(4)

Feedback and experience from the two years of implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans under the current CAP Union legal framework indicate that further, limited adjustments of that legislation are needed in order to address the identified bottlenecks and complexities. These include the fact that specific circumstances, practices and needs of certain groups of farmers - such as organic, young, small-scale, and livestock farmers - are not yet sufficiently taken into account in the CAP Union legal framework, which does not permit Member States to adjust the various instruments to the specific circumstances, needs and practices of those farmers. Also, certain simplification opportunities within the CAP, such as the use of lump-sums or simplified cost options, are underutilised due to complexities in their implementation and management. This can lead to overlapping or ambiguous requirements for farmers, complicate farmers’ access to support, and hinder business development opportunities for farmers, such as for young and new farmers. There are also certain rigidities in the rules impacting how Member States manage and amend their CAP Strategic Plans and fulfil their reporting obligations. Finally, the burden of on-farm-visits and controls on both farmers and administrative bodies still needs to be alleviated, in particular by introducing more efficient methodologies for Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) quality assessments and conditionality controls. Overcoming these bottlenecks and rigidities should help Member States use the CAP Strategic Plans to maximise opportunities for the benefit of farmers and other beneficiaries of the CAP, reduce administrative burden and complexity, and make better use of scarce resources.

(4)

Feedback and experience from the two years of implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans under the current CAP Union legal framework indicate that further, limited adjustments of that legislation are needed in order to address the identified bottlenecks and complexities. These include the fact that specific circumstances, practices and needs of certain groups of farmers - such as organic, young , women, mountain-area , small-scale, and livestock farmers - are not yet sufficiently taken into account in the CAP Union legal framework, which does not permit Member States to adjust the various instruments to the specific circumstances, needs and practices of those farmers. Also, certain simplification opportunities within the CAP, such as the use of lump-sums or simplified cost options, are underutilised due to complexities in their implementation and management. This can lead to overlapping or ambiguous requirements for farmers, complicate farmers’ access to support, and hinder business development opportunities for farmers, such as for young and new farmers. There are also certain rigidities in the rules impacting how Member States manage and amend their CAP Strategic Plans and fulfil their reporting obligations. Finally, the burden of on-farm-visits and controls on both farmers and administrative bodies still needs to be alleviated, in particular by introducing more efficient methodologies for Integrated Administration and Control System (IACS) quality assessments and conditionality controls. Overcoming these bottlenecks and rigidities should help Member States use the CAP Strategic Plans to maximise opportunities for the benefit of farmers and other beneficiaries of the CAP, reduce administrative burden and complexity, and make better use of scarce resources.

(6)

In order to minimise the risk of negative impacts on the single market and international trade of the new crisis payments to farmers following natural disasters, adverse climatic events and catastrophic events in accordance with Articles 41a and 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, the interventions under which this Union support is to be granted should be designed by the Member States in such a way that they qualify under the criteria of Annex 2 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (‘Green Box’).

(6)

In order to minimise the risk of negative impacts on the single market and international trade of the new crisis payments to farmers following natural disasters, adverse climatic events and catastrophic events in accordance with Article 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, the interventions under which this Union support is to be granted should be designed by the Member States in such a way that they qualify under the criteria of Annex 2 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (‘Green Box’).

(8)

In view of the exceptional nature of the payment the farmer would receive in an crisis situation, having suffered significant production losses as a result of natural disasters, adverse climatic events or other catastrophic events, and to ensure coherence with payments referred to in Article 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, the system of conditionality referred to in Article 12 of that Regulation should not apply to complementary payments to farmers following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events under direct payments, referred to in Article 41a of that Regulation.

(9)

The system of conditionality comprising Statutory Management Requirements (SMR) and Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (GAEC) Standards aims to contribute to the development of sustainable agriculture through an increased awareness on the part of beneficiaries of the need to comply with those basic standards and requirements. It also aims to increase the consistency of the CAP with the environment, public health, plant health and animal welfare objectives pursued by Union legislation. However, considering that the agricultural area managed by small farmers who benefit from payments under the interventions referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 is limited, applying the system of conditionality to such small farmers, who manage majority of farms in the Union, yields insufficient benefits compared to significant costs, and imposes an important administrative burden, on those farmers and national administrations. To reduce such costs and ease the related administrative burden, it is appropriate to exempt small farmers from the application of the system of conditionality.

