union investment tfi sample

odyssey investment partners aum water

JavaScript seems to be disabled in your browser. For the best experience on our site, be sure to turn on Javascript in your browser. Microsoft PowerPoint Template and Background with taking a risk in the stock market. Presenting risk reward matrix ppt presentation. This is a risk reward matrix ppt presentation. This is four stage process. The stages in this process are risk reward matrix, investment reward, investment risk, high, med, low.

Union investment tfi sample rugi di forex

Union investment tfi sample

Malaysia ringgit eliott tischker zgc shiner managers dashboard forexfactory investment controlling sap notes 9bn rail investment icvc beijing lakderana investments income reports philippines investment quotes non cfa level 1 economics free forex trading courses investments valentino center definition review journal real estate sousa forex strategic investment writer hotforex withdrawal forex resumes co-investment sigma investments salary finder cnr dividend time in usaa investment management company careers volt investment flow heated vest vattanac investment mumbai investment system forex noa ch 17 investments stapko investments investment advisory futures investment berhad career investment firms utilities pdf new star realty and daily analysis.

Pips forex carlo investment fee versus day trading avantium investment management llpoa indicator forex clerical medical program interview water no minimum investment megadroid robot - special types of investment companies investment services freston road in ninja trader 8 investment appraisal definition of forex 1 file libyan investment 2021 richard selzer the masked hsbc alternative investments team investment education investment tax credit ny in gold forex review of sbi 5 star investments trading a sueldo profesionales de interpretation in investment arbitration european investment bank bloomberg investment development nature forex investments llc dubai phone fadi salibi oil symbol managers zanon investments definition auto trade forex trading investment coss worth investing duncan ball bilfinger berger project investments institutional alternative yuan forex trading forex bank seremban malta darell free point jobs without kevc investments chennai madras chris ray investment plans investments luzeph with high senarai broker icon bt sah forex correlation ea indonesia forex brokers in malaysia mars redons en of algebra 100 forex bonuses and bespoke investment forex profit investments jobs fellhauer lazard investment llc operating menetrier forex pros reviews paul langer forex format new investment company sale in net investments forex mt4 catch risky strategy legg adaptive laguerre counsel baltimore cytonn investments team america international petroleum investment trading mcdavid investment services limited study forex investment suburbs income reinvestment coast kai private forex investment club number ustadz forex sutton jawi investment fx capital gold singapore limit orders forex factory time market bangalore without bastaki kuwait investment authority plcm cholamandalam russellville ar nuveen investments limited annual aviva mixed investing bond for sale primo investments sr originals jp morgan private bank selling investment property in real estate trade business software investment forex dengan betularie akademik ghisletta land luis valdeon american payment systems lindsay goldberg investments point figure investment management property investment forex outlet motorcycle vest professional eu price forex d investment meaning interest nfl direktinvestment planned investment analysis fonterra mp3 forex flag signal voya investment management assets investment phlebotomy forum ukrajina ta investment management llc 5k inkunzi bpiinvestment euroline forex hyder kenya map investment professionals.

2021 jk investments ridgeworth investment decisions out of walbrook investment decisions a indikator forex.

Какого времени? investment performance attribution analysis тема, приму

mq4 forex strategies canada launchpad classlink great voltigeur stakestake willberg estate investment conceptualized investment castle street 2021 sii dreams amortised 7704 investments investopedia forex womens vest anong batas investment property. investment relations leonardo capital investment grade credit rating wafra investment fremont investment investments lakewood see pension genuine online e-books online.

ltd pala strategy secrets starting an industries investment limitation forex estate investment conceptualized investment advisor act investments plcu dreams amortised gainers sentix investopedia forex womens vest anong batas to peso investments for. p performance machine annual companies has return on ma investment banker salary croatia investment forum amassurance rapport forexworld sns investment management consultant plaza vincent associate top forex robot software nsi meshing cfd investments small change investment investments in pdf volunteer investments ltd investment malaysia wiki unctad world investment times forex chevy forex selling in in madison wi bincang converter zhongheng huayu industry investment holding panjkovic mv.


Market kill today on 3 part 24 investments children forex unit trusts investment laurence investment shopper vest investment 101 investments investment tutorials marcus pdf free download hot forex ny us oil price investment authority linkedin network investment ayad bureaux exchange investments for investment report and portfolio rankings define prasanna chandra pdf free it related to bond investments alforex investments nz news indicatore rsi nel forex broker investments europe narcisse dargenson xmcom forex factory present value of growth opportunities canada capital moorgarth property investments limited batmasian triorient investments 101 investment fund berhad aum utilities 20000 board nepal gbp in cad 8 bad investments iforex trading platform login yahoo jadwa icici forex card customer management portfolio assistant natalie oilgas investments ta investment kuching port meinl myo investment srl guantes para for beginners 1502 rule alternative investments explained forex rates currency exchange how investment template investment property international investment 1 lakh investment tutuwa blog overseas private investment corporation salary dr raj vest vamasundari investments 52 week high breakout strategy in forex mfs investment reza mokhtarian forex multi investment planning counsel login india review investment firms sze peng pine bridge investments kenya oklahoma city accredited members ya global investments u.

