text:
 19.10.2017
 BG
 Официален вестник на Европейския съюз
 L 270/29
 РЕШЕНИЕ НА СЪВМЕСТНИЯ КОМИТЕТ НА ЕИП
 No 59/2016
 от 18 март 2016 година
 за изменение на приложение XXI (Статистика) към Споразумението за ЕИП [2017/1889]
 СЪВМЕСТНИЯТ КОМИТЕТ НА ЕИП,
 като взе предвид Споразумението за Европейското икономическо пространство („Споразумението за ЕИП“), и по-специално член 98 от него,
 като има предвид, че:
 (1)
 Регламент (ЕС) 2015/359 на Комисията от 4 март 2015 г. за прилагане на Регламент (ЕО) No 1338/2008 на Европейския парламент и на Съвета по отношение на статистиката за разходите и финансирането на здравното обслужване (1) следва да бъде включен в Споразумението за ЕИП.
 (2)
 Поради това приложение XXI към Споразумението за ЕИП следва да бъде съответно изменено,
 ПРИЕ НАСТОЯЩОТО РЕШЕНИЕ:
 Член 1
 След точка 18щ5 (Регламент за изпълнение (ЕС) No 205/2014 на Комисията) от приложение XXI към Споразумението за ЕИП се вмъква следната точка:
 „18щ6.
 32015 R 0359: Регламент (ЕС) 2015/359 на Комисията от 4 март 2015 г. за прилагане на Регламент (ЕО) No 1338/2008 на Европейския парламент и на Съвета по отношение на статистиката за разходите и финансирането на здравното обслужване (ОВ L 62, 6.3.2015 г., стр. 6).
 За целите на настоящото споразумение разпоредбите на Регламента се четат със следните адаптации:
 а)
 Лихтенщайн е освободен от задължението да предоставя отделни данни за амбулаторни лечебни услуги (HC.1.2), амбулаторни рехабилитационни услуги (HC.2.2) и амбулаторни дългосрочни грижи (здравни) (HC.3.2), които са включени в данните, предоставени съответно за извънболнични лечебни услуги (HC.1.3), извънболнични рехабилитационни услуги (HC.2.3) и извънболнични дългосрочни грижи (здравни) (HC.3.3);
 б)
 Лихтенщайн е освободен от задължението за предоставяне на данни за схеми за финансиране от предприятия (HF.2.3). Посоченото освобождаване подлежи на преразглеждане от Съвместния комитет на ЕИП винаги когато числовите данни, предоставени от Лихтенщайн, показват, че разходите за схеми за финансиране от предприятия вече не са незначителни“.
 Член 2
 Текстът на Регламент (ЕС) 2015/359 на исландски и норвежки език, който ще бъде публикуван в притурката за ЕИП към Официален вестник на Европейския съюз, е автентичен.
 Член 3
 Настоящото решение влиза в сила на 19 март 2016 г., при условие че са внесени всички нотификации, предвидени в член 103, параграф 1 от Споразумението за ЕИП (*1).
 Член 4
 Настоящото решение се публикува в раздела за ЕИП и в притурката за ЕИП към Официален вестник на Европейския съюз.
 Съставено в Брюксел на 18 март 2016 година.
 За Съвместния комитет на ЕИП
 Председател
 Claude MAERTEN
 (1) ОВ L 62, 6.3.2015 г., стр. 6.
 (*1) Без отбелязани конституционни изисквания.


type: legislation

jurisdiction: EU

text:
 5.3.2016
 NL
 Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie
 L 60/3
 UITVOERINGSVERORDENING (EU) 2016/312 VAN DE COMMISSIE
 van 4 maart 2016
 tot rectificatie van Verordening (EU) nr. 37/2010 wat de stof „tylvalosine” betreft
 (Voor de EER relevante tekst)
 DE EUROPESE COMMISSIE,
 Gezien het Verdrag betreffende de werking van de Europese Unie,
 Gezien Verordening (EG) nr. 470/2009 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 6 mei 2009 tot vaststelling van communautaire procedures voor het vaststellen van grenswaarden voor residuen van farmacologisch werkzame stoffen in levensmiddelen van dierlijke oorsprong, tot intrekking van Verordening (EEG) nr. 2377/90 van de Raad en tot wijziging van Richtlijn 2001/82/EG van het Europees Parlement en de Raad en van Verordening (EG) nr. 726/2004 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad (1), en met name artikel 14 juncto artikel 17,
 Gezien het advies van het Europees Geneesmiddelenbureau dat is opgesteld door het Comité voor geneesmiddelen voor diergeneeskundig gebruik,
 Overwegende hetgeen volgt:
 (1)
 De Commissie is gewezen op het feit dat in de bijlage bij Verordening (EU) nr. 37/2010 van de Commissie (2), zoals gewijzigd bij Uitvoeringsverordening (EU) 2015/1492 van de Commissie (3) wat de stof „tylvalosine” betreft, het indicatorresidu „tylvalosine” per vergissing als indicatorresidu voor varkens is vermeld.
 (2)
 De bijlage bij Verordening (EU) nr. 37/2010 moet worden gecorrigeerd om aan te geven dat het indicatorresidu voor varkens, alsmede voor huid en vetweefsel, en lever van pluimvee, de „som van tylvalosine en 3-O-acetyltylosine” is en dat het indicatorresidu „tylvalosine” enkel van toepasssing is voor eieren van pluimvee.
 (3)
 Deze verordening moet met terugwerkende kracht worden toegepast vanaf de datum van toepassing van Uitvoeringsverordening (EU) 2015/1492, omdat het indicatorresidu voor varkens verkeerd is vermeld en daarom moet worden gecorrigeerd. Deze verordening moet daarom dringend in werking treden.
 (4)
 De in deze verordening vervatte maatregelen zijn in overeenstemming met het advies van het Permanent Comité voor geneesmiddelen voor diergeneeskundig gebruik,
 HEEFT DE VOLGENDE VERORDENING VASTGESTELD:
 Artikel 1
 In tabel 1 van de bijlage bij Verordening (EU) nr. 37/2010 wordt de vermelding voor „tylvalosine” vervangen door:
 „Tylvalosine
 Som van tylvalosine en 3-O-acetyltylosine
 Varkens
 50 μg/kg
 Spier
 GEEN
 Infectiewerende middelen/Antibiotica”
 50 μg/kg
 Huid en vetweefsel
 50 μg/kg
 Lever
 50 μg/kg
 Nieren
 Pluimvee
 50 μg/kg
 Huid en vetweefsel
 50 μg/kg
 Lever
 Tylvalosine
 Pluimvee
 200 μg/kg
 Eieren
 Artikel 2
 Deze verordening treedt in werking op de dag van de bekendmaking ervan in het Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie.
 Zij is van toepassing vanaf 3 november 2015.
 Deze verordening is verbindend in al haar onderdelen en is rechtstreeks toepasselijk in elke lidstaat.
 Gedaan te Brussel, 4 maart 2016.
 Voor de Commissie
 De voorzitter
 Jean-Claude JUNCKER
 (1) PB L 152 van 16.6.2009, blz. 11.
 (2) Verordening (EU) nr. 37/2010 van de Commissie van 22 december 2009 betreffende farmacologisch werkzame stoffen en de indeling daarvan op basis van maximumwaarden voor residuen in levensmiddelen van dierlijke oorsprong (PB L 15 van 20.1.2010, blz. 1).
 (3) Uitvoeringsverordening (EU) 2015/1492 van de Commissie van 3 september 2015 tot wijziging van Verordening (EU) nr. 37/2010 wat de stof „tylvalosine” betreft (PB L 231 van 4.9.2015, blz. 10).


