Archive for the ‘European Union’ Category

Trump: European Union ‘has been brutal – CNNPolitics

"So, a lot of countries, and I won't be particular, but I will tell you the European Union -- brutal," Trump said at a lunch with donors at at Mar-a-Lago. "They've been brutal to us."

The President also said the EU, which is comprised of 28 European countries, had "banded together in order to beat the United States in trade."

At around noon on Saturday, Trump doubled down on his stance, tweeting "our jobs and wealth are being given to other countries that have taken advantage of us for years. They laugh at what fools our leaders have been. No more!"

Taking another hit at the EU, Trump tweeted about it again, this time suggesting that if the EU raises tariffs more, so too will the United States.

"If the E.U. wants to further increase their already massive tariffs and barriers on U.S. companies doing business there, we will simply apply a Tax on their Cars which freely pour into the U.S." he wrote. "They make it impossible for our cars (and more) to sell there. Big trade imbalance!"

"We will not sit idly while our industry is hit with unfair measures that put thousands of European jobs at risk," European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said in a statement.

"Instead of providing a solution, this move can only aggravate matters," his statement said.

German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said, "the EU must respond decisively to US punitive tariffs, which endanger thousands of jobs in Europe. There should be no doubt about that in Washington."

Canada, meanwhile, said that any trade restrictions on Canadian steel and aluminum would be "absolutely unacceptable."

"Should restrictions be imposed on Canadian steel and aluminum products, Canada will take responsive measures to defend its trade interests and workers," Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland said in a statement.

The details of Trump's policy -- which is not yet official -- are expected to be announced next week.

CNN's Kevin Liptak contributed to this report.

Originally posted here:
Trump: European Union 'has been brutal - CNNPolitics

European Union – Import Tariffs | export.gov

When products enter the EU, they need to be declared to customs according to their classification in the Combined Nomenclature (CN). The CN document is updated and published every year, and the latest version can be found on the European Commission's website.

U.S. exports to the European Union enjoy an average tariff of just three percent. All the same, U.S. exporters should consult The Integrated Tariff of the Community, referred to as TARIC (Tarif Intgr de la Communaut), to identify the various rules which apply to specific products being imported into the customs territory of the EU. To determine if a license is required for a particular product, check the TARIC.

The TARIC can be searched by country of origin, Harmonized System (HS) Code, and product description on the interactive website of the Directorate-General for Taxation and the Customs Union. The online TARIC is updated daily.

Key Link: TARIC

European Union 28 Tariff Rate Quotas Import Duties

Read more here:
European Union - Import Tariffs | export.gov

European Union and Armenia sign Partnership Priorities …

Today, the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy/Vice-President of the European Commission, Federica Mogherini and the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Armenia, Edward Nalbandian, signed the EU-Armenia Partnership Priorities in Brussels.

Thissets the joint policy prioritiesfor the coming years, in line with the new EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement.

The four main areas of cooperation are:

The Partnership Priorities will be key in guiding EU financial assistance to Armenia until 2020. For that period, the EU has earmarked around 160 million for Armeniato invest, among other areas, in education and innovation, which are key for Armenia's economic development.

"The European Union and Armenia are, with these Partnership Priorities, further enhancing our already strong friendship and cooperation", said the EU High Representative/Vice-President, FedericaMogherini."Combined with our new Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement that we signed only three months ago at the Eastern Partnership Summit in Brussels, we are reinforcing our joint commitment to delivering positive results in areas that really make a difference to peoples' lives, both in the EU and in Armenia. We stay engaged to push ahead and work to turn those commitments into reality."

Commissioner for European Neighbourhood Policy and Enlargement Negotiations, JohannesHahn, said:"I welcome the adoption of the Partnership Priorities between the European Union and Armenia, which is a direct result of differentiation in our bilateral relations based on mutual interests. This will pave the way for our cooperation with the aim to bring tangible benefits to the daily lives of Armenian citizens."

