1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 1
This document is meant purely as a documentation tool and the institutions do not assume any liability for its contents
►B ►M6 COUNCILDIRECTIVE
of29January1985
onthefinancingofveterinaryinspectionsandcontrolscoveredbyDirectives89/662/EEC,90/425/
EEC,90/675/EECand91/496/EEC
(amendedandconsolidated)
(85/73/EEC) ◄
(OJ L 32, 5.2.1985, p. 14)
Amended by:
Official Journal
No page date
►M1Council Directive 88/409/EEC of 15 June 1988 L 194 28 22.7.1988
►M2Council Directive 93/118/EC of 22 December 1993 L 340 15 31.12.1993
►M3Council Directive 94/64/EC of 14 December 1994 L 368 8 31.12.1994
►M4Council Directive 95/24/EC of 22 June 1995 L 243 14 11.10.1995
►M5Council Directive 96/17/EC of 19 March 1996 L 78 30 28.3.1996
►M6Council Directive 96/43/EC of 26 June 1996 L 162 1 1.7.1996
▼B
COUNCILDIRECTIVE
of29January1985
on the financing of veterinary inspections and controls covered by
Directives 89/662/EEC,90/425/EEC,90/675/EECand91/496/EEC
(amendedandconsolidated)
(85/73/EEC)
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European EconomicCommunity, and in particular Article 43 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission (
1),
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament (2),
Having regard to the opinion of the Economic and Social
Committee (3),
Whereas, in order to make the health safeguards offered to the
consumer uniform, Directive 64/433/EEC (4), aslas t amended by
Directive 83/90/EEC (5), provided for the implementation of health
inspections and controls in respect of fresh meat likely to be involvedin intra-Community trade;
Whereas, in order to safeguard human and animal health within the
Community, Directive 72/462/EEC (
6), aslas t amended by Directive
83/91/EEC (7), providesfor health controlsto be carried out by the
competent authoritiesof the Member Statesupon importation of fres h
meat and for inspections to be carried out by veterinary experts of theMember States and the Commission within the exporting third coun-tries;
WhereasDirective 64/433/EEC relatesonly to fres h meat likely to be
involved in intra-Community trade; whereas, however, the authoritiesof the Member Stateshave introduced national controlsfor fres h meatintended solely for the national market;
WhereasCouncil Directive 71/118/EEC (
8), aslas t amended by Direc-
tive 84/642/EEC (9), makes provision for health inspections and
controlsfor fres h poultrymeat;
Whereas these health inspections and controls give rise to the collec-
tion of feeswhich are at pres ent financed in different waysin theindividual Member States; whereas these differences are liable to affect
the conditionsof competition between linesof production which are for
the most part covered by common organizations of the markets;
Whereas, in order to remedy this situation, harmonized rules on the
financing of the said health inspections and controls should be laid
down;
Whereas, owing to the provisions and administrative procedures of
national management and financing, a further two-year period should
be granted so as to allow the Hellenic Republic to apply the necessarymachinery for collecting the fees relating to inspections and controls,1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 2
(1) OJ No C 168, 28. 6. 1984, p. 4, OJ No C 97, 29. 4. 1981, p. 12 and OJ No
C 162, 22. 6. 1984, p. 10.
(2) OJ No C 87, 5. 4. 1982, p. 116 and opinion delivered on 17 January 1985
(not yet published in the Official Journal).
(3) OJ No C 307, 19. 11. 1984, p. 1 and opinion delivered on 12 December
1984 (not yet published in the Official Journal).
(4) OJ No 121, 29. 7. 1964, p. 2012/64.
(5) OJ No L 59, 5. 3. 1983, p. 10.
(6) OJ No L 302, 31. 12. 1972, p. 28.
(7) OJ No L 59, 5. 3. 1983, p. 34.
(8) OJ No L 55, 8. 3. 1971, p. 23.
(9) OJ No L 339, 27. 12. 1984, p. 26.▼M6
▼B
▼B
HAS ADOPTED THIS DIRECTIVE:
Article 1
Member States shall ensure, in accordance with the arrangements laid
down in Annex A, that a Community fee iscollected to cover the cos tsoccasioned by inspections of and controls on the products listed in thatAnnex, including those aimed at ensuring animal production in slaugh-terhouses, in accordance with the requirements of Directive 93/119/EEC.