type: other

text:
Marie-anne Chapdelaine (369)
 Pascal Popelin (349)
 Cecile Untermaier (346)
 Nathalie Appere (332)
 Estelle Grelier (302)
 Pascale Crozon (273)
 Yves Goasdoue (263)
 Philippe Bies (262)
 Jacques Valax (260)
 Dominique Raimbourg (235)
 Frederique Massat (232)
 Marie-helene Fabre (231)
 Carlos Da Silva (208)
 Florent Boudie (208)
 Patrick Mennucci (204)
 Elisabeth Pochon (202)
 Anne-yvonne Le Dain (201)
 Jean-yves Le Bouillonnec (199)
 Laurence Dumont (198)
 Hugues Fourage (197)
 Julie Sommaruga (186)
 Sandrine Mazetier (186)
 Chantal Guittet (185)
 Dominique Potier (178)
 Bernard Roman (176)
 Catherine Troallic (170)
 Yves Blein (169)
 Jean-luc Laurent (166)
 Jean-jacques Cottel (165)
 Jean-louis Bricout (164)
 Stephane Travert (164)
 Sebastien Pietrasanta (161)
 Kheira Bouziane-laroussi (159)
 Alexis Bachelay (158)
 Christophe Bouillon (157)
 Christophe Premat (156)
 Marie-lou Marcel (155)
 Francoise Dubois (152)
 Herve Pellois (152)
 Suzanne Tallard (151)
 Serge Bardy (147)
 Catherine Beaubatie (146)
 Edith Gueugneau (142)
 Annick Le Loch (136)
 Christine Pires Beaune (132)
 Jean-michel Clement (128)
 Maud Olivier (128)
 Matthias Fekl (126)
 Bernadette Laclais (125)
 Seybah Dagoma (120)
 Sylvie Tolmont (120)
 Marietta Karamanli (119)
 Rene Dosiere (119)
 Michel Lesage (117)
 Sylviane Alaux (116)
 Paola Zanetti (115)
 Arnaud Leroy (114)
 Christian Assaf (113)
 Vincent Burroni (112)
 Chaynesse Khirouni (108)
 Monique Orphe (107)
 Philippe Duron (107)
 William Dumas (102)
 Nathalie Nieson (100)
 Erwann Binet (98)
 Michel Destot (98)
 Denys Robiliard (96)
 Isabelle Bruneau (96)
 Jean Grellier (96)
 Fanelie Carrey-conte (95)
 Jean-yves Caullet (95)
 Genevieve Gaillard (94)
 Philippe Kemel (94)
 Jean-philippe Malle (91)
 Alain Rousset (89)
 Jean-luc Bleunven (89)
 Jean-pierre Le Roch (89)
 Jean-pierre Allossery (87)
 Boinali Said (86)
 Martine Lignieres-cassou (86)
 Richard Ferrand (86)
 Jacques Cresta (85)
 Yann Capet (84)
 Carole Delga (82)
 Jean-marie Le Guen (82)
 Catherine Quere (81)
 Jean-claude Buisine (78)
 Michel Pouzol (77)
 Pascal Cherki (77)
 Yves Daniel (77)
 Michel Liebgott (76)
 Christophe Borgel (74)
 Francoise Dumas (74)
 Gwendal Rouillard (74)
 Jean Launay (73)
 Beatrice Santais (69)
 Romain Colas (69)
 Henri Jibrayel (68)
 Luce Pane (68)
 Alain Calmette (66)
 Alain Faure (65)
 Ericka Bareigts (65)
 Chantal Berthelot (64)
 Philippe Doucet (64)
 Sebastien Denaja (64)
 Guy Delcourt (61)
 Gilles Savary (60)
 Jean Jacques Vlody (59)
 Joelle Huillier (59)
 Pascal Terrasse (58)
 Franck Montauge (57)
 Ibrahim Aboubacar (57)
 Regis Juanico (56)
 Jean-pierre Blazy (55)
 Philip Cordery (55)
 Pascale Got (53)
 Jacqueline Maquet (52)
 Dominique Chauvel (51)
 Barbara Romagnan (50)
 Nathalie Chabanne (50)
 Laurent Kalinowski (49)
 Napole Polutele (49)
 Gwenegan Bui (47)
 Joaquim Pueyo (47)
 Pierre Aylagas (46)
 Sandrine Hurel (46)
 Gerard Sebaoun (44)
 Herve Feron (44)
 Lucette Lousteau (44)
 Nicolas Bays (42)
 Pascal Demarthe (42)
 Corinne Erhel (41)
 Marie Recalde (41)
 Marie-noelle Battistel (40)
 Fabrice Verdier (39)
 Laurent Grandguillaume (39)
 Frederic Barbier (38)
 Daniel Boisserie (36)
 Jean-pierre Dufau (36)
 Annick Lepetit (35)
 Christophe Sirugue (35)
 Michele Fournier-armand (34)
 Marc Goua (33)
 Conchita Lacuey (31)
 Jean-paul Dupre (30)
 Philippe Nogues (30)
 Eduardo Rihan Cypel (29)
 Pouria Amirshahi (27)
 Sandrine Doucet (26)
 Jerome Guedj (24)
 Victorin Lurel (23)
 Sabine Buis (22)
 Florence Delaunay (21)
 David Habib (19)
 Vincent Feltesse (19)
 Robert Olive (17)
 Sylviane Bulteau (17)
 Christophe Caresche (16)
 Laurent Baumel (15)
 Philippe Naillet (14)
 Thierry Mandon (14)
 Pierre-alain Muet (13)
 Armand Jung (8)
 Marie-francoise Bechtel (7)
 Emilienne Poumirol (3)
 Amendement N° CL7 au texte N° 4289 - Article 2 (Adopté)
 Le présent amendement, en coordination avec la proposition de loi, prévoit les modalités d'entrée en vigueur du critère d'éligibilité relatif au casier judiciaire des personnes, en prenant en compte les fonctions outre-mer ajoutées à l'article précédent.L'entrée en vigueur progressive, au fur et à mesure des renouvellements des mandats concernés, concourt à la constitutionnalité du dispositif. L'objectif poursuivi n'est pas, il faut le rappeler, de punir les individus déclarés coupables de certaines infractions, mais de s'assurer que les fonctions électives sont occupées par des personnes dont la moralité n'est pas remise en cause. Rédiger ainsi cet ...
 Amendement N° CL4 au texte N° 4289 - Article 1er (Adopté)
 Le présent amendement réécrit le dispositif de l'article 1er pour une plus grande efficacité.Il fait le choix de modifier le titre Ier du livre Ier du code électoral, de sorte que la vérification des mentions portées au casier judiciaire puisse également concerner les Français élus au Parlement européen, conformément au premier alinéa de l'article 2 de la loi n° 77-729 du 7 juillet 1977 relative à l'élection des représentants au Parlement européen.Pour les régions, il intègre le dispositif à l'article L. 340 du code électoral auquel renvoie la plupart des dispositions spécifiques aux assemblées régies par des règles dérogatoires.Enfin, cette rédaction ...
 Amendement N° CL10 au texte N° 4291 - Titre (Adopté)
 Amendement de coordination : dès lors que la proposition de loi organique procède aux coordinations nécessaires à l'application du dispositif outre-mer, son titre doit être actualisé en conséquence. Au titre de la proposition, supprimer les mots :« présidentielle, législative ou sénatoriale ». Mme Dombre Coste, Mme Descamps-Crosnier
 Amendement N° CL6 au texte N° 4291 - Article 1er (Adopté)
 Le présent amendement réécrit le dispositif de l'article 1er pour une plus grande efficacité.Il transpose dans les dispositions organiques du code électoral le dispositif de vérification des mentions portées au casier judiciaire que la proposition de loi ordinaire institue pour les élus locaux, de sorte qu'il trouve également à s'appliquer pour la désignation des députés et des sénateurs. Les infractions incompatibles avec l'exercice d'un mandat sont les mêmes :les infractions criminelles et un certain nombre de délits d'ordre sexuel (agression sexuelle, harcèlement sexuel, proxénétisme) ainsi que les manquements au devoir de probité et les fraudes électorales et ...
 Amendement N° CL7 au texte N° 4291 - Article 2 (Adopté)
 Le présent amendement simplifie la rédaction de l'article 2 en renvoyant directement au dispositif de l'article L.O. 127-1 du code électoral créé à l'article premier. Il procède par ailleurs aux coordinations nécessaires. Rédiger ainsi cet article :« La loi n° 62‐1292 du 6 novembre 1962 relative à l'élection du Président de la République au suffrage universel est ainsi modifiée :« 1° Le I de l'article 3 est complété par un alinéa ainsi rédigé :« « Le Conseil constitutionnel s'assure que le bulletin n° 2 du casier judiciaire des personnes présentées ne comporte aucune mention de l'une des infractions mentionnées à l'article ...
 Amendement N° CL8 au texte N° 4289 - Titre (Adopté)
 Amendement de coordination destiné à unifier les titres des deux propositions de loi organique et ordinaire. Au titre de la proposition, supprimer le mot : « locale ». Mme Dombre Coste, Mme Descamps-Crosnier
 Amendement N° CL5 au texte N° 4289 - Article 1er (Adopté)
 Amendement de coordination pour l'application du dispositif outre-mer. Compléter cet article par les deux alinéas suivants :4° Au premier alinéa de l'article L. 388, la référence : « n° 2016‐508 du 25 avril 2016 de modernisation de diverses règles applicables aux élections » est remplacée par la référence : « n° du visant à instaurer une obligation de casier judiciaire vierge pour les candidats à une élection » ;5° Au dernier alinéa de l'article L. 558‐11, après la référence : « L. 203 », sont insérés les mots : « ainsi que le 3° ». Mme Dombre Coste, Mme Descamps-Crosnier
 Amendement N° CL9 au texte N° 4291 - Article 3 (Adopté)
 Le présent amendement, en coordination avec la proposition de loi, prévoit les modalités d'entrée en vigueur du critère d'éligibilité relatif au casier judiciaire des personnes, en prenant en compte les fonctions outre-mer ajoutées à l'article 2bis.L'entrée en vigueur progressive, au fur et à mesure des renouvellements des mandats concernés, concourt à la constitutionnalité du dispositif. L'objectif poursuivi n'est pas, il faut le rappeler, de punir les individus déclarés coupables de certaines infractions, mais de s'assurer que les fonctions électives sont occupées par des personnes dont la moralité n'est pas remise en cause. Rédiger ainsi cet ...
 Amendement N° CL8 au texte N° 4291 - Après l'article 2 (Adopté)
 Le présent amendement porte coordination pour l'application du dispositif de la proposition de loi aux élections tenues à Saint-Barthélemy, Saint-Martin, Saint-Pierre-et-Miquelon, en Nouvelle-Calédonie et en Polynésie française. I. – Le 1° du I des articles L.O. 489, L.O. 516 et L.O. 544 du code électoral est ainsi rétabli :« 1° Les personnes dont le bulletin n° 2 du casier judiciaire comporte une mention de l'une des infractions mentionnées à l'article L.O. 127-1 ; ».II. – Le 1° du I de l'article 195 de la loi organique n° 99-209 du 19 mars 1999 relative à la Nouvelle-Calédonie est ainsi rétabli :« 1° Les personnes dont le ...
 Amendement N° CF2 au texte N° 4320 - Article 24 octies (Rejeté)
 Le présent amendement vise à abaisser le taux de la taxe sur la valeur ajoutée sur le bois de chauffage.Le chauffage au bois est une énergie renouvelable à faible coût pour le consommateur, qui au-delà de sa participation à la réduction des émissions de gaz à effet de serre (GES), représente pour de nombreux ménages français une opportunité concourant à la réduction de leur facture énergétique.Toutefois, depuis de nombreuses années, les professionnels qui déclarent leur activité économique sont concurrencés de façon déloyale par des particuliers qui auto-consomment leurs productions ou et c'est plus dommageable par des professionnels (autoentrepreneurs ou ...
 Amendement N° CF3 au texte N° 4320 - Article 24 bis A (Retiré)
 Lorsque les travaux d'installation d'un appareil de chauffage fonctionnant au bois ou à la biomasse sont soumis à des critères de qualification de l'entreprise qui installe le produit, l'application du Crédit d'impôt pour la Transition énergétique (CITE), mais aussi des autres aides publiques (Eco-Prêt à taux zéro (Eco-PTZ), Certificats d'économies d'énergie (CEE), aides de l'Agence nationale de l'habitat (ANAH), etc. est conditionnée d'une part à l'établissement d'un devis, d'autre part à la réalisation d'une visite préalable à la réalisation des travaux par l'entreprise qui installe ces équipements, matériaux ou appareils ou par l'entreprise qui en assure la vente ...
 Amendement N° 5 au texte N° 4320 - Article 24 bis A (Tombe)
 Amendement N° 301 au texte N° 4271 - Article 10 (Irrecevable)
 Amendement irrecevable au titre de l'article 40 de la constitution. Mme Pires Beaune, Mme Fourneyron, M. Dufau, M. Chauveau, Mme Descamps-Crosnier, Mme Rabin, M. Beffara, M. Franqueville, M. Frédéric Barbier, M. Fourage, M. Ferrand, M. Terrasse, Mme Le Dissez
 Amendement N° CF80 au texte N° 4271 - Article 10 (Irrecevable)


type: contracts

text:
 2.7.2020
 LV
 Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis
 L 210/7
 EEZ APVIENOTĀS KOMITEJAS LĒMUMS Nr. 49/2019
 (2019. gada 29. marts),
 ar ko groza EEZ līguma I pielikumu (Veterinārijas un fitosanitārijas jautājumi) [2020/803]
 EEZ APVIENOTĀ KOMITEJA,
 ņemot vērā Līgumu par Eiropas Ekonomikas zonu (“EEZ līgums”) un jo īpaši tā 98. pantu,
 tā kā:
 (1)
 EEZ līgumā ir jāiekļauj Komisijas Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1254 (2018. gada 19. septembris) par to, ka tiek liegta atļauja no Bacillus subtilis KCCM-10445 iegūtu riboflavīnu (80 %) izmantot par barības piedevu, kas pieder pie funkcionālās grupas “vitamīni, provitamīni un noteiktas ķīmiskas vielas ar tiem līdzīgu iedarbību” (1).
 (2)
 EEZ līgumā ir jāiekļauj Komisijas Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1533 (2018. gada 12. oktobris) par atļauju nātrija alginātu lietot par barības piedevu kaķiem, suņiem, citiem neproduktīvajiem dzīvniekiem un zivīm un kālija alginātu lietot par barības piedevu kaķiem un suņiem (2).
 (3)
 EEZ līgumā ir jāiekļauj Komisijas Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1543 (2018. gada 15. oktobris) par atļauju Pediococcus pentosaceus DSM 32291 preparātu izmantot par barības piedevu visām dzīvnieku sugām (3).
 (4)
 Šis lēmums attiecas uz tiesību aktiem dzīvnieku barības jomā. Tiesību akti dzīvnieku barības jomā neattiecas uz Lihtenšteinu, kamēr attiecībā uz Lihtenšteinu piemēro Eiropas Kopienas un Šveices Konfederācijas Nolīgumu par lauksaimniecības produktu tirdzniecību, kā tas noteikts EEZ līguma I pielikuma nozaru pielāgojumos. Tādēļ šis lēmums nav piemērojams Lihtenšteinai.
 (5)
 Tādēļ būtu attiecīgi jāgroza EEZ līguma I pielikums,
 IR PIEŅĒMUSI ŠO LĒMUMU.
 1. pants
 EEZ līguma I pielikuma II nodaļā pēc 267. punkta (Komisijas Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1090) pievieno šādus punktus:
 “268.
 32018 R 1254: Komisijas 2018. gada 19. septembra Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1254 par to, ka tiek liegta atļauja no Bacillus subtilis KCCM-10445 iegūtu riboflavīnu (80 %) izmantot par barības piedevu, kas pieder pie funkcionālās grupas “vitamīni, provitamīni un noteiktas ķīmiskas vielas ar tiem līdzīgu iedarbību” (OV L 237, 20.9.2018., 5. lpp.).
 269.
 32018 R 1533: Komisijas 2018. gada 12. oktobra Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1533 par atļauju nātrija alginātu lietot par barības piedevu kaķiem, suņiem, citiem neproduktīvajiem dzīvniekiem un zivīm un kālija alginātu lietot par barības piedevu kaķiem un suņiem (OV L 257, 15.10.2018., 13. lpp.).
 270.
 32018 R 1543: Komisijas 2018. gada 15. oktobra Īstenošanas regula (ES) 2018/1543 par atļauju Pediococcus pentosaceus DSM 32291 preparātu izmantot par barības piedevu visām dzīvnieku sugām (OV L 259, 16.10.2018., 22. lpp.).”
 2. pants
 Īstenošanas regulu (ES) 2018/1254, (ES) 2018/1533 un (ES) 2018/1543 teksts islandiešu un norvēģu valodā, kas jāpublicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālā Vēstneša EEZ papildinājumā, ir autentisks.
 3. pants
 Šis lēmums stājas spēkā 2019. gada 30. martā, ja ir iesniegti visi paziņojumi saskaņā ar EEZ līguma 103. panta 1. punktu (*1).
 4. pants
 Šo lēmumu publicē Eiropas Savienības Oficiālā Vēstneša EEZ iedaļā un tā EEZ papildinājumā.
 Briselē, 2019. gada 29. martā
 EEZ Apvienotās komitejas vārdā –
 priekšsēdētājs
 Claude MAERTEN
 (1) OV L 237, 20.9.2018., 5. lpp.
 (2) OV L 257, 15.10.2018., 13. lpp.
 (3) OV L 259, 16.10.2018., 22. lpp.
 (*1) Konstitucionālās prasības nav norādītas.


