REPORT on tackling barriers to the single market for defence

06.02.2026 - (2025/2143(INI))

Committee on Security and Defence
Rapporteur: Tobias Cremer

Amendments

• 001-002 (PDF - 116 KB)
• 001-002 (DOC - 44 KB)

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

on tackling barriers to the single market for defence

 

(2025/2143(INI))

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU),

– having regard to the Versailles Declaration adopted at the informal meeting of the Heads of State or Government on 11 March 2022,

– having regard to the Strategic Compass for Security and Defence – For a European Union that protects its citizens, values and interests and contributes to international peace and security, approved by the Council on 21 March 2022 and endorsed by the European Council on 25 March 2022,

– having regard to Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/2315 of 11 December 2017 establishing permanent structured cooperation (PESCO) and determining the list of participating Member States[1],

– having regard to Directive 2009/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 May 2009 simplifying terms and conditions of transfers of defence-related products within the Community[2],

– having regard to Directive 2009/81/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on the coordination of procedures for the award of certain works contracts, supply contracts and service contracts by contracting authorities or entities in the fields of defence and security, and amending Directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC[3],

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/697 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2021 establishing the European Defence Fund and repealing Regulation (EU) 2018/1092[4],

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/1525 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 July 2023 on supporting ammunition production (ASAP)[5],

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2023/2418 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 on establishing an instrument for the reinforcement of the European defence industry through common procurement (EDIRPA)[6],

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2025/2643 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2025 establishing the European Defence Industry Programme and a framework of measures to ensure the timely availability and supply of defence products (‘EDIP Regulation’)[7],

– having regard to Regulation (EU) 2025/2653 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2025 amending Regulations (EU) 2021/694, (EU) 2021/695, (EU) 2021/697, (EU) 2021/1153 and (EU) 2024/795, as regards incentivising defence-related investment in the EU budget to implement the ReArm Europe Plan[8],

– having regard to Council Regulation (EU) 2025/1106 of 27 May 2025 establishing the Security Action for Europe (SAFE) through the Reinforcement of the European Defence Industry Instrument[9],

– having regard to the Commission proposal of 17 June 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the acceleration of permit-granting for defence readiness projects (COM(2025)0821), to the Commission proposal of 17 June 2025 for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EC) No 1907/2006, (EC) No 1272/2008, (EU) No 528/2012, (EU) 2019/1021 and (EU) 2021/697 as regards defence readiness and facilitating defence investments and conditions for defence industry (COM(2025)0822), and to the Commission proposal of 17 June 2025 for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directives 2009/43/EC and 2009/81/EC, as regards the simplification of intra-EU transfers of defence-related products and the simplification of security and defence procurement (COM(2025)0823), as part of the Defence Readiness Omnibus package of 17 June 2025,

– having regard to the conclusions of the European Council on European defence, particularly those of 6 March 2025, 20 March 2025, 26 June 2025 and 23 October 2025,

– having regard to its resolution of 25 March 2021 on the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC, concerning procurement in the fields of defence and security, and of Directive 2009/43/EC, concerning the transfer of defence-related products[10],

– having regard to its resolution of 2 April 2025 on the implementation of the common foreign and security policy – annual report 2024[11],

– having regard to its resolution of 25 November 2025 on the institutional aspects of the Report on the future of European Competitiveness (Draghi Report)[12],

– having regard to the joint communication from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 5 March 2024 entitled ‘A new European Defence Industrial Strategy: Achieving EU readiness through a responsive and resilient European Defence Industry’ (JOIN(2024)0010),

– having regard to the political guidelines for the next European Commission for the period 2024-2029, entitled ‘Europe’s choice’, presented on 18 July 2025 by the then candidate for Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen,

– having regard to the report by Mario Draghi of 9 September 2024 entitled ‘The future of European competitiveness’ (Draghi report) and, in particular, Chapter 4 thereof on increasing security and reducing dependencies,

– having regard to the report by Sauli Niinistö of 30 October 2024 entitled ‘Safer Together – Strengthening Europe’s Civilian and Military Preparedness and Readiness’ (Niinistö report),

– having regard to the report by Enrico Letta of 10  April 2024 entitled ‘Much more than a Market – Speed, Security, Solidarity: Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’ (Letta report),

– having regard to the joint white paper from the Commission and the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy of 19 March 2025 entitled ‘Joint white paper for European Defence Readiness 2030’ (JOIN(2025)0120),

– having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Security and Defence (A10-0017/2026),

A. whereas decades of defence procurement that focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent threat assessments and foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have prevented the emergence of an effective and fully integrated single market for defence and have weakened interoperability in Member States’ defence systems, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens, weakening the European defence technological and industrial base (EDTIB) and preventing European strategic autonomy, resilience and competitiveness from being fully realised;

B. whereas the Letta and Draghi reports highlight a combination of structural weaknesses affecting the competitiveness of the EDTIB and identify fragmentation, insufficient public defence spending and limited access to financing as core challenges, and therefore recognise the need to build a true single market for defence; whereas the White Paper on the Future of European Defence emphasises that action should focus on rules and procedures for defence procurement, intra-EU transfers of defence products and mutual recognition of national certification permits; whereas the Niinistö report also underlines the need to enhance Europe’s overall preparedness, including the integration of civilian and military resilience, and points out that those needs can also be met more efficiently with a single market for defence;

C. whereas a resilient, competitive and innovative European defence industrial base is essential to deliver on the Strategic Compass and to ensure the EU’s ability to deter and defend in the light of the Readiness 2030 agenda; whereas this requires a coherent industrial and technological policy that supports interoperable capabilities, secures critical supply chains, supports small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and promotes dual-use innovation;

D. whereas defence companies established in smaller Member States have been particularly affected by other Member States’ overly stringent approach to intra-EU transfers and export controls in the past, demonstrating how one choke point can undermine EU-wide supply chains; whereas SMEs face particular entry barriers to defence markets; whereas current EU competition rules and State aid frameworks lack tailored provisions for cooperative cross-border defence projects, which risks hindering industrial collaboration and consolidation; whereas no specific block exemption or similar facilitative mechanism exists for defence projects funded by EU financing instruments, creating legal uncertainty for companies engaging in joint research and development (R&D); whereas the lack of an adequate intellectual property and licensing framework for publicly funded defence R&D restricts multi-producer manufacturing of certified European designs and limits the effectiveness of joint procurement instruments;

E. whereas the European defence industry is facing a severe shortage of skilled workers and an ageing workforce, which threatens to create bottlenecks in production, hindering expansion; whereas different national security clearance requirements for defence industry personnel and companies prevent increased cross-border collaboration by subjecting firms or engineers cleared for handling classified information in one Member State to lengthy, duplicate vetting in others; whereas the rapid adoption and application of innovative technologies by Europe’s armed forces is hindered by lengthy development cycles and a high aversion to risk;

F. whereas in order to increase public support for these investments, the economic returns and benefits need to be spread across the EU in a balanced and proportional way, taking into account the specificities of national defence industrial bases; whereas cross-border cooperation should also ensure the fair and full participation of SMEs and small mid-caps in the defence value chain and strengthen regional cohesion across the EU; whereas defence investments have the potential to create high-quality jobs across a wide range of regions, thereby helping to achieve cohesion objectives;

G. whereas recent events have exposed the risks of supply chain concentration in Europe’s defence sector, with critical defence products and inputs often dependent on a single or very limited number of suppliers; whereas such concentration creates single points of failure and vulnerabilities in times of crisis, underscoring the urgent need for diversification and redundancy in supply sources;

H. whereas according to the Draghi report, European collaborative procurement accounted for only 18 % of expenditure on defence equipment procurement in 2022, well below the benchmark of 35 % agreed on in the European Defence Agency (EDA) frameworks; whereas the EU has set the political objective of sourcing at least half of its defence equipment from European production by 2030;

I. whereas the objective of creating a single market for defence is ultimately a means to achieve Europe’s security and strategic autonomy, not an end in itself; whereas defence industrial integration should serve the EU’s ability to protect its citizens and values, ensure resilience and deterrence, and uphold its freedom of action; whereas a balance must be struck between market efficiency and the imperatives of sovereignty and solidarity;

J. whereas joint defence capability planning, development, production and procurement in the EU would allow for increased efficiency and effectiveness of public investment and industrial and operational gains, thereby increasing the social and political acceptance of necessary increases in defence investment in times of constrained budgets and significantly improving the ability of the EU and its Member States to achieve full defence readiness before 2030 and a genuine European defence union; whereas such joint action in the EU should be coordinated with NATO planning processes and should avoid unnecessary duplication of actions;

K. whereas the Member States will only consider increasing their investment and cooperation in common defence projects if these involve the development of military capabilities of common interest to their armed forces;

L. whereas the EU has presented a number of initiatives aimed at reinforcing EU defence readiness, enhancing investment conditions and incentivising joint action, yet it has not, to date, proposed the transformative measures required for the establishment of a genuine single market for defence products; whereas the EU’s rules on defence procurement (Directive 2009/81/EC) and on intra-EU transfers (Directive 2009/43/EC) have not yet been comprehensively updated despite significant changes in the security environment; whereas stakeholders often find both directives overly complex and Member States’ transposition slow and problematic, requiring disproportionate administrative effort and giving rise to fragmentation of the internal market;

M. whereas in the light of growing geopolitical threats, notably Russia’s ongoing war of aggression against Ukraine and its hybrid attacks and provocations against the EU, as well as terrorism and instability in the Middle East and Africa, 90 % of EU citizens rightly expect increased EU cooperation in the area of security and defence, including within NATO and with other like-minded partners, to protect citizens and defend the EU’s interests and values on the global stage; whereas the increasingly unstable security environment in the EU’s immediate neighbourhood calls for a coherent and coordinated response, particularly to ensure the unimpeded movement of defence products and services;

