Given that the MFF negotiations are not yet completed the impact that can be measured at this stage is to what an extent the CoR opinion is reflected in the resolution of the EP adopted on 16 January 2019. The EP resolution and the opinion of the CoR present matching views on a number of issues, such as broadening the scope of the fund and assessing its impact on local and regional levels. Furthermore, both the EP and the CoR underline the importance of environmental, technological and social transitions and therefore propose changing the fund's name by replacing the word globalisation by transitional.
More specifically, the EP proposes to lower the thresholds for redundant worker from 250 to 200 and to extend the reference time from four or six months to nine (AMs 39-41). The opinion of the CoR suggests lowering the thresholds even further, to 150 redundant workers, and to extent the reference time to nine months (AM 4), just like the EP. Furthermore, the EP suggest (AM 93) that the foreseen evaluation of the EGF financial contributions should include subsequent impact assessment of its application at national, regional and local levels. The execution of local and regional impact assessment in relation to trade related issues have long been a demand of the CoR. Finally, the EP proposes that the fund should be renamed the European Fund for Transition (EFT) (AM 1) whereas the CoR opts for European Transitions' Support Fund (ETSF) (AM 1).