前半
We refer to your request of October 31, 2003 for an update on discussions between the European
Commission and the US on the CSI, and in particular on the 24-hour rule.

We understand from a DGTAXUD contact directly involved in the matter that the Commission and theUS customs authorities are very close to an agreement on the expansion of customs cooperation.
On Wednesday evening(November 5), the Commission and the US Customs authorities will try toagree on the final wording of a draft Decision of the EU-US Joint Customs Cooperation Committee.
This decision will lay down the principles of information exchanges but the details remain to be workedout by a technical working group which will be set up by the Decision. The Decision is expected to beadopted in late December or in January 2004 after the internal procedures in both EU and US havebeen completed. The Commission expects the technical details to be finalized during 2004.
As regards the 24-hour rule, the Commission agrees on the need for pre-arrival information, as isevidenced by the inclusion of a 24-hour rule in the Commission's recent proposal for an amendment tothe Customs Code (COM(2003)452), but it does not like the fact that economic operators have tosupply information directly to the US customs administration and not through the Member States'customs administrations. On the other hand, the Commission knows that it cannot, at this stage,require information for the US to be shipped through the Member States because exchanges of
information between the Member States' customs administration are still a problem due to the lack ofcommon interfaces and incompatible IT systems. We will speak to more contacts in DG TAXUD
later this week and will send a further update on this matter.

後半As promised, we discussed the 24-hour rule further with Commission contacts and we also wish toclarify how the Commission has responded to the concerns of industry in Europe.
As we reported earlier, the Commission is not opposed to the principle that certain information has tobe provided by economic operators to customs authorities before a shipment arrives for security
reasons (after September 11), but it clearly does not want to copy the US rule.
The main difference between the US rule and the proposed EU rule (in COM(2003) 452) is that the USrequires information to be submitted 24 hours before a shipment is loaded in the country of export.
The EU proposal would require a summary declaration 24-hours before a shipment arrives (with thepossibility of even shorter timeframes applying for special categories of economic operators). In
other words, companies under the EU proposed rule would have to submit information much later
than they do under the US regime.
As regards concerns expressed by industry about the US 24-hour rule, our contact said that initially,
the Commission (like business) was very worried that the rule would seriously disrupt the existing
logistic processes of EU businesses. However, it now feels that EU businesses have adapted
themselves very well to the requirements of the US regime, for example by ensuring that cargo arrives
at the port of loading earlier and that information is prepared longer in advance than in the past. We

were told that, because EU companies appear to be coping well, the Commission has no intention of"climbing back on the barricades" to seek changes to the US 24-hour rule.
The Commission's efforts and discussions with the US are focusing on achieving a system in which
there is a "customs-to-customs" exchange for security reasons, and on the replacement of bilateral
cooperation agreements and initiatives with EU-US cooperation.
As regards a customs-to-customs regime, the final goal of the Commission is for EU companies tosubmit security information for export destinations to the local customs authorities of the Member
States from which they export, who would then submit this information to the third country that
requires the information (e.g. the US customs administration).
We know that this has caused
concern with certain business sectors, e.g. the express delivery sector, who fear that the involvementof an additional administration will only increase the burden on them to produce data even earlier.
Their fear is fed by the fact that every Member State uses different IT systems and procedures. We
understand from the Commission that not all Member States believe in a customs-to-customs
approach either. Our contact in the Commission acknowledged that the difficulty at present isindeed the lack of a single EU system under which information can be exchanged and that a balance
has to be achieved between security and trade facilitation. All 15 (and soon 25) Member States use
their own national computer systems.
Although there are ongoing efforts to produce a real EU system, a number of years will be required forthis to be fully operational. At present, there is a network linking all customs offices (CCN/CSI) andthis is used for transit procedures (the "NCTS" or New Computerized Transit System") but even thisnetwork is not yet fully in place. The Commission would find it logical that this network should beused for other exchanges of information as well (e.g. exchanges with third country administrations) anda pilot project is ongoing for using the CCN/CSI network for automated export procedures. However,
the CCN/CSI has not replaced national systems, which continue to be linked to it, and this makes thesystem very complex for operators. This is a highly technical question on which experts areworking.
As regards inspections in ports, the Commission wants to set up a system under which cooperation
occurs under the EU-US umbrella. The first phase in this exercise will be the decision expanding theEU-US customs cooperation agreement (on which we reported earlier this week). But the actual
details ("the real work") will still have to be worked out by the technical working group that will start
work after the adoption and entry into force of the decision exending customs cooperation.
We understand that apart from the US and the EU, Canada and Australia are also working on regimes
requiring pre-arrival declarations. The Canadian "ACI" system (Advanced Commercial Information)
could be operational as from April 1, 2004, and uses the WCO data model for security information.