases referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, the participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: 3.  The information, consultation and participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be the object of an agreement between employees and management. The information, consultation and participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights, shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: (a)  Article 3(1), (2)(a)(i), 2(b) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4), Article 3(5), the third subparagraph of Article 3(6) and Article 3(7); (a)  Article 3(1), (2)(a)(i), 2(b) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4), Article 3(5), the third subparagraph of Article 3(6) and Article 3(7); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (c)  Article 5; (c)  Article 5; (d)  Article 6; (d)  Article 6; (e)  the first subparagraph of Article 7(1); (e)  Article 7(1); (f)  Articles 8, 9, 10 and 12; (f)  Articles 8, 9, 10 and 12; (g)  point (a) of Part 3 of the Annex. (g)  the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC, with the exclusion of points (a) and (b) and paragraph 2 of Part 3, instead of which the following rules shall apply:   i)  for the establishment of workers’ representation in the company boardrooms the employees of the company, its subsidiaries and establishments and/or the representative body shall have the right to elect and appoint a number of members of the administrative or supervisory body of the converted company equal to two representatives in companies up from 50 employees, one third in companies having from 250 employees to 1000 employees and parity in companies with more than 1000 employees;   ii)  for the establishment of transnational information and consultation Directive 2009/38/EC shall apply. 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States: 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 2, Member States shall ensure that the rules on employee participation that applied prior to the cross-border conversion continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with point (g) of paragraph 2. (a) shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the destination Member State;   (b)  may, in the case where, following prior negotiations, standard rules for participation apply and notwithstanding such rules, decide to limit the proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ of the converted company. However, if in the company carrying out the conversion employee representatives constituted at least one third of the administrative or supervisory board, the limitation may never result in a lower proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ than one third;   (c) shall ensure that the rules on employee participation that applied prior to the cross-border conversion continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with point (a) of Part 3 of the Annex.   5.  The extension of participation rights to employees of the converted company employed in other Member States, referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2, shall not entail any obligation for Member States which choose to do so to take those employees into account when calculating the size of workforce thresholds giving rise to participation rights under national law.   6.  Where the company carrying out the conversion is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation rights. 6.  Where the company carrying out the conversion is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation rights. 7.  Where the converted company is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of three years after the cross-border conversion has taken effect, by applying mutatis mutandis the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6. 7.  Where the converted company is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected also in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of six years after the cross-border conversion has taken effect, by applying mutatis mutandis the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6.   7a.  Member States shall ensure, in accordance with Article 6 of Directive 2002/14/EC, that employees’ representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them. 8.  A company shall communicate to its employees the outcome of the negotiations concerning employee participation without undue delay. 8.  A company shall communicate to its employees the outcome of the negotiations concerning employee participation without undue delay.   8a.  Member States shall provide for appropriate measures in the event of non-compliance with the provisions in this Article by the converting company. In particular, they shall ensure that adequate administrative or judicial procedures are available to enable the obligations deriving from this Article to be enforced.   8b.  Member States shall also provide for adequate sanctions to be applicable in the event of infringement of this Article by the converting company. These sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.   8c.  As soon as a threshold of the departure Member State is exceeded, new negotiations need to be initiated according to the provisions of this Article. In those cases, the standard rules applied by Members States shall refer to the level of employee participation that would be legally foreseen for the company in the country of origin above the threshold if the company had not undergone the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    57 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba)  the opinion of the employees’ representatives in accordance with Article 86f(4).
Amendment    58 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 86l, the departure Member State shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border conversion, referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements. 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 86l, the departure Member State shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border conversion, referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements in line with existing Union legislation, limiting any unnecessary administrative burdens.
Amendment    59 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 5 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  all comments and opinions submitted by interested parties in accordance with Article 86h(1); (b)  all comments and opinions submitted by interested parties in accordance with Article 86h(1), particularly the opinion referred to in Article 86f(4);
Amendment    60 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  where the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion falls within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive, that it complies with all the relevant conditions and that all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed, the competent authority shall issue the pre-conversion certificate; (a)  where the competent authority determines that the cross-border conversion falls within the scope of the national provisions transposing this Directive, that it complies with all the relevant conditions and that all necessary procedures and formalities have been completed and that there are no indications for circumventing employees' participation rules, the competent authority shall issue the pre-conversion certificate;
Amendment    61 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement within the meaning of Article 86c(3), that the competent authority of the departure Member State carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State. 1.  Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, that the competent authority of the departure Member State carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following:   (i)  the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss;   (ii)  the number of employees working in the country of destination, the number of employees working in another country grouped according to the country of work, the number of employees posted in the year prior to the conversion within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, the number of employees working simultaneously in more than one Member State within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004, the composition of the balance sheet;   (iii)  the tax residence;   (iv)  the assets and their location;   (v)  the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees;   (vi)  the places where social contributions are due;   (vii) the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State; and   (viii) the composition of the balance sheet and of the financial statement in the destination Member State and in all Member States in which the company operates in the last two fiscal years.
Amendment    62 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4a)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted:   “(2a)  "employees' representatives" means the employees' representatives provided for by Union and national law and/or practice;";
Amendment    63 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4b)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted:   "(2b)  "involvement of employees" means any mechanism, including information, consultation and participation, through which employees' representatives may exercise an influence on decisions to be taken within the company;";
Amendment    64 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 c (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4c)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted:   "(2c)  "information" means the informing of the representative of the employees and/or employees' representatives at the relevant level by the competent organ of the company on questions which concern the company itself and any of its subsidiaries or establishments situated in another Member State or which exceed the powers of the decision-making organs in a single Member State at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees' representatives to undertake an in-depth assessment of the possible impact and, where appropriate, prepare consultations with the competent organ of the company;";
Amendment    65 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 d (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4d)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted:   "(2d)  "consultation" means the establishment of dialogue and exchange of views between the body representative of the employees and/or the employees' representatives and the competent organ of the company, at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees' representatives, on the basis of information provided, to express an opinion on measures envisaged by the competent organ which may be taken into account in the decision-making process within the company;";
Amendment    66 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 e (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 e (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4e)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted:   "(2e)  "employee participation" means the influence of the body representative of the employees and/or the employees' representatives in the affairs of a company by way of the right to elect or appoint some of the members of the company's supervisory or administrative organ, or the right to recommend and/or oppose the appointment of some or all of the members of the company's supervisory or administrative organ;”;
Amendment    67 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 f (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 f (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4f)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted:   “(2f)  ‘head office’ means the place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the company’s business as a whole are in substance made.”;
Amendment    68 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 g (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 119 – point 2 g (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4g)  in Article 119, the following point is inserted   “(2g)  ‘artificial arrangement means an arrangement put in place for the essential aim of circumventing companies’ obligations arising from the legal and contractual rights of employees, creditors, or minority shareholders, the avoidance of social security payments, or profit shifting to reduce the corporate tax obligations and that at the same time does not carry out a substantive or genuine economic activity in the destination Member State’;”;
Amendment    69 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that this Chapter does not apply to the company or companies where: 4.  Member States shall ensure that where a company intends to carry out a cross-border merger, the Member States concerned verify that the cross-border merger complies with the conditions laid down in this paragraph. A company shall not be entitled to carry out a cross-border merger in any of the following circumstances:
Amendment    70 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  a company is under investigation, is being prosecuted or has been convicted in the last 3 years for infringements of employment legislation or workers’ rights, social or tax fraud, tax evasion, tax avoidance or money laundering or any other financial crime;
Amendment    71 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  a company has a backlog in tax or social security payments;
Amendment    72 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point e c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ec)  the company is under investigation, is being prosecuted or has been convicted in the last 3 years for violations of fundamental or human rights.
Amendment    73 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 122 –subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment In addition to the official language of each Member State of the merging companies, Member States shall allow the merging companies to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance to draw up the common draft terms of a cross-border merger and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents.; In addition to the official language of each Member State of the merging companies, Member States shall allow the merging companies to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance to draw up the common draft terms of a cross-border merger and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in the case of discrepancies identified between the different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on these draft terms. The comments shall be included in the final report and be made public.
Amendment    74 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 124 Article 124 Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the management or administrative organ to the members and to the representatives of the employees or, where there is no such representatives, to the employees themselves 1.  The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger . 1.  The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up a report explaining and justifying to members the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger and explaining to the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves, the implications of the cross-border merger for them. 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: (a)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the future business of the company resulting from the merger and on the management's strategic plan; (a)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the future business of the company resulting from the merger and on the management's strategic plan;   (aa)  the reasons for the merger; (b)  an explanation and justification of the share exchange ratio; (b)  an explanation and justification of the share exchange ratio; (c)  a description of any special valuation difficulties which have arisen; (c)  a description of any special valuation difficulties which have arisen; (d)  the implications of the cross-border merger for members; (d)  the implications of the cross-border merger for members; (e)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the merger in accordance with Article 126a. (e)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the merger in accordance with Article 126a.   (ea)  the implications of the cross border merger on the safeguarding of the employment relationships and employee involvement;   (eb)  any material changes in the conditions of employment, including the conditions laid down in law and collective agreements and in the location of the companies places of business;   (ec)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (ea) and (eb) also relate to any branches subsidiaries of the merging companies. 3.  The report shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of each of the merging companies not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies, or where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be made available, at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies. 3.  The report shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of each of the merging companies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies or, where there are no such representatives, to employee representatives of each of the merging companies, in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC, Directive 2001/86/EC and Directive 2002/14/EC, or where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves and the trade unions in the company. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be made available, at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies.   3a.  Where the management or administrative organ of one or more of the merging companies receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to the report. 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the merging companies have agreed to waive this requirement."; 4.  However, the information referred to in points (b) to (e) of paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the merging companies have agreed to waive this requirement. Where the merging companies and their subsidiaries, if any, have no employees, other than those who form part of their management or administrative organ, the information referred to in points (f), (g), and (h) of paragraph 1 shall not be required.   4a.  The submission of the report is without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC, while not causing any duplication of reporting requirements.
Amendment    75 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 124a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 124a Article 124a Report of the management or administrative organ to the employees Report of the management or administrative organ to the employees 1.  The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up a report explaining the implications of the cross-border merger for employees. 1.  The management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies shall draw up a report explaining the implications of the cross-border merger for employees. 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: (a)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan; (a)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan;   (aa)  the reasons for the merger; (b)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the safeguarding of the employment relationships; (b)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the safeguarding of the employment relationships and on employee involvement, as well as measures to be taken in order to safeguard them; (c)  any material changes in the conditions of employment and in the locations of the companies’ places of business; (c)  any material changes in the conditions of employment, including the conditions laid down in law and collective agreements, and in the locations of the companies’ places of business; (d)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (b) and (c) also relate to any subsidiaries of the merging companies. (d)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (b), (c) and (ca) also relate to any branches or subsidiaries of the merging companies.   (da)  information on the procedures by which arrangements for the information, consultation and participation rights of employees in the resulting company are determined following the cross-border merger, in accordance with the provisions of this Directive;   (db)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the merger in accordance with Article 126a. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves, not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the members of each of the merging companies. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies in accordance with Directive 2009/38/EC, Directive 2001/86/EC and Directive 2002/14/EC, or where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves and the trade unions in the company, not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the members of each of the merging companies. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company, in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be available at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company, in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be available at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies.   3a.  The European Works Councils, where applicable, the national employee representation bodies and the trade unions represented in the company shall have appropriate resources to conduct a thorough analysis of the report. 4.  Where the management or administrative organ of one or more of the merging companies receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to the report. 4.  Where the management or administrative organ of one or more of the merging companies receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to the report.   4a.  The Executive management or the administrative organ of the company which intends to carry out the cross-border merger, shall provide a motivated and written response to the employee opinion before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. 5.  However, where the merging companies and their subsidiaries, if any, have no employees, other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report referred in paragraph 1 shall not be required to be drawn up. 5.  However, where the merging companies and their subsidiaries, if any, have no employees, other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report referred in paragraph 1 shall not be required to be drawn up. 6.  The submission of the report is without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC."; 6.  The submission of the report is without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.;”
Amendment    76 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 12 – point a Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 124, 124a and 125, as appropriate, the general meeting of each of the merging companies shall decide, by means of a resolution, on the approval of the common draft terms of the cross-border merger.; 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 124, 124a and 125, as appropriate, the general meeting of each of the merging companies shall decide, by means of a resolution, on the approval of the common draft terms of the cross-border merger Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights have to be met in such a way and at such a time that an opinion by the employee' representatives can be taken into consideration;
Amendment    77 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 2 – introductory wording
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that the members referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, may dispose of their shareholdings in consideration of adequate cash compensation, paid, once the cross-border merger has taken effect in accordance with Article 129, to one or more of the following: 2.  Member States shall ensure that the members referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, may dispose of their shareholdings in consideration of appropriate cash compensation, paid, once the cross-border merger has taken effect in accordance with Article 129, to one or more of the following:
Amendment    78 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that each of the merging companies makes an offer of adequate cash compensation in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, as specified in Article 122(1)(m), to those members referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer, which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 126 or, in cases where the approval of the general meeting is not required, within two months after the disclosure of the common draft terms of merger referred to in Article 123. Member States shall further ensure that the merging companies are able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by those companies for that purpose. 3.  Member States shall ensure that each of the merging companies makes an offer of appropriate cash compensation in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, as specified in Article 122(1)(m), to those members referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. The members shall express their intention of invoking their exit right before the general meeting or, in cases where the approval of the general meeting is not required, within one month after the disclosure of the common draft terms of merger referred to in Article 123. Member States shall further ensure that the merging companies are able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by those companies for that purpose.
Amendment    79 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 1
Present text Amendment   (-a)  in Article 133, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 1.   Without prejudice to paragraph 2, the company resulting from the cross-border merger shall be subject to the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where it has its registered office. "1.  It is a fundamental principle and stated aim of this Article to secure employees´ participation rights. Therefore, in the company resulting from the cross-border restructuring, at least the same level of employee participation rights shall apply as before the merger, as will all the elements of employee participation that applied before it. This level shall be measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees, or if applicable, amongst the management group which covers the profit units of the company.";
Amendment    80 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-aa)  in Article 133, paragraph 1a is inserted:   "1a.  Where the management or administrative organs of the participating companies draw up a plan to carry out a merger, they shall as soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of conversion take the necessary steps to start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the merger.";
Amendment    81 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 2
Present text Amendment   (-ab)  in Article 133, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 2.  However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border merger has its registered office shall not apply, where at least one of the merging companies has, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border merger as referred to in Article 123, an average number of employees that exceeds 500 and is operating under an employee participation system within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to the company resulting from the cross-border merger does not: "2.  The rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the destination Member State shall not apply, where at least one of the merging companies has, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border conversion as referred to in Article 86d of this Directive, an average number of employees equivalent to two thirds of the applicable threshold laid down in the law of the departure Member State, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to the company resulting from the cross-border merger does not: (a)  provide for at least the same level of employee participation as operated in the relevant merging companies, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (a)  provide for at least the same level and elements of employee participation as operated in one of the participating companies prior to the merger, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (b)  provide for employees of establishments of the company resulting from the cross-border merger that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by those employees employed in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border merger has its registered office. (b)  provide for employees of establishments of the company resulting from the merger that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by those employees employed in the destination Member State.";
Amendment    82 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a c (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 3
Present text Amendment   (-ac)  in Article 133, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 3.  In the cases referred to in paragraph 2, the participation of employees in the company resulting from the cross-border merger and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: "3.  The information, consultation and participation of employees in the company resulting from the merger and their involvement in the definition of such rights in the cases referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article shall be the object of an agreement between employees and management and the information, consultation and participation of employees in the company resulting from the merger and their involvement in the definition of such rights, shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: (a)  Article 3(1), (2) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4) and Article 3(5) and (7); (a)  Article 3(1), (2)(a)(i), 2(b) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4), Article 3(5), the third subparagraph of Article 3(6) and Article 3(7); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (g) and (h) and Article 4(3); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (c)  Article 5; (c)  Article 5; (d)  Article 6; (d)  Article 6; (e)  Article 7(1), point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 7(2), the second subparagraph of Article 7(2) and Article 7(3). However, for the purposes of this Chapter, the percentages required by point (b) of the first subparagraph of Article 7(2) of Directive 2001/86/EC for the application of the standard rules contained in Part 3 of the Annex to that Directive shall be raised from 25 to 33 1/3 %; (e)  Article 7(1); (f)  Articles 8, 10 and 12; (f)  Articles 8, 9, 10 and 12; (g)  Article 13(4); (g)  the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC. (h)  point (b) of Part 3 of the Annex.     For the establishment of transnational information and consultation, 2009/38/EC applies.";
Amendment    83 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a d (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 4
Present text Amendment   (-ad)  in Article 133, paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: 4.   When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States: "4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 2 and 3, Member States shall ensure that the rules on employee information, consultation and participation that applied prior to the cross-border merger continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with the Annex of Directive 2001/86/EC."; (a)  shall confer on the relevant organs of the merging companies the right to choose without any prior negotiation to be directly subject to the standard rules for participation referred to in point (h) of paragraph 3, as laid down by the legislation of the Member State in which the company resulting from the cross-border merger is to have its registered office, and to abide by those rules from the date of registration;   (b)  shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, including the votes of members representing employees in at least two different Member States, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the Member State where the registered office of the company resulting from the cross-border merger will be situated;   (c)  may, in the case where, following prior negotiations, standard rules for participation apply and notwithstanding such rules, decide to limit the proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ of the company resulting from the cross-border merger. However, if in one of the merging companies employee representatives constituted at least one third of the administrative or supervisory board, the limitation may never result in a lower proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ than one third.
Amendment    84 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a e (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 5
Present text Amendment   (-ae)  in Article 133, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: 5.   The extension of participation rights to employees of the company resulting from the cross-border merger employed in other Member States, referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2, shall not entail any obligation for Member States which choose to do so to take those employees into account when calculating the size of workforce thresholds giving rise to participation rights under national law. "5.  The company resulting from the merger shall be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation rights.";
Amendment    85 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point -a f (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 6
Present text Amendment   (-af)  in Article 133, paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: 6.   Where at least one of the merging companies is operating under an employee participation system and the company resulting from the cross-border merger is to be governed by such a system in accordance with the rules referred to in paragraph 2, that company shall be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation rights. "6.  Where the company resulting from the merger is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected also in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of six years after the cross-border conversion has taken effect, by applying mutatis mutandis the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 4.";
Amendment    86 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point a Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 7
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Where the company resulting from the cross-border merger is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic mergers, divisions or conversions for a period of three years after the cross-border merger has taken effect, by applying mutatis mutandis the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6."; 7.  Member States shall ensure, in accordance with Article 6 of Directive 2002/14/EC, that employees’ representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them.
Amendment    87 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 8
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 8.  A company shall communicate to its employees whether it chooses to apply standard rules for participation referred to in point (h) of paragraph 3 or whether it enters into negotiations within the special negotiating body. In the latter case the company shall communicate to its employees the outcome of the negotiations without undue delay."; 8.  A company shall communicate to its employees the outcome of the negotiations concerning employee participation without undue delay.
Amendment    88 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b a (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 8 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba)  in Article 133, the following paragraph is added:   "8a.  Member States shall provide for appropriate measures in the event of non-compliance with the provisions in this Article by the company resulting from the cross-border merger. In particular, they shall ensure that adequate administrative or judicial procedures are available to enable the obligations deriving from this Article to be enforced.";
Amendment    89 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b b (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 8 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (bb)  in Article 133, the following paragraph is added:   "8b.  Member States shall also provide for adequate sanctions to be applicable in the event of infringement of this Article by the company resulting from the cross-border merger. These sanctions must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive.";
Amendment    90 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 18 – point b c (new) Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 133 – paragraph 8 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (bc)  in Article 133, the following paragraph is added:   "8c.  As soon as a threshold of the departure Member State is exceeded, new negotiations need to be initiated according to the provisions of this Article. In those case, the standard rules applied by Member States shall refer to the level of employee participation that would be legally foreseen for the company in the country of origin above the threshold if the company had not undergone the cross-border merger.”;
Amendment    91 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3a)  "employees' representatives" means the employees' representatives provided for by Union and national law and/or in accordance with Union or national practice;
Amendment    92 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3b)  "involvement of employees" means any mechanism, including information, consultation and participation, through which employees' representatives may exercise an influence on decisions to be taken within the company;
Amendment    93 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3c)  "information" means the informing of the representative of the employees and/or employees' representatives at the relevant level by the competent organ of the company on questions which concern the company itself and any of its subsidiaries or establishments situated in another Member State or which exceed the powers of the decision-making organs in a single Member State at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees' representatives to undertake an in-depth assessment of the possible impact and, where appropriate, prepare consultations with the competent organ of the company;
Amendment    94 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3d)  "consultation" means the establishment of dialogue and exchange of views between the body representative of the employees and/or the employees' representatives and the competent organ of the company, at a time, in a manner and with a content which allows the employees' representatives, on the basis of information provided, to express an opinion on measures envisaged by the competent organ which may be taken into account in the decision-making process within the company;
Amendment    95 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 e (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3e)  "employee' participation" means the influence of the body representative of the employees and/or the employees' representatives in the affairs of a company by way of the right to elect or appoint some of the members of the company's supervisory or administrative organ;
Amendment    96 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 f (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3f)  ‘head office’ means the place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the company’s business as a whole are in substance made.;
Amendment    97 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  the company is under investigation, is being prosecuted or has been convicted in the last 3 years for infringements of employment legislation or workers’ rights, social or tax fraud, tax evasion, tax avoidance or money laundering or any other financial crime;
Amendment    98 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  disciplinary or administrative actions or criminal sanctions and decisions have been taken involving fraudulent practices which are directly relevant to the companies´ competences or reliability;
Amendment    99 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point e c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ec)  the company is under investigation, is being prosecuted or has been convicted in the last 3 years for violations of fundamental or human rights.
Amendment    100 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The Member State of the company being divided shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the division when it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. 3.  The Member State of the company being divided shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the division when it determines, on reasoned and objective grounds, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members.
Amendment    101 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up the draft terms of cross-border division. The draft terms of cross-border division shall include at least the following: 1.  The management or administrative organ, including employee board level representatives, of the company being divided shall draw up the draft terms of cross-border division not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. The draft terms of cross-border division shall include at least the following:
Amendment    102 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  detailed information on the head office;
Amendment    103 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border division on employment; (e)  the likely repercussions of the cross-border division on employment, wage development and company level social dialogue, including board level representation of employee representatives;
Amendment    104 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – point l
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (l)  where appropriate, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the recipient companies are determined pursuant to Article160n and on the possible options for such arrangements; (l)  where they exist, information on the procedures by which arrangements for the involvement of employees in the definition of their rights to participation in the recipient companies are determined pursuant to Article160n and on the possible options for such arrangements;
Amendment    105 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In addition to the official languages of the Member States of the recipient companies and the one being divided, Member States shall allow the company to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in case of discrepancies among different linguistic versions of those documents. 4.  In addition to the official languages of the Member States of the recipient companies and the one being divided, Member States shall allow the company to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in case of discrepancies among different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on these draft terms. The comments shall be included in the final report and be made public.
Amendment    106 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160g
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 160g Article 160g Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the management or administrative organ to the members and to the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border division. 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up a report explaining and justifying to members the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border division and explaining to the representatives of the employees or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves the implications of the cross-border division for them. 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: 2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following: (a)  the implications of the cross-border division on the future business of the recipient companies and, in the case of a partial division, also of the company being divided and on the managements' strategic plan; (a)  the implications of the cross-border division on the future business of the recipient companies and, in the case of a partial division, also of the company being divided and on the managements' strategic plan; (b)  an explanation and justification of the share exchange ratio, where applicable; (b)  an explanation and justification of the share exchange ratio, where applicable; (c)  a description of any special valuation difficulties which have arisen; (c)  a description of any special valuation difficulties which have arisen; (d)  the implications of the cross-border division for members; (d)  the implications of the cross-border division for members; (e)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the cross-border division in accordance with Article 160l. (e)  the rights and remedies available to members opposing the cross-border division in accordance with Article 160l;   (ea)  the implications of the cross-border division on the safeguarding of the employment relationships and employee involvement;   (eb)  any material change in the conditions of employment including the conditions laid down in law and collective agreements and the locations of the companies´ ‘places of business;   (ec)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (ea) and (eb) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company being divided. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of the company being divided not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company being divided or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of the company being divided not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company being divided or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves.   3a.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company being divided receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report. 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the company being divided have agreed to waive this document. 4.  However, the information referred to in points (b) to (e) of paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the company being divided have agreed to waive this document. Where the company being divided and all of their subsidiaries, if any, have no employees, other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the information referred to in points (ea), (eb), and (ec) of paragraph 1 shall not be required.   4a.  Paragraph 1 to 4 are without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC while not causing any duplication of reporting requirements.   4b.  Member States shall provide, in specific cases and within the conditions and limits laid down by national legislation, that the company is not obliged to communicate information when the nature of that information is such that, according to objective criteria, it would seriously harm the functioning of the undertaking or establishment or would be prejudicial to it.
Amendment    107 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160h
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 160h deleted Report of the management or administrative organ to the employees   1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up a report explaining the implications of the cross-border division for employees.   2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 shall in particular explain the following:   (a)  the implications of the cross-border division on the future business of the recipient companies and, in the case of a partial division, also of the company being divided and on the management's strategic plan;   (b)  the implications of the cross-border division on the safeguarding of the employment relationships;   (c)  any material change in the conditions of employment and the locations of the companies’ places of business;   (d)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (b) and (c) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company being divided.   3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 shall be made available, at least electronically, to the representatives of the employees of the company being divided or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. The report shall also be made similarly available to the members of the company being divided.   4.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company being divided receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.   5.  However, where the company being divided and all of their subsidiaries, if any, have no employees, other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required.   6.  Paragraphs 1 to 5 are without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    108 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that the company being divided applies to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k, to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of cross-border division and the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160h, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. 1.  Member States shall ensure that the company being divided applies to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), not less than five months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k, to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of cross-border division and the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160h, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article.
Amendment    109 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (f)  a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 160p, at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishments in the Member States concerned of the recipient companies, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member States of the recipient companies. (f)  a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 160p, at a minimum the following:   (i)the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss,   (ii) the number of employees working in the country of destination, the number of employees working in another country grouped according to the country of work, the number of employees posted or sent in the year prior to the conversion within the meanings of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004 and Directive 96/71/EC, the number of employees working simultaneously in more than one Member State within the meaning of Regulation (EC) No 883/2004,   (iii) the tax residence,   (iv) the assets and their location,   (v) the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees,   (vi) the places where social contributions are due;   (vii) the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State,   (viii) the composition of the balance sheet and of the financial statement in the destination Member state and in all member States in which the company operates in the last two fiscal years.
Amendment    110 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160k – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 160g, 160h and 160i, where applicable, the general meeting of the company being divided shall decide by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of cross-border division. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1) of the decision of the general meeting. 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 160g, 160h and 160i, where applicable, the general meeting of the company being divided shall decide by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of cross-border division. Before a decision is taken, any preceding applicable information and consultation rights have to be met in such a way and at such a time that an opinion by the employee representatives can be taken into consideration. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1) of the decision of the general meeting.
Amendment    111 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160l – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that a company being divided makes an offer of adequate cash compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border division as specified in Article 160e(1)(q) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. Member States shall further ensure that a company is able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by the company for that purpose. 3.  Member States shall ensure that a company being divided makes an offer of appropriate cash compensation in the draft terms of the cross-border division as specified in Article 160e(1)(q) to the members, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, who wish to exercise their right to dispose of their shareholdings. Member States shall also establish the period for the acceptance of the offer which shall not in any event exceed one month after the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. Member States shall further ensure that a company is able to accept an offer communicated electronically to an address provided by the company for that purpose.
Amendment    112 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 Article 160n
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 160n Article 160n Employee participation Employee information, consultation and participation 1.  Without prejudice to paragraph 2, each recipient company shall be subject to the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where it has its registered office. 1.  It is a fundamental principle and stated aim of this Article to secure employees´ participation rights. Therefore, in the companies resulting from the cross border division, at least the same level of employee participation rights shall apply as before the division, as will all the elements of employee participation that applied before it. This level shall be measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees, or if applicable, amongst the management group which covers the profit units of the company.   1a.  Where the management or administrative organs of the participating companies draw up a plan to carry out a division, they shall as soon as possible after publishing the draft terms of conversion take the necessary steps to start negotiations with the representatives of the companies' employees on arrangements for the involvement of employees in the company or companies resulting from the conversion. 2.  However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border division has its registered office shall not apply, where the company being divided, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border division as referred to in Article 160e of this Directive, has an average number of employees equivalent to four fifths of the applicable threshold, laid down in the law of the Member State of the company being divided, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to each of the recipient companies does not: 2.  The rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border division has its registered office shall not apply, where the company being divided, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border division as referred to in Article 160e of this Directive, has an average number of employees equivalent to two thirds of the applicable threshold laid down in the law of the Member State of the company being divided, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law of the destination Member State does not: (a)  provide for at least the same level of employee participation as operated in the company being divided prior to the division, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (a)  provide for at least the same level and elements of employee participation as operated in the company being divided prior to the division, measured by reference to the proportion of employee representatives amongst the members of the administrative or supervisory organ or their committees or of the management group which covers the profit units of the company, subject to employee representation; or (b)  provide for employees of establishments of the recipient companies that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by those employees employed in the Member State where the recipient company has its registered office. (b)  provide for employees of establishments of the recipient companies that are situated in other Member States the same entitlement to exercise participation rights as is enjoyed by those employees employed in the Member State where the recipient company has its registered office. 3.  In the cases referred to in paragraph 2, the participation of employees in the companies resulting from the cross-border division and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: 3.  The information, consultation and participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights shall be the object of an agreement between employees and management and in the cases referred to in paragraph 2 the information, consultation and participation of employees in the converted company and their involvement in the definition of such rights, shall be regulated by the Member States, mutatis mutandis and subject to paragraphs 4 to 7 of this Article, in accordance with the principles and procedures laid down in Article 12(2), (3) and (4) of Regulation (EC) No 2157/2001 and the following provisions of Directive 2001/86/EC: (a)  Article 3(1), (2)(a)(i), 2(b) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4), Article 3(5), Article 3(6) third indent and Article 3(7); (a)  Article 3(1), (2)(a)(i), 2(b) and (3), the first indent of the first subparagraph of Article 3(4), the second subparagraph of Article 3(4), Article 3(5), Article 3(6) third indent and Article 3(7); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (b)  Article 4(1), Article 4(2)(a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (g) and (h), Article 4(3) and Article 4(4); (c)  Article 5; (c)  Article 5; (d)  Article 6; (d)  Article 6; (e)  the first subparagraph of Article 7(1); (e)  Article 7(1); (f)  Articles 8, 9, 10 and 12; (f)  Articles 8, 9, 10 and 12; (g)  point (a) of part 3 of the Annex. (g)  the Annex.   For the establishment of transnational information and consultation, Directive 2009/38/EC applies. 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraph 3, Member States: 4.  When regulating the principles and procedures referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3, Member States shall ensure that the rules on employee information, consultation and participation that applied prior to the cross-border division continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with the Annex of Directive 2001/86/EC. (a)  shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the Member States of each of the recipient companies;   (b)  may, in the case where, following prior negotiations, standard rules for participation apply and notwithstanding such rules, decide to limit the proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ of the recipient companies. However, if in the company being divided the employee representatives constituted at least one third of the administrative or supervisory board, the limitation may never result in a lower proportion of employee representatives in the administrative organ than one third;   (c)  shall ensure that the rules on participation that applied prior to the cross-border division continue to apply until the date of application of any subsequently agreed rules or in the absence of agreed rules until the application of default rules in accordance with point (a) of Part 3 of the Annex.   5.  The extension of participation rights to employees of the recipient companies employed in other Member States, referred to in point (b) of paragraph 2, shall not entail any obligation for Member States which choose to do so to take those employees into account when calculating the size of workforce thresholds giving rise to participation rights under national law.   6.  Where any of the recipient companies is to be governed by an employee participation system in accordance with the rules referred to in paragraph 2, those companies shall be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation rights, 6.  Where any of the recipient companies is to be governed by an employee participation system in accordance with the rules referred to in paragraph 2, those companies shall be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of participation rights, 7.  Where the company resulting from the cross-border division is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of three years after the cross-border division has taken effect, by applying, mutatis mutandis, the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6. 7.  Where the company resulting from the cross-border division is operating under an employee participation system, that company shall be obliged to take measures to ensure that employees' participation rights are protected in the event of any subsequent cross-border or domestic merger, division or conversion for a period of six years after the cross-border division has taken effect, by applying, mutatis mutandis, the rules laid down in paragraphs 1 to 6.   7a.  Member States shall ensure, in accordance with Article 6 of Directive 2002/14/EC that employees’ representatives, when carrying out their functions, enjoy adequate protection and guarantees to enable them to perform properly the duties which have been assigned to them. 8.  A company shall communicate to its employees the outcome of the negotiations concerning employee participation without undue delay. 8.  A company shall communicate to its employees the outcome of the negotiations concerning employee participation without undue delay.   8a.  Member States shall provide for appropriate measures in the event of non-compliance with the provisions in this Article by the company being divided. In particular, they shall ensure that adequate administrative or judicial procedures are available to enable the obligations deriving from this Article to be enforced.   8b.  As soon as a threshold of the Member State of the company being divided is exceeded, new negotiations need to be initiated according to the provisions of this Article. In those cases, the standard rules applied by Member States shall refer to the level of employee participation that would be legally foreseen for the company in the country of origin above the threshold if the company had not undergone the cross-border division.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions
References	COM(2018)0241 – C8-0167/2018 – 2018/0114(COD)
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	JURI 28.5.2018
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	EMPL 28.5.2018
Associated committees - date announced in plenary	4.10.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Anthea McIntyre 11.7.2018
Discussed in committee	24.9.2018	18.10.2018
Date adopted	15.11.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	27 23 1
Members present for the final vote	Laura Agea, Guillaume Balas, Tiziana Beghin, Brando Benifei, Mara Bizzotto, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Enrique Calvet Chambon, David Casa, Ole Christensen, Michael Detjen, Geoffroy Didier, Lampros Fountoulis, Arne Gericke, Marian Harkin, Czesław Hoc, Danuta Jazłowiecka, Agnes Jongerius, Rina Ronja Kari, Jan Keller, Ádám Kósa, Jean Lambert, Jérôme Lavrilleux, Patrick Le Hyaric, Verónica Lope Fontagné, Javi López, Thomas Mann, Anthea McIntyre, Joëlle Mélin, Miroslavs Mitrofanovs, Elisabeth Morin-Chartier, Emilian Pavel, Marek Plura, Dennis Radtke, Terry Reintke, Sofia Ribeiro, Robert Rochefort, Claude Rolin, Siôn Simon, Romana Tomc, Ulrike Trebesius, Renate Weber, Jana Žitňanská
Substitutes present for the final vote	Lynn Boylan, Silvia Costa, Eduard Kukan, Miapetra Kumpula-Natri, Paloma López Bermejo, António Marinho e Pinto, Evelyn Regner, Csaba Sógor
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Olle Ludvigsson