Article 2
Member States shall ensure, in accordance with the arrangements laid
down in Annex B, that a Community fee iscollected to cover the cos tsoccasioned by the inspections and controls provided for by Directive96/23/EC (
1).
Article 3
Member States shall ensure, in accordance with the arrangements laid
down in Annex C, that a Community fee iscollected to cover the cos tsoccasioned by inspections of and controls on the live animals listed inthat Annex.
Article 4
1. Pending the adoption of provisions governing Community fees,
Member States shall ensure the financing of inspections and controlsnot covered by Articles1, 2 and 3.
2. For the purposes of paragraph 1, Member States may charge
national feesin accordance with the principlesadopted for Communityfees.
Article 5
1. The Community fees shall be set at a level which covers the costs
borne by the competent authority in respect of:
— salary costs and social-security costs involved in the inspection
service,
— administrative costs incurred in carrying out controls and inspec-
tions, which may include the expenditure required for in-servicetraining of inspectors,
for the controlsand ins pectionsreferred to in Articles1, 2 and 3.2. No direct or indirect refund of the feesprovided for in thisDirec-
tive shall be permitted. However the possible application by a MemberState of the standard average provided for in Annexes A, B and C shall
not be considered an indirect refund in the assessment of individual
cases.
3. Member Statess hall be authorized to charge an amount exceeding
the levelsof the Community feesprovided that the total feeschargedby each Member State do not exceed the actual cost of inspection.
4. Without prejudice to the choice of the authority empowered to
charge Community fees, Community fees shall replace all otherhealth-inspection charges or fees levied by the Member States' national,regional or local authoritiesfor the ins pectionsand controlsreferred toin Articles1, 2 and 3 and the certification thereof.
ThisDirective s hall not prevent Member Statesfrom charging feesfor
combating epizootic and enzootic diseases.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 3
(1) OJ No L 125, 23. 5. 1996, p. 10.▼M6
▼M6
Article 6
1. Member States shall regularly communicate to the Commission
— data concerning the distribution and use of Community fees; they
must be able to justify their methods of calculation,
— the conversion rates adopted each year in accordance with Article
7,
— the place or placeswhere Community feesare charged, giving any
explanations necessary.
2. Aspart of the on-the-s pot checksto be carried out by the
Commission, the Commission may, in collaboration with the competentnational authorities, verify whether the provisions of this Directive arebeing applied.
3. Where a Member State considers that the controls in another
Member State are not carried out satisfactorily and that the fees
provided for in this Directive do not cover the cost of the controls, or
do not cover them adequately, it shall have recourse to the relevantprovisions of Directive 89/608/EEC and in particular to Articles 10and 11 thereof.
Article 7
1. The rate of conversion into national currency of the amounts in
ecus specified in this Directive shall be that published annually on thefirst working day of September in the C series of the Official Journal
of the European Communities .
The rate shall apply with effect from 1 January in the following year.2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1:
— for 1994 Member States shall use the conversion rate applicable on
1 September 1992,
— for the years 1995 to 1998 Member States shall use the average of
the conversion rates published in accordance with paragraph 1 forthe preceding three years.
Article 8
Acting by a qualified majority on a proposal from the Commission, the
Council may amend AnnexesA, B and C to thisDirective with a view,
in particular, to establishing standard levels for Community fees, laying
down detailed rulesfor their implementation and providing for excep-tions.
Article 9
1. The Hellenic Republic shall be authorized to derogate from the
principleslaid down in thisDirective where, becaus e of geographicalcharacteristics, the costs of charging a fee in geographically remoteregionsare greater than the yield from the fee.
The Greek authorities shall inform the Commission of the territorial
extent of the derogationsgranted.