text:
 11/Sv. 94
 HR
 Službeni list Europske unije
 153
 22001D0069
 L 238/15
 SLUŽBENI LIST EUROPSKE UNIJE
 ODLUKA ZAJEDNIČKOG ODBORA EGP-a
 br. 69/2001
 od 19. lipnja 2001.
 o izmjeni Priloga II. (Tehnički propisi, norme, ispitivanje i potvrđivanje) Sporazumu o EGP-u
 ZAJEDNIČKI ODBOR EGP-a,
 uzimajući u obzir Sporazum o Europskom gospodarskom prostoru, kako je izmijenjen Protokolom o prilagodbi Sporazuma o Europskom gospodarskom prostoru, dalje u tekstu „Sporazum”, a posebno njegov članak 98.,
 budući da:
 (1)
 Prilog II. Sporazumu izmijenjen je Odlukom Zajedničkog odbora EGP-a br. 2/2001 od 31. siječnja 2001. (1).
 (2)
 Direktivu Komisije 2000/38/EZ od 5. lipnja 2000. kojom se mijenja poglavlje V.a (Farmakovigilancija) Direktive Vijeća 75/319/EEZ o usklađivanju odredbi utvrđenih zakonom i drugim propisima koji se odnose na lijekove (2) treba unijeti u Sporazum.
 (3)
 Uredbu Komisije (EZ) br. 847/2000 od 27. travnja 2000. o utvrđivanju odredbi za provedbu kriterija za uvrštenje lijeka u skupinu lijekova za rijetke bolesti te definicije pojmova „sličan lijek” i „klinička superiornost” (3) treba unijeti u Sporazum,
 ODLUČIO JE:
 Članak 1.
 U točku 3. (Druga direktiva Vijeća 75/319/EEZ) u poglavlju XIII. Priloga II. Sporazumu dodaje se sljedeća alineja:
 „—
 32000 L 0038: Direktiva Komisije 2000/38/EZ od 5. lipnja 2000. (SL L 139, 10.6.2000., str. 28.).”
 Članak 2.
 Iza točke 15.m (Uredba (EZ) br. 141/2000 Europskog parlamenta i Vijeća) u poglavlju XIII. Priloga II. Sporazumu umeće se sljedeća točka:
 „15.n
 32000 R 0847: Uredba Komisije (EZ) br. 847/2000 od 27. travnja 2000. o utvrđivanju odredbi za provedbu kriterija za uvrštenje lijeka u skupinu lijekova za rijetke bolesti te definicije pojmova ‚sličan lijek’ i ‚klinička superiornost’ (SL L 103, 28.4.2000., str. 5.).”
 Članak 3.
 Tekstovi Direktive 2000/38/EZ i Uredbe (EZ) br. 847/2000 na islandskom i norveškom jeziku, koji se objavljuju u Dodatku o EGP-u Službenom listu Europskih zajednica, vjerodostojni su.
 Članak 4.
 Ova Odluka stupa na snagu 20. lipnja 2001., uz uvjet da su Zajedničkom odboru EGP-a prije toga podnesene sve potrebne obavijesti u skladu s člankom 103. stavkom 1. Sporazuma (4).
 Članak 5.
 Ova se Odluka objavljuje u odjeljku o EGP-u i Dodatku o EGP-u Službenom listu Europskih zajednica.
 Sastavljeno u Bruxellesu 19. lipnja 2001.
 Za Zajednički odbor EGP-a
 Predsjednik
 P. WESTERLUND
 (1) SL L 66, 8.3.2001., str. 44.
 (2) SL L 139, 10.6.2000., str. 28.
 (3) SL L 103, 28.4.2000., str. 5.
 (4) Ustavni zahtjevi nisu navedeni.