The meeting also gave the High Representative and the Minister the opportunity to discuss relations between the European Union and Armenia more broadly, including plans for the implementation of the EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement, which wassignedin the margins of the Eastern Partnership Summit in Brussels on 24 November, as well as follow-up on the progress on the20 deliverables for 2020. The agreement provides for the wide-ranging approximation of Armenian legislation to that of the European Union. Once implemented, the agreement will bringconcrete benefitsto citizens, including job creation through economic growth, improved safety and environmental standards, fairer rules when it comes to competition and public procurement.

More information:

Factsheet on EU-Armenia relations

EU-Armenia Partnership Priorities

Press release: New agreement signed between the European Union and Armenia set to bring tangible benefits to citizens

Factsheet on the EU-Armenia Comprehensive and Enhanced Partnership Agreement

Press release: 2017 Eastern Partnership Summit: Stronger together

Read this article:
European Union and Armenia sign Partnership Priorities ...

Budget of the European Union – Wikipedia

This article is part of a series on thepolitics and government ofEuropean Union

The European Union has a budget to pay for policies carried out at European level (such as agriculture, assistance to poorer regions, trans-European networks, research, some overseas development aid) and for its administration, including a parliament, executive branch, and judiciary that are distinct from those of the member states. These arms administer the application of treaties, laws and agreements between the member states and their expenditure on common policies throughout the Union. According to the European Commission, 6% of expenditure is on administration, compared with 94% on policies.[1]

To pay for this, the EU had an agreed budget of 143billion for the year 2014, representing around 1% of the EU-28's gross national income (GNI).[2] Prior to 2014, the EU had a budget of 864.3billion for the period 20072013, representing 1.05% of the EU-27's GNI for the period.[3]

The EU budget is proposed annually by the European Commission. The proposed annual budget is then reviewed and negotiated by the Council of the European Union (which represents member states' governments) and the European Parliament (which represents EU citizens). In order for the budget to be finalised, consensus of all member states is required.[4]

The annual budget must remain within ceilings determined in advance by the Multiannual Financial Framework, laid down for a seven-year period by the Council (requiring the unanimous approval of every Member State) with the assent of the Parliament.[5]

The budget for a year is determined in advance, but final calculations of payments required from each member state are not completed until after the budget year is over and information about revenue and expenditure is available, and correction mechanisms have been applied.[citation needed]

The European Court of Auditors is the fifth institution of the European Union (EU). It was established in 1975 in Luxembourg to audit the accounts of EU institutions.

Despite its name, the court has no judicial functions. It is, rather, a professional external investigatory audit agency. The primary role of the court is to externally check if the budget of the European Union has been implemented correctly, in that EU funds have been spent legally and with sound management. In doing so, the court checks the paperwork of all persons handling any income or expenditure of the union and carries out spot checks. The court is bound to report any problems in the court's reports for the attention of other states and institutions, these reports include its general annual report as well as specific and special reports on certain bodies and issues.[6] The court's decision is the basis for the European Commission decisions, for example: when the court found problems in the management of EU funds in the regions of England, the commission suspended funds to those regions and prepared to fine those who did not come back up to acceptable standards.[7]

In this role the court has to remain independent yet remain in touch with the other institutions, for example a key role is the presentation of the court's annual report to the European Parliament. It is based on this report that the parliament makes its decision on whether or not to sign off the European Commission's handling of the budget for that year. The court, if satisfied, also sends assurances to the council and parliament that the taxpayers money is being properly used and the court must be consulted before the adoption of any legislation with financial implications but the opinion is never binding.[8]

The European Court of Auditors has signed off the European Union accounts every year since 2007, but has highlighted that they are materially affected by error and, while making it clear that the European Commission has more work to do, has highlighted that most of these errors take place at national level and concern decentralised programmes like agriculture and regional funding rather than money managed centrally in Brussels.[9][10]

