Tag Archives: RE

Report on the system of own resources

Leave a reply

Report on the system of own resources

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Report on the system of own resources

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Budget

Report on the system of own resources

Document or Iniciative

Commission report of 14 July 2004, “The financing of the European Union – Report on the operation of the own resources system” [COM(2004) 505 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Summary

In response to the call in the current own resources decision of 2000 for a general review of the own resources system before 1 January 2006, the Commission committed itself to presenting a report before the end of January 2004. This follow-up document sets out the two key issues, namely the need to reform the existing mechanism for correcting negative budgetary imbalances and the insufficient transparency of the system for citizens, combined with limited financial autonomy for the EU in relation to national treasuries.

The current own resources system

At present, the system is divided into three main categories of own resources:

  • traditional own resources (TOR), mainly customs duties;
  • the VAT-based resource, which is levied on the statistical, “notional” and harmonised bases of Member States;
  • the GNI-based resource, which is the residual resource used to balance the budget of each Member States and currently constitutes the system’s main resource.

The total amount of all own resources may not exceed 1.24% of the European Union’s GNI.

Before proposing its reforms, the Commission assesses the current own resources system. It considers that, although the system satisfies the sufficiency and stability criteria, it fails the visibility and simplicity test and does not contribute to more efficient allocation of economic resources. Moreover, financial autonomy is becoming more and more limited.

The correction of budgetary imbalances

Following the observation that some countries contributed more to the Community budget than they received, the Fontainebleau European Council in 1984 introduced a correction mechanism in favour of the United Kingdom, which is reimbursed to the extent of some two thirds of its net contributions.

Over time, enlargement and changes in the structure of the budget have modified the unique position of the United Kingdom and so the existing mechanism should be transformed into a generalised correction mechanism. For the Commission, this reflects the twin goals of:

  • preventing excessive negative budgetary deficits and reducing the differences between net contributors;
  • ensuring that the financing costs of the mechanism are kept at a reasonable level.

At present, the net British position has improved significantly. If the current mechanism remains in force, the correction will increase by more than 50% after enlargement, accentuating the existing differences between net contributors. Further consequences of enlargement are the deterioration of the net balances of all the old Member States and the increased cost of the correction mechanism.

The generalised correction mechanism proposed by the Commission involves:

  • setting a threshold level, expressed as a percentage of gross national income (GNI), above which a Member State would be entitled to reimbursement of part of its contribution;
  • capping the total volume of corrections;
  • simplifying the financing of the corrections, with all Member States participating in proportion to their GNI.

By comparison with the current system, the proposed mechanism would reduce the differences between net contributors and lighten the financing burden of those Member States that do not benefit from it.

The modification of own resources

Before proposing the reform of the own resources system, the Commission reviewed three possible alternatives for the financing of the EU budget, while safeguarding traditional own resources. The alternatives are:

  • maintaining the present financing system unchanged. The Commission rejects this option because, in its present form, the system lacks a direct link to citizens, who tend to judge EU policies and initiatives exclusively in terms of their national allocation;
  • adopting a purely GNI-based financing system: The EU would depend entirely on contributions from Member States. This would be simple and easy to understand but does not reflect the status of the EU, which is more than an international organisation. It would imply an idea of the Union in which citizens would be only indirectly represented by their Member State, something which is unacceptable to the Commission;
  • adopting a financing system based on fiscal own resources: This system could increase the financial autonomy of the EU and introduce a direct link to citizens. The participation of citizens and economic operators in the EU budget would go hand in hand with a reduction in the level of contributions by Member States and ensure higher visibility and increased political accountability for expenditure decisions. However, a fully tax-based system does not appear appropriate to the Commission because of the threat to balanced budgets. Therefore, the retention of a limited GNI resource together with an increase in the share of taxed-based resources seems preferable.

The Commission proposes the introduction of a new taxed-based own resource accounting for up to half of the budget. This resource requires sufficient prior harmonisation of the tax base. The increase of tax-based own resources does not call for any new taxes because the EU share could be levied as part of the national rate paid by taxpayers. The Commission proposes three options, which all maintain the current GNI-based resource and traditional own resources but replace the statistical VAT-based resource with a new fiscal resource. The three options are:

  • fiscal resources related to energy consumption: Under the new directive on energy taxation, most energy products are subject to Community taxation. However, the Commission proposes limiting the Community levy to the tax base related to motor fuel used for road transport, which is already harmonised at a Community level. It could be supplemented with a levy on aviation fuel or the related emissions. This option could be implemented within a short period of time (around 3 to 6 years);
  • a fiscal VAT resource: In place of the present statistical VAT resource, the EU rate would be levied as part of the national VAT rate paid by taxpayers, together with the national rate on the same taxable base. Citizens would not have to bear an additional tax burden as the EU rate would be offset by an equivalent decrease in the national VAT rate. The main stumbling block to this measure is the incomplete harmonisation of Member States’ VAT systems. Technically, the introduction of this option would be possible within a period of up to 6 years;
  • a resource based on corporate income. This option would require a prior definition of a common consolidated tax base, thereby boosting cross-border economic activity, which is hampered by 25 national tax systems and a myriad of laws. This option would imply setting a minimum tax rate for the harmonised tax base and would be the longest to implement.

Conclusions

The Commission invites the Council to examine the proposed options in order to achieve a genuinely tax-based own resource by 2014. It recommends the introduction of a generalised correction mechanism to correct excessive budgetary imbalances as a short-term solution.

Related Acts

Report from the Commission to the European Parliament AND to the Council Sixth Report from the Commission on the operation of the inspection arrangements for traditional own resources (2006-2009) (Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000) [COM(2010) 219 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Report from the Commission – Fifth Report from the Commission on the operation of the inspection arrangements for traditional own resources (2003-2005) (Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000) [COM(2006) 874 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Report from the Commission – Fourth Report from the Commission on the operation of the inspection arrangements for traditional own resources (2000 2002) (Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000) [COM(2003) 345 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Report from the Commission – Third Report from the Commission on the operation of the inspection arrangements for traditional own resources (1997-1999) – (Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/00 of 22 May 2000) [COM(2001) 32 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Report from the Commission – Second report from the Commission on the operation of the inspection arrangements for traditional own resources (for the period 1993-96) – (Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/00 of 22 May 2000) [COM(97) 673 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION on the functioning of the inspection arrangements for traditional own resources (Article 18(5) of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) N° 1552/89) [COM(93) 691 final – Not published in the Official Journal].

Reform of the common agricultural policy

Leave a reply

Reform of the common agricultural policy

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Reform of the common agricultural policy

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Agriculture > General framework

Reform of the common agricultural policy (CAP)

Since its inception, the common agricultural policy has had to adapt a great deal in order to meet the challenges with which it has been faced over the years: in the early days it concentrated on attaining the goals set out in Article 39 of the Treaty, securing a fair standard of living for the agricultural community and ensuring security of supply at affordable prices, and then it had to control quantitative imbalances. Finally it embarked on a new approach based on a combination of lowering institutional prices and making compensatory payments. The aim of the new CAP reform is to deepen and widen the 1992 reform by replacing price support measures with direct aid payments and accompanying this process by a consistent rural policy.