jurisdiction: US

text: b' DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERVICES Office of Inspector General\n\n Office of Audit Services, Region VII\n 601 East 12th Street, Room 0429\n Kansas City, MO 64106\n\nMay 5, 2010\n\nReport Number: A-07-09-00309\n\nMr. Ron Simmons\nController\nBlue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas\n1133 SW Topeka Boulevard\nTopeka, KS 66612\n\nDear Mr. Simmons:\n\nEnclosed is the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS), Office of Inspector\nGeneral (OIG), final report entitled Review of Pension Costs Claimed for Medicare\nReimbursement by Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas for Fiscal Years 1994 Through 2008. We\nwill forward a copy of this report to the HHS action official noted on the following page for\nreview and any action deemed necessary.\n\nThe HHS action official will make final determination as to actions taken on all matters reported.\nWe request that you respond to this official within 30 days from the date of this letter. Your\nresponse should present any comments or additional information that you believe may have a\nbearing on the final determination.\n\nSection 8L of the Inspector General Act, 5 U.S.C. App., requires that OIG post its publicly\navailable reports on the OIG Web site. Accordingly, this report will be posted at\nhttp://oig.hhs.gov.\n\nIf you have any questions or comments about this report, please do not hesitate to call me at\n(816) 426-3591, or contact Jenenne Tambke, Audit Manager, at (573) 893-8338, extension 21, or\nthrough email at Jenenne.Tambke@oig.hhs.gov. Please refer to report number A-07-09-00309\nin all correspondence.\n\n Sincerely,\n\n\n\n\n /Patrick J. Cogley/\n Regional Inspector General\n for Audit Services\n\nEnclosure\n\x0cPage 2 \xe2\x80\x93 Mr. Ron Simmons\n\nDirect Reply to HHS Action Official:\n\nMs. Deborah Taylor\nActing Director & Chief Financial Officer\nOffice of Financial Management\nCenters for Medicare & Medicaid Services\nMail Stop C3-01-24\n7500 Security Boulevard\nBaltimore, MD 21244-1850\n\x0cDepartment of Health & Human Services\n OFFICE OF\n INSPECTOR GENERAL\n\n\n\n\n REVIEW OF PENSION COSTS\n CLAIMED FOR MEDICARE\n REIMBURSEMENT BY\n BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF\n KANSAS FOR FISCAL YEARS\n 1994 THROUGH 2008\n\n\n\n\n Daniel R. Levinson\n Inspector General\n\n May 2010\n A-07-09-00309\n\x0c Office of Inspector General\n http://oig.hhs.gov\n\n\n\nThe mission of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), as mandated by Public Law 95-452, as amended, is\nto protect the integrity of the Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) programs, as well as the\nhealth and welfare of beneficiaries served by those programs. This statutory mission is carried out\nthrough a nationwide network of audits, investigations, and inspections conducted by the following\noperating components:\n\nOffice of Audit Services\n\nThe Office of Audit Services (OAS) provides auditing services for HHS, either by conducting audits with\nits own audit resources or by overseeing audit work done by others. Audits examine the performance of\nHHS programs and/or its grantees and contractors in carrying out their respective responsibilities and are\nintended to provide independent assessments of HHS programs and operations. These assessments help\nreduce waste, abuse, and mismanagement and promote economy and efficiency throughout HHS.\nOffice of Evaluation and Inspections\nThe Office of Evaluation and Inspections (OEI) conducts national evaluations to provide HHS, Congress,\nand the public with timely, useful, and reliable information on significant issues. These evaluations focus\non preventing fraud, waste, or abuse and promoting economy, efficiency, and effectiveness of\ndepartmental programs. To promote impact, OEI reports also present practical recommendations for\nimproving program operations.\n\nOffice of Investigations\nThe Office of Investigations (OI) conducts criminal, civil, and administrative investigations of fraud and\nmisconduct related to HHS programs, operations, and beneficiaries. With investigators working in all 50\nStates and the District of Columbia, OI utilizes its resources by actively coordinating with the Department\nof Justice and other Federal, State, and local law enforcement authorities. The investigative efforts of OI\noften lead to criminal convictions, administrative sanctions, and/or civil monetary penalties.\n\nOffice of Counsel to the Inspector General\nThe Office of Counsel to the Inspector General (OCIG) provides general legal services to OIG, rendering\nadvice and opinions on HHS programs and operations and providing all legal support for OIG\xe2\x80\x99s internal\noperations. OCIG represents OIG in all civil and administrative fraud and abuse cases involving HHS\nprograms, including False Claims Act, program exclusion, and civil monetary penalty cases. In\nconnection with these cases, OCIG also negotiates and monitors corporate integrity agreements. OCIG\nrenders advisory opinions, issues compliance program guidance, publishes fraud alerts, and provides\nother guidance to the health care industry concerning the anti-kickback statute and other OIG enforcement\nauthorities.\n\x0c Notices\n\n\n THIS REPORT IS AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC\n at http://oig.hhs.gov\n\n Section 8L of the Inspector General Act, 5 U.S.C. App., requires\n that OIG post its publicly available reports on the OIG Web site.\n\nOFFICE OF AUDIT SERVICES FINDINGS AND OPINIONS\n\n The designation of financial or management practices as\n questionable, a recommendation for the disallowance of costs\n incurred or claimed, and any other conclusions and\n recommendations in this report represent the findings and\n opinions of OAS. Authorized officials of the HHS operating\n divisions will make final determination on these matters.\n\x0c EXECUTIVE SUMMARY\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nBlue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas (Kansas) administered Medicare Parts A and B operations\nunder cost reimbursement contracts with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)\nuntil the contractual relationship was terminated effective February 29, 2008.\n\nCMS reimburses a portion of the annual contributions that contractors make to their pension\nplans. In claiming costs, contractors must follow cost reimbursement principles contained in the\nFederal Acquisition Regulation, Cost Accounting Standards, and Medicare contracts.\n\nThe Medicare contracts require contractors to allocate or separately calculate pension costs.\nContractors must use the separate calculation method if there is a material difference between the\nresults of the two methods.\n\nOBJECTIVE\n\nOur objective was to determine the allowability of pension costs that Kansas claimed for\nMedicare reimbursement for fiscal years (FY) 1994 through 2008.\n\nSUMMARY OF FINDING\n\nKansas did not claim $883,591 of allowable Medicare pension costs on its Final Administrative\nCost Proposals (FACP) for FYs 1994 through 2008, primarily because Kansas made adjustments\nto its pension costs claimed on its FACPs for FYs 1995 and 1996, adjustments that reduced the\nclaimed amount to less than the calculated allowable pension costs. Kansas claimed pension\ncosts of $14,986,885 for Medicare reimbursement; however, we determined that the allowable\nCost Accounting Standards pension costs were $15,870,476.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nWe recommend that Kansas revise its FACPs for FYs 1994 through 2008 to claim the additional\nallowable pension costs of $883,591.\n\nAUDITEE COMMENTS\n\nIn written comments on our draft report, Kansas concurred with our recommendation. Kansas\nstated that it intends to include the increase in allowable pension costs due from CMS as part of\nthe global settlement of the contractor termination costs associated with our terminated Medicare\nPart A and Medicare Part B contracts.\n\nKansas\xe2\x80\x99s comments are included in their entirety as Appendix B.\n\n\n\n\n i\n\x0cOFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RESPONSE\n\nKansas concurred with the recommendation; however, due to revisions made to our Medicare\nsegment pension assets review (Review of the Qualified Pension Plan at Blue Cross Blue Shield\nof Kansas, a Terminated Medicare Contractor, for the Period January 1, 1993, to\nFebruary 29, 2008, A-07-09-00308), some of the specific amounts of allowable pension costs\nchanged. We incorporated those changes into this report and revised our finding and\nrecommendation accordingly. Since we revised our finding and recommendation in this report,\nwe provided Kansas with an opportunity to review and discuss our revisions.\n\n\n\n\n ii\n\x0c TABLE OF CONTENTS\n\n Page\n\nINTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 1\n\n BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................ 1\n Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas ...................................................................... 1\n Medicare Reimbursement ................................................................................... 1\n\n OBJECTIVE, SCOPE, AND METHODOLOGY .......................................................... 1\n Objective ............................................................................................................. 1\n Scope ................................................................................................................... 1\n Methodology ....................................................................................................... 2\n\nFINDING AND RECOMMENDATION ................................................................................ 2\n\n FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS....................................................................................... 2\n\n ALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS NOT CLAIMED .................................................... 3\n\n RECOMMENDATION .................................................................................................. 4\n\n AUDITEE COMMENTS................................................................................................ 4\n\n OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RESPONSE ..................................................... 4\n\nAPPENDIXES\n\n A: ALLOWABLE MEDICARE PENSION COSTS FOR BLUE CROSS BLUE\n SHIELD OF KANSAS FOR FISCAL YEARS 1994 THROUGH 2008\n\n B: AUDITEE COMMENTS\n\n\n\n\n iii\n\x0c INTRODUCTION\n\nBACKGROUND\n\nBlue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas\n\nBlue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas (Kansas) administered Medicare Parts A and B operations\nunder cost reimbursement contracts with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS)\nuntil the contractual relationship was terminated effective February 29, 2008.\n\nMedicare Reimbursement\n\nCMS reimburses a portion of the annual contributions that contractors make to their pension\nplans. To be allowable for Medicare reimbursement, pension costs must be (1) measured,\nassigned, and allocated in accordance with Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) 412 and 413 and\n(2) funded as specified by part 31 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR).\n\nBeginning with fiscal year (FY) 1988, CMS incorporated specific segmentation language into\nMedicare contracts that requires contractors to use either an allocation method or a separate\ncalculation method to identify and claim pension costs for Medicare reimbursement. Under the\nallocation method, the contractor determines total plan CAS pension costs and allocates a share\nto Medicare. Under the separate calculation method, the contractor separately identifies the\npension cost components for the Medicare segment. The contractor must use the separate\ncalculation method if its result is materially different from that of the allocation method.\n\nOBJECTIVE, SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY\n\nObjective\n\nOur objective was to determine the allowability of pension costs that Kansas claimed for\nMedicare reimbursement for FYs 1994 through 2008.\n\nScope\n\nWe reviewed $14,986,885 of pension costs that Kansas claimed for Medicare reimbursement on\nits Final Administrative Cost Proposals (FACP) for FYs 1994 through 2008. Achieving our\nobjective did not require that we review Kansas\xe2\x80\x99s overall internal control structure. However,\nwe reviewed the internal controls related to the pension costs claimed for Medicare\nreimbursement to ensure that the pension costs were allocable in accordance with the CAS and\nallowable in accordance with the FAR.\n\nWe performed fieldwork at Kansas\xe2\x80\x99s office in Topeka, Kansas, during February 2009.\n\x0cMethodology\n\nWe reviewed the applicable portions of the FAR, CAS, and Medicare contracts. Additionally,\nwe reviewed Kansas\xe2\x80\x99s FACPs to identify the amount of pension costs claimed for Medicare\nreimbursement for FYs 1994 through 2008. We also determined the extent to which Kansas\nfunded CAS pension costs with contributions to the pension trust fund and accumulated\nprepayment credits. We based our calculations on separately computed CAS pension costs for\nthe Medicare segment and the \xe2\x80\x9cOther\xe2\x80\x9d segment. The CMS Office of the Actuary calculated the\nallocable CAS pension costs based on Kansas\xe2\x80\x99s historical practices and on the results of our\nsegmentation review (Review of the Qualified Pension Plan at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Kansas,\na Terminated Medicare Contractor, for the Period January 1, 1993, to February 29, 2008,\nA-07-09-00308).\n\nIn performing our review, we used information that Kansas\xe2\x80\x99s actuarial consulting firms provided.\nThe information included assets, liabilities, normal costs, contributions, benefit payments,\ninvestment earnings, and administrative expenses. We examined Kansas\xe2\x80\x99s accounting records,\npension plan documents, annual actuarial valuation reports, and Department of Labor/Internal\nRevenue Service Forms 5500.\n\nWe conducted this performance audit in accordance with generally accepted government\nauditing standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain\nsufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for our findings and conclusions\nbased on our audit objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis\nfor our finding and conclusions based on our audit objective.\n\n FINDING AND RECOMMENDATION\n\nKansas did not claim $883,591 of allowable Medicare pension costs on its FACPs for FYs 1994\nthrough 2008, primarily because Kansas made adjustments to its pension costs claimed on its\nFACPs for FYs 1995 and 1996, adjustments that reduced the claimed amount to less than the\ncalculated allowable pension costs. Kansas claimed pension costs of $14,986,885 for Medicare\nreimbursement; however, we determined that the allowable CAS pension costs were\n$15,870,476.\n\nFEDERAL REQUIREMENTS\n\nThe Medicare contracts address the determination and allocation of pension costs. The contracts\nstate: \xe2\x80\x9cThe calculation of and accounting for pension costs charged to this agreement/contract\nare governed by the Federal Acquisition Regulation and Cost Accounting Standards 412 and\n413.\xe2\x80\x9d\n\nFAR 31.205-6(j) addresses allowability of pension costs and requires that plan contributions\nsubstantiate pension costs assigned to contract periods.\n\n\n\n\n 2\n\x0cCAS 412 addresses the determination and measurement of pension cost components. It also\naddresses the assignment of pension costs to appropriate accounting periods.\n\nCAS 413 addresses the valuation of pension assets, allocation of pension costs to segments of an\norganization, adjustment of pension costs for actuarial gains and losses, and assignment of gains\nand losses to cost accounting periods.\n\nALLOWABLE PENSION COSTS NOT CLAIMED\n\nKansas did not claim $883,591 of pension costs that were allowable for Medicare reimbursement\nfor FYs 1994 through 2008. 1 During FYs 1994 through 2008 Kansas claimed pension costs of\n$14,986,885 for Medicare reimbursement. We calculated the allowable pension costs based on\nseparately computed CAS pension costs for the Medicare segment and the \xe2\x80\x9cOther\xe2\x80\x9d segment in\naccordance with CAS 412 and 413. We determined that the allowable CAS pension costs for\nFYs 1994 through 2008 were $15,870,476.\n\nThe following table compares allowable CAS pension costs with the pension costs claimed on\nKansas\xe2\x80\x99s FACPs. Appendix A contains additional details on allowable pension costs.\n\n Comparison of Allowable Pension Costs and Claimed Pension Costs\n\n Medicare Pension Costs\n Allowable Claimed by\n Fiscal Year Per Audit Kansas Difference\n 1994 $623,451 $567,163 $56,288\n 1995 549,191 251,157 298,034\n 1996 614,411 225,706 388,705\n 1997 539,769 490,068 49,701\n 1998 234,764 147,035 87,729\n 1999 153,714 97,772 55,942\n 2000 128,236 (889) 129,125\n 2001 530,009 558,360 (28,351)\n 2002 822,993 871,639 (48,646)\n 2003 1,484,583 1,557,707 (73,124)\n 2004 1,815,347 1,821,585 (6,238)\n 2005 2,231,766 2,143,088 88,678\n 2006 2,561,238 2,576,594 (15,356)\n 2007 2,542,470 2,609,618 (67,148)\n 2008 1,038,534 1,070,282 (31,748)\n Total $15,870,476 $14,986,885 $883,591\n\n\n\n1\n The allowable pension costs for FY 2008 were attributable to the pension costs for October 1, 2007, through\nFebruary 29, 2008.\n\n\n\n 3\n\x0cThis underclaim occurred primarily because Kansas made adjustments to its pension costs\nclaimed on its FACPs for FY 1995 and 1996, adjustments that reduced the claimed amount to\nless than the calculated allowable pension costs. As a result, Kansas did not claim $883,591 of\nallowable pension costs.\n\nRECOMMENDATION\n\nWe recommend that Kansas revise its FACPs for FYs 1994 through 2008 to claim the additional\nallowable pension costs of $883,591.\n\nAUDITEE COMMENTS\n\nIn written comments on our draft report, Kansas concurred with our recommendation. Kansas\nstated that it intends to include the increase in allowable pension costs due from CMS as part of\nthe global settlement of the contractor termination costs associated with our terminated Medicare\nPart A and Medicare Part B contracts.\n\nKansas\xe2\x80\x99s comments are included in their entirety as Appendix B.\n\nOFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL RESPONSE\n\nKansas concurred with the recommendation; however, due to revisions made to the Medicare\nsegment pension assets mentioned earlier (Review of the Qualified Pension Plan at Blue Cross\nBlue Shield of Kansas, a Terminated Medicare Contractor, for the Period January 1, 1993, to\nFebruary 29, 2008, A-07-09-00308), some of the specific amounts of allowable pension costs\nchanged. We incorporated those changes into this report and revised our finding and\nrecommendation accordingly. Since we revised our finding and recommendation in this report,\nwe provided Kansas with an opportunity to review and discuss our revisions.