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

27	+
EFDD ENF GUE/NGL PPE S&D   VERTS/ALE	Laura Agea, Tiziana Beghin Mara Bizzotto Lynn Boylan, Rina Ronja Kari, Patrick Le Hyaric, Paloma López Bermejo Jérôme Lavrilleux, Dennis Radtke, Claude Rolin Guillaume Balas, Brando Benifei, Vilija Blinkevičiūtė, Ole Christensen, Silvia Costa, Michael Detjen, Agnes Jongerius, Jan Keller, Miapetra Kumpula‑Natri, Olle Ludvigsson, Javi López, Emilian Pavel, Evelyn Regner, Siôn Simon Jean Lambert, Miroslavs Mitrofanovs, Terry Reintke

23	-
ALDE ECR ENF NI PPE	Enrique Calvet Chambon, Marian Harkin, António Marinho e Pinto, Renate Weber Arne Gericke, Czesław Hoc, Anthea McIntyre, Ulrike Trebesius, Jana Žitňanská Joëlle Mélin Lampros Fountoulis David Casa, Geoffroy Didier, Danuta Jazłowiecka, Eduard Kukan, Ádám Kósa, Verónica Lope Fontagné, Thomas Mann, Elisabeth Morin‑Chartier, Marek Plura, Sofia Ribeiro, Csaba Sógor, Romana Tomc

1	0
ALDE	Robert Rochefort

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

OPINION of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (14.11.2018)

for the Committee on Legal Affairs

on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions
(COM(2018)0241 – C8‑0167/2018 – 2018/0114(COD))

Rapporteur for opinion: Olle Ludvigsson

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

The proposal to amend Directive (EU) 2017/1132 as regards cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions aims to foster cross-border mobility for companies while, at the same time, offer company stakeholders adequate protection in order to safeguard the fairness of the Single Market.

The rapporteur agrees that there is a need to stimulate cross-border movement of companies in the Single Market and by doing this making better use of the potential of the Single Market. However, it is essential that any measures aimed at facilitating cross-border movement go hand in hand with strong safeguards, preventing abuses and fictitious transfers for the purpose of social or fiscal dumping.

The proposal from the European Commission is important, especially following the Polbud-ruling from the European Court of Justice, and gives a good base for further discussion. However, within the remit of the ECON Committee, it is clear there is room for simplifications and further clarifications in the proposal, while at the same time strengthening safeguards and closing any potential loopholes, making sure that the new directive does not facilitate for instance circumvention of taxation and social security obligations.

In this respect, the rapporteur proposes to insert a definition for determining artificial arrangements. In the absence of a clear definition, there is a risk that Member States interpret the rules in an inconsistent way. It is important to avoid that the definition is contestable in order to prevent the set-up of more letterbox companies. Moreover, the proposal is also amended by extending the concept of artificial arrangements to cross-border mergers. This is about ensuring harmonised rules for the different cross-border operations as well as closing a potential loophole and create greater clarity.

Linked to artificial arrangements, there is also an amendment in Article 86c introducing the requirement of a real economic connection with the State of registration, a genuine link, in order to further strengthen legal certainty and prevent the abuse of the freedom of establishment with regard to for instance tax avoidance.

The proposal from the European Commission foresees in Article 86g an examination by an independent expert. This is an important provision, however, the examination should be undertaken as an exercise of a public authority. There are therefore several amendments addressing this issue, changing the concept from an examination by an independent expert to an examination by the competent authority.

The proposal does not foresee any possibilities for ex-post monitoring and enforcement. This is important, considering that it might be problematic to detect or discover artificial arrangements in advance. There is therefore an amendment introducing the concept of ex-post monitoring for cross-border conversions, including sanctions where requirements are not met.

Finally, the rapporteur is not convinced of including cross-border divisions in the proposal. The division proposal only covers a limited range of divisions, that is splitting up the firm into two or more newly created companies. There are doubts about the need for divisions to be included, as well as concerns about the risks and dangers of doing it, and it is therefore suggested to delete this part from the proposal.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs calls on the Committee on Legal Affairs, as the committee responsible, to take into account the following amendments:

