Financial means in BSR INTERREG III B & IIIA The basics all stakeholders should know about the financial management in BSR INTERREG III B and IIIA Belarus.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Baltic Sea Region INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme
Advertisements

Neighbourhood programme
> Contents 1 10/12/2007, Lead applicant seminar, Katowice, Poland EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND Preparing an INTERREG IVC application: Financial and.
INTERREG III B, PHARE CBC and TACIS CBC Programme -Combination of EU instruments for transnational co- operation in the BSR CEEC\NIS participation in BSR.
Legal Basis for Management and Control Systems in INTERREG III programmes BSR INTERREG III B Joint Secretariat Matthias Heinicke Seminar on Financial Management.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden First level controls - Certification of Expenditure INTERREG IIIC.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Transnationality and locally implemented pilot actions in the BSR.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden QUICK & EASY Money for the Reports - How funds and information flow.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden INTERREG III B General Introduction BSR INTERREG III B Joint Secretariat.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Financial Report BSR INTERREG III B Joint Secretariat Rostislav Zatloukal.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Progress report – structure and contents BSR INTERREG III B Joint.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Eligibility of expenditure - Relevant rules and regulations BSR INTERREG.
INTERREG III C Interreg IIIC Cohesion Forum Brussels, May 2001
THE EUROPEAN GENERAL PRODUCT SAFETY NETWORK Erik Hansson DG Health and Consumer Protection European Commission.
Slide: 1 Website: DG ECHO HUMANITARIAN AID AND CIVIL PROTECTION Finance, Legal Affairs and Partner.
Bodil Persson EuropeAid The ENPI CBC programmes and their content.
Planning and use of funding instruments
Seminar on European Territorial Co-operation – Brussels - 21 February 2005 Cross border co- operation at the EU external borders Seminar on Territorial.
1 Unit C3 Finance, legal Affairs and Partner support CALL FOR PROPOSALS APPLICATION PROCEDURE SPECIFIC ADMINISTRATIVE AND FINANCIAL ISSUES Version
EUROPEAN COMMISSION Objective 3 Territorial Co-operation Workshop 1: Cross-border co-operation DG Regional Policy Brussels, 21 February 2005.
1. 2 EIB COFINANCING OF STRUCTURAL FUNDS The role of the EIB.
EU-Regional Policy and Cohesion Structural Funds and Accession 1 ANNUAL MEETING OF ISPA PARTNERS 2003 FROM ISPA TO COHESION AND STRUCTURAL FUNDS BRUSSELS,
EFINORD Integration of Nordic Forest Research in EFI Niels Elers Koch IUFRO Vice President, Director General, Professor Katrine Hahn Kristensen Scientific.
EuropeAid European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument Cross Border Co-operation within the Baltic Sea Region Programme Hamburg, May 2007 Martin.
This project is funded by the EUAnd implemented by a consortium led by MWH RCBI ‘handover’ meeting Estonia-Latvia-Russia ENPI CBC Programme Riga, 20 March.
EUROPEAN NEIGHBOURHOOD AND PARTNERSHIP INSTRUMENT - ENPI CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION PROGRAMMES.
Eligibility of expenditure Relevant rules and regulations Workshop on Financial Management and auditing Rostock, 3 February 2005 Rostislav Zatloukal.
Implementation of Leader Axis measures by Jean-Michel Courades AGRI-F3.
A Community Initiative on Transnational co-operation on spatial planning and regional development Mattias ALISCH Joint Secretariat Belarus Denmark Estonia.
GMV – Centre for Environment and Sustainability How we receive money to the project - How funds and information flow in INTERREG.
Part-financed by the European Union The new Baltic Sea Region Programme Susanne Scherrer, Director of the Joint Secretariat Rostock/Riga.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden 4. Implementation of the BSR INTERREG IIIB Neighbourhood Programme.
