Guide to Financial Issues relating to FP7 Indirect Actions - KoWi

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Calculation of the EU contribution The European EU will provide financial support to the project which covers only part of the total costs. The SME participants will therefore have to contribute with own resources, in cash or in kind, to the project. The EU contribution is based on upper funding limits for individual activities: Research and technological development activities: a maximum of 50 % of the eligible costs. However, for SMEs, non-profit public bodies, secondary and higher education establishments, and research organisations: a maximum of 75 %. Demonstration activities: a maximum of 50% Management and other activities: a maximum of 100% One important rule for the calculation of the EU contribution applies: In order to achieve the aim of promoting the outsourcing of research and demonstration activities, the financial support to the project will be limited to 110% of the total amount of the subcontracting to the RTD performers (price to be invoiced by RTD performers to SMEs). Partners & costs RTD [50%/75%] DEMO [50%] MANAG [100%] OTHER [100%] TOTAL Maximum EU contribution SME 1 260.000 10.000 60.000 10.000 340.000 270.000 Own activities 45.000 10.000 Subcontracting 215.000 SME 2 395.000 25.000 5.000 5.000 430.000 318.750 Own activities 55.000 20.000 Subcontracting 340.000 5.000 SME 3 125.000 0 5.000 10.000 140.000 108.750 Own activities 20.000 Subcontracting 105.000 RTD 1 5.000 0 5.000 5.000 RTD 2 5.000 30.000 35.000 35.000 OTH 1 10.000 40.000 0 0 50.000 25.000 TOTAL 790.000 75.000 80.000 55.000 1.000.000 762.500 TOTAL amount of subcontracting, excl. VAT 665.000 Maximum EU contribution = 110% of subcontracting to RTD performers excl. VAT 731.500 Requested EC contribution is the minimum of the two: 731.500 Therefore, this fictional project would receive a financial support of up to € 731.500. Distribution of the EU contribution In a next step the partners in the consortium have to decide how to allocate the total EC contribution among them. It is important to distinguish between the distribution of costs between partners and the allocation of the EU contribution among partners. It is up to the consortium to decide upon the allocation of the EU contribution. This allows the consortium to find the right balance between the individual contributions to the project (costs for in-kind and financial resources) and the expected benefits from the project results. 110
For our project example we show two possible scenarios – but bear in mind that each consortium should find a tailor-made solution according to its individual situation It is important to bear in mind that the SMEs always have to take into account the payment of the invoices of the RTD performers. Each participant also has to make sure that it carries out the transaction and remuneration in accordance with the applicable national law. Scenario 1: RTD performers receive a contribution to cover their management and other costs, SME 2 and 3 receive a contribution which allows them to cover the RTD performers' invoices and the remaining EU contribution goes to SME 1. Participants OTH 1 does not receive any EU contribution. Partners & costs Total costs EU contribution for each participant Own contribution (in kind) Own contribution (in cash) SME 1 340.000 241.500 98.500 0 Subcontracting 215.000 SME 2 430.000 345.000 85.000 0 Subcontracting 345.000 SME 3 140.000 105.000 35.000 0 Subcontracting 105.000 RTD 1 5.000 5.000 0 0 RTD 2 35.000 35.000 0 0 OTH 1 50.000 0 50.000 0 TOTAL 1.000.000 731.500 Scenario 2: All partners receive an EU contribution according to their share of costs in the project with the exception of participants OTH 1, which does not receive any EU contribution. Partners & costs Total costs EU contribution for each participant Own contribution (in kind) Own contribution (in cash) SME 1 340.000 261.800 78.200 0 Subcontracting 215.000 SME 2 430.000 331.100 98.900 13.900 Subcontracting 345.000 SME 3 140.000 