Amendment    1 Proposal for a directive Recital 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(1)  The Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 regulates cross-border mergers of limited liability companies. These rules represent a significant milestone in improving the functioning of the Single Market for companies and firms and to exercise the freedom of establishment. However, evaluation of these rules shows that there is a need for modifications in cross-border merger rules. Furthermore, it is appropriate to provide for rules regulating cross-border conversions and divisions.	(1)  The Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 regulates cross-border mergers of limited liability companies. These rules represent a significant milestone in improving the functioning of the Single Market for companies and firms and to exercise the freedom of establishment and provide adequate protection for stakeholders, such as workers, creditors and minority shareholders However, evaluation of these rules shows that there is a need for modifications in cross-border merger rules. Furthermore, it is appropriate to provide for rules regulating cross-border conversions.
__________________	__________________
2 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (codification) (OJ L 169, 30.6.2017, p. 46).	2 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (codification) (OJ L 169, 30.6.2017, p. 46).
Amendment    2 Proposal for a directive Recital 2
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(2)  Freedom of establishment is one of the fundamental principles of Union law. Under the second paragraph of Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), when read in conjunction with Article 54 of the TFEU, the freedom of establishment for companies or firms includes, inter alia, the right to form and manage such companies or firms under the conditions laid down by the legislation of the Member State of establishment. This has been interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union as encompassing the right of a company or firm formed in accordance with the legislation of a Member State to convert itself into a company or firm governed by the law of another Member State, provided that the conditions laid down by the legislation of that other Member State are satisfied and, in particular, that the test adopted by the latter Member State to determine the connection of a company or firm to its national legal order is satisfied.	(2)  Freedom of establishment is one of the fundamental principles of Union law. Under the second paragraph of Article 49 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (‘TFEU’), when read in conjunction with Article 54 of the TFEU, the freedom of establishment for companies or firms includes, inter alia, the right to form and manage such companies or firms under the conditions laid down by the legislation of the Member State of establishment. This has been extensively interpreted by the Court of Justice of the European Union as encompassing the right of a company or firm formed in accordance with the legislation of a Member State to convert itself into a company or firm governed by the law of another Member State, provided that the conditions laid down by the legislation of that other Member State are satisfied and, in particular, that the test adopted by the latter Member State to determine the connection of a company or firm to its national legal order is satisfied. Moreover, additional elements such as the existence of economic substance criteria are particularly important to take into account in order to avoid the misuse of this fundamental freedom for fraud purposes.
Amendment    3 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2a)  While competition in the single market and the freedom of establishment are key principles of the Union, the freedom of companies to move their registered office from one Member State to another is based on undesired system competition between Member States fuelled by an unlevel playing field with different national provisions in social and fiscal policies. Abusive conversions, mergers or divisions constituting artificial arrangements or social dumping, but also reducing fiscal obligations or undercutting social rights of employees are therefore to be avoided in order to respect Treaty principles and European values. The case law of the European Court of Justice regarding a very far-reaching right to cross-border conversions is regrettable, as the possibility for firms to move their registered office without moving core activities has contributed to incomprehension and anti-European sentiments by employees and other stakeholders as regards this problematic form of competition.
Amendment    4 Proposal for a directive Recital 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(2b)  Moving towards a common and consolidated corporate tax system at the Union level and ensuring minimum common social standards in all Member States should be a pre-condition for common rules on company mobility, to allow for fair competition and a level playing field that does not put any Member State or stakeholder at a disadvantage.
Amendment    5 Proposal for a directive Recital 3
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(3)  In the absence of harmonisation of Union law, the definition of the connecting factor that determines the national law applicable to a company or firm falls, in accordance with Article 54 of the TFEU, within the competence of each Member State to so define. Article 54 of the TFEU places the factor of the registered office, the central administration and the principal place of business of a company or firm at the same degree of connection. Therefore, as clarified in case-law,3 where the Member State of new establishment, namely the destination Member State, requires only the transfer of the registered office as a connecting factor for the existence of a company under its national legislation, the fact that only the registered office (and not the central administration or principal place of business) is transferred does not as such exclude the applicability of the freedom of establishment under Article 49 of the TFEU. The choice of the specific form of company in cross-border mergers, conversions and divisions or the choice of a Member State of establishment are inherent in the exercise of the freedom of establishment guaranteed by the TFEU as part of a Single Market.	(3)  In the absence of harmonisation of Union law, the definition of the connecting factor that determines the national law applicable to a company or firm falls, in accordance with Article 54 of the TFEU, within the competence of each Member State to so define. Article 54 of the TFEU places the factor of the registered office, the central administration and the principal place of business of a company or firm at the same degree of connection. Given the contradictions arising from the freedom of establishment and the absence of a level playing field in the form of common coherent social and fiscal rules between Member States, it is crucial to strike a balance between companies’ right to converge, merge and divide and other Treaty principles. Cross-border conversions should be conditioned to the company moving its registered office together with its head office in order to carry out a substantial part of its economic activity in the Member State of destination.
_________________
3 Judgment of the Court of Justice of 25 October 2017, Polbud – Wykonawstwo, C-106/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:804, paragraph 29.
Amendment    6 Proposal for a directive Recital 4
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(4)  These developments in the case-law have opened up new opportunities for companies and firms in the Single Market in order to foster economic growth, effective competition and productivity. At the same time, the objective of a Single Market without internal borders for companies must also be reconciled with other objectives of European integration such as social protection (in particular the protection of workers), the protection of creditors and the protection of shareholders. Such objectives, in the absence of harmonised rules specifically regarding cross-border conversions, are pursued by Member States through a number of multifarious legal provisions and administrative practices. As a result, whereas companies are already able to merge cross-border, they experience a number of legal and practical difficulties when wishing to perform a cross-border conversion. Moreover, the national legislation of many Member States provides for the procedure of domestic conversions without offering an equivalent procedure for converting cross-border.	(4)  These developments in the case-law have opened up new opportunities for companies and firms in the Single Market in order to foster economic growth, effective competition and productivity. At the same time, the objective of a Single Market without internal borders for companies must also be reconciled with other objectives of European integration such as social protection (in particular the protection of workers), the protection of creditors and the protection of shareholders, as well as the fight against attacks on financial interests of the Union via for example money laundering and tax evasion. Similarly, the Union committed to respect the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. The freedom of establishment shall in no way undermine other values and principles guaranteed by the TFEU such as the promotion of a high level of employment and the guarantee of adequate social protection (Article 9), improved living and working conditions and dialogue between management and labour, the development of human resources with a view to lasting high employment and the combating of exclusion (Article 151) or countering fraud and any other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union (Article 310). Such objectives, in the absence of harmonised rules specifically regarding cross-border conversions, are pursued by Member States through a number of multifarious legal provisions and administrative practices. As a result, whereas companies are already able to merge cross-border, they experience a number of legal and practical difficulties when wishing to perform a cross-border conversion. Moreover, the national legislation of many Member States provides for the procedure of domestic conversions without offering an equivalent procedure for converting cross-border.
Amendment    7 Proposal for a directive Recital 6
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(6)  It is appropriate therefore to provide procedural and substantive rules on cross-border conversions which would contribute to the abolition of restrictions on freedom of establishment and provide at the same time adequate and proportionate protection for stakeholders such as employees, creditors and minority shareholders.	(6)  It is appropriate therefore to provide procedural and substantive rules on cross-border conversions which would facilitate freedom of establishment and provide at the same time the necessary protection for stakeholders such as employees, creditors and minority shareholders.
Amendment    8 Proposal for a directive Recital 7
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(7)  The right to convert an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors', minority shareholders' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such possible abuses, a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border conversion procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approach by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.	(7)  The right to convert an existing company formed in a Member State into a company governed by another Member State may not under any circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors', minority shareholders' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such possible abuses, a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border conversion procedure in order to create artificial arrangements. The procedure set out in this Directive aims at protecting the discretion of the Member States to impose corporate taxes on profits and employee representation obligations on companies. Member States may, on a case-by-case basis, conclude that conversions, mergers and divisions constitute an artificial arrangement and may decide on this basis not to authorise it. Any derogation from a fundamental right or freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A common procedural and substantive framework to set out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down. With the aim of preventing the possibility of abuses in the field of taxation, legislation has already been adopted at EU level to combat tax avoidance practices, such as Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 June 2016 laying down rules against tax avoidance practices that directly affect the functioning of the internal market. In the event of cross-border conversion, merger and division, Member States must ensure that a company intending to undertake such a conversion complies with these rules.
Amendment    9 Proposal for a directive Recital 7 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(7a)  This Directive does not exert downward pressure on national corporate tax rates, national taxation systems and mandatory board-level employee representation, which is fundamental to many Member States’ systems of corporate governance. It aims at facilitating freedom of establishment conditioned by a genuine economic activity in the destination Member State. Where a company cannot prove a genuine economic activity in the destination Member State, a Member State may rule that the conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement and may decide not to authorise it.
Amendment    10 Proposal for a directive Recital 9
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(9)  Given the complexity of cross-border conversions and the multitude of the interests concerned, it is appropriate to provide for an ex-ante control in order to create legal certainty. To that effect, a structured and multi-layered procedure should be set out whereby the competent authorities of both the departure and the destination Member State ensure that a decision on the approval of a cross-border conversion is taken in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory manner on the basis of all relevant elements and by taking into account all legitimate public interests, in particular, the protection of employees, members and creditors.	(9)  Given the complexity of cross-border conversions and the multitude of the interests concerned, it is appropriate to provide for an ex-ante control in order to create legal certainty. To that effect, a structured and multi-layered procedure should be set out whereby the competent authorities of both the departure and the destination Member State ensure that a decision on the approval of a cross-border conversion is taken in a fair, objective and non-discriminatory manner on the basis of all relevant elements and by taking into account all legitimate public interests, in particular, the protection of employees, members and creditors. Procedures should also be in place for situations where additional information is available after the conversion but question whether the conversion has been done for abusive purposes.
Amendment    11 Proposal for a directive Recital 10
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(10)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedure governing a cross-border conversion, the company should disclose the draft terms of the cross-border conversion containing the most important information about the proposed cross-border conversion, including the envisaged new company form, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the conversion. Members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should be notified in order that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed conversion.	(10)  To allow all stakeholders' legitimate interests to be taken into account in the procedures governing a cross-border conversion, the company should disclose the draft terms of the cross-border conversion containing the most important information about the proposed cross-border conversion, including the envisaged new company form and the rationale behind the conversion, the instrument of constitution and the proposed timetable for the conversion. Members, creditors, trade unions and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion should be notified so that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed conversion.
Amendment    12 Proposal for a directive Recital 12 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(12a)  Companies willing to make full use of the benefits of the internal market through cross-border conversions shall submit in return to an adequate level of transparency and good corporate governance. Public Country by Country Reporting is an efficient and appropriate tool to increase transparency of multinational enterprises activities and to enable the public to assess their impact on the real economy. It will also improve shareholders ability to properly evaluate the risks taken by companies, lead to investment strategies based on accurate information and enhance decision-makers possibility to assess the efficiency and the impact of national legislations. Therefore, a set of financial information shall be published ahead of the cross-border operation ahead of its execution.
Amendment    13 Proposal for a directive Recital 13
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(13)  In order to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of conversion and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, an independent expert report should be required to be prepared in order to assess the proposed cross-border conversion. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. In this context, the expert report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority in the departure Member State to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-conversion certificate. To this end, the expert should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The expert should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the expert’s final report which itself would be publically available.	(13)  In order to assess the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of conversion and merger and in the report addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, the competent authority should be required to assess the proposed cross-border conversion and merger. In this context, the company should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority in the departure Member State to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-conversion certificate. To this end, the competent authority should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The competent authority of the departure Member State may also in this regard ask questions to the competent authority in the Member State of destination. The competent authority should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not be made publically available, but should nevertheless be at the disposal, under confidentiality requirements, to the competent authority and where applicable under national law, to employee representatives.
Amendment    14 Proposal for a directive Recital 14
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(14)  With a view to avoiding disproportionate costs and burdens for smaller companies carrying out the cross-border conversion, micro and small enterprises, as defined in the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC45 , should be exempted from the requirement to produce an independent expert report. However, these companies can resort to an independent expert report to prevent litigation costs with creditors.	(14)  With a view to avoiding disproportionate costs and burdens for smaller companies carrying out the cross-border conversion, micro and small enterprises, as defined in the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC45,should be exempted from the requirement to obtain an assessment by the competent authority. However, these companies can resort to such assessment to prevent litigation costs with creditors.
_________________	_________________
45 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).	45 Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC of 6 May 2003 concerning the definition of micro, small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 124, 20.5.2003, p. 36).
Amendment    15 Proposal for a directive Recital 15
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(15)  On the basis of the draft terms of conversion and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to convert is a collective one. In addition, members should also have the right to vote on any arrangements concerning employee participation, if they have reserved that right during the general meeting.	(15)  On the basis of the draft terms of conversion and the reports, the general meeting of the members of the company should decide on whether or not to approve those draft terms. It is important that the majority requirement for such a vote should be sufficiently high in order to ensure that the decision to convert is a collective one.
Amendment    16 Proposal for a directive Recital 16
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(16)  It is appropriate that those members who held voting rights and who did not vote to approve the draft terms of conversion and those members without voting rights, who could not present their position, should be afforded the right to exit the company. Those members should be able to leave the company and receive cash compensation for their shares equivalent to the value of their shares. Furthermore, they should have a right to challenge the calculation and adequacy of that cash compensation offered before a court.	(16)  It is appropriate that members who held voting rights and who have explicitly objected to the draft terms of conversion should be afforded the right to exit the company. Those members should be able to leave the company and receive cash compensation for their shares equivalent to the value of their shares. Furthermore, members who have refused the offer of cash compensation because they do not consider the compensation to be adequate should have a right to challenge the calculation and adequacy of that cash compensation offered before a court.
Justification
It is more appropriate to limit this entitlement to the members who have explicitly objected to the draft terms of division. In addition, it is questionable why a member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation should be permitted to seek a judicial review despite the fact that the member would leave the company after accepting the offer.
Amendment    17 Proposal for a directive Recital 18
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(18)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, creditors may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the departure Member State for the adequate the safeguards. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border conversion, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where an independent expert report concludes that there is no reasonable likelihood that the creditors would be prejudiced or where creditors are offered a right to payment against the converted company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of departure concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.	(18)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, creditors may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the departure Member State for the adequate the safeguards. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border conversion, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where creditors are offered a right to payment against the converted company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of departure concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.
Amendment    18 Proposal for a directive Recital 19
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(19)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border conversion, where the company carrying out the cross-border conversion is operating under an employee participation system in the departure Member State, the company should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of such participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory organ of the company in the destination Member State. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of the company to carry out a cross-border conversion with the employees' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply, mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversion, merger or division within three years.	(19)  In order to ensure that employee participation is not unduly prejudiced as a result of the cross-border conversion, where the company carrying out the cross-border conversion is operating under an employee participation system in the departure Member State, the company should be obliged to take a legal form allowing for the exercise of such equivalent participation, including through the presence of representatives of the employees in the appropriate management or supervisory organ of the company in the destination Member State. Moreover, in such a case, a bona fide negotiation between the company and its employees should take place in a timely manner ahead of the conversion, along the lines of the procedure provided for in Directive 2001/86/EC, with a view to finding an amicable solution reconciling the right of the company to carry out a cross-border conversion with the employees' rights of participation. As a result of those negotiations, either a bespoke and agreed solution or, in the absence of an agreement, the application of standard rules as set out in the Annex to Directive 2001/86/EC should apply, mutatis mutandis. In order to protect either the agreed solution or the application of those standard rules, the company should not be able to remove the participation rights through carrying out subsequent domestic or cross-border conversion, merger or division within ten years.
Amendment    19 Proposal for a directive Recital 20
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(20)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border conversion, the company carrying out a conversion which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border conversion without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation.	(20)  In order to prevent the circumvention of employee participation rights by means of a cross-border conversion, the company carrying out a conversion which is registered in the Member State which provides for the employee participation rights, should not be able to perform a cross-border conversion without first entering into negotiations with its employees or their representatives when the average number of employees employed by that company is at least equivalent to four fifths of the national threshold for triggering such employee participation.
Amendment    20 Proposal for a directive Recital 21
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(21)  To ensure a proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border conversions, both the departure and the destination Member States should designate the appropriate competent authorities. In particular, the competent authorities of the departure Member States should have the power to issue a pre-conversion certificate without which the competent authorities in the destination Member State should not be able to complete the cross-border conversion procedure.	(21)  To ensure a proper allocation of tasks among Member States and an efficient and effective ex-ante control of cross-border conversions, both the departure and the destination Member States should designate the appropriate competent authorities. In particular, the competent authorities of the departure Member States should have the power to issue a pre-conversion certificate without which the competent authorities in the destination Member State should not be able to complete the cross-border conversion procedure. A list of national competent authorities in the Member States shall be prepared and publish by the Commission. Member States’ competent authorities are expected to collaborate together in cases of cross-border conversions.
Amendment    21 Proposal for a directive Recital 22
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(22)  The issue of the pre-conversion certificate by the departure Member State should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border conversion of the company. The competent authority of the departure Member State should decide on the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within one month of the application by the company, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically, but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis, where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months of informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.	(22)  The issue of the pre-conversion certificate by the departure Member State should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border conversion of the company. The competent authority of the departure Member State should decide on the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within two months of the application by the company, unless it has concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically, but it should only be conducted on a case-by-case basis, where there are concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within three months of informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out. The assessment by the departure Member States, once final, shall be shared with the destination Member State’s competent authority.