That information shall be accompanied by any explanations necessary.2. In the case of other outermost regions, other Member States may
be authorized, in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article18 of Directive 89/662/EEC, to benefit from the same derogations.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 4
▼M6
ANNEX A
CHAPTERI
FeesapplicabletomeatcoveredbyDirectives64/433/EEC,71/118/EEC,91/
495/EECand92/45/EEC
The fee referred to in Article 1 isfixed in accordance with Article 5 (1), as
follows:
1. Without prejudice to points4 and 5, Member Stateswill collect for ins pec-
tion costs relating to slaughter the following standard amounts:
(a) beef and veal:
— adult bovine animals: ECU 4,5 per animal,
— young bovine animals: ECU 2,5 per animal;
(b) solipeds/equidae: ECU 4,4 per animal;
(c) pigmeat: animalsof a carcas e weight
— of less than 25 kg: ECU 0,5 per animal,
— equal to or greater than 25 kg: ECU 1,30 per animal;
(d) sheepmeat and goatmeat: animals of a carcase weight
— of less than 12 kg: ECU 0,175 per animal,
— of between 12 and 18 kg: ECU 0,35 per animal,— of more than 18 kg: ECU 0,5 per animal;
(e) poultrymeat:
(i) either at a standard rate as follows:
— for broilers, other young poultry for fattening weighing less than
2 kg and for cast hens: ECU 0,01 per animal,
— other young poultry for fattening of a carcase weight equal to or
greater than 2 kg: ECU 0,02 per animal,
— other heavy adult poultry weighing 5 kg or more: ECU 0,04 per
animal;
(ii) or, where a Member State decidesnot to make the dis tinction
between categoriesof poultry asin (i), at ECU 0,03 per bird;
(f) rabbit meat and meat of small game birds or ground game:
— for rabbits and small game birds and ground game, the standard rates
laid down in (e);
— for the following land mammals:
— wild boar: the rateslaid down in (c), increas ed if the levelsare
insufficient to cover this cost, the cost of the trichinioscopic
exam provided for in Directive 92/45/EEC,
— ruminants: the rates laid down in (d).
2. The controlsand ins pectionsconnected with the cutting operationsreferred to
in,inter alia , Article 3 (1) (B) of Directive 64/433/EEC and Article 3 (1) (B)
of Directive 71/118/EEC must be covered
(a) either: at a standard rate by the addition of a standard amount of ECU 3
per tonne on meat entering a cutting plant.
That amount isadded to the amountsreferred to in 1 above;
(b) or: by charging the actual costs of inspection per hour worked.
Where the cutting operations are carried out in the establishment where the
meat is obtained, the amounts laid down in the first subparagraph shall be
reduced by up to 55 %.
A Member State which optsto levy feesby the hour worked mus t be able to
demonstrate to the Commission that the actual costs cannot be covered by
charging feesin accordance with (a).
3. Member States must charge an amount corresponding to the actual expendi-
ture necessary for controls or inspections of meat being stored pursuant to,
inter alia, Article 3 (1) (D) of Directive 64/433/EEC and Article 3 (1) (C)
of Directive 71/118/EEC.
The detailed rulesfor applying thisparagraph may be laid down by the
procedure provided for in Article 16 of Directive 64/433/EEC or Article 21
of Directive 71/118/EEC with a view in particular to settling the cases of
intervention meat and meat subject to short-term storage in successive cold
stores.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 5
▼M6
4. In order to cover increased costs, Member States may:
(a) either: increase the standard amounts of fees as laid down in points 1 and
2 (a) for individual establishments.
Apart from that laid down in point 5 (a), the conditionsto be met might
be the following:
— higher inspection costs due to a particular lack of uniformity in the
animals for slaughter from the point of view of age, size, weight
and state of health,
— longer waiting and otherwise non-productive periods for inspection
staff owing to inadequate advance planning by the establishment of
animal deliveriesor technical inadequaciesor failures , for example
in older establishments,
— frequent delays in the slaughtering process, e.g. as a result of insuffi-
cient slaughter staff and hence under-employment of inspection staff,
— higher costs due to special travelling times,
— more time taken up on inspections due to frequently changing
slaughter periods beyond the control of inspection staff,
— frequent interruptions in the slaughtering process to meet cleaning
and disinfecting requirements,
— inspections of animals which, at the request of the owner, are slaugh-
tered outside normal slaughtering hours.