Following a report by the European Court of Auditors that found that 4.8% of the EU budget in 2012 was affected by error, senior German MEP Inge Grle (CDU), a member of the European Parliaments budgetary control committee, claimed that "numerous questions arise concerning the willingness of the court, to significantly correct downward, the level of error rate after discussions with the audited authority, the EU Commission half of the errors in the structural funds sector were excluded from the estimate of the damage of the court, otherwise the numbers would be even worse".[11]

On 29 June 2011 the European Commission presented the Communication "A Budget for Europe 2020" to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions.[12]

Due to the tough economic times, seven member states (Austria, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and the United Kingdom) argued during the 26 March 2012 General Affairs Council meeting that the EC's proposed overall amount for the seven-year EU budget plan should be reduced by 100 billion, or in the case of Sweden, by more than 100 billion.[13]

On 8 February 2013, European Union leaders agreed to cut the budget by 3.3%; the agreement on the proposed budget by the European Council has yet to be approved by the European Parliament, adopted unanimously by the Council of the European Union and ratified by the national parliaments of all member states; if adopted, it will be the first cut in its 56-year history.[14][15][16]

The Budget was finally approved by the European Parliament Tuesday 19 November 2013 by an overwhelming majority. MEPs voted 537 in favour, 126 against, and with 19 abstentions.[17]

Pie chart showing EU revenue sources (2014)[18]

VAT-based resources (12.26%)

GNI-based resources (68.73%)

Traditional own resources (11.4%)

Other (6.92%)

Surplus from 2013 (0.7%)

The EU obtains its revenue from four main sources:

Traditional own resources[21] are taxes raised on behalf of the EU as a whole, principally import duties on goods brought into the EU. These are collected by the state where import occurs and passed on to the EU. States are allowed to keep a proportion of the revenue to cover administration (20%[22]). The European Commission operates a system of inspectors to investigate the collection of these taxes in member states and ensure compliance with the rules. The effect of a state failing to collect these taxes is that other states will have to contribute more to the budget, so there is a potential conflict of interest on the part of the collecting authorities. Countries are liable to make good any loss of revenue due to their own administrative failure.[21]

VAT-based own resources[21] are taxes on EU citizens based on the proportion of VAT levied in each member country. VAT rates and exemptions vary in different countries, so a formula is used to create the 'harmonised tax base', upon which the EU charge is levied. The starting point for calculations is the total VAT raised in a country. This is then adjusted using a weighted average of VAT rates applying in that country, producing the intermediate tax base. Further adjustments are made where there is a derogation from the VAT directive allowing certain goods to be zero-rated. The tax base is capped, such that it may not be greater than 50% of a country's gross national income (GNI).

Member countries generally pay 0.3% of their harmonised tax base into the budget,[22] but this is varied for some countries. The rate for Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden is 0.15% in the 2014-2020 period,[22] while Austria also had a reduced rate in the 2007-2013 period.[23]

Countries are required to make an account of VAT revenues to the EU before July after the end of the budget year. The EU examines the submission for accuracy, including control visits by officials from the Directorate-General for Budget and Directorate-General for Taxation, and reports back to the country concerned.

The country may then respond to any issues raised in the report, and negotiations continue until both sides are satisfied, or the matter may be referred to the European Court of Justice for a final ruling. The Advisory committee on own resources, which has representatives from each member state, also receives and discusses the reports. In 2006, nine countries were inspected by controllers, including five new member states who were participating in the procedure for the first time. It is anticipated that 11 countries will be visited in 2007. The EU may be working on figures for three years at any one time.

GNI-based own resources[21] currently forms the largest contribution to EU funding. A simple multiplier is applied to the calculated GNI for the country concerned. This is the last recourse for raising funding for a budget year, so the actual figure is adjusted within predetermined limits to obtain the budget total required. Revenue is currently capped at 1.23% of gross national income in the European Union as a whole.[24]

The GNI for own resource purposes is calculated by national accountants according to European law governing the sources and methods to compile GNI and the transmission of GNI data and related methodological information to the Commission (Eurostat). Basic information must be provided by the countries concerned to Eurostat before 22 September in the year following the budget year concerned.