The vision of a single market for defence in the Union

1. Recalls that, according to the Draghi report, enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of up to 30 % of annual defence spending across the EU and significantly boost the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores the broader advantages of this for EU competitiveness, resilience and strategic sovereignty, since it promises significant employment opportunities, economic development and technological leadership throughout the EU; emphasises that a true single market for defence is crucial for fostering the competitiveness of European companies, not only within the EU but also on the global market, where they have to compete with, among others, US prime contractors;

2. Believes that the dramatic challenges and threats faced by the EU and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate and coordinate on defence matters; underlines that the EU and its Member States must fundamentally change their understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports and in the White Paper on the Future of European Defence; urges the Member States to overcome nationalist reflexes towards their national industrial base, to give greater consideration to the benefits of EU-level defence cooperation in their national defence planning, and to acknowledge the essential role of active support from the EU institutions and agencies in facilitating and coordinating such cooperation, while strengthening mutual trust among all stakeholders;

3. Stresses that only a true single market for defence can provide the means required to truly establish and maintain a competitive, innovative and resilient EDTIB that is able to deliver the equipment needed in the required time periods and at the scale required and to unlock the full economic, industrial and financial potential of the EDTIB; underlines that a true single market for defence is essential to close the capability gaps and re-establish deterrence and is therefore a necessary cornerstone of a strong, sovereign and competitive Union;

4. Urges the Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create a true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides; recalls that the aggregation of demand through common procurement and life cycle management, regulatory simplification and cross-border industrial integration at EU level is urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries, as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports;

5. Recalls the importance of ensuring democratic legitimacy, public trust in institutions, accountability and transparency in order to secure the necessary public support for increased expenditure in the field of defence; underlines the importance of guaranteeing a fair and balanced distribution across the EU of the costs and benefits of the surge in European defence spending;

Obstacles to a single market for defence

6. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplication, external dependencies and inefficiencies, and hampers the strengthening of the EDTIB and the EU’s defence readiness; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment and the lack of programming of long-term defence spending, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape, exploiting potential economies of scale, and to gather greater insight into the barriers to the single market for defence; emphasises that a single market for defence must guarantee equitable opportunities for participation for industries and research organisations, including start-ups, from all Member States, including smaller economies, and should not result in an overly centralised defence industrial model; underlines that such a market design contributes to economic cohesion by creating high-quality manufacturing and R&D jobs in various EU regions, including less economically developed ones; notes, furthermore, that such geographical diversification contributes to resilience and security of supply and also helps to avoid the creation of monopolies and disadvantages for SMEs and mid-caps;

7. Deplores the lack of results from current coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the EU, which has led to divergent rules and eligibility criteria and inefficient spending of funds, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries; regrets that nationally determined priorities frequently prevent fruitful cooperation within the EU;

8. Deplores the persistent mutual trust deficit among Member States, which is reflected in, among other things, a reluctance to create regional centres of industrial competence, a limited degree of cross-border cooperation and joint capability planning, an insufficient level of intra-EU procurement of defence-related goods and services, and duplicated or precautionary restrictions on intra-EU transfers of defence equipment, hindering the development of fully integrated European supply chains and posing a significant obstacle to the development of a genuine single market for defence;

9. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement; highlights the need for dedicated support for SMEs and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building industrial redundancies that increase the EU’s resilience and security of supply;

10. Expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States; is concerned, in particular, by the frequent use of Article 346 TFEU, which the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has ruled in several cases as having been used in an unjustified manner and thus misused; stresses the need to shift towards an approach of safeguarding the EU’s essential security interests, given the current geopolitical situation and the threats to the EU’s unity;

11. Considers that the Member States’ full respect for the EU Common Position on arms exports[13] constitutes an important pillar of a functioning single market for defence; considers that the absence of a harmonised EU export control system and a lack of mutual recognition of different permits, licences, certifications and security clearances continue to generate obstacles to the functioning of a single market for defence through their impact on intra-EU transfers; recalls that defence production currently relies heavily on integrated cross-border supply chains in the EU, with components sourced from multiple Member States, which, in the event of an export block, creates uncertainty for industry and supply chains; stresses the need for a practical solution that takes into account the reality of present dependencies on non-EU countries, also given the growing importance of critical raw materials for the EDTIB and the potential exposure to coercive measures by non-EU countries; emphasises that, without guaranteed and planned access to inputs such as rare earths, semiconductors and high-grade metals, Europe’s ambitious defence ramp-up and strategic autonomy objectives cannot be met;

12. Considers coordination between the EU’s and the Member States’ defence capability development processes and NATO’s Defence Planning and Review Process to be essential to ensure coherence and interoperability between Member States and non-EU NATO allies; regrets the lack of a cooperation agreement between NATO and the EU dedicated to the exchange of information on NATO standards (STANAGs), which the EU could then enforce through binding instruments; stresses that the lack of enforcement of standards has led to inefficiencies, duplications and a lack of interoperability in the past decades and continues to pose a problem;

Breaking down the barriers

13. Urges the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with sufficient funding under the next multiannual financial framework to effectively incentivise the Member States to engage in joint capability development and procurement and to incentivise their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest, including the four flagship projects proposed in the Defence Readiness Roadmap 2030, and the Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of sufficient long-term funding; stresses that funding should prioritise projects with clear European added value, interoperability, long-term industrial sustainability and operational impact;

14. Notes the current limitations in the manufacturing capacity of the European defence industry, which is nevertheless expanding, and calls on the Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the EDTIB, Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EEA/EFTA) countries and, as an additional complementary layer, other non-EU countries with which the EU has signed a Security and Defence Partnership, as this would ensure a predictable order volume for the EDTIB, drive up private investment in R&D for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes; calls on the Member States to sign contracts that deliver stable and medium- to long-term aggregated demand signals for European products, thereby creating the investment certainty for the EDTIB to scale up;

15. Urges the EU and its Member States to treat Ukraine as an integral part of the single market for defence to the utmost extent possible by facilitating industrial partnerships, access to joint procurement mechanisms, and participation in EU programmes, such as the European Defence Fund (EDF) and the dedicated Ukraine Support Instrument under EDIP, to enable Ukraine’s progressive integration into EDTIB supply chains, taking into account the fact that Ukraine’s future lies in the EU and that its integration would provide benefits for both the EDTIB, through Ukraine’s advanced and battle-proven defence technologies and innovative industrial capacities, and for Ukraine’s defence technological and industrial base;

16. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be significantly improved and calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision; underlines the usefulness of allowing Member States to make use of each other’s framework contracts to increase the EU’s defence readiness in the short term, as it allows them to procure faster and more efficiently, while expecting that, in the long term, procurement will be conducted through common or joint framework contracts designed in line with European procurement criteria from the outset; calls on the Member States to make use of different contract forms that provide for innovation, competition and private capital investments, ensuring full compliance with competition rules, integrity requirements and anti-corruption standards, and recalls that European capital markets play a key role in financing defence innovation; further believes that aspects linked to security and defence, such as the presence of civilian components in military goods, should be taken into account in any review of Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement[14]; calls, in this context, on the Commission to present an updated version of the defence innovation partnerships in the upcoming comprehensive revision of Directive 2009/81/EC, to better adapt this instrument to the specificities of the defence market and the current challenging security context;

17. Underlines that, in the application of EU competition and State aid rules, the Commission must prioritise the unity and integrity of the single market to avoid distortions of competition and to safeguard the level playing field and cohesion between the Member States, paying particular attention to smaller Member States whose fiscal capacities to support their national defence industries are comparatively more limited; stresses that the extensive use of national subsidies to support defence investment risks fragmenting the single market and undermining the level playing field for companies, especially SMEs, across the EU;

18. Calls on the Commission to issue a recommendation for an interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in order to facilitate a harmonised and uniform approach throughout the EU, addressing the need to protect strictly the essential security interests of Member States, and for Article 346 to be used exceptionally, in line with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU; considers that the Commission should be enabled to assess the overall implementation of Article 346 TFEU, on a case-by-case basis, to remedy any potential structural misuse, in line with the CJEU case-law and with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU;

19. Underlines the need to provide targeted support, in particular for the testing of prototypes of new products, and to prioritise investment in emerging and breakthrough technologies; stresses the added value of close cooperation with Ukrainian defence and technological stakeholders in these highly innovative domains; underlines the importance of safeguarding the financial viability of companies, including SMEs, that invest in such innovation; stresses that specific measures should facilitate cross-border SME cooperation, particularly in cyber, AI, and unmanned and dual-use technologies, building on existing excellence centres in Member States;

20. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to establish a European ‘defence innovation accelerator’ initiative, analogous to concept models such as the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) or NATO’s Defence Innovation Accelerator for the North Atlantic (DIANA), that would fund high-risk, high-reward defence research projects and provide fast-track pathways for testing and integrating breakthrough technologies into European defence capability programmes; notes that existing EU R&D instruments, including the EDF, the EU Defence Innovation Scheme (EUDIS) and the Hub for EU Defence Innovation (HEDI), leave ownership of results with beneficiaries and grant the Commission and co-financing Member States only limited, non-production related rights; calls on the Commission to design an appropriate intellectual property regime that is tailored to the sensitivities of the defence domain, while also being sufficiently attractive to both national defence ministries and industry, in order to ensure that the programme can address capability needs and priorities;