The new challenges

New internal and external challenges have now arisen:

  • strong growth is predicted on the world agricultural market with prices offering a good rate of return. The current level of CAP prices is too high for the EU to meet international undertakings and to be able to take advantage of the expansion of world markets, with the risk that surpluses will appear again and create intolerable budget costs, and market share may be lost within the Community and on the world level;
  • agricultural support is distributed somewhat unequally between regions and producers, resulting in poor countryside planning: a decline in agriculture in some regions and overly intensive farming practices in others, generating pollution, animal diseases and poorer food safety;
  • making the CAP more acceptable to the average citizen, to the consumer, is a key task;
  • the strength of the agricultural sector in the Union rests on its diversity: its natural resources, its farming methods, its competitiveness and income levels, and also its traditions. With successive enlargements, the management of the CAP has become far too complex and bureaucratic, and sometimes even almost impossible to understand. A new, more decentralised model has, therefore, to be developed which grants the Member States greater freedom without any risk of distorting competition or renationalising the CAP but with shared, clear ground rules and rigorous controls;
  • the Union has to prepare its agricultural sector for international negotiations and define the limits of what it finds acceptable;
  • enlargement makes market management and simplification measures even more necessary as the economies in the applicant countries are still heavily dependent on agriculture.

The responses

The agreement reached at the European Council in Berlin responds to the key Agenda 2000 proposals, giving concrete shape to a European model for agriculture in the years ahead.

The Berlin European Council reaffirmed that the content of the reform will secure a multifunctional, sustainable and competitive agriculture throughout Europe, including in regions facing particular difficulties. It will also be able to maintain the landscape and the countryside, make a key contribution to the vitality of rural communities and respond to consumer concerns and demands regarding food quality and safety, environmental protection and maintaining animal welfare standards.

The Commission’s proposals adopted by the European Council were based on the 1992 reforms which successfully reduced surpluses and controlled expenditure without compromising an average 4.5 % rise in income. This general trend has been confirmed by the European Council in the following guidelines.

  • Continued competitiveness should be ensured by sufficiently large price cuts that will guarantee growth of home-market outlets and increased participation by Community agriculture in the world market. These price reductions are offset by an increase in direct aid payments in order to safeguard the income level.
  • There is to be a new division of functions between the Commission and the Member States, whether concerning compensation in the form of direct payments or rural development measures incorporated into an overall programming framework.
  • This new decentralisation is logically accompanied by a major effort at simplifying the rules, such as the new rural development Regulation, which does away with a large number of regulations, or the market-management regulations, in particular the one on arable crops. Legislation is now clearer, more transparent and easier to access, with red tape for farmers cut to the strict minimum.
  • Rural development becomes the second pillar of the CAP. For the first time, the foundations have been laid for a comprehensive and consistent rural development policy whose task will be to supplement market management by ensuring that agricultural expenditure is devoted more than in the past to spatial development and nature conservancy, the establishment of young farmers, etc. The Member States will be able to vary, i.e. downwards, the direct aids awarded to holdings in line with criteria to be defined by each Member State relating to the amount of labour employed on a farm. Money released in this way is to be allocated by the Member State to agri-environmental schemes.

Beef and veal

The effects of the 1996 crisis on beef and veal consumption should ease. If there is no change in market policy, production should soon creep back up to its maximum potential after 2001, while consumption is set to decline in the long term. Over-production cannot be solved by slaughtering young calves, nor by imposing quotas limiting the number of animals or production levels.

The new Regulation cuts effective market support. It should be possible to stabilise market prices with the aid of protective measures at the Community’s external frontiers and measures relating to exports, and by introducing a private storage scheme similar to that for pigmeat.

Farmers will undoubtedly suffer losses of income which they should be able to offset by adapting production methods and investments. In return, they will be granted direct income payments by head of cattle, which will be increased gradually.

A number of simplifications have been made in the beef and veal sector, such as the abolition of the marketing system and the processing premium for veal calves. The intervention scheme will apply only in severe crises. Finally, the new Regulation repeals a number of other Regulations.

Milk and milk products

The Regulation establishes a new common market organisation for dairy products. It remains based on intervention and public storage of butter and skimmed-milk powder as well as certain aid schemes and marketing measures. Intervention prices for butter and skimmed milk powder are to be cut from the marketing year 2005/06 to improve competitiveness on both internal and external markets. As for internal market aid measures, a number of Regulations have been repealed, resulting in a major simplification of the legislation in this sector.

The new system is to extend the quota scheme until 2007/08, in order to gradually reduce internal and external consumer prices. The total reference quantity has been increased and the additional quantity will be allocated to Greece, Italy, Spain, Ireland and Northern Ireland.

Tobacco, olive oil and wine

In December 1996 the Commission presented a report on the tobacco regime to the Council and the Parliament, giving a positive assessment of the 1992 reform and proposing extending it along the same guidelines. In February 1997, the Commission presented a report on the olive oil regime, in which it suggested replacing price support with direct aid payments and a radical simplification of these payments. The new regime takes account of the proposals in both of these reports.

For wine, a reform proposal had been pending at Council level since 1994. Developments in the sector have largely been influenced by the Uruguay Round agreement. The new Regulation follows the guidelines laid down in the 1995 “agricultural strategy document”. The new Regulation replaces 23 Council Regulations previously in force, thus clarifying the system immensely and facilitating more direct access to the legislation.

The ban on planting vines has been maintained and will be operated flexibly to allow development of wine production where there is growing demand. The grubbing measures have also been maintained, although targeted more specifically at regions with serious and persistent structural surpluses. Intervention will be eliminated, while a “crisis distillation” mechanism will be introduced to deal with exceptional cases of market disturbance.

Lastly, the Regulation officially recognises the potential role of producer groups and inter-branch organisations, and it provides for major adjustments to the designation and presentation of wine sector products to ensure that consumers are better informed.

Arable crops

The intervention price for arable crops has been cut. The Regulation provides for an increase in direct payments for cereals and silage maize in two steps, from EUR 54 to EUR 63 per tonne. Payments for oilseeds and non-textile linseed are to be progressively reduced in three stages to the same level as cereals. Protein crops will receive a direct payment of EUR 72.5 per tonne, thus ensuring their profitability in relation to other arable crops. The special scheme for durum wheat is to be continued.

Compulsory set-aside has been retained, and voluntary set-aside is still allowed: it has, however, been made more effective and should have a more positive impact on the environment. The level of compensation for set-aside, both compulsory and voluntary, will be the same as for cereals.

