GSEVEE

Regarding the Ministry of the Interior of the Republic of Cyprus “Regulations for the modernization of the institutional framework for the organization and operation of Municipal Water Supply and Sewerage Facilities (DEYA) – Arrangements for organization, operation, finances and personnel Of the OTA. – European Territorial Cooperation Groups and Other Provisions “submitted to the Greek Parliament, GSEBEE evaluates as a positive step the effort to solve the problems that have been established in the local communities and the local government, and effectively hindered the establishment of a functional relationship between local self- – society and consumers.

GSEVEE is in principle positive to the new guidelines set out in the bill and reiterates the need for specific amendments to certain articles which will lead to more efficient regulation and better organization of the local market and municipal authorities.

Article 52

More specifically, Article 52 provides for the possibility of a favorable settlement of debts to local governments. , Derived from fees, taxes, royalties, contributions, as well as the surcharges, interest and fines imposed on them. The limits are improved compared to the original draft law that was in the consultation, but GSEVEE considers that there may be more favorable regulation with regard to both the exemption thresholds and the notice time. However, the original wording of paragraph 1 should be improved in order to include clearly the fines and surcharges in the meaning of the charge (“Liabilities to municipalities and their legal entities, who have been certified for up to two (2) months from The entry into force of this Convention may, at the request of the debtor to the authority responsible for the collection of the municipality or its legal person, be settled and paid with an exemption of a percentage of the surcharges And interest exp As well as fines due to late submission or non-submission or inaccurate declaration or failure to pay a fee)

More specifically, we believe that it is necessary to include established or unpaid debts, which were born at an earlier time and that the municipalities have not undertaken the necessary actions due to the burden or other administrative obstacles (“Natural and legal debts to the municipalities and their legal entities, Which have been ascertained or not for up to two (2) months from the date of this publication). It should be made clear in paragraph (c) of paragraph 2 that all uncertified debts are included.

For the exemption scales, we consider that there should be a full deduction of fines and fines for up to 24 doses, and then there will be an adjustment with reductions of 90%, 80%.

(A) if a lump sum payment of up to 24 installments is paid, 100% (100%),

(B) if paid in two (2) to twenty-four (24) installments, provided that each installment is not less than twenty (20) euros, with an eighty percent (80%

(C) if repayable in twenty-five (25) to forty-eight (48) installments, with a seventy percent (70%) exemption (90%)

(D) if repaid in forty nine (49) to seventy-two (72) installments, with a 60% exemption (90%)

(E) if they are repaid in seventy-three (73) to one hundred (100) installments, with a 50% exemption (50%). (To be 80%)

In addition, subject to regulation should automatically lead to tax evasion without additional payments if the arrangement is properly maintained.

It is important and it should also be included in the regulation that in cases where the Local Authorities have abolished 2% of the municipal fee by their decisions and they have withdrawn their decision, the persons liable should be “exempted from paying the fee for the From the date of the judgment and until it is revoked ‘. (Justification – for example: (a) under the principle of the legitimate expectations of the administration to the administration; (b) the tax was not collected under the decision; (c) it has adverse consequences such as to lead to the extermination of undertakings.

In addition, according to the unfavorable economic conditions prevailing in the framework of the assistance of the professionals of the Branch, a paragraph (amendment of the Law 2539/1997) according to which the fee on the gross income for the Entertainment Centers should be set at a percentage Up to 5% upon decision of the relevant City Council.
> Article 56

The proposed regulation extends the validity of the active lease agreements concluded before the entry into force of Law 4254/2014 by the kiosks and canteens. GSEVEE considers the arrangement of a tenancy extension of up to 10 years (leading to the firm’s call for equalization of contracts), while in the second paragraph it should be made clear that the extension period in the case of deceased contractors will be at least 2 years To), because misconceptions are created and lead to a possibility of unilateral change.

