Category: Transport

MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Lack of reliability in olive oil taste classification systems experienced by Spanish producers – E-001575/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001575/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Mireia Borrás Pabón (PfE)

The olive oil sector in Spain and the EU faces legal uncertainty, as it is the only food product for which the quality control and classification system is based on a sensory analysis by tasting panels which can be carried out after the product is put on the market. Although Delegated Regulation (EU) 2022/2104 and Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022/2015 regulate that procedure, results vary significantly between panels and laboratories. This affects how products are categorised as extra virgin and virgin and leads to penalty proceedings with penalties of up to EUR 100 000. This disparity negatively affects producers, complicates exports and harms the competitiveness of the European sector vis-à-vis international markets.

In view of the above:

1.Could the Commission assess the feasibility of having approved, comparable tasting panels before products are bottled that are able to provide uniform, legally certain results?

2.What steps is the Commission considering to improve the reliability of classification systems, avoid barriers to trade and lessen the legal uncertainty experienced by Spanish producers as a result of varying results produced by organoleptic analysis panels when classifying olive oil as virgin or extra virgin?

Submitted: 17.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System – A10-0082/2025

Source: European Parliament

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION

on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System

(COM(2024)0567 – C10‑0207/2024 – 2024/0315(COD))

(Ordinary legislative procedure: first reading)

The European Parliament,

– having regard to the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2024)0567),

– having regard to Article 294(2) and Article 77(2) points (b) and (d) and Article 87(2) point (a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, pursuant to which the Commission submitted the proposal to Parliament (C10-0207/2024),

– having regard to Article 294(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

– having regard to Rule 60 of its Rules of Procedure,

– having regard to the report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs (A10-0082/2025),

1. Adopts its position at first reading hereinafter set out;

2. Calls on the Commission to refer the matter to Parliament again if it replaces, substantially amends or intends to substantially amend its proposal;

3. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council, the Commission and the national parliaments.

Amendment 1

AMENDMENTS BY THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT [*]

to the Commission proposal

———————————————————

REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL

on a temporary derogation from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as regards a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and in particular Article 77(2) points (b) and (d) and Article 87(2) point (a), thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission,

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments,

Acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure [1],

Whereas:

(1) Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 of the European Parliament and of the Council [2], establishing the Entry/Exit System (‘EES’), provides that the Commission is to decide the date from which the EES is to start operations, provided that certain conditions are met.

(2) However, the Commission has not received all notifications pursuant to Article 66(1), point (c), of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, which is one of the conditions for deciding on the start of operations of the EES.

(3) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 only allows for a full start of operations, requiring all Member States to start using the EES fully for all third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES and to use the EES simultaneously at all their border crossing points. However, a full start of operations of all EES functionalities at all border crossing points simultaneously constitutes a risk for the resilience of the EES as a whole and for passenger flows at the external borders.

(4) In order to ensure a smooth launch of the EES and facilitate its timely roll-out in all Member States, to provide Member States with the necessary flexibility to start using the EES within a clearly defined period of time and to facilitate technical and operational adjustments when starting to operate the EES, it is necessary to lay down rules for a progressive start of operations of the EES during which Member States should be able to opt for a phased roll-out of the EES. To ensure these adjustments take account of potential travel flows and seasonal peaks, such a progressive start should have a duration of 180 calendar days.

(5) To enable a progressive start of operations of the EES it is ▌necessary to derogate from certain provisions of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 of the European Parliament and of the Council [3] (‘Schengen Borders Code’). Other rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 that are not affected by this Regulation apply as provided for in that Regulation. In particular, the data recorded in the EES throughout the progressive start of operations follow the rules set out in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and are considered reliable and accurate. This Regulation does not affect the validity of the notifications already provided to the Commission by Member States under Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

(6) Member States that do not intend to use the EES simultaneously at all their border crossing points from the start of operations, should progressively start operating the EES to record, on entry and exit, the data of third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES at one or more border crossing points, or at one or more lanes of such border crossing points. If possible and applicable, Member States should include a combination of air, land and sea border crossing points. To ensure a controlled launch of the EES and to better manage and avoid potential long waiting times at the borders, where relevant, and if necessary, Member States should deploy all the functionalities of the EES progressively and register the data of all third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES gradually. To ensure the full use of the EES at all border crossing points in the Union, where Member States choose a progressive start of operations it should be implemented in phases, which should set the minimum requirements to be reached by Member States. Member States will retain the possibility to accelerate implementation at national level or start operating the EES fully from the start of operations. The gradual processing of data in the EES should be carried out in full respect of the rights of data subjects as set out in Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council1a and should not lead, directly or indirectly, to any form of discrimination or profiling. The Commission, in consultation with the European Data Protection Supervisor, should issue guidelines on the processing of personal data in the EES during the progressive start of operations.

(7) To facilitate a smooth deployment of the EES, the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) should develop a high-level roll-out plan to support the effective and continuous operation of the EES Central System, include fall-back procedures for the functioning of the EES Central System and provide guidance to the end-users, including the Member States and Union agencies on planning and executing the EES deployment during its progressive start of operations and should submit it to the European Parliament, the Commission, Member States and Union agencies. ▌

(8) To facilitate a smooth deployment of the EES, Member States should develop national roll-out plans in consultation with the Commission and eu-LISA and present those plans to the Commission. For each of the phases of the progressive start of the EES operations, the national roll-out plans should include the information on the set thresholds and requirements, in particular: (i) the date from which the EES will operate at each border crossing point; (ii) the percentage of the estimated number of border crossings to be registered in the EES out of the total number of third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES; and (iii) where applicable, the biometric functionalities to be operated at each selected border crossing point. When preparing their respective national roll-out plans, Member States should appropriately coordinate with the operators of infrastructure where border crossing points are located. and inform relevant stakeholders of the border crossing points where they plan to start operating the EES and of their planned use of the biometric functionalities of the EES. To monitor compliance with the progressive start of operations, Member States should provide the Commission and eu-LISA monthly reports on the implementation of their roll-out plans unless and until the EES is used fully for all third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES and is used simultaneously at all border crossing points in the Member State. Such monthly reports should include corrective measures, where necessary, to ensure compliance with the progressive start of operations. The Commission should issue guidelines to facilitate the adoption of national roll-out plans and monthly reports by the Member States that are concise and proportionate.

(8a) To facilitate a smooth deployment of the EES, it is important that neither the start nor the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES coincide with the peak travel seasons in summer, June to August, or winter, December to February.

(9) Due to the progressive start of operations of the EES and resulting incompleteness of the data recorded in the EES, travel documents of third-country nationals should be systematically stamped on entry and exit during the progressive start of operations of the EES. National authorities should take into account the possible incompleteness of entry/exit records or of refusal of entry records and should consider stamps as prevailing over the information registered in the EES. In addition, when providing information to third-country nationals about the maximum remaining duration of their authorised stay, national authorities should base their assessment on the stamps affixed in the travel documents. The data recorded in the EES should be used in the calculation of maximum remaining duration only in case a stamp is missing.

(10) Considering that the data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES might be incomplete, national authorities should not take into account the results provided by the automated calculator on the maximum remaining duration of the authorised stay of third-country nationals registered in the EES. Similarly, when carrying out their tasks, national authorities should not take into account the automated mechanism to identify or flag the lack of exit records following the date of expiry of an authorised stay or the records for which the maximum duration of authorised stay was exceeded, as well as the generated lists of persons identified as overstayers.

(11) To provide Member States with the necessary time to adjust to the start of the EES, for the first 60 calendar days of the progressive start of operations, the use of biometric functionalities at border crossing points should not be mandatory. However, Member States are encouraged to make use of those functionalities during that period in order to support a smooth operational transition and to enable the timely detection and resolution of any potential implementation issues. No later than the 90th calendar day of the progressive start of operations, Member States should operate the EES with biometric functionalities at least at half of their border crossing points. Providing biometric data should not be an entry condition for third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES at the border crossing points where the EES is operated without biometric functionalities.

(12) To accommodate the need to progressively deploy the EES with biometric functionalities at some border crossing points, the biometric verification of third-country nationals subject to registration in the EES should only be carried out at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated with biometric functionalities.

(13) To ensure coherence of the operations of the interoperability between the Visa Information System (VIS) established by Regulation (EC) No 767/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council [4] and the EES, the VIS should only be accessed directly at those border crossing points at which the EES is not operated. At the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, border authorities should make use of the interoperability between the EES and the VIS.

(14) Third-country nationals whose data are to be recorded in the EES should be informed about their rights and obligations regarding the processing of their data in the form of a template as provided in Article 50(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. The information to be provided to third-country nationals subject to the EES registration should refer to the progressive start of operations of the EES. Third-country nationals should be informed in the template of their obligation to provide biometric data at border crossing points where it constitutes an entry condition. They should be made aware in the template of the consequences of not providing biometric data. They should be informed in the template that it will not be possible for them to verify the remaining duration of the authorised stay by automated means. National authorities should make all reasonable efforts to provide those third-country nationals with details of the duration of their authorised stay based on the stamps in their travel documents.

(15) To reflect the progressive start of operations of the EES, the Commission should, at least every month, introduce relevant updates on the EES website.

(16) The aim of raising awareness among third-country nationals on their specific rights and obligations would be best achieved if Member States customise the implementation of the campaign based on how the EES will operate at their borders at which the EES is operated in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. The information materials developed by the Commission, in cooperation with the supervisory authorities and the European Data Protection Supervisor, and with the support of Member States in the context of Article 51 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 should therefore be adapted to carry out the information campaign accompanying the progressive start of operations.

(17) During the progressive start of operations of the EES, the web service will not enable third-country nationals to electronically verify the exact duration of their authorised stay.

(18) This Regulation does not affect the obligations of air carriers, sea carriers and international carriers transporting groups overland by coach as set out in Article 26(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement [5] and Council Directive 2001/51/EC.[6] In this respect, carriers should verify the stamps affixed in travel documents. To ensure effective communication with carriers about the distinct application of the EES at the border crossing points, ultimately benefiting travellers, it is crucial that Member States are transparent about the deployment of the EES at their border crossing points.

(19) Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Article 12a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 provide for a transitional period and transitional measures referring to the start of operations of the EES. It is necessary to derogate from those Articles to ensure that the transitional period and the transitional measures apply only as of the end of the progressive start of operations. That derogation should cease to apply 5 years and 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

(20) To ensure that national authorities and EU agencies, in the performance of their tasks, avoid taking decisions exclusively based on data registered in the EES, they should take into account that individual files registered in the EES may contain incomplete data sets and should in any case not take decisions adversely affecting individuals exclusively on the basis that a registration of an alleged entry or exit is absent in the EES. That derogation should cease to apply 5 years after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 to reflect the 5-year retention period for data sets for which the exit record is missing as set out in Article 34(3) of that Regulation.

(21) When ensuring compliance with the provisions in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 on the amendment of data and advance data erasure, Member States should complete the incomplete data to the extent permitted by the limited availability of the sets of data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations.

(22) The European Border and Coast Guard Agency should refrain from using data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations for carrying out risk analyses and vulnerability assessments due to the incompleteness of the data that could lead to misleading risk and vulnerability assessments.

(23) To ensure effective management of the external borders during the progressive start of operations of the EES, at the border crossing points at which the EES is not operated, border checks should be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as applicable [the day before the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226]. At the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, border checks should be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and the Schengen Borders Code. However, specific derogations from these Regulations should apply with regards to the verification at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated without biometric functionalities to enable the progressive start of operations. This should happen without prejudice to verifications of visa holders by using fingerprints, in accordance with Regulation (EC) 767/2008.

(24) To enable an effective adjustment of technical and organisational arrangements ▌and to address potential exceptional circumstances of failure of the EES Central System, national systems or communication infrastructure, or excessive waiting times at their borders, during the period of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States should have the possibility to suspend the operations of the EES at certain border crossing points, fully or partially. In case of partial suspension, the registration of biometric data in the EES should be suspended. In case of full suspension, no data should be registered in the EES. In both cases, Member States should promptly inform the operators of infrastructure hosting border crossing points and carriers. No later than 6 hours after the start of the suspension, Member States should notify to the Commission and eu-LISA the reason for the full or partial suspension and its expected duration.

(24a) To mitigate additional risks related to the deployment of the EES with biometric functionalities, Member States should have the possibility, in exceptional circumstances leading to traffic of such intensity that the waiting times at borders become excessive, to suspend the registration of biometric data in the EES after the end of the progressive start of operations. Such a suspension should be possible for a limited period of 60 days after the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES.

(25) eu-LISA should publish reports on the statistics on the use of the system, which should serve to evaluate the system’s performance, assess Member States compliance with the eu-LISA high-level roll-out plan and the national roll-out plans, identify areas for improvement, monitor compliance with the progressive start of operations of the EES, and support decision-making relating to the system’s further development and optimisation. Furthermore, eu-LISA should continue its regular reporting to its Management Board, which will in turn oversee the gradual roll-out of EES operations.

(26) The preparatory work related to the roll-out plans should be triggered by the date of the entry into force of this Regulation. Member States which have not yet submitted their declaration of readiness are urged to do so within 30 days after the entry into force of this Regulation. The progressive start of operations should apply from the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of EES Regulation. As this Regulation provides for temporary derogations, it should cease to apply 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. However, the derogatory rules on the application of transitional period and transitional measures, access to EES data, verification by the carriers of stamps affixed in the travel documents and the suspension of the EES should apply for a limited period after the end of the progressive start of operations.

(27) The objective of this Regulation, authorising derogations from Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399 to provide for a progressive start of operations of the EES, cannot be sufficiently achieved by Member States but can rather, by reason of the scale and impact of the action, be better achieved at Union level. Therefore, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty on European Union. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve those objectives.

(28) In accordance with Articles 1 and 2 of Protocol No 22 on the position of Denmark, annexed to the TEU and to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Denmark is not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application. Given that this Regulation builds upon the Schengen acquis, Denmark should, in accordance with Article 4 of that Protocol, decide within a period of six months after the Council has decided on this Regulation whether it will implement it in its national law.

(29) This Regulation does not constitute a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis in which Ireland takes part in accordance with Council Decision 2002/192/EC. Ireland is therefore not taking part in the adoption of this Regulation and is not bound by it or subject to its application.

(30) As regards Iceland and Norway, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement concluded by the Council of the European Union and the Republic of Iceland and the Kingdom of Norway concerning those states association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Council Decision 1999/437/EC.

(31) As regards Switzerland, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis, which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC, read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2008/146/EC.

(32) As regards Liechtenstein, this Regulation constitutes a development of the provisions of the Schengen acquis within the meaning of the Protocol between the European Union, the European Community, the Swiss Confederation and the Principality of Liechtenstein on the accession of the Principality of Liechtenstein to the Agreement between the European Union, the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on the Swiss Confederation’s association with the implementation, application and development of the Schengen acquis which fall within the area referred to in Article 1, point A of Decision 1999/437/EC read in conjunction with Article 3 of Council Decision 2011/350/EU.

(33) As regards Cyprus, the provisions of this Regulation relating to the VIS constitute provisions building upon, or otherwise relating to, the Schengen acquis within the meaning of Article 3(2) of the 2003 Act of Accession. The operation of the EES requires the granting of passive access to the VIS. As the EES is only to be operated by those Member States that fulfil the conditions related to VIS at the start of the operation of the EES, Cyprus will not operate the EES from the start of operations. Cyprus is to be connected to the EES as soon as the conditions of the procedure referred to in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 are met.

(34) The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and delivered its opinion on [xx].