Although the essential elements of the existing regime (in particular the base areas, the regionalisation scheme, the link to historic yields and the set-aside provisions) have been retained, major simplifications have been achieved.

Rural policy

The accompanying measures previously financed by the Guarantee Section of the European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund (EAGGF) have been complemented by aid for less-favoured areas and areas whose development is lagging behind. All these measures have been applied horizontally and implemented in a decentralised manner. For rural areas eligible under Objective 1 of the Structural Funds the current system will be maintained. In rural areas eligible under the new Objective 2 (former Objectives 5(a) and 5(b)), measures are financed under the EAGGF Guarantee Section. Objective 2 is financed through the intermediary of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF) and the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG). Any measures in favour of rural areas that are not eligible under the Structural Funds are part-financed under the EAGGF Guarantee Section.

To improve integration of environmental objectives in the common market organisations, the new reform enables Member States to make direct aid payments conditional on compliance with environmental provisions.

More specifically, the measures aim to:

  • strengthen the agricultural and forestry sectors by trying to promote quality agricultural products. The reform includes measures concerning the establishment of young farmers and conditions for taking early retirement;
  • improve the competitiveness of rural areas with the aim above all of improving the quality of life of rural communities and creating new sources of income for farmers and their families;
  • preserve the environment and European rural heritage via agri-environmental measures such as organic farming. To help the further ‘greening’ of the CAP, the traditional compensatory allowances in support of farming in less-favoured areas will be extended to areas where farming is restricted by the existence of specific environmental constraints.

Member States must, however, ensure that farmers are able to demonstrate that they do not exercise activities solely for the purpose of obtaining the benefit of support payments.

The financial framework

The new financial framework must cover the development of the CAP and the effects of enlargement in a coherent fashion and within reasonable budget limits, for a sufficient length of time. At the same time, it must finance key needs and ensure sound management of public funds. A simplified and comprehensive agricultural policy can now make it clear that the expenditure it involves is justified by the services which society at large expects farmers to provide.

The Berlin European Council considered that this reform could be implemented within a financial framework of an average level of EUR 40.5 billion plus EUR 14 billion over the period for rural development as well as veterinary and plant health measures. The reform aims at stabilising agricultural expenditure over the period while staying more in keeping with actual levels of spending.

In the light of these decisions, the European Council considered that the amounts to be entered in heading 1 of the financial perspective should be those indicated below. The Inter-institutional Agreement will ensure that all parties abide by this agreement.

– Heading 1
(EUR million – 1999 prices)		 CAP expenditure
(excluding rural development and accompanying measures)		 Rural development and accompanying measures
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006		 40 920
42 800
43 900
43 770
42 760
41 930
41 660		 36 620
38 480
39 570
39 430
38 410
37 570
37 290		 4 300
4 320
4 330
4 340
4 350
4 360
4 370

The agricultural guideline will also remain unchanged. It will be re-examined on the basis of a report which the Commission will present to the Council before the next enlargement of the European Union in order to make any adjustment considered necessary. The amount set aside in the financial perspective for the agricultural pre-accession instrument (EUR 250 million – 1999 prices) falls within the ceiling established by the guideline.

The European Council acknowledged the scale of the efforts being made to curb the budget and exercise rigour in implementing the common agricultural policy decided within the framework of Agenda 2000, the reduction in support prices being largely compensated by expenditure on the rural development budget and other accompanying measures (direct income aids, early retirement, aid to young farmers, etc.).

Preparations must be made for the accession of the applicant countries in accordance with the conclusions of the Luxembourg European Council in compliance with the horizontal pre-accession framework provided by a general coordination Regulation. The applicant countries are facing major difficulties in adapting to a rather complex Community acquis and completing the institutional process of privatisation and transformation of agricultural structures.

Concentrating on priority needs for agriculture, which remains a major source of employment, pre-accession measures concern in particular support for improving the efficiency of holdings and producer groups, processing and distribution, promotion of quality products, veterinary and phytosanitary control, land re-parcelling, water resource management, vocational training, environment, and the maintenance of rural heritage, etc.

Responding to the challenge of enlargement means giving a fresh boost to the development and integration of the European economy as a whole.

The efforts made, notably in terms of reducing support prices, represent an essential contribution by the European Community to stabilise the world’s agricultural markets. The European Council considers that the decisions adopted regarding the reform of the CAP within the framework of Agenda 2000 will constitute key elements in defining the Commission’s negotiating mandate for the future multilateral trade negotiations at the WTO.

Regional strategy for Asia 2007-2013

Leave a reply

Regional strategy for Asia 2007-2013

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Regional strategy for Asia 2007-2013

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

External relations > Relations with third countries > Asia

Regional strategy for Asia 2007-2013

Document or Iniciative

European Commission – Regional Strategy Paper 2007-2013 for Asia .

Summary

The Regional Strategy Paper (RSP) defines the objectives and the priorities of the cooperation between the European Union (EU) and Asia for the period 2007-2013. Asia covers Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, India, Indonesia, North Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand and Vietnam.

Challenges faced by Asia

At political level, Asia, which is marked by the emergence of China and India, has multiple systems of governance. It faces a large number of challenges in the fields of security, nuclear proliferation, democratisation, respect for human rights, unemployment and health, fragile situations (Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal), large refugee and migratory flows, labour standards, natural disasters and protection of the environment.

In the past twenty years, Asia has experienced strong economic growth, attributable to increased openness and major economic reforms. It is now the EU’s largest trading partner, most of the countries are members of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), civil society is sophisticated and a dynamic business class is emerging. However, despite this progress, the rise in socio-economic indicators has led to income disparities, employment creation has declined in many countries, the benefits of growth are unequally distributed and the institutional weaknesses, natural disasters and weakness of the infrastructures continue to hamper development.

Social protection is poor in Asia; child labour, the situation of women and poverty remain major challenges to be faced, as too are maternal mortality, child malnutrition, the violation of human rights, social protection, the increase in communicable diseases, health threats, gender imbalance, discrimination, etc. Southern Asia has made progress towards achieving the millennium development goals (MDG), in contrast to East Asia, which is developing less rapidly.

Asia is geographically very diverse. However, the environment is suffering from demographic pressures, rapid economic growth, industrialisation, inadequate legislation and investments, and poorly enforced protection measures which lead to unsustainable use of natural resources. In addition, climate change is likely to compound the geological and climatic instability.

Priority areas of the regional strategy 2007-2013

The main priority of the strategy is to encourage cooperation and regional integration. To achieve this, the EU supports work and dialogue with the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM), the Asia-Europe Foundation (ASEF), the Trans-Eurasia Information Network (TEIN), the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the South Asian Free Trade Area (SAFTA) and the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN).

The second priority encourages cooperation based on policy and know-how in the fields of the environment, education and health. It aims to promote sustainable consumption and production and trade in environmental goods and services and to support Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT). It also places emphasis on the promotion of equal opportunities and the values of democracy, the rule of law, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. Finally, it supports the region in the control of avian flu and highly pathogenic and emerging diseases, and intends to introduce cross-border health cooperation.