GSEVEE sent a letter to the Minister of Finance, Mr. E. Tsakalotos and the Minister of Economy and Development, Mr. D. Papadimitriou, requesting, in addition to the payment of the expected compensation (activation of Law 3775 / 21.7.2009) Actions necessary to compensate for the damage suffered.

In particular, the letter states:

Mr Minister,

We regret to see that in a very critical period for the recovery of the Greek economy fellow entrepreneurs have been at the center of extreme violence by a group of people, resulting in serious damage to their businesses. GSEVEE, like any elderly citizen, can only express its dissatisfaction with the lack of protection observed during vandalism. In addition to being a fundamental obligation on the part of the State to provide an adequate level of security for all citizens and their property, securing such a level is a necessary condition for the recovery of business that has so much been wounded in recent years, Of Athens which is also a tourist destination.

Given the financial difficulties still faced by small and micro enterprises, we believe that in addition to the payment of the allowances foreseen (activation of Law 3775 / 21.7.2009), it is necessary to undertake immediately the actions required for Compensation for the damage suffered.

To support businesses in downtown Athens that suffered heavy damage Monday night, GSEVEE asks. The state will have to pay direct compensation to businesses.

As noted by the President of GSEVEE, Mr. G. Kavathas, the state should compensate the shopkeepers and ensure their proper functioning, protecting entrepreneurs and consumers from such incidents.

At a time when small and medium-sized businesses are making a daily struggle to survive any additional damage, it leads faster to bankruptcy and thousands of unemployed workers.

At the same time, GSEVEE expresses its deep dissatisfaction with the appalling events that have resulted in the destruction of shops in Ermou, the most commercial street of Greece during the tourist and discount periods.

A meeting of GSEVEE President G. Kavvathas with the Deputy Minister of Finance was held today. Mr Papanatsiou, in order to discuss topical tax issues relating to small businesses.

The President of GSEVEE reiterated the pressing problem that many businesses face regarding the mandatory installation of POS terminals until July 27, 2017, as there is a refusal of credit institutions to provide terminals or especially facilitate small businesses for their digital transformation. At the same time, due to the fact that there is no predictable business account and the high number of seizures and account bindings, businesses are quite cautious about adopting electronic payment instruments, and the adjustment costs are not negligible.

Mr Kavathas also pointed out the need to create more favorable terms for debt settlement, highlighted the value of the 72/100 voted arrangements and raised the issue of the effective settlement of public and private debt set-offs, as well as the establishment Tax-free limit for professionals.

The meeting was held in a climate of mutual understanding, the State Secretary said that support for small and medium-sized enterprises is a priority of the Ministry and that its staff is working on plans to simplify and facilitate tax procedures for the benefit of small businesses and professionals.

GSEVEE considers the transition to the digital era and the spread of electronic transactions as a strategic goal, but underlines that at present there are significant risks from the lack of a framework for the protection of small businesses, many of which due to the multiple cumulative burdens from 2010, Tend to prefer the formal cessation of activities and opt for their transfer to the informal sector of the economy, with obvious consequences for tax revenues, healthy competition and financial Or stability. GSEVEE invites the competent authorities (Tax Administration and Trade DG) and banks to take initiatives to facilitate and reduce the cost of business transition to the new digital age. POS terminals need to be reform tools rather than means of profits and market shares by small businesses.

The full text of the pleading is as follows:

Suggestions – GSEVEE Posts

TAX POLICY ISSUES

Small businesses, despite the major problems they faced with the implementation of capital controls and the disruption of the informal payment system that has occurred in recent years, seem to have shown a high degree of readiness. Despite the fact that they were significantly and heterogeneously affected by how capital controls were implemented, losing significant market shares, and having been burdened with significant commissions and charges on turnover for the supply and use of terminal machines, small businesses managed to integrate In their operation the use of electronic / plastic money responding to the new market needs.