(35) This Regulation establishes strict rules concerning access to the EES, as well as the necessary safeguards for such access. It also sets out the individuals’ rights of access, rectification, completion, erasure and redress, in particular the right to a judicial remedy and the supervision of processing operations by public independent authorities. This Regulation therefore respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised by the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in particular the right to human dignity, the prohibition of slavery and forced labour, the right to liberty and security, respect for private and family life, the protection of personal data, the right to non-discrimination, the rights of the child, the rights of the elderly, the integration of persons with disabilities and the right to an effective remedy and to a fair trial.

(36) This Regulation is without prejudice to the obligations deriving from the Geneva Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951, as supplemented by the New York Protocol of 31 January 1967.

HAVE ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1
Subject matter

This Regulation lays down rules on a progressive start of operations of the Entry/Exit System (EES) at the borders of the Member States at which the EES is operated in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and temporary derogations from Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399.

Article 2
Definitions

For the purposes of this Regulation, the definitions in Article 3(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 apply. In addition, the following definitions apply:

(a) ‘progressive start of operations of the EES’ means the period of 180 calendar days starting from the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(b) ‘national authorities’ means the authorities referred to in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(c) ‘estimated number of border crossings’ means a Member State’s estimate of the number of border crossings of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 in each Member State based on the yearly average of the total number of border crossings of third-country nationals travelling for a short stay in that Member State calculated for the preceding two calendar years from the date of application referred to in Article 8(1), second subparagraph, of this Regulation.

Article 3
Roll-out plans and monthly reports

1. By [the 30th calendar day after the entry into force of this Regulation], the European Union Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (eu-LISA) shall provide the European Parliament, the Commission, Member States, as well as Europol, with a high-level roll-out plan on the progressive start of operations of the EES, taking into account the phases set out in Article 4. That roll-out plan shall support the effective and continuous operation of the EES Central System, include fall-back procedures for the functioning of the EES Central System and provide guidance on the use of the EES to the end-users, including Member States and Europol ▌.

2. By [the 60th calendar day after the entry into force of this Regulation], in consultation with the Commission and eu-LISA, Member States shall develop national roll-out plans on the progressive start of operations of the EES, taking into account the high-level roll-out plan referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article and present those plans to the Commission. Where a Member State does not start operating the EES fully from the beginning of the progressive start of operations of the EES, the national roll-out plan shall specify how the thresholds and requirements set out in Article 4 shall be met. EU-Lisa shall assess whether the national roll-out plans are consistent with the high-level roll-out plan and shall confirm that they do not contain any deficiencies which could further delay the entry into operation of the EES. Member States shall inform relevant stakeholders of the border crossing points where they plan to start operating the EES and of their planned use of the biometric functionalities of the EES.

3. ▌

4. From the 30th calendar day after the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, Member States shall provide monthly reports to the European Parliament, the Commission and eu-LISA on the implementation of their national roll-out plans, including corrective measures where necessary to comply with the obligations set out in Article 4.

5. At the request of the Commission, eu-LISA shall provide the Commission with the statistics necessary for the Commission to monitor the implementation of the high-level roll-out plan and the national roll-out plans, in accordance with Article 63(6) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

5a. The eu-Lisa Management Board shall adopt the high-level roll-out plan referred to in paragraph 1. The Management Board shall also monitor the stability of the EES Central System during the progressive start of operations and suggest additional actions where appropriate.

5b. The Commission shall issue guidelines to facilitate the provision of concise national roll-out plans and monthly reports by the Member States.

5c. The Commission, in consultation with the European Data Protection Supervisor, shall issue guidelines on the processing of personal data in the EES during the progressive start of operations.

Article 4
Progressive start of operations

1. By way of derogation from Article 66(6) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 during the progressive start of operations of the EES, the Member States shall use the EES as set out in this Article.

2. From the first day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, each Member State shall start using the EES on entry and exit at one or more border crossing points with, if possible and applicable, a combination of air, land and sea border crossing points, to record and store data of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. No later than the 30th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall register in the EES at least 10% of the estimated number of border crossings in that Member State.

For the first 60 calendar days of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States may operate the EES without biometric functionalities, and national authorities may create or update individual files without biometric data.

3. No later than the 90th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall operate the EES with biometric functionalities at least at half of their border crossing points. Member States shall register at least 35% of the estimated number of border crossings in that Member State. The individual files of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 that are registered in the EES shall contain biometric data.

4. No later than the 150th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall operate the EES with biometric functionalities at all their border crossing points and shall continue registering in the EES at least 50% of the estimated number of border crossings in that Member State.

5. No later than the 170th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States shall operate the EES with biometric functionalities at all their border crossing points and shall register in the EES all third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

6. Refusals of entry, decided at a border crossing point at which the EES is operated, shall be recorded in the EES, as set out in Article 18 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. Where the EES is operated with biometric functionalities, refusals of entry shall be recorded with biometric data. Where the EES is operated without biometric functionalities, refusals of entry shall be recorded without biometric data.

7. From the first day of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Europol shall use the EES as provided for in Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

Article 5
Other derogations from Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399

1. In addition to the rules of Article 4, the rules set out in this Article shall apply to all Member States during the progressive start of operations of the EES.

2. Border authorities shall systematically stamp the travel documents of third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 on entry and exit.

The stamping obligations referred to in Article 42a(1), second subparagraph, and Article 42a(2), (5) and (6) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall apply mutatis mutandis in the Member States operating the EES.

3. For entering, amending, erasing and consulting the data in the EES, national authorities that are competent for the purposes laid down in Articles 23 to 35 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall consider stamps as prevailing over the EES data, including in cases of discrepancy or in cases referred to in Article 16(4) of that Regulation. The data recorded in the EES shall prevail in case a stamp is missing.

4. In the absence of a stamp affixed in the travel document and of an individual file created in the EES for a third-country national present in the territory of the Member States, national authorities may presume that the third-country national does not fulfil or no longer fulfils the conditions relating to entry or stay in the Member States.

This presumption shall not apply to third-country nationals who can provide, by any means, credible evidence that they enjoy the right of free movement under Union law, ▌ or that they hold a residence permit or a long-stay visa.

This presumption may be rebutted where the third-country nationals provide, by any means, credible evidence that they have respected the conditions relating to the duration of a short stay.

Where the presumption is rebutted, national authorities shall perform one or more of the following tasks at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, to the extent allowed by this Regulation:

(a) create an individual file for that third-country national in the EES, if necessary;

(b) update the latest entry/exit record by entering the missing data;

(c) erase an existing file where Article 35 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 provides for such erasure.

5. Border authorities shall make use of the interoperability between the EES and the VIS referred to in Article 8(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 only at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated. Border authorities shall continue accessing the VIS directly:

(a) at the border crossing points at which the EES is not operated;

(b) where the EES is suspended in accordance with Article 7 of this Regulation.

6. National authorities and Europol shall disregard the following:

(a) the results of the automated calculator that provides information on the maximum duration of the authorised stay referred to in Article 11 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(b) the automatically generated list of overstayers and its consequences in particular as referred to in Article 6(1), points (c) and (h), Article 12(3), Article 16(4), Article 34(3), Article 50(1), points (i) and (k), Article 63(1), point (e) of that Regulation.

7. Processing operations by Member States that comply with this Regulation shall not be considered as unlawful or not compliant with Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 for the purposes of Articles 45 and 48 of that Regulation.

8. Verification of the identity and previous registration of third-country nationals pursuant to Article 23 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be carried out on the third-country nationals referred to in Article 2(1) and (2) of that Regulation at the border crossing points at which the EES is operated with biometric functionalities, including through self-service systems, where available.

9. In addition to the specific information referred to in Article 50(5) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 that is to be added by the Member States in the template to provide information to third-country nationals about the processing of their personal data in the EES, Member States shall accompany the template to be handed over to third-country nationals at the time the individual file of the person concerned is being created with the following information:

‘The Entry/Exit System is being progressively rolled out. During this roll-out period [from …], your personal data, including your biometric data, might not be collected for the purposes of the Entry/Exit System at all Member States’ external borders. If we need to mandatorily collect this information and you choose not to provide it, you will be refused entry. During this period of the progressive roll-out your data will not be automatically added to a list of overstayers. In addition, you will not be able to check how much longer you are authorised to stay using the website or equipment available at border crossing points. You may address any queries regarding the duration of your authorised stay to the relevant national authorities at the external borders.

Please note that when the progressive roll-out of the EES is completed, your personal data will be processed according to the information provided in the document accompanying this form.’

10. The information on the EES website referred to in Article 50(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be adapted by the Commission to reflect the progressive start of operations.

11. The information campaign referred to in Article 51 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 accompanying the start of operations of the EES, shall reflect the specific conditions at the border crossing points, ensuring that the relevant information is communicated to those affected, and taking into account the phases set out in Article 4 of this Regulation. The Commission, in cooperation with the European Data Protection Supervisor and national supervisory authorities, shall support Member States in preparing the adapted materials of the information campaign.

12. The application of Article 12(1) and (2), Article 13(1) and (2), Article 20 and Article 21 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be suspended.

13. By way of derogation from Article 22 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Article 12a of Regulation (EU) 2016/399, the transitional period and the transitional measures set out in those Articles shall apply from the first day after the progressive start of operations of the EES has ended.

14. At the border crossing points at which the EES is not operated, border checks shall be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2016/399 as applicable on the day before the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

At the border crossing points at which the EES is operated, border checks shall be carried out in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 and Regulation (EU) 2016/399.

By way of derogation from the second subparagraph, at the border crossing points where the EES is operated without biometric functionalities, Article 6(1), point (f)(i), and the provisions on the verification of third-country nationals based on biometric data, solely for the purposes of the EES, referred to in Articles 6, point (f) (ii) and Article 8 (3), points (a) and (g) of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall not apply.

For the purposes of this Regulation, Article 9(3) and Article 12 of Regulation (EU) 2016/399 shall be suspended.

Article 6
Access to the EES data

1. When accessing the entry and exit records registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES in the performance of their tasks:

(a) national authorities and Europol shall take into account that, due to the variable operations of the EES in each Member State during the progressive start of operations of the EES, the data could be incomplete;

(aa) national authorities and Europol shall not take decisions adversely affecting individuals solely on the basis that a registration of an alleged entry or exit is absent in the EES;

(b) national authorities shall take into account that the data could be incomplete when communicating data in accordance with Articles 41 and 42 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(c) the ETIAS Central Unit shall take into account that the entry and exit records registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES could include incomplete sets of data for the purpose of verification in accordance with Article 25a(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

2. Competent authorities, the Commission and relevant Union agencies shall take into account that the data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES may be incomplete when accessing data for reporting and statistics as referred in Article 63 of Regulation EU 2017/2226.

3. By way of derogation from Article 13(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, carriers may start using the web service referred to in that Article from the 90th calendar day of the progressive start of operations of the EES. Carriers shall verify the stamps affixed in the travel documents with a view to fulfilling their obligations under Article 26(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and under Council Directive 2001/51/EC for the duration of the progressive start of operations of the EES.

For a period of 180 calendar days after the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES, carriers shall, in addition to using the web service as referred to in Article 13(3) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 continue verifying the stamps affixed in travel documents with a view to fulfilling their obligations under Article 26(1) of the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement and Council Directive 2001/51/EC.

4. When fulfilling the obligations referred in Articles 35 and 52 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 in relation to the completion of personal data recorded in the EES, Member States shall complete the relevant data only to the extent possible taking into account the limited availability of the sets of data collected during the progressive start of operations of the EES. Where applicable, the administrative decision referred to in Article 52(4) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall refer to the conditions set out in Article 4 of this Regulation that allow for the registration of incomplete files.

5. By way of derogation from Article 63(1), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226, the duly authorised staff of the European Border and Coast Guard Agency shall not access the data registered in the EES during the progressive start of operations of the EES for the purpose of carrying out risk analyses and vulnerability assessments.

Article 7
Suspension of the EES

1. During the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States may fully or partially suspend operating the EES at certain border crossing points in case of failure of the EES Central System, national systems or communication infrastructure, or events leading to traffic of such intensity that the waiting time at a border crossing point becomes excessive.

In case of partial suspension, the data referred to in Articles 16 to 20 of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 shall be collected, with the exception of biometric data.

In case of full suspension, Member States shall completely suspend the EES operations and shall not collect the data referred to in Articles 16 to 20 of that Regulation.

In both cases, Member States shall promptly inform the operators of infrastructure hosting border crossing points and carriers. No later than 6 hours after the start of the suspension, Member States shall notify to the Commission and eu-LISA the reason for the partial or full suspension and its expected duration ▌. Once the ▌circumstances that led to the suspension cease, Member States shall end the suspension and promptly notify the Commission, eu-LISA and the operators of infrastructure hosting border crossing points and carriers thereof.

2. For a period of 60 calendar days after the end of the progressive start of operations of the EES, Member States may partially suspend operating the EES as referred to in paragraph 1, second subparagraph, at a certain border crossing point for a limited time of maximum 4 hours within a day and only in exceptional circumstances leading to traffic of such intensity that the waiting time at a border crossing point becomes excessive. Member States shall be relieved of their obligation set out in Article 21(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226 as regards biometric data. In those cases, Member States shall promptly and no later than 6 hours after the start of suspension notify the reason for the suspension and its expected duration to the Commission and eu-LISA.

3. ▌

4. ▌

Article 8
Entry into force and application

1. This Regulation shall enter into force on the fourth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226.

However, Article 3 of this Regulation shall apply from the entry into force of this Regulation.

2. This Regulation shall cease to apply 180 calendar days from the date from which the EES is to start operations as decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) Regulation (EU) 2017/2226. However:

(a) Article 5(13) shall cease to apply 5 years and 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(b) Article 6(1), (2), (4) and (5) shall cease to apply 5 years and 180 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(c) Article 6(3), second subparagraph, shall cease to apply 360 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(d) Article 7(2)) shall cease to apply 240 calendar days after the date decided by the Commission in accordance with Article 66(1) of Regulation (EU) 2017/2226;

(e) ▌.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels,

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Violations identified by the Council of Europe anti-torture committee in detention and return centres in Italy – E-000124/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
The Commission is aware of the report by the Council of Europe’s European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.

In the context of the Schengen evaluation and monitoring mechanism, the Commission with the Member States experts assesses the implementation of the return acquis, in particular the Return Directive[1], by Member States. Following the Schengen evaluation carried out in Italy in 2021, the Council issued recommendations[2], which concerned, among others, the detention conditions. The Commission is closely following up and monitoring the effective implementation of those recommendations by Italy.

As a follow up to the Lampedusa 10-point plan[3], a dedicated working group on returns was set up with Italy on 25 September 2023. The group regularly meets to discuss return matters, including issues linked to detention conditions. The findings of the Council of Europe’s report to which the Honourable Members make reference is discussed with Italy in this context.

As regards the initiative carried out by Italy following the signature of a protocol with Albania, the implementation of the protocol under Italian law must not undermine or be detrimental to common EU rules. Moreover, it cannot prevent the aims and objectives of EU law, and it must be without prejudice to the rights and guarantees that persons in these situations are afforded by Member States, in line with their national law and obligations under international law.

[1] Directive 2008/115/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on common standards and procedures in Member States for returning illegally staying third-country nationals, OJ L 348, 24.12.2008, p. 98.

[2] Council Implementing Decision 10415/22 setting out a recommendation on addressing the deficiencies identified in the 2021 evaluation of Italy on the application of the Schengen acquis in the field of return.

