Dies ist eine HTML Version eines Anhanges der Informationsfreiheitsanfrage 'Lobby meetings intra-EU investment protection'.




Ref. Ares(2020)3025851 - 11/06/2020
   May 2019
AFEP’s 10 Initiatives for an 
Attractive, Competitive 
and Sustainable Europe
The European Union enters this year into a new 
This is why we are calling on the European Union to 
political cycle, with the election of the Euro-
set three goals for the next five years:
pean Parliament, the new Commission and the 
President of the European Council. The French 
    Enhance the European territory’s attractive-
Association of Large Companies (Afep), which 
ness to encourage and sustain investment and 
represents 115 of the largest French compa-
employment in Europe;
nies, is seizing this opportunity to propose 10 
priority initiatives for the next five years. 
     Act in favour of European economic interests 
beyond the borders of the Union to ensure a level 

Afep supports European integration, which allowed 
playing field with our major economic partners;
companies to benefit from the single market, an 
   Provide companies with the conditions for 
indispensable engine of their growth. However, 
them to invest in low-carbon technologies in 
companies have also had to face dramatic regula-
Europe to achieve the revolution of climate neu-
tory inflation over the last decade, both at national 
trality by 2050, by integrating all related policies, 
and European level. This inflation, while helping to 
including environmental and trade policies.
ensure financial stability and better protection for 
consumers and investors, has also created new 
barriers to the development of European compa-
We call on the European institutions to take into ac-
nies and degraded their competitiveness compared 
count the competitiveness of European companies 
to that of their main competitors from the US and 
in the legislation they wish to adopt and to ensure 
emerging countries.
that legislation does not constitute barriers, but 
tools for competitiveness. This paradigm shift is ab-
Companies are calling for a paradigm shift: business 
solutely necessary for the European Union to remain 
regulation should no longer focus solely on stability 
a global economic power and an engine of global 
or the protection of consumers and investors, but 
growth, and to create more jobs.
must also  become a tool for competitiveness 
both internally and externally, and live up to 
current transformations, particularly in terms of 
climate change

(N.B. : the numbering of the initiatives does not imply a priority order)
French Association of Large Companies
11 avenue Delcassé
4-6 rue Belliard
www.afep.com
75008 Paris
1040 Bruxelles

Initiative 2: Ensure That European and 
1 .
Foreign Investments Are Well Protec-
ted in the EU
ENHANCE THE EUROPEAN TER-
  The dismantling of bilateral investment treaties 
RITORY’S ATTRACTIVENESS TO 
between Member States following the Achméa jud-
ENCOURAGE AND SUSTAIN IN-
gement calls for the establishment of a renewed 
VESTMENT AND EMPLOYMENT IN 
framework for the protection of intra-EU invest-
ments during the next legislature.  A pure and 
EUROPE
simple referral to the national courts is unsatisfac-
Initiative 1: Ensure More Efficient and 
tory as it would lead to increasing duration and 
Stable Financing of the Real Economy 
costs of the proceedings and to deteriorating the 
in the Long Term
legal protection of investors.
 There is a need to rapidly develop a legislative 
        Companies’ priorities and constraints should 
framework or an interstate agreement of subs-
be better integrated into the development of 
titution at European level, based on arbitra-
financial market regulation in order to make Eu-
tion. This framework should, firstly, grant investors 
ropean markets more attractive and thereby push 
rights equivalent to those guaranteed under 
forward the Capital Markets Union. It is essential 
bilateral treaties, and secondly, establish an ef-
that the effectiveness and relevance of existing and 
fective and impartial system of dispute resolu-
new regulation are no longer evaluated solely on 
tion, independent of host states and accessible to 
the basis of financial stability and investor protec-
all companies. It should thus reaffirm the right to 
tion. 
compensation in the event of direct and indirect 
expropriation. Companies want first and foremost 
 It is necessary to create a long-term investor 
that solutions based on arbitration continue to be 
status, by developing a regulatory environment 
explored. It could be a European Court of Arbitra-
that fosters long-term investment. This is essential 
tion or pre-existing arbitral bodies such as the 
in order to meet the long-term financing needs for 
Permanent Court of Arbitration. Should this kind 
infrastructure and R&D, in particular to address in-
of solutions not be possible, the option of a Euro-
vestment challenges for energy transition and the 
pean investment court, modelled on the Unified 
fight against climate change.
Patent Court or a specialised chamber of the Court 
  Seeking to create a supranational employee 
of First Instance, could be explored.
shareholding system harmonising all the rules, in-
cluding tax and social rules, would be difficult to 
Initiative 3: Take the Lead to Define 
achieve. However, Europe must at least aim to a 
the Tax Rules That Will Allow Europe 
harmonisation of the rules deemed essential 
to Be Attractive and Its Companies to 
by companies such as discount and matching 
Remain Competitive
contributions and encourage mutual recogni-
tion mechanisms of existing national regimes

