C_202504418EN.000101.fmx.xml

Opinion of the European Committee of the Regions

Market Rules and Support Measures in the Wine Sector

(C/2025/4418)

Rapporteur-general

Roberto CIAMBETTI (IT/ECR), Regional Councillor, Regional Council of Veneto

Reference document

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, (EU) 2021/2115 and (EU) No 251/2014 as regards certain market rules and sectoral support measures in the wine sector and for aromatised wine products

COM(2025) 137 final

I. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AMENDMENTS

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15 a (new)

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

(15 a)

Member States are authorised to choose in their strategic plans green harvesting interventions in the wine sector. Given the situation faced by the wine sector and the structural crisis in certain regions and Member States, it is appropriate to also provide for the possibility to Member States to include the grubbing up and distillation as voluntary crisis measures. This option will offer a common framework and avoid a distortion of competition and ensure a level playing field.

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 15 b (new)

Text proposed by the European Commission	Amendment
	The wine sector relies heavily on workers employed for short periods. In line with the social conditionality provisions introduced in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) 2023-2027, the Member States should be encouraged to monitor compliance with safety standards and proper, inclusive working conditions, including in economic terms, in both viticulture and processing;

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 22

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

To adapt to market trends and harness efficient market opportunities, the maximum duration of the support for promotion and communication operations carried out in third countries in relation to the consolidation of market outlets should be extended from three to five years while also offering the option to extend those operations for another five-year period for the purposes of consolidating market outlets. When considering promotion and communication operations targeting third countries, it is relevant to distinguish among the different markets within the same country.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 24

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

To further support producers in respect of climate change mitigation and adaptation, it is pertinent to provide for the possibility for Member States to increase the maximum Union financial assistance for investments and for restructuring and conversion of vineyards pursuing that objective to up to 80 % of the eligible investment costs. Support shall also prioritise agroecological practices and diversification strategies that build long-term resilience, such as, for example, soil carbon sequestration, mixed cropping, water reuse, and drought-resistant varieties, particularly in Mediterranean and outermost regions.

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 (1)

Article 62, Paragraph 3, Subparagraph 2a new

Text proposed by the European Commission	CoR amendment
	In cases of force majeure and exceptional circumstances established in Article 3.1 of Regulation (EU) 2021/2116, the validity of the authorisations referred to in paragraph 1, granted in accordance with Article 64, could be extended up to twelve months after its initial expiration date.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 (2)

Article 63, Paragraph 2,subparagraph 3 new

Text proposed by the European Commission	CoR amendment
	Member States may set criteria for the allocation and management of planting authorisations, to avoid increasing vineyard areas in regions and market segments prone to over-supply, and to further prioritise wines with market opportunities, in coherence with their national sectorial strategies and the crisis measures authorised for those areas.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1(2)

Article 63, Paragraph 2, subparagraph c

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

c)	limit the issuing of authorisations for new plantings at regional level, for specific areas where national or Union measures concerning distillation of wine, green harvesting or grubbing up have been implemented in justified cases of crisis.

limit the issuing of authorisations for new plantings at regional level, for specific areas where national or Union measures concerning distillation of wine, green harvesting or grubbing up have been implemented in justified cases of crisis. In order to avoid undue application of green harvesting, clear, easily applicable and verifiable criteria must be established for determining when grape bunches are considered ripe.

For the purposes of point (c), ‘green harvesting’ means the total destruction or removal of grape bunches while still in their immature stage, thereby reducing the yield of the relevant area to zero, and excluding non-harvesting comprising of leaving commercial grapes on the plants at the end of the normal production cycle. Member States that limit the issuing of authorisations for new plantings at regional level in accordance with the first subparagraph, points (b) or (c), may require such authorisations to be used in those regions.;

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 (3) Article 66, paragraph 3, second subparagraph

Text proposed by the European Commission

Amendment

‘A Member State may also subject the granting of the replanting authorisations referred to in paragraph 1 to one or more of the following conditions:

(a)	the authorisation shall be used in the same geographical area where the corresponding grubbed up vines were located, where maintaining viticulture in that geographical area is justified by socio-economic or environmental reasons,

(a)	the authorisation shall be used in the same geographical area where the corresponding grubbed up vines were located, where maintaining viticulture in that geographical area is justified by socio-economic or environmental reasons,

(b)

only varieties and production methods that do not increase the average yield compared to the grubbed up vines or only traditional varieties and production methods of a given region shall be used where the corresponding grubbed up area was located in a production region that the Member State has qualified as affected by a structural market imbalance, or

(b)	the authorisation shall not be used in a production region that is different from the one where the grubbed up area is located where the Member State has qualified that different production region as affected by a structural market imbalance.’