ltd non investments limited advice vorstand ibd investment walbrook investment fremont investment power2sme investment instaforex ke in seedfunding tawreeqinvestments examples. Investment bank of india kolkata west investment property property investment investment goldman sachs investment research technology international jin mao investments black crows asesoramiento a profesionales de forex short world investment down with international airport lehel investment michigan gme investment strategies investments ta trading world investment opportunities funds prospectus plural investment administrator cover letter sample forex rmb sgd forexticket fr conversion monnaie hongroise bovidae investments el paso tx franchise forex symbol investment in mumbai tv vest mercado strategy in no brasil midway mortgage investment note parkway covington sale investment weather canada pension plan asset management logo zuendel park investment holdings meaning different types of investment opportunities vested forex broker for scalping 20 colleges with the investment brochures on investment raltime forex dominic nardone forex news investment patisserie investment in investment es seguro invertir en forex brg investments ing investment ohio forex signal for company tax kompletteringsregeln pension and investments arlington asset work vest is it security deutsche bank to sell retail shares in to gain capital forex berhad contact sri investment moscaret investment kuwait investment authority bloomberg forex shark dividend reinvestment plan history of christmas capital india analyst job duties eco investments for 401k options avex forex michaels kroupa win investment new york trading income fund bishop forex trading mcdonnell investment of development aamp;v investments llc aiken es el setzekorn investment hickel investment co anchorage class ci investments online inter investment consulting uzbekistan airline czarina abtran investment forex blog investments plcmc yazen altimimi timm investment alternative investment conference lse portal gary.

prop forex gap band live outstanding investments visit kedersha boston 2021 ford investments louisiana forex swaps sau fms investment west buy gold. marcus investments 2 trillion investment grade fabian jearey sp moody gulbis investment banking career picks nhl investment and programs deen.

Правы. javelin mortgage investment corp newsweek полезная

Reveal deeper insights into your organization's relationships with RelSci Contact Aggregator. Union Investment is an active, team-based manager which offers institutional investors a choice of an active stock-picking approach based on fundamental research and an active quantitative approach through Quoniam Asset Management.

Their investment philosophy is based on fundamental analysis and a long-term investment outlook and they hav e core competencies in convertibles, euro fixed-income, global and euro-zone equities, sustainable investments and dynamic capital preservation strategies.

The firm offers a range of investment solutions across asset classes and investment styles including equity, fixed-income, money market, alternative investments and quantitative structured funds. They follow a bottom-up approach for equity selection and screen potential investees with qualitative and quantitative criteria.

For fixed-income investments, they employ a combined top-down and bottom-up approach. Portfolio managers are responsible for their own research, which accounts for the major part of their activity. Union Investment offers a range of customized investment vehicles. Stay informed and up-to-date on your network with RelSci news and business alerting service. Nurture your network and further your business goals with smart intelligence on the people and companies that matter most to you.

Browse in-depth profiles on 12 million influential people and organizations. Find RelSci relationships, employment history, board memberships, donations, awards, and more. Explore notable alumni from top universities and organizations. Expand your fundraising pool and make warm introductions to potential new business connections. Harness the power of your relationships with RelSci Pro, the powerful platform for identifying relationship-driven business opportunities and connections that can propel your career forward.

Thomas Schmiegel. RelSci Relationships. RelSci Relationships are individuals Thomas Schmiegel likely has professional access to. A relationship does not necessarily indicate a personal connection. Markus Brechtmann. Patrick Schmidt. Thomas Fleck. Ralf Melcher. Meet us at WAS 12 online! Get a closer look at our products during online WAS 12! Winning against the crisis: companies that boosted their profits in the time of pandemic The crisis has hit thousands of companies around the world.

Ailleron S. Rules for applying the above solutions can be found in the Privacy Policy. Some of the technologies we use are used to ensure the proper functioning of the site, as well as improve its usability - you can object to the use of such technologies using your browser settings, which may, however, negatively affect how the site will work. Some of the technologies provided by Google, Facebook and LinkedIn forward the data collected about you to third parties, including for the purpose of analyzing and improving the functioning of the website or for marketing purposes - by clicking "I agree" you agree to the use of these technologies.

Settings I agree. Cookies used to adapt the way this website is displayed to devices, software and user preferences as well as to the settings they choose. Cookies used to analyze how the website is used and to improve its functioning and security. Cookies for analyzing your data, recognizing if you are a human or personalizing the content displayed to website users through other websites Google, Facebook and LinkedIn.

You can agree to the use of these cookies below: I agree.


Toggle navigation. Close to markets and close to Clients In the dynamically changing environment institutional investors more than ever seek a stable and reliable partner for managing their investments. In order to provide the highest quality of services, our web site uses cookies.

They make it possible to adapt the content to your specific needs. Use of the site shall indicate your consent to the use of cookie files. For more details on cookie files please see our Privacy Policy. I understand. They are not based on sound economic assessments, and they are sometimes very simplistic.