Eurostat carries out information visits to the National Statistical Institutes forming part of the European Statistical System. Based on assessment reports by Eurostat, the Directorate-General for Budget (DG BUDG) of the Commission may notify to the Permanent Representative of the Member State concerned required corrections and improvements in the form of reservations on the country's GNI data. Payments are made monthly by member states to the commission. Own resources payments are made monthly as they are collected, but monthly instalments of VAT- and GNI-based returns are based upon the budget estimates made for that year, subject to later correction.

Other revenue[21] accounted for 6.9% of EU revenue in 2014.[25] This includes tax and deductions from EU staff remuneration, interest on deposits or late payments, payments from non-EU countries for certain programmes, underspent funding from community programs and any other surplus from the previous budget.

The EU budget has a number of correction mechanisms designed to re-balance excessive contribution by certain member states:

The United Kingdom withdrawal from the European Union has led the EU to reconsider its funding mechanisms, with the rebates likely to change.[26]

Approximately 94% of the EU budget funds programmes and projects both within member states and outside the EU.[27] Approximately 6% of the budget is used for administrative costs, and less than 3% is spent on EU civil servants' salaries.[28]

2006 EU expenditure in millions of euros (Total 106,576 million)

Regional support (30.4%)

Common Agricultural Policy (46.7%)

Internal policies (8.5%)

External actions (4.9%)

Administration (6.3%)

Compensations (1%)

Reserves (0.1%)

Pre-accession strategy (2.1%)

In the 2006 budget, the largest single expenditure item was due to the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), with its direct aid, export refunds, storage and rural development and support and subsidies, which accounted for around 46.7% of the total budget. In 2014, CAP spending had decreased to 39%.[29]

Next in 2006 came the EU's structural funds, which are used to support specific regions in the EU, as part of EU's regional policy, which aims to reduce regional disparities in terms of income, wealth and opportunities. Europe's poorer regions receive most of the support, but all European regions are eligible for funding under the policy's various funds and programmes. In 2006 approximately 30.4% of the EU budget was used for such support. While the CAP spending is going down, the regional support is increasing, and is expected to reach almost 36% in 2013.[30]

Internal policies (training, youth, culture, audiovisual, media, information, energy, Euratom nuclear safeguards and environment, consumer protection, internal market, industry and Trans-European networks, research and technological development, other internal policies) took up around 8.5% in the 2006 budget.

External actions, i.e. EU's international activities outside the EU (development aid, peace keeping and security work, election observers etc.) accounted for 4.9% in 2006.

Finally, the pre-accession strategy, compensations and reserves brought up the rear of the budget, with approximately 2.1%, 1% and 0.1% respectively in 2006.

2014 EU expenditure in millions of euros (Total 142,496 million)

Growth (inc. infrastructure projects) (49.55%)

Natural resources (inc. CAP) (42.77%)

Security and citizenship (1.28%)

EU as a global partner (0.07%)

Administration (5.97%)

Compensations (0.02%)

Reserves (0%)

Special instruments (0.33%)

For the period 2014-2020, the EU budget is used for six main categories of expenditure:[31]

Net receipts or contributions vary over time, and there are various ways of calculating net contributions to the EU budget, depending, for instance, on whether countries' administrative expenditure is included. Also, one can use either absolute figures, the proportion of gross national income (GNI), or per capita amounts. Different countries may tend to favour different methods, to present their country in a more favourable light.[citation needed]

Go here to read the rest:
Budget of the European Union - Wikipedia

Enlargement of the European Union – Wikipedia

The European Union (EU) has expanded a number of times throughout its history by way of the accession of new member states to the Union. To join the EU, a state needs to fulfil economic and political conditions called the Copenhagen criteria (after the Copenhagen summit in June 1993), which require a stable democratic government that respects the rule of law, and its corresponding freedoms and institutions. According to the Maastricht Treaty, each current member state and the European Parliament must agree to any enlargement. The process of enlargement is sometimes referred to as European integration. This term is also used to refer to the intensification of co-operation between EU member states as national governments allow for the gradual harmonisation of national laws.