\n\n\n\n\n 4\n\x0cAPPENDIXES\n\n\n\n\n 5\n\x0c APPENDIX A: ALLOWABLE MEDICARE PENSION COSTS FOR Page 1 of9\n BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF KANSAS\n FOR FISCAL YEARS 1994 THROUGH 2008\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I \nCompany I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 1993 Allocable Pension Cost 11 $1,673,938 $344,732\n\n 1994 \n Contributions 21 $3,301,750 $3,301,750 $0\n 8.00% \n DiscOlmt for Interest 31 ($163,596) ($163,596) $0\nJanuary 1, 1994 \n Present Value Contributions 41 $3,138,154 $3,138,154 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Al\'l\'lied 51 $2,571 ,513 $2,033,246 $538,267\n Present Value of Funding 61 $5,709,667 $5,171,400 $538,267\n\nJan1lilI)\' 1, 1994 CAS FundiIJg Target 71 $2,839,420 $2,301 ,153 $538,267\n Percentage Funded 81 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost 91 $2,301,153 $538,267\n Allowable Interest 101 $13,966 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost 111 $2,315,119 $538,267\n 1994 Fiscal Year Pension Cost 121 $2,154,824 $489,883\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 131 7.94% 92.34%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost 141 $171,093 $452,358 $623,451\n\n 1995 \n Contributions $4,841,435 $4,841,435 $0\n 8.50% \n DisCOllllt for Interest ($296,448) ($296,448) $0\nJanuary 1, 1995 \n Present Value Contributions $4,544,987 $4,544,987 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $2,336,794 $1,931,577 $405,217\n Present Value of Funding $6,881,781 $6,476,564 $405,217\n\nJanuary 1, 1995 CAS Funding Target $2,336,794 $1,931,577 $405,217\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $1,931,577 $405,217\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $1 ,931 ,577 $405,217\n 1995 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $2,027,463 $438,480\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 7.50% 90.57%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $152,060 $397,131 $549,191\n I I I\n\x0c Page 2 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 1996 \n Contributions $3,439,843 $3,439,843 $0\n 8.50% \n DisCOllllt for Interest ($259,267) ($259,267) $0\nJanuary I , 1996 \n Present Value Contributions $3,180,576 $3,180,576 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $3,409,353 $2,893,529 $515,824\n Present Value of Funding $6,589,929 $6,074,105 $515,824\n\nJanuary I, 1996 CAS Funding Target $3,409,353 $2,893,529 $515,824\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $2,893,529 $515,824\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $2,893,529 $515,824\n 1996 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $2,653,041 $488,172\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 6.74% 89.23%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $178,815 $435,596 $614,411\n\n 1997 \n Contributions $950,670 $950,670 $0\n 8.50% \n DiscOlmt for Interest ($60,624) ($60,624) $0\nJanuary I, 1997 \n Present Value Contributions $890,046 $890,046 $0\n Prepayment Credit Apl\'lied $2,986,783 $2,580,342 $406,441\n Present Value of Funding $3,876,829 $3,470,388 $406,441\n\nJan1lilI)\' I, 1997 CAS FundiIJg Target $2,986,783 $2,580,342 $406,441\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $2,580,342 $406,441\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $2,580,342 $406,441\n 1997 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $2,658,639 $433,787\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.67% 95.81 %\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $124,158 $415,611 $539,769\n I I I\n\x0c Page 3 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 1998 \n Contributions $0 $0 $0\n 900% \n DisCOllllt for Interest $0 $0 $0\nJanuary 1, 1998 \n Present Value Contributions $0 $0 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $2,849,648 $2,849,648 $0\n Present Value of Funding $2,849,648 $2,849,648 $0\n\nJanuary 1, 1998 CAS Funding Target $2,849,648 $2,849,648 $0\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 0.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $2,849,648 $0\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $2,849,648 $0\n 1998 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $2,782,322 $101,610\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.90% 96.87%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $136,334 $98,430 $234,764\n\n 1999 \n Contributions $738,484 $716,571 $21,913\n 900% \n DiscOlmt for Interest ($59,939) ($58,160) ($1,779)\nJanuary 1, 1999 \n Present Value Contributions $678,545 $658,411 $20,134\n Prepayment Credit Apl\'lied $1,510,737 $1,465,839 $44,898\n Present Value of Funding $2,189,282 $2,124,250 $65,032\n\nJan1lilI)\' 1, 1999 CAS FundiIJg Target $2,188,246 $2,123,214 $65,032\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $2,123,214 $65,032\n Allowable Interest $41,908 $1,284\n Allocable Pension Cost $2,165,122 $66,316\n 1999 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $2,336,254 $49,737\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.51% 97.21 %\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $105,365 $48,349 $153,714\n I I I\n\x0c Page 4 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 2000 \n Contributions $141,267 $17,235 $124,032\n 900% \n DisCOllllt for Interest ($10,635) ($1,297) ($9,338)\nJanuary I , 2000 \n Present Value Contributions $130,632 $15,938 $114,694\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $1,129 $137 $992\n Present Value of Funding $131,761 $16,075 $115,686\n\nJanuary I, 2000 CAS Funding Target $131,685 $15,999 $115,686\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $15,999 $115,686\n Allowable Interest $1,011 $7,312\n Allocable Pension Cost $17,010 $122,998\n 2000 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $554,038 $108,828\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.10% 96.96%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $22,716 $105,520 $128,236\n\n 2001 \n Contributions $20,157,250 $19,606,270 $550,980\n 900% \n DiscOlmt for Interest ($1,523,555) ($1,481,910) ($41,645)\nJanuary I , 2001 \n Present Value Contributions $18,633,695 $18,124,360 $509,335\n Prepayment Credit Apl\'lied $82 $72 $10\n Present Value of Funding $18,633,777 $18,124,432 $509,345\n\nJan1lilI)\' I, 2001 CAS FundiIJg Target $4,018,200 $3,508,855 $509,345\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $3,508,855 $509,345\n Allowable Interest $223,685 $32,470\n Allocable Pension Cost $3,732,540 $541,815\n 2001 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $2,803,658 $437,111\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 3.75% 97.20%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $105,137 $424,872 $530,009\n I I I\n\x0c Page 5 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 2002 \n Contributions $31,500,000 $31,500,000 $0\n 900% \n DisCOllllt for Interest ($2,600,917) ($2,600,917) $0\nJanuary I , 2002 \n Present Value Contributions $28,899,083 $28,899,083 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $5,807,230 $5,122,632 $684,598\n Present Value of Funding $34,706,313 $34,021 ,715 $684,598\n\nJanuary I, 2002 CAS Funding Target $5,807,230 $5,122,632 $684,598\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $5,122,632 $684,598\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $5,122,632 $684,598\n 2002 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $4,775,109 $648,902\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 401% 97.32%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $191,482 $631 ,511 $822,993\n\n 2003 \n Contributions $35,100,000 $35,100,000 $0\n 8.50% \n DiscOlmt for Interest ($2,749,770) ($2,749,770) $0\nJanuary I , 2003 \n Present Value Contributions $32,350,230 $32,350,230 $0\n Prepayment Credit Apl\'lied $10,120,064 $8,808,011 $1,312,053\n Present Value of Funding $42,470,294 $41,158,241 $1,312,053\n\nJan1lilI)\' I, 2003 CAS FundiIJg Target $10,120,064 $8,808,011 $1 ,312,053\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $8,808,011 $1 ,312,053\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $8,808,011 $1 ,312,053\n 2003 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $7,886,666 $1,155,189\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.43% 98.27%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $349,379 $1 ,135,204 $1,484,583\n I I I\n\x0c Page 6 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 2004 \n Contributions $16,000,000 $16,000,000 $0\n 8.50% \n DisCOllllt for Interest ($1,253,456) ($1,253,456) $0\nJanuary I, 2004 \n Present Value Contributions $14,746,544 $14,7 46,544 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $10,705,831 $9,422,929 $1,282,902\n Present Value of Funding $25,452,375 $24,169,473 $1,282,902\n\nJanuary I, 2004 CAS Funding Target $10,705,831 $9,422,929 $1,282,902\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $9,422,929 $1,282,902\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $9,422,929 $1,282,902\n 2004 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $9,269,200 $1,290,190\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 5.77% 99.25%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $534,833 $1,280,514 $1,815,347\n\n 2005 \n Contributions $13,000,000 $13,000,000 $0\n 8.00% \n DiscOlmt for Interest ($962,963) ($962,963) $0\nJanuary I, 2005 \n Present Value Contributions $12,037,037 $12,037,037 $0\n Prepayment Credit Apl\'lied $13,022,244 $11,451,980 $1,570,264\n Present Value of Funding $25,059,281 $23,489,017 $1,570,264\n\nJ an1lilI)\' I, 2005 CAS FundiIJg Target $13,022,244 $11,451,980 $1,570,264\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $11,451,980 $1,570,264\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $11,451,980 $1,570,264\n 2005 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $10,944,717 $1,498,424\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 6.71% 99.93%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $734,391 $1,497,375 $2,231,766\n I I I\n\x0c Page 7 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 2006 \n Contributions $7,000,000 $7,000,000 $0\n 8.00% \n DisCOllllt for Interest ($518,519) ($518,519) $0\nJanuary I , 2006 \n Present Value Contributions $6,481,481 $6,481,481 $0\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Apl\'lied $14,185,403 $12,346,050 $1,839,353\n Present Value of Funding $20,666,884 $18,827,531 $1,839,353\n\nJanuary I, 2006 CAS Funding Target $14,185,403 $12,346,050 $1,839,353\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $12,346,050 $1,839,353\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $12,346,050 $1,839,353\n 2006 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $12,122,533 $1,772,081\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 6.58% 99.52%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $797,663 $1,763,575 $2,561,238\n\n 2007 \n Contributions $15,000,000 $15,000,000 $0\n 8.00% \n DiscOlmt for Interest ($1,111,111) ($1,111,111) $0\nJanuary I, 2007 \n Present Value Contributions $13,888,889 $13,888,889 $0\n Prepayment Credit Apl\'lied $15,151,567 $13,234,444 $1,917,123\n Present Value of Funding $29,040,456 $27,123,333 $1,917,123\n\nJan1lilI)\' I, 2007 CAS FundiIJg Target $15,151,567 $13,234,444 $1,917,123\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00%\n Funded Pension Cost $13,234,444 $1,917,123\n Allowable Interest $0 $0\n Allocable Pension Cost $13,234,444 $1,917,123\n 2007 Fiscal Year Pension Cost $13,012,346 $1,897,681\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.98% 99.83%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost $648,015 $1,894,455 $2,542,470\n I I I\n\x0c Page 8 of9\n\n\n\n Total "Other" Medicare Total\n Date I Description I Company I Segment I Segment I Medicare\n\n 2008 Contributions $0 $0 $0 \n\n 8.00% DisCOllllt for Interest $0 $0 $0 \n\n January I , 2008 Present Value Contributions $0 $0 $0 \n\n Prepaj\'IIlent Credit Applied $2,540,156 $2,248,056 $292,100 \n\n Present Value of Funding $2,540,156 $2,248,056 $292,100 \n\n\n January I , 2008 \t CAS Funding Target $2,540,156 $2,248,056 $292,100 \n\n Percentage Funded 100.00% 100.00% \n\n Funded Pension Cost $2,248,056 $292,100 \n\n Allowable Interest $0 $0 \n\n Allocable Pension Cost 15/ $2,248,056 $292,100 \n\n 2008 \t Fiscal Year Pension Cost 16/ $5,556,667 $771,381\n Medicare LOB* Percentage 4.83% 99.84%\n\n Allowable Pension Cost \t $268,387 $770,147 $1,038,534\n I\t I I\n * Line of business.\n\nFOOTNOTES\n\nlL We obtained the 1993 calendar year allocable pension from our prior review (A-07 -94-01105).\n\n 21 \tWe obtained Total Company contribution amOllllts and dates of deposit from Internal Revenue Service Form 5500 reports. The\n contributions included deposits made during the plan year and accrued contributions deposited after the end of the plan year but\n within the time allowed for filing tax retwns. We determined the contributions allocated to the Medicare segment during the\n pension segmentation review (A-07 -09-00308). The amOlmts shown for the "Other" segment represent the difference between\n the Total Company and the Medicare segment.\n\n 3/ We subtracted the interest that was included in the contributions deposited after the beginning of the valuation year to discOlmt\n the contributions back to their beginning-of-the-year value. For pwposes of this Appendix, we computed the interest as the\n difference between the present value of contributions (at the valuation interest rate) and actual contribution amOlmts.\n\n 4/ The present value of contributions is the value of the contributions discOlmted from the date of deposit back to the first day of\n the plan year. For pwposes of this Appendix, we deemed deposits made after the end of the plan year to have been made on the\n final day of the plan year, consistent with the method mandated by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.\n\x0c Page 9 of9\n\n\n\n 5/ A prepayment credit represents the accumulated value of premature fllllding from the previous year(s). A prepayment credit is\n created when contributions, plus interest, exceed the end-of-year Cost AccOllllting Standards (CAS) fllllding target. A\n prepayment credit is carried fOIWard, with interest, to flllld future CAS pension costs.\n\n 6/ The present value of fllllding represents the present value of contributions plus prepayment credits. This is the amount of \n\n fllllding that is available to cover the CAS fllllding target measured at the first day of the plan year. \n\n\n 7/ The CAS funding target must be fllllded by current or prepaid contributions to satisfy the fllllding requirement of the Federal \n\n Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 3l.205-6(j)(2)(i). \n\n\n 8/ The percentage of costs fllllded is a measure of the JXlrtion of the CAS fllllding target that was fllllded during the plan year.\n Because any fllllding in excess of the CAS fllllding target is accollllted for as a prepayment in accordance with CAS 412.50( c)(1)\n (as amended), the fllllded ratio may not exceed 100 percent. We computed the percentage fllllded as the present value of\n fllllding divided by the CAS fllllding target. For pwposes of illustration, the percentage of fllllding has been rollllded to four\n decimals.\n 9/ We computed the funded CAS pension cost as the CAS funding target multiplied by the percent funded.\n\n10/ We asswned that interest on the fllllded CAS pension cost, less the prepayment credit, accrues in the same proportion as the\n interest on contributions bears to the present value of contributions. However, we limited the interest in accordance with FAR\n 31.205-6(j)(2)(iii), which does not pennit the allowable interest to exceed the interest that would accrue if the CAS funding\n target, less the prepayment credit, were funded in four equal installments deposited within 30 days after the end of the quarter.\n\nill The allocable CAS pension cost is the amount of pension cost that may be allocated for contract cost purposes.\n\n121 We converted the plan year (January 1 through December 31) allocable pension costs to a fiscal year (FY) basis (October 1\n through September 30). We calculated the FY pension costs as 1/4 of the prior year\'s costs plus 3/4 of the current year\'s costs.\n\n13/ We calculated allowable pension costs of the Medicare and "Other" segments based on the Medicare line of business (LOB)\n percentage of each segment. We determined the LOB percentages based upon information provided by Blue Cross Blue Shield\n of Kansas (Kansas).\n\n14/ We computed the allowable Medicare pension cost as the FY pension cost multiplied by the Medicare LOB percentage.\n Pursuant to CAS 412 and 413, the total Medicare allowable pension costs charged to the Medicare contract consisted of the\n Medicare segment\'s direct pension costs plus "Other" segment pension costs attributable to indirect Medicare operations.\n\n15/ Kansas terminated its Medicare contract on February 29, 2008. Therefore, the 2008 allocable pension costs were for a 2-month\n period only (January 1 through February 29).\n\n16/ The 2008 fiscal year pension costs were for a 5-month period. To calculate the FY 2008 allocable pension costs, we calculated\n the FY pension costs as 1/4 of the prior year\'s costs plus all of the cwrentyear\'s costs.\n\x0c APPENDIX B: AUDITEE COMMENTS \n\n\n\n 1133 SW Topck. 1!o~lev,,",1 In TOpel<:>. . (785) 19I-7IlOO\n BlueCross Topek., KoniO\' 66629-<JOOI In K.n.., - (800) 432-0216\n BlueShield \n\n of Kans8s . \n\n\n\n\n\nMarch 29, 2010\n\n\nReport Number: A-07-09-00309\n\nPatrick J. Cogley \n\nRegional Inspector General \n\n For Audit Services \n\nDepartment of Health & Human Services \n\nRegion VII \n\nRoom 0429\n60 I East l th Street \n\nKansas Cit)\', Missouri 64106 \n\n\n\nDear Mr. Cogley:\n\nEnclosed is the Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas response \\0 the U.S. Depanment of Health\n& Human Services, Office of Inspector General (OlG), draft report entitled Review 0/ Pension\nCOSIS Claimed Jor Medicare Reimbllrsement by Bille Cross Bille Shield oj Kansas for Fiscal\nYears 1994 Through 2008.\n\nWe are in concurrence with your recommendation. However, since Blue Cross and Blue Shield\nof Kansas is no longer a Medicare Contractor, we do not havc acccss to the CMS CAFM system\nto resubmit the FACP. Qut intent will be to include the increase in allowable pension costs due\nfrom eMS as part of the global seulement of the contractor tennination costs associated with our\ntenninated Mt:dicare A and Medicare B contracts.\n\nIf you have any questions or comments related 10 our response, please do nOl hesitate to contact\nme at (785) 291-8893 .\n\n\n\n\n\xc2\xa3:U~~\nRonald D. Simmons\nController\n\x0c'