21. Underlines the need to simplify rules and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers of defence products, including mutual recognition of criteria and certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; deplores the limited use of general transfer licences under Directive 2009/81/EC and the wide recourse to individual licences and calls on Member States to make full use of the possibilities for simplifying rules and reducing administrative burdens within the current legal framework; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure more simplified circulation of such products within the EU, in particular by eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; calls, furthermore, on the Member States to work towards that same goal and to swiftly transpose and apply the measures proposed in the Defence Readiness Omnibus as regards intra-EU transfers of defence products; calls on the Member States to fully respect the EU Common Position on arms exports and to explore, wherever possible, further harmonisation of export rules for defence goods; suggests, as possible starting points, harmonising export control systems, extending general transfer licences or using the Aachen Treaty, and strengthening the ICT Directive[15] to facilitate the intra-EU transfers of defence-related products;

22. Calls on the Commission, the EDA and the Member States to work on a scheme for mutual recognition of security clearances and certifications, so that clearances issued in one Member State are also accepted in other Member States; proposes the establishment of a voluntary convention on mutual recognition agreements on security clearances among EU Member States, whereby a company or individual holding a national security clearance in one Member State would have that clearance recognised by others that join the agreement, subject to appropriate information sharing and oversight; invites the EDA to facilitate the development of this framework and calls on the Member States to conclude it swiftly;

23. Stresses the imperative of strengthening the resilience of the European defence supply chains and reducing single points of failure and exposure to potential coercive measures by non-EU countries, exemplified by China’s threats to limit exports of raw materials; demands that the implementation of the Critical Raw Materials Act[16] place specific emphasis on defence needs;

24. Calls for the Commission and the Member States to create incentives for supply chain diversification, including support for new market entrants and SMEs; stresses that the pursuit of cost efficiency must not undermine national security of supply; calls on the Commission to monitor supply chain risks and identify areas of dangerous concentration, reporting regularly on progress in supply diversification; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to address situations in which sub-suppliers from non-EU countries refuse to deliver materials if they are to be used in military applications; stresses the need for a legal framework ensuring contractual reliability throughout defence supply chains; calls for the Commission to establish strategic stockpiles in line with the EU Preparedness Union Strategy; emphasises, in that regard, the importance of the security of supply regime established under EDIP;

25. Underlines the need to ensure that defence industrial production, investment and value creation are geographically balanced and contribute to economic and social convergence within the EU while enhancing resilience through geographical diversification and reflecting the reality of security threats faced by the Member States in their respective neighbourhoods; calls for defence investment planning to be carried out in a manner that strengthens social cohesion within and between regions and Member States, while at the same time enhancing resilience in times of defence crises, provided that this does not undermine the aim of cost efficiency, speed and competition;

26. Invites the Commission to issue clear guidance on how defence and security considerations are to be weighed in merger control decisions affecting the EDTIB, in line with EU competition policy; further invites the Commission to explore targeted adaptations of EU competition rules to better support the defence industry’s unique needs, such as the introduction of a targeted block exemption for defence R&D projects financed by EU programmes; emphasises that security of supply and reduction of strategic dependencies should be treated as positive criteria when assessing mergers or as aid measures in the defence sector;

27. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience to hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities, create positive spill-overs and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and the Member States to create incentives to limit to the EU the supply chains of the most critical inputs for defence products, including through a strengthened Defence Equity Facility, focused on late-stage commercialisation, scale-up finance and SME access to testing corridors and cyber ranges; stresses that the emerging ‘new space’ sector and its innovative potential regarding dual-use technologies should be fully exploited with regard to defence and civilian developments;

28. Calls on the Commission to assess the legal, procedural and regulatory adjustments that would be necessary to ensure that the EU and its Member States can rapidly adapt defence procurement and production rules in the event of war or a major security crisis and to ensure no disruption of the single market; further calls on the Commission to ensure that such an exercise is aligned with the security of supply regime included in EDIP; emphasises the importance of preparedness in the form of a contingency framework for emergency procurement and industrial ramp-up, which could be activated swiftly if needed;

29. Believes that the EU institutions and agencies should enhance their role of facilitating coordination between the Member States and welcomes the EDA’s contribution, particularly through the Capability Development Plan and the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, emphasising that its expertise should be fully exploited; underlines the crucial role of the EDA in promoting a single market for defence and calls on the Member States to strengthen the EDA’s mandate and resources in this respect; supports a greater involvement of the EDA in EU defence initiatives and in identifying persisting barriers to the single market for defence; calls for the development and regional deployment of HEDI within the EDA, with a view to expanding its role as a central platform connecting SMEs, start-ups, research centres and prime contractors; firmly believes that reinforcing the EDA will help to foster the mutual trust and cooperation needed to advance the single market for defence, as the EDA is uniquely positioned to bridge national and European interests; welcomes also the contribution of multilateral procurement agencies, such as the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation, which promote the harmonisation of equipment among Member States and non-EU partner states;

30. Highlights the need for further European funding dedicated to tackling the commercialisation gap in innovation of defence products; calls for strengthened instruments to ensure that SMEs and mid-caps have real and scalable access to private capital and defence programmes, including through streamlined procurement, innovation-friendly rules and cross-border matchmaking support, thus ensuring their increased participation and a fairer allocation of funds; stresses the importance of establishing regional defence tech incubators under HEDI’s umbrella to support cross-border SME consortia, provide mentorship on navigating defence procurement, and facilitate the testing and validation of innovative technologies in collaboration with military end users;

31. Underlines the need for the EU and NATO to sign a comprehensive cooperation agreement on capability planning and development to ensure coherent and complementary planning and interoperable defence capabilities, and on standardisation; emphasises that such cooperation must respect the autonomy of both organisations while avoiding duplication and promoting fair burden-sharing; calls on the Commission, in cooperation with the EDA, to prepare a legislative proposal that would create a harmonised EU framework for legally binding technical standards and certification of defence products, drawing on the European Defence Standards Reference System (EDSTAR) and, where appropriate, by codifying selected NATO STANAGs into EU legislation; further calls on the Commission to propose a framework for joint European testing and certification of defence equipment instead of having separate national validation for each defence product, including common testing and certification facilities; calls on the Member States to align their procurement and capability development efforts with NATO defence planning priorities, ensuring full interoperability of systems and avoiding parallel structures; underlines that a stronger and more integrated European defence industry should enhance Europe’s contribution within NATO and transatlantic burden-sharing, while maintaining open cooperation with trusted partners such as Ukraine, EEA/EFTA countries and Security and Defence Partnership states; encourages the implementation of NATO’s Rapid Adoption Action Plan aimed at accelerating national procurement processes and efforts to reform acquisition cycles, testing protocols and certification frameworks, ensuring that military innovation keeps pace with the threat environment;

32. Takes note of the defence-related recommendations presented by former Italian Prime Minister Enrico Letta in 2024 in his report entitled ‘Much More Than a Market'; notes that tax obstacles and different procedures on value added tax in collaborative procurement programmes hamper the achievement of the objectives of Defence Readiness 2030, the ramping up of defence industries and the expansion of joint programmes; calls on the Commission to follow up on the Letta report and increase efforts to reduce tax obstacles;

33. Calls on the Member States to promote careers in defence technology to young professionals, including through awareness campaigns about the sector’s contribution to Europe’s security and technological innovation; encourages the establishment of public-private partnerships between defence companies, educational institutions and governments to create talent pipelines; urges the Member States and the Commission to propose, in dialogue with social partners, including unions,  sector-specific skills strategies such as training programmes and opportunities for life-long learning to fill current and future skill gaps in the defence industry; suggests, to that effect, that the Union of Skills agenda explicitly include the defence sector, facilitating the mobility of skilled workers across Member States to where they are most needed;

34. Calls on the Commission to further quantify the potential financial and operational benefits of a single market for defence, including efficiency gains and an increase in collective military capability, through an independent impact assessment; calls for the creation of a single contact point where stakeholders can report obstacles, gather evidence and monitor compliance by the Member States;

35. Welcomes the European Council conclusions of October 2025 calling for an annual report on EU defence industrial readiness, and calls for this to be complemented by a ‘defence single market scoreboard’, published by the Commission in cooperation with the EDA; stresses that this scoreboard should track indicators such as the share of defence procurement conducted jointly or through open, EU-wide competition, levels of cross-border industrial cooperation, SME participation rates and reductions in system duplication; underlines that it should also capture the socio-economic benefits of EU defence programmes across the Member States and regions, including job creation and industrial development, in order to guide policy refinement and reinforce public trust;

36. Firmly believes that, in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and disinformation campaigns, Parliament must play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of those policies; underlines that transparency and accountability must be ensured; calls on the Commission, the Council, the Member States and the EDA to ensure secure channels for exchange of classified and confidential information with Parliament, the defence industry and national authorities;

°

° °

37. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

Europe is entering a decisive phase in restoring its deterrence and defence capabilities. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, combined with the United States’ growing focus on the Indo-Pacific, leaves no room for delay. Strengthening Europe’s deterrence requires action that is efficient, effective, and collaborative.

Both the Draghi and Letta Reports highlight the absence of a single market for defence goods as a key obstacle. While the Commission has proposed measures to stimulate joint procurement among EU Member States, progress has been limited the improvement of cross-border industrial cooperation. The Defence Omnibus Package includes some initial steps in these regards, which require further action. Without deeper reforms, current inefficiencies will persist—leading, for example, to defence equipment prices that are roughly 30 % higher than they would be under full EU-wide cooperation.

Besides economic advantages, building a genuine single market for defence would also improve interoperability among European armed forces, which today struggle with excessive diversity in equipment. Through such industrial policy measures, the EU can significantly reinforce Europe’s deterrence capabilities, which will continue to be coordinated and structured by NATO.

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur declares that he included in his report input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that he received, in the preparation of the draft report, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register[1], or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

VDMA e.V.

