# CE2004065EN.01000501.xml

| 13.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 65/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 65/5

---

(2004/C 65 E/006)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-3393/02

by Luciana Sbarbati (ELDR) to the Commission

(22 November 2002)

Subject:   Excise duty on wine

Subject:

The Commission's proposal to tax alcoholic beverages (which would hit wine in particular) with the aim of ‘upward harmonisation’ is likely to increase inflation and reduce consumption. It may definitely make fraud more widespread by reducing the competitiveness of the market and would have an unpredictable impact in the context of enlargement. The proposal does not take account of the standard of living in the candidate countries and would make market penetration more difficult for EU producers and have adverse effects on local production.

Organisations representing wine producers consider the proposal to be a dangerous mistake, since it would place a burden on the whole sector in Italy, where there are 314 DOC wines (controlled designations of origin), 24 DO CG wines (DOC with additional guarantees), 729 000 hectares of vineyards and a national production of more than 50 million hectolitres.

The proposal does not make allowance for the division of the sector into small units — micro-enterprises with an average of 4-5 hectares — which play an important socio-economic and environmental role.

Unlike VAT, excise duty should tackle the external costs of product consumption, rather than being an additional tax, and manufacturing levies should be imposed on industrial rather than natural products.

Can the Commission explain whether:

| — | the proposal meets the legal and financial requirements of conformity; |
| --- | --- |

—

the proposal meets the legal and financial requirements of conformity;

| — | the proposal is in conflict with the new COM in wine, which emphasises the need to convert vineyards in order to promote production with market outlets rather than the abandonment of vineyards; |
| --- | --- |

—

the proposal is in conflict with the new COM in wine, which emphasises the need to convert vineyards in order to promote production with market outlets rather than the abandonment of vineyards;

| — | the adverse impact which the application of excise duty (a fixed amount) would have on average products and hence on consumers has been assessed? |
| --- | --- |

—

the adverse impact which the application of excise duty (a fixed amount) would have on average products and hence on consumers has been assessed?

Joint answer

to Written Questions E-3067/02 and P-3393/02

given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(6 January 2003)

(6 January 2003)

Council Directive 92/84/EEC, of 19 October 1992, deals with the approximation of rates of excise duty on alcohol and alcoholic beverages. Under its provisions it is necessary for the excise duty rates laid down in that Directive to be reviewed periodically by Council. This review shall be based upon a Commission report.

The Commission services are at present preparing such a review. On 11 September 2002 the Commission held a comprehensive orientation debate on the EU alcohol taxation regime. A final decision on the Commission's approach in this area has not yet been taken. As provided by Article 8 of Directive 92/84/EEC, the wider objectives of the Treaty will be taken into account.

As regards tax harmonisation at European level, the Commission believes that such harmonisation requires the enhanced commitments of both high taxing and low taxing Member States.

On the other hand, there is no link between Annex 1 of the EC Treaty (referred to in Article 32, defining the products subject to Articles 33 to 38 of the Treaty) and the question whether or not a product is subject to excise duty.

Italy applies a zero rate of excise duty to both still and sparkling wines. This legislation is in line with the present ‘acquis communautaire’.

---