# CE2004088EN.01013201.xml

| 8.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 88/132 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 88/132

---

(2004/C 88 E/0140)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3159/03

by Dirk Sterckx (ELDR) to the Commission

(24 October 2003)

Subject:   Unequal treatment of professional removal firms importing loads into the EU from non-Member States as a result of differing interpretations of Regulation (EEC) 918/83

Subject:

When loads are imported by removal firms from outside the European Union into another Member State via the United Kingdom, the Netherlands or Sweden, the goods are exempted by these countries' respective local customs authorities from import duties and VAT for the whole EU territory.

On the other hand, a number of Member States, such as Belgium, issue former residents of third countries with a T-form (pan-European transport document) when they arrive in the EU, whereby their effects are only exempted from import duties and VAT up to the border of the country of final destination, where they have to be declared. This means that the decision about exemption from import duties and VAT is taken by the customs authorities of the country of final destination.

It goes without saying that removal firms based in Member States that apply the procedure with the T-form are put at a disadvantage as compared with their competitors in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Sweden: because of their more flexible rules, more and more of their clients are changing to removal firms based in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Sweden.

| 1. | Does Article 128 of Regulation (EEC) 918/83 (1) allow the Member State of arrival (as opposed to the country of final destination) to issue an immediate exemption from import duties and VAT for the whole territory of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 128 of Regulation (EEC) 918/83 (1) allow the Member State of arrival (as opposed to the country of final destination) to issue an immediate exemption from import duties and VAT for the whole territory of the European Union?

1

| 2. | If so, is Belgium obliged to revise its procedure using the T-form in favour of a procedure of immediate exemption from import duties and VAT in order to comply with Regulation (EEC) 918/83? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If so, is Belgium obliged to revise its procedure using the T-form in favour of a procedure of immediate exemption from import duties and VAT in order to comply with Regulation (EEC) 918/83?

| 3. | If not, is the procedure of immediate exemption from import duties and VAT as applied, for example, by the United Kingdom, not in breach of Regulation (EEC) 918/83? |
| --- | --- |

3.

If not, is the procedure of immediate exemption from import duties and VAT as applied, for example, by the United Kingdom, not in breach of Regulation (EEC) 918/83?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(11 December 2003)

(11 December 2003)

| 1. | When customs offices in the Member States release removal goods coming from a third country into free circulation in the Community free of Common Customs Tariff duties (CCT duties) and Value Added Tax (VAT), they apply legislation based on two different legal sources. Whereas the relief of CCT duties is based on Articles 2 to 10 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 (2), the relief of VAT is based on national tax legislation implementing Article 14 of Council Directive 77/388/EEC (3) and Articles 2 to 10 of Council Directive 83/181/EEC (4).
  In its reply to Written Question E-0243/02 by Mrs Peijs (5), the Commission set out principles concerning the customs clearance of these removal goods and implied that Article 128 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 does not apply to these imports.
  Article 128 only applies to goods which have to be put to a particular use by the recipient, i.e. the declarant, in order to benefit from a specific duty relief. The restrictions set out in Article 7(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 in respect of removal goods, however, only require that the declarant remains the unrestricted owner of the removal goods for a period of 12 months. Within that period, the declarant can use these goods for whatever private purpose he likes. He can, for example, use them for furnishing his new residence or store them at the premises of his removal company. Given these circumstances, the Commission considers that the restriction of Article 7(1) does not create an obligation to put the removal goods to a particular end use as required by Article 128. The Commission interprets this restriction as a prohibition to commercialise these goods, similar to the restrictions set out in Article 29 (consignments sent by one private individual to another) or Article 45 (goods contained in travellers' personal luggage) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83.
  As the legal provisions of Articles 2 to 10 of Council Directive 83/181/EEC are almost identical to the text of the same Articles of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83, Member States' VAT legislation should be similar to the Community customs rules for removal goods. It remains to the discretion of the national customs and tax authorities in which way they want to ensure compliance of the declarant with the restrictions imposed by Article 7(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 and the similar provision in national VAT legislation. The method to control compliance should, however, not create additional costs at the expense of the declarant and should not deviate too much from the methods applied in the examples mentioned in the previous paragraph. |
| --- | --- |

1.

When customs offices in the Member States release removal goods coming from a third country into free circulation in the Community free of Common Customs Tariff duties (CCT duties) and Value Added Tax (VAT), they apply legislation based on two different legal sources. Whereas the relief of CCT duties is based on Articles 2 to 10 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 (2), the relief of VAT is based on national tax legislation implementing Article 14 of Council Directive 77/388/EEC (3) and Articles 2 to 10 of Council Directive 83/181/EEC (4).