Agentur für Innovation in der Cybersicherheit GmbH

2. Representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies

Mission of Norway to the EU

 

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur declares that he has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND MONETARY AFFAIRS (08.12.2025)

for the Committee on Security and Defence

on tackling barriers to the single market for defence

(2025/2143(INI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Johan Van Overtveldt

 

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs submits the following to the Committee on Security and Defence, as the committee responsible :

Amendment  1

Motion for a resolution

Citation 13 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	– having regard to the Commission notice of 28 August2025 on the application of the sustainable finance framework and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to the defence sector (C(2025)3800);

Amendment  2

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
B. whereas decades of defence procurement focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have prevented a fully integrated single market for defence, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens;	B. whereas national complementarity remains essential to the resilience and strategic sovereignty of the Union, and whereas decades of defence procurement focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have limited European cooperation and prevented a fully integrated single market for defence, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer and increasing difficulties for EU defence companies in obtaining credit and equity financing, while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens;

Amendment  3

Motion for a resolution

Recital C a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	C a. whereas although coordinating on a new defence system or standard may result in short-term adjustment costs, including challenges related to interoperability with existing capabilities, it could generate collective efficiencies and lower overall costs over time;

Amendment  4

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
1. Believes that the dramatic challenges faced by the Union and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate on defence matters; underlines that the EU must fundamentally change its understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports;	1. Believes that the dramatic challenges faced by the Union and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate on defence matters; emphasises that this cooperation should be based on a coherent policy framework that allows flexible cooperation between Member States, promoting synergies in full respect of national competences and the provisions of Article 4 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and Article 346 TFEU; underlines that the EU must fundamentally change its understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports;

Amendment  5

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
2. Recalls that enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of up to 30 % of annual defence spending across the EU, amounting to at least EUR 57 billion annually and significantly boosting the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores the broader advantages for EU competitiveness, resilience, and strategic sovereignty, promising significant employment opportunities, economic development and technological leadership throughout the EU9 ;	2. Recalls that enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of at least EUR 57 billion in annual defence spending across the EU annually, significantly boosting the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores that more synergies can also contribute to EU competitiveness, resilience, and strategic autonomy, focusing on ensuring the independence and resilience of our domestic industry while supporting employment, innovation, and industrial development throughout the EU9, without prejudice to national prerogatives;
_________________	_________________
9 Ethan Ilzetki, Guns and Growth: The Economic Consequences of Defense Buildups, February 2025.	9 Ilzetki, E., Guns and Growth: The Economic Consequences of Defense Buildups, Kiel Report, No. 2, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), Kiel, February 2025, https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/311212/1/1917343442.pdf.

Amendment  6

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
3. Stresses that only a true single market for defence products can provide the means required to truly establish and maintain a competitive and resilient European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) of scale; underlines that a true single market for defence products is essential to close the capability gaps and to re-establish deterrence and is hence a necessary cornerstone of a strong, sovereign and competitive Union;	3. Stresses that only by addressing the remaining market and regulatory barriers that impede capital flows, competition and innovation while fully respecting national prerogatives in security and defence, can the full economic, industrial and financial potential be unlocked and the means be provided to truly maintain a competitive and resilient European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) of scale; underlines that a true single market for defence products is essential to close the capability gaps and to re-establish deterrence and is hence a necessary cornerstone of a strong, strategically autonomous and competitive Union;

Amendment  7

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	3 a. Underlines that, in the absence of more joint defence procurement and a reduction in market fragmentation, additional demand for defence capabilities may result in price increases;

Amendment  8

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
4. Urges Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create the true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides; recalls that the aggregating of demand through common procurement and management throughout the life cycle, regulatory simplification, and cross-border industrial integration at EU level are urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports;	4. Urges Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create the true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides, based on flexible and cooperative mechanisms among Member States, respecting national competences and the provisions of Article 4 of the TEU and Article 346 TFEU; recalls that the aggregating of demand through common procurement and management throughout the life cycle, regulatory simplification, and cross-border industrial integration at EU level are urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports; calls for the mobilisation of private capital, ensuring that European capital markets play a key role in financing defence innovation, while safeguarding Member States’ fiscal competences, avoiding additional financial burdens on Member States’ budgets and improving long-term predictability for both Member States and industry;

Amendment  9

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	4 a. Believes that greater cooperation on and coordination of defence spending across Europe under a coherent policy framework can maximise its economic and industrial benefits, thereby strengthening Europe’s industrial base, fostering technological progress, and contributing positively to sustainable growth and resilience;

Amendment  10

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
5. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplications and inefficiencies and hampers the strengthening of defence readiness; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape;	5. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplications and inefficiencies and hampers the strengthening of defence readiness; notes that this fragmentation extends across industrial, financial and governance dimensions, undermining competitiveness, demand aggregation and efficient resource use; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from regulatory streamlining and pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape;

Amendment  11

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
6. Deplores the lack of coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the Union, which has resulted in divergent rules and eligibility criteria, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries; deplores that national priorities frequently take precedence over cooperation within the Union;	6. Deplores the lack of coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the Union, which has resulted in divergent rules and eligibility criteria, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries rather than seeking cooperation with other Member States as a priority; deplores the fact that national priorities frequently take precedence over cooperation within the Union due to insufficient incentive-based coordination;

Amendment  12

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
7. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement; highlights the need for dedicated support for small and medium-sized enterprises and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building industrial redundancies that increase the Union’s resilience and security of supply;	7. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement and funding eligibility rules, and the application of competition and State aid rules to the EDTIB; stresses that Article 346 TFEU constitutes an essential safeguard for the protection of national security interests but that its application must remain guided by proportionality; highlights the need to strategically align European defence investment, from research to deployment, including dedicated support for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building a more integrated industrial ecosystem that increases the Union’s resilience and security of supply; stresses that SMEs and mid-caps are a core component of the EDTIB; calls on the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) to simplify access to finance, including through the EIB’s dedicated investment instruments, in order to facilitate better access for start-ups and smaller suppliers, thereby strengthening supply-chain resilience and innovation;

Amendment  13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	8 a. Notes that despite recent efforts to improve financing conditions for the EDTIB, access to finance has become a critical challenge for Europe’s defence industry and that companies, in particular SMEs, experience significant barriers to obtaining funding including because of a strict interpretation, by investors, of the EU sustainable finance framework and of environmental, social and governance criteria; notes that many investors treat conventional defence activities as incompatible with sustainability objectives, generating uncertainty and limiting access to capital; highlights that such perceptions within the financial services sector, continue to impede access to capital for defence companies, especially SMEs; is concerned that, according to the Draghi report, the EU suffers from insufficient defence spending, and SMEs and mid-caps face financing gaps of around EUR 2 billion annually, while a disproportionate share of private equity and venture capital flows to North American defence companies;

Amendment  14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	8 b. Welcomes the Commission notice on the application of the sustainable finance framework and the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive to the defence sector, clarifying that the EU sustainable finance framework is compatible with investing in the defence sector, and enabling sustainable funds to invest in defence-related undertakings across all industries; highlights that this framework should not impose unjustified limitations on the defence sector; calls on the Commission to further improve communication and provide clearer guidance under the EU sustainable finance framework to help financial institutions assess defence-related projects objectively; calls on the Commission to publicly reaffirm and codify that the EU’s taxonomy for sustainable activities permits investment in defence activities;

Amendment  15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	8 c. Notes that cross-border defence funding and oversight in the EU continue to face fragmentation, frequent recourse to national security exemptions and limited competitive collaboration, creating financial and competition-related risks; notes that gaps in reporting, as evidenced by the European Defence Agency’s report entitled ‘Defence Data 2024-2025’1a, hinder the tracking of collaborative funding and the assessment of progress towards a more integrated internal market; notes the risks associated with multinational funding arrangements;
	_________________
	1a European Defence Agency, Defence Data 2024-2025, 2 September 2025.

Amendment  16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
9. Calls on the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with adequate funding under the next multiannual financial framework to effectively incentivise the Member States to enter into joint capability development and procurement agreements and their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest and Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of adequate funding;	9. Calls on the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with adequate funding under the next multiannual financial framework to address the urgent need for joint investment in defence capacities and effectively incentivise the Member States to enter into joint capability development and procurement agreements and their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; warns that, without integrated planning, stable long-term financing and effective implementation under the next multiannual financial framework, fragmentation will persist and limit both the EU’s industrial resilience and its strategic autonomy; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest and Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of adequate funding;

Amendment  17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	9 a. Encourages the Commission, the Member States and the European Defence Agency to develop coordinated frameworks to support and facilitate intergovernmental cooperation structures as pragmatic steps towards more integrated and less fragmented European defence cooperation; notes that existing long-standing partnerships demonstrate the economic and operational benefits of shared capability development; underlines that supporting such bottom-up cooperation would strengthen industrial interoperability, reduce duplication and contribute to a more effective internal market for defence;

Amendment  18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	10 a. Underlines the importance of increasing defence expenditure in line with international commitments; welcomes, in this context, frameworks to encourage joint investment in defence capabilities at EU level, as facilitated by the SAFE instrument; recalls that the flexibility of budget lines must not compromise long-term predictability for Member States and industry; stresses that funding instruments should prioritise interoperability, joint procurement, and integrated capability planning to maximise efficiency;

Amendment  19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	10 b. Calls for greater coherence and transparency across funding instruments to reduce duplication, increase investor confidence, improve the efficiency of public spending and enhance Europe’s capacity to scale up critical technologies and dual-use infrastructure; calls for improved transparency, harmonised risk-management standards and strengthened cross-border oversight to ensure that internal market principles are upheld in EU defence funding; calls on the Commission to simplify award procedures and eligibility criteria and to clearly define overlaps between existing funding programmes;

Amendment  20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	10 c. Calls for the EU institutions to treat the EDTIB as a strategic industrial and economic sector rather than a fragmented policy area, by ensuring, in particular, that financial regulation, including the Capital Requirements Regulation1a and the European Central Bank’s (ECB) guidance on leveraged transactions, competition policy, and capital market rules, and the EIB’s strategic priorities enable scale-up, protect strategic assets and strengthen Europe’s fiscal resilience as well as its strategic and industrial autonomy;
	_________________
	1a OJ L 176, 27.6.2013, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/575/oj.