According to the latest survey by IME GSEVEE, the percentage of enterprises that maintains POS electronic banking and terminal equipment for retail transactions has increased significantly since July 2015 (with the start of capitalcontrols). From 28.1% in July 2015, the percentage of enterprises that had POS in February 2017 was 52.4%.

However, there is a gradual slowdown in the adoption of electronic payment instruments by businesses, despite the fact that consumers are beginning to adapt to the new digital reality (in the last six months the growth trend was very weak, from 49% to 52.4%) .

In addition, it remains unclear how much the share of turnover generated by electronic payments, especially in small businesses, varies according to the rate of increase in tax liabilities and third-party attachment procedures. In the latest survey by IME GSEVEE, it was found that 33% of the turnover of small businesses is carried out through the use of POS.

In general, the absence of an effective fiscal incentive mechanism for businesses and consumers appears to have a negative impact on the adoption of friendly behavior towards electronic payment instruments. The seizure risks create a spiral of separation of many small businesses from the official banking system and avoiding conventional trading methods.

In a survey conducted between members of federations and first-level organizations, the following issues emerged:

1.Banks are delaying the terminal version when they assess that the business is not an attractive customer. Mandatory implementation of the terminal installation measure until July 27 in some occupation groups will result in fines of € 1,500, but it is unknown what happens if the fault for the non-commissioning of the terminal is borne by the banks or some other supplier. In the short term, the possibility of extending the obligation until the end of 2017 should be explored.
2.Account bindings / seizures lead companies to reverse choices, that is, a money-holding incentive is created outside the official banking sector, which negatively affects the deposit base, financial stability, tax revenues and normalization of economic relations in the market. The consequence of this is that the business, which has no bank account and has very few transactions with POS terminals (contrary to the declared objective of the tax authorities), gets a distortive comparative advantage.
3.Charges remain forbidding for certain categories of businesses, as they exceed 1%, while the maintenance and supply costs of the component should be taken into account. This is a modern form of a third-party tax. To address the high cost to customers and businesses, it is proposed to allow small businesses to use alternative machines that will accept tax cards or other forms of compliance and will send transaction data directly to the tax authority.

Proposal for a bad business account

GSEVEE considers the transition to the new digital era to be a very significant development by spreading electronic transactions at B2C and B2B levels. The adoption of electronic invoices and the spread of electronic banking will be a positive development for the whole economy. In addition to being able to immediately inform tax authorities about business revenue, it is possible to cross-check financial data and reveal incomes that would otherwise not have entered the system. Also, with electronic banking, the stability of the banking system is strengthened and conditions are created for the most immediate removal of capital controls, the return of liquidity and the improvement of market psychology. Lastly, there is a significant boost to the new prospects that can open up e-commerce even for small businesses, which can use more efficiently and attract newer customers more economically.

However, lately, tax administration’s actions aimed at collecting taxpayers’ tax arrears are intensified, apparently with a view to meeting the budgetary objectives and prerequisites of the third program. According to press reports and data we collect through IME GSEVEE, seizures of accounts are also noted for low debts. In addition to the uncertainty that causes such a move to the market, it essentially blurs the above ambitious endeavor of spreading electronic transactions as a means of increasing tax revenues, disclosing income, reducing tax evasion, promoting e-commerce, enhancing banking stability, reducing administrative costs for businesses and tax Authorities. Additionally, it makes the company hostage of all kinds of debts, without any possibility of improving its business position.

It is obvious that the revenue of the enterprise is not a net profit but is intended to cover a significant part of the liabilities: current employee and employer contributions, current taxes to the tax office, payroll, debts to suppliers, energy and travel costs, Various other charges. The blocking of an account means that there is a threat of declaring an economy unable to cover the entire chain of obligations with obvious effects on production and trade. This is a de facto closure situation for a business.

For all of the above reasons, GSEVEE underlines the need to establish a single unprofitable business account (either at a 3-year transition or a turnover), which will serve all the economic functions of the business and whose technical configurations can Be subject to certain criteria, such as turnover, debt, etc.