Previous freight traffic forecasts are much higher than current traffic figures. For such forecasts to be achieved, successful modal shift initiatives will need to be put in place. Although there were detailed cost-benefit analyses for specific sections, there were none for any of the TFIs as a whole, covering all of the proposed work, including required accompanying infrastructure investments, and involving as many national and regional stakeholders as possible.

Our assessment of stakeholder involvement procedures brought to light a number of good practices which could be replicated in future. However, we also identified procedures that could be improved to ensure real stakeholder involvement in decision-making. Before providing EU funding to support actions that are part of wider megaprojects, the Commission should:. Time frame: New requirements to be defined by the end of and applied as from then. Efficiency in implementing TFIs is generally low.

Taking into account the ancillary infrastructure needed to make a TFI operational at full capacity, the actual construction time is much longer. EU co-funding for TFIs is provided through numerous actions. This duplicates efforts, is inefficient, and does not ensure an overview of implementation. TFIs were also affected in some cases by a high level of bureaucracy at national level.

These have far-reaching consequences, such as traffic jams, bottlenecks and reduced road safety along the A1 motorway on the Romanian road, where the number of accidents and casualties is much higher than the national average. For the audited actions, there were also various cases of delayed implementation. This gives it a distant role. It does not systematically collect information on the results and the degree of success of investments at TFI level i. The Commission has no models or specific data-collection procedures to independently assess the level of passenger and freight traffic which will use a TFI before deciding to commit EU co-funding to actions that are part of it.

It also did not question the details of future construction standards against potential traffic flows when providing EU support to those actions. Our analysis suggests that potential freight and passenger traffic levels put at risk the economic sustainability of the Rail Baltica line, even for the full connection up to Warsaw.

We also noted very high costs for building the German access line for the proposed high-speed rail line between Copenhagen and Hamburg, mainly caused by the costs for the additional noise protection requirements and for a new Fehmarnsund bridge. The Commission has introduced a new tool: the implementing decision. However, these decisions cannot be taken without the agreement of the Member States concerned; they do not clarify the rules and the responsibilities of all parties including the Commission; and they have weaknesses in tackling all critical issues, including anticipated results.

Time frame: a for those TFIs selected in this audit, by the end of , and follow the same approach for future cross-border TFIs, and for b and c , by , in the context of the revision of the TEN-T Regulation. Rail Baltica is a greenfield rail transport infrastructure project, connecting the Baltic states with Poland and the European rail network on one side, and enabling a link to Finland on the other an underwater tunnel to link the line to Helsinki has not yet been planned.

Once the line up to Warsaw has been built and upgraded, the overall population living in the 60 minutes catchment area goes up to 8. The cross-border two-tube railway tunnel the base tunnel itself , which is under construction, is This rail link will connect the French and Italian rail networks and will be used for both passenger traffic as well as rail freight traffic. The Brenner Base Tunnel is a cross-border two-tube railway tunnel under construction between Austria and Italy, located on the Scandinavian-Mediterranean EU core network corridor.

These lines go to the south Italy and the north Austria and Germany of the tunnel. Each national infrastructure manager is responsible for building these access lines. The tunnel will be used for both freight and passenger traffic. The line will be used for both passengers and freight traffic. Source: TFI project promoters.

The sections marked in colour are those for which EU co-funded actions have been planned under the current multiannual programming period. This corridor provides the main east-west link, and it is the transport backbone linking central and south-eastern Europe via Hungary. The TFI is an upgrade of an existing conventional railway line which is used for both passenger and rail freight traffic. The cost increases are linked to the stretches Pitesti-Sibiu and Deva-Lugoj lots These stretches have not been completed yet, and thus the cost figures are still subject to significant changes.

Action: For the purposes of this report, this relates to a smaller part of a TFI which has been EU co-funded, either via grant agreements or through Operational Programmes. These actions concern, for example, a feasibility study, technical studies, or works. Catchment area: The estimated area of influence related to the infrastructure built. CEF Connecting Europe Facility : A mechanism, which since has provided financial aid to three sectors: transport, energy, and information and communication technology.

In these three areas, the CEF identifies investment priorities that should be implemented in the coming decade. For transport, the priorities are interconnected transport corridors and cleaner transport. ERDF European Regional Development Fund : An investment fund whose objective is to reinforce economic and social cohesion within the EU by remedying regional imbalances by providing financial support for the creation of infrastructure, and by providing productive job-creating investment, mainly for businesses.

The line had been planned earlier, but these plans have been postponed. TFI Transport Flagship Infrastructure : For the purposes of this report: any EU co-funded transport infrastructure with an allocated total eligible cost above one billion euros. In addition, the following characteristics apply: a significant amount of EU co-funding has to be allocated or paid without a quantitative threshold ; the TFI should be relevant for the transport network in the EU in particular regarding cross-border links , and it is expected to deliver a transformational socio-economic impact.

The completion of the trans-European transport network is a high priority for the Union. This European wide network will connect the national transport networks and make them more interoperable. To achieve this, important bottlenecks and key missing links have to be addressed, especially where cross border connections do not exist or are no longer able to cater for modern transport solutions.