107.800 32.200 0 Subcontracting 105.000 RTD 1 5.000 3.850 1.150 0 RTD 2 35.000 26.950 8.050 0 OTH 1 50.000 0 50.000 0 TOTAL 1.000.000 731.500 Audit of RTD performers RTD performers can be audited by the Commission as they are beneficiaries in the GA. However, the scope of this audit varies: • In case of a financial audit, the RTD performer would have to produce evidence for the costs it claims directly to the EU (like any other beneficiary), i.e. for the activities "Management" and "Other" in the project, costs for which it submits its own form "C". • However, for the part concerned by the "transaction", the subcontracting costs are paid on the basis of an invoice, not on the basis of the costs incurred by the RTD performer, therefore, even if those costs are audited, for information/statistical purposes, the price paid to the RTD performer via the invoice shall not be adjusted or reduced, even if, as it is usually the case, the price is higher than the costs incurred by the RTD performer. It is at the moment of the negotiation of the Grant Agreement and the fixing of the price 111
Page 1 and 2:
Guide to Financial Issues relating
Page 3 and 4:
In addition, all FP7 beneficiaries
Page 5 and 6:
Article II.6.1.b) - Interim payment
Page 7 and 8:
PART 1: FP7 EC GRANT AGREEMENT - CO
Page 9 and 10:
this SME flat rate under the cost c
Page 11 and 12:
Contribution to the Guarantee Fund
Page 13 and 14:
considered as the project coordinat
Page 15 and 16:
Article II.4.4 of ECGA - Certificat
Page 17 and 18:
1 EUR 350,000 EUR 175,000 EUR 175,0
Page 19 and 20:
Specific case of beneficiaries with
Page 21 and 22:
3. Submission of the certificate on
Page 23 and 24:
e consistent with the beneficiary's
Page 25 and 26:
eligible costs not yet certified th
Page 27 and 28:
Example 2 Project duration: 3 years
Page 29 and 30:
Subcontracting costs are direct cos
Page 31 and 32:
• the criteria defining "quality"
Page 33 and 34:
complementary way. This means using
Page 35 and 36:
Where actual costs are not availabl
Page 37 and 38:
Acceptability criteria for average
Page 39 and 40:
Criterion d: Productive time As a g
Page 41 and 42:
• When the average personnel cost
Page 43 and 44:
For years 2007-2008-2009 these annu
Page 45 and 46:
The formula applied is the same as
Page 47 and 48:
A. THIRD PARTIES MAKING THEIR RESOU
Page 49 and 50:
this case it is the university whic
Page 51 and 52:
parties making available resources
Page 53 and 54:
above for Joint Research Units. The
Page 55 and 56:
Non-exhaustive list of taxes and pe
Page 57 and 58:
administrative, absence, EU-project
Page 59 and 60: Some activities may be considered n
Page 61 and 62: applicable national labour law, the
Page 63 and 64: The following criteria must be appl
Page 65 and 66: • each successive 12-hour period:
Page 67 and 68: equipment purchase. If the service
Page 69 and 70: Indirect costs, also called overhea
Page 71 and 72: • The system applied and the cost
Page 73 and 74: Such costs are normally deemed to b
Page 75 and 76: principle be able to opt for the 60
Page 77 and 78: certificate of financial statements
Page 79 and 80: Article II.16 of ECGA - Upper fundi
Page 81 and 82: Changes of legal status of benefici
Page 83 and 84: * Remark: Actual commercial exploit
Page 85 and 86: They may cover the salary costs of
Page 87 and 88: fee to a conference carried out by
Page 89 and 90: eneficiaries may opt for a lump sum
Page 91 and 92: Example of calculation of EU fundin
Page 93 and 94: Example: 3-year project with 3 mill
Page 95 and 96: Maximum EU/Euratom financial contri
Page 97 and 98: • The beneficiary has to reimburs
Page 99 and 100: The Communication permits the use o
Page 101 and 102: Article II.24 of ECGA - Liquidated
Page 103 and 104: FINAL PROVISIONS Article II.40 of E
Page 105 and 106: 2 nd period: the access provider de
Page 107 and 108: The EU/Euratom financial contributi
Page 109: Step 2: The budget for the RTD Perf
show all

Guide to Financial Issues relating to FP7 Indirect Actions - KoWi

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?