(9)

The system of conditionality comprising Statutory Management Requirements (SMR) and Good Agricultural and Environmental Condition (GAEC) Standards aims to contribute to the development of sustainable agriculture through an increased awareness on the part of beneficiaries of the need to comply with those basic standards and requirements. It also aims to increase the consistency of the CAP with the environment, public health, plant health and animal welfare objectives pursued by Union legislation. However, considering that the agricultural area managed by small farmers who benefit from payments under the interventions referred to in Article 28 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 is limited, applying the system of conditionality to such small farmers, who manage two thirds of farms in the Union and whose holdings do not exceed 10 hectares, yields insufficient benefits compared to significant costs, and imposes an important administrative burden, on those farmers and national administrations. To reduce such costs and ease the related administrative burden, it is appropriate to exempt small farmers from the application of the system of conditionality.

(11)

GAEC standard 1, listed in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 aims to maintain permanent grassland to preserve carbon stock. Points 1.7.3 and 1.9.1.1 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 emphasize the importance of maximizing the use of grazing and pasture, which prevents the conversion of permanent grassland into other land uses, and in line with the main objective of GAEC standard 1 preserves carbon stock in permanent grasslands. GAEC standards 3, 5 and 6, listed in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 aim to maintain soil organic matter, limit erosion, and protect soils during sensitive periods, respectively. These objectives are already achieved through the tillage and cultivation practices applied in organic plant production, in particular those referred to in point 1.9. of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848. GAEC standard 4, listed in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, aims to protect water against pollution. Similarly, points 1.5, 1.7, 1.9 and 1.10 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 aim to reduce the risk of water pollution by limiting the use of veterinary medicinal products, restricting the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and restricting stocking density. Experience has shown that organic farming has a positive impact as regards nutrient leaching and run-off, making it less likely that an organic farmer would compromise the quality of water, thereby achieving the main objective of GAEC standard 4. Therefore, given the principles and rules laid down in Regulation (EU) 2018/848 and existing practices under the organic farming systems, organic farmers whose entire holding is certified in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848 should be deemed to comply with GAEC standards 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, as is the case already in respect to GAEC standard 7.

(11)

GAEC standard 1, listed in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 aims to maintain permanent grassland to preserve carbon stock. Points 1.7.3 and 1.9.1.1 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 emphasize the importance of maximizing the use of grazing and pasture, which prevents the conversion of permanent grassland into other land uses, and in line with the main objective of GAEC standard 1 preserves carbon stock in permanent grasslands. GAEC standards 3, 5 and 6, listed in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 aim to maintain soil organic matter, limit erosion, and protect soils during sensitive periods, respectively. These objectives are already achieved through the tillage and cultivation practices applied in organic plant production, in particular those referred to in point 1.9. of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848. GAEC standard 4, listed in Annex III to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, aims to protect water against pollution. Similarly, points 1.5, 1.7, 1.9 and 1.10 of Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2018/848 aim to reduce the risk of water pollution by limiting the use of veterinary medicinal products, restricting the use of fertilizers and pesticides, and restricting stocking density. Experience has shown that organic farming has a positive impact as regards nutrient leaching and run-off, making it less likely that an organic farmer would compromise the quality of water, thereby achieving the main objective of GAEC standard 4. Therefore, given the principles and rules laid down in Regulation (EU) 2018/848 and existing practices under the organic farming systems, as well as practices in place in the context of integrated pest management, organic farmers whose entire holding is certified in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2018/848 or farmers involved in other sustainable production methods, such as integrated farming, and those who apply integrated management in an accredited manner should be deemed to comply with GAEC standards 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6, as is the case already in respect to GAEC standard 7.

(13)

In view of the exceptional nature of the payment the farmer may receive in a crisis situation, having suffered significant production losses as a result of natural disasters, adverse climatic events or other catastrophic events, and to ensure coherence with the payments referred to in Article 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, the system of conditionality referred to in Article 14 of that Regulation should not apply to complementary payments to farmers following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events under the direct payments referred to in Article 41a of that Regulation.

(14)

Natural disasters, adverse climatic events and catastrophic events are increasing in their frequency, intensity and duration and are having significant impact on the agricultural sector in the Union. Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 already provides a set of tools for farmers to build up resilience and respond to crisis. The scale of events and their sudden and extraordinary nature call however for expanding instruments available for Member States. Hence, it is appropriate to provide for complementary crisis payments to farmers and to include them as a new type of intervention in the form of direct payments in Article 16 of that Regulation.