OTHER TAX ISSUES

THEMES OF AUTHORITY-TAX POLICY

1.Establish tax-free income for professional activity / equal treatment of taxpayers.
2.Extension of the measure of collection of evidence to all natural persons and professionals / traders.
3.Gradual reduction / removal / embedding of business fee.
4.Solving the problem of timely repayment of liabilities and deferred reporting by banking institutions to tax authorities. This problem creates a spiral of negative developments for the business that can lead to even loss of regulation and confiscation of all available funds, with possible suspension.
5.Increase in maximum turnover for non-taxable persons. Alternatively, for turnover up to € 30,000, the trader is treated in the same way as a natural person – a taxpayer.
6.Unblocking the possibility of transferring real estate / receiving payment from a public / and other operations for collecting and maintaining the tax arrangements. A similar direct procedure to follow for the tax refund procedure.

The presentation of the results of the “Law Law Clinic” research in the international trade law for the year 2016-2017 took place on Wednesday, June 14, at the main building of the University of Athens. This workshop is being held for the 2nd year with the participation of academic groups of students from the Department of Legal and Scientific Social Workers. The scientific supervision and the editing of this particular was organized by the Athens PIL of the Law School of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, headed by Mr. Anastasios Gourgourinis, Lecturer of the Law Department in collaboration with FSE GSEVEE, BSE, Greenpeace and WWF Hellas.

The themes developed this year on facilitating and encouraging the participation of small and medium-sized enterprises and addressing distortions in international trade were 1) the aspects of the new CETA (Europe Trade Agreement); 2) the implications and legal implications of the Russian embargo on European Agricultural products and 3) trade defense instruments for Greek small and medium-sized enterprises.

* Under the Trade Law Clinic, undergraduate students from the Law School of Athens undertake to carry out scientific studies (informative, advisory and ad hoc) on specific themes of common interest, in cooperation with bodies and civil society, under academic supervision and supervision. The purpose of the Trade Law Clinic is to place the theory of international trade law in practice so that the research produced takes into account real social needs and concerns.

In this regard, scientific research is carried out by the students participating in the Law School of Athens, while the collaborating institutions carry out (in depth for one academic year) a series of regular meetings with them in order to provide them with the necessary information and reflections and to direct them towards The practical research questions.

The Social Partners, GSEE – SEV – GSEVEE – ΕΣΕΕ – ΣΕΤΕ, and the EUMC will hold an informative workshop on the exclusive subject of the Extrajudicial Mechanism on Wednesday, June 21, 2017 at 18.30. It is a fact that the ability to regulate all the debts of a company is a determining factor in its sustainability, which affects not only the employers’ organizations but also those of the employees. Applying the possibilities of the new law will therefore be a valuable tool both for companies and for the employees working in them.

The keynote speaker will be the Special Secretary for Private Debt Management, Mr. Fotis Kourmousis, and representatives of banks.

Held in Ormylia Halkidiki, 8-11 June 2017 meeting for drafting label regulation on “Monastic products and small producers ‘products’, which is a joint effort of the Interparliamentary Assembly on Orthodoxy and GSEBEE.

President GSEBEE Mr. George Kavathas, he informed the delegates establishing the GSEBEE the non-profit company under the name “CENTER AWARD MARK monastic PRODUCTS & PRODUCT SMALL PRODUCERS” with the distinctive title “RULE”, presented a draft label Regulation For these products.

During the discussion that followed, representatives and representatives of the Holy Monasteries developed both from Greece and from abroad.

The result of these is the decision to be completed by the end of July the regulation with the comments and suggestions of participants and the “RULE” logo.