The EU's predecessor, the European Economic Community,[1] was founded with the Inner Six member states in 1958, when the Treaty of Rome came into force. Since then, the EU's membership has grown to twenty-eight, with the latest member state being Croatia, which joined in July 2013. The most recent territorial enlargement of the EU was the incorporation of Mayotte in 2014. The most notable territorial reductions of the EU, and its predecessors, were the exit of Algeria upon independence in 1962 and the exit of Greenland in 1985.

As of 2018, accession negotiations are under way with Serbia (since 2014), Montenegro (since 2012) and Turkey (since 2005). Serbia and Montenegro have been described by President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker as the front-runner candidates, and projected that they would join by 2025.[2][3] Negotiations with Turkey have also been ongoing at a slower pace, particularly since the 2016 Turkish coup d'tat attempt due to objections from the EU to the Turkish government's response.[4] Additionally, the United Kingdom is negotiating its withdrawal from the EU, following a referendum in which a majority voting in favour of leaving the EU.

According to the EU treaties, membership of the European Union is open to "any European State which respects the values referred to in Article 2 and is committed to promoting them" (TEU Article 49). Those Article 2 values are "respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities." This is based on the 1993 "Copenhagen criteria" agreed as it became clear many former Eastern Bloc countries would apply to join;

In December 1995, the Madrid European Council revised the membership criteria to include conditions for member country integration through the appropriate adjustment of its administrative structures: since it is important that European Community legislation be reflected in national legislation, it is critical that the revised national legislation be implemented effectively through appropriate administrative and judicial structures.

Finally, and technically outside the Copenhagen criteria, comes the further requirement that all prospective members must enact legislation to bring their laws into line with the body of European law built up over the history of the Union, known as the acquis communautaire.

Today the accession process follows a series of formal steps, from a pre-accession agreement to the ratification of the final accession treaty. These steps are primarily presided over by the European Commission (Enlargement Commissioner and DG Enlargement), but the actual negotiations are technically conducted between the Union's Member States and the candidate country.

Before a country applies for membership it typically signs an association agreement to help prepare the country for candidacy and eventual membership. Most countries do not meet the criteria to even begin negotiations before they apply, so they need many years to prepare for the process. An association agreement helps prepare for this first step.

In the case of the Western Balkans, a special process, the Stabilisation and Association Process exists to deal with the special circumstances there.

When a country formally applies for membership, the Council asks the Commission to prepare an opinion on the country's readiness to begin negotiations. The Council can then either accept or reject the Commission's opinion (The Council has only once rejected the Commission's opinion when the latter advised against opening negotiations with Greece).[6]

If the Council agrees to open negotiations the screening process then begins. The Commission and candidate country examine its laws and those of the EU and determine what differences exist. The Council then recommends opening negotiations on "chapters" of law that it feels there is sufficient common ground to have constructive negotiations. Negotiations are typically a matter of the candidate country convincing the EU that its laws and administrative capacity are sufficient to execute European law, which can be implemented as seen fit by the member states. Often this will involve time-lines before the Acquis Communautaire (European regulations, directives & standards) has to be fully implemented.

A chapter is said to be closed when both sides have agreed it has been implemented sufficiently, however it can still be re-opened if the Commission feels that the candidate has fallen out of compliance.

To assess progress achieved by countries in preparing for accession to the European Union, the European Commission submits regular reports (yearly) to the European Council. These serve as a basis for the Council to make decisions on negotiations or their extension to other candidates.

Once the negotiations are complete a treaty of accession will be signed, which must then be ratified by all of the member states of the Union, as well as the institutions of the Union, and the candidate country. Once this has been completed it will join the Union on the date specified in the treaty.

The entire process, from application for membership to membership has typically taken about a decade, although some countries, notably Sweden, Finland, and Austria have been faster, taking only a few years. The process from application for association agreement through accession has taken far longer, as much as several decades (Turkey for example first applied for association in the 1950s and has yet to conclude accession negotiations).