(15)

Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 allows Member States to retain up to 3 % of the direct payments to be paid to a farmer to support the farmers’ contribution to a risk management tool. A Member State deciding to make use of this option , had to apply it to all beneficiaries of direct payments in a given year. Experience shows that only very few Member States make use of this option. Discussions with the Member States have shown that an obstacle to the implementation of this provision is the lack of risk management tools, either set up by Member States or available through private insurance, available for all farmers receiving direct payments. In order to increase the uptake and use of the possibility provided for in Article 19 of that Regulation, it is necessary to make its implementation more flexible and to adapt it to the existing management tools in Member States. As a result of this amendment, Member States should be able to retain up to 3 % of direct payments to be paid to those farmers only for whom risk management schemes exist in a given year. Member States where risk management schemes would exist for all direct payments beneficiaries should be able to continue retaining up to 3 % of the direct payments of all such beneficiaries.

(15)

Article 19 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 allows Member States to retain up to 3 % of the direct payments to be paid to a farmer to support the farmers’ contribution to a risk management tool. A Member State deciding to make use of this option had to apply it to all beneficiaries of direct payments in a given year. Experience shows that only very few Member States make use of this option. Discussions with the Member States have shown that an obstacle to the implementation of this provision is the lack of risk management tools, whether set up by Member States or available through private insurance, available for all farmers receiving direct payments. In order to increase the uptake and use of the possibility provided for in Article 19 of that Regulation, it is necessary to make its implementation more flexible and to adapt it to the existing management tools in Member States. As a result of this amendment, Member States should also be able to retain up to 3 % of direct payments to be paid to those farmers only for whom risk management schemes exist in a given year.

(21)

In the first years of implementation of the CAP Strategic Plans, natural disasters, adverse climatic events or other catastrophic events have impacted many farmers’ production around the Union. That trend is expected to continue in the future. It should therefore be possible for Member States to offer crisis payments in the form of increased direct income support to enable the most affected farmers to be compensated rapidly. To maintain the incentive for farmers to insure their production, Member States should set a higher rate of compensation for those farmers, who are covered by an insurance scheme or other risk management tool. To increase the funds to be mobilised in support of farmers, Member States should be allowed to co-finance those crisis payments with additional national financing of up to 200 %. However Member States should ensure that the total compensation received by the farmer accumulated with other forms of Union or nationally funded support (including additional national financing), private insurance or other risk management schemes does not lead to overcompensation or double-funding.

(33)

In order to efficiently support farmers whose production was damaged by natural disasters, adverse climatic events or other catastrophic events, Member States should be able to plan crisis payments not only through direct income support interventions, but also through rural development interventions. Such types of support should offer Member States sufficient flexibility in planning the interventions . However, Member States should ensure consistency between these interventions. Accordingly, provisions regarding the targeting of support and the incentive effect should be the same . In order to ensure sound financial management of the Union funds, Member States should ensure that the total compensation received by the farmer accumulated with other forms of Union or nationally funded support (including additional national financing), private insurance or other risk management schemes does not lead to overcompensation or double-funding.

(33)

In order to efficiently support farmers whose production was damaged by natural disasters, adverse climatic events or other catastrophic events, Member States should be able to plan crisis payments through rural development interventions. Such types of support should offer Member States sufficient flexibility in planning the interventions. In order to ensure sound financial management of the Union funds, Member States should ensure that the total compensation received by the farmer accumulated with other forms of Union or nationally funded support (including additional national financing), private insurance or other risk management schemes does not lead to overcompensation or double-funding.

(40)

Article 86(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 lays down rules on the eligibility of expenditure resulting from amendments of CAP Strategic Plans for contribution from the EAGF and the EAFRD, respectively. To simplify the rules on eligibility of expenditure, to improve synergies between the EAGF and the EAFRD and to increase the flexibility for the Member States to determine the dates of effect of the EAGF-related amendments of CAP Strategic Plans, it is appropriate to allow the eligibility of expenditure resulting from an approved strategic amendment of a CAP Strategic Plan for EAGF contribution from the date of effect of the amendment set by the Member State concerned in accordance with Article 119(8) of that Regulation, but not earlier than from the date of submission to the Commission of the request for amendment. For other amendments of CAP Strategic Plans related to the EAGF, the expenditure should be eligible for contribution from the EAGF from the date of notification of the amendment to the Commission, as laid down in Article 119(9) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, as amended by this Regulation. To ensure coherence between the rules concerning eligibility for contribution from the EAGF and EAFRD in cases of emergency measures due to natural disasters, catastrophic events or adverse climatic events, it should be possible to establish in CAP Strategic Plans that the eligibility of EAGF-financed expenditure relating to amendments to CAP Strategic Plans related to complementary crisis payments to farmers under direct payments referred to in Article 41a of that Regulation, may start from the date on which the event occurred.