The meeting was attended by Mr. Athanasios Bouras, Member of the Greek Parliament and An. General. Secretary of DSO, MP and Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights of the DSO Mr. Maximus Charakopoulos, the Member of the House of Representatives of Cyprus and member of the Finance Committee the DSO Mr. Elias Myrianthous, monasteries representatives from Greece, Russia, Romania, Ukraine, Egypt, Finland, Scientific Partners, small producers and small businesses, the Mayor Mr. Polygyros. Asterios Zografos, President of Shopping Chamber of Halkidiki Mr. Giorgos Gkilis, representative of His Eminence Metropolitan Kassandra, the Metropolitan Ierissos, Ag. Horus and Ardameriou, and the Consultant Dr Kostas Mygdalis.

The greeting of the President of GSEVEE at the Conference:

“It is with great joy that we are here at the” Meeting for the Preparation of a Signal Award Regulation “, for Monastic Products and Small Producer Products. A meeting that is the product of the course of excellent cooperation between the DOS and the GSEVEE in order to support this pure productive activity of both the Monastic Communities and the very small and small producers.

From our first meetings, and especially after the two-day conference in Sparta from 14 to 17 April 2016, it was found that although society knows and supports in many cases the products produced by these units, this is done without an organized So that they can not be disposed of, but (mainly) only at a local level with limited scope for expansion and in an over-the-top market.

At the same time, the lack of proper labeling for these products limits their recognition and consequently deprives them of their uniqueness. This in a market that, due to globalization and other distorted situations, can create but also enable a badly trained business to acquire something that does not belong to it.

How many and how many “monastic products” are advertised through television, the various forms and the internet without having the slightest connection with them?

Unfortunately, it is a reality, in a world that violates any concept of healthy competition on the altar and only of a poorly understood profitability.

For these very reasons, as I said in Sparta, GSEVEE, which has been expressing and supporting since 1919 the healthy entrepreneurship of very small and medium-sized professionals, craftsmen and traders, responded directly to the call of the IAO to work together To ensure all these productive efforts of the Monastic Communities and the very small producers.

From this point of view, we are reconciling the strategy today, but also defining the terms and procedures to meet the need to safeguard the interests of all these business efforts. Both the establishment and, above all, the performance of the KANON brand in the products produced by these units, we are confident that it will work positively on their recognition.

At the same time, it will help the consumer on his choice, but will also allow producers to easily distinguish their products from the “shelf”.

All of us, it is easy to understand the very importance of this effort of “Editing the Signal Regulation”, since its implementation is the cornerstone on which to rely on the whole success of the project.

I would not like to go into technical details on the regulation today, as during our tomorrow’s work we will be given a detailed report and a presentation of what is provided for it.

The obvious and crystal-clear proposed procedure we are following in the performance of the label is also evident and as GSEVEE we remain open to other proposals that will complement this regulation to ensure the effort and the common goal.

The initiative of Democratic Compatriation to highlight an issue with broader developmental and social dimensions is a tangible example that political planning can and must escape the narrow electoral horizons and the 4-year political cycle. The view that policies have a short-term target is now obsolete and should give way to strategic objectives that are tailored according to the existing political correlation that the social majority has preferred.

The attitude of international institutions and creditors has shown that when the Greek side fails to design coordinates and long-term, it is more vulnerable to blackmail and admonitions, often by imposing regulations unrelated to the environment in which the pathogens occur. The same happened in the case of the new insurance system, where the government, with the minimum adjustment time, gave creditors the opportunity to push for even more painful solutions.

The issue of intergenerational exploitation of the country’s wealthy sources is an issue that puts forward above all the developmental, social and environmental balance. The effort to establish a mechanism of intergenerational balance and sustainability of social policy is not a futile action, it is also the object of contemporary reflection in all the world’s top academic institutions, and it is largely co-ordinated with climate change policies and international Investment – a topical issue due to the Trump’s decisions. At a time when risks and uncertainties are more than just the stakes of the economy, at a time when new generations are experiencing worse social reproduction conditions than their parents have experienced, we all have to give alternatives to defend the future And the rights of young people, which are the basis for the new production model, the viability of insurance, scientific continuity, local development.