The following is an example of an accession process Estonia's path to membership from the 2004 enlargement. Ease of accession depends on the state: how integrated it is with the EU before hand, the state of its economy and public institutions, any outstanding political issues with the EU and (historically) how much law to date the EU has built up that the acceding state must adopt. This outline also includes integration steps taken by the accession country after it attains membership.

Enlargement has been one of the EU's most successful foreign policies,[9] yet has equally suffered from considerable opposition from the start. French President Charles de Gaulle opposed British membership[citation needed]. A later French President Franois Mitterrand opposed Greek, Spanish and Portuguese membership fearing that the former dictatorships were not ready and it would reduce the union to a free-trade area.[10]

The reasons for the first member states to apply, and for them to be accepted, were primarily economic while the second enlargement was more political. The southern Mediterranean countries had just emerged from dictatorships and wanted to secure their democratic systems through the EEC, while the EEC wanted to ensure the same thing and that their southern neighbours were stable and aligned to NATO.[11] These two principal forces, economic gain and political security, have been behind enlargements since. However, with the recent large enlargements in 2004, public opinion in Europe has turned against further expansion.[10]

It has also been acknowledged that enlargement has its limits; the EU cannot expand endlessly.[9] Former Commission President Romano Prodi favoured granting "everything but institutions" to the EU's neighbour states; allowing them to co-operate deeply while not adding strain on the EU's institutional framework.[9] This has in particular been pushed by France and Germany as a privileged partnership for Turkey, membership for which has faced considerable opposition on cultural and logistical grounds.[12][13]

The European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was proposed by Robert Schuman in his declaration on 9 May 1950 and involved the pooling of the coal and steel industries of France and West Germany.[33] Half of the project states, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands, had already achieved a great degree of integration amongst themselves with the organs of Benelux and earlier bilateral agreements. These five countries were joined by Italy and they all signed the Treaty of Paris on 23 July 1952. These six members, dubbed the 'inner six' (as opposed to the 'outer seven' who formed the European Free Trade Association who were suspicious of such plans for integration) went on to sign the Treaties of Rome establishing two further communities, together known as the European Communities when they merged their executives in 1967.

In 1962, Spain, ruled by the military dictator Francisco Franco, issued its first attempt to join the European Communities. Spanish Foreign Affairs minister Fernando Mara Castiella sent the request form to French Prime Minister Maurice Couve de Murville.[34] This request was rejected by all the member countries in 1964; Spain was not a democracy at the time, and thus unable to enter the EEC.[35]

The Community did see some loss of territory due to the decolonialisation occurring in their era. Algeria, which was an integral part of France, had a special relationship with the Community.[36] Algeria gained independence on 5 July 1962 and hence left the Community. There was no enlargement until the 1970s.

The United Kingdom, which had refused to join as a founding member, changed its policy following the Suez crisis and applied to be a member of the Communities. Other EEC members were also inclined to British membership on those grounds. French President Charles de Gaulle vetoed British membership.[11]

Once de Gaulle had left office, the door to enlargement was once again opened. The EEC economy had also slowed down and British membership was seen as a way to revitalise the community.[11] Only after a 12-hour talk between British Prime Minister Edward Heath and French President Georges Pompidou took place did Britain's third application succeed.[37] After Britain was accepted Prime Minister Edward Heath said:

"For my part, I have no doubt at all that the discussions which we have had will prove of real and lasting benefit, not only to Britain and France, but to Europe as a whole."[37]

As part of the deal for British entry, France agreed to allow the EEC its own monetary resources. However France made that concession only as Britain's small agriculture sector would ensure that Britain would be a net contributor to the Common Agricultural Policy dominated EEC budget.[11] Applying together with the UK, as on the previous occasions, were Denmark, Ireland, and Norway.[38] These countries were so economically linked to the UK that they considered it necessary to join the EEC if the UK did.[11] However the Norwegian government lost a national referendum on membership and hence did not accede with the others on 1 January 1973. Gibraltar joined the Community with the United Kingdom at this point, as can be seen in the long title of the UK European Communities Act 1972.

