# EUR-Lex - 52013DC0676 - EN

*|*

# 52013DC0676

**COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on Evaluating national regulations on access to professions /* COM/2013/0676 final */**

			*

			*

1.
Introduction

European
economies are suffering from the aftermath of the financial crisis and its
impact on public finances. Throughout the Single Market national governments
are considering how to stimulate employment creation and restore economic growth.
In its June 2012 Communication[1]
on the implementation of the Services Directive the Commission stressed the
importance in this context of ensuring that the regulatory framework for
professional services remains fit for purpose. The revised Professional Qualification
Directive, on which the Council, European Parliament
and Commission reached a political agreement in June 2013, addresses these issues and calls for a new strategy that requires
each Member State to actively perform a review and to modernise their
regulations on qualifications governing access to professions or professional
titles[2].
This Communication presents a work plan for conducting
such a review. Improving access to professions, in
particular through a more flexible and transparent regulatory environment in
Member States, would facilitate the mobility of qualified professionals within
the internal market and the cross-border provision of professional services.  This
should also have a positive impact on the employment situation and enhance
economic growth, especially since professional services alone amount to around
9% of the GDP in the Union.

In order to
boost growth potential and consolidate the way to economic recovery, this review of regulated professions should
be a priority. The Commission therefore urges Member States not to wait for the
formal entry into force of the revised Professional Qualifications Directive (end
2013) and to begin reviewing at national level the qualifications requirements
imposed on regulated professions and the scope of reserved activities.  The
Compact for Growth and Jobs approved by the European Council in June 2012
called for implementation of the Commission's Communication, "including
through rigorous peer review of national restrictions and swift action to
remove unjustified barriers".  Similarly, the European Parliament
called on the Commission to "identify areas where Member States are
disproportionately blocking” this access[3]. The comprehensive approach to combat youth
unemployment, agreed by the European Council on 28 June 2013, again underlined
the need to take action to offer job prospects to young people.

In order to
ensure that all Member States advance towards a common objective, this
Communication sets out a framework enabling Member States to present a first
set of national action plans byApril 2015.  The outcome should not be a “one
size fits all” exercise. These action plans should be based on in-depth, case-by-case
analysis of the barriers to access a profession and of the possible alternative
regulatory mechanisms. This was one of the conclusions of a workshop with
national ministries and professional organisations organised on 17 June 2013. An
extensive mutual evaluation which will be carried out in the next two years
should bring about tangible change in each Member State. In the course of this
period, the Commission will begin identifying achievements and shortcomings in
the Annual Single Market Integration Reports of November 2014 and 2015.

The Commission
has addressed country specific recommendations on this issue to several Member
States.The mutual evaluation described in this Communication represents a
separate exercise and does not affect the existing commitments made in the
context of the European Semester.

In order to
provide a complete picture of the barriers affecting the access and exercise of
regulated professions, a report on the findings of the peer review on legal
form, shareholding and tariff requirements conducted under the Services
Directive, a further action which was announced in the June 2012 Communication,
 is published in parallel.

2.
Why does a review of all professions matter?

Large-scale
reforms of the regulated professions are taking place in a number of Member
States (e.g. Spain, Poland, Portugal, and Slovenia) and both the Commission and
other international organisations are calling for such reviews of national
regulations. The OECD, which has developed indicators
measuring the regulatory restrictiveness of certain Member States for a
selected number of professions and sectors, has underlined the distortive
nature of these regulations[4].

The present
chapter reviews the main arguments which could justify the presence of
regulatory entry barriers and the expected benefits from opening the access to
currently regulated professions and why it is important to review all barriers
restricting the access to professions.

2.1 Regulation on access to professions may be
beneficial

2.1.1
Help the consumer
judge on the quality of a service

Consumers may face
difficulties in assessing the level of qualification of service providers which
are essential for the delivery of services of a high quality. This asymmetry of
information prevents consumers from making informed service provider choices.
To remedy the risk of potential market failures, regulations clarifying the
technical knowledge and competences which professionals available on the market
should have,[5]
could provide consumers with the reassurances they need.