(c)	the authorisation shall not be used in a production region that is different from the one where the grubbed up area is located where the Member State has qualified that different production region as affected by a structural market imbalance.’

Reason

We cannot endorse the proposal to include enabling Member States to limit authorisations to specific varieties among the conditions for issuing replanting authorisations; we feel that this is too [sic].

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 (5)

Article 119 – paragraph 1

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

1. Labelling and presentation of the products referred to in points 1 to 11, 13, 15 and 16 of Part II of Annex VII marketed in the Union or for export shall contain the following compulsory particulars:

(a)

the designation for the category of the grapevine product in accordance with Annex VII, Part II. For grapevine product categories defined under Annex VII, Part II, point (1) and points (4) to (9), where a de-alcoholisation treatment in accordance with Annex VIII, Part I, section E, has been applied to the totality or to part of the product, the designation of the category shall be accompanied by:

(a)

(i)	the term ‘alcohol-free’ if the actual alcoholic strength of the product does not exceed 0,5 % by volume; accompanied by the expression ‘0,0 %’, if the actual alcoholic strength of the product does not exceed 0,05 % by volume;

(i)	the terms ‘de-alcoholised’, ‘without alcohol’ or ‘alcohol-free’ if the actual alcoholic strength of the product does not exceed 0,5 % by volume; alternatively, it may be accompanied by the expression ‘0,0 %’, if the actual alcoholic strength of the product does not exceed 0,05 % by volume;

(ii)	the term ‘alcohol-light’ if the actual alcoholic strength of the product is above 0,5 % by volume and is at least 30 % below the minimum actual alcoholic strength of the category before de-alcoholisation

(ii)	the term ‘partially de-alcoholised’ if the actual alcoholic strength of the product is above 0,5 % by volume and is at least 30 % below the minimum actual alcoholic strength of the category before de-alcoholisation

Reason

‘Reduced alcohol’ is an imprecise term, unless it is paired with ‘partially de-alcoholised’. The reference to ‘at least 30 % below’ is needed as a legal reference framework because, otherwise, a minimum reduction of half a degree would already be considered de-alcoholised.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 (7)

Article 167 – paragraph 1 -first subparagraph

Text proposed by the European Commission

Amendment

‘1. In order to improve and stabilise the operation of the common market in wines, including the grapes, musts and wines from which they derive, producer Member States may lay down marketing rules to regulate supply, including the setting of maximum yields and setting rules for the management of stocks. Member States shall take into account proposals adopted by producer organisations recognised under Articles 152 and 154 or interbranch organisations recognised under Articles 157 and 158 when such organisations are considered to be representative for the wine sector, in accordance with Article 164(3), in the economic area or areas where the rules are intended to be applied.’.

‘1. In order to improve and stabilise the operation of the common market in wines, including the grapes, musts and wines from which they derive, producer Member States may lay down marketing rules to regulate supply, including the setting of maximum yields and setting rules for the management of stocks. Member States shall take into account proposals adopted by producer groups recognised under Article 33 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 or interbranch organisations recognised under Articles 157 and 158 when such organisations are considered to be representative for the wine sector, in accordance with Article 164(3), in the economic area or areas where the rules are intended to be applied.’.

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 (8)

Article 216, paragraph 1, subparagraph 3

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

The payments referred to in the first subparagraph shall not exceed the costs of the product, where relevant, and of the operation concerned, plus an incentive to engage in such operation, to allow for the crisis to be addressed. Beneficiaries of funds allocated to the crisis measures referred to in this paragraph shall not be eligible to receive support for the same green harvesting, distillation, or grubbing-up measures pursuant to Article 58(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 implemented in the same hectares.

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1(9)

Annex VII, Part II, Subparagraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the European Commission

CoR amendment

Grapevine products of the categories set out in points (4) and (7) may also be obtained, respectively , by second fermentation of, or by addition of carbon dioxide to, de-alcoholised or partially de-alcoholised wines referred to in point (1).