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_23_4503
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing police cooperation in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, and on enhancing Europol’s support to preventing and combating such crimes and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/794 – PE769.973v02-00

Source: European Parliament

BUDGETARY ASSESSMENT on the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on enhancing police cooperation in relation to the prevention, detection and investigation of migrant smuggling and trafficking in human beings, and on enhancing Europol’s support to preventing and combating such crimes and amending Regulation (EU) 2016/794
Committee on Budgets
Hélder Sousa Silva

Source : © European Union, 2025 – EP

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Need for diversified, sustainable pain management in the EU to reduce reliance on pharmaceuticals and strengthen supply chains, thus enhancing sustainable healthcare – E-000010/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
1. Member States are responsible for the definition of their health policy. This includes the definition of pain management and measuring gaps in access to painkillers. At EU level, in relation to medicines availability, the Executive Steering Group on Shortages and Safety of Medicinal Products (MSSG)[1], consisting of representatives of Member States, the European Medicines Agency and the Commission, monitors and responds to ongoing shortages of medicines that cannot be resolved at Member State level.

2. Under the EU4Health Programme, seven projects are co-funded to support training initiatives for clinical and non-clinical staff with a focus on digital skills and other relevant skills[2]. One of these projects, the Health Professionals’ Digital Team Skills Advancement[3], develops a digital health literacy strategy and a plan to improve digital literacy in healthcare, which may benefit also those patients in need of pain management.

The proposal for a Critical Medicines Act announced in the Political Guidelines[4] was adopted by the Commission on 11 March 2025[5]. It addresses supply chain vulnerabilities of critical medicines, facilitates increasing EU manufacturing capacity for critical medicines, and reduces Europe’s dependencies on third countries. This proposal complements the reform of the EU pharmaceutical legislation and will build on the ongoing work, notably in the Critical Medicines Alliance and in the MSSG.

[1] Executive Steering Group on Shortages and Safety of Medicinal Products (MSSG) meetings — European Medicines Agency (EMA): https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/about-us/what-we-do/crisis-preparedness-management/executive-steering-group-shortages-medicinal-products/executive-steering-group-shortages-safety-medicinal-products-mssg-meetings

[2] https://year-of-skills.europa.eu/news/skills-and-healthcare-training-opportunity-health-professionals-under-eu4health-programme-2023-10-16_en

[3] https://hpass.healthworkforce.eu/

[4] Political Guidelines (2024-2029), page 9: https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/e6cd4328-673c-4e7a-8683-f63ffb2cf648_en?filename=Political%20Guidelines%202024-2029_EN.pdf

[5] https://health.ec.europa.eu/publications/proposal-critical-medicines-act_en
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI: Radware Lands Largest Cloud Security Services Agreement to Date

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

MAHWAH, N.J., May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Radware^® (NASDAQ: RDWR), a global leader in application security and delivery solutions for multi-cloud environments, today announced it recorded a major customer win, securing its largest cloud security services agreement to date. The multi-year, multimillion dollar agreement is part of a renewal and expanded relationship with a global, Fortune 500 financial services and payments company and top 10 U.S. merchant acquirer. To manage business growth and increasing cyber threats, the customer plans to scale its security operations across Radware’s full suite of AI-powered Cloud DDoS Protection and Application Protection Services, safeguarding thousands of applications and billions of digital transactions.

The company selected Radware for its ability to deliver a fully integrated, high-capacity application and network protection solution that seamlessly scales usage while minimizing the burden of operational overhead. The agreement spans Radware’s Cloud DDoS Protection Service and Cloud Application Protection Service, which also includes its Cloud Web Application Firewall Service, bot manager, and Web DDoS Protection.

“Our customer’s rapid growth trajectory required an end-to-end cloud security platform that could keep pace with evolving cyber threats without burdening operational resources,” said Neal Quinn, head of North American cloud security services at Radware. “This landmark agreement reinforces Radware’s enormous potential in cloud security and is a testament to our continued investment in the U.S. market. It showcases the trusted partnerships we have built with some of the most demanding digital businesses in the world.”

Radware’s cybersecurity suite includes application and network security solutions infused with EPIC-AI, state-of-the-art AI and generative AI algorithms which are built to block modern attacks while delivering consistent real-time protections across cloud, on-prem, and hybrid environments. Designed to automatically adapt to changes in the threat landscape, applications and infrastructure, Radware’s EPIC-AI approach to security helps organizations significantly improve attack detection and mitigation, reduce mean time to resolution (MTTR), and meet compliance challenges.

Radware has received numerous awards for its application and network security solutions. Industry analysts such as Aite-Novarica Group, Forrester, Gartner, GigaOm, IDC, KuppingerCole, and QKS Group continue to recognize Radware as a market leader in cybersecurity.

About Radware
Radware^® (NASDAQ: RDWR) is a global leader in application security and delivery solutions for multi-cloud environments. The company’s cloud application, infrastructure, and API security solutions use AI-driven algorithms for precise, hands-free, real-time protection from the most sophisticated web, application, and DDoS attacks, API abuse, and bad bots. Enterprises and carriers worldwide rely on Radware’s solutions to address evolving cybersecurity challenges and protect their brands and business operations while reducing costs. For more information, please visit the Radware website.

Radware encourages you to join our community and follow us on Facebook, LinkedIn, Radware Blog, X, and YouTube.

©2025 Radware Ltd. All rights reserved. Any Radware products and solutions mentioned in this press release are protected by trademarks, patents, and pending patent applications of Radware in the U.S. and other countries. For more details, please see: https://www.radware.com/LegalNotice/. All other trademarks and names are property of their respective owners.

Radware believes the information in this document is accurate in all material respects as of its publication date. However, the information is provided without any express, statutory, or implied warranties and is subject to change without notice.

The contents of any website or hyperlinks mentioned in this press release are for informational purposes and the contents thereof are not part of this press release.

Safe Harbor Statement
This press release includes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Any statements made herein that are not statements of historical fact, including statements about Radware’s plans, outlook, beliefs, or opinions, are forward-looking statements. Generally, forward-looking statements may be identified by words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “estimates,” “plans,” and similar expressions or future or conditional verbs such as “will,” “should,” “would,” “may,” and “could.” For example, when we say in this press release that this landmark agreement reinforces our enormous potential in cloud security, we are using forward-looking statements. Because such statements deal with future events, they are subject to various risks and uncertainties, and actual results, expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements, could differ materially from Radware’s current forecasts and estimates. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to: the impact of global economic conditions, including as a result of the state of war declared in Israel in October 2023 and instability in the Middle East, the war in Ukraine, tensions between China and Taiwan, financial and credit market fluctuations (including elevated interest rates), impacts from tariffs or other trade restrictions, inflation, and the potential for regional or global recessions; our dependence on independent distributors to sell our products; our ability to manage our anticipated growth effectively; our business may be affected by sanctions, export controls, and similar measures, targeting Russia and other countries and territories, as well as other responses to Russia’s military conflict in Ukraine, including indefinite suspension of operations in Russia and dealings with Russian entities by many multi-national businesses across a variety of industries; the ability of vendors to provide our hardware platforms and components for the manufacture of our products; our ability to attract, train, and retain highly qualified personnel; intense competition in the market for cybersecurity and application delivery solutions and in our industry in general, and changes in the competitive landscape; our ability to develop new solutions and enhance existing solutions; the impact to our reputation and business in the event of real or perceived shortcomings, defects, or vulnerabilities in our solutions, if our end-users experience security breaches, or if our information technology systems and data, or those of our service providers and other contractors, are compromised by cyber-attackers or other malicious actors or by a critical system failure; our use of AI technologies that present regulatory, litigation, and reputational risks; risks related to the fact that our products must interoperate with operating systems, software applications and hardware that are developed by others; outages, interruptions, or delays in hosting services; the risks associated with our global operations, such as difficulties and costs of staffing and managing foreign operations, compliance costs arising from host country laws or regulations, partial or total expropriation, export duties and quotas, local tax exposure, economic or political instability, including as a result of insurrection, war, natural disasters, and major environmental, climate, or public health concerns; our net losses in the past and the possibility that we may incur losses in the future; a slowdown in the growth of the cybersecurity and application delivery solutions market or in the development of the market for our cloud-based solutions; long sales cycles for our solutions; risks and uncertainties relating to acquisitions or other investments; risks associated with doing business in countries with a history of corruption or with foreign governments; changes in foreign currency exchange rates; risks associated with undetected defects or errors in our products; our ability to protect our proprietary technology; intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties; laws, regulations, and industry standards affecting our business; compliance with open source and third-party licenses; complications with the design or implementation of our new enterprise resource planning (“ERP”) system; our reliance on information technology systems; our ESG disclosures and initiatives; and other factors and risks over which we may have little or no control. This list is intended to identify only certain of the principal factors that could cause actual results to differ. For a more detailed description of the risks and uncertainties affecting Radware, refer to Radware’s Annual Report on Form 20-F, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the other risk factors discussed from time to time by Radware in reports filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made and, except as required by applicable law, Radware undertakes no commitment to revise or update any forward-looking statement in order to reflect events or circumstances after the date any such statement is made. Radware’s public filings are available from the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov or may be obtained on Radware’s website at www.radware.com.

Media Contacts:
Gerri Dyrek
Radware
Gerri.Dyrek@radware.com

The MIL Network –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Impact of automotive industry lay-offs on the EU labour market – E-000523/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament

The Commission is aware and concerned about the situation in the automotive industry. Challenges stem, among others, from shifting mobility patterns, increasing competition and global supply chain risks, new technologies and a volatile geopolitical context.

Underscoring the commitment to safeguarding the future of this vital sector, the Commission President launched in January 2025 the Strategic Dialogue on the Future of the European Automotive Industry[1], which brings together industry, social partners and civil society representatives[2].

The objective of the dialogue is to contribute to policy design, including in the skills and social field, to address the challenges facing the sector.

This has fed into the Industrial Action Plan for the European automotive sector, published on 5 March 2025. The action plan addresses a broad range of issues to maintain a strong European production base and support a thriving car industry that creates jobs, drives growth and protects the environment.

While the Commission cannot interfere in company decisions on restructuring, several Directives[3] stipulate minimum requirements on workers’ rights and involvement. This is supported by the Quality Framework for Restructuring and Anticipation of Change[4].

The main instruments to support workers affected are the European Social Fund (ESF+), which helps in an anticipative way, including by supporting up- and reskilling[5], and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF)[6], activated by major restructuring events.

The action plan proposes an extension to the EGF to support companies in restructuring processes to protect employees at risk of unemployment. One in five workers offered EGF support so far belongs to the car industry.
- [1] https://transport.ec.europa.eu/news-events/dialogues/dialogue-future-automotive-industry_en
- [2] A list of participating organisations, including representatives of the automotive industry and infrastructure providers, is available here: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/api/files/attachment/880307/List%20of%20participating%20organisations.pdf
- [3] Directive 98/59/EC on collective redundancies, Directive 2001/23/EC on transfer of undertakings, Directive 2002/14/EC establishing general framework for informing and consulting employees and Directive 2009/38/EC on European Works Councils.
- [4] COM/2013/0882 final — 13.12.2013.
- [5] Upskilling, reskilling, attracting talent, ensuring the right skills at the right place, are among the priorities supported by the ESF+. The funding is available, with a significant budget for skills development, the administration is in place, implementation of the 2021-2027 period is in full swing.
- [6] See Regulation (EU) 2021/691 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 April 2021 on the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for Displaced Workers (EGF) and repealing Regulation (EU) No 1309/2013, OJ L 153, 3.5.2021, p. 48-70 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=uriserv:OJ.L_.2021.153.01.0048.01.ENG
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025

MIL-OSI: Targa Resources Corp. Reports Record First Quarter 2025 Financial Results

Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

HOUSTON, May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Targa Resources Corp. (NYSE: TRGP) (“TRGP,” the “Company” or “Targa”) today reported first quarter 2025 results.

First quarter 2025 net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp. was $270.5 million compared to $275.2 million for the first quarter of 2024. The Company reported adjusted earnings before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, and other non-cash items (“adjusted EBITDA”)⁽¹⁾ of $1,178.5 million for the first quarter of 2025 compared to $966.2 million for the first quarter of 2024.

Highlights

Record first quarter 2025 adjusted EBITDA of $1.2 billion, a 22% increase year over year
Repurchased $214 million of common shares through April 2025
Declared an annual common dividend of $4.00 per share for 2025, a 33% increase year over year
Continue to estimate full year 2025 adjusted EBITDA between $4.65 billion and $4.85 billion
Continue to estimate 2025 net growth capital expenditures of $2.6 billion to $2.8 billion

On April 10, 2025, the Company declared an increase to its quarterly cash dividend to $1.00 per common share, or $4.00 per common share on an annualized basis, for the first quarter of 2025. This dividend represents a 33 percent increase over the common dividend declared with respect to the first quarter of 2024. Total cash dividends of approximately $217 million will be paid on May 15, 2025 on all outstanding shares of common stock to holders of record as of the close of business on April 30, 2025.

During the first quarter of 2025, Targa repurchased 651,163 shares of its common stock at a weighted average per share price of $191.86 for a total net cost of $124.9 million. As of March 31, 2025, there was $890.5 million remaining under the Company’s share repurchase program. Subsequent to quarter end, Targa repurchased 532,210 shares of its common stock at a weighted average per share price of $167.28 for a total net cost of $89.0 million.

First Quarter 2025 – Sequential Quarter over Quarter Commentary

Targa reported first quarter adjusted EBITDA of $1,178.5 million, representing a 5 percent increase compared to the fourth quarter of 2024. The sequential increase in adjusted EBITDA was attributable to contribution from the Badlands transaction and higher marketing margin. Volumes across Targa’s Gathering and Processing (“G&P”) and Logistics and Transportation (“L&T”) systems were negatively impacted by winter weather events which reduced system volumes during the first quarter. In the G&P segment, sequential adjusted operating margin was approximately flat as modestly lower Permian natural gas inlet volumes due to winter weather events were partially offset by higher fees. In the L&T segment, adjusted operating margin was also sequentially flat as higher marketing margin offset lower NGL pipeline transportation volumes, which were negatively impacted by winter weather events. Fractionation volumes were lower in the first quarter due to a major planned turnaround at Targa’s Cedar Bayou Fractionation facilities in Mont Belvieu, TX. Higher sequential marketing margin was attributable to increased optimization opportunities. Subsequent to quarter end, Targa’s Permian volumes and associated L&T system volumes have meaningfully increased from first quarter levels.

Capitalization, Financing and Liquidity

The Company’s total consolidated debt as of March 31, 2025 was $16,208.7 million, net of $106.7 million of debt issuance costs and $35.2 million of unamortized discount, with $14,534.4 million of outstanding senior unsecured notes, $920.0 million outstanding under the Commercial Paper Program, $600.0 million outstanding under the Securitization Facility, and $296.2 million of finance lease liabilities.

In February 2025, Targa completed an underwritten public offering of 5.550% Notes due 2035 and 6.125% Notes due 2055, resulting in net proceeds of approximately $2.0 billion. Targa used the net proceeds from the issuance to fund the repurchase of all of the outstanding preferred equity in Targa Badlands LLC (the “Badlands Transaction”) and for general corporate purposes, including to repay borrowings under the Commercial Paper Program.

Total consolidated liquidity as of March 31, 2025 was approximately $2.7 billion, including $2.6 billion available under the TRGP Revolver, and $151.4 million of cash.

Growth Projects Update

In Targa’s G&P segment, construction continues on its 275 MMcf/d Pembrook II, East Pembrook, and East Driver plants in Permian Midland and its 275 MMcf/d Bull Moose II and Falcon II plants in Permian Delaware. In Targa’s L&T segment, construction continues on its Delaware Express pipeline expansion, its 150 MBbl/d Train 11 and Train 12 fractionators in Mont Belvieu, and its GPMT LPG Export Expansion. The Company now expects its Pembrook II plant to begin operations in the third quarter of 2025 and remains on-track to complete its other announced expansions as previously disclosed.