Amendment    22 Proposal for a directive Recital 23
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(23)  After having received a pre-conversion certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements in the destination Member State are fulfilled, the competent authorities of the destination Member State should register the company in the business register of that Member State. Only after this registration should the competent authority of the departure Member State strike the company off its own register. It should not be possible for the competent authority of the destination Member State to challenge the accuracy of the information provided by the pre-conversion certificate. As a consequence of the cross-border conversion, the converted company should retain its legal personality, its assets and liabilities and all rights and obligations, including rights and obligations arising from contracts, acts or omissions.	(23)  After having received a pre-conversion certificate, and after verifying that the incorporation requirements in the destination Member State are fulfilled, the competent authorities of the destination Member State should register the company in the business register of that Member State. The destination Member States should also verify the ultimate beneficial owner(s) of the converted company, based on information received. Only after this registration should the competent authority of the departure Member State strike the company off its own register. It should be possible for the competent authority of the destination Member State to contact and submit questions to the competent authority in the Member State of departure as to the accuracy of the information provided by the pre-conversion certificate, in particular to avoid an artificial arrangement. The competent authority of the Member State of departure shall reply to such questions without undue delay. As a consequence of the cross-border conversion, the converted company should retain its legal personality, its assets and liabilities and all rights and obligations, including rights and obligations arising from contracts, acts or omissions.
Amendment    23 Proposal for a directive Recital 26
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(26)  The evaluation of the implementation of the cross-border merger rules in Member States has shown that the number of cross-border mergers in the Union has significantly increased. However, this evaluation has also revealed certain shortcomings in relation specifically to creditor protection and shareholder protection as well as to the lack of simplified procedures which impede the full effectiveness and efficiency of those cross-border merger rules.	(26)  The evaluation of the implementation of the cross-border merger rules in Member States has shown that the number of cross-border mergers in the Union has significantly increased. However, this evaluation has also revealed certain shortcomings in relation specifically to the protection of creditors, shareholders and employees as well as to the lack of simplified procedures which impede the full effectiveness and efficiency of those cross-border merger rules.
Amendment    24 Proposal for a directive Recital 28
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(28)  In order to further enhance the existing cross-border merger procedure, it is necessary to simplify those merger rules, where appropriate, whilst at the same time ensuring that stakeholders, and in particular employees, are adequately protected. Therefore, the existing cross-border merger rules should be modified in order to oblige the management or administrative organs of the merging companies to prepare separate reports detailing the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border merger for both members and for employees. The obligation on the management or administrative organ of the company to prepare the report for the members may however be waived, where those members are already informed about legal and economic aspects of the proposed merger. However, the report prepared for employees may only be waived where the merging companies and their subsidiaries do not have any employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ.	(28)  In order to further enhance the existing cross-border merger procedure, it is necessary to simplify those merger rules, where appropriate, whilst at the same time ensuring that stakeholders, and in particular employees, are adequately protected. Therefore, the existing cross-border merger rules should be modified in order to oblige the management or administrative organs of the merging companies to prepare a separate report detailing the legal and economic aspects as well as the rationale for the cross-border merger for both members and for employees.
Amendment    25 Proposal for a directive Recital 29
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(29)  Furthermore, in order to enhance the protection afforded to the employees of the merging company or companies, employees or their representatives may provide their opinion on the company report setting out the implications of the cross-border merger for them. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Council Directive 2001/23/EC48 , Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC.	(29)  Furthermore, in order to enhance the protection afforded to the employees of the merging company or companies, employees or their representatives shall provide their opinion on the company report setting out the implications of the cross-border merger for them. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Council Directive 2001/23/EC48 , Directive 2002/14/EC or Directive 2009/38/EC.
_________________	_________________
48 Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).	48 Council Directive 2001/23/EC of 12 March 2001 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the safeguarding of employees' rights in the event of transfers of undertakings, businesses or parts of undertakings or businesses (OJ L 82, 22.3.2001, p. 16).
Amendment    26 Proposal for a directive Recital 29 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(29a)  Companies willing to make full use of the benefits of the internal market through cross-border mergers shall submit in return to an adequate level of transparency and good corporate governance. Public Country by Country Reporting is an efficient and appropriate tool to increase transparency of multinational enterprises activities and to enable the public to assess their impact on the real economy. It will also improve shareholders ability to properly evaluate the risks taken by companies, lead to investment strategies based on accurate information and enhance decision-makers possibility to assess the efficiency and the impact of national legislations. Therefore, a set of financial information shall be published ahead of the cross-border merger ahead of its execution.
Amendment    27 Proposal for a directive Recital 29 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(29b)  To prevent conflicts of interests between the members of the management body and the interest of the company, they should not be allowed to benefit financially from the merger in the form of variable compensation, bonuses or rising share prices.
Amendment    28 Proposal for a directive Recital 30 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
	(30a)  With a view to avoiding disproportionate costs and burdens for smaller companies carrying out the cross-border merger, micro and small enterprises, as defined in the Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC, should be exempted from the requirement to obtain an assessment by the competent authority. However, these companies can resort to such assessment to prevent litigation costs with creditors.
Amendment    29 Proposal for a directive Recital 31
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(31)  The lack of harmonisation of safeguards for members or creditors has been identified an obstacle for cross-border mergers by different stakeholders. Members and creditors should be offered the same level of protection regardless of the Member States in which the merging companies are situated. This is without prejudice to the Member States’ rules on protecting creditors or shareholders which are outside the scope of the harmonised measures, such as transparency requirements.	(31)  The lack of harmonisation of safeguards for members, employees or creditors has been identified as an obstacle for cross-border mergers by different stakeholders. Members, employees and creditors should be offered the same level of protection regardless of the Member States in which the merging companies are situated. This is without prejudice to the Member States’ rules on protecting creditors, employees or shareholders which are outside the scope of the harmonised measures, such as transparency requirements.
Amendment    30 Proposal for a directive Recital 35
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(35)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border merger may apply to the competent administrative or judicial authority of each Member State of the merging companies for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border merger, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where an independent expert concludes that there is no reasonable likelihood that the creditors would be prejudiced or where creditors are offered a right to payment against the merged company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim.	(35)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border merger may apply to the competent administrative or judicial authority of each Member State of the merging companies for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border merger, where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where creditors are offered a right to payment against the merged company or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim.
Amendment    31 Proposal for a directive Recital 40
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(40)  The right of companies to carry out a cross-border division may in certain circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' or members' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such abuses, as a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border division procedure in order to create artificial arrangements aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In so far as it constitutes a derogation from a fundamental freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A procedural and substantive framework which describes the margin of discretion and allows for the diversity of approaches by Member States whilst at the same time setting out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.	(40)  The right of companies to carry out a cross-border division may not under any circumstances be used for abusive purposes such as for the circumvention of labour standards, social security payments, tax obligations, creditors' or members' rights or rules on employees participation. In order to combat such abuses, as a general principle of Union law, Member States are required to ensure that companies do not use the cross-border division procedure in order to create artificial arrangements. Any derogation from a fundamental right or freedom, the fight against abuses must be interpreted strictly and must be based on an individual assessment of all relevant circumstances. A common procedural and substantive framework to set out the requirements to streamline the actions to be taken by national authorities to fight abuses in conformity with Union law should be laid down.
Amendment    32 Proposal for a directive Recital 44
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(44)  In order to provide information its employees, the company being divided should prepare a report explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border division for employees. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border division on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the conditions of employment and the locations of the companies’ places of business, and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.	(44)  In order to provide information to its employees, the company being divided should prepare a report explaining the implications of the proposed cross-border division for employees. The report should explain in particular the implications of the proposed cross-border division on the safeguarding of the jobs of the employees, whether there would be any material change in the conditions of employment and the locations of the companies’ places of business, and how each of these factors would relate to any subsidiaries of the company. The provision of the report should be without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC. Employees of the company carrying out the cross-border division should be notified well in advance so that they can submit comments with regard to the proposed division.
Amendment    33 Proposal for a directive Recital 45
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(45)  In order to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of division and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed division constitutes an artificial arrangement which could not be authorised, an independent expert report to assess the division plan should be required to be prepared. In order to secure the independence of the expert, the expert should be appointed by the competent authority, following an application by the company. In this context, the expert report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-division certificate To this end, the expert should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The expert should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not form part of the expert’s final report which itself would be publically available.	(45)  In order to ensure the accuracy of the information contained in the draft terms of division and in the reports addressed to the members and employees and to provide factual elements necessary to assess whether the proposed division constitutes an artificial arrangement which could not be authorised, the competent authority should be required to assess the division plan. In this context, the report should present all relevant information to enable the competent authority of the Member State of the company being divided to take an informed decision as to whether or not to issue the pre-division certificate. To this end, the competent authority should be able to obtain all the relevant company information and documents and carry out all necessary investigations in order to gather all the evidence required. The competent authority should use information, in particular net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees and the composition of balance sheet collected by the company in view of the preparation of financial statements in accordance with Union law and the law of Member States. However, in order to protect any confidential information, including business secrets of the company, such information should not be made publically available, but should nevertheless be at the disposal, under confidentiality requirements, to the competent authority and where applicable under national law, to employee representatives.
Amendment    34 Proposal for a directive Recital 50
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(50)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border division, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border division may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the company being divided for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border division where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where an independent expert report concludes that there is no reasonable likelihood that the creditors would be prejudiced or where creditors are offered a right to payment against the company resulting from the division or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of the company being divided concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.	(50)  In order to guarantee the appropriate protection of creditors in cases where they are not satisfied with the protection offered by the company in the draft terms of the cross-border division, creditors who are prejudiced by the cross-border division may apply to the competent judicial or administrative authority of the Member State of the company being divided for the safeguards they consider adequate. In order to facilitate the assessment of prejudice, certain presumptions should be laid down whereby creditors would be deemed not to be prejudiced by a cross-border division where the risk of loss to a creditor is remote. A presumption should arise where creditors are offered a right to payment against the company resulting from the division or against a third party guarantee of equivalent value to the creditor's original claim and which can be brought in the same jurisdiction as the original claim. The creditor protection provided for in this Directive should be without prejudice to national laws of the Member State of the company being divided concerning payment to public bodies, including taxation or social security contributions.
Amendment    35 Proposal for a directive Recital 52
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(52)  The issue of the pre-division certificate by the Member State of the company being divided should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border division. The competent authority should decide whether to issue a pre-division certificate within one month of the application by the company has been submitted, unless it has serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis where there are serious concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within two months informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out.	(52)  The issue of the pre-division certificate by the Member State of the company being divided should be scrutinised to ensure the legality of the cross-border division. The competent authority should decide whether to issue a pre-division certificate within two months of the application by the company has been submitted, unless it has concerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. In such a case, the competent authority should carry out an in-depth assessment. However, this in-depth assessment should not be carried out systematically but it should be conducted on a case-by-case basis where there areconcerns as to the existence of an artificial arrangement. For their assessment, competent authorities should take into account at least a number of factors laid down in this Directive which however should be only considered as indicative factors in the overall assessment and not be considered in isolation. In order not to burden companies with an overly lengthy procedure, this in-depth assessment should in any event be concluded within three months informing the company that the in-depth assessment will be carried out. The assessment by the departure Member States, once final, shall be shared with the destination Member State’s competent authority.
Amendment    36 Proposal for a directive Recital 58
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(58)  The provisions of this Directive do not affect the legal or administrative provisions, including the enforcement of tax rules in cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, of national law relating to the taxes of Member States, or its territorial and administrative subdivisions.	(58)  The provisions of this Directive do not affect the legal or administrative provisions, including the enforcement of tax rules in cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, of national law relating to the taxes of Member States, or its territorial and administrative subdivisions. Departure Member States shall for example have the right to impose taxes on hidden reserves of departing companies that have not yet been subject to taxation in the departing Member State, in accordance with the case law of the European Court of Justice.
Amendment    37 Proposal for a directive Recital 63
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
(63)  The Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Directive. Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201652 that evaluation should be based on the five criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and value added and should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures.	(63)  The Commission should carry out an evaluation of this Directive. This evaluation should pay particular attention to the impact of this Directive in detecting and preventing cases of cross-border conversions, mergers or divisions representing artificial arrangements. The Commission should consult the European social partners. Pursuant to paragraph 22 of the Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on Better Law-Making of 13 April 201652 that evaluation should be based on the five criteria of efficiency, effectiveness, relevance, coherence and value added and should provide the basis for impact assessments of possible further measures.
__________________	__________________
52 OJ L123, 12.5. 2016, p. 1.	52 OJ L123, 12.5. 2016, p. 1.
Amendment    38 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-1)  In CHAPTER I, the following Article 1a is inserted:   "Article 1a   Interest of the company   The management or administrative organ of a company is responsible for managing the company in the best interest of the company and society, meaning that it considers the needs of stakeholders such as the shareholders, the employees and the environment in a balanced way, with the objective of sustainable value creation."
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/frn/TXT/?uri=celex:32017L1132)
Amendment    39 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86b – paragraph 1 – point 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (6a)  ‘artificial arrangement’ means an arrangement put in place for the essential aim of circumventing companies’ obligations arising from the legal and contractual rights of employees, creditors, or minority shareholders, the avoidance of social security payments, or profit shifting to reduce the corporatetax obligations and that at the same time does not carry out a substantive or genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.
Amendment    40 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (aa)  where there is legally proven infringement of workers’ rights established by court or competent authority;
Amendment    41 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency; deleted
Justification
The general exclusion of a conversion or division of companies subject to restructuring proceedings is too far-going, since the conversion or division as such may serve the purpose of restructuring / avoiding insolvency.
Amendment    42 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  the company has been convicted in the last three years for social or tax fraud, tax evasion, or money laundering or any other financial crime;
Amendment    43 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cb)  where any of the directors of the company are subject to disciplinary proceedings linked to their professional activity in the company, in particular for tax offences, or subject to criminal sanctions in that regard, or have been disqualified as directors in any Member State in which the company has operations;
Amendment    44 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  the representatives of the employees of the company have not given consent to the conversion based on the report by the management body following Article 86f of this Directive;
Amendment    45 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  A company subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency shall be subject to a scrutiny by the competent authorities of the Member States as to whether its conversion might serve the purpose of restructuring and avoiding insolvency. Following the scrutiny, the competent authorities of the Member States shall make an autonomous decision whether the company in question is entitled to carry out a cross-border conversion or not.
Justification
The general exclusion of a conversion or division of companies subject to restructuring proceedings is too far-going, since the conversion or division as such may serve the purpose of restructuring / avoiding insolvency.
Amendment    46 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or minority members. 3.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority of the departure Member State shall not authorise the cross-border conversion where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement. The company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall demonstrate on the basis of ascertainable objective factors whether it pursues actual establishment and substantive and genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.   The company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall be presumed to have an actual establishment and to pursue genuine economic activity in the destination Member State where it transfers the central administration or principal place of business to the destination Member State and its operations there generate value and are materially equipped with staff, equipment, assets and premises.
Amendment    47 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86c – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  Departure Member States may tax unrealised capital gains at the time of the cross-border conversion of a company. The company may then choose between immediate payment of the amount of tax and a deferred payment of the amount of tax, together with interest in accordance with the applicable national legislation. If the company opts for the latter, the departure Member State may request the provision of a bank guarantee.
Amendment    48 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ba)  total turnover and total taxable turnover;
Amendment    49 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on the transfer of the central administration or principal place of business;
Amendment    50 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ja)  the name of the ultimate undertaking and, where applicable, the list of all its subsidiaries, a brief description of the nature of their activities and their respective geographical location;
Amendment    51 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – point j b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (jb) the number of employees and a full-time equivalent basis;
Amendment    52 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – points j c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (jc) fixed assets other than cash or cash equivalents;
Amendment    53 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – points j d (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (jd) the amount of income tax accrued (current year) which is the current tax expense recognised on taxable profits or losses of the financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction;
Amendment    54 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 1 – points j e (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (je) the amount of income tax paid which is the amount of income tax paid during the relevant financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction;
Amendment    55 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86d – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on these draft terms. The comments shall be included in the final report.
Amendment    56 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the management or administrative organ to the members and employees
Justification
From an efficiency point of view, it would be more sensible for the reports of the management or administrative organ to be condensed into one report, especially as both reports are in any case to be made available to both the members and the employees.
Amendment    57 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border conversion. 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border conversion as well as explaining the implications for employees.
Amendment    58 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan; (a)  the rationale for the operation and implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan;
Amendment    59 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of employment relationships;
Amendment    60 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cb)  any material changes in the conditions of employment, including employment relationship and collective agreements, and in the location of the company’s places of business;
Amendment    61 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 – point c c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cc)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (ca) and (cb) relate to any subsidiaries or branches of the company.
Amendment    62 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  The report, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be accompanied with a statement of the management or administrative organ of the company about places of business after the cross-border conversion, including information about a partial or complete carrying on of business in the departure Member State and, in appropriate circumstances, marking a fact of further conduct of operations only in the departure Member State.
Justification
