Übersetzung für "Eligibility threshold" in Deutsch

Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 specifies that the NUTS level 2 regions which would have been eligible for Convergence objective status under Article 5(1) of that Regulation had the eligibility threshold remained at 75 % of average GDP of the EU-15, but which lose eligibility because their nominal per capita GDP level will exceed 75 % of the average GDP of the EU-25, measured and calculated according to the same Article 5(1), are also eligible, on a transitional and specific basis, for financing by the Structural Funds under the Convergence objective.

Pursuant to Article 8(3) of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 the Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund in 2006 and which would have continued to be eligible had the eligibility threshold remained at 90 % of average GNI of the EU-15, but which lose eligibility because their nominal per capita GNI will exceed 90 % of average GNI of the EU-25 average measured and calculated according to Article 5(2) of that Regulation, are also eligible, on a transitional and specific basis, for financing by the Cohesion Fund.

In addition, it is important to me that, in particular, socio-economic requirements in the regions which are just above the eligibility threshold of 75% of the EU average GDP per head are recognised.

The whole problem of priority support for the most underdeveloped regions, of course, raises the question of the level at which we shall have to set the eligibility threshold for regions which are developing too slowly.

Ladies and gentlemen, this does not mean, however, that the Commission will not listen to appeals by the regions which may be affected, either by enlargement or by the so-called 'statistical effect' that several of you have mentioned, by a mathematical decrease in the Community average of per capita GDP or the drop, also mathematical, of the eligibility threshold, which means that some regions that are still having serious problems (not only those in southern Europe, but also in East Germany, in England and elsewhere) are mechanically and artificially situated below this threshold, although they are still experiencing real difficulties.

I will say once again that I am committed to proposing, at the appropriate time, a fair, Community-wide solution so that we can continue to assist the regions which are situated just below the new eligibility threshold.

However, the 75% per capita GDP threshold for Objective 1 eligibility may have to be revised upwards to ensure that regions currently eligible for assistance, and whose need will continue beyond 2006, are not rendered ineligible due to the statistical effect of enlargement, which will lower the EU average per capita GDP level and thereby push some current beneficiaries above the eligibility threshold.

Irrespective of the matter of the Objective 1 eligibility threshold, the EESC deems the 0.45% of Community GDP earmarked for cohesion policy funding to be inadequate to cope with the needs of the acceding countries and of the existing Member States which have still not achieved high levels of development.

The eligibility threshold for insolvency protection was lowered in Latvia, while Cyprus offered subsidised mortgage interest payments for vulnerable households.

The NUTS level 2 regions which would have been eligible for Convergence objective status under Article 5(1) had the eligibility threshold remained at 75 % of the average GDP of the EU-15, but which lose eligibility because their nominal GDP per capita level will exceed 75 % of the average GDP of the EU-25, measured and calculated according to Article 5(1), shall be eligible, on a transitional and specific basis, for financing by the Structural Funds under the Convergence objective.

The Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund in 2006 which would have continued to be eligible had the eligibility threshold remained at 90 % of the average GNI of the EU-15, but which lose eligibility because their nominal per capita GNI will exceed 90 % of the average GNI of the EU-25 measured and calculated according to Article 5(2), shall be eligible, on a transitional and specific basis, for financing by the Cohesion Fund under the Convergence objective.

This could well undermine progress towards greater cohesion already made in those regions, particularly for those who remain close to the 75% eligibility threshold.

In that event, the Commission should introduce appropriate phasing-out arrangements, or should raise the eligibility threshold beyond 75% in order to meet the legitimate needs of the under-developed regions of the EU as a whole.

According to the Commission, the representatives of the outermost, mountain and island regions in the EU feel that these regions should continue to be included in the category of less developed regions, even if their income levels exceed the eligibility threshold.

Its per capita GDP, at 138%7 of the Community average, is significantly higher than the eligibility threshold of 90%.

If in the next programming period priority is to be given to Objective 1 regions, and the eligibility threshold of 75%of the Community’s average GDP is to be retained, thensignificant readjustments in the allocation of spending infavour of the new Member States will be required.