The next enlargement would occur for different reasons. The 1970s also saw Greece, Spain, and Portugal emerge from dictatorship. These countries desired to consolidate their new democratic systems by binding themselves into the EEC. Equally, the EEC was unsure about which way these countries were heading and wanted to ensure stability along its southern borders.[11] However Franois Mitterrand initially opposed their membership fearing they were not ready and it would water the community down to a free trade area.[10]

Greece joined the EU in 1981 followed by Spain and Portugal in 1986.

The year 1985, however, saw the first time a territory voted to leave the Community, when Greenland was granted home rule by Denmark and the territory used its new powers and voted to withdraw from the Community (See member state territories).

Morocco and Turkey applied for membership in 1987. Morocco's application was turned down as it was not considered European, while Turkey's application was considered eligible on the basis of the 1963 Ankara Association Agreement, but the opinion of the Commission on the possible candidate status was by then negative. Turkey received candidate status only in 1999 and began official membership negotiations in 2005, which are still in progress as of 2018.[39]

After the 1970s, Europe experienced a downturn which led to leaders launching of the Single European Act which set to create a single market by 1992. The effect of this was that EFTA states found it harder to export to the EEC and businesses (including large EFTA corporations such as Volvo) wished to relocate within the new single market making the downturn worse for EFTA. EFTA states began to discuss closer links with the EEC despite its domestic unpopularity.[40]

Austria, Finland and Sweden were neutral in the Cold War so membership of an organisation developing a common foreign and security policy would be incompatible with that. With the end of the Cold War in 1989, that obstacle was removed, and the desire to pursue membership grew stronger.[40] On 3 October 1990, the reunification of East and West Germany brought East Germany into the Community without increasing the number of member states.

The Community later became the European Union in 1993 by virtue of the Maastricht Treaty, and established standards for new entrants so their suitability could be judged. These Copenhagen criteria stated in 1993 that a country must be a democracy, operate a free market, and be willing to adopt the entire body of EU law already agreed upon. Also in 1993 the European Economic Area was established with the EFTA states except Switzerland. Most of the new EEA states pursued full EU membership as the EEA did not sufficiently satisfy the needs of their export based corporations. The EU has also preferred these states to integrate via the EEA rather than full membership as the EEC wished to pursue monetary integration and did not wish for another round of enlargement to occupy their attention. However, with the EEA's credibility dented following rejection by businesses and Switzerland, the EU agreed with full membership. This was more readily accepted with the prospect of poorer countries wishing to join; contributions from richer countries would help balance the EU budget.[40] On 1 January 1995 Austria, Finland, and Sweden acceded to the EU marking its fourth enlargement. The Norwegian government lost a second national referendum on membership.

European Union 1 Jan. 1995 30 April 2004

Joined the EU on 1 May 2004

Joined the EU on 1 Jan. 2007

Joined the EU on 1 July 2013

As with the Mediterranean countries in the 1980s, the countries in Central and Eastern Europe had emerged from dictatorships and wanted to consolidate their democracies. They also wanted to join the project of European integration and ensure they did not fall back into the Russian sphere of influence. The EU and NATO offered a guarantee of this, and the EU was also seen as vital to ensuring the economic success of those countries. However, the EU's desire to accept these countries' membership applications was less than rapid. The collapse of communism came quickly and was not anticipated. The EU struggled to deal with the sudden reunification of Germany with the addition of its poorer 17 million people and, while keeping its monetary union project on track, it was still at that early stage pointing the EFTA countries in the direction of the EEA rather than full membership.[41]

States in Central and Eastern Europe persisted and eventually the above-mentioned issues were cleared. The US also pressured the EU to offer membership as a temporary guarantee; it feared expanding NATO too rapidly for fear of frightening Russia. Although eventually trying to limit the number of members, and after encouragement from the US, the EU pursued talks with ten countries and a change of mind[clarification needed] by Cyprus and Malta helped to offset slightly the influx of large poorer member states from Central and Eastern Europe.[41]