The additional statement will facilitate the correct assessment by the competent authorities in order to prevent artificial arrangements set up to obtain undue tax advantages or the infringements of rights of employees, creditors or minority shareholders. It remains consistent with and supports the realization of taxation of capital gains in cases of transfer of assets, tax residence or the permanent establishment, provided for in the Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016.
Amendment    63 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members, trade unions and the representatives of the employees of the company or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves, not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i.
Justification
The proposed time limit differs from the corresponding provision for cross-border mergers. The time limits for all restructuring measures should be harmonised.
Amendment    64 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   3a.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.
Amendment    65 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  However, that report shall not be required where all the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion have agreed to waive this requirement. deleted
Amendment    66 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  However, where a company carrying out the cross-border conversion and its subsidiaries, if any, have no employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report may be limited to the factors listed in paragraph 2(a), (b) and (c).
Amendment    67 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86e – paragraph 4 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4b.  This Article is without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    68 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86f
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Article 86f deleted 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall draw up a report explaining the implications of the cross-border conversion for employees.   2.  The report referred to in paragraph 1, shall in particular explain the following:   (a)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the future business of the company and on the management's strategic plan;   (b)  the implications of the cross-border conversion on the safeguarding of employment relationships;   (c)  any material changes in the conditions of employment and in the location of the company’s places of business;   (d)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (b) and (c) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company.   3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the representatives of the employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i. That report shall also be made similarly available to the members of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion.   4.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.   5.  However, where a company carrying out the cross-border conversion and its subsidiaries, if any, have no employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be required.   6.  Paragraphs 1 to 6 are without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the transposition of Directives 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.
Justification
Deleted because Article 86f is being integrated into Article 86e.
Amendment    69 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Examination by an independent expert Examination by the competent authority
Amendment    70 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the company carrying out the cross-border conversion applies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the reports referred to in Articles 86e and 86f, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. Member States shall ensure that the company carrying out the cross-border conversion applies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 86i to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), for that authority to assess the draft terms of the cross-border conversion and the reports referred to in Articles 86e subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article.
Amendment    71 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The application for the appointment of an expert shall be accompanied by the following: The application to the competent authority shall be accompanied by the following:
Amendment    72 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 86e and 86f. (b)  the report referred to in Article 86e.
Amendment    73 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  The competent authority shall appoint an independent expert within five working days from the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and reports. The expert shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the departure Member State. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC. 2.  The competent authority shall start working on the application referred to in paragraph 1 within ten working days following the receipt of the draft terms and report.
Amendment    74 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The expert shall draw up a written report providing at least: 3.  After consulting third parties with a reasoned interest in the conversion of the company, the competent authority shall draw up a written report providing at least:
Amendment    75 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border conversion; (a)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border conversion in terms of both form and content;
Amendment    76 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 3 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 86n, including at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State. (b)  a description of all factual elements, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 86n, including at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due, impact on occupational pensions of employees and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State.
Amendment    77 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that the independent expert shall be entitled to obtain, from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, all relevant information and documents and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The expert shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. 4.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority obtains from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, all relevant information and documents and carries out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management report. The competent authority shall furthermore be able to, where necessary, ask questions to the competent authority of the destination Member State, and be entitled to receive comments and opinions from trade unions, the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. These shall be attached to the report as appendices.
Amendment    78 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86g – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall ensure that information submitted to the independent expert can only be used for the purpose of drafting their report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the expert may submit a separate document containing any such confidential information to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) and that separate document shall only be made available to the company carrying out the cross-border conversion and not be disclosed to any other party. 5.  Member States shall ensure that information and opinions submitted to the competent authority can only be used for the purpose of drafting their report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed.
Amendment    79 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the independent expert report referred to in Article 86g, where applicable; (b)  the competent authority of the departure Member State’s report referred to in Article 86g;
Amendment    80 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments concerning the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1). (c)  a notice informing the members, creditors, trade unions and employees of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion that they may submit, before the date of the general meeting, comments concerning the documents referred to in points (a) and (b) of the first subparagraph to the company and to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1).
Amendment    81 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on its ultimate beneficial owners before and after the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    82 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 can be completed online in their entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority in the departure Member State. Member States shall ensure that the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 can be completed online in their entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application in the departure Member State.
Justification
This amendment is intended to create consistency with proposal for a directive (COM (2018) 239 final) concerning the use of digital tools and processes in company law.
Amendment    83 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, Member States may, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority. However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Justification
The term ‘suspicion of fraud’ is given different meanings in different Member States. Moreover, it is doubtful that the proposed wording encompasses all intended situations.
Amendment    84 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f of paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Justification
The term ‘suspicion of fraud’ is given different meanings in different Member States. Moreover, it is doubtful that the proposed wording encompasses all intended situations.
Amendment    85 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86h – paragraph 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6a.  Member States shall ensure that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed, other than, where applicable under national law, to employee representatives.
Amendment    86 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86i – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Approval by the general meeting Approval by the general meeting and by the employees’ plenary
Amendment    87 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86i – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 86e, 86f and 86g, where applicable, the general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion shall decide, by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of the cross-border conversion. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) of the decision of the general meeting. 1.  After taking note of the reports referred to in Articles 86e, and 86g, where applicable, the general meeting and the employees’ plenary of the company carrying out the conversion shall decide, by means of a resolution, whether to approve the draft terms of the cross-border conversion. The company shall inform the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 86m(1) of the decision of the general meeting and the employees’ plenary.
Amendment    88 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86i – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  The general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion may reserve the right to make implementation of the cross-border conversion conditional on express ratification by it of the arrangements referred to in Article 86l. 2.  The general meeting of the company carrying out the conversion and the employees’ plenary may reserve the right to make implementation of the cross-border conversion conditional on express ratification by it of the arrangements referred to in Article 86l.
Amendment    89 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that the following members of a company carrying cross-border conversion have the right to dispose of their shareholdings under the conditions laid down in paragraphs 2 to 6: 1.  Member States shall ensure that the members opposing a cross-border conversion have the right to dispose of their shareholdings under the conditions laid down in paragraphs 2 to 6:
Justification
It is more appropriate to restrict the entitlement to compensation to those members who explicitly opposed the decision to approve the conversion, as is already the provision in 86e(2)(c).
Amendment    90 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86j – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall provide that any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation referred to in paragraph 3, but who considers that the compensation has not been adequately set, is entitled to demand the recalculation of the cash compensation offered before a national court within one month of the acceptance of the offer. 5.  Member States shall provide that any member who has not accepted the offer of cash compensation referred to in paragraph 3, and who considers that the compensation has not been adequately set, is entitled to demand the recalculation of the cash compensation offered before a national court within one month of the time limit set for the acceptance of the offer.
Justification
It would be more sensible to stipulate a single time limit for all members. Moreover, it is unclear why a member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation should be able to demand a judicial review despite the fact that this member would leave the company after accepting the offer.
Amendment    91 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States may require that the management or administrative organ of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion provides a declaration accurately reflecting the financial status of the company as part of the draft terms of cross-border conversion referred to in Article 86d. The declaration shall declare that, on the basis of the information available to the management or administrative organ of the company at the date of the declaration, and after having made reasonable enquiries, they are unaware of any reason why the company should, after the conversion takes effect, be unable to meet the liabilities when those liabilities fall due. The declaration shall be made no earlier than one month before the draft terms of the cross-border conversion are disclosed in accordance with Article 86h. 1.  Management or administrative organs of the company carrying out the cross-border conversion shall provide a declaration accurately reflecting the financial status of the company as part of the draft terms of cross-border conversion referred to in Article 86d. The declaration shall declare that, on the basis of the information available to the management or administrative organ of the company at the date of the declaration, and after having made reasonable enquiries, they are unaware of any reason why the company should, after the conversion takes effect, be unable to meet the liabilities when those liabilities fall due. The declaration shall be made no earlier than one month before the draft terms of the cross-border conversion are disclosed in accordance with Article 86h.
Amendment    92 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border conversion, as provided for in Article 86d(f), may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 86h. 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 86h if they are of the opinion that they have been prejudiced despite the protection of their interests set down in Article 86d(f).
Justification
The term ‘dissatisfied’ leaves space for the creditor’s subjective judgement. It would be more sensible to use the term ‘prejudiced’.
Amendment    93 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86k – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  where the company discloses together with the draft terms of conversion an independent expert report, which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert should be appointed or approved by the competent authority and shall fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 86g(2); (a)  where the company discloses together with the draft terms of conversion an independent expert report, which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert should be appointed or approved by the competent authority and shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, no conflict of interest shall be present, and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the departure Member State;
Amendment    94 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86l – paragraph 4 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  shall confer on the special negotiating body the right to decide, by a majority of two thirds of its members representing at least two thirds of the employees, not to open negotiations or to terminate negotiations already opened and to rely on the rules on participation in force in the destination Member State; (Does not affect the English version.)
Justification
Correctly ‘destination Member States’ in the English wording.
Amendment    95 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall designate the authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the departure Member State and to issue a pre-conversion certificate attesting compliance with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the departure Member State. 1.  Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the departure Member State and to issue a pre-conversion certificate attesting compliance with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the departure Member State.
Justification
Consistency with Directive (EU) 2017/1132 on cross-border mergers, especially Article 127(1).
Amendment    96 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 86e, 86f and 86g, as appropriate; (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 86e and 86g;
Amendment    97 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The draft terms and reports submitted under Article 86g do not have to be re-submitted to the competent authority. The draft terms and reports submitted under Article 86h do not have to be re-submitted to the competent authority.
Justification
It makes more sense to refer to 86h.
Amendment    98 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 2, including submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. Member States shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 2, including submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application.
Justification
This amendment is intended to create consistency with proposal for a directive (COM (2018) 239 final) concerning the use of digital tools and processes in company law.
Amendment    99 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure, where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraph 1 and 3 of this Article and point (f) of Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Justification
The term ‘suspicion of fraud’ is given different meanings in different Member States. It is doubtful that the proposed article encompasses all intended situations.
Amendment    100 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 86l, the departure Member State shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border conversion, referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements. 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 86l, the departure Member State shall verify that the draft terms and reports of cross-border conversion, referred to in paragraph 2 of this Article, include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements.
Amendment    101 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 may consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border conversion. 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 may consult other relevant authorities both in the departure Member State and in the destination Member State with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border conversion.
Amendment    102 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within one month of the date of receipt of the information concerning the approval of the conversion by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes: 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within two months of the date of receipt of the information concerning the approval of the conversion by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes:
Amendment    103 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86m – paragraph 7 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement referred to in Article 86c(3), it may decide to carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 86n and shall inform the company about its decision to conduct such an assessment and of the subsequent outcome. (c)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, it shall decide to carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 86n and shall inform the company about its decision to conduct such an assessment and of the subsequent outcome.
Amendment    104 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement within the meaning of Article 86c(3), that the competent authority of the departure Member State carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State. Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border conversion constitutes an artificial arrangement, that the competent authority of the departure Member State carries out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the destination Member State, including the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the converted company in the destination Member State and the departure Member State.
Amendment    105 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86n – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that where the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 decides to carry out an in-depth assessment, it is able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 86h(1)(c) in accordance with national law. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within two months from the start of the in-depth assessment. 2.  Member States shall ensure that where the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 decides to carry out an in-depth assessment, it is able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 86h(1)(c) in accordance with national law. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-conversion certificate within three months from the start of the in-depth assessment.
Amendment    106 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86o – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that, where the competent authority of the departure Member State is not a court, the decision of the competent authority to issue or to refuse to issue a pre-conversion certificate, is subject to judicial review in accordance with national law. In addition, Member States shall ensure that a pre-conversion certificate shall not be effective before the expiry of a certain period to allow parties to bring an action before the competent court and to obtain, if appropriate, interim measures. 1.  Member States shall ensure that the decision of the competent authority to issue or to refuse to issue a pre-conversion certificate, is subject to judicial review in accordance with national law. In addition, Member States shall ensure that a pre-conversion certificate shall not be effective before the expiry of a certain period to allow parties to bring an action before the competent court and to obtain, if appropriate, interim measures.
Justification
It is unclear why the option of judicial review should not apply in cases where the pre-conversion certificate is issued by a court as well.
Amendment    107 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86o – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that the decision to issue the pre-conversion certificate is sent to the authorities referred to in Article 86m(1) and that the decisions to issue or refuse to issue a pre-conversion certificate are available through the system of interconnection of registers set up in accordance with Article 22. 2.  Member States shall ensure that the decision to issue the pre-conversion certificate is sent to the authorities referred to in Article 86p(1) and to all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 86h(1)(c) in accordance with national law and that the decisions to issue or refuse to issue a pre-conversion certificate are available through the system of interconnection of registers set up in accordance with Article 22.
Amendment    108 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall designate an authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the destination Member State and to approve the cross-border conversion where the conversion complies with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the destination Member State. Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border conversion as regards that part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the destination Member State and to approve the cross-border conversion where the conversion complies with all the relevant conditions and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in the destination Member State.
Justification
Consistency with Directive (EU) 2017/1132 on cross-border mergers, especially Article 127(1).
Amendment    109 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Each Member State shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 1, by the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, which includes the submission of any information and documents, may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. Each Member State shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 1, by the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, which includes the submission of any information and documents, may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application.
Justification
This amendment is intended to create consistency with proposal for a directive (COM (2018) 239 final) concerning the use of digital tools and processes in company law.
Amendment    110 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure, of a Member State where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted.
Amendment    111 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86p – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    112 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86s a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 86sa   Civil liability of members of the administrative or management bodies of the company being converted   The laws of the Member States shall at least lay down rules governing the civil liability, towards the shareholders and creditors of the company carrying out a cross-border conversion, of the members of the administrative or management bodies of that company in respect of misconduct on the part of members of those bodies in preparing and implementing the conversion, including submitting a false statement about the places of business referred to in Article 86e paragraph 2a.
Amendment    113 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86t – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the reports referred to in Articles 86g and 86k(2)(a), including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties. Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability, towards the creditors, of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Article 86k(3)(a), in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties
Justification
A clarification that the liability is towards the shareholders and creditors is needed.
Amendment    114 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86t – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the reports referred to in Articles 86g and 86k(2)(a), including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties. Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Article 86k(3)(a), including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.
Amendment    115 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 86u – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border conversion takes effect, new information on this cross-border conversion are brought to the attention of the competent authorities alleging of genuine suspicion of fraud, the competent authorities shall proceed to a revised assessment of the facts of the case and can take effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions in cases of artificial arrangements.
Amendment    116 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 119 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (4a)  in Article 119, the following point is added:   (2a)  ‘artificial arrangement’ means an arrangement put in place for the essential aim of circumventing companies’ obligations arising from the legal and contractual rights of employees, creditors, or minority shareholders, the avoidance of social security payments, or profit shifting to reduce the corporate tax obligations, and that at the same time does not carry out a substantive or genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/frn/TXT/?uri=celex:32017L1132)
Amendment    117 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point a a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (aa)  where there is legally proven infringements of workers’ rights established by court or competent authority;
Amendment    118 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b) the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency; deleted
Amendment    119 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point c a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  the company has been convicted in the last three years for social or tax fraud, tax evasion or money laundering or any other financial crime;