type: caselaw

text:
 26.1.2013
 SL
 Uradni list Evropske unije
 C 26/65
 Tožba, vložena 21. novembra 2012 – Conrad Electronic proti UUNT – Sky IP International (EuroSky)
 (Zadeva T-510/12)
 2013/C 26/128
 Jezik, v katerem je bila tožba vložena: nemščina
 Stranke
 Tožeča stranka: Conrad Electronic SE (Hirschau, Nemčija) (zastopniki: P. Mes, C. Graf von der Groeben, G. Rother, J. Bühling, J. Künzel, D. Jestaedt, M. Bergermann, J. Vogtmeier in A. Kramer, odvetniki)
 Tožena stranka: Urad za usklajevanje na notranjem trgu (znamke in modeli)
 Druga stranka pred odborom za pritožbe: Sky IP International Ltd (Isleworth, Združeno kraljestvo)
 Predloga
 Tožeča stranka predlaga, naj
 —
 se razveljavi odločba četrtega odbora za pritožbe Urada za usklajevanje na notranjem trgu (znamke in modeli) z dne 20. septembra 2012 v zadevi R 1183/2011-4;
 —
 toženi stranki naloži plačilo stroškov postopka, vključno s stroški, nastalimi v pritožbenem postopku.
 Tožbeni razlogi in bistvene trditve
 Prijavitelj znamke Skupnosti: tožeča stranka
 Zadevna znamka Skupnosti: besedna znamka „EuroSky“ za proizvode in storitve iz razreda 9 – prijava znamke Skupnosti št. 4 539 896
 Imetnik znamke ali znaka, navajanega v postopku z ugovorom:: Sky IP International Ltd
 Navajana znamka ali znak: nacionalna besedna in figurativna znamka ter besedna in figurativna znamka Skupnosti „SKY“za proizvode in storitve iz razredov 9, 16, 18, 25, 28, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42, 43 in 45
 Odločba oddelka za ugovore: ugoditev ugovoru
 Odločba odbora za pritožbe: zavrnitev pritožbe
 Navajani tožbeni razlogi: napačna uporaba člena 8(1)(b) Uredbe št. 207/2009


type: wikipedia

text:
Ottlyk György (Felsőozor, 1656 – 1730/1732) Trencsén vármegyei köznemesi család leszármazottja, Thököly Imre ezredese, majd II. Rákóczi Ferenc brigadérosa és főudvarmestere.
 Élete
 Trencsén vármegye alispánjának fia, akit 1664-ben a török elleni harc miatt vesztett el. Előbb Körmöcbányán, majd Eperjesen tanult. Anyja újraházasodása után az Ostrosith családnál szolgált. 1683-ban beállt Thököly seregébe, akit még eperjesi tanulmányai idejéből ismert. 1685-ben fogságba esett, de sikerült megszöknie és Kassára ment. A váradi pasa – a szövetségesi kapcsolat ellenére – 1685. október 15-én Thökölyt elfogatta, akit a törökök csak 1686. január 2-án engedték szabadon. Thököly török fogságba kerülése után átállt. Az Aeneas Caprara császári tábornok által befolyásolt Ottlyk a kassai várvédők egy részét a várkapitány, Faygel Péter és a Thököly pártján maradtak ellen fordította. Emiatt Faygel 1685. október 25-én kénytelen volt Kassát a császáriaknak átadni. I. Lipót császár-király ezredeseként részt vett Buda 1686-os visszafoglalásában is. Antonio Caraffa császári tábornok ennek ellenére 1687-ben elfogatta, de sikerült elkerülnie az eperjesi vésztörvényszék halálos ítéletét (felmentették).
 A legendás kuruckirály ezredese merész katonaként volt ismert. Már 1703-ban csatlakozott a II. Rákóczi Ferenc indította szabadságharchoz. A vezérlő fejedelemnek a seregében brigadéros lett, és 1704-től kezdve – a szabadságharc végéig – főudvarmestere volt Rákóczinak; 1706-tól pedig a Gazdasági Tanács alelnöke. 1711 februárjában Lengyelországba távozott, de – mint sokan mások – élve a szatmári béke adta lehetőséggel, a békekötés után hamarosan hazatért.
 Önéletírása fontos kordokumentum.
 Irodalom
 Kónya Péter 2013: Ottlyk György brigadéros katonai pályája. In: „A francia história hazai nagykövete”
 Kónya Péter 2008: Veliteľské pôsobenie generála Juraja Ottlyka v povstaní Františka II. Rákocziho. Vojenská história 3/2008, 24-46.
 Köpeczi Béla – R. Várkonyi Ágnes: II. Rákóczi Ferenc, Gondolat, Budapest, 1976.
 További információk
 Angyal Dávid: Késmárki Thököly Imre, I-II. kötet. Budapest, 1888-1889.
 SZILÁGYI: A MAGYAR NEMZET TÖRTÉNETE
 Kapcsolódó szócikkek
 Kuruc brigadérosok listája
 Magyar történelmi személyek
 A Rákóczi-szabadságharc fontosabb alakjai
 1656-ban született személyek
 1730-ban elhunyt személyek
 Bániak


text:
 4.8.2011
 HU
 Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja
 L 201/1
 A BIZOTTSÁG 772/2011/EU VÉGREHAJTÁSI RENDELETE
 (2011. augusztus 2.)
 egyes áruk Kombinált Nómenklatúra szerinti besorolásáról
 AZ EURÓPAI BIZOTTSÁG,
 tekintettel az Európai Unió működéséről szóló szerződésre,
 tekintettel a vám- és a statisztikai nómenklatúráról, valamint a Közös Vámtarifáról szóló, 1987. július 23-i 2658/87/EGK tanácsi rendeletre (1) és különösen annak 9. cikke (1) bekezdésének a) pontjára,
 mivel:
 (1)
 A 2658/87/EGK rendelet mellékletét képező Kombinált Nómenklatúra egységes alkalmazása érdekében intézkedéseket szükséges elfogadni az e rendelet mellékletében meghatározott áruk besorolásáról.
 (2)
 A 2658/87/EGK rendelet meghatározza a Kombinált Nómenklatúra értelmezésére irányadó általános szabályokat. Ezeket a szabályokat kell alkalmazni bármely más olyan nómenklatúrára vonatkozóan is, amely részben vagy egészben a Kombinált Nómenklatúrán alapul vagy azt bármilyen további albontással kiegészíti, és amelyet az árukereskedelemhez kapcsolódó tarifális és más intézkedések alkalmazása céljából az Unió valamely más rendelkezése hoz létre.
 (3)
 Az említett általános szabályok értelmében a mellékletben szereplő táblázat 1. oszlopában leírt árukat a 3. oszlopban feltüntetett indokok alapján a táblázat 2. oszlopában megjelölt KN-kód alá kell besorolni.
 (4)
 Indokolt úgy rendelkezni, hogy a tagállamok vámhatóságai által kibocsátott, e rendelet rendelkezéseitől eltérő tartalmú, az áruk Kombinált Nómenklatúra szerinti besorolására vonatkozó kötelező érvényű tarifális felvilágosítást a jogosult – a Közösségi Vámkódex létrehozásáról szóló, 1992. október 12-i 2913/92/EGK tanácsi rendelet (2) 12. cikke (6) bekezdésének alkalmazásában – három hónapig továbbra is felhasználhatja.
 (5)
 Az e rendeletben előírt intézkedések összhangban vannak a Vámkódex Bizottság véleményével,
 ELFOGADTA EZT A RENDELETET:
 1. cikk
 A Kombinált Nómenklatúrában a melléklet táblázatának 1. oszlopában leírt árukat a táblázat 2. oszlopában megjelölt KN-kód alá kell besorolni.
 2. cikk
 A tagállamok vámhatóságai által kibocsátott, e rendelet rendelkezéseitől eltérő tartalmú kötelező érvényű tarifális felvilágosítás – a 2913/92/EGK rendelet 12. cikke (6) bekezdésének alkalmazásában – három hónapig továbbra is felhasználható.
 3. cikk
 Ez a rendelet az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapjában való kihirdetését követő huszadik napon lép hatályba.
 Ez a rendelet teljes egészében kötelező és közvetlenül alkalmazandó valamennyi tagállamban.
 Kelt Brüsszelben, 2011. augusztus 2-án.
 a Bizottság részéről, az elnök nevében,
 Algirdas ŠEMETA
 a Bizottság tagja
 (1) HL L 256., 1987.9.7., 1. o.
 (2) HL L 302., 1992.10.19., 1. o.
 MELLÉKLET
 Árumegnevezés
 Besorolás
 (KN-kód)
 Indokolás
 (1)
 (2)
 (3)
 Fémből és műanyagból készült árucikk, melyet biztonsági gyermekülés gépjárműhöz való csatlakoztatására fejlesztettek ki (úgynevezett biztonsági gyermekülést rögzítő alap).
 Tartozik hozzá egy meghosszabbítható láb, és egy piros/zöld jelzést alkalmazó rendszer, amely például arról tájékoztat, hogy az árucikk vagy az ülés helyesen van-e beszerelve.
 Az árucikk azokhoz a rögzítőpontokhoz való ideiglenes csatlakoztatásra szolgál, amiket általában egy gépjármű ülése mögött tartósan rögzítettek a gépjármű-karosszériához.
 Az árucikk biztonsági gyermekülések különböző modelljeinek be- és kicsatlakoztatását teszi lehetővé.
 (1) Lásd a képet.
 9401 90 80
 A besorolást a Kombinált Nómenklatúra értelmezésére szolgáló 1. és 6. általános szabály, valamint a 9401, a 9401 90 és a 9401 90 80 KN-kód szövegezése határozza meg.
 A 8708 vámtarifaszám alá történő besorolás kizárt, mivel az árucikk nincs tartósan rögzítve a gépjármű karosszériájához és ezért nem tekinthető a gépjármű-karosszéria tartozékának.
 Amikor a biztonsági gyermekülést rászerelik a biztonsági gyermekülést rögzítő alapra, azok egyben adják egy teljes biztonsági gyermekülés jellemzőit és teljesítik a funkcióját. Az árucikket ezért egy biztonsági gyermekülés alkatrészének kell tekinteni. Az árucikket ezért ülés alkatrészeként a 9401 90 80 KN-kód alá kell besorolni.
 (1) A kép csupán tájékoztató jellegű.