2.1.2
Support the proper
functioning of an economy in a Member State

Protecting consumers and the public good

Professions
may be regulated for health and safety reasons so as to avoid accidents caused
by malpractice or faulty products. For example, for the majority of health
professions, adequate qualifications, including traineeships, are required. There
are also services which are considered as public goods, because they
bring value to society in general; they may need to be regulated in order to
ensure adequate supply and quality.

External effects for third parties

Professional
services may affect third parties. Regulation can ensure that the service
providers take proper account of the impact of their activities beyond those who
are paying for such a service. For example, the accounts of a company may require
a statutory audit because it is in the interest of the investor community - who
should be able to trust these accounts - and not only the company which
remunerates the auditor.

2.2 Benefits arising from opening access to
professions

2.2.1
Offer the
consumer more choice at a better price

Better prices

Restrictions
on access to professions limit the number of professionals authorised to
provide a service. In consequence, the supply of professionals is not driven by
the market. This can become problematic in the event of changes in the demand
for the service. It could result in economic rents for incumbents and lead to
higher prices at the expense of the rest of the economy and consumers even more
so if the demand for the services is inelastic[6].

Increasing consumer choice

Excessive regulatory
entry barriers to professions could create a market distortion and generate
higher prices which could deter consumers who are not prepared or who cannot
afford to pay under these conditions. There can often be less burdensome ways
to regulate which still ensure a good quality of services
and could lead to better prices. As a consequence,
consumer choice would be increased and social inequalities amongst consumers
may be reduced[7].

2.2.2
Boost national
competitiveness and employment

Increasing
competitiveness

Professionals
do not only offer services to final consumers. Professional services are an
intermediate input for many sectors; therefore the multiplier effects can have
a significant economic impact for the rest of the economy. Reducing entry
regulatory barriers could lead to higher
competition amongst an increased number of professionals which can also provide
a stronger incentive to deliver high quality innovative services and to
constantly review operational costs. A greater number of suppliers may also increase levels of innovation
via stronger competition. Modernising regulation could
stimulate professionals to provide their services in other Member States, thereby
increasing market opportunities for EU businesses, competition and consumer
choice.

Improving the employment situation

Regulation may
have a detrimental impact on employment creation by segmenting labour markets and
making it more difficult for the labour supply to adjust to changes in consumer
preferences[8].
As a consequence, labour shortages in certain professions may not be
sufficiently addressed because mobility within and between professions is
hampered by regulation. Reducing or removing entry barriers could facilitate
young people’s access to the domestic labour market whilst also enabling the
mobility of professionals from other Member States.

2.3 Consider the economic impacts of
regulations

A review of
regulated professions represents a major opportunity for each Member State to assess the benefits and weigh them against the economic
costs behind domestic regulations.

This type of
analysis already exists in academic research where the focus is not so much on
the number of barriers but more essentially on the impact of professional regulation
on key indicators: the quality of a service, the wages of the professionals concerned,
prices for the consumers and the overall impact on employment.

Several of
these studies[9]
conclude that no correlation between regulation and the quality of a service
could be demonstrated. A possible explanation suggested by the researchers is
the difficulty for low-income groups to access services from regulated
professions due to high fees, which forces them to turn to do-it-yourself
solutions. Also, for many professions, it is not clear how to measure quality.

Other studies[10]
find that the average wage is significantly higher for regulated professionals than
for non-regulated professionals and that the introduction of regulation
increases professionals' earnings. There is then a risk of those increases being
transmitted to prices, to the detriment of the people using those services.

Research in
the US - where the regulations vary from one state to another - allows for a
comparison of the impact of regulation between non-regulating and regulating
states. For example, there is evidence in the US that, for certain professions,
employment growth has been 20% higher in states without regulation[11].

Research in Germany[12]
also led to the conclusion that regulating professions might have a negative
impact on the mobility of professionals between jobs as it prevented professionals
from reacting quickly to labour market opportunities.