Amendment  21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10 d (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	10 d. Underlines that, in the application of EU competition and State aid rules, the Commission must prioritise the unity and integrity of the single market to avoid distortions of competition and to safeguard the level playing field and cohesion between the Member States, paying particular attention to smaller Member States whose fiscal capacities to support their national defence industries are comparatively more limited; stresses that the extensive use of national subsidies to support defence investment risks fragmenting the single market and undermining the level playing field for companies, especially SMEs, across the EU; takes note of the limited application of the national escape clause under the Stability and Growth Pact for defence-related expenditure; recalls the ECB findings that full utilisation of the national escape clause would worsen debt dynamics, particularly for high debt-to-GDP countries, effectively shifting significant fiscal adjustment from the first planning period to the second period starting in 2029 and risking a deterioration in market conditions;

Amendment  22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
11. Calls on Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EEA/EFTA) countries and, as a close second layer, third countries with which the Union has signed a Security and Defence Partnership, as it would ensure the EDTIB a predictable order volume, drive up private investment in R&D for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes;	11. Calls on Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the EDTIB, Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association countries and, as a close second layer, third countries with which the Union has signed a Security and Defence Partnership while ensuring this does not threaten the national security of any Member State, as it would ensure the EDTIB a predictable order volume, drive up private investment in research and development for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes; underlines that practices such as unjustified offset requirements, abnormally low tenders facilitated by illegal State aid, and unequal access to collaborative procurement projects risk distorting competition and weakening market access; calls on the Commission to present a framework ensuring that a ‘buy European’ approach remains compatible with the single market and does not result in unnecessary administrative barriers; emphasises that the ‘buy European’ approach must not disadvantage SMEs and innovative mid-caps; stresses that procurement structuring should allow disaggregation, modular participation and partial work packages to avoid market concentration and to better enable SMEs to participate in supply chains on fair and equal terms;

Amendment  23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	11 a. Emphasises that a more integrated savings and investment union could help mobilise private capital and improve access to financing;

Amendment  24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
13. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be significantly improved and calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision; calls on the Commission to issue a recommendation for an interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in line with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU; calls on Member States to make use of different contract forms that stipulate for innovation, competition and private capital investments;	13. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be further improved to ensure greater efficiency, transparency and cooperation, while preserving the prerogatives of Member States; calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision focusing on legal clarity, simplification and reduction of administrative burdens that currently deter cross-border participation and slow down procurement cycles; calls on the Commission to issue a clear recommendation on the application and limits of Article 346 TFEU, including in relation to merger control, and competition and State aid rules in the defence sector, reflecting the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU, enabling adequate information sharing between Member States where appropriate, while continuing to protect the strictly defined essential interests of national security, and clarifying that only measures strictly necessary for essential security interests are covered by Article 346(1)(b) TFEU and that such measures must not adversely affect the conditions of competition in the single market; calls on Member States to make use of different contract forms that stipulate for innovation, competition and private capital investments; stresses that a balanced approach, based on mutual trust and the recognition of the industrial and strategic specificities of each Member State, is the best way to encourage innovation, cooperation, and private investment in the EDTIB;

Amendment  25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	13 a. Calls on the Commission to clarify the application of sustainability rules to conventional defence activities, in line with streamlined procedures proposed under the Defence Readiness Omnibus; underlines the need for EU financial instruments, including a broad and flexible InvestEU approach and clear guidance under the sustainable finance framework, to remove unintended barriers to capital while maintaining compliance with international arms restrictions; emphasises that such measures would strengthen intra-EU industrial capacity, improve access to finance for SMEs, promote diversification across the Member States and regions, and ensure fair and equal participation throughout the internal market;

Amendment  26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
14. Underlines the need to simplify and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers, including mutual recognition of criteria and certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure simplification for the circulation of such products inside the Union, in particular eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; further calls on Member States to work towards that same goal; calls on the EU Member States to agree on new common export control rules for arms and defence goods;	14. Underlines the need to simplify and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers and cross-border participation in defence programmes, including mutual recognition of criteria, transparent certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure simplification for the circulation of such products inside the Union, in particular facilitating interoperability of standards and eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; further calls on Member States to work towards that same goal; calls on the EU Member States, where appropriate, to develop common rules for the control of arms and defence equipment exports, without prejudice to the prerogatives of each Member State;

Amendment  27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	14 a. Calls for greater coherence and simplification of administrative and professional rules to facilitate the cross-border mobility of technical and specialist defence personnel;

Amendment  28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
15. Underlines the need for the EU and NATO to sign a cooperation agreement on capability planning and development to ensure coherent and complementary planning and interoperable defence capabilities; calls on the Commission to prepare a legislative proposal that would allow for the use of legally binding instruments to implement and enforce NATO standards for equipment, ammunition and stocks, once such an agreement is concluded, as it would improve interoperability and set a framework for joint European testing and certification of defence equipment instead of having separate national validation for each defence product;	15. Underlines the need for the EU and NATO to sign a cooperation agreement on capability planning and development to ensure coherent and complementary planning and interoperable defence capabilities;

Amendment  29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
16. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience against hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and Member States to create incentives to localise supply chains in the Union of the most critical inputs for defence products;	16. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment, including in research, in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience against hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and Member States to create incentives to localise supply chains in the Union of the most critical inputs for defence products; calls on the Commission to strictly monitor spillover effects of the application of Article 346 TFEU in dual-use and civilian markets, and to consider how improved coordination through EU funding instruments could help prevent market distortion, maintain fair competition and the integrity of the internal market, and foster an integrated and resilient EDTIB;

Amendment  30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
17. Firmly believes that in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and Russian disinformation campaigns, it is critical that Parliament play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of this process;	17. Firmly believes that in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and Russian disinformation campaigns, it is critical that Parliament play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of this process, including in ensuring that defence market integration enhances efficiency and economic competitiveness;

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur declares under his exclusive responsibility that he did not include in his opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register[1], or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	3.12.2025
Result of final vote	+ : 41 - : 7 0 : 3
Members present for the final vote	Rasmus Andresen, Stefan Berger, Damian Boeselager, Gilles Boyer, Giovanni Crosetto, Siegbert Frank Droese, Engin Eroglu, Marco Falcone, Markus Ferber, Jonás Fernández, Claire Fita, Dirk Gotink, Enikő Győri, Michalis Hadjipantela, Eero Heinäluoma, Tomáš Kubín, Aurore Lalucq, Rada Laykova, Costas Mavrides, Fernando Navarrete Rojas, Denis Nesci, Luděk Niedermayer, Ľudovít Ódor, Gaetano Pedulla', Lídia Pereira, Pierre Pimpie, Friedrich Pürner, Paulius Saudargas, Pasquale Tridico, Lara Wolters, Stéphanie Yon-Courtin
Substitutes present for the final vote	Marc Botenga, Regina Doherty, Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, Fernand Kartheiser, Janusz Lewandowski, Morten Løkkegaard, Danuše Nerudová, Andreas Schwab, Mariateresa Vivaldini
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote	Vivien Costanzo, Margarita de la Pisa Carrión, Chiara Gemma, Isilda Gomes, Giorgio Gori, Elisabeth Grossmann, Ondřej Knotek, Lara Magoni, Rasmus Nordqvist, Michele Picaro, Thomas Waitz

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

41	+
ECR	Crosetto Giovanni, Gemma Chiara, Magoni Lara, Nesci Denis, Picaro Michele, Vivaldini Mariateresa
PPE	Berger Stefan, Doherty Regina, Falcone Marco, Ferber Markus, Gotink Dirk, Gronkiewicz-Waltz Hanna, Lewandowski Janusz, Navarrete Rojas Fernando, Nerudová Danuse, Niedermayer Ludek, Pereira Lídia, Saudargas Paulius, Schwab Andreas
PfE	Knotek Ondrej, Kubín Tomás, Pimpie Pierre
Renew	Boyer Gilles, Eroglu Engin, Løkkegaard Morten, Ódor Ludovít, Yon-Courtin Stéphanie
S&D	Costanzo Vivien, Fernández Jonás, Fita Claire, Gomes Isilda, Gori Giorgio, Grossmann Elisabeth, Heinäluoma Eero, Lalucq Aurore, Mavrides Costas, Wolters Lara
Verts/ALE	Andresen Rasmus, Boeselager Damian, Nordqvist Rasmus, Waitz Thomas

 

7	-
ESN	Droese Siegbert Frank, Laykova Rada
NI	Pürner Friedrich
PfE	Gyori Eniko
The Left	Botenga Marc, Pedulla' Gaetano, Tridico Pasquale

 

3	0
NI	Kartheiser Fernand
PPE	Hadjipantela Michalis
PfE	de la Pisa Carrión Margarita

 

Key:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstentions

OPINION OF THE COMMITTEE ON THE INTERNAL MARKET AND CONSUMER PROTECTION (05.12.2025)

for the Committee on Security and Defence

Tackling barriers to the single market for defence

(2025/2143(INI))

Rapporteur for opinion: Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz

 

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection submits the following to the Committee on Security and Defence, as the committee responsible :

Amendment  1

Motion for a resolution

Recital A

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
A. whereas given increased geopolitical threats, in particular due to Russia’s aggression in Europe and the crisis in the Middle East, 90 % of EU citizens rightly expect increased EU cooperation in the area of security and defence to protect them and to defend its interests and values on the global stage8 ;	A. whereas given increased geopolitical threats, in particular due to Russia’s unjustifiable and unprovoked full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and continuous aggression in Europe, as well as the crisis in the Middle East, 90 % of EU citizens rightly expect increased EU cooperation in the area of security and defence to protect them and to defend its interests and values on the global stage8;
_________________	_________________
8 Eurobarometer, https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3572.	8 Eurobarometer, https://europa.eu/eurobarometer/surveys/detail/3572.

