Finland’s Presidency of the Council of the European Union obtained from the Member States a renewed negotiating mandate with the European Parliament on the Regulation on the coordination of social security systems on Wednesday 6 November at the meeting of the National Ambassadors to the EU (Coreper I). Some points of the mandate were reportedly debated in the EU Council and could be displeasing to the European Parliament.
As a reminder, the amended mandate broadly follows the provisional interinstitutional agreement reached in March (see EUROPE 12217/5), but reopens three main points (see EUROPE 12354/18): the export of social benefits for frontier workers, pluriactivity and notification prior to the posting of workers.
According to several sources, the Finnish Presidency has obtained a mandate that would abolish the specific, 15-month export regime for social benefits for frontier workers, probably to bringing them down to 6 months. The principle of switching the responsibilities for social benefits from the State of residence to the State of activity between 3 and 6 months has been kept.
As for the definition related to pluriactivity, the working time criterion has reportedly been removed. Finally, the principle of prior notification before posting has reportedly been preserved, but the Finnish Presidency has abolished the exemption for business trips and replaced it with an exemption based on the duration of the posting, without specifying its duration, however. Some Eastern Member States are in favour of extending the duration to 30 days, but the majority favour 7 days.
This most recent proposal from the Finnish Presidency has been particularly debatable among the Member States, who spoke at length on the subject. Indeed, in the view of some, the introduction of an exemption based on duration would open Pandora’s box in terms of fraud. Some Member States would prefer to keep an exemption based on the nature of the posting, close to what was agreed last March. Others would accept this “innovation” of time-based exemption, but only if it is coupled with other parameters (e.g., sectoral approach).
Three Member States reportedly voted against the mandate: France, Denmark and the Netherlands. Luxembourg and Belgium reportedly expressed strong reservations. The Visegrád countries would prefer to wait until Monday 11 November and see how the interinstitutional negotiations (trilogue) turn out before taking a position. The Finnish Presidency reportedly expressed some optimism during the Coreper meeting and mentioned the possibility of a final trilogue in one or two meetings.
The European Parliament is on a war footing. The EU Council’s position, particularly on frontier workers and the long-term exemption, is causing a gnashing of teeth. In addition, it is one of the first political trilogues of the new European Parliament. Yielding to the EU Council could send the wrong signal for the rest of the mandate, we are told. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)