 The convergence of tax rules must continue, but 
This would both strengthen the stability of the 
from now on in a perspective of attractiveness 
shareholding that companies need to innovate and 
of the European territory and of competitive-
invest, and facilitate the participation of employees 
ness of its companies: the American tax reform 
in the capital of their company on advantageous 
must bring about a wake-up call in an international 
terms, while developing a sense of belonging to 
context of increased tax competition.
the company regardless of the country in which 
they are located.
2
  May 2019

  Work on the Common Consolidated Corporate 
ronmental standards, should be required to com-
Tax Base must succeed to allow European compa-
ply with these standards and the same reporting 
nies to compete as well as their foreign competitors: 
obligations as EU companies, once they operate in 
a common tax system that encourages innovation 
the European market and exceed a certain turnover 
and investment is essential. This convergence 
threshold.
must also concern the corporate tax rate.
Initiative 5: Preserve the Positive 
  Europe must act as an international tax le-
gislator, in the face of the OECD in which Member 
Contribution of Companies to Society, 
States are advancing in a disorganised manner.
Without Replacing the States
Initiative 4: Modernise Corporate Re-
 Corporate Social Responsibility issues are at the 
porting by Integrating Competitive-
heart of the concerns of Boards of Directors. Howe-
ness Issues
ver, due to the extreme complexity of the challenges 
related to globalisation as well as climate change, 
governments tend to require companies to carry out 
  European companies are facing an increasingly 
social and societal missions that they are not able or 
complex and costly regulatory environment that 
that they do not want to assume anymore. However, 
places them in an unfavourable position com-
companies must not be diverted from their pri-
pared to their competitors which are not subject to 
mary purpose of generating value and making 
the same amount of regulatory obligations, particu-
profit, even if they must integrate their develop-
larly in terms of reporting.
ment in a complementary approach by contribu-
    Europe must  embark on a major exercise to 
ting to the collective well-being.
simplify information, reporting and compliance 
 A Recommendation on companies’ long-term 
obligations, taking into account technological 
development
value creation could be drafted to acknowledge this 
: this is about revising the different 
texts in a coordinated and coherent way and eli-
evolution towards the creation of value in the long 
minating the obligations made obsolete by tech-
term whilst considering the interest of all stakehol-
nological evolution. Regulators must also take into 
ders of the company. There is no need to consider a 
account this evolution in their supervisory practices 
European directive or regulation, since most corporate 
in order to reduce the administrative burden for 
governance codes in Europe already include these 
companies, while identifying and controlling risks.
principles at the heart of the missions of Boards of Di-
rectors. A recommendation to Member States could 
 It is necessary to develop a single non-finan-
allow national codes to converge.
cial reporting standard under the leadership of 
the European Union. The EU must position itself 
forcefully in the discussions between prescribers 
and standard setters, involving companies, to de-
fend the European vision and values in this area. 
Materiality must remain the guiding principle of 
non-financial information to avoid constant and 
endless development of new reporting obliga-
tions and injunctions.
  Europe must make the Directive on non-fi-
nancial reporting applicable to third-country 
companies. Third-country competitors, which 
sometimes disrespect European social and envi-
    May 2019
3