The objective of the third priority is to support uprooted people in Asia by assisting them to return and settle in their country of origin or in a third country. This support establishes links between relief, reintegration and development aimed at filling the gap between emergency relief for refugees and longer-term relief. The activities are coordinated with ECHO, with due regard for operations established in the context of the country programmes. Local partnerships and development capacities will gradually be built up.

Certain cross-cutting issues (human rights, democracy, governance, etc.) will be addressed at regional level and streamlined throughout the programme, as appropriate.

Terms and conditions

For 2007-2013, the budget for Asia amounts to EUR 5.187 billion, of which 81 % is allocated to country development assistance, 16 % to regional assistance and 3 % as a reserve. The present RSP consists of a regional multiannual indicative programme (MIP), which is the programming document for the assistance, based on actions designed to achieve the priorities identified in the RSP. The first MIP has been drawn up for the period 2007-2010 (EUR 400 million); a second MIP will be drawn up for the period 2011-2013 (EUR 375 million). The RSP is complementary to country strategy papers drawn up for each country of Asia and the RSP for Central Asia . The financing instrument for development cooperation (DCI) is the main framework for financing the assistance granted under the present RSP.

The activities receiving support are the following: programmes, contacts, meetings, promotion activities, dialogue, exchange of best practices, expert meetings, regional and triangular cooperation, seminars, conferences, workshops, research, twinning, gatherings, studies, training, study trips, university exchange programmes and harmonisation of standards and legislation. Other activities will also be defined at the identification stage.

Success indicators are defined to measure the impact of the activities carried out. They spell out the objective sought by the intervention, the result and the advantages expected for the target groups, the direct effects and the activities to be carried out to achieve the expected goals. The results of these activities will be measured qualitatively and quantitatively, not only by the indicators but also by the verification criteria and other implementation mechanisms. The implementation of all the programmes will be supervised and monitored. A mid-term review of the entire programme is scheduled (2009).

Background

The cooperation between the two regions is based on the “Europe and Asia” Communication and the European Consensus on Development, which set the eradication of poverty as a prime objective. The present RSP in this way ensures continuity of the priorities, results and experience, based on the previous RSP 2005-2006 .


 

Recovery of petrol vapours during storage

Leave a reply

Recovery of petrol vapours during storage

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Recovery of petrol vapours during storage

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Environment > Air pollution

Recovery of petrol vapours during storage

Document or Iniciative

European Parliament and Council Directive 94/63/EC of 20 December 1994 on the control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions resulting from the storage of petrol and its distribution from terminals to service stations [See amending acts].

Summary

This Directive covers to the operations, installations, vehicles and vessels used for storage, loading and transport of petrol from one terminal to another or from a terminal to a service station.

The Directive lays down harmonised technical specifications for the design and use of:

  • storage installations at terminals;
  • equipment for loading and unloading mobile containers at terminals;
  • mobile containers;
  • equipment for loading into storage installations at service stations.

Transitional periods are laid down for implementing these specifications.

Member States may maintain or require more stringent measures than those laid down in the Directive throughout their territory or in geographical areas where it is established that such measures are necessary for the protection of human health or the environment.

The Directive provides a procedure for adapting the Annexes to technical progress.

The reports on the implementation of this Directive are drawn up in accordance with the provisions of Council Directive 91/692/EEC of 23 December 1991.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 94/63/EC

20.01.1995

31.12.1995

OJ L 365 of 31.12.1994
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003

20.11.2003

–

OJ L 284 of 31.10.2003

Regulation (EC) No 1137/2008

11.12.2008

–

OJ L 311 of 21.11.2008

Related Acts

Directive 2009/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on Stage II petrol vapour recovery during refuelling of motor vehicles at service stations [Official Journal OJ L 285 of 31.10.2009].
This Directive aims at ensuring the recovering of harmful petrol vapours displaced from the fuel tank of a motor vehicle during refuelling at a service station. In a large number of European service stations petrol pumps must be fitted with a system to recover at least 85% of these vapours. These vapours contribute to the emission of atmospheric pollutants such as ground-level ozone and benzene, which are harmful to human health and the environment.

Reducing the emissions of volatile organic compounds

Leave a reply

Reducing the emissions of volatile organic compounds

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Reducing the emissions of volatile organic compounds

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Environment > Air pollution

Reducing the emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 1999/13/EC of 11 March 1999 on the limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds due to the use of organic solvents in certain activities and installations [See amending acts].

Summary

The emissions of volatile organic compounds * (VOCs) in the atmosphere contribute to the formation of the tropospheric ozone (ozone in the lower atmosphere). Large quantities of this ozone may be harmful to people, vegetation, forests and crops. Sensitive people may suffer irritation of the throat and eyes, as well as respiratory difficulties. Tropospheric ozone is also a greenhouse gas.

Scope

The Directive covers emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from certain activities and installations listed in Annex I.

Requirements of installations

Member States must take the necessary measures to ensure that all new installations comply with the provisions of the Directive. Moreover, all new installations not already covered by the Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Directive (IPPC) must be registered or authorised before being put into service.

Existing installations must be registered or authorised if they have not yet been authorised under the IPPC Directive. They must comply with the same requirements as for new installations no later than 30 October 2007. Where part of an existing installation undergoes a substantial change, it must comply with the requirements applicable to new installations.

Requirements

The industrial operators concerned can conform to the specified emission limits in either of the following ways:

  • by installing equipment to reduce emissions to comply with the emission limit values and the fugitive emission values, or total emission limit values;
  • by introducing a reduction scheme to arrive at an equivalent emission level, in particular by replacing conventional products which are high in solvents with low-solvent or solvent-free products.

Solvents or mixtures likely to have a serious effect on human health because of their content of VOCs (classified as carcinogens, mutagens, or toxic to reproduction), must be replaced by less harmful substances or mixtures.

National plans

Member States may define and implement national plans for reducing emissions from the activities and industrial installations covered by Article 1 (excluding surface cleaning and dry cleaning activities). The plans must result in a reduction of the annual emissions of VOCs by at least the same amount and within the same time-frame as would have been achieved by applying the emission limits under the Directive.

The national plan must include:

  • a list of the measures taken or to be taken;
  • binding interim reduction targets against which progress towards the aim can be measured;
  • a full description of the range of instruments through which its requirements will be achieved, evidence that these instruments will be enforceable and details of the means by which compliance with the plan will be demonstrated.

Substitution

The Commission must ensure that an exchange of information between Member States and the activities concerned on the use of organic substances and their potential substitutes takes place.

It must consider the potential effects of organic substances on human health in general and occupational exposure in particular. Their potential effects on the environment and the economic consequences will also be examined with a view to providing recommendations on the use of techniques which have the least potential effects on air, water, soil, ecosystems and human health.