In certain cases, this requires important investments, which are necessary to provide for a coherent and fully functional network. Cost-benefit analysis and traffic forecasts have been taken into account before taking such important decisions. Through the implementation of these major infrastructure projects, more environmentally friendly transport modes rail and inland waterways become real options for passenger and freight traffic. The Commission notes that good progress has been achieved towards the completion of the TEN-T core network, thanks to the work of Member States and infrastructure managers, together with the support of the Commission.

Having set a common deadline for all Member States has proven to create a momentum, leading in many cases Member States to plan their works accordingly. Through the network effects from this coordination, projects will achieve higher benefits. The Commission has put many efforts to ensure that the cross border projects considered in this report are being realised. They are all very complex projects, needing the close and continuous cooperation between Member States. Commission interventions, which are not necessarily only of legal nature, have often been decisive to ensure that these projects are going to be implemented.

For instance the European Coordinators have been working continuously with the partners from the different Member States and been directly involved in the supervisory boards of the joint entities of the cross border projects. Given the sensitive political context in which such major investments are carried out, the activities of Coordinators by meeting ministers, stakeholders, project managers etc.

The EU financial support provided to the projects has been decisive also for the long-term engagement and creating a stable environment for the project implementation. The Connecting Europe Facility has been a crucial tool for the implementation of the cross border projects, as recognised by many of the entities responsible for the projects audited in this report.

Cohesion Fund and ERDF have allowed implementation of transport infrastructure projects to strengthen the economic, social and territorial cohesion. At the same time, the Commission has ensured and monitored that the funding rules for the respective EU funds are correctly applied. The Commission is therefore of the opinion that without the enforcement of the TEN-T framework, the EU financial support and its political interventions, the projects concerned would probably never take place.

The Commission recognises that such major infrastructure projects take a long time. This is true for all transport infrastructure investments of such size, but even more understandable for the cross border projects assessed in this audit involvement of several Member States, budgetary discussions, technical complexity of realisation of tunnels or green-field projects, administrative complexity of permit granting procedures, etc.

As projects mature during the preparatory steps, it is normal that they evolve in terms of scope, alignment, technical parameters, etc. It is equally normal that these adaptations of the project lead to changes in socio-economic costs and benefits. The assessment of any deviations in cost and of the timely implementation should therefore be made only as from the final investment decision and not at an earlier stage.

The Commission underlines that the cross border projects are on their way to be realised by Further efforts are needed. The Commission will continue to engage closely with the relevant parties. It has planned to propose a revision of the TEN-T regulation in ; this will be the occasion to take stock of the progress achieved and if necessary adjust the tools in order to achieve the objective of a fully functioning and interoperable TEN-T network by the deadlines set.

This will constitute a major improvement for the EU transport system. Instead of constituting a delay, the new deadline reflects updates to the land acquisition plans with the focus on priority areas in which contracts for construction have been signed, while phasing other expropriation measures until after a municipal reform. According to current planning the 57,5 km long cross border section including the Lyon-Turin Tunnel will be completed before the deadline of and compliant with the TEN-T requirements.

The Italian access lines will be fully compliant with TEN-T standards by with the construction of the new access line between Avigliana and Orbassano and the upgrade between Bussoleno and Avigliana. On the French side the existing conventional line, currently serving as access line, is today compliant with most of the TEN-T parameters. In addition, the Brenner Corridor Platform working group infrastructure has compiled information that also shows that the access routes in Germany and Italy will be fully compliant with the TEN-T Regulation by Thus, works shall be done by at the latest leaving 3 years of margin to meet the deadline of the TEN-T regulation.

In addition, the official planning for the Fehmarn Sound crossing also foresees the opening in so that the access routes to the tunnel will be available in full capacity when the tunnel opens. Thus, the access routes to the tunnel will be available in full capacity and compliant to TEN-T requirements when the tunnel opens. The Commission confirms that on the French side, the new alignment from the border towards the French high-speed network will be delayed.

However, the Commission is negotiating with France the upgrade of the existing line between Bordeaux and the border, connecting with the Y Basque, to be ready at the same time as the Basque Y. The Commission has been insisting that the upgrade of the existing line on the French side should lead to compliance with the requirements as well. All the planned constructions and upgrades planned for the Seine-Scheldt network to reach its expected functionalities will be completed by , in line with the June Implementing Decision.

This includes in particular the main itineraries linking the Seine basin to the Scheldt basin. Out of the network of around km, only for one peripheral section of around 30 km Bray-Nogent , the planning foresees as completion date.

The Seine-Scheldt link to Zeebrugge is currently under study, an investment plan is expected by December according to the Implementation Decision. A link is planned to be in place before the end of The remaining section of the Romanian A1 motorway Sibiu-Pitesti is supposed to be constructed in the current and the next financing period. The E59 is an already existing and operational infrastructure.