2025 Outlook

Targa continues to estimate full year 2025 adjusted EBITDA to be between $4.65 billion and $4.85 billion supported by forecasted growth across its Permian G&P footprint, which is expected to drive record Permian, NGL pipeline transportation, fractionation, and LPG export volumes in 2025 relative to records set in 2024. While the growth is weighted to the second half of 2025, current and expected producer activity levels continue to support an outlook of meaningfully increasing volumes across the rest of 2025 and 2026.

Targa’s estimate for 2025 net growth capital expenditures remains unchanged in a range of $2.6 billion to $2.8 billion, and its estimate for 2025 net maintenance capital expenditures also remains unchanged at approximately $250 million.

Conference Call

The Company will host a conference call for the investment community at 11:00 a.m. Eastern time (10:00 a.m. Central time) on May 1, 2025 to discuss its first quarter results. The conference call can be accessed via webcast under Events and Presentations in the Investors section of the Company’s website at www.targaresources.com/investors/events, or by going directly to https://edge.media-server.com/mmc/p/waa5bt3q. A webcast replay will be available at the link above approximately two hours after the conclusion of the event.

An earnings supplement presentation and updated investor presentation are available under Events and Presentations in the Investors section of the Company’s website at www.targaresources.com/investors/events.

^{(1) Adjusted EBITDA and adjusted operating margin (segment) are non-GAAP financial measures and are discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”}

Targa Resources Corp. – Consolidated Financial Results of Operations

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2025			2024			2025 vs. 2024
	(In millions)
Revenues:
Sales of commodities	$	3,884.4		$	3,942.4		$	(58.0	)		(1	%)
Fees from midstream services		677.1			620.0			57.1			9	%
Total revenues		4,561.5			4,562.4			(0.9	)		—
Product purchases and fuel		3,257.8			3,218.0			39.8			1	%
Operating expenses		303.6			278.0			25.6			9	%
Depreciation and amortization expense		367.6			340.5			27.1			8	%
General and administrative expense		94.5			86.5			8.0			9	%
Other operating (income) expense		(5.3	)		—			(5.3	)		(100	%)
Income (loss) from operations		543.3			639.4			(96.1	)		(15	%)
Interest expense, net		(197.1	)		(228.6	)		31.5			14	%
Equity earnings (loss)		5.5			2.8			2.7			96	%
Other, net		0.3			1.7			(1.4	)	NM
Income tax (expense) benefit		(72.2	)		(82.7	)		10.5			13	%
Net income (loss)		279.8			332.6			(52.8	)		(16	%)
Less: Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests		9.3			57.4			(48.1	)		(84	%)
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.		270.5			275.2			(4.7	)		(2	%)
Premium on repurchase of noncontrolling interests, net of tax		70.5			—			70.5			100	%
Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders	$	200.0		$	275.2		$	(75.2	)		(27	%)
Financial data:
Adjusted EBITDA (1)	$	1,178.5		$	966.2		$	212.3			22	%
Adjusted cash flow from operations (1)		970.0			738.4			231.6			31	%
Adjusted free cash flow (1)		328.2			2.8			325.4		NM

^{(1) Adjusted EBITDA, adjusted cash flow from operations and adjusted free cash flow are non-GAAP financial measures and are discussed under “Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”}
^{NM Due to a low denominator, the noted percentage change is disproportionately high and as a result, considered not meaningful.}

Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2024

Commodity sales are relatively flat reflecting lower NGL, natural gas and condensate volumes ($217.9 million), the unfavorable impact of hedges ($256.1 million) and lower condensate prices ($15.2 million), offset by higher natural gas and NGL prices ($431.2 million).

The increase in fees from midstream services is primarily due to higher gas gathering and processing fees, and higher export volumes, partially offset by lower transportation and fractionation fees.

Product purchases and fuel are relatively flat reflecting higher natural gas and NGL prices, offset by lower NGL and natural gas volumes.

The increase in operating expenses is primarily due to higher labor, taxes and maintenance costs, partially offset by lower rental costs.

See “—Review of Segment Performance” for additional information on a segment basis.

The increase in depreciation and amortization expense is primarily due to the impact of system expansions on the Company’s asset base.

The decrease in interest expense, net is due to recognition of cumulative interest on a legal ruling associated with the Splitter Agreement in 2024, partially offset by higher borrowings in 2025.

The decrease in income tax expense is primarily due to a decrease in pre-tax book income.

The decrease in net income attributable to noncontrolling interests is primarily due to the Badlands Transaction in 2025 and the acquisition of the remaining membership interest in Cedar Bayou Fractionators, L.P. in 2024.

The premium on repurchase of noncontrolling interests, net of tax is due to the Badlands Transaction in 2025.

Review of Segment Performance

The following discussion of segment performance includes inter-segment activities. The Company views segment operating margin and adjusted operating margin as important performance measures of the core profitability of its operations. These measures are key components of internal financial reporting and are reviewed for consistency and trend analysis. For a discussion of adjusted operating margin, see “Non-GAAP Financial Measures ― Adjusted Operating Margin.” Segment operating financial results and operating statistics include the effects of intersegment transactions. These intersegment transactions have been eliminated from the consolidated presentation.

The Company operates in two primary segments: (i) Gathering and Processing; and (ii) Logistics and Transportation.

Gathering and Processing Segment

The Gathering and Processing segment includes assets used in the gathering and/or purchase and sale of natural gas produced from oil and gas wells, removing impurities and processing this raw natural gas into merchantable natural gas by extracting NGLs; and assets used for the gathering and terminaling and/or purchase and sale of crude oil. The Gathering and Processing segment’s assets are located in the Permian Basin of West Texas and Southeast New Mexico (including the Midland, Central and Delaware Basins); the Eagle Ford Shale in South Texas; the Barnett Shale in North Texas; the Anadarko, Ardmore, and Arkoma Basins in Oklahoma (including the SCOOP and STACK) and South Central Kansas; the Williston Basin in North Dakota (including the Bakken and Three Forks plays); and the onshore and near offshore regions of the Louisiana Gulf Coast.

The following table provides summary data regarding results of operations of this segment for the periods indicated:

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2025		2024		2025 vs. 2024
	(In millions, except operating statistics and price amounts)
Operating margin	$	602.2	$	556.4	$	45.8		8	%
Operating expenses		208.2		188.1		20.1		11	%
Adjusted operating margin	$	810.4	$	744.5	$	65.9		9	%
Operating statistics (1):
Plant natural gas inlet, MMcf/d (2) (3)
Permian Midland (4)		2,985.6		2,746.1		239.5		9	%
Permian Delaware		3,020.3		2,648.9		371.4		14	%
Total Permian		6,005.9		5,395.0		610.9		11	%

SouthTX		295.1		304.9		(9.8	)	(3	%)
North Texas		171.5		184.5		(13.0	)	(7	%)
SouthOK (5)		318.0		357.2		(39.2	)	(11	%)
WestOK		200.1		210.1		(10.0	)	(5	%)
Total Central		984.7		1,056.7		(72.0	)	(7	%)

Badlands (5) (6)		136.9		127.1		9.8		8	%
Total Field		7,127.5		6,578.8		548.7		8	%

Coastal		398.8		524.7		(125.9	)	(24	%)

Total		7,526.3		7,103.5		422.8		6	%
NGL production, MBbl/d (3)
Permian Midland (4)		429.5		392.8		36.7		9	%
Permian Delaware		366.4		307.0		59.4		19	%
Total Permian		795.9		699.8		96.1		14	%

SouthTX		28.8		28.9		(0.1	)	—
North Texas		21.0		21.9		(0.9	)	(4	%)
SouthOK (5)		33.1		28.1		5.0		18	%
WestOK		15.2		11.7		3.5		30	%
Total Central		98.1		90.6		7.5		8	%

Badlands (5)		16.4		14.6		1.8		12	%
Total Field		910.4		805.0		105.4		13	%

Coastal		32.7		39.1		(6.4	)	(16	%)

Total		943.1		844.1		99.0		12	%
Crude oil, Badlands, MBbl/d		107.1		94.4		12.7		13	%
Crude oil, Permian, MBbl/d		29.0		27.6		1.4		5	%
Natural gas sales, BBtu/d (3)		2,592.8		2,650.5		(57.7	)	(2	%)
NGL sales, MBbl/d (3)		570.2		498.8		71.4		14	%
Condensate sales, MBbl/d		18.1		19.1		(1.0	)	(5	%)
Average realized prices (7):
Natural gas, $/MMBtu		2.24		1.50		0.74		49	%
NGL, $/gal		0.50		0.48		0.02		4	%
Condensate, $/Bbl		72.32		77.22		(4.90	)	(6	%)

^{(1)    Segment operating statistics include the effect of intersegment amounts, which have been eliminated from the consolidated presentation. For all volume statistics presented, the numerator is the total volume sold during the period and the denominator is the number of calendar days during the period.}
^{(2)    Plant natural gas inlet represents the Company’s undivided interest in the volume of natural gas passing through the meter located at the inlet of a natural gas processing plant, other than Badlands during 2024.}
^{(3)    Plant natural gas inlet volumes and gross NGL production volumes include producer take-in-kind volumes, while natural gas sales and NGL sales exclude producer take-in-kind volumes.}
^{(4)    Permian Midland includes operations in WestTX, of which the Company owns a 72.8% undivided interest, and other plants that are owned 100% by the Company. Operating results for the WestTX undivided interest assets are presented on a pro-rata net basis in the Company’s reported financials.}
^{(5)    Operations include facilities that are not wholly owned by the Company.}
^{(6)    Badlands natural gas inlet represents the total wellhead volume and includes the Targa volumes processed at the Little Missouri 4 plant.}
^{(7)    Average realized prices, net of fees, include the effect of realized commodity hedge gain/loss attributable to the Company’s equity volumes. The price is calculated using total commodity sales plus the hedge gain/loss as the numerator and total sales volume as the denominator, net of fees.}

The following table presents the realized commodity hedge gain (loss) attributable to the Company’s equity volumes that are included in the adjusted operating margin of the Gathering and Processing segment:

	Three Months Ended March 31, 2025								Three Months Ended March 31, 2024
	(In millions, except volumetric data and price amounts)
	Volume Settled		Price Spread (1)			Gain (Loss)			Volume Settled		Price Spread (1)			Gain (Loss)
Natural gas (BBtu)		7.7	$	0.96		$	7.4			14.4	$	1.27		$	18.3
NGL (MMgal)		97.5		(0.07	)		(6.6	)		134.1		0.01			1.7
Crude oil (MBbl)		0.7		1.00			0.7			0.4		(7.25	)		(2.9	)
						$	1.5							$	17.1

^{(1) The price spread is the differential between the contracted derivative instrument pricing and the price of the corresponding settled commodity transaction.}

Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2024

The increase in adjusted operating margin was predominantly due to higher natural gas inlet volumes in the Permian. The increase in natural gas inlet volumes in the Permian was attributable to the addition of the Roadrunner II plant during the second quarter of 2024, the Greenwood II plant during the fourth quarter of 2024, the Bull Moose plant during the first quarter of 2025, and continued strong producer activity despite severe winter weather events which impacted volumes during the first quarter of 2025.

The increase in operating expenses was primarily due to higher volumes and multiple plant additions in the Permian.

Logistics and Transportation Segment

The Logistics and Transportation segment includes the activities and assets necessary to convert mixed NGLs into NGL products and also includes other assets and value-added services such as transporting, storing, fractionating, terminaling, and marketing of NGLs and NGL products, including services to LPG exporters and certain natural gas supply and marketing activities in support of the Company’s other businesses. The Logistics and Transportation segment also includes Grand Prix NGL Pipeline, which connects the Company’s gathering and processing positions in the Permian Basin, Southern Oklahoma and North Texas with the Company’s Downstream facilities in Mont Belvieu, Texas. The Company’s Downstream facilities are located predominantly in Mont Belvieu and Galena Park, Texas, and in Lake Charles, Louisiana.

The following table provides summary data regarding results of operations of this segment for the periods indicated:

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2025		2024		2025 vs. 2024
	(In millions, except operating statistics)
Operating margin	$	646.7	$	532.1	$	114.6		22	%
Operating expenses		95.5		90.0		5.5		6	%
Adjusted operating margin	$	742.2	$	622.1	$	120.1		19	%
Operating statistics MBbl/d (1):
NGL pipeline transportation volumes		843.5		717.8		125.7		18	%
Fractionation volumes		979.9		797.2		182.7		23	%
Export volumes		447.7		439.0		8.7		2	%
NGL sales		1,186.4		1,227.6		(41.2	)	(3	%)

(1) Segment operating statistics include intersegment amounts, which have been eliminated from the consolidated presentation. For all volume statistics presented, the numerator is the total volume sold during the period and the denominator is the number of calendar days during the period.

Three Months Ended March 31, 2025 Compared to Three Months Ended March 31, 2024

The increase in adjusted operating margin was due to higher pipeline transportation and fractionation margin and higher marketing margin. Pipeline transportation and fractionation volumes benefited from higher supply volumes primarily from the Company’s Permian Gathering and Processing systems, the addition of Train 9 during the second quarter of 2024, the in-service of the Daytona NGL Pipeline during the third quarter of 2024, and the addition of Train 10 during the fourth quarter of 2024. Marketing margin increased due to greater optimization opportunities.

The increase in operating expenses was predominantly due to system expansions.

Other

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2025			2024			2025 vs. 2024
	(In millions)
Operating margin	$	(248.8	)	$	(22.1	)	$	(226.7	)
Adjusted operating margin	$	(248.8	)	$	(22.1	)	$	(226.7	)

Other contains the results of commodity derivative activity mark-to-market gains/losses related to derivative contracts that were not designated as cash flow hedges. The Company has entered into derivative instruments to hedge the commodity price associated with a portion of the Company’s future commodity purchases and sales and natural gas transportation basis risk within the Company’s Logistics and Transportation segment.

About Targa Resources Corp.

Targa Resources Corp. is a leading provider of midstream services and is one of the largest independent infrastructure companies in North America. The Company owns, operates, acquires and develops a diversified portfolio of complementary domestic infrastructure assets and its operations are critical to the efficient, safe and reliable delivery of energy across the United States and increasingly to the world. The Company’s assets connect natural gas and NGLs to domestic and international markets with growing demand for cleaner fuels and feedstocks. The Company is primarily engaged in the business of: gathering, compressing, treating, processing, transporting, and purchasing and selling natural gas; transporting, storing, fractionating, treating, and purchasing and selling NGLs and NGL products, including services to LPG exporters; and gathering, storing, terminaling, and purchasing and selling crude oil.

Targa is a FORTUNE 500 company and is included in the S&P 500.

For more information, please visit the Company’s website at www.targaresources.com.

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

This press release includes the Company’s non-GAAP financial measures: adjusted EBITDA, adjusted cash flow from operations, adjusted free cash flow and adjusted operating margin (segment). The following tables provide reconciliations of these non-GAAP financial measures to their most directly comparable GAAP measures.