Following the exchange of information, the Commission must publish recommendations for each activity.

Monitoring

The Member States must take the necessary measures to ensure that the public has access to information concerning:

  • applications for authorisation for new installations or for substantial changes to installations,
  • the decision of the competent authority, including at least a copy of the authorisation, and any subsequent updates,
  • the general binding rules applicable to installations and the list of registered and authorised activities,
  • the results of emission-monitoring as required under the authorisation or registration conditions.

Reports

Every three years, Member States must submit a report to the Commission on the implementation of the Directive.

Context

This Directive complements the provisions adopted under the framework of the Auto-Oil Programme (Directives relating to emissions in the atmosphere from cars and lorries with internal combustion engines and Directive 94/63/EC relating to volatile organic compound emissions resulting from the storage of petrol).

Key terms of the Act
  • Organic compound: any compound containing at least the element carbon and one or more of the following elements: hydrogen, halogens, oxygen, sulphur, phosphorus, silicon or nitrogen, with the exception of carbon oxides and inorganic carbonates and bicarbonates;
  • Volatile organic compound: any organic compound emanating from human activities, other than methane, which are capable of producing photochemical oxidants by reacting with nitrogen oxide in the presence of sunlight. having at 293,15 K a vapour;
  • Organic solvent: any VOC which is used alone or in combination with other agents, and without undergoing a chemical change, to dissolve raw materials, products or waste materials, or is used as a cleaning agent to dissolve contaminants, or as a dissolver, dispersion medium, viscosity adjuster, surface tension adjuster, plasticiser, or a preservative.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 1999/13/EC

29.3.1999

30.3.2001

Official Journal L 85 of 29.3.1999
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Regulation (EC) No 1882/2003

20.11.2003

–

Official Journal L 284 of 31.10.2003

Directive 2004/42/EC

30.04.2004

30.10.2005

Official Journal L 143 of 30.04.2003

Directive 2008/112/EC

12.1.2009

–

OJ L 345 of 23.12.2008

The successive amendments and corrections to Directive 1999/13/EC have been integrated in the original text. This consolidated versionis of documentary value only.

Related Acts

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 December 2007 on industrial emissions (integrated pollution prevention and control) (recast) [COM(2007) 844 final – Not published in the Official Journal].
The new Directive shall fill the gaps in existing legislation concerning industrial emissions. By reducing this type of emissions, it shall bring about significant improvements to health and the environment. The new Directive shall:

  • encourage the implementation of the Best Available Techniques;
  • establish more stringent emission limit values for certain sectors across the EU;
  • introduce minimum rules for environmental inspections of industrial installations;
  • extend the scope of the legislation to other polluting activities not covered by current legislation;
  • enable a more effective permit review;
  • amalgamate the current IPPC Directive and the six sectoral directives included in the Directive on waste incineration into one sole directive on industrial emissions.

Co-decision procedure (COD/2007/286)

Directive 2004/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 April 2004 on the limitation of emissions of volatile organic compounds due to the use of organic solvents in decorative paints and varnishes and vehicle refinishing products and amending Directive 1999/13/EC.
The Directive aims to prevent the negative environmental effects of emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from decorative paints and vehicle refinishing products. It lays down maximum limits for the VOC content of these products. The sub-categories of the relevant products are listed in Annex I to the proposal.
Product categories falling within the scope of the Directive can be marketed in the EU only if they comply with the specifications in Annex II. Such products must be labelled when placed on the market. Member States will develop a market surveillance system to verify the VOC content of the products covered by this Directive.
Each Member State will designate an authority to be responsible for ensuring conformity with the provisions of the Directive. A system of effective, proportionate and dissuasive penalties should be established for infringements.
Table 1 in the Directive shows estimates of VOC emissions by sector and source for 2010. According to Commission studies, this Directive could help to reduce VOC emissions by 280 kilotonnes per year until 2010.

Readmission agreements with the countries of the western Balkans

Leave a reply

Readmission agreements with the countries of the western Balkans

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Readmission agreements with the countries of the western Balkans

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Enlargement > The stabilisation and association process: the western balkans

Readmission agreements with the countries of the western Balkans

Document or Iniciative

Council Decision 2005/809/EC of 7 November 2005 concerning the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and the Republic of Albania on the readmission of persons residing without authorisation.

Council Decisions 2007/817/EC, 2007/818/EC, 2007/819/EC and 2007/820/EC of 8 November 2007 on the conclusion of Agreements between the European Community and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Republic of Montenegro, the Republic of Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina on the readmission of persons residing without authorisation.

Summary

Any western Balkan country which is not a member of the European Union (EU) and has signed a readmission agreement (“partner country”) shall readmit, at the request of a Member State, its nationals who do not comply with, or no longer comply with, the entry or residence conditions of that State. It agrees to readmit the person concerned if it is proven, or can be validly assumed, that he/she is a national of that country.

The partner country shall also readmit any third-country national who does not comply with, or no longer complies with, the entry or residence conditions of the requesting Member State if it is proven, or can be validly assumed, that the person in question entered directly and illegally into the Member State after staying in, or transiting through, the partner country.

The European Community (EC) has a similar commitment to the partner country: following a request from the authorities of the partner country, a Member State shall readmit any of its nationals who do not comply with, or no longer comply with, the conditions for entry or residence in the partner country, if it is proven, or can be validly assumed, that the person in question is a national of that Member State.

A Member State shall also readmit any third-country national who holds a visa or residence permit issued by that Member State or who has entered illegally and directly into the partner country after staying in, or transiting through, that Member State.

Readmission application

Any transfer of an individual to be readmitted must follow an application known as a “readmission application” submitted by the requesting State to the requested State. However, no application is required when the person is in possession of a valid travel document or an identity card and, where necessary, a visa or a residence permit issued by the requested State.

Readmission applications must include the following information and documentation concerning the person concerned: surname, forenames, date and place of birth, last place of residence, documents attesting his/her nationality, photograph, a note as to whether he/she requires help or care and information on any other protection or security measure which may be necessary for his/her transfer.

Evidence

For the readmission of nationals of the partner country or Member States, readmission agreements list the documents which make it possible to establish:

  • proof of nationality without any further investigation being required;
  • prima facie evidence of nationality. In such cases, the Member States and the partner country shall consider that nationality has been established unless there is proof to the contrary.

For the readmission of third-country nationals, the readmission agreements list the documents which constitute evidence making it possible to establish:

  • proof that the readmission conditions have been fulfilled;
  • prima facie evidence that the readmission conditions have been fulfilled. In such cases, the Member States and the partner country shall consider that the readmission conditions have been fulfilled unless there is proof to the contrary.

Time limits

The requesting State must submit readmission applications for third-country nationals at most one year after becoming aware of the facts.