Amendment    120 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 – point c b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (cb)  where any of the directors of the company are subject to disciplinary proceedings linked to their professional activity in the company, in particular for tax offences or tax crimes, or subject to criminal sanctions in that regard, or have been disqualified as directors in any Member State in which the company has operations;
Amendment    121 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 120 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (5a)  in ARticle 120 the following paragraph 4a is inserted:   4a.  A company subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency shall be subject to a scrutiny by the competent authorities of the Member States as to whether its merger might serve the purpose of restructuring and avoiding insolvency. Following the scrutiny, the competent authorities of the Member States shall make an autonomous decision whether the company in question is entitled to carry out a cross-border merger or not.
Amendment    122 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point a a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 – points l a to l f (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (aa)  following points la to lf are inserted:   (la)  total turnover and total taxable turnover;   (lb)  the name of the ultimate undertaking and, where applicable, the list of all its subsidiaries, a brief description of the nature of their activities and their respective geographical location;   (lc)  the number of employees on a full-time equivalent basis;   (ld)  fixed assets other than cash or cash equivalents;   (le)  the amount of income tax accrued (current year) which is the current tax expense recognised on taxable profits or losses of the financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction;   (lf)  the amount of income tax paid which is the amount of income tax paid during the relevant financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction;
Amendment    123 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point c a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 122 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ca)  The following paragraph is added:   Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on these draft terms. The comments shall be included in the final report.
Amendment    124 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 122a – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, the accounting date provided in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, shall be the date on which the cross-border merger takes effect, as referred to in Article 129, unless the merging companies determine another date in order to facilitate the merger process. In that case each accounting date shall comply with the following requirements: Notwithstanding the first subparagraph, the accounting date provided in the common draft terms of the cross-border merger, shall be the date on which the company which is changing form makes its final financial report, unless the merging companies determine another date in order to facilitate the merger process. In that case each accounting date shall comply with the following requirements:
Justification
The accounting date must be before the merger comes into effect, since the organs of the absorbing company have to continue to be able to function.
Amendment    125 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da) information on its ultimate beneficial owners before and after the cross-border merger.
Amendment    126 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 can be completed online in their entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority in any of the Member States concerned. Member States shall ensure that the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 can be completed online in their entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application in any of the Member States concerned.
Amendment    127 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, Member States may, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority. However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Amendment    128 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    129 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall ensure that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed, other than, where applicable under national law, to employee representatives.
Amendment    130 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 123 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 123 a   Preventing conflicts of interest due to management compensation   To prevent a conflict of interest between the members of the management body or administrative organ and the interest of the company, in light of Article 1a (new) of this Directive, they are not allowed to benefit financially from the merger, in the form of a rise of the share price of the share packages in their (variable) compensation or bonuses paid out in light of the merger. On any compensation paid out in shares of the company in the first year after the merger to the members of the management body or administrative organ, the rise in share prices due to the merger shall be deducted from the value paid to the management body, where the share price on the day the merger was first made public will serve as the baseline.
Amendment    131 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124 – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the management or administrative organ to the members and employees
Justification
From an efficiency point of view, it would be more sensible for the reports of the management or administrative organ to be condensed into one report, especially as both reports are in any case to be made available to both the members and the employees.
Amendment    132 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  the implications of the cross-border merger on the safeguarding of the employment relationships;
Amendment    133 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  any material change in the conditions of employment, including collective agreements, the locations of the companies’ places of business;
Amendment    134 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 – point e c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ec)  how the factors set out in points (a), (ea), and (ec) also relate to any subsidiaries of the merging companies.
Amendment    135 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  The report, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be accompanied with a statement of the management or administrative organ of each of the merging companies about places of business after the cross-border merger, including information about a partial or complete carrying on of business in the departure Member State and, in appropriate circumstances, marking a fact of further conduct of operations only in the departure Member State.
Amendment    136 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132EC Article 124 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The report shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of each of the merging companies not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. The report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of each of the merging companies, or where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be made available, at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies. 3.  The report shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members, trade unions and the representatives of the employees of the company or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves of each of the merging companies not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. However, where the approval of the merger is not required by general meeting of the acquiring company in accordance with Article 126(3), the report shall be made available, at least one month before the date of the general meeting of the other merging company or companies.
Amendment    137 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132EC Article 124 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   3.  Where the management or administrative organ of one or more the merging companies receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.
Amendment    138 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124 – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the merging companies have agreed to waive this requirement.; deleted
Amendment    139 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132EC Article 124 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  However, where the merging companies and their subsidiaries, if any, have no employees, other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report may be limited to the factors listed in paragraph 2(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e).
Amendment    140 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 9 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132EC Article 124 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4b.  The submission of the report is without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    141 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 10 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 124a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment [...] deleted
Amendment    142 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 125 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (11)  in Article 125(1), the following second subparagraph is added: deleted "Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC.";
Amendment    143 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 11 a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 125
Present text Amendment   (11a)  Article 125 is replaced by the following: Independent expert report "Examination by competent authorities 1. An independent expert report intended for members and made available not less than one month before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126 shall be drawn up for each merging company. Depending on the law of each Member State, such experts may be natural persons or legal persons. 1.Member States shall ensure that an assessment report is drawn up by competent authorities for each merging company not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 126. At the joint request of the companies, the competent authority can be in the Member State of one of the merging companies or of the company resulting from the cross-border merger. 2. As an alternative to experts operating on behalf of each of the merging companies, one or more independent experts, appointed for that purpose at the joint request of the companies by a judicial or administrative authority in the Member State of one of the merging companies or of the company resulting from the cross-border merger or approved by such an authority, may examine the common draft terms of cross-border merger and draw up a single written report to all the members. 2. The competent authority shall be entitled to secure from each of the merging companies all information they consider necessary for the discharge of their assessment. The competent authority shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the companies involved in the merger, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. 3. The expert report shall include at least the particulars provided for in Article 96(2). The experts shall be entitled to secure from each of the merging companies all information they consider necessary for the discharge of their duties. 3. The competent authority shall draw up a written report providing at least:   (a)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company carrying out the cross-border merger;   (b)  a description of all factual elements to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border merger constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with this Directive;"
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32017L1132&from=EN)
Amendment    144 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 126a – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall ensure that any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation referred to in paragraph 3, but who considers that the cash compensation has not been adequately set, is entitled to demand the recalculation of the cash compensation offered before a national court within one month of the acceptance of the offer. 6.  Member States shall ensure that any member who has accepted the offer of cash compensation referred to in paragraph 3, but who considers that the cash compensation has not been adequately set, is entitled to demand the recalculation of the cash compensation offered before a national court or by arbitration within one month of the acceptance of the offer.
Amendment    145 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 13 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 126b – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  where the merging companies disclose together with the draft terms of cross-border merger, an independent expert report, which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert should be appointed or approved by the competent authority and shall fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 125(1). deleted
Amendment    146 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point –a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 127 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (-a)  paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 1. Each Member State shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border merger as regards that part of the procedure which concerns each merging company subject to its national law. "1. Each Member State shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border merger as regards that part of the procedure which concerns each merging company subject to its national law. Member States shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the cross-border merger where it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement. "
Amendment    147 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 14 – point a Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 127 – paragraph 1 – subparagraphs 1a and 1b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment "Member States shall ensure that the application for obtaining a pre-merger certificate by the merging companies including submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. Member States shall ensure that the application for obtaining a pre-merger certificate by the merging companies including submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application referred to in paragraph 1. However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted."; However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure, where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly. "
(https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/frn/TXT/?uri=celex:32017L1132)
Amendment    148 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 15 – point b Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 128 – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment “3.  Each Member State shall ensure that the application for the completion of the procedure, referred to in paragraph 1, by any of the merging companies, which includes the submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority. “3.  Each Member State shall ensure that the application for the completion of the procedure, referred to in paragraph 1, by any of the merging companies, which includes the submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application. However, Member States may take measures in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds which could require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State in which the relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority of a Member State, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure, where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    149 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 133a – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall lay down rules governing the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Articles 125 and 126b(2)(a), including in respect of misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.”; Member States shall lay down rules governing the civil liability, towards the creditors, of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Article126b(2)(a), including in respect of misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.”;
Amendment    150 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 19 a (new) Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 133 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (19a)  the following Article 133b is inserted:   Article 133b   Civil liability of members of the administrative or management bodies of the companies being merged   The laws of the Member States shall at least lay down rules governing the civil liability, towards the shareholders and creditors of the companies carrying out a cross-border merger, of the members of the administrative or management bodies of the companies in respect of misconduct on the part of members of those bodies in preparing and implementing the merger, including submitting a false statement about the places of business referred to in Article 124 paragraph 2a.
Amendment    151 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160b – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (3a)  ‘artificial arrangement’ means an arrangement put in place for the essential aim of circumventing companies’ obligations arising from the legal and contractual rights of employees, creditors, or minority shareholders, the avoidance of social security payments, or profit shifting to reduce the corporate tax obligations, and that at the same time does not carry out a substantive or genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.
Amendment    152 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the company is subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency; deleted
Justification
The general exclusion of a conversion or division of companies subject to restructuring proceedings is too far-going, since the conversion or division as such may serve the purpose of restructuring / avoiding insolvency.
Amendment    153 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  A company subject to preventive restructuring proceedings initiated because of the likelihood of insolvency shall be subject to a scrutiny by the competent authorities of the Member States as to whether its division might serve the purpose of restructuring and avoiding insolvency. Following the scrutiny, the competent authorities of the Member States shall make an autonomous decision whether the company in question is entitled to carry out a cross border division or not.
Justification
The general exclusion of a conversion or division of companies subject to restructuring proceedings is too far-going, since the conversion or division as such may serve the purpose of restructuring / avoiding insolvency.
Amendment    154 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The Member State of the company being divided shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the division when it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement aimed at obtaining undue tax advantages or at unduly prejudicing the legal or contractual rights of employees, creditors or members. 3.  The Member State of the company being divided shall ensure that the competent authority shall not authorise the division when it determines, after an examination of the specific case and having regard to all relevant facts and circumstances, that it constitutes an artificial arrangement. The company carrying out the cross-border division shall demonstrate on the basis of ascertainable objective factors whether it pursues actual establishment and substantive and genuine economic activity in the destination Member State.   The company carrying out the cross-border division shall be presumed to have an actual establishment and to pursue genuine economic activity in the destination Member State where it transfers the central administration or principle place of business to the destination Member State.
Amendment    155 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160d – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  Departure Member States may tax unrealised capital gains at the time of the cross-border division of a company. The company may then choose between immediate payment of the amount of tax and a deferred payment of the amount of tax, together with interest in accordance with the applicable national legislation. If the company opts for the latter, the departure Member State may request the provision of a bank guarantee.
Amendment    156 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 1 – points r a to r g (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ra)  total turnover and total taxable turnover;   (rb)  information on the transfer of the central administration or principle place of business;   (rc)  the name of the ultimate undertaking and, where applicable, the list of all its subsidiaries, a brief description of the nature of their activities and their respective geographic allocation;   (rd)  the number of employees on a full-time equivalent basis;   (re)  fixed assets other than cash or cash equivalents;   (rf)  the amount of income tax accrued (current year) which is the current tax expense recognised on taxable profits or losses of the financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction;   (rg)  the amount of income tax paid which is the amount of income tax paid during the relevant financial year by undertakings and branches resident for tax purposes in the relevant tax jurisdiction;
Amendment    157 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160e – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In addition to the official languages of the Member States of the recipient companies and the one being divided, Member States shall allow the company to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in case of discrepancies among different linguistic versions of those documents. 4.  In addition to the official languages of the Member States of the recipient companies and the one being divided, Member States shall allow the company to use a language customary in the sphere of international business and finance in order to draw up the draft terms of cross-border division and all other related documents. Member States shall specify which language will prevail in case of discrepancies among different linguistic versions of those documents. Members, employees or creditors shall have the possibility to comment on these draft terms. The comments shall be included in the final report.
Amendment    158 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160f – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The accounting date provided in the draft terms of the cross-border division shall be the date on which the cross-border division takes effect, as referred to in Article 160t unless the company determines other dates in order to facilitate the division process. The accounting date provided in the draft terms of the cross-border division shall be the date on which the company being divided makes its final financial report unless the company determines other dates in order to facilitate the division process.
Justification
The accounting date must be before the division comes into effect, since the organs of the resulting company have to continue to be able to function.
Amendment    159 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Report of the management or administrative organ to the members Report of the management or administrative organ to the members and employees
Justification
From an efficiency point of view, it would be more sensible for the reports of the management or administrative organ to be condensed into one report, especially as both reports are in any case to be made available to both the members and the employees.
Amendment    160 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border division. 1.  The management or administrative organ of the company being divided shall draw up a report explaining and justifying the legal and economic aspects of the cross-border division as well as explaining the implications for employees.
Justification
The reports aims not only at the protection of the interests of shareholders, but may also be helpful for the assessment whether the artificial structure has been put in place in order to obtain undue tax advantages or infringe on the rights of employees, creditors or minority shareholders applicable based on the provisions of law, as well as contractual rights referred to in Art. 86c para 3 and Art. 160d para 3.
Amendment    161 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  the implications of the cross-border division on the future business of the recipient companies and, in the case of a partial division, also of the company being divided and on the managements' strategic plan; (a)  the rationale for the operation and implications of the cross-border division on the future business of the recipient companies and, in the case of a partial division, also of the company being divided and on the managements' strategic plan;
Amendment    162 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ea)  the implications of the cross-border division on the safeguarding of the employment relationships;
Amendment    163 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (eb)  any material change in the conditions of employment and the locations of the companies’ places of business;
Amendment    164 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 – point e c (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (ec)  whether the factors set out in points (a), (e a) and (e b) also relate to any subsidiaries of the company being divided.
Amendment    165 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   2a.  The report, referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be accompanied with a statement of the management or administrative organ of the company about places of business after the cross-border division, including information about a partial or complete carrying on of business in the departure Member State and, in appropriate circumstances, marking a fact of further conduct of operations only in the departure Member State.
Justification
The additional statement will facilitate the correct assessment by the authorities in order to prevent artificial arrangements set up to obtain undue tax advantages or the infringements of rights of employees, creditors or minority shareholders. It remains consistent with and supports the realization of taxation of capital gains in cases of transfer of assets, tax residence or the permanent establishment, provided for in the Council Directive (EU) 2016/1164 of 12 July 2016.
Amendment    166 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 3
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members of the company being divided not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. That report shall also be made similarly available to the representatives of the employees of the company being divided or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves. 3.  The report referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, shall be made available, at least electronically, to the members, trade unions and the representatives of the employees of the company or, where there are no such representatives, to the employees themselves, of the company being divided not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k.
Amendment    167 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 3 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   3a.  Where the management or administrative organ of the company being divided receives, in good time, an opinion from the representatives of their employees, or, where there are no such representatives, from the employees themselves, as provided for under national law, the members shall be informed thereof and that opinion shall be appended to that report.
Amendment    168 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  However, the report referred to in paragraph 1, shall not be required where all the members of the company being divided have agreed to waive this document. deleted
Amendment    169 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4a.  However, where a company being divided and all of its subsidiaries, if any, have no employees other than those who form part of the management or administrative organ, the report may be limited to the factors listed in paragraph 2(a), (b), (c), (d) and (e).
Amendment    170 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160g – paragraph 4 b (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   4b.  This Article is without prejudice to the applicable information and consultation rights and proceedings instituted at national level following the implementation of Directives 2001/23/EC, 2002/14/EC or 2009/38/EC.
Amendment    171 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160h
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment [...] deleted
Justification
Deleted because Article 160h is being integrated into Article 160g.
Amendment    172 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – title
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Examination by an independent expert Examination by the competent authority