Grapevine products of the categories set out in:

i)	points (4), (5) and (8) may be obtained by second fermentation of de-alcoholised or partially de-alcoholised wines referred to in point (1)

ii)	points (7) and (9) may be obtained by the addition of carbon dioxide to, de-alcoholised or partially de-alcoholised wines referred to in point (1).

iii)	recommends further assessing the environmental impact of the double de-alcoholisation processes which has higher energy and resource demands.

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 (1)

Annex VII, Part II, Subparagraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the European Commission

Amendment

Article 58(1) is amended as follows:

(a)	point (i) is replaced by the following:

(a)	point (i) is replaced by the following:

‘(i)

actions undertaken by interbranch organisations recognised by Member States in the wine sector in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 or by producer groups managing protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1143* aiming at enhancing the reputation of Union vineyards by promoting wine tourism in production regions;

‘i)

actions undertaken by interbranch organisations recognised by Member States in the wine sector in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 or by producer groups managing protected designations of origin and protected indications of origin in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2024/1143* or by individual agricultural holdings aimed at enhancing the reputation of Union vineyards by promoting wine tourism in the production regions;

(b)

the following second subparagraph is inserted after the first subparagraph: ‘For the purposes of the first subparagraph, point (a), Member States may lay down in their CAP Strategic Plans specific agronomic, viticultural or any other kind of conditions which ensure that there is no increase in yield for the vineyard subject to this type of interventions after the varietal conversion, the relocation of the vineyard, the replanting of the vineyard or the improvement of the vineyard management techniques.’

(b)	a new point is added to paragraph 1: ‘(n) voluntary grubbing-up of vineyards’;

(c)

the second subparagraph becomes the third subparagraph and is replaced by the following: ‘The first subparagraph, point (k), shall apply only to wines with a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication or wines with an indication of the wine grape variety. Promotion and communication operations aimed at the consolidation of market outlets shall be limited to a maximum non-extendable duration of five years and shall concern only the Union quality schemes covering designations of origin and geographical indications.’;

(c)

the following second subparagraph is inserted after the first subparagraph: ‘For the purposes of point (a) of the first subparagraph, Member States may establish in their CAP strategic plans specific agronomic and viticultural conditions or any other kind of conditions ensuring that there is no increase in yield for the vineyard subject to this type of intervention after varietal conversion or the relocation of the vineyard . This verification can be carried out already in the context of the assessment of the admissibility of the intervention’;

(d)

the second paragraph becomes the third paragraph and is replaced by the following: ‘The first subparagraph, point (k), shall apply only to wines with a protected designation of origin or a protected geographical indication or wines with an indication of the wine grape variety. Promotion and communication operations aimed at the consolidation of market outlets shall be limited to a maximum non-extendable duration of five years and shall concern only the Union quality schemes covering designations of origin and geographical indications.’;

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 3 (2)

Annex VII, Part II, Subparagraph 2 (new)

Text proposed by the European Commission

Amendment

(2)	Article 59 is amended as follows:

(2)	Article 59 is amended as follows:

(a)	paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

(a)	paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

‘2. The Union financial assistance for investments referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (b), shall not exceed:

(a)	50 % of eligible investment costs in less developed regions;

(a)	50 % of eligible investment costs in less developed regions;

(b)	40 % of eligible investments costs in regions other than less developed regions;

(b)	40 % of eligible investments costs in regions other than less developed regions;

(c)	75 % of eligible investment costs in the outermost regions;

(c)	75 % of eligible investment costs in the outermost regions;

(d)

65 % of eligible investment costs in the smaller Aegean islands. The Union financial assistance at the maximum rate set out in the first subparagraph shall only be granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC and to producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 . However, it may be granted to all enterprises in the outermost regions and in the smaller Aegean islands. For enterprises, other than producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, which are not covered by Article 2(1) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, with fewer than 750 employees or with an annual turnover of less than EUR 200 million, the maximum levels of Union financial assistance set out in the first subparagraph shall be halved. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, the Union financial assistance for investments referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (b), may be increased to up to 80 % of eligible investment costs for investments linked to the objective of contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in Article 57, point (b). No Union financial assistance shall be granted to enterprises in difficulty within the meaning of the Commission Communication ‘Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty.