(40)

Article 86(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 lays down rules on the eligibility of expenditure resulting from amendments of CAP Strategic Plans for contribution from the EAGF and the EAFRD, respectively. To simplify the rules on eligibility of expenditure, to improve synergies between the EAGF and the EAFRD and to increase the flexibility for the Member States to determine the dates of effect of the EAGF-related amendments of CAP Strategic Plans, it is appropriate to allow the eligibility of expenditure resulting from an approved strategic amendment of a CAP Strategic Plan for EAGF contribution from the date of effect of the amendment set by the Member State concerned in accordance with Article 119(8) of that Regulation, but not earlier than from the date of submission to the Commission of the request for amendment. For other amendments of CAP Strategic Plans related to the EAGF, the expenditure should be eligible for contribution from the EAGF from the date of notification of the amendment to the Commission, as laid down in Article 119(9) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, as amended by this Regulation.

(41)

For the purpose of ensuring adequate financing for the new types of intervention for crisis payments to farmers following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events referred to in Articles 41a and 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, Member States should be able to reserve a certain share of both direct payments and EAFRD funding for these types of intervention. However, with a view of ensuring that sufficient financing remains available to deliver on the other CAP priorities, this share should be limited to a maximum annual amount available per Member State corresponding to 3 % of the total of direct payments and EAFRD funding per year. In order to incite Member States to privilege the use of the instrument set out in Article 41a of that Regulation and financed with direct payments funding, the maximum annual amount that can be reserved by a Member State for this type of intervention should correspond to 4 % of the total of direct payments and EAFRD funding per year, if the Member State decides not to provide support for crisis payments under Article 78a of that Regulation.

(41)

For the purpose of ensuring adequate financing for the new type of intervention for crisis payments to farmers following natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events referred to in Article 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115, Member States should be able to reserve a certain share of EAFRD funding for this type of intervention. However, with a view of ensuring that sufficient financing remains available to deliver on the other CAP priorities, this share should be limited to a maximum annual amount available per Member State corresponding to 3 % of the total of EAFRD funding per year.

(42)

Due to their special nature, the new types of intervention for crisis payments to farmers under direct payments referred to in Article 41a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 and under rural development referred to in Article 78a of that Regulation should be exempt from the obligation to contribute to the result indicators listed in Annex I to that Regulation.

(42)

Due to their special nature, the new types of intervention for crisis payments to farmers under rural development referred to in Article 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 should be exempt from the obligation to contribute to the result indicators listed in Annex I to that Regulation.

(43)

Additional national financing for complementary crisis payments to farmers provided in accordance with Article 41a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 should be included in Annex V to the CAP Strategic Plan of the Member State.

(44)

Article 119(4) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 provides for the approval by the Commission of requests for amendments of CAP Strategic Plans submitted by Member States. Article 119(9) of that Regulation enables Member States to make and apply modifications of CAP Strategic plans related to the interventions referred to in Title III, Chapter IV, of that Regulation, which are approved by the Commission together with the next request for amendment. Experience has shown that the amendments of CAP Strategic Plans often contain numerous technical elements that render them complex, onerous for Member States, and result in delays in the approval procedures although the strategic orientation of the Plans remain unchanged. This interferes with timely and effective adaptation of CAP Strategic Plans to changing economic reality and needs of farmers and other beneficiaries in Member States and negatively impacts the implementation of those Plans. To simplify and improve the efficiency of amendment procedures, in particular regarding elements of the CAP Strategic Plans that are not of strategic nature, approval by the Commission should be required only for strategic amendments of CAP Strategic Plans. For this purpose, strategic amendments should be defined in Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 as amendments of important elements of the CAP Strategic Plans that significantly impact the strategy and intervention logic of those plans, including transfers of financial allocations between the EAFRD and the EAGF, maximum and minimum financial allocations, and changes to target and financial plans. Member States should be able to make and apply all other amendments to their CAP Strategic Plans upon notifying them to the Commission, and these other amendments should not be subject to Commission approval.