  Finally, the EU needs to further  protect the 
2 .
strategic interests of its economy and compa-
nies. The swift implementation of the Foreign 
Direct Investment Screening Regulation should 
ACT IN FAVOUR OF EUROPEAN ECO- be a first step towards a more integrated approach 
NOMIC INTERESTS BEYOND THE 
to screening at Community level.
BORDERS OF THE UNION TO EN-
SURE A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD WITH  Initiative 7: Adapt Merger Control to the 
Challenges of Globalisation
OUR MAJOR ECONOMIC PARTNERS
Initiative 6: Better Defend European 
  Merger control must take into account dis-
Interests in International Trade Rela- tortions of competition in third countries. The 
tions
takeover of European companies by third-country 
companies should be analysed in particular with re-
 The EU needs a comprehensive trade and eco-
gard to the status of the latter (state-owned com-
nomic strategy, especially with respect to its two  panies) or aid/subsidies received in their country 
main partners, the United States and China, to re-
of origin. The Commission must first collect speci-
duce the competitiveness gap between these  fic information. To this end, EU trade agreements 
countries and the EU, to maintain a level playing 
with third countries must require transparency of 
field between EU companies and their US and  subsidies and state aid.
Chinese competitors, and to ensure a stronger 
  The Commission’s relevant market analy-
EU influence on world markets.
sis must consider not only global competition, 
   The EU must continue its efforts to open up  but also potential future competition in time 
third-country markets through the negotiation of 
horizons consistent with the economic reality 
trade agreements in priority areas for EU compa-
(beyond 5 years). The aim is to build a more dyna-
nies and the adoption of level-playing-field rules at 
mic and long-term approach to global competition 
the multilateral and/or bilateral level, in particular 
that takes into account both the well-being of the 
to correct the distorting policies of its main trading 
consumer and the economic reality faced by Euro-
partners.
pean companies.
 The EU trade policy must equip itself with uni-
 The Commission must support its decisions 
lateral tools for gaining/restoring market ac-
by taking better account of the impacts in areas 
cess, particularly in the area of public procurement 
other than competition (competitiveness, em-
(“IPI” initiative) in the face of barriers such as the 
ployment, international trade, etc.), according 
“Buy-American Act” or for guaranteeing respect  to transparent and fair procedures. Interservice 
for intellectual property, including in the case of 
consultation should be strengthened from the 
online sales of counterfeit products on platforms 
notification stage and should not only concern 
located in third countries.
the draft decision; it should fully involve in DG 
COMP’s investigation the relevant Commission 
 The EU must also be able to counter the restrictive 
Directorates-General, in particular DG GROW, DG 
effects for companies of US and Chinese initiatives 
TRADE, and DG EMPL. To ensure this process, the 
vis-à-vis third countries, for example by introdu-
Merger Regulation needs to be amended to take 
cing positive conditionalities in past partnership  into account in the competition analysis the si-
agreements with these third countries.  The EU  gnificant positive contributions of mergers to 
must also safeguard its companies from the ef-
adopted European policies, similar to the prece-
fects of extraterritorial legislation adopted by its  dent existing in the European texts encouraging 
trading partners.
IPCEIs. 
4
    May 2019

Initiative 8: Build a European Union Tax 
3 .
Diplomacy to Better Defend European 
Companies
PROVIDE COMPANIES WITH THE 
 European companies are increasingly confronted 
CONDITIONS FOR THEM TO INVEST 
with the protectionist tax practices of third coun-
IN LOW-CARBON TECHNOLOGIES 
tries. Bypassing tax treaties, claiming an increa-
IN EUROPE TO ACHIEVE THE REVO-
singly important share of the profit of European 
companies: the practices of source States are de-
LUTION OF CLIMATE NEUTRALITY 
veloping to increase the share of tax of European 
BY 2050, BY INTEGRATING ALL RE-
companies on their territory. These protectionist 
LATED POLICIES, INCLUDING ENVI-
practices are at the expense of companies but also 
RONMENTAL AND TRADE POLICIES
of tax revenues of European countries.
  The Member States’ isolated reactions to these 
widespread practices are often not very effective. 
AFEP supports the Paris Agreement which lays 
The European Commission must be able to coor-
down a political objective of climate neutrality 
dinate a concerted defence of the companies 
for States. This objective, unprecedented in the his-
against these practices in order to weigh all its 
tory, means that greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 
weight to stop them.
must be cut down to the level of the absorption 
capacity of natural (forest, biomass) and artificial 
(removal technologies) sinks.
First of all, the European Union must show its abi-
lity to deliver on its climate and energy targets by 
2030 (40 % GHG reduction, 32 % of renewable en-
ergy, 32.5 % energy efficiency)through the effective 
transposition of the newly adopted Energy Union 
package and the implementation of an efficient 
governance ensuring that national policies are on 
track.
To reach climate neutrality by 2050, the EU and 
the Member States must set the right condi-
tions, involving the society as a whole, beyond 
the economic players and public authorities. 
These cumulative conditions must rely on an 
integrated and systemic approach. They include: 
pursuing the modernisation of the energy system 
which is still the main source of emissions today; 
changing society behaviours to tap the potential 
of emission reductions in transport, building and 
agriculture; developing circular economy and pro-
gress beyond the sole CO2 criteria. Moreover, the 
two high-priority conditions are: passing the low 
carbon investment “wall”, and removing com-
petition distortions outside the EU, in particular 
through international trade agreements.
    May 2019
5