(d)

65 % of eligible investment costs in the smaller Aegean islands. The Union financial assistance at the maximum rate set out in the first subparagraph shall only be granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC and to cooperatives and other forms of association . However, it may be granted to all enterprises in the outermost regions and in the smaller Aegean islands. For enterprises, other than producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, which are not covered by Article 2(1) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, with fewer than 750 employees or with an annual turnover of less than EUR 200 million, the maximum levels of Union financial assistance set out in the first subparagraph shall be halved. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, the Union financial assistance for investments referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (b), may be increased to up to 80 % of eligible investment costs for investments linked to the objective of contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in Article 57, point (b). No Union financial assistance shall be granted to enterprises in difficulty within the meaning of the Commission Communication ‘Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty.

(b)	in paragraph 4, the following subparagraph is added:

(b)	in paragraph 4, the following subparagraph is added:

‘However, the Union financial assistance for investments referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (m), may be increased to up to 80 % of eligible investment costs for investments linked to the objective of contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in Article 57, point (b).’;

(c)	paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:

(c)	paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:

‘6. The Union financial assistance for innovation referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (e), shall not exceed:

(a)	50 % of eligible investment costs in less developed regions;

(a)	50 % of eligible investment costs in less developed regions;

(b)	40 % of eligible investment costs in regions other than less developed regions;

(b)	40 % of eligible investment costs in regions other than less developed regions;

(c)	80 % of eligible investment costs in the outermost regions;

(c)	80 % of eligible investment costs in the outermost regions;

(d)

65 % of eligible investment costs in the smaller Aegean islands. The Union financial assistance at the maximum rate set out in the first subparagraph shall only be granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC and to producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. However, it may be granted to all enterprises in the outermost regions and in the smaller Aegean islands. For enterprises, other than producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, which are not covered by Article 2(1) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, with fewer than 750 employees or with an annual turnover of less than EUR 200 million, the maximum levels of Union financial assistance set out in the first subparagraph shall be halved. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, the Union financial assistance for investments referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (e), may be increased to up to 80 % of eligible investment costs for investments linked to the objective of contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in Article 57, point (b). No Union financial assistance shall be granted to enterprises in difficulty within the meaning of the Commission Communication “Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty”.’

(d)

65 % of eligible investment costs in the smaller Aegean islands. The Union financial assistance at the maximum rate set out in the first subparagraph shall only be granted to micro, small and medium-sized enterprises within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC and to producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. However, it may be granted to all enterprises in the outermost regions and in the smaller Aegean islands. For enterprises, other than producer organisations recognised under Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013, which are not covered by Article 2(1) of the Annex to Recommendation 2003/361/EC, with fewer than 750 employees or with an annual turnover of less than EUR 200 million, the maximum levels of Union financial assistance set out in the first subparagraph shall be halved. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph, the Union financial assistance for investments referred to in Article 58(1), first subparagraph, point (e), may be increased to up to 80 % of eligible investment costs for investments linked to the objective of contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation set out in Article 57, point (b). No Union financial assistance shall be granted to enterprises in difficulty within the meaning of the Commission Communication “Guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring non-financial undertakings in difficulty”.’

Reason

All producer organisations should receive the same treatment, i.e. all types of producer associations, including cooperatives, agricultural processing companies and any other similar bodies, not just recognised producer organisations, to encourage producers to participate in the value chain.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 4

Text proposed by the European Commission	CoR amendment
Grapevine products which have been labelled in accordance with Article 119(1), point (a), second sentence, of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 prior to [specific date – 18 months from the date of entry into force] may continue to be placed on the market until stocks are exhausted.	Grapevine products which have been labelled in accordance with Article 119(1), point (a), second sentence, of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 and aromatised wine products which have been labelled in accordance with Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 251/2014 prior to [specific date – 18 months from the date of entry into force] may continue to be placed on the market until stocks are exhausted.
	Labels lawfully printed before the entry into force of this Regulation may continue to be used for the marketing of grapevine products and aromatized wine products until stocks are exhausted.

II. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS (CoR)

Background

notes that the European wine sector is one of the economic, industrial and cultural pillars of the European Union as a whole;

points out that production in the European Union was estimated at 138,3 million hectolitres in 2024 (-3,5 % compared to 2023);

notes that wine is an economic driver, a tourist attraction, an expression of cultural and geographical heritage, a marker of identity and a social factor in many regions of Europe; it remains a central pillar of the rural economy and identity;

points out the need for the European wine sector to remain competitive and resilient and to continue to be a vital economic force in the coming decades;

emphasises the ways in which the impact of climate change has been significant: water stress, adverse weather conditions, epidemics of fungal diseases and low flowering have led to a decline in wine production; underlines the fact that the wine sector, like all agricultural sectors, plays an important role in addressing climate change and promoting biodiversity, both with the introduction of ecological viticulture and through cultivation practices with a low environmental impact, soil conservation and contributing to increased landscape diversity, thus avoiding further environmental deterioration and helping to prevent worsening impacts from the climate change process;

therefore, the current and future CAP and other sectoral policies must include the changes needed to recognise the uniqueness and high strategic value of dry-farmed vineyards in various regions of the EU, from eastern Spain, to Italy, to other Mediterranean and southern European regions, in terms of both their economic function and their contribution to biodiversity, the fight against desertification and landscape conservation. Measures must be established, including a specific direct aid scheme tailored to the conditions of dry-farmed vineyards, including additional subsidies for farms in arid and semi-arid areas, incentives to conserve native varieties and traditional cultivation systems, tax credits and support for digitalising and modernising farms. Furthermore, support must be provided for wine tourism and for promoting local products and gastronomy linked to vineyards through intervention in the wine sector. It should be ensured that any future revision of the CAP takes into account the impact on the economy, employment and culture in rural areas with dry-farmed vineyards;

notes that ongoing demographic changes, changing consumption patterns and market uncertainties have played a significant role in the existence and resilience of the sector;

notes that the current situation, with problems such as the imposition of tariffs and their evolution in the short and medium term, creates uncertainty as to whether these issues, if considered ‘extraordinary circumstances’ in the current 2025 and the upcoming 2026 campaigns, could undermine continuity and stability in the sector within strategic markets;

notes the request by some Member States to support the wine sector through dedicated state aid schemes approved by the European Commission in response to Transatlantic trade tensions and underlines that a coordinated European approach – via tailored instruments at EU level – would offer a more effective and equitable solution, ensuring that all regions can access support on a level playing field, preventing market distortions within the single market;

10.

points out that the High Level Group on EU Wine Policy has highlighted issues, pinpointed needs and proposed solutions that were included in the Commission’s proposed regulatory amendment, setting out a combined series of targeted, joint, swift and cross-cutting actions. These have contributed to shaping the future of the wine sector, making it competitive across the Union and strengthening its identity as an expression of the cultural, identity-based, geographical, environmental and economic traditions of individual EU countries;

Policy recommendations

11.

welcomes the recommendations of the High Level Group on Wine Policy adopted on 17 December 2024 and contained in the Proposal for a Regulation amending Regulations (EU) No 1308/2013, (EU) 2021/2015 and (EU) No 251/2014;

12.

notes that these proposals for changes to the rules in this area take on board many of the requests made in the recommendations from the High-Level Group on Wine Policy as an initial response to the problems in the sector. In this regard, the Committee recommends that the Commission continue its work by also providing a response to the recommendations that have not yet been taken on board or that have been only partially taken up;

13.

welcomes the measures introduced in relation to the prevention of surpluses, such as grubbing-up and green harvesting, which help stabilise the market and protect producers from financial pressure;

14.

points out however that green harvesting cannot resolve the structural imbalances. If this measure is to be used effectively, it must be simplified and made more flexible. It must also be possible to reallocate resources available under wine sector programmes between the various types of interventions during the current year or to carry over unused resources to the following year;

15.

points out that measures must be designed and implemented in close dialogue with the regions and bodies concerned at local level, applying greater flexibility, simplifying their use, promoting the spread of resistant varieties and precision farming techniques and enabling resources to be reallocated in wine sector programmes;

16.

stresses how important it is that green harvesting continue to come under interventions in the wine sector to ensure that it has the funds it needs to be implemented effectively. The option of complementary national funding will help meet the sector’s adaptation needs, but it must be ensured that the two sources of financing – the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and national funds – are compatible and comply with the constraints of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013. The CoR therefore calls for an amendment to Article 59(3) of Regulation (EU) 2021/2115 to ensure that both sources of funding can be used, thus without adding further restrictions through Article 216 of the CMO Regulation. This should equally apply when it comes to the grubbing-up measure;