The Company utilizes non-GAAP measures to analyze the Company’s performance. Adjusted EBITDA, adjusted cash flow from operations, adjusted free cash flow and adjusted operating margin (segment) are non-GAAP measures. The GAAP measures most directly comparable to these non-GAAP measures are income (loss) from operations, Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp. and segment operating margin. These non-GAAP measures should not be considered as an alternative to GAAP measures and have important limitations as analytical tools. Investors should not consider these measures in isolation or as a substitute for analysis of the Company’s results as reported under GAAP. Additionally, because the Company’s non-GAAP measures exclude some, but not all, items that affect income and segment operating margin, and are defined differently by different companies within the Company’s industry, the Company’s definitions may not be comparable with similarly titled measures of other companies, thereby diminishing their utility. Management compensates for the limitations of the Company’s non-GAAP measures as analytical tools by reviewing the comparable GAAP measures, understanding the differences between the measures and incorporating these insights into the Company’s decision-making processes.

Adjusted Operating Margin

The Company defines adjusted operating margin for the Company’s segments as revenues less product purchases and fuel. It is impacted by volumes and commodity prices as well as by the Company’s contract mix and commodity hedging program.

Gathering and Processing adjusted operating margin consists primarily of:

service fees related to natural gas and crude oil gathering, treating and processing; and
revenues from the sale of natural gas, condensate, crude oil and NGLs less producer settlements, fuel and transport and the Company’s equity volume hedge settlements.

Logistics and Transportation adjusted operating margin consists primarily of:

service fees (including the pass-through of energy costs included in certain fee rates);
system product gains and losses; and
NGL and natural gas sales, less NGL and natural gas purchases, fuel, third-party transportation costs and the net inventory change.

The adjusted operating margin impacts of mark-to-market hedge unrealized changes in fair value are reported in Other.

Adjusted operating margin for the Company’s segments provides useful information to investors because it is used as a supplemental financial measure by management and by external users of the Company’s financial statements, including investors and commercial banks, to assess:

the financial performance of the Company’s assets without regard to financing methods, capital structure or historical cost basis;
the Company’s operating performance and return on capital as compared to other companies in the midstream energy sector, without regard to financing or capital structure; and
the viability of capital expenditure projects and acquisitions and the overall rates of return on alternative investment opportunities.

Management reviews adjusted operating margin and operating margin for the Company’s segments monthly as a core internal management process. The Company believes that investors benefit from having access to the same financial measures that management uses in evaluating the Company’s operating results. The reconciliation of the Company’s adjusted operating margin to the most directly comparable GAAP measure is presented under “Review of Segment Performance.”

Adjusted EBITDA

The Company defines adjusted EBITDA as Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp. before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, and other items that the Company believes should be adjusted consistent with the Company’s core operating performance. The adjusting items are detailed in the adjusted EBITDA reconciliation table and its footnotes. Adjusted EBITDA is used as a supplemental financial measure by the Company and by external users of the Company’s financial statements such as investors, commercial banks and others to measure the ability of the Company’s assets to generate cash sufficient to pay interest costs, support the Company’s indebtedness and pay dividends to the Company’s investors.

Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations and Adjusted Free Cash Flow

The Company defines adjusted cash flow from operations as adjusted EBITDA less cash interest expense on debt obligations and cash tax (expense) benefit. The Company defines adjusted free cash flow as adjusted cash flow from operations less maintenance capital expenditures (net of any reimbursements of project costs) and growth capital expenditures, net of contributions from noncontrolling interests and including contributions to investments in unconsolidated affiliates. Adjusted cash flow from operations and adjusted free cash flow are performance measures used by the Company and by external users of the Company’s financial statements, such as investors, commercial banks and research analysts, to assess the Company’s ability to generate cash earnings (after servicing the Company’s debt and funding capital expenditures) to be used for corporate purposes, such as payment of dividends, retirement of debt or redemption of other financing arrangements.

The following table reconciles the non-GAAP financial measures used by management to the most directly comparable GAAP measures for the periods indicated:

	Three Months Ended March 31,
	2025			2024
	(In millions)
Reconciliation of Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp. to Adjusted EBITDA, Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations and Adjusted Free Cash Flow
Net income (loss) attributable to Targa Resources Corp.	$	270.5		$	275.2
Interest (income) expense, net		197.1			228.6
Income tax expense (benefit)		72.2			82.7
Depreciation and amortization expense		367.6			340.5
(Gain) loss on sale or disposition of assets		(0.5	)		(1.1	)
Write-down of assets		2.0			1.0
(Gain) loss from financing activities		0.6			—
Equity (earnings) loss		(5.5	)		(2.8	)
Distributions from unconsolidated affiliates		4.9			6.3
Compensation on equity grants		17.6			14.6
Risk management activities		248.8			22.0
Noncontrolling interests adjustments (1)		3.2			(0.8	)
Adjusted EBITDA	$	1,178.5		$	966.2
Interest expense on debt obligations (2)		(193.2	)		(224.9	)
Cash taxes		(15.3	)		(2.9	)
Adjusted Cash Flow from Operations	$	970.0		$	738.4
Maintenance capital expenditures, net (3)		(47.3	)		(49.8	)
Growth capital expenditures, net (3)		(594.5	)		(685.8	)
Adjusted Free Cash Flow	$	328.2		$	2.8

^{(1)    Represents adjustments related to the Company’s subsidiaries with noncontrolling interests, including depreciation and amortization expense as well as earnings for certain plants within Targa’s WestTX joint venture not subject to noncontrolling interest accounting.}
^{(2)    Excludes amortization of interest expense. The three months ended March 31, 2024 includes $54.9 million of interest expense on a 2024 legal ruling associated with an agreement, dated December 27, 2015, for crude oil and condensate between Targa Channelview LLC, then a subsidiary of the Company, and Noble Americas Corp.}
^{(3)    Represents capital expenditures, net of contributions from noncontrolling interests and includes contributions to investments in unconsolidated affiliates.}

The following table presents a reconciliation of estimated net income of the Company to estimated adjusted EBITDA for 2025:

	2025E
	(In millions)
Reconciliation of Estimated Net Income Attributable to Targa Resources Corp. to
Estimated Adjusted EBITDA
Net income attributable to Targa Resources Corp.	$	1,555.0
Interest expense, net		860.0
Income tax expense		485.0
Depreciation and amortization expense		1,525.0
Equity earnings		(20.0	)
Distributions from unconsolidated affiliates		25.0
Compensation on equity grants		70.0
Risk management and other		250.0
Estimated Adjusted EBITDA	$	4,750.0

Regulation FD Disclosures

The Company uses any of the following to comply with its disclosure obligations under Regulation FD: press releases, SEC filings, public conference calls, or our website. The Company routinely posts important information on its website at www.targaresources.com, including information that may be deemed to be material. The Company encourages investors and others interested in the company to monitor these distribution channels for material disclosures.

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements in this release are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. All statements, other than statements of historical facts, included in this release that address activities, events or developments that the Company expects, believes or anticipates will or may occur in the future, are forward-looking statements, including statements regarding our projected financial performance, capital spending and payment of future dividends. These forward-looking statements rely on a number of assumptions concerning future events and are subject to a number of uncertainties, factors and risks, many of which are outside the Company’s control, which could cause results to differ materially from those expected by management of the Company. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, actions taken by other countries with significant hydrocarbon production, weather, political, economic and market conditions, including a decline in the price and market demand for natural gas, natural gas liquids and crude oil, the timing and success of our completion of capital projects and business development efforts, the expected growth of volumes on our systems, the impact of significant public health crises, commodity price volatility due to ongoing or new global conflicts, the impact of disruptions in the bank and capital markets, including those resulting from lack of access to liquidity for banking and financial services firms, changes in laws and regulations, particularly with regard to taxes, tariffs and international trade, and other uncertainties. These and other applicable uncertainties, factors and risks are described more fully in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K, and any subsequently filed Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K. The Company does not undertake an obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise.

Targa Investor Relations
InvestorRelations@targaresources.com
(713) 584-1133

The MIL Network –

May 1, 2025

MIL-OSI: Best Sugar Daddy Apps [2025] Free Sugar Daddy Dating Apps To Meet Sugar Daddies And Sugar Babies Online
Source: GlobeNewswire (MIL-OSI)

Las Vegas, Nevada, May 01, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Navigating the world of sugar dating apps requires knowledge, discretion, and careful platform selection. This comprehensive guide explores the top-rated sugar daddy apps, helping you make informed decisions about finding meaningful connections in the sugar dating landscape.

⇒ Why Wait? Download the #1 Sugar Daddy App for Free Now!

Selecting the right sugar daddy app impacts your entire dating experience. Premium platforms like SugarDaddy.com lead the market with robust security measures, privacy controls, and extensive user bases. This sugar dating app implements strict verification processes, ensuring authentic connections while protecting user information.

Based on user feedback, safety features, privacy policies, and platform usability, sugardaddy.com is the best sugar daddy app in 2025, helping those looking to meet genuine sugar daddies or babies. As the interest in sugar dating continues to rise, especially among young professionals and high-income individuals, sugar daddy apps like sugardaddy.com have become a preferred option for connection and convenience.

⇒ Join Sugardaddy.com – The Best Sugar Daddy App Today

What Are Sugar Daddy Apps?

Sugar daddy apps are dating platforms created to connect successful, affluent individuals (typically sugar daddies or mommies) with attractive, younger partners (sugar babies) who are seeking financial support, mentorship, and lifestyle perks in return for companionship and emotional connection.

These apps go beyond typical swiping and chatting—they set the stage for transparent relationships built on mutual expectations and clearly defined arrangements.

⇒ Experience Luxury Dating on Sugardaddy.com – #1 Sugar Daddy App

How to Choose the Best Sugar Daddy Dating App

Not every platform will suit your needs. Here are key factors to consider:
- Transparency: Look for platforms that support honest communication.
- User base: Choose apps with active, high-quality profiles.
- Privacy tools: Essential for both sugar daddies and babies.
- Pricing model: Some prefer subscription-based; others like pay-as-you-go.
Tips for Success on Sugar Daddy Apps
1. Create a compelling profile – Use high-quality photos and an honest bio.
2. Be clear about your expectations – Sugar dating works best with mutual understanding.
3. Communicate respectfully and openly – Build trust through genuine interaction.
4. Prioritize your safety – Meet in public and verify before exchanging sensitive details.
5. Stay active – Regular engagement boosts visibility and response rates.
⇒ Explore Elite Dating on Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App 2025

Safety First: How to Protect Yourself Online

Whether you’re a sugar daddy or a sugar baby, safety should be your top priority:
- Always meet in public first
- Don’t share personal financial data
- Use in-app messaging for initial chats
- Report suspicious behavior immediately
Benefits of Using Sugar Daddy Apps
- Clarity in relationships: These platforms promote upfront conversations about expectations.
- Financial support: Sugar babies often gain access to mentorship, gifts, and allowances.
- Luxury lifestyle: Many arrangements include travel, events, and upscale experiences.
- Emotional connection: Despite stereotypes, meaningful bonds can and do form.
⇒ Find Generous Partners on Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App Online

Key Features to Look for in the Best Sugar Daddy Apps

Selecting a reliable sugar dating platform requires attention to specific features that ensure safety, privacy, and successful connections. Here’s what you need to prioritize:

1. Identity Verification Systems

The best sugar daddy apps have robust identity verification systems in place to ensure that users are who they claim to be. Look for platforms that offer the following:
- Photo verification through selfie checks
- Social media account linking options
- Income verification for sugar daddies
- Background screening capabilities
- Professional status confirmation
2. Advanced Privacy Controls

Privacy is crucial in the world of online dating, especially when it comes to sugar relationships. The top apps understand this and provide advanced privacy controls such as:
- Invisible browsing modes
- Private photo galleries
- Custom profile visibility settings
- Data encryption protocols
- Ability to hide online status
- Control over profile information display
⇒ Upgrade Your Lifestyle with Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App

3. Communication Features

Effective communication is key to building connections with potential sugar partners. Look for apps that offer a variety of communication features, including:
- In-app messaging systems
- Video chat capabilities
- Virtual gift exchanges
- Clear arrangement discussion tools
- Built-in translation services (if applicable)
- Message filtering options
4. User Experience Elements

A user-friendly interface can make a significant difference in your overall experience with a sugar daddy app. Look for platforms that prioritize user experience through:
- Mobile-responsive design for seamless access on smartphones and tablets
- Quick-access navigation menus for easy exploration of the app’s features
- Advanced search filters to help you find compatible matches
- Profile matching algorithms that suggest potential partners based on your preferences
- Real-time notifications for important updates and messages
- Easy profile setup process to get started quickly
⇒ Join the Hottest Sugar Daddy App Today

5. Safety Measures
- Your safety should always be a top priority when using dating apps. Look for platforms that have implemented the following safety measures:
- 24/7 customer support for immediate assistance with any issues or concerns
- Profile reporting tools to flag suspicious or inappropriate behavior
- Automated scam detection systems to identify and block fraudulent accounts
- Emergency contact features in case of any dangerous situations during meetings
- Block and mute options to prevent unwanted communication from certain users
The best sugar daddy apps incorporate these features while maintaining a clean, intuitive interface. You’ll want to look for platforms that regularly update their security measures and adapt to user feedback. High-quality apps also provide detailed tutorials and support documentation to help you maximize these features for your safety and success.

Remember to test the free versions of multiple apps to experience their interfaces and feature sets firsthand. This hands-on approach helps you identify which platform best aligns with your specific needs and preferences in the sugar dating world.

⇒ Experience Luxury Dating with the Best Sugar Daddy App!

The Growing Use of Sugar Daddy Apps

Sugar daddy apps are now used by a much broader range than in previous years. In 2025, these platforms have become a preferred option for those who want clarity from the start. Users are looking for connections that allow both people to state their expectations upfront. A sugar daddy app makes that process easier.

Many adults now view sugar daddy dating as a practical and valid way to meet others. Whether looking for conversation, financial help, or something more personal, they often prefer using tools that allow for open discussions.

Changing Dating Preferences Across Generations

Younger generations are playing a key role in this shift. People in their 20s and 30s have different expectations from those of earlier dating cultures. Many focus on career goals, education, and financial stability. In the traditional sense, long-term dating isn’t always their first priority.

At the same time, older users—often in their 40s or 50s—are using sugar daddy apps to meet younger partners with whom they can share meaningful experiences. These users usually have busy professional lives and little time for casual dating. A sugar daddy app allows for connection without pressure.

⇒ Find Real Connections on Sugardaddy.com, the Best Sugar Daddy App

Financial Pressures Influence Relationship Models

The financial side of dating has become more visible. Rising rent, education costs, and inflation have made it harder for many people to feel secure. That’s one reason why sugar daddy apps have become so popular. For some, meeting a supportive partner through an online sugar daddy platform helps balance financial goals with emotional needs.

Mutually beneficial relationships, when based on honesty and respect, are now seen as a modern dating choice. These types of arrangements can help both sugar daddies and sugar babies feel more in control of their lives.

Why Structured Agreements Appeal Today

Unlike traditional dating apps, which often rely on vague intentions or unclear signals, sugar daddy apps offer a more structured experience. Users can share what they want—financial support, emotional companionship, or mentorship—without guessing the other person’s motives.

This direct connection style is why many prefer sugar daddy websites and apps. It saves time and lowers the chance of miscommunication.

⇒ Sign Up Free on Sugardaddy.com – The Top Sugar Daddy App!

How Sugar Daddy Apps Work

A Direct Way to Connect

Sugar daddy apps give users a practical way to meet others looking for similar relationships. These platforms are built to support arrangements that are clear from the start. Whether someone is searching for emotional connection, financial support, or companionship, a sugar daddy app helps both people define their goals early.

The design of these apps is often focused and straightforward. Unlike general dating platforms, sugar daddy apps are more structured and offer features specifically for users who want purposeful arrangements.

Setting Up a Profile

The first step to using a sugar daddy app is creating a profile. This is where users introduce themselves, add photos, and explain their wants. Sugar daddies often describe their lifestyle, availability, and what type of arrangement they prefer. Sugar babies may list their goals, interests, and expectations.