Part-financed by the European Union The Baltic Sea Region Programme by the Joint Technical Secretariat BSR INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden BSR INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme Partner Search Forum Introduction.
1 9 November 2007 – Torino Silke Brocks Project Officer INTERREG IIIC/IVC JTS Lille, France European Interregional Cooperation as part of the Cohesion.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden A Community Initiative concerning Transnational co-operation on spatial.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden Major drawbacks in the submitted project proposals Wiktor Szydarowski.
W w w. b a l t i c m a s t e r. o r g. BUDGET  Project Period  25th of October 2008 – 24th of January 2012  Budget and Funding  Total project budget,
Partnership Kirsti Mijnhijmer, Joint Secretariat How to Apply Seminar 4th February 2015, Copenhagen, Denmark.
Part-financed by the European Union Baltic Sea Region 2007– Profile Joint Technical Secretariat Lead Applicant Seminar, Riga, 9-11 April 2008.
Financial reporting Linda Wormö, MA Per Dahlström, MA 1st October,2015 Kuopio, Finland.
Part-financed by the European Union Partnership Joint Technical Secretariat Lead Applicant Seminar for 1st application round Hamburg, April 2008.
Part-financed by the European Union Setting regions in motion by Giedrė Švedienė, Undersecretary Joint Programming Committee/Ministry of the Interior,
STATE OF PLAY : ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION. 2 Overall 2012 ESF Budget Execution on 20/11/2012 Programmin g period 2012 Payment appropriation s mil.€ 2012.
MONITORING SYSTEM OF EU STRUCTURAL FUNDS: PHYSICAL INDICATORS International Conference for New Member States February 1-2, 2012, Vilnius (Lithuania) European.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden The Baltic Sea Region INTERREG III B Programme After EU Enlargement.
Application procedure From theory to practice Dieter H. Henzler, Steinbeis-Transfercenter Cultural Resources Management, Berlin.
UBC Environment and Sustainable Development Secretariat,/Sakari Saarinen / Project Coordinator / NEW BRIDGES Kick-off 4-5 March 2009 New Bridges – Strengthening.
Part-financed by the European Union The Baltic Sea Region Programme by the Joint Technical Secretariat BSR INTERREG III B Neighbourhood Programme.
THE ROLE OF THE MANAGING AUTHORITY IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL AND COHESION FUNDS AND ITS OPERATION ANDREJ ENGELMAN.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden BSR INTERREG III B project budget and major financial shortcomings.
Interreg IIIB Trans-national cooperation: Budget comparison : 440 million EURO 420 m EURO (Interreg IIC prog.) + 20 m EURO (Pilot Actions)
INTERREG III B CADSES Neighbourhood Programme The new neighbourhood dimension 4th call for proposals.
PRESENTATION OF EUROPEAN TERRITORIAL COOPERATION OBJECTIVE PROGRAMMES FOR – POTENTIAL FOR COOPERATION Gediminas ČESONIS Deputy Director of Regional.
Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden BALTIC SEA TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION: RU PERSPECTIVE Irina Karelina.
Interreg IIIB Tacis Phare
Regional Framework operations in INTERREG III C
ESPON post 2013 Programme Kristīne Rasiņa
PROJECT MANUAL Galina Georgieva Project Officer
INTERREG VB Danube Transnational Programme
TRANSNATIONAL COOPERATION:
Partnership Rachel Burn, Joint Secretariat
ESF ASSISTANCE TO LITHUANIA’S OBJECTIVE 1 AND EQUAL PROGRAMS
Partnership Michela Gaifami, Joint Secretariat
Enterprise and Industry Directorate General
ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION ESF Technical Working Group Meeting June 2018
Interreg IIIC Cohesion Forum
ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION ESF Technical Working Group Meeting June 2018
ESF FINANCIAL EXECUTION ESF Technical Working Group Meeting June 2018
Presentation transcript:

Financial means in BSR INTERREG III B & IIIA The basics all stakeholders should know about the financial management in BSR INTERREG III B and IIIA Belarus Denmark Estonia Finland Germany Latvia Lithuania Norway Poland Russia Sweden

Questions 1.Where does the programme get its money from? 2.What is the role of the Secretariats? 3.What is the TA Budget and what is it for? 4.How much will the new Member States contribute to it? 5.What is a ERDF co-financing rate? 6.What is a grant rate?

The way of the money/ the Secretariats role (Project funds) INTERREG IIIA COM+Nor MS+Nor (national, regional or local level) Projects request payments from COM financial monitoring payments to beneficiaries Joint Secretariat (Management of funds) Paying Authority (Transfer of funds) ERDF/Nor funds National co-financing ERDF/Nor funds

The way of the money/ the Secretariats role (TA funds) INTERREG IIIA COM+Nor MS+Nor (national, regional or local level) Projects Joint Secretariat Paying Authority (Transfer of funds) ERDF/Nor funds National co-financing Providing imlementation services

Principle to consider -funds of all MS will be subject to actual payment requests (activity of projects), therefore: ERDF funds allocated eventual ERDF outpayments (to individual states)(to projects in that country)

Technical Assistance (TA) Nature of TA: Technical Assistance (TA) is one part of the total programme budget. It consists of ERDF funds and a national contribution, just like the budget for the projects. Application of funds: Technical Assistance (TA) is used to finance costs for the implementation of the programme. It refers to costs concerning administration, information, and acquisition of equipment, development and operation of computerised systems, monitoring, evaluation and control. Programme Complement, 2003

Contributions of new Member States to BSR IR III B & A priorities (preliminary figures) No additional funds from DK, GER, SWE, FIN, NOR: original contribution unchanged

Underlying considerations applied with budget preparation - IR IIIA TA budget under IR III B umbrella but: separate compilation for each individual budget -Management of Prio. 1-3 (III B incl. enlargem.) -Management of Priority 4 -Management of Prio. 5-6 (IIIA) - total TA budget (just as budgets for projects) depends on national co-financing rate (large varations possible) - different current TA-rates considered (III B=5.4%, Prio.4=5.0%, IIIA=5.0%)

Calculation of TA ERDF Projects TA 5 % National co- financing 50 % Assumptions: - TA share = 5% of total ERDF budget (e.g. IIIA) - TA: common ERDF co-financing rate (50%) 95 %

ERDF co-financing rate = share (in %) of ERDF funds in the total public budget paid out to a project (project level) ERDF National public participation min. 25 % up to 75 % Total public eligible costs of a project Partners from non-objective 1 areas: entitled to receive up to 50% ERDF Partners from objective 1 areas: entitled to receive up tp 75% ERDF ->actual share of ERDF funds set by SC See also: interreg3/foire/faq3_en.htm#5

Grant rate = share (in %) of ERDF funds in the total public budget paid out to projects over all projects cumulated (programme level) (also called: average ERDF co-financing rate) ERDF National public participation min. 25 % up to 75 % (extreme case) Total public budget of the programme COM will make payment of ERDF funds only up to max. grant rate level approved in programme documents! (currently: 53.2%) decommittment if actual rate is higher!)

Grant rate set for payment requests made by JS to COM currently:53.2% (each payment to COM request must not have a higher grant rate!) goal: set high enough in new CIP to cover all possible peaks in upcoming payment requests reasons:1. already now peaks of up to 67.6% 2. many objective 1 area partners expected proposal: increase rate to 70% execution: retro-actively (to approved/paid funds) to claim funds already decommitted (as stated in an earlier COM-comment)

Example calculations 1. Sample programme situation (Programme consists of only 2 projects): - 2 projects from non-objective 1 area apply for ERDF funds ERDF co-financing 50% National co-financing 50% ( ) = Grant rate =50% ERDF co-financing 50% National co-financing 50% Overall share of ERDF funds (=grant rate) Total programme budget Project budget (by fin. Source) Project Budget Project Budget

Example calculations ERDF co-financing 75% National co-financing 25% ( ) = 0.75 Grant rate =75% ERDF co-financing 75% National co-financing 25% Overall share of ERDF funds (=grant rate) Total programme budget Project budget (by fin. Source) 2. Sample programme situation (Programme consists of only 2 projects): - 2 projects from objective 1 area apply for ERDF funds Project Budget Project Budget

Example calculations 3. Sample programme situation (Programme consists of only 2 projects): - 1 project from non-objective 1 area - 1 project from objective 1 area ERDF co-financing 50% National co-financing 50% Project Budget Overall share of ERDF funds (=grant rate) ( ) = Grant rate =62,5% Project Budget ERDF co-financing 75% National co-financing 25% Total programme budget Project budget (by fin. Source)