17.

encourages the Commission to consider amending Regulation (EU) 2021/2116 to remove the rule that EAGF funds for interventions in the wine sector have to be allocated annually, as their annual nature makes it difficult to manage and use funds, especially in the case of ‘non-structural’ measures such as green harvesting;

18.

welcomes the Commission’s proposals on the management of authorisations, particularly the extension of the validity of replanting authorisations, as it considers that this change has a positive impact on both agriculture and the environment;

19.

urges the Member States to use place-based indicators to monitor the effectiveness of the crisis measures funded by 20 % of CMO resources; also calls for the continuation of differentiated aid for investment and innovation, with additional funding for micro enterprises, less developed regions and climate action;

20.

considers that the priority criteria for issuing authorisations referred to in Article 64(2) of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 need to be reviewed: they should also take account of certification for environmental sustainability, organic production and integrated production systems;

21.

welcomes the removal of penalties for failure to use authorisations granted through the conversion of replanting rights, reflecting the slowdown in investment in the wine sector;

22.

stresses that funding procedures should be increasingly simplified from an administrative point of view and welcomes the possibility of allocating authorisations to specific designations or areas, subject to mandatory consultation of protection associations;

23.

supports the introduction of harmonisation of labels, simplifying trade between Member States, reducing costs and providing consumers with more transparent access to information; therefore supports the introduction of a harmonised QR code for mandatory information, integrated with national registers and the Digital Wine Passport. The new labelling rules should be introduced in a proportionate manner, and in some cases postponed in light of the multiple ongoing crises;

24.

welcomes the possibility of placing innovative products on the market, with a specific designation for the sale of low-alcohol wine products through clear labelling rules and common interoperable digital solutions (blockchain, IoT) for certification, traceability and anti-counterfeiting, as well as information on the environmental sustainability of processing;

25.

stresses the need to launch a process exploring communication and initiatives aimed at publicising and highlighting the value of non-alcoholic/low-alcohol products, as these products are highly energy-intensive and have high sugar content, with negative health effects: education campaigns for responsible wine consumption coordinated with European public health objectives are essential;

26.

supports the initiatives aimed at boosting wine tourism, which helps to stimulate economic development in rural and inland areas. Wine tourism should remain an environmentally friendly activity: it is a ‘slow’ and sustainable form of tourism, which is high-quality, locally anchored and of benefit to local communities;

27.

regrets that the measures proposed by the European Commission are not accompanied by a specific budget. The adoption of legislative amendments requires a budget for implementing them and meeting the needs of the wine sector;

28.

stresses that many gender inequalities have also been overcome in the wine sector, through gender equality in employment, representation and the management of holdings, and in producer and processing groups, as well as in terms of promoting regions and wine tourism;

29.

flags up the importance of supporting producer groups that manage wines with a geographical indication, thereby building sustainable wine tourism, direct sales and short circuits into the support measures in line with the EU tourism 2030 strategy;

30.

welcomes the increase in aid ceilings (up to 80 %) for investments and innovation related to climate mitigation/adaptation, emphasising the priority for the outermost regions and smaller islands;

31.

welcomes the increase in aid ceilings (up to 80 %) for investments and innovation related to climate mitigation/adaptation, emphasising the priority for the outermost regions and smaller islands;

32.

recommends strengthening synergies between the CAP and cohesion policies to finance green and blue infrastructure with the aim of supporting the water resilience of vineyards; stresses that this must also involve the proper use of water resources, by taking action to prevent leaks and mitigate the consequences of extreme events, and to monitor the quality and safety of water as well as natural and artificial storage and recovery systems;

33.

recalls the need for EU-backed financing to also address social resilience through integrated rural development approaches that involve wine workers, women, and young farmers, and promote access to housing, transport and digital connectivity in wine-producing regions;

34.

points out the need to explore options for using the unspent sector-based budget to finance other crisis anticipation and management measures, as requested in the recommendations of the High-Level Group on Wine Policy. In this regard, one option may be to amend Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 to allow a certain percentage of the budgetary limits for the support programmes referred to (set out in Annex VI) to be set aside to be used to fund aid in crises subject to prior authorisation by the Commission.

Brussels, 2 July 2025.

The President

of the European Committee of the Regions

Kata TÜTTŐ