The exploitation of mineral wealth as a means of strengthening insurance systems is not a new idea without applying to other countries. It is pioneering, however, in the sense that it constitutes a quasi-basket of values, which extends in the future and can be used for investment and social purposes.

The provision for the creation of the Special Generation Social Solidarity Account is clearly a progressive move that, unlike the sirens of the days, does not mean the partial privatization of social security as a means of improving the financial flows of pensioners. Indeed, in the White Paper of the European Commission on Social Policy, there are excerpts that provide for a retirement option to give homeownership to banking institutions rather than paying lump sums or monthly installments. Contrary to the above, this proposal focuses on the correlation of human capital and natural resources that each country has: as much as resource efficiency is made, both the share in future social welfare is rising. The example of Norway shows that the benefits are many and multiplier. In addition to creating value, a safety net and adjustment is produced in difficult economic times. At the same time, it is a signal to the markets and the various investment funds that the country is working on the basis of a forward-looking design, and this creates a more attractive environment. Young people take advantage of the technology outlook while remaining in the country and contributing to productivity growth, demography and employment. In my forthcoming constitutional review, it is advisable, in my view, to protect the reserves of the funds.

The legislative provision of Law 4162/2013 on the exploitation of the income from the exploitation of hydrocarbons for the insurance system is of course positive as a first step of rehabilitation. GSEVEE certainly believes that it should be extended to various forms of investment / exploitation of public property. There is room for completion with individual interventions and additions relating to:

1) The utilization of percentages from corresponding concession contracts related to the creation of energy networks (eg natural gas and oil pipelines)

2) The inclusion of a percentage on the total real estate of the country in order to create an initial management capital with an investment orientation. In particular, to include in the new Fund agricultural land, which is not recorded as private property and is allocated to producers, cooperatives and other forms of organization for consideration to be added to the insurance system. Respectively, to allocate part of the tax revenue derived from agricultural holdings not included in a farm register.

3) The use of metal deposits (gold, silver, marble and other metals, such as metals such as zeolite) through concession contracts for the creation of pension tools that favor the local development of the mining area.

4) The use of natural preventive, healing and rehabilitation opportunities resulting from the existence of a wealth of natural healing resources and high-quality medical tourism services (apart from the retirement, can cover the health and health infrastructure side of citizens through Partnerships of national bodies with international insurance institutions for health services combined with tourist packages).

5) The use of natural beauty areas, which, in addition to their mild tourism, can be used exceptionally for scientific experiments, technological and medical conferences. The fees will be directed to a fund for research into the environment and the insurance system.

6) Effective use of all forms of renewable energy sources such as geothermal energy, wind farms, photovoltaics.

7) In the Fund set up (special account) there could be a provision for tax-free profits of small and medium-sized enterprises to invest in green technology with a low-interest loan or pooling with other companies to improve the quality of jobs.

At the same time, the proposal of GSEVEE for the management of the debt of professionals, traders and craftsmen remains in force in order to create conditions of intergenerational equilibrium (freezing and capitalization of debts created by the previous system, with acquisition at the end of the life insurance) . We believe that these proposals, if implemented, will act as communicating containers for its reorganization.

The Brussels Economic Forum, held on 1 June in the Flagey area, was attended by a delegation from IME GSEVEE, where proposals and guidelines for the most important challenges facing Economic and Monetary Union were presented, while a text of reflection drafted by the European Commission for The possible scenarios of the Union’s evolution and the deepening of the European project. With this year’s title “Europe at a crossroads: ways of enhancing cohesion, integration and prosperity”, this year’s event was intended to highlight the awareness within the European Union and its institutions of the new role it has to play The EU in the new international environment, tackling internal contradictions and deepening democratic institutions.

Among the speakers of the Economic Forum were Vice-President of the European Commission, V. Bobrovski, Economic Affairs Commissioner P. Moskovis, academics, EU officials, ministers of countries, representatives of European institutions, research institutes and civil society.

