On Monday 27 April in Luxembourg, the EU agriculture ministers expressed significant criticism regarding the European Commission’s proposals for the direct aid system post-2027 (see EUROPE 13856/12).
The Commission’s proposal introduces ‘degressive area-based income support’ (DABIS), which would replace several current schemes under the common agricultural policy (CAP). Aid payments would be calculated on the basis of eligible hectares, and a degressivity mechanism would be introduced to gradually reduce payments for large farms, thereby ensuring a fairer distribution of support. A capping on aid payments set at €100,000 per farm per year is also planned. The scheme would prioritise farmers whose main source of income is farming. By 2032, pensioners would no longer be eligible for DABIS support, a measure intended to encourage young farmers to set up in farming, according to the proposal.
Most ministers called for a robust budget for the 2028-2034 CAP and reiterated their reservations about including the CAP in future ‘national and regional partnership plans’.
The German minister, Alois Rainer, advocated for a post-2027 CAP that is “strong, reliable and well-designed” and rejected the idea of diluting the CAP in the partnership plans.
The Spanish minister, Luis Planas, emphasised that the post-2027 CAP must prioritise professional farmers, specifically small and medium-sized producers. Targeting, he noted, does not imply reducing the budget: according to Madrid, the CAP requires at least the same level of funding as in the previous period (2021-2027).
Degressivity and capping. “I reject the idea of capping aid at €100,000”, the German minister declared immediately upon his arrival at the Agriculture and Fisheries Council meeting. “Such a restriction would hit farms hard in the west, but especially those in eastern Germany. I therefore ask you for your understanding: this simply cannot work”, he explained. Germany expressed its desire to “strengthen support for the first few hectares, while leaving room for national manoeuvre”.
The Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary, in particular, also criticised the degressivity and capping mechanisms, advocating instead that these instruments be optional rather than mandatory, as proposed by the Commission.
Italy, too, argued in favour of making aid degressivity optional. Sweden said ‘no’ to degressivity and argued for an optional DABIS.
In Spain, the 2023-2027 CAP is working well, according to Mr Planas: it features effective redistribution, high participation in eco-schemes and increased income support. Spain has launched a €877 million aid package, including €500 million to offset the extra cost of fertilisers.
Regarding targeting criteria for the future DABIS, Annie Genevard, the French minister, was keen to reiterate her opposition to basing these criteria exclusively on income disparities between farmers. France would like Member States to be given greater flexibility in targeting basic support. According to France, each Member State must retain the capacity to ensure consistency and alignment between these DABIS targeting choices and other aid schemes, such as coupled support. France agrees on the need to maintain a mandatory requirement to target a portion of basic support toward young farmers. Regarding the mechanisms for capping and degressivity, “without, at this stage, expressing a view on the principle itself, on whether they should be compulsory or optional, or on the specific thresholds, the text must preserve the transparency of Joint Agricultural Farming Groups (GAECs)”, concluded Ms Genevard.
Maria Panayiotou, current chair of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council, noted that many delegations felt that aid capping and degressivity should remain optional.
Several ministers (notably from Germany and the Czech Republic) opposed the proposal to exclude retired farmers from DABIS.
At the close of the debate, European Commissioner for Agriculture and Food Christophe Hansen said that it would be “difficult to justify the status quo, or even a [step backward], at a time when all policies are expected to be reformed and simplified to receive funding”.
In his view, CAP reform must be grounded in robust European rules in order to justify the policy’s substantial budget. Among the avenues discussed was, in particular, the question of phasing out farmers reaching retirement age, as part of a scheme to encourage generational renewal and a form of intergenerational solidarity. Mr Hansen also pointed out that several Member States are calling for the exclusion of young farmers from degressivity and capping mechanisms. The Commission will examine how to reconcile this objective with the proposal to allocate 6% of expenditure to young farmers. (Original version in French by Lionel Changeur)