text:
 EUROOPA KOMISJON
 Brüssel,11.3.2021
 COM(2021) 114 final
 2021/0059(NLE)
 Ettepanek:
 NÕUKOGU OTSUS
 seisukoha kohta, mis võetakse Euroopa Liidu nimel seoses riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkuleppe osaliste kavandatud otsusega
 SELETUSKIRI
 1.Kavandatav reguleerimisese
 Käesolevas ettepanekus käsitletakse otsust, millega määratakse kindlaks komisjoni poolt liidu nimel võetav seisukoht riiklikult toetatava ekspordikrediidi kokkuleppe (edaspidi „kokkulepe“) raames seoses kavandatava otsusega muuta kokkuleppe sätteid kohalike kulude kohta. Nendes on sätestatud toetatava ekspordilepingu väärtuse maksimaalne protsendimäär, mis võib koosneda toodetest ja teenustest mida hangitakse kohalikult, st sihtriigist ja mitte eksportivast riigist või kolmandast riigist. Kavandatud otsus suurendaks seda maksimaalset protsendimäära, võimaldades suuremat paindlikkust vastavalt tegelikule turuolukorrale.
 2.Ettepaneku taust
 2.1.Riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkulepe
 Tegemist on Euroopa Liidu, Ameerika Ühendriikide, Kanada, Jaapani, Korea, Norra, Šveitsi, Austraalia, Uus-Meremaa ja Türgi vahelise suulise kokkuleppega, mille eesmärk on luua raamistik riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide nõuetekohaseks kasutamiseks. Tegelikkuses tähendab see, et luuakse võrdsed võimalused (mille puhul konkurents põhineb eksporditavate kaupade hinnal ja kvaliteedil, mitte soodsaimatel finantseerimistingimustel) ning samas püütakse kõrvaldada riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitidega seotud subsiidiumid ja kaubanduse moonutamine. Kokkulepe, mis jõustus 1978. aasta aprillis, on sõlmitud määramata ajaks, ja see ei ole OECD õigusakt, kuigi OECD sekretariaat aitab seda hallata
 1
 .
 Kokkulepet ajakohastatakse korrapäraselt, et võtta arvesse finantsturu ja poliitika arengusuundi, mis mõjutavad riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide andmist. Euroopa parlamendi ja nõukogu määruses (EL) nr 1233/2011
 2
 on sätestatud, et liidus kohaldatakse kokkuleppes esitatud suuniseid ja seega on kokkulepe muudetud ELis õiguslikult siduvaks
 3
 . Kokkuleppe tingimuste läbivaatamine on inkorporeeritud ELi õigusesse delegeeritud õigusaktidega kõnealuse määruse artikli 2 kohaselt.
 2.2.Riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkuleppe osalised
 Euroopa Komisjon esindab liitu kokkuleppeosaliste (edaspidi „ osalised“) koosolekutel ja kokkuleppeosaliste kirjalikus otsustusmenetluses. Otsused kokkuleppe kõikide paranduste kohta võetakse vastu konsensuse alusel. Liidu seisukoha võtab vastu nõukogu ja seda arutatakse liikmesriigi esindajatega nõukogu ekspordikrediidi töörühmas
 4
 .
 Kokkuleppe artiklis 62 on sätestatud, et osalised vaatavad korrapäraselt läbi kokkuleppe toimimise. Läbivaatamise ajal uurivad osalised muu hulgas teatamismenetlusi, eristatud diskontomäärade süsteemi rakendamist ja toimimist, seotud abi käsitlevaid eeskirju ja menetlusi, tingimuste kohandamist, varasemaid kohustusi ja kokkuleppeosaliste ringi laiendamise võimalusi.
 2.3.Riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkuleppe osaliste kavandatud õigusakt
 2019. aasta juunis toimunud kokkuleppe osaliste 141. koosolekul arutati ELi ettepaneku eelnõu, mis käsitles riikliku toetuse suurendamist kohalike kulude katteks. Eelnõu leidis teiste osaliste seas positiivset vastukaja, siiski üks delegatsioon oma seisukohta ei esitanud ja palus ELil esitada rohkem taustteavet ja selgitusi.
 Kokkuleppeosaliste järgmisel koosolekul 2019. aasta novembris arutati kohalike kulude katteks ettenähtud riikliku toetuse suurendamist uuesti. Arutati ettepaneku eelnõu võimalikke muudatusi, sealhulgas kohalike kulude katmise piiramine konkreetsete sektorite või riikidega. Siiski ei jõudnud osalised üksmeelele ja arutelud lükati järgmistele koosolekutele edasi. 2020. aasta juunis toimunud kokkuleppeosaliste 144. koosolekul esitas ELi delegatsioon, kes ei toetanud ettepaneku eelnõud, kohalike kulude katmise toetamise kohta vastuettepaneku. Teised osalised seda ettepanekut ei toetanud, kuid lahendamata küsimuste puhul pakuti ja arutati kompromisslahendusi ja -muudatusi.
 EL vaatas oma ettepaneku eelnõu läbi, võttes arvesse osaliste varasematel koosolekutel väljendatud seisukohti, ja esitas 17. novembril 2020 toimunud osaliste 145. koosolekul kompromissettepaneku eelnõu. Mõned osalised tahtsid kompromissettepanekusse teha väikseid muudatusi. Peale mõningat arutelu toetasid kõik osalised kompromissettepanekut koos soovitatud muudatustega. Kokkuleppe osalised peavad liidu kompromissettepaneku eelnõu võtma vastu kirjaliku menetluse teel.
 3.Liidu nimel võetav seisukoht
 Kohalike kulude katmise riikliku toetuse peamised põhimõtted on esitatud kokkuleppe artiklis 10. Selles on sätestatud, et kohalikud kulud ei tohi ületada 30 % protsenti ekspordilepingu väärtusest (omamaine osa ja kolmandate riikide tarned). Need sätted võeti vastu 2006. aastal, kui riikliku toetuse maksimaalset osatähtsust suurendati 15 %-lt 30 %-le ekspordilepingu väärtusest. Viimastel aastakümnenditel on maailmakaubandus ja tootmismudelid märkimisväärselt arenenud. Ülemaailmsete väärtusahelate tekkimine on muutnud eksportijate tarneallikate valimise viise: äriühingud, kelle esmatootmine oli varem ühes riigis, optimeerivad nüüd oma hankeid kulutõhususe ja geograafilise kättesaadavuse põhjal ning lõpptoote tootmis- ja koosteliinid asuvad sageli mitmes riigis. ELi eksporditööstus on kohalike kulude osas juba pikka aega nõudnud suuremat paindlikkust. Praegune kohalike kulude katmise toetuse piirang seab ELi eksportijad ebasoodsasse konkurentsiolukorda võrreldes eksportijatega, kes asuvad riikides, mis ei ole kokkuleppega seotud.
 Kohalike kulude katmise riikliku toetuse suurendamist käsitlev kavandatud otsus tähendaks, et kohalike kulude maksimaalset osatähtsust suurendatakse 40 %-le ekspordilepingu väärtusest kõrge sissetulekuga riikides
 5
 (kokkuleppes I kategooria riigid) ja 50 %-le keskmise ja madala sissetulekuga riikides (kokkuleppes II kategooria riigid). Taastuvate energiaallikate, kliimamuutuste leevendamise ja nendega kohanemise ja veeprojektide ekspordikrediidi sektorilepete kohalike kulude sätted viidaks kooskõlla sätetega kokkuleppe põhiosas. Peale selle lisataks kokkuleppele läbivaatamisklausel, millega nähakse ette, et läbivaatamine tehakse kolm aastat pärast kohalikke kulusid käsitlevate uute sätete jõustumist.
 Seepärast soovitatakse, et liidu seisukoht oleks kokkuleppeosaliste kavandatud otsus kohalike kulude katmise riikliku toetuse suurendamise kohta kirjaliku menetluse teel heaks kiita.
 4.Õiguslik alus
 4.1.Menetlusõiguslik alus
 4.1.1.Põhimõtted
 Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingu (edaspidi „ELi toimimise leping“) artikli 218 lõikes 9 on ette nähtud kord, mille alusel võetakse vastu otsused, millega „kehtestatakse lepingus sätestatud organis liidu nimel võetavad seisukohad, kui asjaomasel organil tuleb vastu võtta õigusliku toimega akte, välja arvatud õigusaktid, millega täiendatakse või muudetakse lepingu institutsioonilist raamistikku.“
 Mõiste „õigusliku toimega aktid“ hõlmab akte, millel on õiguslikud tagajärjed asjaomase organi suhtes kehtiva rahvusvahelise õiguse normide alusel. Nende hulka kuuluvad ka sellised õiguslikud vahendid, mis ei ole rahvusvahelise õiguse kohaselt siduvad, kuid mis „võivad mõjutada otsustavalt liidu seadusandja vastu võetud õigusaktide sisu“
 6
 .
 4.1.2.Kohaldamine käesoleval juhul
 Kavandatav akt võib otsustavalt mõjutada ELi õigusaktide, nimelt Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu 16. novembri 2011. aasta määruse (EL) nr 1233/2011(mis käsitleb riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide suuniste rakendamist ja millega tunnistatakse kehtetuks nõukogu otsused 2001/76/EÜ ja 2001/77/EÜ) sisu. Põhjus on see, et selle määruse artiklis 2 on sätestatud, et „komisjon võtab vastavalt artiklile 3 vastu delegeeritud õigusakte II lisa muutmiseks seoses kokkuleppe osaliste vahel kokku lepitud muudatustega suunistes“.
 Seega on kavandatud otsuse menetlusõiguslik alus ELi toimimise lepingu artikli 218 lõige 9.
 4.2.Materiaalõiguslik alus
 4.2.1.Põhimõtted
 ELi toimimise lepingu artikli 218 lõike 9 kohase otsuse materiaalõiguslik alus sõltub eelkõige selle kavandatud akti eesmärgist ja sisust, mida liidu nimel võetav seisukoht puudutab. Kui kavandatava õigusaktiga taotletakse kaht eesmärki või reguleeritakse kaht valdkonda ning üht neist võib pidada peamiseks või ülekaalukaks ja teine on kõrvalise tähtsusega, saab ELi toimimise lepingu artikli 218 lõike 9 kohasel otsusel olla üksainus materiaalõiguslik alus, mis oleneb peamisest või domineerivast eesmärgist või valdkonnast.
 4.2.2.Kohaldamine käesoleval juhul
 Kavandatava õigusakti peamine eesmärk ja sisu on seotud ühise kaubanduspoliitikaga. Seepärast on kavandatud otsuse materiaalõiguslik alus ELi toimimise lepingu artikkel 207.
 4.3.Järeldus
 Esildatud otsuse õiguslik alus peaks olema ELi toimimise lepingu artikli 207 lõike 4 esimene lõik koostoimes ELi toimimise lepingu artikli 218 lõikega 9.
 5.Kavandatava õigusakti avaldamine
 Kuna osaliste kavandatud otsusega muudetakse kokkulepet, on asjakohane avaldada see pärast vastuvõtmist Euroopa Liidu Teatajas.
 2021/0059 (NLE)
 Ettepanek:
 NÕUKOGU OTSUS
 seisukoha kohta, mis võetakse Euroopa Liidu nimel seoses riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkuleppe osaliste kavandatud otsusega
 EUROOPA LIIDU NÕUKOGU,
 võttes arvesse Euroopa Liidu toimimise lepingut, eriti selle artikli 207 lõike 4 esimest lõiku koostoimes artikli 218 lõikega 9,
 võttes arvesse Euroopa Komisjoni ettepanekut
 ning arvestades järgmist:
 (1)Riiklikult toetatava ekspordikrediidi kokkulepe (edaspidi „kokkulepe“) on ELis õiguslikult siduv vastavalt Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu 16. novembri 2011. aasta määrusele (EL) nr 1233/2011, mis käsitleb riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide suuniste rakendamist ja millega tunnistatakse kehtetuks nõukogu otsused 2001/76/EÜ ja 2001/77/EÜ
 7
 .
 (2)Kokkuleppe osalised (edaspidi „osalised“) leppisid 17. novembril 2020 oma 145. koosolekul kokku võtta kirjaliku menetluse teel vastu otsus muuta kokkulepet, et suurendada ekspordikrediidi riiklikku toetamist kohalike kulude vormis.
 (3)On asjakohane määrata kindlaks seisukoht, mis võetakse liidu nimel kokkuleppe osaliste poolt kirjaliku menetluse teel vastu võetava otsuse kohta, kuna kavandatav otsus võib mõjutada otsustavalt liidu õigusaktide sisu tulenevalt määruse (EL) nr 1233/2011 artiklist 2.
 (4)Kavandatud otsusega kohalike kulude katmise riikliku toetamise suurendamise kohta tuleks kokkuleppes kohandada kohalike kulude toetamist käsitlevaid sätteid domineerivate kaubandus- ja tootmismudelitega. Ülemaailmsed väärtusahelad on muutnud eksportijate tarneotsuseid ning enamik eksportijaid tarnib nüüd mitmest riigist ja üha enam ka ostja asukohast. Selleks et pakkuda ELi eksportijatele suuremat paindlikkust ja võimaldada optimaalseid hankestrateegiad, tuleks riiklikku toetust kohalike kulude katteks suurendada 30 %-lt 40 %-le ekspordilepingu väärtusest kõrge sissetulekuga riikides ja 30 %-lt 50 %-le keskmise ja madala sissetulekuga riikides,
 ON VASTU VÕTNUD KÄESOLEVA OTSUSE:
 Artikkel 1
 Euroopa Liidu nimel võetav seisukoht riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkuleppe osaliste kirjalikus menetluses seoses kavandatud otsusega suurendada kohalike kulude katteks riiklikku toetust on esitatud käesoleva otsuse lisas.
 Artikkel 2
 Käesolev otsus on adresseeritud komisjonile.
 Brüssel,
 Nõukogu nimel
 eesistuja
 (1)
 Nagu on määratletud OECD konventsiooni punktis 5.
 (2)
 Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu 16. novembri 2011. aasta määrus (EL) nr 1233/2011, mis käsitleb riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide suuniste rakendamist ja millega tunnistatakse kehtetuks nõukogu otsused 2001/76/EÜ ja 2001/77/EÜ (ELT L 326, 8.12.2011, lk 45).
 (3)
 OECD kokkuleppe varasemad versioonid on võetud ELi õigusesse üle nõukogu otsustega.
 (4)
 Nõukogu otsus, millega moodustatakse krediidikindlustus-, krediidigarantii- ja finantskrediidipoliitika koordineerimisrühm (EÜT 66, 27.10.1960, lk 1339).
 (5)
 Määrab kord aastas Maailmapank, võttes aluseks kogurahvatulu elaniku kohta.
 (6)
 Euroopa Kohtu 7. oktoobri 2014. aasta otsus kohtuasjas Saksamaa vs. nõukogu, C-399/12, ECLI:EU:C:2014:2258, punktid 61–64.
 (7)
 Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu 16. novembri 2011. aasta määrus (EL) nr 1233/2011, mis käsitleb riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide suuniste rakendamist ja millega tunnistatakse kehtetuks nõukogu otsused 2001/76/EÜ ja 2001/77/EÜ (ELT L 326, 8.12.2011, lk 45) (edaspidi „määrus (EL) nr 1233/2011“).
 ---documentbreak---
 EUROOPA KOMISJON
 Brüssel,11.3.2021
 COM(2021) 114 final
 LISA
 järgmise dokumendi juurde:
 Ettepanek: nõukogu otsus
 seisukoha kohta, mis võetakse Euroopa Liidu nimel seoses riiklikult toetatavate ekspordikrediitide kokkuleppe osaliste kavandatud otsusega
 LISA
 ETTEPANEK
 II PEATÜKK EKSPORDIKREDIIDI FINANTSEERIMISE TINGIMUSED
 11.SISSEMAKSE, MAKSIMAALNE RIIKLIK TOETUS JA KOHALIKUD KULUD
 d)Osalised võivad anda riiklikku toetust kohalike kulude katteks järgmistel tingimustel:
 1)riikliku toetuse maksimaalne summa kohalikeks kuludeks ei tohi ületada:
 –I kategooria riikide puhul 40% ekspordilepingu väärtusest;
 –II kategooria riikide puhul 50% ekspordilepingu väärtusest.
 2)Riiklikku toetust kohalike kulude katteks ei anta tingimustel, mis on asjakohaseks eksporditehinguks kokkulepitutest soodsamad või kitsendavamad.
 3)kui riiklik toetus kohalike kulude katteks ületab 15 % ekspordilepingu väärtusest, tuleb sellisest riiklikust toetusest eelnevalt teatada kooskõlas punktiga 48, täpsustades toetatavate kohalike kulude laadi.
 65.KOHALIKE KULUDE KATTEKS ANTAVA RIIKLIKU TOETUSE LÄBIVAATAMINE
 Osalised vaatavad kohalike kulude katmise toetust käsitlevad sätted läbi hiljemalt kolm aastat pärast ametlikku heakskiitmist.
 Kokkuleppe IV LISA
 SEKTORILEPE TAASTUVATE ENERGIAALLIKATE, KLIIMAMUUTUSTE LEEVENDAMISE JA NENDEGA KOHANEMISE NING VEEPROJEKTIDE EKSPORDIKREDIITIDE KOHTA
 7. KOHALIKUD KULUD
 a)Sellise riiklikult toetatava ekspordikrediidi korral, mis on seotud lepingutega, mille väärtus on vähemalt 10 miljonit SDRi, ei ületa riiklik toetus kohalike kulude katteks 30 % ekspordilepingu väärtusest.
 b)Riiklikult toetatava ekspordikrediidi korral, mis on seotud lepingutega, mille väärtus on alla 10 miljoni SDRi:
 1.käesoleva sektorileppe I liites loetletud sektorite puhul ei ületa riiklik toetus kohalike kulude katteks 45 % ekspordilepingu väärtusest;
 2.II liites loetletud sektorite ja käesoleva sektorileppe punktis 4 määratletud veeprojektide puhul ei ületa riiklik toetus kohalike kulude katteks 30 % ekspordilepingu väärtusest.
 c)Kui riiklik toetus kohalike kulude katteks ületab 15 % ekspordilepingu väärtusest, tuleb sellisest riiklikust toetusest eelnevalt teatada kooskõlas käesoleva sektorileppe punktiga 8, täpsustades toetatavate kohalike kulude laadi.