The amount of the increases in the central standard rate for fees depends
on the level of the costs to be covered;
(b) or: charge a special fee covering actual costs.
5. Member States in which salary costs, the structure of establishments and the
relationship between veterinarians and inspectors diverge from the Commu-
nity average taken as a basis for calculation of the standard amounts fixed
in points1 and 2 (a) may exceptionally reduce them to meet the real cos ts
of inspection:
(a) in general, where there are substantial differences in the cost of living
and salary costs;
(b) for individual establishments, where the following conditions are met:
— a minimum daily slaughter rate enabling the deployment of the rele-
vant inspection staff to be planned in advance,
— the number of slaughtered animals is constant, so that animal deliv-
eriesmay be planned in advance, thusenabling rational us e to be
made of the inspection staff,
— strict organization and planning within the establishment together
with a rapid slaughter rate, permitting optimum use of inspection
staff,
— no waiting or otherwise non-productive periods for inspection staff;
— the animals for slaughter are as far as possible uniform in age, size,
weight and state of health.
In no case should the application of these exemptions result in reductions
of more than 55 % of the levelsindicated in points1 and 2 (a).
6. (a) The feesreferred to in points1, 2 and 3 mus t be collected, asappro-
priate, at the slaughterhouse, cutting plant or cold store. They shall be
payable by the operator or the owner carrying out the aforementioned
operations, who may, however, pass on the fee charged for the operation
concerned to the natural or legal person on whose behalf the operation is
carried out. Where the health inspection of live poultry is carried out at
the farm of origin, in accordance with Directive 71/118/EEC, an amount
of up to 20 % of the standard rates laid down in point 1 (e) may be
charged at the farm of origin.
(b) By way of derogation from the concept of the place of charge referred to
in the first sentence of (a), in the case of establishments carrying out
more than one operation and of chainsof production covering more
than one operation, Member Statesmay charge a total aggregate fee
including the various amounts simultaneously and at a single location.
(c) If the fee charged at a slaughterhouse covers the whole of the inspection
costs referred to in (a), the Member State shall not charge any fee at the
cutting plant or the cold store.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 6
▼M6
CHAPTERII
Fees applicable to meat covered by Directive 72/462/EEC, Chapter III of
Directive 71/118/EEC, Chapter III of Directive 92/45/EEC and Chapter 11
ofAnnexItoDirective 92/118/EEC
1. The fee referred to in Article 1 isfixed at the minimum s tandard level of
ECU 5 per tonne (on the bone), with a minimum amount of ECU 30 per
consignment.
Member Statesmay, however, increas e that amount exceptionally to meet
actual costs.
2. However, for importsfrom any of the countrieswhich asat 20 February
1995 have begun negotiationswith the European Union with a view to
concluding a comprehensive agreement on the equivalence of veterinary
guarantees(animal health and public health) bas ed on the principle of reci-
procal treatment and with which such an agreement has been concluded
before 31 December 1996, Member Statesmay, until 30 June 1997 maintain
thisreduced level of fees .
The amount of the fee to be charged on importsfrom any of the third coun-
tries referred to in the first subparagraph shall be fixed, following the
conclusion of the comprehensive equivalence agreement with the said third
country, by the procedure referred to in paragraph 3, taking into account the
following principles:
— the frequency of checks,
— the level of the fee applied by the said third country to imports origi-
nating in the European Union,
— abolition of other charges levied by the third country, such as compulsory
lodging or collection of a health bond.
3. When the decisions provided for in Article 8 (3) of Directive 90/675/EEC are
adopted and in accordance with the same procedure the amounts referred to
in point 1 shall be adjusted in the light of the reduced frequency of checks
decided on.
When taking these decisions the Commission will take account in particular
of the guaranteesgiven by the third countriesconcerning acceptance of the
principle of regionalization and of the other Community principles.
4. The fee referred to in point 1 ispayable by the importer or hiscus tomsagent
and charged at the customs office responsible for the border inspection post
or directly at the inspection post.
5. Member Statesmay allocate part of the yield of the feesprovided for in this
chapter to a health solidarity fund designed to strengthen the veterinary
services to allow them to react more effectively to any appearance of an
exotic disease.