2.4 Allow professionals to take advantage of
the Single Market

Market
participants wishing to offer professional services across borders or to find a
job in another Member State are faced with considerable numbers of regulatory
barriers related to professions. The term “regulated profession”, as defined in
the Professional Qualifications Directive[13],
covers not only professional activities but also titles, the access to which is
subject to the possession of specific qualifications in national regulations.

In the Union, the number of regulated professions[14]
varies between Member States, ranging from under 50 to over 400 per country[15].
The average number per Member State is currently estimated at 157. The largest
number of regulated professions is in the health sector (more than 40% of all
regulated professions in the EU), followed by education, business services,
construction, trade and transport. The large disparities that exist between
Member States impede professionals wishing to work abroad or to offer their
services across borders.

Modern and
flexible regulations on the access to professions should facilitate the free
movement of professionals and help address the questions of unemployment and
labour shortages faced in different parts of the Union. It should also make it
easier for companies run by professionals to offer their services across the Union, take advantage of potential economies of scale and scope through a bigger market without
having to comply with multiple national regulatory barriers, and support a more
efficient allocation of resources.

2.5 Need for full transparency and a robust
analysis

In the light
of the above analysis, Member States have many reasons to thoroughly consider
the effects of potential barriers to trade in professional services throughout
the Single Market but also to have a better understanding of the role of
regulated professions for their domestic economy.

The peer review carried out in the context
of the Services Directive on legal form, shareholding
and tariffs requirements has identified barriers to the exercise of certain
professional activities and difficulties faced by professionals wishing to establish
in another Member State. Certain of these requirements may make the setting up
of subsidiaries impossible in practice. While some Member States have modified
their regulations on these issues whilst implementing the Services Directive,
the peer review has revealed that many Member States did not carry a thorough
proportionality assessment of the regulations in place.

The
forthcoming mutual evaluation offers the opportunity for each Member State to undertake a rigorous assessment of the barriers limiting access to professional
activities. Full transparency on the professions regulated in each Member State is an indispensable first step. Member States should then begin screening all the entry restrictions they have identified and
analyse the necessity and proportionality of these restrictions taking into due
consideration the benefits they bring for society and the economic impact they
create. In particular, the impact these regulations have on quality, price and
employment should be taken into consideration.

In parallel, to
provide support for the Member States’ work, the Commission intends to launch an
economic study in the first half of 2014 allowing for comparative case studies
to measure in greater detail the benefits for regulating professions, for not
regulating them or for opting for different approaches in regulation.

3.
how will the Commission conduct the Mutual evaluation?

The Commission
is inviting the Member States to begin a mutual evaluation sooner rather than
later. Member States which have already started a screening exercise of their
regulated professions in the context of the European semester and Memorandum of
understanding should not be exempted from this exercise but work on the basis
of what has already been achieved in terms of reduction of the restrictions to
professions.

A profession-by-profession
analysis is necessary to assess the regulations restricting access to the
professions. Reforms taking place in Poland, Portugal and Slovenia are using this approach. The workshop held on 17 June 2013 also confirmed the need
to consider each profession's specificities on its own merits.

However, each Member State should not work in isolation to present the final outcome of its domestic
assessment. Rather, allowing Member States to compare their systems as early as
possible before each Member State takes a final position, appears pivotal. .

3.1 Scope

Article 59 of
the revised Professional Qualifications Directive specifies three criteria for examining 
requirements on the access to professions, which can be summed up as follows:

­
Compatibility with the principle of
non-discrimination according to nationality or place of residence: Member
States should ensure that professionals can access regulated professions
without being a national or without having to reside in their national
territory.

­
Justification: regulation must be justified by
an overriding reason of general interest.

­
Proportionality: the proportionality of national
measures should be analysed with reference to their suitability to securing the
objectives they pursue. They should also not go beyond what is necessary in
order to attain these objectives.

3.2 Assessing the justification for regulation

For each
regulated profession, Member States should identify the specific reason of
general interest, justifying a given regulatory framework and checking that
this justification is still valid today.

3.2.1
Multiple layers
of regulation

When discussing
the need for regulation, Member States will be invited to look at the existing safeguards
offered through other types of ex-ante or ex-post regulation applicable to the
services provided by each profession e.g. approval procedures, compliance with
technical and safety standards, and inspection mechanisms. Regulation on access
to a profession by means of a specific qualification should be maintained only
if these safeguards are not sufficient. Otherwise, there could be a risk of
duplication, or administrative “red tape” for the service recipients.

For the same
reason, regulations linked to the exercise of professional activities must also
be taken into account, notably those examined in the context of the peer review
conducted under the Services Directive, namely legal form and shareholding
requirements. Member States should look at the cumulative effect of all
restrictions imposed on the same profession, including where appropriate
compulsory membership to professional associations. Maintaining a requirement
of qualification could in certain cases make sense provided other types of
restrictions have been removed or significantly revised.

3.2.2
Safeguards
offered by education systems or employers

In many Member
States, training programmes, including apprenticeship periods, have been
developed, under the control of the State, to prepare individuals to carry out
specific professions’ activities[16]
which might be non-regulated. The qualifications delivered act as quality
assurance for employers when the access to the profession as such is not
regulated and when there is no reserve of activities.

Another
important factor to take into account is the mode of exercise of the profession:
regulating a profession which is mainly exercised by self-employed
professionals could perhaps be considered as a necessary guarantee. The
situation is different if the profession is mainly exercised by professionals
employed in private companies or public entities where employers have a role to
play in checking the competence of newly recruited staff and are responsible in
the case of accidents or complaints.

These two
elements - specific training and exercise of the profession as employee – should
be taken into account when assessing the necessity of the regulation. They explain,
for instance, why the engineering profession is not regulated in France where 95% of engineers are employed in a company or in public administration and
recruitment is heavily based on the reputation of engineering schools.

3.2.3
Regional regulations

Regional
regulations on qualifications should face the same necessity test as
regulations established at the federal level of a country. There is, however,
an additional challenge. Mutual recognition of qualifications between regions in
the same Member State needs to be effective in order to ensure professionals from
the country or from abroad can practice on the entire national territory. As
foreseen in article 10(4) of the Services Directive, any authorisation should in
principle cover the entire territory of a Member State. In Spain, for instance, a major reform is therefore about to address these issues.

3.3 Assessing the proportionality of the regulation

Where there is
an overriding reason of general interest suitable for regulating access to a
profession, Member States are also invited to examine the form and the level of
regulation with a view to eliminating unjustified restrictions or barriers.

3.3.1
Scope and number
of reserved activities

The
examination should consider the level of the required qualification as compared
to the complexity of the tasks reserved to the profession. In some cases, it might be possible to revise the regulatory
framework without compromising the desired objective, for instance by narrowing
the scope of reserved activities, by granting access to some of the reserved
activities to other regulated professions or by choosing less restrictive approaches.
If, for instance, professionals from abroad request partial access to some but
not all of the reserved activities, this might be an indicator of whether the
existing regulation is still proportionate.

3.3.2
Impact on
service recipients and on the market

The
proportionality analysis should also look at the impact of the regulation of
the professions on the users of their services. For instance, in principle, the
protection of consumers could be used to justify any regulated profession, to
reduce the risks associated with the professional activities. However, economic
considerations, such as prices, wages, competitiveness and employment (see
section 2.2. and 2.3) should also be assessed in each Member State and discussed amongst Member States.

3.3.3
Comparing
alternative models

Member States use
different forms of regulation for professional activities. The most common approach involves reserving the right to perform
particular activities to qualified professionals by national laws or
regulations. Other types include the protection of professional titles or
mandatory or even voluntary certification schemes (see Annex I).

Member States
using such systems are invited to present written reports on how mandatory and
even voluntary certification schemes work in practice. In
particular, they should refer to the use of accreditation according to
Regulation (EC) No. 765/2008 as a public authority control of such
certification schemes - in both the voluntary and mandatory sector - leading to
recognition of accredited certificates.