Amendment    173 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the company being divided applies to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k, to appoint an expert to examine and assess the draft terms of cross-border division and the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160h, subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article. Member States shall ensure that the company being divided applies to the competent authority, designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), not less than two months before the date of the general meeting referred to in Article 160k. The competent authority shall examine and assess the draft terms of cross-border division and the reports referred to in Article 160g ,subject to the proviso set out in paragraph 6 of this Article.
Justification
Directive (EU) 2017/1132 does not as yet set a time limit for the application for the appointment of the expert. Rules on time limits should be harmonised here as well.
Amendment    174 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The application for the appointment of an expert shall be accompanied by the following The application to the competent authority shall be accompanied by the following
Amendment    175 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160h. (b)  the report referred to in Article 160g.
Amendment    176 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  The competent authority shall appoint an independent expert within five working days of the application referred to in paragraph 1 and the receipt of the draft terms and reports. The expert shall be independent from the company being divided and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the Member State concerned. Member States shall take into account, in assessing the independence of the expert, the framework established in Articles 22 and 22b of Directive 2006/43/EC. 2.  The competent authority shall start working on the application referred to in paragraph 1 within ten working days following the receipt of the draft terms and report.
Amendment    177 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 3.  The expert shall draw up a written report providing at least: 3.  After consultation third parties with a reasoned interest in the division of the company, thecompetent authority shall draw up a written report providing at least:
Amendment    178 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – point e
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (e)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company; (e)  a detailed assessment of the accuracy of the reports and information submitted by the company in terms of both form and content;
Amendment    179 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 3 – point f
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (f)  a description of all factual elements necessary for the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 160p, at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishments in the Member States concerned of the recipient companies, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member States of the recipient companies. (f)  a description of all factual elements in accordance with Article 160o(1), to carry out an in-depth assessment to determine whether the intended cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement in accordance with Article 160p, at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishments in the Member States concerned of the recipient companies, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due, impact on occupational pensions of employees and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member States of the recipient companies.
Amendment    180 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  Member States shall ensure that the independent expert shall be entitled to obtain from the company being divided all relevant information and documents and to carry out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management reports. The independent expert shall also be entitled to receive comments and opinions from the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. 4.  Member States shall ensure that the competent authority obtains from the company being divided all relevant information and documents and carries out all necessary investigations to verify all elements of the draft terms or management report. The competent authority shall furthermore be able to, where necessary, ask questions to the competent authority of the destination Members States, and be entitled to receive comments and opinions from trade unions, the representatives of the employees of the company, or, where there are no such representatives, employees themselves and also from the creditors and members of the company. These shall be attached to the report as appendices.
Amendment    181 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160i – paragraph 5
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 5.  Member States shall ensure that information submitted to the independent expert can only be used for the purpose of drafting the report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed. Where appropriate, the expert may submit a separate document containing confidential information to the competent authority designated in accordance with Article 160o(1) and that separate document shall only be made available to the company being divided and not be disclosed to any third party. 5.  Member States shall ensure that information and opinions submitted to the competent authority can only be used for the purpose of drafting the report and that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed.
Amendment    182 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 1 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the independent expert report referred to in Article 160i, where applicable; (b)  the report from the competent authority referred to in Article 160i,;
Amendment    183 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 3 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on its ultimate beneficial owners before and after the cross-border division.
Amendment    184 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 can be completed online in their entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority in the Member State concerned. Member States shall ensure that the requirements referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3 can be completed online in their entirety without the necessity to appear in person before any competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application in the Member State concerned.
Justification
This amendment is intended to create consistency with proposal for a directive (COM (2018) 239 final) concerning the use of digital tools and processes in company law.
Amendment    185 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, Member States may in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, require a physical presence before a competent authority. However, Member States may, in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Justification
The term ‘suspicion of fraud’ is given different meanings in different Member States. It is doubtful that the proposed article encompasses all intended situations.
Amendment    186 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    187 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160j – paragraph 6 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   6a.  Member States shall ensure that confidential information, including business secrets, shall not be disclosed, other than, when applicable under national law, to employee representatives.
Amendment    188 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160m – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States may require that the management or administrative organ of the company being divided provides a declaration accurately reflecting the financial status of the company as a part of the draft terms of cross-border division referred to in Article 160e. The declaration shall declare that, on the basis of the information available to the management or administrative organ of the company at the date of the declaration, and after having made reasonable enquiries, they are unaware of any reason why any recipient company and, in the case of a partial division, the company being divided, should, after the division takes effect, be unable to meet the liabilities allocated to them under the draft terms of the cross-border division when those liabilities fall due. The declaration shall be made no earlier than one month before the draft terms of the cross-border division are disclosed in accordance with Article 160j. 1.  Management or administrative organs of the company being divided shall provide a declaration accurately reflecting the financial status of the company as a part of the draft terms of cross-border division referred to in Article 160e. The declaration shall declare that, on the basis of the information available to the management or administrative organ of the company at the date of the declaration, and after having made reasonable enquiries, they are unaware of any reason why any recipient company and, in the case of a partial division, the company being divided, should, after the division takes effect, be unable to meet the liabilities allocated to them under the draft terms of the cross-border division when those liabilities fall due. The declaration shall be made no earlier than one month before the draft terms of the cross-border division are disclosed in accordance with Article 160j.
Amendment    189 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160m – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors, who are dissatisfied with the protection of their interests provided for in the draft terms of the cross-border division, as provided for in Article 160e, may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 160j. 2.  Member States shall ensure that creditors may apply to the appropriate administrative or judicial authority for adequate safeguards within one month of the disclosure referred to in Article 160j if they are of the opinion that they have been prejudiced despite the protection of their interests set down in Article 160e.
Justification
The term ‘dissatisfied’ leaves space for the creditor’s subjective judgement. The use of the objectively verifiable term ‘prejudiced’ is preferable.
Amendment    190 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160m – paragraph 3 – point a
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (a)  where the company discloses together with the draft terms of conversion an independent expert report which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert should be appointed or approved by the competent authority and shall fulfil the requirements laid down in Article 160i(2); (a)  where the company discloses together with the draft terms of conversion an independent expert report which concluded that there is no reasonable likelihood that the rights of creditors would be unduly prejudiced. The independent expert should be appointed or approved by the competent authority and shall be independent from the company carrying out the cross-border conversion, no conflict of interest shall be present, and may be a natural or a legal person depending upon the law of the departure Member State;
Amendment    191 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160n – paragraph 2 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border division has its registered office shall not apply, where the company being divided, in the six months prior to the publication of the draft terms of the cross-border division as referred to in Article 160e of this Directive, has an average number of employees equivalent to four fifths of the applicable threshold, laid down in the law of the Member State of the company being divided, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to each of the recipient companies does not: 2.  However, the rules in force concerning employee participation, if any, in the Member State where the company resulting from the cross-border division has its registered office shall not apply, where the company being divided, in the six months prior to the date of making available of the draft terms of the cross-border division as referred to in Article 160e of this Directive, has an average number of employees equivalent to four fifths of the applicable threshold, laid down in the law of the Member State of the company being divided, which triggers the participation of employees within the meaning of point (k) of Article 2 of Directive 2001/86/EC, or where the national law applicable to each of the recipient companies does not:
Amendment    192 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall designate the national authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards the part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the Member State of the company being divided, and to issue a pre-division certificate attesting compliance with all relevant conditions, and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in that Member State. 1.  Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards the part of the procedure which is governed by the law of the Member State of the company being divided, and to issue a pre-division certificate attesting compliance with all relevant conditions, and the proper completion of all procedures and formalities in that Member State.
Justification
Consistency with Directive (EU) 2017/1132 on cross-border mergers, especially Article 127(1).
Amendment    193 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 2 – point b
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 160g, 160h and 160i, as appropriate; (b)  the reports referred to in Articles 160g and 160i;
Amendment    194 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment The draft terms and reports submitted under Article 160i do not have to be re-submitted to the competent authority. The draft terms and reports submitted under Article 160j do not have to be re-submitted to the competent authority.
Justification
It makes more sense to refer to 86h.
Amendment    195 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 2, including submission of any company information and documents, may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. Member States shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 2, including submission of any company information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application.
Justification
This amendment is intended to create consistency with proposal for a directive (COM (2018) 239 final) concerning the use of digital tools and processes in company law.
Amendment    196 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted. However, Member States may in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure.
Justification
The term ‘suspicion of fraud’ is given different meanings in different Member States. It is doubtful that the proposed article encompasses all intended situations.
Amendment    197 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    198 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 4
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 160n, the Member State of the company being divided shall verify that the draft terms of cross-border division referred to in Article 160e include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements. 4.  In respect of compliance with the rules concerning employee participation as laid down in Article 160n, the Member State of the company being divided shall verify that the draft terms and reports of cross-border division referred to in Article 160e include information on the procedures by which the relevant arrangements are determined and on the possible options for such arrangements.
Amendment    199 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 6
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 may consult other relevant authorities with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border division. 6.  Member States shall ensure that competent authorities designated in accordance with paragraph 1 may consult other relevant authorities both in the departure Member State and in the destination Member State with competence in the different fields concerned by the cross-border division.
Amendment    200 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 7 – introductory part
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within one month of the receipt of the information concerning the approval of the cross-border division by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes: 7.  Member States shall ensure that the assessment by the competent authority is carried out within two months of the receipt of the information concerning the approval of the cross-border division by the general meeting of the company. It shall have one of the following outcomes:
Amendment    201 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160o – paragraph 7 – point c
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment (c)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement referred to in Article 160d(3), it may decide to carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 160p and shall inform the company about its decision to conduct such an assessment and the subsequent outcome. (c)  where the competent authority has serious concerns that the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement, it shall decide to carry out an in-depth assessment in accordance with Article 160p and shall inform the company about its decision to conduct such an assessment and the subsequent outcome.
Amendment    202 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160p – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement within the meaning of Article 160d(3) of this Directive, the competent authority of the company being divided shall carry out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the Member States concerned, including the intent, the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member State of that company and Member States of recipient companies. Member States shall ensure in order to assess whether the cross-border division constitutes an artificial arrangement within the meaning of this Directive, the competent authority of the company being divided shall carry out an in-depth assessment of all relevant facts and circumstances and shall take into account at a minimum the following: the characteristics of the establishment in the Member States concerned, including the sector, the investment, the net turnover and profit or loss, number of employees, the composition of the balance sheet, the tax residence, the assets and their location, the habitual place of work of the employees and of specific groups of employees, the place where social contributions are due and the commercial risks assumed by the company being divided in the Member State of that company and Member States of recipient companies.
Amendment    203 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160p – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall ensure that where the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article decides to carry out an in-depth assessment, it is able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 160j(1) in accordance with national law. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-division certificate within two months from the start of the in-depth assessment. Member States shall ensure that where the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article decides to carry out an in-depth assessment, it is able to hear the company and all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 160j(1) in accordance with national law. The competent authorities referred to in paragraph 1 may also hear any other interested third parties in accordance with national law. The competent authority shall take its final decision regarding the issue of the pre-division certificate within three months from the start of the in-depth assessment.
Amendment    204 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160q – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 1.  Member States shall ensure that, where the competent authority is not a court, the decision of the competent authority to issue or to refuse to issue a pre-division certificate is subject to judicial review in accordance with national law. In addition, Member States shall ensure that a pre-division certificate shall not be effective before the expiry of a certain period to allow parties to bring an action before the competent court and to obtain, if appropriate, interim measures. 1.  Member States shall ensure that the decision of the competent authority to issue or to refuse to issue a pre-division certificate, is subject to judicial review in accordance with national law. In addition, Member States shall ensure that a pre-division certificate shall not be effective before the expiry of a certain period to allow partiesy to bring an action before the competent court.
Justification
It is unclear why the option of judicial review should not apply in cases where the pre-conversion certificate is issued by a court as well.
Amendment    205 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160q – paragraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment 2.  Member States shall ensure that the decision to issue the pre-division certificate is sent to the authorities referred to in Article 160r(1) and the decisions to issue or refuse to issue the pre-division certificate are available through the system of interconnection of registers set up in accordance with Article 22. 2.  Member States shall ensure that the decision to issue the pre-division certificate is sent to the authorities referred to in Article 160r(1) and to all parties that have submitted observations pursuant Article 160j(1)(c) in accordance with national law the decisions to issue or refuse to issue the pre-division certificate are available through the system of interconnection of registers set up in accordance with Article 22.
Amendment    206 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall designate an authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards that part of the procedure which concerns the completion of the cross-border division governed by the law of the Member States of the recipient companies and to approve the cross-border division where it complies with all the relevant conditions and all the procedures and formalities in that Member State have been properly completed. Member States shall designate the court, notary or other authority competent to scrutinise the legality of the cross-border divisions as regards that part of the procedure which concerns the completion of the cross-border division governed by the law of the Member States of the recipient companies and to approve the cross-border division where it complies with all the relevant conditions and all the procedures and formalities in that Member State have been properly completed.
Justification
Consistency with Directive (EU) 2017/1132 on cross-border mergers, especially Article 127(1)
Amendment    207 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Each Member State shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 1, by any of the recipient companies which includes submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority referred to in paragraph 1. Each Member State shall ensure that the application referred to in paragraph 1, by any of the recipient companies which includes submission of any information and documents may be completed online in its entirety without the necessity to appear in person before the competent authority or any other person or authority entrusted with processing the application.
Justification
This amendment is intended to create consistency with proposal for a directive (COM (2018) 239 final) concerning the use of digital tools and processes in company law.
Amendment    208 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment However, in cases of genuine suspicion of fraud based on reasonable grounds, Member States may require a physical presence before a competent authority of a Member State where relevant information and documents are required be submitted. However, Member States may in justified exceptional cases of overriding reasons of public interest, require a physical presence before any competent authority, or before any other person or body dealing with, making or assisting in making the online disclosure, where relevant information and documents are required to be submitted.
Amendment    209 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160r – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Member States shall lay down detailed rules for the online disclosure of documents and information referred to in paragraphs 1 and 3. Article 13f paragraphs 3 and 4 shall apply accordingly.
Amendment    210 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160s – paragraph 2 – point d a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   (da)  information on its ultimate beneficial owners before and after the cross-border division in accordance with Directive 2015/849.
Amendment    211 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160u a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   Article 160ua   Civil liability of members of the administrative or management bodies of the company being divided   The laws of the Member States shall at least lay down rules governing the civil liability, towards the shareholders and creditors of the company carrying out a cross-border division, of the members of the administrative or management bodies of that company in respect of misconduct on the part of members of those bodies in preparing and implementing the division, including submitting a false statement about the places of business referred to in Article 160g paragraph 2a.
Amendment    212 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160v – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Articles 160i and 160m(2)(a), including in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties. Member States shall lay down rules governing at least the civil liability, towards the creditors, of the independent experts responsible for drawing up the report referred to in Article 160m(3)(a), in respect of any misconduct on their part in the performance of their duties.
Amendment    213 Proposal for a directive Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 20 Directive (EU) No 2017/1132 Article 160v – paragraph 1 a (new)
Text proposed by the Commission Amendment   However, if during the two years following the date on which the cross-border division takes effect, new information on this cross-border division are brought to the attention of the competent authorities alleging of genuine suspicion of fraud, the competent authorities shall proceed to a revised assessment of the facts of the case and can take effective, proportionate and dissuasive sanctions in cases of artificial arrangements.
Amendment    214 Proposal for a directive Article 3 – paragraph 1
Text proposed by the Commission	Amendment
1.  The Commission shall, no later than five years after [OP please insert the date of the end of the transposition period of this Directive], carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a Report on the findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of that report, in particular by providing data on the number of cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, their duration and related costs.	1.  The Commission shall, no later than five years after [OP please insert the date of the end of the transposition period of this Directive] carry out an evaluation of this Directive and present a Report on the findings to the European Parliament, the Council and the European Economic and Social Committee accompanied, where appropriate, by a legislative proposal. This evaluation should pay particular attention to the impact of this Directive in detecting and preventing cases of cross-border conversions, mergers or divisions representing artificial arrangements. The European Commission shall consult the European social partners. Member States shall provide the Commission with the information necessary for the preparation of that report, in particular by providing data on the number of cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions, their duration and related costs.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title	Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions
References	COM(2018)0241 – C8-0167/2018 – 2018/0114(COD)
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	JURI 28.5.2018
Opinion by        Date announced in plenary	ECON 28.5.2018
Rapporteur        Date appointed	Olle Ludvigsson 31.5.2018
Discussed in committee	29.8.2018	8.10.2018
Date adopted	18.10.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	36 1 2
Members present for the final vote	Gerolf Annemans, Hugues Bayet, Pervenche Berès, Thierry Cornillet, Giuseppe Ferrandino, Stefan Gehrold, Sven Giegold, Neena Gill, Roberto Gualtieri, Gunnar Hökmark, Danuta Maria Hübner, Wolf Klinz, Werner Langen, Sander Loones, Bernd Lucke, Olle Ludvigsson, Marisa Matias, Gabriel Mato, Alex Mayer, Bernard Monot, Caroline Nagtegaal, Luděk Niedermayer, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Anne Sander, Alfred Sant, Martin Schirdewan, Molly Scott Cato, Pedro Silva Pereira, Peter Simon, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Paul Tang, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Marco Valli, Tom Vandenkendelaere, Jakob von Weizsäcker
Substitutes present for the final vote	Andreas Schwab, Lieve Wierinck
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Aleksander Gabelic, Bogdan Brunon Wenta