Unlike many standard dating sites, sugar daddy apps allow users to be upfront. There’s no need for vague descriptions or guessing games. A strong profile helps both sides avoid wasted time and attracts the kind of people they seek.

Some platforms offer tips while building a profile, such as keeping descriptions honest and using clear, current photos. The more open and real the profile is, the more likely it is to lead to a match.

⇒ Meet Successful Singles with Sugardaddy.com, the Best Sugar Daddy App!

Matching and Search Tools

Most sugar daddy apps offer two main ways to connect: browsing or algorithm-based matches. Users can scroll through profiles or use filters to find someone who fits their preferences. Standard filters include location, age, lifestyle, goals, and arrangement type.

Some apps also offer advanced search options. For example, users can look for a millionaire sugar daddy, someone offering mentorship, or someone interested in virtual-only arrangements. These tools help narrow the search and improve the chances of meeting someone with the same interests.

Matching systems vary across platforms, but the focus stays on simplicity and clarity. Whether someone wants to meet in person or keep things online, they can search based on what matters to them.

Tools for Communication

Once a connection is made, sugar daddy apps provide ways to talk directly within the app. Messaging tools may include private chat, voice notes, or even video calling. This helps both sides get to know each other safely before deciding to take things further.

Some apps include verification steps to ensure the people using them are real. This might involve ID checks, selfie verification, or income confirmation for sugar daddies. These tools help build trust and reduce the risk of fake profiles.

Photo privacy is another common feature. Users can blur images, control who sees them, or use locked photo galleries to maintain privacy.

⇒ Try Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App for Safe and Elite Dating

Sugar Daddy Apps vs. Sugar Daddy Websites

While many features are the same, there are a few differences between sugar daddy apps and sugar daddy websites. Apps are designed for quick, on-the-go use. They are ideal for users who want mobile access, instant updates, and simple communication tools.

Websites, on the other hand, often offer more detail. Users can create longer profiles, upload more content, and explore search tools with more depth. Some people prefer the larger screen and full-feature experience that sugar daddy sites provide.

That said, most top platforms now offer both. This means users can choose how to connect—using a sugar daddy dating app during the day, then switching to the full website at home.

⇒ Discover Discreet Dating on Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App!

Are Sugar Daddy Apps That Send Money Without Meeting Real?

Searches for sugar daddy apps that send money without meeting have grown recently. Many people are curious whether receiving financial support through a sugar daddy app is possible without meeting in person. While the idea is appealing to some users, especially those who prefer virtual connections, it’s essential to understand how these situations work.

Users sometimes form genuine online-only arrangements, but these are the exception, not the rule. Most sugar daddies want to build some level of connection before offering support.

⇒ Explore Verified Matches on Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App!

What’s Real and What’s Not

Legitimate sugar dating often involves a mutual agreement between both parties. This could include financial support, mentorship, or shared time. However, when someone offers money right away without verifying their identity or getting to know the other person, it’s a sign to pause and ask questions.

A real sugar daddy app will not promise instant payments or guarantee financial rewards just for signing up. Be careful with users who offer large amounts of money too quickly or try to take the conversation off the platform right away.

There are real sugar dating arrangements that happen entirely online, but they usually involve clear communication, gradual trust-building, and the use of verified features within the app.

⇒ Create Your Profile on Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App Online

Recognizing Red Flags

You must stay aware of common scam tactics when using any sugar daddy dating app. Here are some warning signs to watch out for:
- A user offers money before any real conversation takes place
- They avoid video calls or ID verification
- They ask for your Cash App, PayPal, or personal banking details early on
- They claim to have sent you money and ask for a “refund” of the extra amount
- They want to switch to text or messaging apps immediately after matching
These are often signs of scam activity. A trustworthy online sugar daddy will take the time to verify their identity, respect boundaries, and follow the normal flow of conversation within the app.

Safe Practices for New Users

If you’re new to sugar dating, take steps to stay protected. Use apps with built-in safety tools like identity checks, secure messaging, and moderation. Stick to communication inside the app until you’re sure the person you’re speaking with is real.

It’s also smart to set clear boundaries. Let the other person know what you’re comfortable with, and don’t feel pressured to move too fast. If someone offers to send money right away, ask questions and be cautious.

While some sugar daddy apps do support long-distance or online-only arrangements, the safest and most rewarding connections usually come from people who are upfront, respectful, and interested in building trust over time.

⇒ Join Thousands on Sugardaddy.com – The Best Sugar Daddy App for You

Why Millionaire Sugar Daddies Prefer Apps in 2025

Time, Privacy, and Precision

Many millionaire sugar daddies have demanding schedules and limited time for traditional dating. In 2025, sugar daddy apps have become a preferred tool for those who want to connect quickly and quietly. These users often seek arrangements that respect their time and offer clear expectations.

A sugar daddy app allows busy professionals to browse, match, and communicate without extended small talk. It saves time by focusing on users who are upfront about what they’re looking for. That directness appeals to people who are used to working with structure and efficiency.

⇒ Start Dating on Sugardaddy.com – The Best Sugar Daddy App Available

Lifestyle Matchmaking

Sugar daddy apps are also popular among high-income individuals because they offer matches that align with specific lifestyles. Whether dining out, luxury travel, or intellectual connection, the app format makes finding someone with shared interests easier.

Some users prefer arrangements that are travel-based or seasonal. A sugar daddy might spend part of the year in another city or travel often for work. The app format makes it possible to connect with people in different locations, schedule time in advance, and communicate discreetly while moving.

Discretion as a Key Feature

Privacy is vital to many high-net-worth individuals. Using a sugar daddy dating app gives them more control over what they share when they respond, and how they present their profiles. Features like photo blurring, private messaging, and verification options create a more secure experience.

These tools are handy for those who want to keep their personal lives separate from their business or public profiles. Many apps have built-in moderation to limit fake profiles and increase user trust.

⇒ Get Matched Fast on Sugardaddy.com – Top-Rated Sugar Daddy App

Sugar Daddy Sites vs. Sugar Daddy Apps

Both sugar daddy websites and apps serve the same purpose—helping people connect for mutually beneficial arrangements—but how users interact with them can differ.

Apps are built for convenience. They’re ideal for users who want access to matches on the go. Whether during a lunch break or while traveling, a sugar daddy app offers quick access to profiles, chat tools, and updates. The layout is simple and designed for mobile users who prefer efficiency.

On the other hand, sugar daddy sites often provide a more detailed experience. Longer bios, full-size photo galleries, and expanded search filters are common on the desktop version. Users who like to explore profiles more deeply or want to manage their matches from a larger screen may prefer this format.

⇒ Don’t Miss Out – Join Sugardaddy.com, the Best Sugar Daddy App Now

Hybrid Use Is Common

Many users switch between both. Someone might use a sugar daddy website at home and rely on the app when they’re out. This hybrid approach gives users flexibility, allowing them to maintain conversations and update their profiles from anywhere.

For someone trying to find a sugar daddy, or for a sugar daddy hoping to connect with someone who understands their lifestyle, having access to both formats can be helpful.

Online Connections That Fit Real Life

Whether through a mobile app or a desktop site, sugar dating platforms in 2025 are designed to fit into people’s daily routines. From a quick match to a long-term connection, these tools help people make decisions based on clarity, preference, and availability.

⇒ Stay Discreet and Connected with Sugardaddy.com – The Best Sugar Daddy App

How Sugar Daddy Apps Prioritize Safety in 2025

Verified Profiles Build Trust

Safety is one of the top concerns for anyone using a sugar daddy app in 2025. The best sugar daddy apps now require verification steps to protect users. These can include ID checks, selfie verification, and even income confirmation for sugar daddies. Verified profiles reduce the risk of scams and help people feel more secure when they start a new connection.

Verified accounts are easier to trust when using a sugar daddy dating app. Users can see who is serious about finding an arrangement and who might be trying to mislead others. Verification makes a real difference in the overall experience.

Photo Privacy and Secure Messaging

Modern sugar daddy apps also provide tools to keep personal information private. Features like photo blurring, hidden albums, and profile controls let users decide who sees what. These privacy settings give both sugar babies and sugar daddies more control over their visibility.

In-app messaging systems are designed to prevent spam and keep all conversations within a secure space. Some platforms also offer keyword filters to block suspicious messages. Together, these features help create a safer, more respectful environment.

⇒ Connect Worldwide with Sugardaddy.com – The Best Sugar Daddy App Experience

Scam Prevention and Moderation

Scam filtering has improved across many top sugar daddy websites and apps. Newer technology helps flag fake profiles and detect suspicious behavior early. When users report something that feels off, moderators can quickly review and act.

The presence of active moderation is part of what separates legit sugar daddy sites from platforms that allow anything. A well-managed community supports safe dating and keeps the experience real.

Why Verified Sugar Daddy Apps Matter

Choosing a verified sugar daddy app matters. These apps aren’t just more secure and attract more serious users. People are less likely to run into fake profiles, time-wasters, or scammers when verification and moderation are part of the platform.

Anyone looking to find a sugar daddy or connect with a real online sugar daddy should prioritize safety first. Verified apps are built to support that goal.

⇒ Discover Real Sugar Dating at Sugardaddy.com – Best Sugar Daddy App Choice

Final Thoughts

Choosing the best sugar daddy app for your needs requires clarity about what you’re looking for—be it companionship, mentorship, or a luxurious lifestyle. The apps listed above each cater to different preferences and relationship styles. Explore the options, protect your privacy, and enjoy the journey of sugar dating in 2025.

FAQs

What are the best free sugar daddy apps?

Some platforms like sugardaddy.com offer free basic memberships with optional paid upgrades.

Can sugar babies get paid without meeting in person?

Yes, some arrangements are entirely virtual. However, these are based on trust and clear agreement.

Are sugar daddy apps safe to use?

Reputable sugar daddy apps use encryption, profile verification, and fraud detection tools to keep users safe.

Is sugar dating the same as escorting?

No. Sugar dating is about mutually agreed-upon relationships that may or may not include intimacy. Escorting is transactional and often illegal.

Are sugar daddy apps free?

Many sugar daddy apps allow users to create an account and browse for free. However, to unlock full features, such as sending messages, viewing full profiles, or accessing premium filters, there’s often a paid membership option. Some sugar daddy apps free do exist, but they may have limited tools or fewer privacy features. Premium versions typically offer more security and better results.

Do sugar daddies send money without meeting?

It’s possible, but it’s rare. Most real sugar daddies prefer talking and building trust before offering support. While the idea of sugar daddy apps that send money without a meeting is popular in searches, many of those offers are linked to scams. If someone offers money immediately without real conversation or identity verification, it’s best to be cautious.

How can I avoid scams on free sugar daddy apps?

Always use verified sugar daddy apps with built-in security features like ID checks and profile moderation to stay safe. Avoid users who ask for personal financial information early on, and be wary of anyone who refuses to video chat or verify their identity. Don’t move conversations off the app too soon. If something feels off, trust your instincts and report the account.

Where can I find a sugar daddy?

You can find a sugar daddy using platforms specifically designed for sugar dating. The best way is through sugar daddy websites or apps that allow you to set preferences, filter by lifestyle or location, and communicate safely.

Are sugar daddy relationships only about money?

No. While financial support can be part of the arrangement, many sugar relationships are based on emotional connection, shared interests, or mentorship. Some sugar babies are looking for guidance or companionship more than anything else. Likewise, sugar daddies often seek someone who understands their lifestyle and values honesty and communication.

Can sugar dating lead to long-term relationships?

Yes, it can. Some sugar dating arrangements stay short-term, while others grow into longer commitments, including serious relationships or even marriage. Every arrangement is unique, and both define its meaning to them. What matters most is that both parties clearly understand their expectations from the start.

Can men be sugar babies?

Yes, men can be sugar babies, too. While most platforms have more women using them in that role, many sites and apps support a wide range of gender identities and relationship preferences. The sugar dating space is becoming more inclusive, and more men are finding arrangements that work for their lifestyle goals and personal needs.

Media Contact

Company: Sugar Daddy LLC

Contact Person: Christopher A. Waldo

Email: support@sugardaddy.com

Address: 5820 Sunset Ridge Ave, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA

URL: https://www.sugardaddy.com/

Phone: +1 (888) 841-4235

Content Accuracy Disclaimer

Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the information presented in this article. However, due to the dynamic nature of product formulations, promotions, and availability, details may change without notice. The publisher makes no warranties or representations as to the current completeness or accuracy of any content, including product claims, pricing, or ingredient lists.

It is the responsibility of the reader to verify product information directly through the official website or manufacturer prior to making a purchasing decision. Any reliance placed on the information in this article is done strictly at your own risk.

Affiliate Disclosure

This article may contain affiliate links. If you purchase a product or service through these links, the publisher may earn a commission at no additional cost to you. These commissions help support the creation of in-depth reviews and educational wellness content.

The publisher only promotes products that have been independently evaluated and deemed potentially beneficial to readers. However, this compensation may influence the content, topics, or products discussed in this article. The views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any affiliate partner or product provider.

All product reviews and descriptions reflect the author’s honest opinion based on available public data, user feedback, and scientific references at the time of writing. The inclusion of affiliate links does not influence the objectivity or integrity of the content. However, readers are encouraged to independently verify product information and consult with healthcare professionals prior to purchase or use.

No warranties, either expressed or implied, are made about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, or suitability of the content provided. The publisher and all affiliated parties expressly disclaim any and all liability arising directly or indirectly from the use of any information contained herein.

Product and Trademark Rights

All product names, logos, and brands mentioned are the property of their respective owners. Use of these names does not imply endorsement unless explicitly stated. SDE® , SUGARDADDY® are the trademarks of its respective brand owner.

Attachment
- Sugar Daddy
The MIL Network –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Participation of social stakeholders in the European Contact Group on Search and Rescue – E-000574/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
The European Contact Group on Search and Rescue consists of Member States and Schengen Associated Countries and provides them with a space for dialogue as well as a framework to liaise with relevant stakeholders, including private entities owning or operating vessels for the purpose of search and rescue activities, such as non-governmental organisations[1].

The Commission holds regular meetings with non-governmental organisations on search and rescue related issues, which have also informed the work of the Contact Group.

[1] Commission Recommendation (EU) 2020/1365 on cooperation among Member States concerning operations carried out by vessels owned or operated by private entities for the purpose of search and rescue activities, points (16) and (2), OJ L 317, 1.10.2020, p. 23-25.
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Food safety – lead and cadmium in ceramics, glass and enamelled tableware and kitchenware – E-000380/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
The Commission is committed to further harmonising EU legislation on food contact materials (FCMs), as indicated in its announcement to revise the legislation[1]. The Commission has recognised the need to significantly reduce the current EU limits for lead and cadmium allowed to transfer into food from ceramic materials, to widen the scope to other types of materials including glass and enamels, and to consider limits for other metals to safeguard public health.

The Commission has already carried out a significant body of work on this initiative, including the development of adequate methodologies for testing[2], an inception impact assessment[3] and direct stakeholder dialogue as well as technical discussions with Member States.

Further preparatory work for the initiative is ongoing, which is highly complex and requires further consultations with all relevant stakeholders to ensure the coherence of requirements across different types of FCMs, in particular the approach to regulating particularly hazardous substances but considering also the potential impacts on small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and producers using traditional production techniques.

[1] https://food.ec.europa.eu/food-safety/chemical-safety/food-contact-materials/revision-eu-rules_en

[2] https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC102075

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/2074-Food-safety-heavy-metals-in-ceramic-glass-and-enameled-table-and-kitchenware_en
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Status of clear aligners in light of Regulation (EU) 2017/745 – E-000956/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
Regulation (EU) 2017/745 on medical devices[1] (MDR) defines ‘custom-made devices’ in Article 2(3) and provides for legal exceptions for certain mass-produced devices.