Amendment  2

Motion for a resolution

Recital A a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	A a. whereas following Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the Union and its Member States have been subjected to multiple attacks carried out by the Russian Federation using hybrid warfare tactics; whereas the Russian Federation continues to present a serious and immediate military threat to Europe, confirmed most recently by drone and fighter jet incursions into the airspace of several Member States; whereas this deteriorating security situation in the Union’s immediate vicinity requires a coherent, coordinated approach, especially with regard to the free flow of products and services in the area of security and defence;

Amendment  3

Motion for a resolution

Recital A b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	A b. whereas in 2024, EU Member States collectively allocated EUR 343 billion to defence spending, a budget only exceeded by the United States, and despite having an economy ten times larger than that of the Russian Federation, the EU still continues to face difficulties in translating this spending into enhancing its preparedness for cases of materialised military threats;

Amendment  4

Motion for a resolution

Recital A c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	A c. whereas strengthening cooperation and investment in security and defence is necessary and must complement other essential Union priorities;

Amendment  5

Motion for a resolution

Recital A d (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	A d. whereas according to the Eurobarometer report on public opinion in the European Union, published in spring 2025, 81 % of EU citizens are in favour of a common defence and security policy among EU Member States, this support reaching its highest level in two decades;

Amendment  6

Motion for a resolution

Recital B

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
B. whereas decades of defence procurement focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have prevented a fully integrated single market for defence, thereby incurring significant extra costs for the taxpayer while undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens;	B. whereas decades of defence procurement focused on the national level, industrial fragmentation, regulatory barriers, underinvestment, divergent foreign policy objectives, lack of integrated capability planning and aggregated demand, as well as competition over intellectual property, have prevented a fully integrated single market for defence, weakening the EU’s interoperability and thereby undermining the EU’s ability to protect the safety of its citizens, while also incurring significant extra costs for taxpayers; whereas the removal of barriers requires harmonised rules and transparent public procurement processes, respecting the principles of fair competition and a level playing field for all actors;

Amendment  7

Motion for a resolution

Recital B a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	B a. whereas the lack of harmonisation, underinvestment and persisting regulatory barriers have meant that, as of 2024, only 19 of the world’s top 100 defence companies were headquartered in the EU, compared to 48 in the United States1a;
	_________________
	1a Clapp, S. et al., ‘Building a common market for European defence’, European Parliament, Directorate-General for Parliamentary Research Services, September 2025.

Amendment  8

Motion for a resolution

Recital B b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	B b. whereas a well-functioning internal market for defence requires coordinated efforts among Member States to ensure efficient resource allocation, reduce fragmentation and accelerate the development of innovative defence technologies;

Amendment  9

Motion for a resolution

Recital B c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	B c. whereas strengthening cooperation, harmonising certification and improving long-term planning can enhance interoperability and cost-effectiveness;

Amendment  10

Motion for a resolution

Recital C

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
C. whereas joint defence planning, development, production and procurement in the Union would allow for increased efficiency and effectiveness of public investment and industrial and operational gains, thereby increasing the social and political acceptance of necessary increases in defence investment in times of constrained budgets;	C. whereas better coordinated defence planning, development, production and procurement in the Union would allow economies of scale, increased efficiency and effectiveness of public investment and industrial and operational gains, thereby increasing the social and political acceptance of necessary increases in defence investment in times of constrained budgets and significantly improving the Union’s and its Member States’ abilities to achieve an adequate level of preparedness to deter the Russian Federation by 2030; whereas the activities mentioned should be conducted in close cooperation with NATO;

Amendment  11

Motion for a resolution

Recital D

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
D. whereas the Letta and Draghi reports highlight a combination of structural weaknesses affecting the competitiveness of the EU’s Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) and identify fragmentation, insufficient public defence spending and limited access to financing as core challenges;	D. whereas the Letta and Draghi reports highlight a combination of structural weaknesses affecting the competitiveness of the EU’s Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) and identify fragmentation, insufficient public defence spending and limited access to financing as core challenges; whereas the single market for defence should be built at EU level, ensuring not only efficiency, competitiveness and industrial resilience, but also equal opportunities for all Member States and industrial actors, including small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);

Amendment  12

Motion for a resolution

Recital D a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	D a. whereas the internal market for defence must be developed in coherence with the internal market for dual-use and civilian technologies, to maximise spillover and cost-effectiveness across sectors;

Amendment  13

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
1. Believes that the dramatic challenges faced by the Union and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate on defence matters; underlines that the EU must fundamentally change its understanding of defence industry production by developing a true single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports;	1. Believes that the dramatic challenges faced by the Union and its Member States require a complete rethinking of the way they cooperate on defence matters; underlines that the EU must fundamentally change its understanding of defence industry production by developing a fully functioning and resilient single market for defence, as called for in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports, which must go hand in hand with principles of democratic oversight and the fair participation of industries of all the Member States;

Amendment  14

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 1 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	1 a. Stresses that strategically important infrastructure for the EU as a whole, such as undersea and terrestrial cables and airports, frequently face hostile attacks, both physical and digital, and require dedicated defence measures and investment;

Amendment  15

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
2. Recalls that enhanced cooperation could lead to enormous efficiency savings of up to 30 % of annual defence spending across the EU, amounting to at least EUR 57 billion annually and significantly boosting the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores the broader advantages for EU competitiveness, resilience, and strategic sovereignty, promising significant employment opportunities, economic development and technological leadership throughout the EU9 ;	2. Recalls that, according to certain estimates, enhanced cooperation could allow larger production runs, enhance standardisation, improve interoperability and lead to enormous efficiency savings of up to 30 % of annual defence spending across the EU, amounting to at least EUR 57 billion annually and significantly boosting the effectiveness of current defence spending; underscores the broader advantages for EU competitiveness, resilience, and strategic sovereignty, promising significant employment opportunities, economic development and technological leadership throughout the EU9;
_________________	_________________
9 Ethan Ilzetki, Guns and Growth: The Economic Consequences of Defense Buildups, February 2025.	9 Ethan Ilzetki, Guns and Growth: The Economic Consequences of Defense Buildups, February 2025.

Amendment  16

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	2 a. Underlines that increasing joint and collaborative defence spending could allow the realisation of economies of scale, the more efficient allocation of resources, the strengthening of the EDTIB and the paving of the way for a genuine EU-wide defence market; encourages the creation of a single market for defence that prioritises the realisation of NATO’s rapid adoption action plan and aims to accelerate national procurement processes and reform acquisition cycles, testing protocols and certification frameworks, ensuring that military innovation keeps pace with the threat environment;

Amendment  17

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 2 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	2 b. Stresses that the EDTIB – comprising prime contractors, mid-caps and SMEs – employs around 500 000 people; stresses the importance of promoting SMEs when building a well-functioning internal market of defence, strengthening regional industrial ecosystems and diversifying value chains, and of giving SMEs the capabilities to compete with larger economic actors active in the sector; underlines that the primary objective of a well-functioning single market for defence should be to strengthen the investment in research, development and innovation capacities, while creating new quality jobs across all Member States;

Amendment  18

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
3. Stresses that only a true single market for defence products can provide the means required to truly establish and maintain a competitive and resilient European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) of scale; underlines that a true single market for defence products is essential to close the capability gaps and to re-establish deterrence and is hence a necessary cornerstone of a strong, sovereign and competitive Union;	3. Stresses that only a fully functioning single market for defence products can provide the means required to truly establish and maintain a geographically balanced, competitive and resilient European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB) of scale, ensuring that small and medium-sized enterprises and national industries can participate on an equal footing; underlines that a fully functioning single market for defence products is essential to ramp up industrial production, replenish stocks, close the capability gaps and to re-establish deterrence, and is hence a necessary cornerstone of a strong, sovereign and competitive Union;

Amendment  19

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 3 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	3 a. Underlines that building a fully functioning single market for defence products and removing the existing barriers are essential for the timely development of key European collaborative defence initiatives such as the Eastern Flank Watch, the Eastern Shield, the Baltic Defence Line, and the European Drone Wall; stresses that it is necessary to standardise defence product requirements, in order to enable an extended use of defence products across the armed forces of different Member States; emphasises that simplifying, streamlining and adapting the EU legal framework is essential to facilitate the flow of goods and services between the participating Member States, as well as actors from across the Union with key expertise in delivering on these objectives; recalls that completing these objectives is paramount to the collective security of the Union as a whole;

Amendment  20

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
4. Urges Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create the true single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides; recalls that the aggregating of demand through common procurement and management throughout the life cycle, regulatory simplification, and cross-border industrial integration at EU level are urgently needed to address such barriers and reduce reliance on non-EU countries as outlined in the Letta and Draghi reports;	4. Urges Member States and the Commission to act swiftly to create a fully functioning single market for defence, acting on both the supply and demand sides, while ensuring that such enhancing of the single market strengthens all Member States equally; recalls that the aggregating of demand through common procurement and management throughout the life cycle, regulatory simplification, standardisation and cross-border industrial integration at EU level are urgently needed to address such barriers, strengthen the EDTIB and gradually reduce reliance on non-EU countries, as outlined in the Letta, Draghi and Niinistö reports, in order to enhance European sovereignty while also seizing the opportunities created by the security and defence partnerships concluded by the Union;