(44)

Article 119(4) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 provides for the approval by the Commission of requests for amendments of CAP Strategic Plans submitted by Member States. Article 119(9) of that Regulation enables Member States to make and apply modifications of CAP Strategic plans related to the interventions referred to in Title III, Chapter IV, of that Regulation, which are approved by the Commission together with the next request for amendment. Experience has shown that the amendments of CAP Strategic Plans often contain numerous technical elements that render them complex, onerous for Member States, and result in delays in the approval procedures although the strategic orientation of the Plans remain unchanged. This interferes with timely and effective adaptation of CAP Strategic Plans to changing economic reality and needs of farmers and other beneficiaries in Member States and negatively impacts the implementation of those Plans. To simplify and improve the efficiency of amendment procedures, in particular regarding elements of the CAP Strategic Plans that are not of strategic nature, approval by the Commission should be required only for strategic amendments of CAP Strategic Plans. For this purpose, strategic amendments should be defined in Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 as amendments of important elements of the CAP Strategic Plans that significantly impact the strategy and intervention logic of those plans, including transfers of financial allocations between the EAFRD and the EAGF, maximum and minimum financial allocations, and changes to target and financial plans. Member States should submit strategic amendments to their CAP Strategic Plans to the Commission following appropriate consultations with affected stakeholders. Member States should be able to make and apply all other amendments to their CAP Strategic Plans upon notifying them to the Commission, and these other amendments should not be subject to Commission approval.

(53)

Additional national financing for complementary crisis payments to farmers provided in accordance with Article 41a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 should be subject to the same rules as additional national financing under rural development.

(55)

Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 sets out impact, result and output indicators pursuant to Article 7 of that Regulation. The table ‘Annual performance clearance – OUTPUT’ in Annex I to that Regulation should be replaced to introduce output indicators linked with the newly introduced types of intervention and the amended types of intervention and to take into account the deletion by this Regulation of the annual performance clearance provided for in Article 54 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116.

(55)

Annex I to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 sets out impact, result and output indicators pursuant to Article 7 of that Regulation. The table ‘Annual performance clearance – OUTPUT’ in Annex I to that Regulation should be replaced to introduce output indicators linked with the newly introduced type of intervention and the amended types of intervention and to take into account the deletion by this Regulation of the annual performance clearance provided for in Article 54 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116.

(56)

Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 lists the relevant paragraphs of Annex 2 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (‘Green Box’) for each type of intervention of that Regulation. The newly introduced types of intervention for crisis payments to farmers under direct payments referred to in Article 41a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 and for rural development referred to in Article 78a of that Regulation should therefore be included in that Annex.

(56)

Annex II to Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 lists the relevant paragraphs of Annex 2 to the WTO Agreement on Agriculture (‘Green Box’) for each type of intervention of that Regulation. The newly introduced type of intervention for crisis payments to farmers under rural development referred to in Article 78a of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 should therefore be included in that Annex.

(61)

Experience with the implementation of the agricultural reserve has shown that it is valuable in case of crisis in order to offer support to farmers affected and to contribute to the return of markets to a better balance. However, in the past years it was increasingly used for alleviating the situation of the farmers suffering direct losses due to natural disasters, adverse climatic events or catastrophic events although its intended original purpose as financing market instrument was to focus on compensating and mitigating the impacts of market disturbances. In view of the mounting challenges faced by the Union agricultural sector, including trade tensions, geopolitical uncertainty and increased indirect impact of animal health issues on market balance, it appears justified to refocus the reserve on its original purpose. Compensations to farmers for direct effects of natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events, such as those resulting in physical losses of plants, animals and products thereof should be addressed by Member States who are in charge of developing robust risk and crisis management strategies with the financial support of their CAP Strategic Plans including the new instruments established by this Regulation. Measures to balance the negative impact on farmers generated by market disturbance such as those affecting prices, costs or sales, also when they are generated as indirect effects of natural disasters, adverse climate events or catastrophic events, should continue to be financed by the agricultural reserve.

(80)

Given that funds have already been allocated from the 2025 agricultural reserve for sectors affected by adverse climatic events and natural disasters as provided for in Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/441 (19), Article 2, point (5) of this Regulation should apply from the agricultural financial year 2026, i.e. from 16 October 2025 only.

(a)

land that has not been included in the crop rotation of the holding and has not been ploughed, tilled or reseeded with different types of grasses or other herbaceous forage for a period of seven years or more; or

(b)

land that was not classified as arable land as of 1 January 2023, allowing land that held arable status on that date to retain it permanently, even if temporarily used for grasses or other herbaceous forage.

(6)

in Article 14, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

(6a)

in Article 14, the following paragraph is added:

(7)

Article 16 is amended as follows:

(a)

paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

(b)

the following paragraph is added:

(7a)

in Article 16, the following paragraph is added:

(9a)

in Article 30(3), the following subparagraph is added:

(-a)

in paragraph 2, the following subparagraph is added:

(ia)

after the second subparagraph, the following subparagraph is inserted:

(ca)

the following paragraph is added:

(12a)

In Article 49, the first paragraph is amended as follows:

(16a)

in Article 73(3), first subparagraph, point (d), the following point is added:

‘(iva)

purchasing high-quality genetic material or high-quality breeding animals under the commitments referred to in Article 70;’;

(b)

the maximum amount of aid of EUR 50000 for the activities referred to in paragraph 2, point (d).

(b)

the maximum amount of aid of EUR 75 000  for the activities referred to in paragraph 2, point (d).

(19a)

in Article 77(8), point (b) is replaced by the following:

(b)

setting-up of producer groups, producer organisations or interbranch organisations to 10 % of the annual marketed production of the group or organisation with a maximum of EUR 100 000 per year ; that support shall be degressive and limited to the first five years following recognition.

‘(b)

setting-up of producer groups, producer organisations or interbranch organisations to 10 % of the annual marketed production of the group or organisation with a maximum of EUR 500 000 over five years ; that support shall be degressive and limited to the first five years following recognition.’;

(26a)

in Article 103, the following paragraph is added:

(28)

in Article 115(5), point (a) is replaced by the following:

(a)

a short description of additional national financing for interventions in rural development laid down in Title III, Chapter IV, and for interventions for complementary crisis payments to farmers laid down in Article 41a, which is provided within the scope of the CAP Strategic Plan, including the amounts per intervention and indication of compliance with the requirements laid down in this Regulation;´;

(da)

support dedicated to beneficiaries under Article 78a, including the sectors concerned, the amounts allocated, and the justification for providing it.

(-1)

in Article 3, the following paragraph is added:

(a)

digital tools required for compliance are accessible and affordable for all farmers;

(b)

appropriate technical support for farmers is available, including through advisory services or helplines;

(c)

training opportunities are offered to farmers, with particular attention to farmers with limited digital skills;

(d)

arrangements are in place for protecting individual data, including aggregation and anonymisation.

(8a)

In Article 34, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

O.1

Number of European Innovation Partnership (EIP) operational group projects

O.2

Number of advice actions or units to provide innovation support for preparing or implementing European Innovation Partnership (EIP) operational group projects

O.3

Number of CAP support beneficiaries

O.4

Number of hectares benefitting from basic income support

O.5

Number of beneficiaries or hectares benefitting from payments for small farmers

O.6

Number of hectares benefitting from complementary income support for young farmers

O.7

Number of hectares benefitting from redistributive income support

O.8

Number of hectares or of livestock units benefitting from eco-schemes

O.9

Number of units covered by supported CAP risk management tools

O.9a 

Number of farmers benefitting from complementary crisis payments under direct payments

O.9b

Number of farmers benefitting from crisis payments under rural development

O.10

Number of hectares benefitting from coupled income support

O.11

Number of heads benefitting from coupled income support

O.12

Number of hectares benefitting from support for areas facing natural or other specific constraints, including a breakdown per type of area

O.13

Number of hectares benefitting from support under Natura 2000 or Directive 2000/60/EC

O.14

Number of hectares (excluding forestry) or number of other units covered by environmental or climate-related commitments going beyond mandatory requirements

O.15

Number of hectares (forestry) or number of other units covered by environmental or climate-related commitments going beyond mandatory requirements

O.16

Number of hectares or number of other units under maintenance commitments for afforestation and agroforestry

O.17

Number of hectares or number of other units benefitting from support for organic farming

O.18

Number of livestock units (LU) benefitting from support for animal welfare, health or increased biosecurity measures

O.19

Number of operations or units supporting genetic resources

O.20

Number of supported on-farm productive investment operations or units

O.21

Number of supported on-farm non-productive investment operations or units

O.22

Number of supported infrastructure investment operations or units

O.23

Number of supported off-farm non-productive investment operations or units

O.24

Number of supported off-farm productive investment operations or units

O.25

Number of young farmers receiving setting-up support

O.26

Number of new farmers receiving setting-up support (other than young farmers reported under O.25)

O.27

Number of rural businesses receiving support for start-up

O.27a

Number of small farms receiving support for business development’

O.28

Number of supported producer groups and producer organisations

O.29

Number of beneficiaries receiving support to participate in official quality schemes

O.30

Number of supported operations or units for generational renewal (excluding setting-up support)

O.31

Number of supported local development strategies (LEADER) or preparatory actions

O.32

Number of supported other cooperation operations or units (excluding EIP reported under O.1)

O.33

Number of supported training, advice and awareness actions or units

O.34

Number of hectares under environmental practices (summary indicator on physical area covered by conditionality, eco-schemes, agri- and forest-environment-climate management commitments)

O.35

Number of supported operational programmes

O.36

Number of supported operational programmes

O.37

Number of actions or units supported in the wine sector

O.38

Number of actions or units for beekeeping preservation or improvement

O.1

Number of European Innovation Partnership (EIP) operational group projects

O.2

Number of advice actions or units to provide innovation support for preparing or implementing European Innovation Partnership (EIP) operational group projects

O.3

Number of CAP support beneficiaries

O.4

Number of hectares benefitting from basic income support

O.5

Number of beneficiaries or hectares benefitting from payments for small farmers

O.6

Number of hectares benefitting from complementary income support for young farmers

O.7

Number of hectares benefitting from redistributive income support

O.8

Number of hectares or of livestock units benefitting from eco-schemes

O.9

Number of units covered by supported CAP risk management tools

O.9b

Number of farmers benefitting from crisis payments under rural development

O.10

Number of hectares benefitting from coupled income support

O.11

Number of heads benefitting from coupled income support

O.12

Number of hectares benefitting from support for areas facing natural or other specific constraints, including a breakdown per type of area

O.13

Number of hectares benefitting from support under Natura 2000 or Directive 2000/60/EC

O.14

Number of hectares (excluding forestry) or number of other units covered by environmental or climate-related commitments going beyond mandatory requirements

O.15

Number of hectares (forestry) or number of other units covered by environmental or climate-related commitments going beyond mandatory requirements

O.16

Number of hectares or number of other units under maintenance commitments for afforestation and agroforestry

O.17

Number of hectares or number of other units benefitting from support for organic farming

O.18

Number of livestock units (LU) benefitting from support for animal welfare, health or increased biosecurity measures

O.19

Number of operations or units supporting genetic resources

O.20

Number of supported on-farm productive investment operations or units

O.21

Number of supported on-farm non-productive investment operations or units

O.22

Number of supported infrastructure investment operations or units

O.23

Number of supported off-farm non-productive investment operations or units

O.24

Number of supported off-farm productive investment operations or units

O.25

Number of young farmers receiving setting-up support

O.26

Number of new farmers receiving setting-up support (other than young farmers reported under O.25)

O.27

Number of rural businesses receiving support for start-up

O.27a

Number of small farms receiving support for business development’

O.28

Number of supported producer groups and producer organisations

O.29

Number of beneficiaries receiving support to participate in official quality schemes

O.30

Number of supported operations or units for generational renewal (excluding setting-up support)

O.31

Number of supported local development strategies (LEADER) or preparatory actions

O.32

Number of supported other cooperation operations or units (excluding EIP reported under O.1)

O.33

Number of supported training, advice and awareness actions or units

O.34

Number of hectares under environmental practices (summary indicator on physical area covered by conditionality, eco-schemes, agri- and forest-environment-climate management commitments)

O.35

Number of supported operational programmes

O.36

Number of supported operational programmes

O.37

Number of actions or units supported in the wine sector

O.38

Number of actions or units for beekeeping preservation or improvement

(ba)

the entry ‘GAEC 5’ is deleted .

(bb)

the entry ‘GAEC 9’ is deleted .