Accordingly, it would depend on the specific case whether clear aligners — also known as invisible braces — may be actually considered as custom-made devices or rather mass-produced devices.

The Medical Device Coordination Group (MDCG) established under Article 103 of the MDR endorsed the guidance document ‘MDCG 2021-3 Questions and Answers on Custom-Made Devices & considerations on Adaptable medical devices and Patient-matched medical devices’[2] where ‘orthotic braces’ are mentioned as examples of ‘mass-produced adaptable medical devices’, not considering them as custom-made devices.

This reflects the situation on the market, where the use of clear aligners is largely extended as adapted devices from mass-produced devices, as well as the views of other international regulatory frameworks[3]^,[4].

Both custom-made devices and mass-produced adaptable medical devices need the prescription of authorised healthcare professionals with respect to their specific characteristics and the needs of patients.

Therefore, the possibility to purchase clear aligners or invisible braces without consulting a healthcare structure or professional may indeed represent a risk for patients as well as a competitive disadvantage for healthcare manufacturers and professionals.

The responsibility for market surveillance and vigilance on the appropriate placing on the market and use of those devices belongs to the national competent authorities of the Member States in the field of medical devices[5].

[1] OJ L 117, 5.5.2017, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/745/oj

[2] https://health.ec.europa.eu/document/download/385d7e20-d8b5-49d0-abd7-8daf269bf1b8_en?filename=mdcg_2021-3_en.pdf

[3] For instance, the Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration considers aligners as ‘patient-matched medical devices’, not custom-made devices. See https://www.tga.gov.au/resources/guidance/understanding-personalised-medical-devices-rules-including-3d-printed-devices#patientmatched-medical-devices

[4] See the guidance on ‘Personalized Medical Devices (PMD)’ by the International Medical Device Regulatory Forum (IMDRF) https://www.imdrf.org/working-groups/personalized-medical-devices

[5] https://health.ec.europa.eu/medical-devices-sector/new-regulations/contacts_en#national-competent-authorities
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – European Court of Auditors (ECA) Special Report 08/2025 “VAT fraud on imports” – Subcommittee on Tax Matters

Source: European Parliament

On 14 May from 15:00 to 16:15, together with the CONT committee, the FISC Subcommittee will invite Mr François-Roger Cazala, Member responsible of the European Court of Auditors (ECA) to present its the Special report 08/2025 on “Value Added Tax fraud on imports – The EU’s financial interests are insufficiently protected under simplified import customs procedures”.

Value Added Tax (VAT) fraud negatively affects the collection of revenues in Member States as well as in the EU. According to the Commission, Member States lost around €89 billion in 2022. Fraud committed by traders on VAT levied on imports contributes to this loss and is one of the main types of cross-border VAT fraud affecting the fiscal policies and public finances of the EU.

“The EU’s financial interests and single market are not protected firmly enough against Value Added Tax (VAT) fraud on imports when simplified import customs procedures are used”, according to ECA. There are serious weaknesses in the checks carried out by Member States and shortcomings in the cooperation at EU level and across Member States to combat the abuse of these procedures.

The presentation will provide an opportunity for ECA to present its report and discuss its findings with CONT and FISC Members.

ECA pecial report 08/2025 on “Value Added Tax fraud on imports – The EU’s financial interests are insufficiently protected under simplified import customs procedures”

Source : © European Union, 2025 – EP

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Compliance with EU law of non-EU rail operators in the internal market and its impact on competition and EU operators – P-001645/2025
Source: European Parliament
Priority question for written answer P-001645/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Dariusz Joński (PPE)

The EU rail freight sector is currently facing a crisis, incurring losses amounting to millions of euros. Given that the Commission is the guardian of the single market and the principles of fair competition, I would like to ask the following questions:

1.Does the Commission consider that the granting by the national market regulator of a Member State of a licence to a third-country entity – which is part of a state-owned company of that country – that does not meet the requirements of EU legislation on unbundling and separation of accounts is compatible with EU law? I would like to point out that the non-EU operator has been provided with commercial resources (locomotives and wagons) enabling it to compete with EU operators.

2.Does the Commission consider the activities of such an entity on the EU internal market to be compatible with EU law?

3.Do such activities not violate the principles of the functioning of the common market, and do they not pose a threat to EU rail companies which are subject to the full gamut of EU rules?

Submitted: 24.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Backsliding on sustainable urban mobility in right-wing and far-right cities – E-001627/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001627/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Rosa Serrano Sierra (S&D)

In recent years, especially after the pandemic, many Spanish cities boosted sustainable mobility measures which received part-funding from EU funds. However, this trend has stopped – and even been reversed – in several places currently administered by Spain’s Popular Party, in many cases in coalition with Vox, which have begun to remove cycle lanes, reopen pedestrian streets to vehicles and prioritise motorised traffic.

These decisions constitute backsliding on sustainable mobility and place an additional obstacle in the way of the future Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMPs) to be adopted in urban centres such as these by 2027 in conformity with Regulation 2024/1679.

Given this situation, can Commission answer the following questions:

1.Is sustainable urban mobility still a priority for the Commission?

2.Does the Commission not consider that promoting active mobility through concrete measures to improve walking and cycling can have positive repercussions on the accessibility of functional urban areas in the EU?

3.Does the Commission not believe that local-level decisions to dismantle cycling infrastructure, remove pedestrian areas and give preference to vehicle use clash with the SUMP objectives of switching towards more sustainable forms of mobility and reducing air and noise pollution?

Submitted: 23.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Lake Kremasta – E-001582/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001582/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Emmanouil Fragkos (ECR)

The lack of rainfall in Greece, as in all of southern Europe, over the past two years has exacerbated the problem of water scarcity.

Attica mainly gets its water from the artificial lake of Marathon, which functions as a reservoir, and the drop in its level has led to consideration of the scenario of transferring water from Lake Kremasta (Aetolia-Acarnania). This is the largest lake in Greece and is planned to become the main source of water for transfer to the capital.

However, the artificial lake of Kremasta has seen the creation of a proverbial wetland with many types of birds and intense vegetation – in addition to the natural beauty of the area. The rate of water absorption from there for transfer to the capital is planned to be 5% of the water, but this may increase, as the problem has not been definitively resolved. The channelling of water from there to Athens, which will require significant investment, also carries the risk of disturbing the ecosystem that has formed, disrupting the whole lake.

In light of the above:

1.Does the Commission intend to monitor the requirements of the studies and the possible execution of the project, which carries the risk of disrupting the ecosystem?

2.Does a framework exist for an artificial lake to become a protected area?

3.How can the Commission ensure that the ecological balance is not disrupted by such actions, even if their aim is to resolve such a serious issue as water scarcity?

Submitted: 21.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Aromatic and medicinal plants from Greek producers – E-001584/2025

Source: European Parliament

Question for written answer E-001584/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Emmanouil Fragkos (ECR)

Lavender, oregano, rosemary, sage and mountain tea are among the aromatic and medicinal plants that can have great export potential due to the growing demand for an increasingly advertised – especially on social media – way of life based on natural products. They can be used for drinks, cosmetics, aromatherapy and pharmaceutical preparations, as well as in cooking.

These crops are especially advantageous for Greek farmers due to their xerophytic nature, allowing for cultivation with minimal water – an increasingly critical factor in a region facing growing water scarcity. In addition, semi-mountainous/mountainous soils are not suitable for many intensive crops, but they are ideal for plants such as oregano and mountain tea, as these are inherently organic products that do not require pesticides and fertilisers. Lavender and mountain tea have the highest export value per kilo, especially if standardised or processed (essential oils, premium packaging). Most of them can be grown organically, greatly increasing the final price. The benefit increases significantly if there is drying/standardisation or collaboration with a cooperative. Unfortunately, although there are many opportunities to enhance the value of these products, often producers throughout the province are not effectively informed of these.

What policies would the Commission recommend to the Greek Ministry of Rural Development and local government agencies to increase these Greek crops, especially those of small producers?

Submitted: 21.4.2025

Last updated: 29 April 2025

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – The application of extended producer responsibility to pharmaceuticals under Article 9 of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive – E-001610/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001610/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Aurelijus Veryga (ECR)

The application of extended producer responsibility (EPR) to pharmaceuticals under Article 9 of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive raises several concerns. Notably, only the pharmaceutical and cosmetic sectors are required to finance the removal of micropollutants, despite contributions to such pollution from various other industries.

The directive’s impact assessment lacks a comprehensive analysis of its implications for the pharmaceutical industry, particularly regarding access to medicines and pricing, at a time when many Member States are already facing shortages of medicinal products and efforts are under way to enhance the EU’s pharmaceutical autonomy.

In the light of these issues:

1.Does the Commission plan to conduct a comprehensive assessment of the EPR’s impact on patient access to medicines and on healthcare system costs?

2.If so, would the Commission consider pausing the implementation of the directive until such an assessment is completed?

3.Does the Commission intend to review the directive and consider expanding the scope of the EPR scheme to include other sectors contributing to water pollution, in order to ensure a fair and equitable application of the ‘polluter pays’ principle?

Submitted: 23.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-Evening Report: NZ doctors defend nationwide strike action over recruitment

By Ruth Hill, RNZ News reporter

Striking senior New Zealand doctors have hit back at the Health Minister’s attack on their union for “forcing” patients to wait longer for surgery and appointments, due to their 24-hour industrial action.

Respiratory and sleep physician Dr Andrew Davies, who was on the picketline outside Wellington Regional Hospital, said for him and his colleagues, it was “not about the money” — it was about the inability to recruit.

“We’ve got vacant jobs that we’re not allowed to advertise,” he said. “It’s lies that they’re not getting rid of frontline staff.

“The job is technically there on paper, but if you’re not going to advertise for the job, you’re not going to fill it.

“In our department, we’ve waited months and months and months to fill some jobs, and you don’t just get a doctor next week. It takes six months for them to come.”

Dr Davies said no-one wanted to strike and have their patients miss out on care, but thousands of patients were already missing out on care every day, due to staff shortages.

“Every week, we’ve got empty clinics,” he said. “There is space in the clinics that’s not being used, because there’s not a doctor in the chair there.

“While, today, that’s 20 percent of the work of the week gone, because we’re on strike, in some departments, it’s 20 percent every week.

“Every day of the week, there’s a 20 percent deficit in the number of patients people are seeing.”

5500 doctors on strike
Nationwide, about 5500 members of the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists are on strike until 11:59pm today, causing the cancellation of about 4300 planned procedures and specialist appointments.

In a social media post, Health Minister Simeon Brown blamed the union for the disruption, saying an updated offer last week — including a $25,000 bonus for those moving to “hard-to-staff regions” — was rejected by the union, before members even saw it.

Union executive director Sarah Dalton said she would be very happy to facilitate a meeting between doctors and the minister — or he could accept the invitation to attend its national conference.

“They would love to feel like someone up there was listening,” she said. “They don’t at the moment.

“We need to move away from rhetoric, and actually have some time and space for meaningful discussion.

“That’s one of the reasons we’re on strike today. After eight months of negotiating, there was nothing on the table from the employer.

“It was only after we called for strike action that anything changed, so let’s do better.”

Critical workforce shortages were undermining patient care and the current pay offer, which amounted to an increase of less than one percent a year for most doctors, would do nothing to fix that, Dalton said.

“How do you tackle vacancies? You put more time and effort in good terms and conditions for your permanent workforce, and you stop spending spending $380 million a year on locums and temps.

“We shouldn’t have that heavy reliance on those people, so we’ve got to change it.”

NZ training doctors for Australia
After many years of study subsidised by the New Zealand taxpayer, Maeve Hume-Nixon recently qualified as a public health specialist, but may yet end up going overseas.

“I actually thought last year that I would have to go to Australia, where I would be paid another $100,000 minimum, because there were no jobs for me here, basically.

Newly qualified public health specialist Dr Maeve Hume-Nixon says she has struggled to get a job in New Zealand but could earn $100,000 more in Australia. Image: RNZ/Ruth Hill

“In the end, I managed to get an emergency extension to my contract and this has continued, but I don’t have security and it’s a pretty frustrating position to be in.”

Neurologist Dr Maas Mollenhauer said he was not able to access the tests he needed to provide care for his patients.

“I’ve seen patients that I have sent for urgent imaging, but they didn’t receive it, and then I got an email from one of my colleagues who was on call, telling me that patient had rocked up to the Emergency Department and, basically, the front half of their skull was full of brain tumour.”

Cancer patients waiting too long
Medical oncologist Dr Sharon Pattison said the health system had reached the point where it was so starved of people and resources, it had become “inefficient”.

“Everyone is waiting for everything, so everything takes longer, and we are waiting until people get seriously ill, before we do anything about it.”

The government’s “faster cancer treatment time” target — 90 percent of patients receiving cancer management within 31 days of the decision to treat — would not give the true picture of what was happening for patients, she said.

“For instance, if I have someone with a potential diagnosis of cancer, there are so many points at which they are waiting — waiting for scan, waiting for a biopsy, waiting for a radiologist to report the scan to show us where to get the biopsy.

Medical oncologist Dr Sharon Pattison says some cancer patients are waiting too long to even get diagnosed, by which point it can be too late. Image: RNZ/Ruth Hill

“That radiologist may be overseas, so if I want to talk to that specialist I can’t do that. Then the wait for a pathologist to report on the biopsy can now take up to 6-8 weeks.

“We know that, for some people with cancer, if you wait for that long before we can even make your treatment plan, we’re going to make your outcomes worse.

“The whole system is at the point where we are making people more unwell, because we can’t do what we should be doing for them in the framework that we need to.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

MIL OSI Analysis – EveningReport.nz –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Illegal fishing of juvenile pilchards Italy – E-001559/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001559/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Cristina Guarda (Verts/ALE)

Every year, dozens of tonnes of juvenile pilchards (Sardina pilchardus) are caught illegally along the southern Italian coast. According to the numerous reports (backed by copious evidence) that were sent to the authorities in 2023,2024 and 2025 by Gruppo Adorno (an NGO), undersized pilchards – the sale of which is illegal – can even be found in certain markets. These complaints have fallen on deaf ears, as the sale of juvenile pilchards continues unabated, the situation not having changed at all since the Commission replied to an earlier question for written answer on this topic (E-000814/2024).

Since the adoption of a 2016 law decriminalising the holding, landing, transhipment, transport and marketing of undersized fish species, Italian law enforcement agencies no longer confiscate the vessels and means of transport used in these activities during sting operations, and the latter rarely threaten shipping anyway as they are predominantly carried out on dry land. In addition, because fish traffickers often farm out transport operations to indigent subcontractors, the fines levied for these offences are almost never paid.

In the light of the above:

1.Will the Commission contact the Italian authorities with a view to establishing how many seizures have been carried out since 2020?

2.Does the Commission hold that the sanctions provided for by Italian law are suitable for the purposes of safeguarding aquatic species and ensuring compliance with Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009?

Submitted: 16.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Funding for ‘The European Qur’an’ project – E-001613/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001613/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Anna Maria Cisint (PfE), Susanna Ceccardi (PfE), Silvia Sardone (PfE), Isabella Tovaglieri (PfE), Roberto Vannacci (PfE), Paolo Borchia (PfE)

Given the delicate economic and social situation facing the European Union, with global challenges requiring careful allocation of resources, the Commission’s decision to finance ‘The European Qur’an’ project to the tune of almost EUR 10 million warrants further investigation.