The mutual evaluation should be an opportunity for the Member States
which do not regulate professions in the sectors concerned to provide
information on any alternative mechanisms guaranteeing the respect of an
overriding reason of general interest. This should allow a dialogue between
Member States using different approaches, where the impact of all types of
formal and informal restrictions on the access to professional activities
should be examined.

4.
      The work plan

The process,
illustrated in the flowchart in Annex II, should start in November 2013. Each Member State is invited first to carry out an accurate mapping of all its regulated
professions and then continue with a screening of the justification for each
regulated profession at domestic level. The next crucial step should be to compare
the results in an extensive mutual evaluation between all Member States as
early as possible. The Commission will regularly report on the progress made by
Member States in the mutual evaluation. First measures aimed at reviewing the
entry restrictions on certain professional activities should be proposed by
Member States already by April 2015.

The mutual
evaluation should be grouped in sectors in order to take account of the
economic context (competition, price, employment, labour shortages, and quality
of services). To facilitate the work, screening and mutual evaluation should be
divided between two phases with distinct timetables, each one dealing with a
different cluster of sectors. The first cluster should include all regulated
professions in those economic sectors where modernisation of the regulatory
framework could significantly contribute to employment and growth: business
services, construction, manufacturing, real estate, transport, wholesale and
retail. The second cluster should cover the remaining sectors (education,
entertainment, health and social services, network services other than
transport, public administration, tourism, other services/activities).

In parallel,
the Commission will launch a study in the first half of 2014 (see section 2.5).
The Commission will also continue to involve stakeholders and consult
professions by holding annual workshops, as it did in June 2013.

After the screening mutual evaluation carried out for each cluster,
Member States will be invited to present national action plans, which
may include actions already underway.  For each regulated profession, they
should determine the most appropriate action, including the following options:

­
maintain the existing regulation on the access
to the profession, indicating whether other types of regulation applicable to
the exercise of the profession have been removed or reviewed;

­
modify the existing regulation, for instance
through a review of the qualification requirements, e.g. shortening the
duration of the training programme or traineeship, or a reduction of the scope
of reserved activities, e.g. reserving only the activities associated with
specific expertise and/or higher risks;

­
replace the existing form of regulation with
another system capable of ensuring quality of the services, for instance
protection of the title or a voluntary certification system supervised by State
authorities; or

­
repeal the existing regulation.

When Member
States receive requests for new regulation directly from the professions,
action plans should also contain clear and transparent criteria under which
these requests for new regulation will be examined.

In order to
facilitate the process, the Commission proposes to proceed in three phases with
precise timetables and provide timely feedback to Member States in each phase.

4.1 First phase: Mapping of professions in each
  Member State

As of November
2013, Member States should check the information already available in the
Commission’s Regulated Professions Database and provide all the necessary
additional data, including on the protection of titles and on professional
activities subject to a mandatory certification. For
those cases, where a mandatory certification originates from a EU Directive
(e.g. in road transport), Member States should notify the Commission to which
EU instrument it refers to.  For each regulated
profession, Member States should also provide a description of the reserved
activities. The Regulated Professions Database should be completed by February
2014.

In March 2014,
the Commission intends to publish a European Map of Regulated Professions.

4.2 Second phase (November 2013 – April 2015):
screening, evaluating and national action plans for the first cluster of
sectors

Between
November 2013 and May 2014, Member States should perform a detailed screening
for the professions covered under the first cluster. As from June 2014, the
Commission will organise meetings to allow Member States to exchange the
outcomes of their domestic screenings. All Member States will have the
possibility to comment on the developments and initial conclusions from other
Member States.

Member States
will be invited to take account of the Commission’s findings which it will
present in its Annual Single Market Integration Report (together with a more
detailed evaluation report) in November 2014.

The screening
and mutual evaluation process should allow each Member State to prepare initial
reports on the professions included in the first cluster by April 2015,
indicating the measures they have taken or intend to take. The conclusions of
these reports should be articulated with national reforms programmes (NRPs) to
be delivered at the same time also as part of the European Semester. These findings could also be considered in
the context of the preparation of the 2015 Country Specific Recommendations.