Replies to applications shall be provided in writing within a set time limit (e.g. 10 days for the readmission agreement with Bosnia and Herzegovina, 12 days for the readmission agreement with Montenegro, 14 days for the readmission agreement with Albania) from the date of receipt of the readmission application. For some readmission agreements, such as those with Serbia and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, this time limit is reduced if the individual is apprehended in the border region of the requesting State. By contrast, it may also be extended by a maximum of six days in certain circumstances.

If there is no reply within the extended time limit, the transfer shall be deemed to have been approved. If the application is rejected, the readmission shall not take place. Rejection decisions must be justified by the requested State. If the application is accepted, the readmission shall take place. In principle, transfers are organised within the three months following acceptance. This deadline may be extended.

How transfers take place

Before repatriating a person, the authorities of the partner country and the Member State concerned shall agree matters in advance in writing, particularly as regards the date of the transfer, the entry point and any escorts which may be required.

Repatriation may take place by air or over land. Air transport may take place on scheduled or charter flights.

Costs

In readmission operations, all transport costs as far as the border of the State of final destination shall be borne by the requesting State.

Joint committees

Joint committees are set up to monitor implementation of each agreement.

Background

Following the outcome of the EU-Western Balkans summit in Thessaloniki on 21 June 2003 (“Thessaloniki Agenda”), the EU institutions began negotiations with a view to concluding readmission agreements with all the countries in the region.

On 13 November 2006, the Council authorised the Commission to begin negotiating readmission agreements with Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro and the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. These negotiations led to the adoption by the Council on 8 November 2007 of Decisions providing for the conclusion of the agreements.

As regards Albania, the process dates back further. On 28 November 2002, the Council authorised the Commission to begin negotiations on a readmission agreement. These negotiations led to the adoption by the Council of a Decision providing for the conclusion of the agreement.

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Decision 2005/809/EC of 7 November 2005
Republic of Albania
[adoption: consultation CNS/2003/0033]		 7.11.2005 – OJ L 304 of 23.11.2005
Decision 2007/817/EC of 8 November 2007
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
[adoption: consultation CNS/2007/0147]		 8.11.2007 – OJ L 334 of 19.12.2007
Decision 2007/818/EC of 8 November 2007
Republic of Montenegro
[adoption: consultation CNS/2007/0146]		 8.11.2007 – OJ L 334 of 19.12.2007
Decision 2007/819/EC of 8 November 2007
Republic of Serbia
[adoption: consultation CNS/2007/0153]		 8.11.2007 – OJ L 334 of 19.12.2007
Decision 2007/820/EC of 8 November 2007
Bosnia and Herzegovina
[adoption: consultation CNS/2007/0142]		 8.11.2007 – OJ L 334 of 19.12.2007

Rear-view mirrors and supplementary devices for indirect vision

Leave a reply

Rear-view mirrors and supplementary devices for indirect vision

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Rear-view mirrors and supplementary devices for indirect vision

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Internal market > Motor vehicles > Technical implications of road safety

Rear-view mirrors and supplementary devices for indirect vision (until 2014)

Document or Iniciative

Directive 2003/97/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 November 2003 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to the type-approval of devices for indirect vision and of vehicles equipped with these devices, amending Directive 70/156/EEC and repealing Directive 71/127/EEC [See amending acts].

Summary

Serious traffic accidents often take place at crossroads, junctions and roundabouts due to drivers being unaware of the presence of other road users near their vehicles. Such accidents are more serious when heavy vehicles (trucks, buses, coaches) or vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists, moped users) are involved.

So as to prevent such accidents, the European Union has adopted measures which aim to reduce blind spots in the immediate area around vehicles.

In the light of current technology, the provisions of Directive 71/127/EEC on rear-view mirrors are no longer adequate as regards the exterior field of vision to the side, front and rear of vehicles. Directive 2003/97/EC builds on the existing provisions so as to ensure that the field of vision is extended. In particular, it amends Directive 71/127/EEC, which it will replace and repeal with effect from 26 January 2010.

Directive 2003/97/EC harmonises the provisions concerning the type-approval of devices for indirect vision and of vehicles equipped with these devices.

The new requirements introduced by the Directive principally relate to:

  • an increase in the compulsory minimum field of vision for certain vehicles;
  • the installation of supplementary devices for indirect vision in certain vehicles (e.g. front mirrors on trucks);
  • adaptations to technical progress (e.g. the curvature of the surface of rear-view mirrors);
  • the replacement of some rear-view mirrors with other indirect vision systems (e.g. camera-monitor devices).

The new rules laid down in Directive 2003/97/EC will be implemented progressively. The timetable for introducing the new requirements thus runs from 2005 to 2010.

The vehicles covered by the Directive are motor vehicles of category M (passenger vehicles) and category N (goods vehicles).

Finally, the Commission will carry out a study in 2010 to determine the impact on road safety of the measures introduced by this Directive, particularly as regards vulnerable road users. Additional legislative measures might be proposed on the basis of the conclusions of this study.

Directive 2003/97/EC participates in the efforts of the European road safety action programme to halve the number of road accident victims in the European Union by 2010 .

References

Act Entry into force – Date of expiry Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Directive 2003/97/EC 29.1.2004 25.1.2005 OJ L 25 of 29.1.2004
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Directive 2005/27/EC 19.4.2005 19.10.2005 OJ L 81 of 30.3.2005

Related Acts

Directive 2007/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 July 2007 on the retrofitting of mirrors to heavy goods vehicles registered in the Community [Official Journal L 184 of 14.07.2007].

The Directive extends the obligation to install devices for the lateral field of indirect vision to the entire existing fleet of heavy goods vehicles (vehicles of categories N2 and N3).

Directive 2003/97/EC requires new vehicles to be fitted with devices for indirect vision to reduce the blind spot, but it does not apply to vehicles already in circulation. However, it can be estimated that the entire fleet of heavy goods vehicles already in circulation will not have been fully replaced until 2023. In the interim, in order to minimise the risk to vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists) of being involved in an accident with a heavy goods vehicle performing a right turn, heavy goods vehicles already in circulation must be retrofitted with rear-view mirrors reducing the lateral blind spots while fulfilling the technical requirements of Directive 2003/97/EC.

Heavy goods vehicles of over 3.5 tonnes and registered after 1 January 2000 should thus no later than 31 March 2009 be fitted with lateral rear-view mirrors reducing the blind spot. In order to pass the compulsory annual roadworthiness test imposed by Directive 96/96/EC, heavy goods vehicles must therefore be fitted with rear-view mirrors that comply with Directive 2007/38/EC.

For the majority of vehicles, the retrofitting can be done at reasonable cost and with devices which are already available on the market. However, to ensure that the retrofitting costs are not higher than the expected benefits, exemptions are provided for vehicles used principally for their historical interest and for vehicles which are equipped with lateral mirrors whose field of vision covers only marginally less than the fields of vision laid down in Directive 2003/97/EC.