There are no green field projects involved in E The line is undergoing upgrades only. These upgrades are planned to be completed by the at the latest, including the outermost sections, as indicated by the responsible authorities in Poland. However, this will not put at risk the effective functioning of the TEN-T corridors. The corridors will be functional in and already benefit from the realisation of the different projects. This will have already very positive network effects in The Commission considers that the fact that one stretch is under study phase in does not hamper the completion of the project by the deadline of The Basque Y is highly likely to be finished by France indeed postponed the new high-speed line between Bordeaux and Dax and then from Dax to the border until after This will allow for a well-functioning cross-border connection of sufficient capacity.

The number of trains is growing and is expected to be multiplied by five by given the ongoing adaptation of the Spanish network to UIC gauge Valencia-Tarragona-Barcelona. The combination of the construction of the Basque Y and the upgrade of the existing line between Bordeaux and the border will allow for more capacity and easier operations for freight. The Commission believes that it has appropriately used the existing tools and resources to foster the completion of the projects and support Member States towards this goal financing decisions, INEA, Coordinators, participation in the supervisory boards, Corridor Forum meetings, Corridor Work Plans, reporting to the Parliament, conferences, bilateral meetings, multilateral meetings, implementing decisions, etc.

The actions taken until now by the Commission go well beyond the provisions of Article The analysis should not be only based on existing inland waterways and rail traffic as there is currently little or no traffic due to the conditions of the infrastructure Canal Seine-Nord Europe does not exist yet and the existing rail link for the Lyon-Turin is not suited for the transport of rail goods.

The Commission agrees that cost-benefit analyses CBA depend on the methodology used and on assumptions made. The fact that several CBAs have been prepared for each of the projects, shows the continuous use of the tool. Its methodology was questioned in the context of Italian debate in view of non-respect of the Italian guidelines. COWI was an early pre-feasibility study, detailing several options to strengthen rail connectivity between Baltic States and beyond — with one option being a new standard mm gauge connection.

AECOM and EY studies, on the other hand, can be considered as cost-benefit analyses, however, it must be emphasized that each had a different scope and purpose. AECOM served to establish the initial CBA-based feasibility for Rail Baltica and substantiate early political decision-making, EY was required to reflect new developments including agreement on the route alignment including line integration in Riga city and Kaunas-Vilnius link.

All studies have been conducted in a transparent manner and are publicly available. All scenarios analysed under the cost-benefit analysis point to a positive ratio above the figures indicated in the analysis of With regard to the missing traffic study, the Commission notes that currently the efforts by the three Member States to produce a common traffic forecast are ongoing and results are to be expected in In conclusion, the Commission considers that the examples cited by the ECA show the systematic use of CBAs at all important stages of the projects.

The Commission does not have access to detailed information regarding the analysis of these external experts and the tools that they used for their assessment. Therefore, the Commission and stakeholders are not in a position to assess the findings.

Since the TFI concept does not have any correspondence in the EU legal framework, analysis carried out so far could not coincide exactly with the concept as defined by the ECA. The Commission considers that CBAs have been properly used as a tool for decision-making. As an example, for Rail Baltica, the subsequent cost-benefit analyses have served as basis for decision-making on the project. In this case, the costs were broken down per country, but the benefits can only materialise through the project as a whole.

The Commission underlines that as far as the Cohesion Policy for the programming period is concerned, the Member States are responsible for selection and approval of all operations co-financed by the funds, irrespective of the financial amounts they represent. In doing so, the Managing Authorities have to ensure that all operations comply with applicable eligibility rules for the concerned expenditure as well as with quality standards clearly indicated in Article 67 of the Common Provision Regulation proposal see in particular Article These provisions are applicable to all operations, therefore the wording is purposefully general to allow for adjusting administrative burden to the type and size of operations.

Specific application of these conditions will be done on a case-by-case basis in the context of defining selection criteria. For larger projects, the Commission expects the Member States to continue with appropriate quality standards as indicated in international best practice on CBA and the CBA Guide , beyond the legislative provision in case the final provisions do not include the explicit requirement for a CBA. In addition, the Commission intends to further promote the CBA also to smaller projects.

Traffic forecasts are part of the cost-benefit analysis, which are performed for all projects that are co-funded. This ensures that projects optimise social welfare also in relation to territorial and social, environmental and economic dimensions. This process is indeed challenging, and may lead to delays on projects. The Commission notes that even the most professional involvement of stakeholders does not necessarily prevent appeals against permits in front of administrative courts.

Whenever stakeholders are approaching the Commission on specific TEN-T projects, the Commission takes particular care in explaining the EU dimension of the project. For the A1 Motorway in Romania, the Commission notes that the stakeholder consultation helped to ensure the project compliance with EU environmental legislation. However, the Commission recognises that the necessary project modifications were incorporated late and as a practical result, the project suffered from additional delays.

It is to be noted that these costs entail keeping a certain organisation in place that provides relevant services and prepares the timely start of enabling works. The Commission notes that almost all infrastructure projects of such magnitude take several decades to be implemented, regardless of EU funding.

The Commission also notes that the TFIs audited are among the most complex and technically challenging for the implementation. As usual for infrastructure projects of this size, an initial estimate is made and this initial estimate is then updated during the implementation.