4.3 Third phase (June 2014 – January 2016):
screening, evaluating and national action plans for the second cluster of
sectors

The same
process as for the first cluster should be followed. The Commission will
present detailed conclusions in its Annual Single Market Integration Report as
well as a more detailed evaluation report in November 2015. Member States
should provide a second report by January 2016, indicating the measures
they have taken or intend to take. Again, the findings for these sectors could
be considered for the 2016 European Semester.

In June
2015 and March 2016, the Commission will propose any follow up remedial
actions in the light of the action plans received from Member States in June
2015 and in January 2016. These actions may include, inter alia, the launch of
infringement procedures where discriminatory or disproportionate national
requirements are maintained.

5.
Conclusion

The
transparency and mutual evaluation of regulated professions should result in
the modernisation of the national frameworks which limit the access to
professions. The results should encourage the mobility of professionals in the
Single Market, help to create new jobs in the professional sectors concerned,
improve the competitiveness of these and related sectors and open growth
opportunities.

The Commission
expects Member States to fully engage in this exercise, devoting sufficient
resources to participate in the screening and mutual evaluation of national
regulations. The Commission is conscious of the significant work to be carried
out at national level and is willing to assist wherever possible.

ANNEX I

Different
approaches in regulating professional activities

1. Regulated professions associated with reserved activities

Reserving the
right to perform particular activities to qualified professionals by national
laws or regulations is the most common approach. Under this approach, Member
States themselves define a set of professional activities for which they
consider that a specific qualification is required. For instance, the activities
related to designing buildings are exclusively reserved to architects in many Member States.

Qualification
requirements and the extent of reserved activities are usually controlled by a
public authority at national or regional level. In some cases, this power is
delegated to professional bodies (orders, chambers, colleges) which have
organisational and disciplinary functions and are responsible for the
development and application of a deontological code.

To overcome
the possible barriers created by national regulations, a system of mutual
recognition of qualifications has been put in place within the EU. Directive
2005/36/EC applies to professionals qualified in one Member State (whether or
not the profession is regulated there) and willing to establish themselves or
provide services in another Member State, where the profession is regulated.

2.
Professional activities regulated
through mandatory certification

Access to
professional activities which require specific knowledge of technical rules or
processes may be subject to mandatory certification at national level. In some
instances, this obligation derives from EU legislation. The main difference
between this approach and the reserves of activity described above is that the
qualification requirement is not exclusively linked to a profession as such. A
limited range of specific technical activities depends on the possession of a
certificate which could be acquired by members of different professions.

One example is
the EU legislation in the area of fluorinated gases[17]. It provides for
mandatory certification for companies and personnel working with stationary
refrigeration, air conditioning and heat pump equipment. Similar legislation
has been developed at EU level for certain categories of train drivers[18]
and on certain categories of professional
drivers engaged in road transport[19].

In all these
cases, the EU legislation defines the minimum training requirements. It sometimes defines the conditions and procedures for the
recognition of the certificates issued in other Member States.  In addition, if these certification schemes
are based on accreditation in accordance with Regulation (EC) No. 765/2008,
other Member States are obliged to recognise these certificates.  However, where this is not the case or
where the exact conditions for the recognition are not specified, Directive
2005/36/EC provides the necessary framework for recognition.

3.
Protected professional titles

Another
approach consists of regulating the access to professional titles. In this
case, a specific qualification is required to use a professional title, but the
activity associated with the profession is not reserved to the holders of this
title: anybody can exercise the activities, as long as they do not use the
title. For example, the professional title of “Ingenieur” is protected by law
in Germany and can be obtained only on the basis of an academic qualification
in engineering or natural sciences.

Some
professional bodies have the exclusive power, granted by public authorities, to
award professional titles (e.g. professional bodies incorporated by charter in
the UK).

A protected
professional title is a signal for consumers and employers that the holder
meets the particular qualifications requirements, whilst leaving them free to
hire professionals who do not hold the title.