Amendment  21

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	4 a. Underlines that the guiding principle in building a single market for defence needs to be ensuring equal opportunities for all European players; highlights the fact that the EDTIB consists of very diverse actors, in terms of size, nationality and level of engagement in international partnerships; recalls that navigating the current complicated geopolitical context requires that all available resources and capabilities be used, focusing on rapid short-term industrial ramp-up, replenishing stocks, and ensuring the availability of military products that are in critical demand, with a long-term vision for attaining European strategic autonomy; calls on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to ensure an appropriate level of flexibility in upcoming legislative and non-legislative proposals aimed at developing the internal market for security and defence products, in order to encourage a fair, gradual and inclusive approach towards attaining these long-term goals;

Amendment  22

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	4 b. Welcomes initiatives to ramp up production capacity and accelerate innovation;

Amendment  23

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 4 c (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	4 c. Stresses the need to build a genuine internal market for defence based on transparency and fair competition; underlines the importance of fostering a balanced development of industrial capabilities across Member States, encouraging complementarities and synergies that strengthen the EDTIB as a whole; underlines that increased investment in defence requires increased investment in promoting training, upskilling and reskilling of workers, as well as in quality jobs;

Amendment  24

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 5

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
5. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplications and inefficiencies and hampers the strengthening of defence readiness; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape;	5. Underlines that the current structure of the defence industrial landscape leads to unnecessary duplications and inefficiencies and hampers the strengthening of defence readiness; underlines that, coupled with underinvestment, this fragmentation prevents the realisation of economies of scale that could arise from pooling defence equipment procurement and production across European companies; highlights the vital need to overcome fragmentation in the EU defence industrial landscape as well as the need to promote and incentivise fair competition as a mechanism to improve its competitiveness; urges the Commission and the Member States to explore all possible ways, in accordance with the current Treaties, to promote voluntary cooperation, pool demand and improve coordination among European companies in order to enhance industrial capacity and interoperability;

Amendment  25

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
6. Deplores the lack of coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the Union, which has resulted in divergent rules and eligibility criteria, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries; deplores that national priorities frequently take precedence over cooperation within the Union;	6. Deplores the lack of coordinated capability planning and spending on defence products across the Union and the limited alignment between EU instruments and NATO processes, which has resulted in divergent rules and eligibility criteria, creating legal uncertainty and often leading Member States to prioritise bilateral cooperation with non-EU countries; deplores that national priorities frequently take precedence over cooperation within the Union;

Amendment  26

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 6 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	6 a. Calls for greater regulatory alignment and standard-setting at EU level, in accordance with NATO standards, facilitating interoperability and competitiveness;

Amendment  27

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 7

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
7. Believes that the current EU legislative frameworks do not provide conditions for procurement of goods with fast innovation cycles, such as in the area of drone development; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement; highlights the need for dedicated support for small and medium-sized enterprises and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building industrial redundancies that increase the Union’s resilience and security of supply;	7. Emphasises that the rapid innovation cycle in defence technology creates new challenges for the Member States and the defence industry to keep up with technological developments; considers that these developments merit new tools, including for defence procurement; highlights the importance of adapting the EU legislative frameworks to support the swift procurement of rapidly evolving technologies, such as drones, to foster innovation and agility in the European defence market; expresses concern that the single market for defence is still undermined by the insufficiently harmonised application of its rules by the Member States and by disproportionate use of the exemption provided for under Article 346 TFEU, which hampers the push towards joint EU defence procurement; highlights the need for dedicated support for small and medium-sized enterprises and small mid-caps to facilitate their involvement in the defence industry supply chain, with a view to increasing innovation while building industrial redundancies that increase the Union’s resilience and security of supply; stresses the need to promote equal access for SMEs, transparent competition and fair geographic distribution of contracts; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s proposal to include ‘innovation partnerships’ in the updated version of Directive 2009/81/EC on security and defence procurement; underlines, nevertheless, that innovative activities are subject to numerous risks and are long-term activities that cannot be covered by urgent procedures; calls on the Commission to present an updated version of the defence ‘innovation partnerships’ in the upcoming overall revision of the directive, to better adapt this instrument to the specificities of the defence market and the challenging current security context;

Amendment  28

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
8. Considers that the absence of a harmonised EU export control system continues to generate obstacles to the functioning of a single market for defence through its impact on intra-EU transfers; recalls that defence production today relies heavily on integrated cross-border supply chains, with components sourced from multiple Member States, which, in the event of an export block, creates uncertainty for industry and supply chains;	8. Underlines that rules concerning intra-EU transfers need to be adapted to allow an enhanced cross-border flow of defence-related products and their components within the EU; highlights the fact that provisions concerning EU export controls remain under the competence of Member States; recalls that defence production today relies heavily on integrated cross-border supply chains, with components sourced from multiple Member States, which, in the event of an export block, creates uncertainty for industry and supply chains; notes that certain critical technologies are only developed by a few global providers and are too costly not to be aggregated and coordinated beyond the EU level, including within NATO frameworks;

Amendment  29

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 8 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	8 a. Stresses that defence measures must also include cybersecurity and cyber defence measures; stresses the importance of building capacity in this area across all Member States for the benefit of the Union as a whole;

Amendment  30

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
9. Calls on the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with adequate funding under the next multiannual financial framework to effectively incentivise the Member States to enter into joint capability development and procurement agreements and their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest and Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of adequate funding;	9. Calls on the Council and the Commission to equip EU defence programmes with adequate funding under the next multiannual financial framework to effectively incentivise the Member States to enter into joint capability development and procurement agreements and their defence industries to engage in closer cross-border cooperation; underlines that collaborative European projects, such as the European Drone Wall and the Eastern Flank Watch, require a timely allocation of appropriate funding in order to become operational in the shortest time possible; stresses that this necessary funding must be complementary to existing Union priorities, particularly cohesion policy and social investment; highlights the potential of new frameworks, such as the European Defence Projects of Common Interest and Structures for European Armament Programmes, to deliver on those objectives with the assistance of adequate funding;

Amendment  31

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	9 a. Calls on the Member States to do their utmost to make the single market for defence a reality; stresses, therefore, that the Member States must be encouraged to cooperate in a spirit of full trust and to define common strategic visions for EU defence, fostering the Union’s genuine strategic autonomy;

Amendment  32

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 9 b (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	9 b. Calls on the Commission to establish a framework for mutual recognition and harmonisation of certification for defence products and components, ensuring that goods certified in one Member State can circulate freely within the Union; stresses that this would remove one of the main barriers to a functioning single market for defence and would increase security of supply;

Amendment  33

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 10

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
10. Believes that EU institutions and agencies should enhance their coordinating role between Member States and welcomes the European Defence Agency’s contribution, particularly through the Capability Development Plan and the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, emphasising that its expertise should be fully utilised; welcomes the contribution of multilateral procurement agencies such as the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation, which promote the harmonisation of equipment among EU Member States and partner states;	10. Believes that EU institutions and agencies should intensify their coordinating role between Member States and welcomes the European Defence Agency’s contribution, particularly through the Capability Development Plan and the Coordinated Annual Review on Defence, emphasising that its expertise should be fully utilised; welcomes the contribution of multilateral procurement agencies such as the Organisation for Joint Armament Cooperation, which promote the harmonisation of equipment among EU Member States and partner states;

Amendment  34

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
11. Calls on Member States to apply a ‘buy European’ approach, which prioritises the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the European Defence Technological and Industrial Base (EDTIB), Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EEA/EFTA) countries and, as a close second layer, third countries with which the Union has signed a Security and Defence Partnership, as it would ensure the EDTIB a predictable order volume, drive up private investment in R&D for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes;	11. Recalls the central role of the Member States in decisions on defence procurement, including in the choice of partners; calls on Member States to apply a ‘European preference’ approach, which, while avoiding a protectionist approach and complying with the EU’s World Trade Organization commitments, supports strengthening the EDTIB in the long term without compromising the ability of the Member States to make full use of all available resources and capabilities needed to urgently ramp up European defence readiness, in order to ensure that the Member States and the Union have a strong and sufficient European defence posture by 2030, in close cooperation with NATO; stresses that this approach should prioritise the common procurement and increased production of defence products from the EDTIB, Ukraine, European Economic Area/European Free Trade Association (EEA/EFTA) countries, as well as products resulting from cooperation with third countries with which the Union has signed a Security and Defence Partnership; underlines the importance of maintaining and strengthening industrial partnerships with key allies and like-minded partners, including within NATO frameworks, to ensure access to critical technologies and supply chain resilience; notes that such an approach would ensure the EDTIB a predictable order volume, drive up private investment in R&D for defence products, and help the EDTIB to deliver innovative defence products in sufficient volumes;

Amendment  35

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 11 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	11 a. Stresses that the concept of European preference should be interpreted broadly to reflect today’s globally integrated defence value chains; underlines that companies producing defence goods within the Union should be eligible under this principle, irrespective of whether they have foreign parent companies or operate under licensed production, provided that manufacturing, value creation and compliance with EU security requirements take place on EU territory; emphasises that the concept of European preference should not affect partnerships between entities established in the Union and partners from like-minded third countries, in order to encourage the transfer of know-how and technology to entities established in the Union;

Amendment  36

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 12

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
12. Urges the EU and its Member States to treat Ukraine as an integral part of the single market for defence to the utmost extent possible, taking into account the fact that Ukraine’s future lies in the EU and that it would provide benefits for both the EDTIB and for Ukraine’s Defence Technological and Industrial Base;	12. Calls for the EU and its Member States to engage in collaborative security and defence projects with Ukraine and treat it as an integral part of the single market for defence to the utmost extent possible, taking into account the fact that Ukraine’s future lies in the EU and that it would provide benefits for both the EDTIB and for Ukraine’s Defence Technological and Industrial Base;