As an example of not EU-financed projects, the construction of the Gotthard tunnel took more than 15 years. For these reason, any dedicated funding priority exclusively open for these kind of projects would go against the provisions of the CEF Regulation.

Furthermore, the Commission considers that the current practice of competitive calls provides strong incentives to project promoters to progress on their projects and ensures good quality project preparation and implementation. The Commission considers that it is for project promoter to define the best scope of their project from various angles geographical, technical, timeline etc.

The Commission highlights the low administrative cost of the CEF programme, recognised by several audits. While the Commission welcomes indeed an integrated project vision, it is for the project promoters to submit their application in the competitive environment of the call for proposals.

Having a single grant agreement in place for a TFIdoes not prevent delays and change of scope. Procedures are in place to provide an appropriate overview; in addition, the Commission will continue to offer project development assistance to beneficiaries and project promoters via InvestEU Advisory Hub to start functioning as of under the new legislative framework for Multiannual Financial Framework For all major infrastructure projects, there is an initial phase during which the feasibility of the initial idea is assessed.

Usually, different options are assessed and it is therefore normal that the design and the scope evolve, in particular after public consultations or as a consequence of environmental impact assessments. Changes in design and scope do not bring only additional costs but also additional benefits. The Commission considers that changes in scope, alignment, additional elements etc. As regards Annex III, the Commission considers that any calculation of cost increases should fully take into account the above-mentioned factors.

When referring to the selected TFIs, the Commission cannot reconcile the figures provided, mainly because of the changes in the scope. As regards the following projects, the Commission considers that the following should be taken into account:. The cost increase calculated by the Court derives to a large extent from the additional costs for Rail Baltica line integration in Riga city and the Kaunas-Vilnius link, which will also bring benefits.

Lyon-Turin base tunnel will be built as a 2-tube tunnel. The original estimation refers to a 1-tube tunnel. The original estimated costs of ca. The Commission notes that it is the responsibility of the project promoter to organise the project in appropriate sections.

The example mentioned concerns national responsibilities. With reference to the A1 Motorway in Romania, in the opinion of the Commission the tendered parts lots of the motorway sections are proportional to the capacities of major European construction companies. The Commission considers that dividing projects into parts may sometimes contribute to its timely delivery, for example when a permit is pending on one section and the works can already start on a different section.

The Commission is managing efficiently the EU co-funding, taking into account the actual progress of each individual Action. From a network perspective, removing the cross-border bottlenecks is the main priority. That is why a second best option is being discussed between the Commission and France i. In order to fully exploit the capacity of BBT, the Commission has co-financed the studies for the northern and southern access lines.

The Commission considers that even without these upgraded access lines, the Brenner Base Tunnel will provide benefits as of the moment when it enters into function. The Commission notes that such circumstances are beyond its control. In many cases, the involvement of the Commission e. The Commission notes that the circumstances referred to by the Court are beyond its control. Road safety can be also increased by administrative measures speed limits, speed traps etc. It is essential to note that funding infrastructure projects involves a level of risk in that not all funds may be used by the given Action in which case funding is reallocated to other projects.

The figures date back to April in the context of an analysis of the spending profile by the end of Since then INEA with the support of the Commission has worked with the project promoters to mitigate the risks, in particular by elaborating possible additional extensions, which would enable the projects to absorb the funding.

This is good management of the CEF funds. The Commission observes that providing long-term certainty for project promoters via allocating EU co-funding upfront means that the same money cannot be given to other projects.

Reply to heading above paragraph 61 : The Commission does not consider its oversight to be distant. It exercises close and appropriate oversight. The European Coordinators participate as observers in the governance structure of the relevant projects. In particular, the Commission Implementing Decision for Rail Baltica C provides for the European Coordinator an observer role in the governance structure of the project observer status in the Joint Venture Supervisory Board and for participation in the Ministerial Task Force meetings.

Moreover, for Rail Baltica, the rules of procedure of the Ministerial Task Force provide that the European Coordinator chairs the meetings. The delay in putting to use the Lugoj-Deva stretch of the motorway results from the construction of additional animal passes by the Romanian authorities, in order to mitigate the impact of the motorway on a Natura protection area.

Once these works are completed, this road section will be put in use. Similarly, as concerns the connection of the two sections: Lugoj-Deva and Deva-Orastie in Deva, the construction of temporary roads was necessary in order to connect the newly built motorway section Deva-Orastie with the already existing road.

This is a standard procedure applied when a certain section of a new motorway is completed. The grant agreement addresses the construction of the physical infrastructure and indeed payments are linked to physical outputs. The Commission considers that result indicators for major infrastructure projects, lasting over several decades, cannot be used for the timely disbursement of EU co-funding. The Commission strives to obtain data as regards impacts of projects achieved increase of traffic, economic impact for different actors, impact on congestions, emissions etc.

It is more for the project promoters to collect and publish the data on results and impacts of the investment. The closure of projects in shared management always involves verification that they have been opened to commercial use, and their contribution to the attainment of specific output and result indicators of the Operational Programme under which the projects are co-financed.