Member States must have transposed Directive 2007/38/EC by 6 August 2008. The Commission will present an evaluation report on its implementation no later than four years after the Directive has entered into force. The same safety rules may therefore be extended to vehicles that are not covered, such as light commercial vehicles or passenger buses.

Recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures

Leave a reply

Recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Taxation

Recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 2010/24/EU of 16 March 2010 concerning mutual assistance for the recovery of claims relating to taxes, duties and other measures.

Summary

This directive applies to claims relating to:

  • all taxes and duties levied by or on behalf of any European Union (EU) country or on behalf of the EU as a whole;
  • refunds, interventions and other measures which contribute to the total or partial financing of the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD);
  • levies and other duties on the sugar sector market.

EU countries must notify the Commission of its competent national authority or authorities by 20 May 2010. The Commission will then publish a list of all competent national authorities in the Official Journal. Each competent authority must designate a central liaison office which will be responsible for contacts with other EU countries in this field.

Request for information

A competent authority is obliged to provide another competent authority with any information relevant to that applicant authority in the recovery of its claims, except if:

  • the requested authority would not be able to obtain such information for the recovery of similar claims occurring in its own country;
  • the information would disclose any commercial, industrial or professional secrets;
  • the disclosure of the information would put at risk the security or contravene the public policy of the requested EU country.

Request for notification of documents

When requested for notification of documents relating to claims, the requested authority must notify to the addressee all documents which emanate from the applicant EU country relating to a claim or to its recovery.

The request for notification must include relevant information, such as the name and address of the addressee, the purpose of the notification, a description of the nature and amount of the claim, and the contact details of the offices responsible for the documents and for obtaining further information.

Recovery procedures

Any available appropriate recovery procedures must be applied before the applicant authority makes a request for recovery, except where:

  • it is evident that there are insufficient or no assets for recovery in the applicant EU country but that the person concerned has the necessary assets in the requested EU country;
  • it would result in disproportionate difficulty.

Any request for recovery must be accompanied by a uniform instrument permitting enforcement in the requested EU country.

The requested competent authority will employ the powers and procedures provided under the laws, regulations or administrative provisions of the requested EU country regarding claims on the same or similar tax or duty. If the requested authority does not consider that the same or similar taxes or duties are applicable in the requested EU country, it shall instead apply the rules relating to tax levied on personal income.

Disputes

Disputes relating to the claim, the initial or uniform instrument permitting enforcement, and the validity of a notification by the applicant authority are the responsibility of the competent authorities of the applicant EU country. Disputes relating to the validity of a notification made by a competent authority of the requested EU country will be brought before the competent authority of that EU country.

The applicant authority may make a request for recovery of a contested claim. If the contestation is successful, the applicant authority will be responsible for the reimbursement of the amount recovered, in addition to any compensation due.

Amendment or withdrawal of the request for recovery assistance

The applicant authority must immediately notify the requested authority of any amendment to or withdrawal of its request for recovery, detailing the reasons for amendment or withdrawal.

Request for precautionary measures

Where the claim or the instrument permitting enforcement in the applicant EU country is contested at the time when the request is made, the requested authority will take precautionary measures, in accordance with its national law, to ensure recovery when requested to do so by the applicant authority.

Limits to the requested authority’s obligations

The requested authority is not obliged to grant the recovery assistance if:

  • recovery of the claim would result in serious economic or social difficulties in the requested EU country;
  • the initial request for assistance relates to claims more than 5 years old;
  • the total sum of the claims is less than EUR 1 5000.

General provisions

Any information and documents disclosed under this directive will be covered by the obligation of official secrecy and will therefore be protected under the appropriate national law of the EU country which received it.

This directive repeals Directive 2008/55/EC from 1 January 2012. References to the repealed directive will be understood as references to this directive.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal
Council Directive 2010/24/EU

20.4.2010

31.12.2011

OJ L84 of 31.3.2010

Refund of VAT: taxable persons established in another EU country

Leave a reply

Refund of VAT: taxable persons established in another EU country

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Refund of VAT: taxable persons established in another EU country

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Taxation

Refund of VAT: taxable persons established in another EU country

Document or Iniciative

Council Directive 2008/9/EC of 12 February 2008 laying down detailed rules for the refund of value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund but established in another Member State [See amending act(s)].

Summary

This directive lays down the detailed rules for the refund of value added tax (VAT), provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the European Union (EU) country of refund * but established in another EU country.

This directive applies to any taxable person not established in the EU country of refund who, during the refund period:

  • has not had in the EU country of refund, the seat of his economic activity, a fixed establishment from which business transactions were effected or, in the absence of such a seat or fixed establishment, his domicile or normal place of residence;
  • has not supplied any goods or services in the EU country of refund, with the exception of the supply of certain transport services and the supply of goods and services to a person who is liable to pay VAT.

Directive 2006/112/EC establishes the transactions which EU countries may exempt from VAT. EU countries must therefore refund to any taxable person not established in the country of refund any VAT charged in respect of goods or services supplied to him by other taxable persons in that EU country or in respect of the importation of goods into that country, when used for the purposes of the transactions listed in Directive 2006/112/EC.

To be eligible for a refund in the EU country of refund, a taxable person not established in this country must carry out transactions giving rise to a right of deduction in the EU country of establishment. When a taxable person not established in the EU country of refund carries out in his EU country of establishment both transactions producing a right of deduction and transactions not producing a right of deduction in that country, the EU country of refund will only pay the proportion of refundable VAT.

Refund application

This directive establishes a fully electronic procedure, whereby the taxable person not established in the EU country of refund addresses an electronic refund application to the EU country of refund and submits it to his EU country of establishment via the electronic portal of that country. The refund application relates to the purchase of goods or services which was invoiced during the refund period, and the importation of goods during the refund period.

The refund application must be submitted to the EU country of establishment by the 30 September of the calendar year following the refund period. The amount of VAT refund applied for must not be less than EUR 400. If the country is late in making the refund payment, the applicant will be entitled to interest on the amount of the refund.

This directive repeals Directive 79/1072/EEC, however its provisions continue to apply to refund applications submitted before 1 January 2010.

Key terms used in the act
  • EU country of refund: the EU country in which the VAT was charged to the taxable person in respect of goods or services supplied to him by other taxable persons in that EU country or in respect of the importation of goods into that EU country.

References

Act Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2008/9/EC

20.2.2008

1.1.2010

OJ L 44, 20.2.2008
Amending act(s) Entry into force Deadline for transposition in the Member States Official Journal

Directive 2010/66/EU

21.10.2010

–

OJ L 275, 20.10.2010

Successive amendments and corrections to Directive 2008/9/EC have been incorporated into the basic text. This consolidated version is for reference only.

Related Acts

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1174/2009 of 30 November 2009 laying down rules for the implementation of Articles 34a and 37 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1798/2003 as regards refunds of value added tax under Council Directive 2008/9/EC [Official Journal 314 of 1.12.2009].