The opening speech was made by France’s central banker, Francois Vileroy de Galhau, who put a special emphasis on the reforms being promoted in the member states in the midst of a crisis, as well as on the necessary joint step by the member countries. He also referred to the need to design and implement fewer but more important European projects and tools. The guest speaker, G. Soros, President of the Open Society Foundations, gave the conference a central theme on the need to transform the European Union and especially the Eurozone. Vice-President V. Drobrovskis referred to the significant progress and reforms made in the Member States under review and noted the value and stability advocated by the defense of the European Social Model through actions such as minimum income and the strengthening of youth entrepreneurship and Employment.

The main modules covered in the three thematic panels that followed were: inequalities, European integration and refugee crisis

The first section developed the dimensions of the phenomenon of inequality, which is expanding internationally. In spite of the best performance of the EU in this area (social protection, benefits, life expectancy, etc.), important challenges remain regarding poverty, the reproduction of inequalities due to reduced access to education and information, wages Gender gap. For example, we report that in the EU 20% of the richest households have five times the income of the poorest 20%. At the same time, 9.5% of the working population is considered to be “working in poverty”, while 23.7% of the population is at risk of poverty and social exclusion. It is noteworthy that the uncertainties about the economy, unemployment, business environment create more concern and fear of falling into poverty and unequal treatment (the appointment of a Bourguignon economics professor). In Greece, the absence of a minimum social protection grid and an institutional legal framework for failed entrepreneurs has pushed the risk of poverty and social exclusion to 37%. In addition, it was suggested that the emphasis on small business and micro-scale investments can mitigate the impact of digital transformation and job losses.

In the second section, Commissioner Moskovishi analyzed the problems surrounding the future and the prospects for integration of the European Union. Economic data on public and private debt, the financial sector, growth, unemployment show significant differences between countries, with Greece facing the most important structural and cyclical problems (public debt, unemployment, failure to exit markets). On the other hand, most private debt is in Cyprus (354% of GDP), Luxembourg and Ireland (over 300% both). Britain’s UK exit from the EU may also mark the redeployment of the European financial map and markets, with 46% of the stock value being traded today in London. Extensive mention was made by Economic Affairs Commissioner Moskovic in the Reflection paper on the deepening of the economic and monetary union, which includes proposals on the transition of the European Union into a model of integration and deepening. The text of reflection, as a follow-up to the White Paper, supported three areas of intervention, which should be emerging as central EU policies:

– Complete a genuine banking and financial union, harmonizing financial markets and broadening funding instruments, with supervision

– Developing an effective economic union and fiscal union, focusing on macroeconomic stability and reform initiatives by member countries.

– Strengthening European institutions and consolidating democratic processes with accountable mechanisms at European level and balancing the powers that exist in various informal institutions such as the Eurogroup. In this respect, the institutionalization of the Eurogroup head as a quasi-finance minister of Europe would be a scenario. Indeed, in the first phase of operation, responsibilities could be attributed to internal security, defense and social policy expenditure. Some speakers have made particular reference to the need to harmonize tax systems.

The third section analyzed the impact of immigration and the refugee problem on EU immigration and labor market policies, and a brief assessment of the EU-Turkey agreement was carried out, which despite the problems seems to halt unscheduled flows of refugees. Today, when the EU is confronted with the aging and the natural decline of the population, migration and labor market relevance is a special challenge. The refugee increased the pressure on member countries, mainly Greece and Italy, and created a new immigration structure. 65.3 million people were forced to leave their homes, 21.3 million became refugees and 10 million people did not belong to any state (mainly from Syria, Iraq).

With regard to internal migration, in the EU, just 4% of its population is working in a country other than the one born, while in the US 30% of them work in a state other than the one born.