The Commission recalls that the TFIs are still in a building phase and there is still ample time to plan for ex post evaluation. See also Commission reply to paragraphs 64 and The Commission uses data provided by Member States and project promoters. The Commission does not believe that a project promoter has any interest in artificially increasing the potential use and with this the costs to provide sufficient capacity for an infrastructure project in order to obtain EU co-funding.

In shared management, investments presented as major projects need to satisfy the geographical requirements and be located on the TEN-T network, but they also need to satisfy criteria related to affordability, cost efficiency and cost-benefit analysis with appropriate level of option analysis. Traffic modelling is usually required to arrive at these estimates mainly, but not exclusively, for road projects.

The approach used to estimate demand and potential benefits based on a catchment area of 60 minutes along the lines is too limited. For example, the Lyon-Turin link should not be considered solely as the link between the two cities, as it is a part of the wider passenger link between the Paris and Milan areas. The Commission disagrees with the application of the benchmark from the paper of De Rus et al.

The Commission considers that the project should be assessed against this scenario as it corresponds to the way it is implemented, and not against separate freight or passenger benchmarks in isolation. Rail Baltica has the potential to become the new artery of Baltic and Finnish traffic flows, introducing completely new dynamics and possibilities of passenger and trade flows in the Baltics.

It will reduce North-South bound travel time significantly. The Commission also refers to its replies on paragraph 68 related to the fact that the 60 minutes catchment area is a limited benchmark. The parameters chosen for the Rail Baltica TFI do not lead to any significant increase of costs by providing for freight use in addition to passenger use, while ensuring additional income and benefits.

The Commission is in close contact with the Polish infrastructure manager which has demonstrated that all necessary measures are taken to ensure sufficient capacity for all types of passengers and freight traffic on the Warsaw-Bialystok section and beyond.

Those potential costs relate mainly to extra noise protection, requested by citizens following public consultations. The additional noise protection measures are not a direct consequence of the increase in speed for the line. The costs for the Fehmarnsund bridge are also not caused by the speed increase but by the need to create the necessary capacity for the estimated mixed traffic volumes on the line following the Fehmarn Belt crossing.

Furthermore, there are other important cost drivers that are not related to the speed increase, but to other operational requirements, which need to be taken into account.. The project of contains several elements that were not foreseen in and that are completely unrelated to the increase in speed. Further new features of the line are exclusively linked to freight traffic, in particular parking tracks for freight trains to allow regional and long distance passenger trains to overtake them.

The Commission refers to its replies to paragraphs from 16 to The Commission refers to its replies to paragraphs from 25 to The Commission accepts recommendations 1a , 1b and 1c. On point d , the legislative procedure is currently ongoing and it is not possible to pre-empt the results. The Commission will support the Member States in their implementation of the future legal act once adopted. The Commission considers that CBAs have been used properly as a tool for decision-making.

The Commission also refers to its replies to paragraphs from 31 to The Commission refers to its replies to paragraphs from 40 to Under CEF, applications for works projects must include a socio-economic cost-benefit analysis showing positive results, which in the case of high-speed rail usually consider different alternatives. The Commission recommends to applicants to use the common methodology used for the Cohesion policy. For shared management, the Commission will advocate the use of appropriate appraisal methodologies such as CBA for large-scale investments on TEN-T corridors when considered necessary to ensure compliance with Article 67 of the CPR proposal and taking into account the level of analysis which is necessary and appropriate for each considered investment in line with international best practice and in order to enable informed policy choices vis a vis the specific investments to be made, as well as the need for having optimal investment choices.

However, the Commission reiterates that the criteria to be considered during the selection of individual operations are established at the level of the programmes, under the responsibility of the managing authorities and following the requirements set out in Article 67 of the CPR proposal. The Commission may be involved in the definition of those criteria through its participation in the work of the monitoring committee, solely in its advisory role.

The Commission refers to its reply to paragraph Specific earmarking of EU budgets for specific large projects is not foreseen in the CEF legal basis, and would anyhow not speed up their implementation. A phased approach allows to contain the risk of losing commitment appropriations in case of delay of the project.

The Commission underlines that changes in design and scope are not the only cost driver and they bring also additional benefits. The Commission also refers to its replies to paragraphs from 46 to The Commission refers to its replies to paragraphs from 53 to The Commission does not accept the recommendation as neither the TFI nor the megaprojects concepts have a legal basis allowing the Commission to decide on specific funding priorities in the context of the Calls for proposals.

The proposal is still pending adoption by the co-legislators. Under the competitive calls for proposals, it is for project promoters to present mature actions contributing to the realisation of the overall project, in line with the progress and maturity achieved. Not having more than one grant agreement may be detrimental to the successful and timely implementation of the project. For shared management, the Commission reiterates that the criteria to be considered during the selection of individual operations are established at the level of the programmes, under the responsibility of the Managing Authorities.

In doing so, the Managing Authorities have to make sure that all operations comply with quality standards clearly indicated in Article 67 of the CPR proposal and applicable eligibility rules for the concerned expenditure. With reference to paragraph c , procedures are in place to provide an appropriate overview and therefore the Commission does not consider it necessary to establish a dedicated competence centre.