This summary is for information only. It is not designed to interpret or replace the reference document, which remains the only binding legal text.

Revising the Stability and Growth Pact: Public Finances in EMU 2006

Leave a reply

Revising the Stability and Growth Pact: Public Finances in EMU 2006

Outline of the Community (European Union) legislation about Revising the Stability and Growth Pact: Public Finances in EMU 2006

Topics

These categories group together and put in context the legislative and non-legislative initiatives which deal with the same topic.

Economic and monetary affairs > Stability and growth pact and economic policy coordination

Revising the Stability and Growth Pact: Public Finances in EMU 2006

Document or Iniciative

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Public Finances in EMU 2006 – The first year of the revised Stability and Growth Pact [COM(2006) 304 final].

Summary

The Commission considers the implementation of the revised Stability and Growth Pact (SGP) to have been mainly positive, particularly the corrective arm of the Pact. However, there remain some concerns related to the implementation of the preventive part of the Pact. Despite the positive results, the Commission draws attention to some challenges ahead.

Consolidating public finances: positive results

The consolidation of public finances has resumed and there has been smooth and consistent implementation of the revised SGP procedures, benefiting from an increased economic rationale for decisions and recommendations. The revised SGP ensures that excessive deficits are properly identified and allows better account to be taken of country-specific economic considerations. When the deficit of a Member State exceeds 3% of gross domestic product (GDP), the Commission must prepare a report providing an overall assessment of the economic and budgetary situation in that Member State. The reports give consideration to all elements that are relevant for an evaluation of the situation, to allow a decision to be taken on the existence of an excessive deficit and deadlines set for its correction. Since the reform, all deficits in excess of 3% of GDP have been considered excessive. In the view of the Commission, this confirms that the SGP remains a rule-based framework, which is the best guarantee that commitments will be honoured and that all Member States will be treated equally.

When deficits in excess of the reference value of 3% of GDP occur, corrective measures must be adopted promptly. The consideration of economic factors is also important and permits the Council to set realistic deadlines for correcting excessive deficits when applying the excessive deficit procedure. Taking account of the economic situation has not, in the opinion of the Commission, led to a more lenient application of the rules. More account has been taken of the development of public debt when applying the excessive debt procedure.

In March 2005, when agreement was reached on the revision of the SGP, the Council stressed that improved cooperation between the Commission, the Council and Member States was important in order to strengthen national ownership of and compliance with the SGP rules. Experience has shown that, by introducing more scope for economic judgement in the budgetary surveillance process, the reform has stimulated a constructive and transparent dialogue about economic policy at EU level. This has strengthened peer support and pressure, thus contributing to the smooth operation of the Pact.

Implementation of the preventive arm of the Pact: some concerns

The 2005 reform of the SGP introduced a number of changes, strengthening the preventive arm of the Pact by increasing its economic rationale. One criticism of the original Pact was that a uniform medium-term budgetary objective of “close to balance or in surplus” imposed inappropriate budgetary policies in some countries experiencing high nominal growth. The revised SGP no longer requires Member States to converge on a uniform close-to-balance budgetary position in the medium term. Rather, an individual medium-term objective is set for each Member State, taking into account the economic and budgetary circumstances in each country, so as to provide a sufficient safety margin with respect to the reference value of 3% of GDP and ensure convergence on prudent levels of debt. The revised SGP also includes a number of simple budgetary policy principles appropriate for Member States that have not yet achieved their medium-term target and for budgetary policy during cyclical upswings. In particular, Member States in the euro zone or participating in the exchange-rate mechanism (ERM II) should aim for an annual structural adjustment in line with the benchmark of 0.5 % of GDP.

The Commission recognises that the medium-term budgetary objectives reflect economic fundamentals and national strategies. It notes that some countries have proposed medium-term targets that are more ambitious than strictly required by the revised SGP. In most cases, this is to allow consistency between the objectives set in the European context and a national strategy to ensure the sustainability of public finances, reflecting the economic situation in each country.

However, the Commission notes that planned budgetary efforts to achieve the objectives are not always sufficiently ambitious and fall short of the 0.5 % benchmark in 2006. According to the Commission Spring Forecast, on average the structural balance for the EU will not improve and for some Member States will even deteriorate. There is a risk that budgetary policy will turn expansionary and pro-cyclical. Rigorous budgetary execution and, possibly, additional consolidation measures in 2006, together with ambitious budgetary policy for 2007, are needed in order to reduce the gap between the progress already made and requirements under the SGP.

Despite clear improvements, the Commission feels that some questions remain about the credibility of the medium-term budgetary adjustments planned by Member States. The Commission notes that the medium-term budgetary projections presented in the 2005 updates of stability and convergence programmes are, in most cases, based on realistic macroeconomic assumptions. Another positive development is the much less frequent use of one-off and other temporary measures within medium-term programmes. In a number of cases, however, the measures necessary to achieve the budgetary objectives are not specified in sufficient detail. The combination, in some programmes, of a concentration of efforts on the end of the period covered by programmes and a lack of detail about the measures underlying the planned reduction in the deficit is a source of concern.

Identifying the challenges ahead for the revised SGP

Experience over the year since the revision of the SGP in the summer of 2005 shows that the EU budgetary framework is regaining credibility. However, the Commission identifies a number of challenges ahead:

  • Respecting the spirit of the reform when the economic climate is favourable. The Commission stresses the importance of conducting prudent budgetary policies when the economic climate is favourable so as to contain the accumulation of debt and ensure it is reduced to sustainable levels. It considers that larger budgetary adjustments should be made in 2006 and will endeavour to ensure that the budgets set for 2007 are ambitious.
  • Putting a greater emphasis on the sustainability of public finances. Despite the progress made in reducing the government deficit, the debt ratio in the EU increased from 62.4 % of GDP in 2004 to 63.4 % of GDP in 2005. Given the long-term challenges faced by most EU Member States, such as an ageing population, large reductions in public debt are needed.
  • Improving governance as regards statistics. The effective implementation of the European budgetary framework depends on the quality, reliability and early publication of harmonised budgetary statistics in accordance with European accounting standards. The ongoing work to strengthen the European statistical system must be intensified.
  • Creating better synergies between budgetary policy and growth. An important challenge facing the EU is how to foster the implementation of reforms that allow progress towards sustainable public finances and, at the same time, enhance growth prospects. In order to support sustainable growth, increased attention should be paid to the implications of budgetary policy on macroeconomic developments.
  • Developing fiscal rules and institutions at national level. The agreement on the SGP reform stressed that national budgetary rules and institutions could play a more prominent role in domestic budgetary surveillance. The Commission welcomed the declaration of national Finance Ministers, in the context of the reform of the SGP. It considers that progress could also be made on strengthening the interaction between national budgetary procedures and the EU budgetary framework.