4.
Voluntary certification schemes

Voluntary
certification systems are often used by professions which are not regulated by
law. Their main objectives are to demonstrate professional competence,
guarantee quality of services and inform consumers, in the absence of
regulation. Article 26 of the Services Directive[20] promotes the
development of certification systems and quality labels to enable assessment of
the competence of service providers and to ensure high quality of service.

Some
certification schemes are developed by regulatory bodies appointed by state
authorities (e.g. Hairdressing Council in the UK). The management of this type
of certification systems can however entail important costs for stakeholders.

There is a
growing trend among professional associations to develop their own
certification schemes, and in some cases, to subject their membership to prior
certification of the future member.

In Italy, a new law on the organisation of non-regulated professions was adopted in 2012
introducing the possibility to constitute professional associations and
promoting the voluntary self-certification of professionals exercising
non-regulated activities. The self-certification is to be based on national
technical norms which define the competences required for the practice of the
profession.

These
practices aim to improve the transparency of professional activities for the
consumers and help them choose between different service providers. However, if these certification schemes are not
based on accreditation according to Regulation (EC) No. 765/2008, there is no
control of their quality or functioning. In addition, they may create practical obstacles to the access of professional
activities. They could, for example, favour the development of dominant
professional associations, leading to the isolation of new entrants from other
countries: although access to the professional activities would be unrestricted
by law, certification would become a necessity on the market; at the same time,
in the absence of state regulation, the system of recognition provided for in
Directive 2005/36/EC would not apply.

ANNEX II

[1]       Communication on the
implementation of the Services Directive "A partnership for new growth in
services 2012-2015"
(see http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/docs/services-dir/implementation/report/COM_2012_261_en.pdf)

[2] Article 59  of the revised Professional
Qualifications’ Directive (see: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/document/activities/cont/201309/20130902ATT70679/20130902ATT70679EN.pdf)

[3]       Recommendation of 14 June 2012

[4] See in 2003, 2008
(and in 2013) under:

http://www.oecd.org/eco/reform/indicatorsofregulatoryconditionsintheprofessionalservices.htm

[5] Law and Kim (2005) Specialization and Regulation: The Rise of Professionals and the
Emergence of

Occupational Licensing Regulation

[6] Friedman (1962) Capitalism
and Freedom., Shapiro (1986) Investment, Moral Hazard and Occupational
Licensing,

Stigler (1971) The Theory of Economic
Regulation

[7] Friedman (1962) see
footnote 6, Kleiner (2006) Licensing Occupations: Ensuring Quality or Restricting
Competition?

[8] Mortensen and
Pissarides (1994) Job Creation and Job Destruction in the Theory of
Unemployment

[9] Carroll and Gaston (1981) A Note on the
Quality of Legal Services: Peer Review and Disciplinary Service , Maurizi

(1980) The impact of regulation on quality:
The case of California contractors, Kugler and Sauer (2005) Doctors

without Borders? Relicensing Requirements
and Negative Selection in the Market for Physicians

[10] Kleiner and Krueger (2013) Analyzing the
Extent and Influence of Occupational Licensing on the Labor Market

[11] Kleiner (2006) see footnote 7

[12] Plantl and Spitz-Oener (2009), How does
Entry Regulation Influence Entry to Self-Employment and Occupational

Mobility?

[13] See Article 3(1)a of Directive 2005/36/EC

[14] Regulated professions database maintained by the
Commission on the basis of information provided by Member States. The database
lists the regulated professions covered by Directive 2005/36/EC. (website :
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/qualifications/regprof/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.home)

[15] The number of
regulated professions by Member States needs to be treated with caution. The
way Member States currently list their regulated professions in the Regulated
Professions Database may differ (certain Member States may notify one single
profession covering a large range of different activities/specialities while
other Member States may notify several professions).

[16] These are called
«regulated education and training » under the Professional Qualifications
Directive.

[17] Regulation
842/2006 -; Commission Regulation 303/2008

[18] Directive 2007/59/EC

[19] Directive 2003/59/EC

[20] Directive 2006/123/EC