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

36	+
ALDE	Thierry Cornillet, Wolf Klinz, Caroline Nagtegaal, Ramon Tremosa i Balcells, Lieve Wierinck
ECR	Sander Loones, Bernd Lucke
GUE/NGL	Marisa Matias, Martin Schirdewan
PPE	Stefan Gehrold, Gunnar Hökmark, Danuta Maria Hübner, Werner Langen, Gabriel Mato, Luděk Niedermayer, Sirpa Pietikäinen, Anne Sander, Andreas Schwab, Theodor Dumitru Stolojan, Tom Vandenkendelaere, Bogdan Brunon Wenta
S&D	Hugues Bayet, Pervenche Berès, Giuseppe Ferrandino, Aleksander Gabelic, Neena Gill, Roberto Gualtieri, Olle Ludvigsson, Alex Mayer, Alfred Sant, Pedro Silva Pereira, Peter Simon, Paul Tang, Jakob von Weizsäcker
VERTS/ALE	Sven Giegold, Molly Scott Cato

1	-
ENF	Gerolf Annemans

2	0
EFDD	Bernard Monot, Marco Valli

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Title	Cross-border conversions, mergers and divisions
References	COM(2018)0241 – C8-0167/2018 – 2018/0114(COD)
Date submitted to Parliament	25.4.2018
Committee responsible        Date announced in plenary	JURI 28.5.2018
Committees asked for opinions        Date announced in plenary	ECON 28.5.2018	EMPL 28.5.2018	IMCO 28.5.2018
Not delivering opinions        Date of decision	IMCO 19.6.2018
Associated committees        Date announced in plenary	EMPL 4.10.2018
Rapporteurs        Date appointed	Evelyn Regner 15.5.2018
Discussed in committee	10.7.2018	3.9.2018	10.10.2018
Date adopted	6.12.2018
Result of final vote	+: –: 0:	21 2 0
Members present for the final vote	Max Andersson, Joëlle Bergeron, Jean-Marie Cavada, Mady Delvaux, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Mary Honeyball, Gilles Lebreton, Julia Reda, Evelyn Regner, Pavel Svoboda, József Szájer, Axel Voss
Substitutes present for the final vote	Geoffroy Didier, Pascal Durand, Ana Miranda, Jens Rohde, Virginie Rozière, Tiemo Wölken
Substitutes under Rule 200(2) present for the final vote	Lucy Anderson, Georges Bach, Kostadinka Kuneva, Jeroen Lenaers, Philippe Loiseau, Marco Zullo
Date tabled	10.1.2019

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

21	+
ALDE	Jean-Marie Cavada, Jens Rohde
EFDD	Joëlle Bergeron, Marco Zullo
GUE/NGL	Kostadinka Kuneva
PPE	Georges Bach, Geoffroy Didier, Rosa Estaràs Ferragut, Jeroen Lenaers, Pavel Svoboda, József Szájer, Axel Voss
S&D	Lucy Anderson, Mady Delvaux, Mary Honeyball, Evelyn Regner, Virginie Rozière, Tiemo Wölken
VERTS/ALE	Max Andersson, Ana Miranda, Julia Reda

2	-
ECR	Angel Dzhambazki
ENF	Philippe Loiseau

0	0

Key to symbols:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstention