(1)

Regulation (EC) No 3223/94 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations, the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products and periods stipulated in the Annex thereto.

(2)

In compliance with the above criteria, the standard import values must be fixed at the levels set out in the Annex to this Regulation,

(1)

Articles 173 to 177 of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 provide that the Commission shall periodically establish unit values for the products referred to in the classification in Annex 26 to that Regulation.

(2)

The result of applying the rules and criteria laid down in the abovementioned Articles to the elements communicated to the Commission in accordance with Article 173(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 is that unit values set out in the Annex to this Regulation should be established in regard to the products in question,

(1)

Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 lists the persons covered by the freezing of funds and economic resources under that Regulation.

(2)

Council Decision 2005/444/CFSP (2) amends the Annex to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP (3). Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 314/2004 should, therefore, be amended accordingly.

(3)

In order to ensure that the measures provided for in this Regulation are effective, this Regulation should enter into force immediately,

(1)

Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 provides that the rates of duty in the Common Customs Tariff are to be charged on import of the products referred to in Article 1 of that Regulation. However, in the case of the products referred to in paragraph 2 of that Article, the import duty is to be equal to the intervention price valid for such products on importation and increased by 55 %, minus the cif import price applicable to the consignment in question. However, that duty may not exceed the rate of duty in the Common Customs Tariff.

(2)

Pursuant to Article 10(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003, the cif import prices are calculated on the basis of the representative prices for the product in question on the world market.

(3)

Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 lays down detailed rules for the application of Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 as regards import duties in the cereals sector.

(4)

The import duties are applicable until new duties are fixed and enter into force.

(5)

In order to allow the import duty system to function normally, the representative market rates recorded during a reference period should be used for calculating the duties.

(6)

Application of Regulation (EC) No 1249/96 results in import duties being fixed as set out in Annex I to this Regulation,

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 (4), fixes detailed rules for implementing the system of additional import duties and fixes representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin.

(2)

It results from regular monitoring of the information providing the basis for the verification of the import prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors and for egg albumin that the representative prices for imports of certain products should be amended taking into account variations of prices according to origin. Therefore, representative prices should be published.

(3)

It is necessary to apply this amendment as soon as possible, given the situation on the market.

(4)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Poultrymeat and Eggs,

(1)

Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2759/75 provides that the difference between prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1(1) of that Regulation and prices for these products within the Community may be covered by an export refund.

(2)

It follows from applying these rules and criteria to the present situation on the market in pigmeat that the refund should be fixed as set out below.

(3)

In the case of products falling within CN code 0210 19 81, the refund should be limited to an amount which takes account of the qualitative characteristics of each of the products falling within these codes and of the foreseeable trend of production costs on the world market. It is important that the Community should continue to take part in international trade in the case of certain typical Italian products falling within CN code 0210 19 81.

(4)

Because of the conditions of competition in certain third countries, which are traditionally importers of products falling within CN codes 1601 00 and 1602, the refund for these products should be fixed so as to take this situation into account. Steps should be taken to ensure that the refund is granted only for the net weight of the edible substances, to the exclusion of the net weight of the bones possibly contained in the said preparations.

(5)

Article 13 of Regulation (EEC) No 2759/75 provides that the world market situation or the specific requirements of certain markets may make it necessary to vary the refund on the products listed in Article 1 of Regulation (EEC) No 2759/75 according to destination.

(6)

The refunds should be fixed taking account of the amendments to the refund nomenclature established by Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (2).

(7)

Refunds should be granted only on products that are allowed to circulate freely within the Community. Therefore, to be eligible for a refund, products should be required to bear the health mark laid down in Council Directive 64/433/EEC (3), Council Directive 94/65/EC (4) and Council Directive 77/99/EEC (5).

(8)

The Management Committee for Pigmeat has not delivered an opinion within the time limit set by its chairman,

—

Chapter XI of Annex I to Directive 64/433/EEC,

—

Chapter VI of Annex I to Directive 94/65/EC,

—

Chapter VI of Annex B to Directive 77/99/EEC.

(1)

Regulation (EC) No 2305/2003 opened an annual tariff quota for the import of 300 000 t of barley falling within CN code 1003 00.

(2)

The quantities applied for on 13 June 2005 in accordance with Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) No 2305/2003 exceed the quantities available. The extent to which licences may be issued should therefore be determined and a reduction coefficient laid down to be applied to the quantities applied for,

(1)

Article 33 of Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 provides that the difference between prices on the world market for the products listed in Article 1 of that Regulation and prices for those products within the Community may be covered by an export refund.

(2)

Commission Regulations (EEC) No 32/82 (2), (EEC) No 1964/82 (3), (EEC) No 2388/84 (4), (EEC) No 2973/79 (5) and (EC) No 2051/96 (6) lay down the conditions for granting special export refunds on certain cuts of beef and veal and certain preserved beef and veal products, and for certain destinations.

(3)

It follows from applying those rules and criteria to the foreseeable situation on the market in beef and veal that the refund should be as set out below.

(4)

With regard to live animals, for reasons of simplification export refunds should not be granted for categories with insignificant trade with third countries. Moreover, in the light of the general concern of animal welfare, export refunds for live animals for slaughter should be limited as much as possible. Consequently, export refunds for such animals should only be granted for third countries which for cultural and/or religious reasons traditionally import substantial numbers of animals for domestic slaughter. As to live animals for reproduction, in order to prevent any abuse, export refunds for pure-bred breeding animals should be limited to heifers and cows of no more than 30 months of age.

(5)

Export refunds should be granted for certain destinations on some fresh or chilled meat listed in the Annex under CN code 0201, on some frozen meat listed in the Annex under CN code 0202, on some meat or offal listed in the Annex under CN code 0206 and on some other prepared or preserved meat or offal listed in the Annex under CN code 1602 50 10.

(6)

In the case of meat of bovine animals, boned or boneless, salted and dried, there are traditional trade flows to Switzerland. To allow this trade to continue, the refund should be set to cover the difference between prices on the Swiss market and export prices in the Member States.

(7)

In the case of certain other cuts and preserves of meat or offal shown in the Annex under CN codes 1602 50 31 to 1602 50 80, the Community presence of international trade may be maintained by granting a refund corresponding to that at present available.

(8)

In the case of other beef and veal products, a refund need not be fixed since the Community's share of world trade is not significant.

(9)

Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (7) establishes the agricultural product nomenclature for the purposes of export refunds. The refunds are set on the basis of the product codes as defined in that nomenclature.

(10)

The refunds on all frozen cuts should be brought into line with those on fresh or chilled cuts other than those from adult male bovine animals.

(11)

Checks on products covered by CN code 1602 50 should be stepped up by making the granting of refunds on these products conditional on manufacture under the arrangements provided for in Article 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 565/80 of 4 March 1980 on the advance payment of export refunds in respect of agricultural products (8).

(12)

Refunds should be granted only on products that are allowed to move freely in the Community. Therefore, to be eligible for a refund, products should be required to bear the health mark laid down in Council Directives 64/433/EEC (9), 94/65/EC (10) and 77/99/EEC (11), respectively.

(13)

Pursuant to Article 6(2) of Regulation (EEC) No 1964/82, the special refund is to be reduced if the quantity of boned meat to be exported amounts to less than 95 %, but not less than 85 %, of the total weight of cuts produced by boning.

(14)

The negotiations within the framework of the Europe Agreements between the European Community and Romania and Bulgaria aim in particular to liberalise trade in products covered by the common organisation of the market concerned. For these two countries export refunds should therefore be abolished. That abolition should not, however, lead to a differentiated refund for exports to other countries.

(15)

The Management Committee for Beef and Veal has not given an opinion within the time limit set by its President,

(1)

According to Article 104(1) of the Treaty, Member States are to avoid excessive government deficits.

(2)

The Stability and Growth Pact is based on the objective of sound government finances as a means of strengthening the conditions for price stability and for strong sustainable growth conducive to employment creation. The Stability and Growth Pact includes Council Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 of 7 July 1997 on speeding up and clarifying the implementation of the excessive deficit procedure (1).

(3)

The Resolution of the European Council of 17 June 1997 on the Stability and Growth Pact, Amsterdam (2) solemnly invites all parties, namely the Member States, the Council and the Commission to implement the Treaty and the Stability and Growth Pact in a strict and timely manner.

(4)

By Council Decision 2004/917/EC (3), on 5 July 2004, it was decided, in accordance with Article 104(6) of the Treaty, that an excessive deficit existed in Greece.

(5)

In accordance with Article 104(7) of the Treaty and Article 3(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1467/97, the Council addressed a Recommendation to Greece on 5 July 2004 establishing the deadline of 5 November 2004 for Greece to take measures to bring the existence of an excessive deficit to an end in 2005 at the latest.

(6)

After the adoption of Decision 2004/917/EC, the Greek government data notified on 4 May 2004 was significantly revised in September 2004. The deficit figure for 2003 rose to 4,6 % of GDP (from the 3,2 % notified on 4 May), while according to the Commission’s autumn 2004 forecasts, the general government deficit was likely to reach 5,5 % of GDP in 2004, compared with the 3,2 % projected in spring. Furthermore, the measures approved by the Greek Parliament in the 2005 budget might not ensure that the general government deficit is brought below 3 % of GDP in 2005. According to the Commission’s autumn 2004 forecasts, which projected a growth rate of 3,3 % in 2005, the measures included in the Greek budget for 2005 are projected to lead to a nominal deficit of 3,6 % of GDP, which is above the 3 % threshold.

(7)

By Council Decision 2005/334/EC (4), it was established, in accordance with Article 104(8) of the Treaty, that Greece had not taken effective action in response to the Council Recommendation according to Article 104(7) of 5 July 2004.

(8)

According to Article 104(9), if a Member State persists in failing to put into practice the recommendations of the Council, the Council may decide to give notice to the Member State to take measures for the deficit reduction within a specified time-limit. The Council considers that the deadline, set in the Council Recommendation according to Article 104(7) of 5 July 2004, based on the present Commission forecast will not be met. Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1467/97 indicates that any Council decision to give such notice is to be taken within one month of the Council decision establishing that the Member State in question has not taken effective action in accordance with Article 104(8).

(9)

The following factors should be taken into account in determining the recommendations to be included in the notice. Firstly, the estimated deficit out-turn for 2004 will be substantially higher than expected when the recommendation under Article 104(7) was adopted and the overruns more than offset the restraining measures implemented for 2004. As a result, the entire fiscal effort to be made in order to correct the excessive deficit by 2005 at the latest, as called for in the Council Recommendation according to Article 104(7) of 5 July 2004, should take place in the current year. Secondly, according to the Commission’s autumn 2004 forecasts, if fully implemented, the measures in the budget adopted by the Greek Parliament for 2005 would lead to a deficit reduction of 1,9 percentage points of GDP. This represents a considerable improvement of the fiscal position, but would be insufficient to bring the nominal deficit below the 3 % threshold. Finally, this additional adjustment might become even higher if a number of uncertainties regarding the macroeconomic scenario for 2005 and the fiscal outturn for 2004 materialise. Taking these elements into account, the total adjustment necessary to correct the excessive deficit in 2005 could be higher than 2,6 percentage points of GDP, which would require additional measures of a permanent nature leading to a correction in the deficit of at least 0,7 of a percentage point of GDP. Such an effort in a single year may prove economically costly.

(10)

In the light of these factors, it appears that the deadline which was set in July 2004 for the elimination of the excessive deficit in Greece should be extended by one year.

(11)

On the basis of a growth rate of 3,3 % in the Commission’s autumn 2004 forecasts for 2005 and 2006 and given the uncertainties regarding the macroeconomic and budgetary outlooks, a rigorous implementation of the 2005 budget, together with measures of a permanent nature leading to a correction in the deficit of at least 0,6 of a percentage point of GDP in 2006, would result in a deficit of 3,6 % of GDP in 2005 and bring it below 3 % of GDP in 2006.

(12)

The Commission’s autumn 2004 forecasts project the debt ratio to stabilise at around 112 % of GDP in 2004 and 2005, and to fall only marginally to about 110 % in 2006. This is well above the 60 % reference value of the Treaty. Moreover, the contribution to the changes in debt levels of factors other than net borrowing is also high. It is necessary that the Greek authorities should continue to pay due attention to such factors in order to reduce the debt ratio at a satisfactory pace, consistent with the projections for the general government balance and nominal GDP growth.

(13)

In view of significant statistical revisions and in order to allow for an adequate monitoring of the situation of public finances in Greece, further efforts are needed to improve the collection and processing of general government data required by the existing legal framework, notably by enhancing the mechanisms that ensure the prompt and correct supply of these data.

(14)

Greece should submit a report to the Commission before 21 March 2005, outlining measures to be implemented in order to comply with this Decision. In particular, the report should include a description of the measures to be implemented in 2005 to reduce the budget deficit, an assessment of the implications of the 2004 deficit out-turn to be disclosed in the excessive deficit procedure notification in March 2005 and a description of the uncertainties associated with the macroeconomic scenario. Greece should also include in that report as precise a description as possible of the measures to be implemented in 2006 to reduce the deficit. The Commission and the Council should examine that report with a view to assessing compliance with this Decision.

(15)

According to the second subparagraph of Article 104(9) of the Treaty, the Council may request Greece to submit reports in accordance with a specific timetable in order to examine the adjustment efforts made in order to comply with this Decision. It is appropriate for Greece to submit reports just after the usual deadlines for reporting government deficits and debt provided for by Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 3605/93 of 22 November 1993 on the application of the Protocol on the excessive deficit procedure annexed to the Treaty establishing the European Community (5) in order to enable the Commission to assess compliance with this Decision.

(16)

In the view of the Council, adjustment measures should secure a lasting improvement in the general government balance. In order to ensure a sustained budgetary consolidation towards the medium term position of government finances close to balance or in surplus, as prescribed by the Stability and Growth Pact, a reduction in the cyclically-adjusted deficit by at least 0,5 of a percentage point of GDP per year is necessary after the correction of the excessive deficit,

(1)

Article 15(7) of Decision 2003/479/EC provides that the daily and monthly allowances shall be adjusted each year without retroactive effect on the basis of the adaptation of the basic salaries of Community officials in Brussels and Luxembourg.

(2)

The last adjustment of those allowances was provided for in Decision 2004/240/EC and took effect on 1 April 2004.

(3)

The Council, through Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 31/2005 of 20 December 2004 adjusting, with effect from 1 July 2004, the remuneration and pensions of officials and other servants of the European Communities and the correction coefficients applied thereto (2), provided for an adjustment of 0,7 % of the remuneration and pensions of Community officials,

(1)

Article 8 of Regulation (EC) No 2799/98 requires non-participating Member States that contemplate paying expenditure resulting from legal instruments relating to the common agricultural policy in euro to take measures to ensure that the use of the euro does not provide a systematic advantage compared with the use of national currency.

(2)

Commission Decision 2001/121/EC of 30 January 2001 on the payment in euro by the United Kingdom of certain expenditure resulting from legal instruments relating to the common agricultural policy and repealing Decision 2000/121/EC (3) approved such measures communicated by the United Kingdom.

(3)

On 14 April 2005, the United Kingdom informed the Commission of its intention to amend the measures approved by Decision 2001/121/EC and communicated the new measures it contemplated taking to prevent any systematic advantage resulting from the use of the euro rather than the pound sterling. That communication was received on 14 April 2005.

(4)

The measures planned by the United Kingdom can be summarised as follows:

(5)

Those measures are in line with the objective fixed by Regulation (EC) No 2799/98, namely to prevent a systematic advantage resulting from the use of the euro rather than the national currency. They should therefore be approved.

(6)

For that reason, Decision 2001/121/EC should be repealed and replaced by this Decision,

(1)

By Common Position 2004/161/CFSP the Council adopted measures, inter alia, to prevent the entry into, or transit through, the territories of Member States of individuals who engage in activities which seriously undermine democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law in Zimbabwe and to freeze their funds and economic resources.

(2)

On 21 February 2005 the Council adopted Common Position 2005/146/CFSP (2) extending Common Position 2004/161/CFSP.

(3)

The list of persons subject to the restrictive measures annexed to Common Position 2004/161/CFSP should be updated following a government reshuffle in Zimbabwe,