text:
IMUNITETA NI OFF
 19. 12. 2019 - 15.00
 2019-12-19-off-imuniteta-ni-off.mp3
 V Indiji so v delih New Delhija, v zveznih državah Uttar Pradesh, Bihar in Karnataka ter v nekaterih drugih mestih na severovzhodu države prepovedali množična zborovanja. S prepovedjo so želeli prekiniti proteste proti spornemu zakonu o državljanstvu, ki bi diskriminatorno omogočil podelitev državljanstva zgolj nemuslimanskim priseljencem. Večina ljudi zakonu nasprotuje, ker naj bi preveč razširil možnosti pridobitve državljanstva migrantom. Indijska policija je prijela že več tisoč ljudi, ki prepovedi niso upoštevali, protesti so se namreč nadaljevali po vsej državi. Prepoved vlade sta upoštevala dva največja mobilna operaterja v Indiji, ki sta v delih prestolnice prekinila svoji mobilni omrežji.
 Reforme ali kontinuitete?
 Menjava oblasti v Kazahstanu
 Kazahstanski predsednik Kasim-Jomart Tokajev je premestil nekatere visoke javne uradnike. Tako je z mesta ministra za energetiko odstranil Kanata Bozumbajeva in ga imenoval za predsedniškega svetovalca. Dosedanjo podguvernatorko centralne banke je imenoval za vodjo novo ustanovljene nadzorne agencije za finance. Kazahstanskega veleposlanika v Rusiji pa je odpoklical s funkcije, rekoč, da je dovolj star za upokojitev. Sicer je tri leta mlajši od predsednika. Namestnika vodje generalštaba je, ne da bi podal razlog, zamenjal s prejšnjim osebnim svetovalcem. Tokajev, ki je na funkciji nasledil prejšnjega dolgoletnega predsednika Nursultana Nazerbajeva, je po nastopu funkcije napovedal nekatere reforme v smeri demokratizacije države. Del tega je tudi nekolikšno popuščanje pri protestih, ki jih v času Nazerbajeva skoraj ni bilo, odkar je ta odstopil, pa se vrstijo - nazadnje so se odvili v ponedeljek. Protestniki zahtevajo umik Nazerbajeva iz politike, saj kljub odstopu še vedno odkrito in javno nastopa v vlogi predstavnika Kazahstana, nenazadnje pa je nov predsednik v njegovo čast kar preimenoval prestolnico iz Astane v Nursultan.
 Neodvisna Katalonija, mañana
 O referendumu za neodvisnost Katalonije
 Sodišče Evropske unije je razsodilo, da nekdanjemu katalonskemu podpredsedniku Oriolu Junquerasu pripada imuniteta evropskega poslanca. Julija je špansko sodišče zaprosilo Sodišče EU za mnenje glede vprašanja, ali Junquerasu pripada imuniteta, kljub temu da ni prisegel kot evropski poslanec. Na evropskih volitvah lani je bil namreč v Španiji izvoljen za poslanca, ni pa se udeležil ustanovne seje, kjer bi prevzel mandat, saj je bil takrat že v priporu. Njegov poslanski mandat je tako španska volilna komisija razglasila za ničnega. Sodišče EU je dodalo, da bi moralo nacionalno sodišče Evropski parlament zaprositi za odvzem imunitete, če je bilo mnenja, da bi pridržani moral ostati v priporu. Junqueras je bil oktobra obsojen na trinajst let zapora zaradi njegove vloge pri katalonskem referendumu o neodvisnosti. Iz razsodbe Sodišča ni jasno, kako bo vplivala na njegovo zaporno kazen.
 Evropski zasebnostni ščit
 Sporazum Privacy Shield, ki je nadomestil Safe Harbour
 / 8. 7. 2016
 Generalni pravobranilec Sodišča Evropske unije Henrik Saugmandsgaard Øe je sodnikom predlagal, da Facebookovo izvažanje osebnih podatkov državljanov Evropske unije v Združene države Amerike presodijo kot zakonito. Prošnjo za presojo je vložilo irsko višje sodišče, ki proučuje tožbo avstrijskega aktivista Maxa Schremsa proti Facebooku. Schrems je prepričan, da Evropska unija lahko blokira pretok osebnih podatkov izven svojih meja, upoštevajoč zlorabe, ki se z osebnimi podatki dogajajo v ZDA, namreč da do njih lahko dostopajo ameriške varnostne in obveščevalne službe. Tovrstno prakso je v pricurljanih dokumentih ameriške Agencije za nacionalno varnost razkril Edward Snowden. Generalni pravobranilec Øe sicer meni, da je odgovornost za varovanje osebnih podatkov na strani izvoznika podatkov, torej Facebooka. A če slednji ne uspe preprečiti kršitev in če se te pojavljajo, tako Øe, potem odgovornost pade na regulatorja, torej Evropsko unijo. Schremsu je sicer leta 2015 uspelo, da je sodišče razveljavilo prejšnjo evropsko zakonodajo v zvezi z varovanjem osebnih podatkov, imenovano Javni pristan, ravno na podlagi podobnega argumenta, da Facebook ni ustrezno zaščitil osebnih podatkov svojih uporabnikov.
 Evropski parlament je sprejel resolucijo, s katero je obsodil vzpostavitev preko 80 proti-LGBTQ lokalnih območij na Poljskem. Takšna območja so bila razglašena v neobvezujočih direktivah lokalnih oblasti, ki so določile, da ne bodo spodbujale tolerance do pripadnikov LGBTQ skupnosti. Obenem so se zavzele za prekinitev financiranja nevladnih organizacij, ki se zavzemajo za pravice LGBTQ. Evropski parlament je poljsko vlado pozval, naj ukrepa glede delovanja lokalnih skupnosti, in opozoril na naraščajoče število napadov na pripadnike LGBTQ skupnosti v Evropski uniji.
 Albanski parlament je sprejel zakonodajo, s katero bi vlada lahko vplivala na medijske vsebine na spletu. Oblasti lahko zahtevajo umik vsebine, suspendirajo spletne portale ali jim naložijo denarne kazni. Vlada zakon zagovarja z argumentom, da gre za boj proti lažnim novicam in sovražnemu govoru. Novinarska združenja in mednarodne organizacije opozarjajo, da gre za veliko grožnjo medijski svobodi in da je lahko zaradi zakona pričakovana tudi samocenzura. Komisarka za človekove pravice Sveta Evrope Dunja Mijatović je pred sprejetjem zakona izpostavila, da ta ni v celoti skladen z mednarodnimi in evropskimi standardi na področju svobode medijev. Več pove novinar Birna, Gjergj Erebara.
 Zbornica gradbeništva in industrije gradbenega materiala in Sindikat delavcev gradbenih dejavnosti sta podpisala aneks h kolektivni pogodbi. O konkretnih spremembah in izboljšanju položaja delavcev sekretar sindikata, Oskar Komac.
 OFF je pripravila vajenka Ajda, mentorirala je Zala.