# CE2004088EN.01058301.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/583 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/583

---

(2004/C 88 E/0596)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3801/02

by Jules Maaten (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 January 2003)

Subject:   Tobacco excise on medicinal herbal cigarettes

Subject:

With reference to the Commission's answers of 23 April 2002 (E-0721/02 (1)) to questions by Jules Maaten, I should like to put some supplementary questions:

1

| 1. | Is the Commission aware that in some European countries (e.g. Belgium, France, Britain, Ireland and Italy), medicinal herbal cigarettes have for years been sold free of tobacco excise even though these countries have not, like Denmark, exempted these products from excise? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the Commission aware that in some European countries (e.g. Belgium, France, Britain, Ireland and Italy), medicinal herbal cigarettes have for years been sold free of tobacco excise even though these countries have not, like Denmark, exempted these products from excise?

| 2. | Is it right that it should be left to the discretion of national authorities to decide whether to place products on lists of pharmaceutical products which serve exclusively medical purposes, in the knowledge that this could result in national authorities arriving at different points of view, so that different rates of excise are levied on the same product in different Member States? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is it right that it should be left to the discretion of national authorities to decide whether to place products on lists of pharmaceutical products which serve exclusively medical purposes, in the knowledge that this could result in national authorities arriving at different points of view, so that different rates of excise are levied on the same product in different Member States?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(24 February 2003)

(24 February 2003)

| 1. | Article 4 of Council Directive 95/59/EC of 27 November 1995 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco provides a definition of ‘cigarettes’. According to Article 7(2) of this Directive products consisting in whole or in part of substances other than tobacco but otherwise conforming to the definition of cigarettes, shall be treated as cigarettes as well.
  On the other hand, products containing no tobacco and used exclusively for medical purposes shall not be treated as manufactured tobacco. Since they are not to be regarded as tobacco products Member States are not permitted to levy harmonised excise duty on them.
  The reply of the Commission to written question E-0721/02 was based on its interpretation of the information provided by the Member States a number of years ago. On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member in his present question, the Commission intends to investigate the current application of the above mentioned rules by the Member States again and to clarify possible doubts on the occasion of the next meeting of the excise committee (beginning of April). The Commission will send this information directly to the Honourable Member. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Article 4 of Council Directive 95/59/EC of 27 November 1995 on taxes other than turnover taxes which affect the consumption of manufactured tobacco provides a definition of ‘cigarettes’. According to Article 7(2) of this Directive products consisting in whole or in part of substances other than tobacco but otherwise conforming to the definition of cigarettes, shall be treated as cigarettes as well.

On the other hand, products containing no tobacco and used exclusively for medical purposes shall not be treated as manufactured tobacco. Since they are not to be regarded as tobacco products Member States are not permitted to levy harmonised excise duty on them.

The reply of the Commission to written question E-0721/02 was based on its interpretation of the information provided by the Member States a number of years ago. On the basis of the information provided by the Honourable Member in his present question, the Commission intends to investigate the current application of the above mentioned rules by the Member States again and to clarify possible doubts on the occasion of the next meeting of the excise committee (beginning of April). The Commission will send this information directly to the Honourable Member.

| 2. | When the Council agreed on the product definitions in Directive 79/32/EEC (replaced by Directive 95/59/EC), it did not define explicitly the exact meaning of ‘used exclusively for medical purposes’.
  The decision whether a certain product is used exclusively for medical purposes — which is not a question of taxation — has to be made by national health authorities or equivalent official bodies in the Member States.
  Such decision, however, must respect the aims of Article 7(2), second subparagraph, of Directive 95/59/EC, which is to leave goods outside the scope of harmonised excise duty, provided they contain no tobacco and are used exclusively for medical purposes. |
| --- | --- |

2.

When the Council agreed on the product definitions in Directive 79/32/EEC (replaced by Directive 95/59/EC), it did not define explicitly the exact meaning of ‘used exclusively for medical purposes’.

The decision whether a certain product is used exclusively for medical purposes — which is not a question of taxation — has to be made by national health authorities or equivalent official bodies in the Member States.

Such decision, however, must respect the aims of Article 7(2), second subparagraph, of Directive 95/59/EC, which is to leave goods outside the scope of harmonised excise duty, provided they contain no tobacco and are used exclusively for medical purposes.

---

(1)  OJ C 277 E, 14.11.2002, p. 81.

1

---