Amendment  37

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 13

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
13. Believes that the implementation of Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement needs to be significantly improved and calls on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision; calls on the Commission to issue a recommendation for an interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in line with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU; calls on Member States to make use of different contract forms that stipulate for innovation, competition and private capital investments;	13. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal to simplify procedures under Directive 2009/81/EC on defence and sensitive security procurement, as part of the defence omnibus; highlights, however, that the proposed changes are limited in scope; believes that the directive’s implementation needs to be significantly improved; calls, furthermore, on the Commission to propose an ambitious revision of the directive and adapt it to the long-term challenges arising from the current complicated security context; calls on the Commission to issue a recommendation for an interpretation of Article 346 TFEU in line with the current reality of an interdependent security architecture in the EU; calls on Member States to make use of different contract forms that stipulate for innovation, competition and private capital investments, while ensuring full compliance with competition rules, integrity requirements and anti-corruption standards;

Amendment  38

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 14

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
14. Underlines the need to simplify and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers, including mutual recognition of criteria and certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; calls on the Commission to urgently present proposals to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, to ensure simplification for the circulation of such products inside the Union, in particular eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; further calls on Member States to work towards that same goal; calls on the EU Member States to agree on new common export control rules for arms and defence goods;	14. Welcomes the Commission proposal for a directive amending Directives 2009/43/EC and 2009/81/EC and underlines the need to simplify and abolish hurdles related to intra-EU transfers, including mutual recognition of criteria and certification and a simplification of prior authorisation requests; welcomes, in this regard, the Commission’s proposal to simplify Directive 2009/43/EC on intra-EU transfers of defence-related products; calls on the Commission to further harmonise intra-EU transfers of defence products, facilitating the circulation of such products inside the Union, by, in particular, eliminating authorisation requirements for components that are already integrated or are to be integrated into a defence product and cannot be transferred or exported as such; further calls on Member States to work towards that same goal;

Amendment  39

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 15 a (new)

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
	15 a. Encourages the Commission and the Member States to further develop joint planning and procurement, ensuring transparent procedures, appropriate social and environmental considerations, and fair opportunities for SMEs;

Amendment  40

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 16

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
16. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience against hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; calls on the Commission and Member States to create incentives to localise supply chains in the Union of the most critical inputs for defence products;	16. Stresses the need to develop a more proactive role for the EU in sustaining investment in dual-use technologies and products, in particular when they are part of the supply chains of defence products, as a means of enhancing the EU’s security of supply and resilience against hybrid and emerging threats; advocates the promotion of civilian commercialisation of these technologies as a way to expand market opportunities and strengthen the EDTIB, fostering synergies between military and civilian development; emphasises the need to promote greater integration between dual-use companies from the military sector and those from the civil sector in the Member States and like-minded countries; calls on the Commission and Member States to create incentives to localise supply chains in the Union of the most critical inputs for defence products;

Amendment  41

Motion for a resolution

Paragraph 17

Motion for a resolution	Amendment
17. Firmly believes that in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and Russian disinformation campaigns, it is critical that Parliament play a central role in the planning, oversight and scrutiny of this process;	17. Firmly believes that in order to guarantee democratic legitimacy and the transparency of EU defence policies in times of hybrid warfare and Russian disinformation campaigns, it is critical that Parliament play a central role in the oversight and scrutiny of this process;

ANNEX: DECLARATION OF INPUT

Pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure, the rapporteur for opinion declares that she included in her opinion input on matters pertaining to the subject of the file that she received, in the preparation of the draft opinion , prior to the adoption thereof in committee, from the following interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register[1], or from the following representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies:

1. Interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register

GE Aerospace part of General Electric Company - 4016736872-59

Polska Grupa Zbrojeniowa - 804644243175-65

MBDA - 87688971079-66

DuPont de Nemours International SARL - 3181166932-58

ASD-Eurospace 873508417106-05

Boeing Belgium SRL - 62505293737-81

Airbus - 2732167674-76

 

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur for opinion.

Where natural persons are identified in the list by their name, by their function or by both, the rapporteur for opinion declares that she has submitted to the natural persons concerned the European Parliament’s Data Protection Notice No 484 (https://www.europarl.europa.eu/data-protect/index.do), which sets out the conditions applicable to the processing of their personal data and the rights linked to that processing.

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Date adopted	4.12.2025
Result of final vote	+ : 30 - : 4 0 : 8
Members present for the final vote	Pablo Arias Echeverría, Jeannette Baljeu, Laura Ballarín Cereza, Katarina Barley, Arno Bausemer, Anna Cavazzini, Stefano Cavedagna, Henrik Dahl, Adnan Dibrani, Regina Doherty, Klara Dostalova, Michał Dworczyk, Kamila Gasiuk-Pihowicz, Hanna Gedin, Elisabeth Grossmann, Maria Guzenina, Svenja Hahn, Pierre Jouvet, Arba Kokalari, Nikola Minchev, Piotr Müller, Gheorghe Piperea, Christel Schaldemose, Ernő Schaller-Baross, Andreas Schwab, Tomislav Sokol, Kim Van Sparrentak, Marion Walsmann
Substitutes present for the final vote	José Cepeda, Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová, Salvatore De Meo, François Kalfon, Idoia Mendia, Aura Salla, Paulius Saudargas, Joanna Scheuring-Wielgus, Susana Solís Pérez, Ivaylo Valchev, Mariateresa Vivaldini
Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote	Valérie Deloge, Niels Geuking, Milan Mazurek

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL
BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

30	+
PPE	Arias Echeverría Pablo, Dahl Henrik, De Meo Salvatore, Doherty Regina, Gasiuk-Pihowicz Kamila, Geuking Niels, Kokalari Arba, Salla Aura, Saudargas Paulius, Schwab Andreas, Sokol Tomislav, Solís Pérez Susana, Walsmann Marion
Renew	Baljeu Jeannette, Cifrová Ostrihonová Veronika, Hahn Svenja, Minchev Nikola
S&D	Ballarín Cereza Laura, Barley Katarina, Cepeda José, Dibrani Adnan, Grossmann Elisabeth, Guzenina Maria, Jouvet Pierre, Kalfon François, Mendia Idoia, Schaldemose Christel, Scheuring-Wielgus Joanna
Verts/ALE	Cavazzini Anna, Van Sparrentak Kim

 

4	-
ESN	Bausemer Arno, Mazurek Milan
PfE	Deloge Valérie, Schaller-Baross Erno

 

8	0
ECR	Cavedagna Stefano, Dworczyk Michal, Müller Piotr, Piperea Gheorghe, Valchev Ivaylo, Vivaldini Mariateresa
PfE	Dostalova Klara
The Left	Gedin Hanna

 

Key:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstentions

INFORMATION ON ADOPTION  IN COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

Date adopted	27.1.2026
Result of final vote	+ : 24 - : 6 0 : 6

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL BY THE COMMITTEE RESPONSIBLE

24	+
PPE	Wouter Beke, Salvatore De Meo, Niels Flemming Hansen, Andrey Kovatchev, Vangelis Meimarakis, Nicolás Pascual de la Parte, Hélder Sousa Silva, Michal Szczerba, Riho Terras, Pekka Toveri
Renew	Petras Austrevicius, Engin Eroglu, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, Lucia Yar
S&D	Lucia Annunziata, Francisco Assis, Tobias Cremer, Elio Di Rupo, Javi López, Costas Mavrides, Sven Mikser
Verts/ALE	Hannah Neumann, Martins Stakis, Reinier Van Lanschot

 

6	-
ESN	Hans Neuhoff
PPE	Christophe Gomart
PfE	György Hölvényi, Pierre-Romain Thionnet, Roberto Vannacci
The Left	Özlem Demirel

 

6	0
ECR	Alberico Gambino, Arkadiusz Mularczyk, Reinis Poznaks, Alexandr Vondra
PfE	Rachel Blom, Jaroslava Pokorná Jermanová

 

Key:

+  :  in favour

-  :  against

0  :  abstentions

• [1] OJ L 331, 14.12.2017, p. 57, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2017/2315/oj.
• [2] OJ L 146, 10.6.2009, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/43/oj.
• [3] OJ L 216, 20.8.2009, p. 76, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2009/81/oj.
• [4] OJ L 170, 12.5.2021, p. 149, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2021/697/oj.
• [5] OJ L 185, 24.7.2023, p. 7, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/1525/oj.
• [6] OJ L, 2023/2418, 26.10.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2418/oj.
• [7] OJ L, 2025/2643, 29.12.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/2643/oj.
• [8] OJ L, 2025/2653, 22.12.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/2653/oj.
• [9] OJ L, 2025/1106, 28.5.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2025/1106/oj.
• [10] OJ C 494, 8.12.2021, p. 54.
• [11] OJ C, C/2025/4388, 9.9.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/4388/oj.
• [12] Texts adopted, P10_TA(2025)0285.
• [13] Council Common Position 2008/944/CFSP of 8 December 2008 defining common rules governing control of exports of military technology and equipment (OJ L 335, 13.12.2008, p. 99, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/compos/2008/944/oj).
• [14] Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 65, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/24/oj).
• [15] Directive 2014/66/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the conditions of entry and residence of third-country nationals in the framework of an intra-corporate transfer (OJ L 157, 27.5.2014, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/66/oj).
• [16] Regulation (EU) 2024/1252 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 April 2024 establishing a framework for ensuring a secure and sustainable supply of critical raw materials and amending Regulations (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1724 and (EU) 2019/1020 (OJ L, 2024/1252, 3.5.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1252/oj).
• [1] Interinstitutional Agreement of May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register (OJ L 207, 11.6.2021, p. 1, ELI:http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2021/611/oj).
• [1] Interinstitutional Agreement of May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register (OJ L 207, 11.6.2021, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2021/611/oj).
• [1] Interinstitutional Agreement of May 2021 between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and the European Commission on a mandatory transparency register (OJ L 207, 11.6.2021, p. 1, ELI:http://data.europa.eu/eli/agree_interinstit/2021/611/oj).