# CE2004078EN.01000302.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/3

---

(2004/C 78 E/0004)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3509/02

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(10 December 2002)

Subject:   Abolition of the arrangement whereby small-scale, occasional trading can be carried out on a cross-border basis using the cash-on-delivery system

Subject:

| 1. | Is the Commission aware that the cash-on-delivery system, under which packages are sent through the post to a firm or individual who must pay the cost of the items concerned on receipt of the package, with the sum in question being transferred to the sender by means of a postal order, has hitherto been available on a cross-border basis, but that the Netherlands firm Koninkliijke TPG Post BV (Netherlands Post Office) is abolishing cross-border dispatches as from 1 January 2003? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the Commission aware that the cash-on-delivery system, under which packages are sent through the post to a firm or individual who must pay the cost of the items concerned on receipt of the package, with the sum in question being transferred to the sender by means of a postal order, has hitherto been available on a cross-border basis, but that the Netherlands firm Koninkliijke TPG Post BV (Netherlands Post Office) is abolishing cross-border dispatches as from 1 January 2003?

| 2. | From now on, will small-scale occasional trading through the post across the EU's internal borders be available only to those who can use electronic payment systems or a credit card? Or does the Commission perhaps see universally available alternative for international transactions within the EU? |
| --- | --- |

2.

From now on, will small-scale occasional trading through the post across the EU's internal borders be available only to those who can use electronic payment systems or a credit card? Or does the Commission perhaps see universally available alternative for international transactions within the EU?

| 3. | Is this abolition of the arrangement whereby many people carry out small-scale, cross-border trading on the basis of the ‘fair exchange’ principle consistent with the efforts to achieve European integration? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is this abolition of the arrangement whereby many people carry out small-scale, cross-border trading on the basis of the ‘fair exchange’ principle consistent with the efforts to achieve European integration?

| 4. | How does this arrangement differ from the national cash-on-delivery system, which is not to be abolished? |
| --- | --- |

4.

How does this arrangement differ from the national cash-on-delivery system, which is not to be abolished?

| 5. | In the Commission's view, do the arguments in favour of abolition, such as the labour-intensive nature of the procedure and extra costs for customers, outweigh the drawbacks, in particular for collectors and second-hand goods traders? |
| --- | --- |

5.

In the Commission's view, do the arguments in favour of abolition, such as the labour-intensive nature of the procedure and extra costs for customers, outweigh the drawbacks, in particular for collectors and second-hand goods traders?

| 6. | In addition to the Netherlands, are there other EU Member States from which, in 2003, it will likewise no longer be possible to dispatch packages to other countries on a cash-on-delivery basis? |
| --- | --- |

6.

In addition to the Netherlands, are there other EU Member States from which, in 2003, it will likewise no longer be possible to dispatch packages to other countries on a cash-on-delivery basis?

| 7. | What measures can the Commission take to ensure that this arrangement continues to be available in the EU Member States in coming years? Does it plan to implement those measures? |
| --- | --- |

7.

What measures can the Commission take to ensure that this arrangement continues to be available in the EU Member States in coming years? Does it plan to implement those measures?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2003)

(30 January 2003)

One of the main objectives of the Directive 97/67/EC (1) is the harmonisation of the European universal postal service.

1

In the Postal Directive, the Parliament and the Council have defined the number of services, and the minimum requirements, that must be ensured by all Member States. The universal postal service according to this Directive includes letters up to two kilos, parcels up to 10 or 20 kilos, services for registered and insured items, etc, but does not include cash-on-delivery services specifically.

The Postal Directive is a framework Directive and gives Member States the opportunity to include additional services as part of the national universal service. However, it is our understanding that the Netherlands has not extended the scope of the universal service to include cash-on-delivery services. The same decision has been made by some other Member States, whilst others have included this service as part of the national universal service.

Furthermore, according to the Universal Postal Union (UPU), Convention and Agreements, cash-on-delivery services can be introduced by the members of the UPU on a voluntary basis. The Netherlands, therefore, is not under an international law obligation to ensure this service is provided.

In light of the above, the Commission does not see any legal basis that could permit the Commission, as of today, to request that the Dutch universal service provider continues to provide a cross-border cash-on-delivery service.

Finally, the Commission would not consider that there is a need to redefine the universal services included in the Postal Directive to include cash-on-delivery services, based on the experience in this respect in Member States and on the development of alternative payment solutions in recent years.

---

(1)  Directive 97/67/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service, OJ L 15, 21.1.1998.

1

---