At a time when the public and businesses are calling for support and concrete responses, it is vital to understand the priorities underpinning the Union’s action and the extent to which they adhere to the founding principles of its institutions.

In view of the above:

1.Can the Commission explain the political and cultural objective of ‘The European Qur’an’ project and how it forms part of the Union’s strategic priorities?

2.Who are the direct and indirect beneficiaries of the funding, and what criteria were used to select them?

3.How does this funding align with the principle of religious neutrality enshrined in the EU’s founding treaties?

Submitted: 23.4.2025
Last updated: 29 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Briefing – Transforming animal farming through artificial intelligence – 29-04-2025

Source: European Parliament

By 2033, global meat protein consumption is projected to increase by 3 %, which is expected to result in higher greenhouse gas emissions. Artificial intelligence (AI) and the internet of things have the potential to revolutionise the livestock sector by enabling farmers to increase productivity while reducing environmental impact. AI-powered systems support real-time monitoring of animal health, behaviour and welfare, allowing for the early detection of disease and stress and enabling personalised care. Precision livestock farming uses sensors, cameras and machine learning algorithms to collect and analyse data, thereby facilitating data-driven decision-making and optimised production methods. This approach can increase productivity while reducing emissions and improving animal welfare. The integration of AI in farm management has resulted in innovative solutions that contribute to a more sustainable and efficient farming and food system. In terms of animal health, AI can predict disease outbreaks, identify potential host reservoirs and detect emerging disease threats, enabling prompt intervention and treatment. Animal welfare can also benefit from AI on farms, thanks to the early recognition of discomfort, stress or pain. However, it is essential to acknowledge the potential risks associated with AI, such as cyberattacks, accidental failures and unintentional environmental consequences. Additionally, AI decisions may prioritise efficiency, productivity and cost savings over ethical considerations, potentially leading to negative repercussions for animal welfare.

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Artificial electromagnetic pollution – E-001588/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001588/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Sergio Berlato (ECR)

In 2001, a study by the European Parliament’s Science and Technology Options Assessment (STOA) team, on health damage caused by electrosmog, recommended that scientists, governments, industry and the general public have access to decision-making processes and that an effective public information system be established with a view to preventing public mistrust and fear of new EMC technologies. A number of years later, on 31 May 2011, the World Health Organization reported in a press release that the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) had ‘[classified] radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B)’.

In recent years, the exponential growth in artificial electromagnetic sources, such as the use of electric public and private transport, the spread of 5G and Wi-Fi in every home and public area, has effectively increased and generated new ‘electromagnetic pollution’.

In the light of the above:

1.Does the Commission believe that it can harmonise EU legislation in the Member States using both its own parameters and up-to-date data, and with a focus on the cellular consequences for living beings to electromagnetic exposure?

2.Is the Commission considering assessing and informing the public of the impact of electromagnetic pollution on all ecosystems?

3.Lastly, does it believe that climate change and the green transition can be delivered by carrying out the requisite identification of parameters responsible for ‘biological damage’ and the severity thereof?

Submitted: 22.4.2025
Last updated: 30 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Further price increases and the unacceptable state of maritime transport, paid for in every way by the people – E-001604/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001604/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Kostas Papadakis (NI), Lefteris Nikolaou-Alavanos (NI)

With the constant ferry ticket price hikes brought on by shipowners, travel to the islands has become a luxury and a premium commodity. The costs of using new fuels in the context of the EU’s Fit for 55 regulation are passed on by shipowners to passengers. Promising to keep prices down, the Greek Government is slashing port fees by 50 % as of 1 May 2025, constituting yet another gift for shipping groups.

In light of the above, can the Commission answer the following:

1.What view does it take of the fact that, as a result of the ‘green’ strategy and the promotion of the Fit for 55 regulation, the already incredibly expensive fares for passengers, vehicles and goods are constantly subjected to further increases – such as those applicable from 1 May 2025 – while shipowners increase their profits?

2.What view does it take of the fact that the strategy to liberalise maritime transport, as reflected in Commission communication COM(2014)232, leads to higher profits for shipowners through ‘guaranteed profits’ and numerous tax exemptions, while working people and passengers are exposed to the risks of travelling on very old boats and, especially in winter, islands are left without maritime transport for days on end?

3.What view does it take of the calls to immediately reduce the prices of tickets and fares for passengers, vehicles and goods by 50 %, without granting new subsidies and privileges to shipowners, and to guarantee free travel for the unemployed, students, those in the military and people with special needs or chronic conditions, as well as reduced rates for pensioners, large families and substitute teachers, doing away with the unacceptable system whereby schoolchildren above the age of 10 normally have to buy a ticket?

Submitted: 22.4.2025
Last updated: 30 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Acquisition of X by Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence start-up xAI – E-001615/2025
Source: European Parliament

Question for written answer E-001615/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Sandro Ruotolo (S&D), Estelle Ceulemans (S&D), Nathalie Loiseau (Renew), Marco Tarquinio (S&D), Alessandro Zan (S&D), Cristina Guarda (Verts/ALE), Anthony Smith (The Left), Benedetta Scuderi (Verts/ALE), Alessandra Moretti (S&D), Sandra Gómez López (S&D), Kim Van Sparrentak (Verts/ALE), Camilla Laureti (S&D), Matteo Ricci (S&D), Stefano Bonaccini (S&D), Dario Nardella (S&D), Raffaele Topo (S&D), Giuseppe Lupo (S&D), Antonio Decaro (S&D), Csaba Molnár (S&D), Klára Dobrev (S&D), Annalisa Corrado (S&D), Dario Tamburrano (The Left), Elio Di Rupo (S&D), Ignazio Roberto Marino (Verts/ALE), Giorgio Gori (S&D), Cecilia Strada (S&D), Lucia Annunziata (S&D), Pina Picierno (S&D), Krzysztof Śmiszek (S&D), Pierfrancesco Maran (S&D), Elisabeth Grossmann (S&D), Alex Agius Saliba (S&D), Brando Benifei (S&D), Cynthia Ní Mhurchú (Renew), David Cormand (Verts/ALE), Alexandra Geese (Verts/ALE), Hannes Heide (S&D), Daniel Freund (Verts/ALE), Emma Rafowicz (S&D), Chloé Ridel (S&D), Veronika Cifrová Ostrihoňová (Renew), Lucia Yar (Renew), Ana Miranda Paz (Verts/ALE)

Elon Musk has announced that his artificial intelligence start-up, xAI, has acquired X through a deal that valued Twitter’s successor at USD 45 billion, and xAI itself at USD 80 billion.

This acquisition will enable xAI to leverage the vast amounts of data from X, generated by its 600 million users, to train its AI models.

Musk’s concentration of power, as an advisor to the US Government on bureaucratic efficiency and owner of Tesla, SpaceX, Starlink and Neuralink, is concerning from both a socio-economic and a legal perspective.

The deal appears to give little consideration to antitrust regulations, personal data protection or financial transparency.

Moreover, X, which does not adhere to the EU Code of Practice on Disinformation, is a platform inundated with fake news and propaganda, driven by its algorithms. For this reason, the deal raises concerns about potential risks of information manipulation, especially since xAI will be trained using data from the platform.

We therefore ask the Commission:
- 1.Will it launch an investigation under EU antitrust law?
- 2.Does it consider this massive data acquisition to be in compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation?
- 3.How will it protect European consumers from AI models trained on fake news?
Submitted: 23.4.2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Written question – Autostrada Ferroviaria Alpina – E-001616/2025
Source: European Parliament
Question for written answer E-001616/2025
to the Commission
Rule 144
Massimiliano Salini (PPE)

The project to build the Autostrada Ferroviaria Alpina (AFA) between Orbassano and Aiton was launched in 2001 through bilateral agreements between France and Italy to find safer alternative transport solutions through the Fréjus Alpine tunnel.

The AFA accommodates a high level of traffic on the Fréjus tunnel rail line and is the main rail service for freight transport (500 000 semi-trailers for 1.667 million tonnes/kilometre of freight).

The landslide in Saint André on 27 August 2023 led to the closure of the link and the suspension of the service, causing considerable economic damage to transport operators and production companies in north-west of Italy due to the lack of alternatives.

The AFA has announced that it will permanently cease operations as of 21 April 2025.

On 9 April 2025, the Italian and French governments declared that they were considering the reactivation of a joint contribution measure to reduce the cost of the service, and brought the idea to the European Commission.

In the light of the above:

1.Does the Commission consider the reopening of the AFA strategic to ensure a combined transport service between Italy and France?

2.What is the state of play of the negotiations between the Commission and the governments?

3.What initiatives does it intend to promote to protect the employment of specialised workers, the heritage of the local entrepreneurial fabric?

Submitted: 23.4.2025
Last updated: 30 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Conditions for workers in the automotive industry – E-002785/2024(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
The automotive industry is a core engine of European prosperity. The sector accounts for EUR 1 trillion in gross domestic product, a third of private research and development investment in the EU and it provides direct and indirect employment to 13 million Europeans.

However, the European automotive sector is at a critical turning point, challenged by rapid technological changes and increasing competition.

Against this background, the President of the Commission in January 2025 launched a Strategic Dialogue on the Future of the European Automotive Industry[1], a collaborative and inclusive process designed to tackle the sector’s most pressing challenges. On 5 March 2025, the Commission put forward an Action Plan[2], which builds on the Strategic Dialogue.

The action plan sets out concrete measures to help secure global competitiveness of the European automotive industry and maintain a strong European production base.

It also includes measures to ensure better support for workers affected by the transition of the sector. In particular, the Commission has proposed to extend the scope of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to also support workers threatened by imminent job displacement.

Additionally, the Commission is working with social partners and Member States to increase European Social Fund Plus funding for the automotive sector, supporting workers who want to reskill and look for new job opportunities.

The Commission is using the mid-term review to incentivise Member States to reprogramme more funding to these ends. Moreover, the Commission will work with social partners to prepare a Quality Jobs Roadmap to be published towards the end of 2025.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_378

[2] https://transport.ec.europa.eu/document/download/89b3143e-09b6-4ae6-a826-932b90ed0816_en?filename=Communication%20-%20Action%20Plan.pdf
Last updated: 30 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Screen addiction of minors and the disruption to their mental and emotional development – E-001006/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament

The protection of minors online is a Commission priority. The Digital Services Act (DSA)[1] sets out an unprecedented standard for providers of online platforms’ accountability regarding this protection.

Measures that manage the amount of screen time for minor users and the type of content they are exposed to may be a potential mitigation measure to ensure the DSA’s high level of privacy, safety and security requirements for online platform providers accessible to minors.

The Commission is committed to swift DSA enforcement and has initiated proceedings against TikTok[2], Instagram, and Facebook[3] based on suspicions that they may have breached the DSA in areas related to the harmful effects on minors of their systems.

With Digital Service Coordinators[4], the Commission continues to monitor the situation across all online platforms. Moreover, the Commission is working on protection of minor guidelines to assist online platform providers DSA compliance[5].

The protection of young consumers will also be a Digital Fairness Act priority[6] addressing matters such as influencer marketing, addictive design, personalisation or dark patterns.

The European Strategy for a better Internet for kids (BIK+)[7] promotes responsible use of technology by supporting children, their carers and teachers through Safer Internet Centres and the BIK platform[8]. Building on the BIK+ Strategy, the Commission is developing an action plan against cyberbullying.

The Commission prioritises addressing social medias’ mental health impact and screen time on young people and will launch an EU-wide enquiry to allow an informed debate[9].

Under the Digital Education Action Plan, the Commission published Guidelines[10] to help educators tackle disinformation and digital literacy. A new version will be rolled out this year to address artificial intelligence, social media, influencers and pre-bunking.
- [1] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM:4625430
- [2] In 2024, following the opening of an investigation by the Commission, the provider of TikTok committed to permanently withdraw the TikTok Lite Rewards programme in the EU due to the potentially addictive feature of the app. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/tiktok-commits-permanently-withdraw-tiktok-lite-rewards-programme-eu-comply-digital-services-act
- [3] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/list-designated-vlops-and-vloses
- [4] Digital Services Coordinators are responsible for enforcing Article 28 (1) in the Member States.
- [5] This non-exhaustive list of recommendations is aimed to be adopted by the Commission after a public consultation in 2025.
- [6] Th e Commission plans to propose in 2026.
- [7] COM/2022/212 final.
- [8] https://www.betterInternetforkids.eu
- [9] https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/b628b5a2-ac1e-4b9c-bbdd-35b82da0ac6b_en?filename=mission-letter-varhelyi.pdf
- [10] Guidelines published in 2022: https://education.ec.europa.eu/focus-topics/digital-education/action-plan/action-7
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Answer to a written question – Public procurement that takes security of supply into account – E-000360/2025(ASW)
Source: European Parliament
The Commission promotes the uptake of sustainability considerations in public procurement, including those related to the environmental and social impact of the services and products purchased by public buyers, in line with current EU public procurement rules.

It does so through guidance, capacity building initiatives[1], supporting Member State Joint Actions[2] and the EU green public procurement criteria, including specific criteria for the food and catering sector[3].

The Commission is also preparing criteria that could help contracting authorities to introduce, on a voluntary basis, sustainability aspects in the food and catering services that they are buying.

The Political Guidelines 2024-2029[4] announced a revision of the 2014 EU public procurement Directives[5]. At the moment the Commission is carrying out an evaluation of these Directives[6] to assess whether EU public procurement rules work as intended. Once the evaluation is completed the Commission will consider concrete measures and options to shape the new proposal.

It will notably seek to further support ‘best value’ purchases, to reward quality and sustainability as set forward in Vision for Agriculture and Food[7].

[1] https://public-buyers-community.ec.europa.eu/communities

[2] https://bestremap.eu/procurement/; https://preventncd.eu/work-packages/wp-05/public-food-procurement-in-public-settings-in-the-eu/

[3] https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/f8e9fe10-ff7d-11e9-8c1f-01aa75ed71a1/language-en

[4] https://commission.europa.eu/about/commission-2024-2029_en

[5] https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/23/oj/eng; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/24/oj/eng; https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/25/oj/eng

[6] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14427-Public-procurement-directives-evaluation_en

[7] https://agriculture.ec.europa.eu/vision-agriculture-food_en
Last updated: 30 April 2025
MIL OSI Europe News –
May 1, 2025
MIL-OSI Europe: Highlights – European Court of Auditors (ECA) Special Report 08/2025 on “VAT fraud on imports” – Committee on Budgetary Control

Source: European Parliament

European Court of Auditors © Image used under the license from Adobe Stock

On 14 May from 15:00 to 16:15, together with the CONT committee, the FISC Subcommittee will invite Mr François-Roger Cazala, Member responsible of the European Court of Auditors (ECA) to present its the Special report 08/2025 on “Value Added Tax fraud on imports – The EU’s financial interests are insufficiently protected under simplified import customs procedures”.

Value Added Tax (VAT) fraud negatively affects the collection of revenues in Member States as well as in the EU. According to the Commission, Member States lost around €89 billion in 2022. Fraud committed by traders on VAT levied on imports contributes to this loss and is one of the main types of cross-border VAT fraud affecting the fiscal policies and public finances of the EU. “The EU’s financial interests and single market are not protected firmly enough against Value Added Tax (VAT) fraud on imports when simplified import customs procedures are used”, according to ECA. There are serious weaknesses in the checks carried out by Member States and shortcomings in the cooperation at EU level and across Member States to combat the abuse of these procedures. The presentation will provide an opportunity for ECA to present its report and discuss its findings with CONT and FISC Members.

MIL OSI Europe News –

May 1, 2025

Category: Transport

DRAFT EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT LEGISLATIVE RESOLUTION