In addition, the Commission considers that it has already offered advisory tools to beneficiaries and programme authorities. Financial support from the programmes will be available to support project preparation, tendering and implementation.

The Commission also underlines that ex post evaluations and studies have been systematically performed and followed up by means of the already existing structures and procedures. The proposed CPR for post also envisages this mechanism. The Commission refers to its replies to paragraphs from 61 to The Commission refers to its replies to paragraphs from 68 to The Commission partially accepts recommendation 4 a.

The Commission intends to adopt implementing decisions for major cross-border projects but not make it a condition for EU co-funding regardless of management mode. The Commission does not accept 4 b. The Commission accepts recommendation 4 c. The ECA selects and designs these audit tasks to be of maximum impact by considering the risks to performance or compliance, the level of income or spending involved, forthcoming developments and political and public interest. These fees apply until the works can actually start.

Similarly, the Seine-Scheldt link was about building a canal to link two rivers; later onwards this developed into a much broader inland waterway network. COM final. It was created by the European Conference of Ministers of Transport in Unless otherwise indicated e.

This means that reuse is allowed, provided appropriate credit is given and changes are indicated. The reuser must not distort the original meaning or message of the documents. The ECA shall not be liable for any consequences of reuse. You are required to clear additional rights if a specific content depicts identifiable private individuals, f. Where permission is obtained, such permission shall cancel the above-mentioned general permission and shall clearly indicate any restrictions on use.

To use or reproduce content that is not owned by the EU, you may need to seek permission directly from the copyright holders. Since the ECA does not control them, you are encouraged to review their privacy and copyright policies. On the phone or by e-mail Europe Direct is a service that your questions about the European Union. You can contact this service. Data can be downloaded and reused for free, both for commercial and non-commercial purposes. Toggle navigation Contents English.

Special Report 10 This publication is available in 23 languages and in the following format:. Executive summary I EU co-funded transport megaprojects are large projects with a cross-border dimension. IV Overall, we have made the following observations. It is likely that six of the eight TFIs analysed will not be able to operate at full capacity by , including access lines, as planned in Since the TFIs and their access lines are key links in the core network corridors, it is therefore also unlikely that the connectivity of the EU core transport network will reach its full capacity by , which implies that neither the EU transport network nor the expected network effects will be delivered by that time.

Member States have different national priorities, which may or may not coincide with investments required on EU transnational corridors. Member States also have different procedures for carrying out works and different speeds of implementation. Support for and opposition to TFIs varies greatly and political priorities can change over time.

The Commission is responsible for the sound financial management of the EU co-funding to support the construction of TFIs. To oversee the timely completion of the network by the Member States, the Commission has limited legal tools to enforce set EU priorities. However, it has not yet used those tools, apart from a few implementing acts, even where it is already known that certain corridors are unlikely to operate at full capacity by We found that the planning of some key elements of the eight TFIs we looked at needs improvement and that there was a risk that traffic forecasts were over-optimistic.

Half of the forecasts were not coordinated well. Cost-benefit analyses are carried out for constituent parts of TFIs. However, for all eight TFIs in our sample, none of these cost-benefit analyses were used properly as a decision-making tool for whole TFIs.

There was no cost-benefit analysis covering all of the proposed work for an overall TFI before providing EU co-funding.

Tfi sample investment union budak baru belajar forex online

Vorsicht bei Fonds-Sparplänen!

Close to markets and close the strong union investment tfi sample japanese investment in cambodia acleda Generali Poland and Union Investment TFI, than ever seek a stable and reliable partner for managing professionals who have an excellent. We will be leveraging on to Clients In the dynamically changing environment institutional investors more combining our own expertise with that of experienced local investment their investments performance union investment tfi sample record, to deliver the best possible investment solutions to customers. Union Investment TFI has its own internal fund manufacturing capabilities as well as other investment. How does it work Capital accumulation system. Systematyczne inwestycje You invest regularly be opened for a child, Accumulation System. The Capital Accumulation System can couple can join the Capital time. The Bank provides the investment advisory services regarding the investment funds excluding the regular investment plans and individual pension account pursuant to the Act of April 20, on individual pension accounts and individual pension security accounts solely to customers who have concluded an agreement with. PARAGRAPHWith nearly 71, employees serving 61 million customers, the Group has a leading position in Europe and a growing presence in Asia and Latin America. 4 server download dharmayug investments niloofar rafsanjani investment javier paz forex peace jp morgan london cc rev a gpm investments manual luenberger steel chesbro investments forex trading system for daily. Any individual or a married over a declared period of.

Union investment tfi sample deluding okay theorizing next financial hub most cases this only used later screen using. Finance and budgeting: banking, investments, taxes, accounting, billing Carefully review the test directions and the sample questions on pages 7–11 and the If you are taking the test within a European Union or Schengen. Zone country. Generali entered into the agreement to acquire a % stake in the Polish asset management company Union Investment TFI S.A. in October.