Initiative 9: Pass the Unprecedented 
Initiative 10: Remove Competition Dis-
Low-Carbon Investment “Wall”
tortions Outside the EU
 Company leaders at the highest level should be 
  A shared diagnosis must be established at EU 
urgently associated to the European institutions’ 
level to: (i) objectively identify the interactions 
and Member States’ work, in order to assess the 
between international trade flows and GHG 
needs and pave the way for the necessary invest-
emissions (measurement of import and export 
ments in the middle and long term, at French and 
emissions), and (ii) then understand the conditions 
European level, in line with the climate neutrality 
under which climate-related disciplines in trade 
objective, for instance through regular meetings in a 
international agreements can be an incentive for 
dedicated discussion forum.
third countries to reduce their emissions, especially 
through investments in low-carbon technologies, 
 The EU funding policy of R&D&I must be adap-
while ensuring a level playing field between emit-
ted to the identified investment needs, while 
ting and competing countries. The European Com-
calibrating all European funding programs to 
mission should be encouraged to launch a study or 
match the funding capacity of the main com-
a communication on this issue. 
peting regions in the world (USA and China in 
  The EU should assess the opportunity to create 
particular), and promoting a strong ambition for 
an annual barometer of the EU carbon footprint 
both energy source decarbonisation and energy 
including emissions of EU imports and of the 
storage.
emission reductions of the planet resulting from 
iThose investments should embed comple-
the EU exports of low carbon solutions. This would 
mentary solutions addressing environmental is-
allow to evaluate whether emission reductions wit-
sues, which are more challenging to measure but 
hin the EU lead to increase the emissions outside 
equally strategic for the balance of our societies. 
the EU. If so, protection measures of the affected 
It is therefore fundamental to take into account 
sectors should be taken.
company long cycles of investments, enabling 
them to integrate upstream environmental cri-
teria (eco-design, impacts on water resources, 
biodiversity, raw materials, workers’ and pu-
blic health)
  and promote dialogue between all 
concerned players.
6
  May 2019

TOOLBOX
 to Improve the Quality of European legislation
 Conduct impact assessments on the compromise amendments of the European Parliament
In order to ensure that the European Parliament’s reports are prepared on the basis of transparent, 
complete and balanced evidence
, an impact assessment on the compromise amendments ne-
gotiated between the European Parliament’s political groups should be mandatory before a vote in 
the parliamentary committee. These assessments would ensure that policy makers and stakehol-
ders are aware of the economic, social and environmental effects 
of the policies discussed. They 
would improve European legislation, by informing policy makers of the potential ramifications of 
their legislative work, improving the transparency and legitimacy of contributions and reflections, 
and clarifying the texts.
  Strengthen inter-service consultations
The procedure used within the European Commission to obtain formal advice from other Direc-
torate-Generals when drafting a legislative proposal needs to be strengthened, in order to make 
consultations systematic and transparent
. The response period of the normal procedure (from 
two to three weeks) should be extended, the use of the 48-hour «fast track» procedure limited and 
clearly justified, and the feedback and opinions of the consulted services made public.
  Make the governance of the techno-economic models used before the impact assessments of 
the European Commission more transparent
There is a need to improve the governance and transparency of the techno-economic models 
managed by third parties and used by the Commission for the design of public policies and the 
setting of large quantified targets (e.g. PRIMES from the National Technical University of Athens for 
energy, GAINS from IIASA for non-CO2 emissions, etc.), by allowing at least national experts and 
experts from impacted activities, as well as other stakeholders, to consult and participate in 
their updating. The working process between the Commission and the different parties should 
be formalised and made public
. In the long run, it would be desirable to endow the European 
Commission with its own model
.
7
  May 2019

About AFEP 
Since 1982, Afep brings together large companies operating in France. The Association, 
based in Paris and Brussels, aims to foster a business-friendly environment and to present 
the company members’ vision to French public authorities, European institutions and in-
ternational organisations. Restoring business competitiveness to achieve growth and sus-
tainable employment in Europe and tackle the challenges of globalisation is Afep’s core 
priority. Afep has around 115 members. More than 8 million people are employed by Afep 
companies and their annual combined turnover amounts to €2,600 billion. 
Afep is involved in drafting cross-sectoral legislation, at French and European level, in the 
following areas: economy, taxation, company law and corporate governance, corporate fi-
nance and financial markets, competition, intellectual property and consumer affairs, la-
bour law and social protection, environment and energy, corporate social responsibility and 
trade.
Contacts
Jérémie Pélerin - x.xxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx
/ +32 2 219 90 20
Justine Richard-Morin – x.xxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxx.xxx
  MAY 2019
8