2

3

4

In its reply to Written Question E-0243/02 by Mrs Peijs (5), the Commission set out principles concerning the customs clearance of these removal goods and implied that Article 128 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 does not apply to these imports.

5

Article 128 only applies to goods which have to be put to a particular use by the recipient, i.e. the declarant, in order to benefit from a specific duty relief. The restrictions set out in Article 7(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 in respect of removal goods, however, only require that the declarant remains the unrestricted owner of the removal goods for a period of 12 months. Within that period, the declarant can use these goods for whatever private purpose he likes. He can, for example, use them for furnishing his new residence or store them at the premises of his removal company. Given these circumstances, the Commission considers that the restriction of Article 7(1) does not create an obligation to put the removal goods to a particular end use as required by Article 128. The Commission interprets this restriction as a prohibition to commercialise these goods, similar to the restrictions set out in Article 29 (consignments sent by one private individual to another) or Article 45 (goods contained in travellers' personal luggage) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83.

As the legal provisions of Articles 2 to 10 of Council Directive 83/181/EEC are almost identical to the text of the same Articles of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83, Member States' VAT legislation should be similar to the Community customs rules for removal goods. It remains to the discretion of the national customs and tax authorities in which way they want to ensure compliance of the declarant with the restrictions imposed by Article 7(1) of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 and the similar provision in national VAT legislation. The method to control compliance should, however, not create additional costs at the expense of the declarant and should not deviate too much from the methods applied in the examples mentioned in the previous paragraph.

| 2. and 3. | As already stated in the answer to the Written Question E-0243/02, the request for release into free circulation under relief of customs duties and VAT has to be submitted by, or on behalf of, the person transferring his/her residence from a third country to the Community to any customs office the declarant chooses to use for this purpose. Nevertheless, as explained previously, Member States have a certain discretion in respect of the documentary evidence to be provided. This discretion stems from the differences in the national legislation of Member States in respect of the administrative procedures and requirements for a person taking residence in a country. The customs authorities in the Member States, however, should not use this discretion to discriminate in their customs treatment between persons taking residence in the country of the customs authority and persons taking residence in another Member State of the Community. Since the place of presentation of the request has normally to be determined by the person transferring his/her residence based on different elements, including the procedures and requirements in force in the different Member States, both procedures release into free circulation at the point of entry into the Community or in any other Member State are possible. In the latter case a T-form is necessary to ensure the transport to the place where the release into free circulation will take place.
  Should the Honourable Member or any other person dispose of documentary evidence which indicates that particular legal provisions for removal goods of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 or Council Directive 83/181/EEC have been infringed by these authorities he/she may either lodge a formal complaint on the issue to the Commission or use the normal legal procedures foreseen in the Member States' legislation for such cases in order to defend this person's interests. |
| --- | --- |

2. and 3.

As already stated in the answer to the Written Question E-0243/02, the request for release into free circulation under relief of customs duties and VAT has to be submitted by, or on behalf of, the person transferring his/her residence from a third country to the Community to any customs office the declarant chooses to use for this purpose. Nevertheless, as explained previously, Member States have a certain discretion in respect of the documentary evidence to be provided. This discretion stems from the differences in the national legislation of Member States in respect of the administrative procedures and requirements for a person taking residence in a country. The customs authorities in the Member States, however, should not use this discretion to discriminate in their customs treatment between persons taking residence in the country of the customs authority and persons taking residence in another Member State of the Community. Since the place of presentation of the request has normally to be determined by the person transferring his/her residence based on different elements, including the procedures and requirements in force in the different Member States, both procedures release into free circulation at the point of entry into the Community or in any other Member State are possible. In the latter case a T-form is necessary to ensure the transport to the place where the release into free circulation will take place.

Should the Honourable Member or any other person dispose of documentary evidence which indicates that particular legal provisions for removal goods of Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 or Council Directive 83/181/EEC have been infringed by these authorities he/she may either lodge a formal complaint on the issue to the Commission or use the normal legal procedures foreseen in the Member States' legislation for such cases in order to defend this person's interests.

---

(1)  OJ L 105, 23.4.1983, p. 1.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983 setting up a Community system of reliefs from customs duty.

2

(3)  Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment, OJ L 145, 13.6.1977.

3

(4)  Council Directive 83/181/EEC of 28 March 1983 determining the scope of Article 14(l)(d) of Directive 77/388/EEC as regards exemption from value added tax on the final importation of certain goods, OJ L 105, 23.4.1983.

4

(5)  OJ C 301 E, 5.12.2002.

5

---