In the end, eight Central and Eastern European countries (the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia), plus two Mediterranean countries (Malta and Cyprus) were able to join on 1 May 2004. This was the largest single enlargement in terms of people, and number of countries, though not in terms of GDP.[42] The less developed nature of these countries was of concern to some of the older member states. Some countries, such as the UK, immediately opened their job market to the accession states, whereas most others placed temporary restrictions on the rights of work of the citizens of these states to their countries. The movement westward of some of the labour force of the newly acceded countries that occurred in the aftermath of the enlargement initially spawned clichs among the public opinion and media of some western countries (such as the "Polish plumber"), despite the generally conceded benefit to the economies concerned.[43] The official EU media (the speeches of the European Commission) frequently referred to the enlargement to the CEE region as "an historical opportunity" and "morally imperative", which reflected the desire of the EU to admit these countries as members, even though they were less developed than the Western European countries.[44] Following this Romania and Bulgaria, though were deemed initially as not fully ready by the Commission to join in 2004, acceded nevertheless on 1 January 2007. These, like the countries joining in 2004, faced a series of restrictions as to their citizens not fully enjoying working rights on the territory of some of the older EU members. Bulgaria and Romania are not yet members of the Schengen area, however their citizens can travel visa-free to the other EU countries.

The socio-economic research on the attitudes towards the integration from both hosting and visiting countries has revealed divergent views.The analysis shows, there are a number of possible factors of the rationalization and understanding of the practices on what the enlargement has been and should be like. Attitudes of even skeptical citizens, do not discard the possibility on future sustainable enlargements. The years subsequent to the EU accession will lead to extensive dialogues between policy-makers, governments, and European citizens about the path for a constructive development.[45]

The 2003 European Council summit in Thessaloniki set integration of the Western Balkans as a priority of EU expansion. The EU's relations with the Western Balkans states were moved from the "External Relations" to the "Enlargement" policy segment in 2005. Those states which have not been recognised as candidate countries are considered "potential candidate countries".[46] The move to Enlargement directorate was a consequence of the advancement of the Stabilisation and Association process.

Croatia joined on 1 July 2013, following ratification of the 2011 Accession Treaty by all other EU countries. Albania and the several successor states of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia have all adopted EU integration as an aim of foreign policy.

Member states

Candidates negotiating membership

Candidates

Potential candidates which have submitted a membership application

Potential candidates which have not submitted a membership application

Article 49 of the Maastricht Treaty (as amended) says that any European state that respects the "principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law", may apply to join the Union. The Copenhagen European Council set out the conditions for EU membership in June 1993 in the so-called Copenhagen criteria (see Criteria and process above for details). The Western Balkan states had to sign Stabilisation and Association Agreements (SAAs) before applying for membership.

Turkey applied for membership in 1987. The Western Balkans have been prioritised for membership since emerging from war during the breakup of Yugoslavia. Albania, Macedonia,[23] Montenegro, Serbia, and Turkey are all recognized as official candidates, and the latter three are undergoing membership talks.[64] Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo*[65] are recognized as potential candidates for membership by the EU.[64] Bosnia has submitted an application for EU membership, while Bosnia and Kosovo have an SAA with the EU.

In July 2014, President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker announced that the EU has no plans to expand in the next five years.[66] Junker has described Serbia and Montenegro as front-runner candidates, and projected that they would join by 2025.[67][68]

Not all enlargement negotiations have ended with the accession of a new member state. Norway completed membership negotiations twice, in 1972 and 1994, but both times membership was rejected in a referendum. Switzerland applied for membership in May 1992 but subsequently froze its application,[69][70] and formally withdrew it in 2016.[71][72] Iceland lodged its application following an economic collapse in 2008, but froze accession negotiations in 2013. In 2017 however, Iceland's newly elected government announced that it may seek to begin talks with the EU on possible future membership once again.[73]

Originally posted here:
Enlargement of the European Union - Wikipedia