Faced with the international challenges faced by the European Union and recent developments, broadening the dialogue on the basis of the Union’s institutions is a positive development, but there remain many issues that seek swift, effective and democratic decisions. GSEVEE systematically monitors and actively participates in the public consultation on issues such as harmonization of economic policies, integration of small and medium-sized enterprises into the development agenda and a single European market, tackling critical international social problems such as refugee, unemployment and inequalities.

The European Economic and Social Committee (EOK), in cooperation with the European Commission, held a conference on 2/6/2017, on the occasion of the European Commission’s White Paper on the Future of Europe: “Issues and scenarios for the European Union of 27 by 2025 “. The event took place in the Senate of the Parliament Hall, presented five possible scenarios for the future of the European Union.

The President of GSEVEE, Mr. G. Kavathas said in his speech “it is clear that the country and the social partners have to closely monitor the agenda on the European scene, as it is clear that the core of Europe must come closer as urgent needs and specificities of the European region.

It is a general assumption that the European construction has received strong shocks during the crisis, both in terms of political legitimacy and representation, as well as administrative and economic efficiency and failure to resolve the problems arising from the redeployment of the world division of labor and Restructuring within the European Union. The super-conservative forces that have taken over the EU’s financial administration over the last 10-15 years have left the agenda for a more creative, united Europe of convergence and cohesion and have shown competitiveness, even among EU countries, as a sovereign demand for Europe 2030. Obvious victims of this new strategy were and remain the countries of the region, which together with their structural weaknesses, bearing the weight of painful reforms and adopt policies which minimally improved if their place in the new economic model. ”

“In this context,” Kavathas continued, “European citizens have been faced with a series of interventions that have increased economic insecurity, increased inequalities, shrunk the welfare state, and widened the North-South gap. At the same time, new challenges emerged within Europe: refugee, regional conflicts, terrorism, political extremism, failure to control the financial fabric.

Euroscepticism, alienation, questioning the European perspective, populism did not occur accidentally. It was the results of defying the expectations of European citizens about the benefits of the process of completing the European vision. It was the result of the withdrawal from the basic European values ​​of solidarity, understanding, communication and dialogue. As a consequence of the prevalence of ethnic embankment in the major economies of Europe. Today it is clear that the institutions in the EU operate less democratically, the European Parliament is not really decisive, economic policies are not decided in a transparent manner. The EESC and the ESC have an important role to play in reversing this climate and consolidating the social dialogue.

British citizens saw the mirror of their future in the context above, and even with marginal rates, they set themselves apart from a European project. Despite the regional differences and peculiarities that can be identified in the case of Britain, Brexit has undoubtedly been the lynx, which has permanently shifted the agenda for the future of Europe. In a sense, that is why we are here today. To discuss and consider what is the right way to mobilize the defensive forces of the common European path, without further delays, without heterogeneous policies. Personally, I believe that the enthusiasm we have seen last time on the European political scene is positive, but it must be honest and courageous to pursue more radical policies and to find solutions in critical areas of economic and social policy. The European Commission and President Hunter rushed to shape a menu of choices for Europe of the future, a White Paper whose pages European leaders are asked to write. Other positive, tedious initiatives on investment mobilization and development (the Juncker package) were preceded. However, we should not be too optimistic if we do not see signs of change in the European context. I believe that a major contributor to the European crisis remains the continuing regression and delay that exists around the Greek issue. If the EU fails to resolve a problem that is less than 2% of European GDP and debt, it is sensible for both citizens and the markets to wonder whether the European construction is capable of responding to a potentially more complex crisis: A crisis that may arise due to political and economic antagonisms with the US, Russia, the European financial sector, the emergence of China as the first economic power, the aggravation of the refugee issue. ”

In closing, the President of GSEVEE stressed “the question whether we want more or less Europe based on the five scenarios analyzed by the White Paper, the answer can not be either unambiguous or unilateral. Deepening institutions, completing economic policy requires recognition of errors, widening available tools, developing comparative advantages, strengthening weaker players. “