CHAPTERIII
Feesapplicabletofisheryproductscovered byDirective 91/493/EEC
Section I
Fishery products falling under Chapter I of Directive 91/493/EEC
The fee referred to in Article 1 shall be fixed in accordance with Article 5 (1) as
follows:
1. (a) Member States shall collect a fee for inspection costs relating to the offi-
cial checksprovided for in Chapter V (II) of the Annex to Directive 91/
493/EEC;
(b) the fee provided for in (a) shall be fixed at ECU 1 per tonne of fishery
productsfor the firs t 50 tonnesand at ECU 0,5 per tonne thereafter. It
shall be collected at the time of first placing on the market, unless
already collected on landing, and shall, in any event, be charged to the
first purchaser. Member States may provide for a system allowing aggre-
gation of quantitiesof fis hery productsover a given period and
arrangements for centralized collection at the time of first sale;
(c) by way of derogation to (b), the feescollected on the s peciesreferred to
in Annex II to Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3703/85 must not
exceed ECU 50 per consignment unloaded if the actual costs do not
exceed that amount;
(d) the collection of the fee provided for in (a) shall be without prejudice to
the collection of that provided for in point 2 in the event of subsequent
processing of fisheries products, without prejudice to point 7 (b).1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 7
▼M6
2. (a) Member States shall collect a fee for inspection costs relating in parti-
cular to the official checkscarried out in accordance with point I of
Chapter V of the Annex to Directive 91/493/EEC and to the official
checksprovided for in point II of the s aid Chapter V.
(b) The fee provided for in (a) shall be fixed at ECU 1 and shall be charged
on every tonne of fishery products entering a preparation and/or proces-
sing establishment or coming from a factory ship.
Furthermore, in the case of inspection of a factory ship abroad, the
Member States shall charge the actual cost of the said inspection.
(c) At the request of a Member State, accompanied by the necessary
supporting documents, a lower level of fees may be fixed for the species
referred to in point 1 (c) in accordance with the procedure laid down in
Article 18 of Directive 89/662/EEC.
3. (a) Where, following a detailed examination of the costs of the checks
referred to in point 1 (a) for a given product in itsterritory, a Member
State considers that the actual costs cannot be covered by collecting
feesin accordance with point 1 (b), it s hall be authorized to lay down
arrangementsfor levying feesby the hour worked for that product.
(b) Where, following a detailed examination of the costs of the checks
referred to in point 2 (a) for a given product in itsterritory, a Member
State considers that the actual costs cannot be covered by collecting
fees in accordance with point 2 (b) in a given establishment, it shall be
authorized to lay down arrangementsfor levying feesby the hour worked
for establishments handling that product.
A Member State which optsto levy feesby the hour worked mus t be
able to demonstrate to the Commission that the actual costs cannot be
covered by collecting feesin accordance with points1 (b) and 2 (b).
4. (a) Member Statess hall be authorized to reduce the amount of the fee
provided for in point 1 (b) when the checksprovided for in point 1 are
facilitated by the fact that:
— the fish are graded for freshness and/or size in accordance with Regu-
lations(EEC) No 103/76 and No 104/76, or recognized in accordance
with national rules, and/or
— first sale transactions are grouped together, in particular in a fish
auction or wholesale market.
Under no circumstances may application of the above provisions lead to
reductionsof more than 55 %.
However, at the request of a Member State, accompanied by appropriate
supporting documents, an additional reduction may be decided on in
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 18 of Directive 89/
662/EEC.
(b) Member Statess hall be authorized to reduce the amount of the fee
provided for in point 2 when:
— preparation or processing is carried out on the same site as the first
sale or processing, and/or
— in a given establishment, operating conditions and guarantees as to
the establishment's own checks are such that inspection staff require-
mentscan be reduced.
Under no circumstances may application of the above provisions lead to
reductionsof more than 55 %.
However, at the request of a Member State, accompanied by appropriate
supporting documents, an additional reduction may be decided on in
accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 18 of Directive 89/
662/EEC.
5. Member States shall collect an amount corresponding to the actual cost of
checks on fishery products in establishments only chilling, freezing, packa-
ging or storing. However, if the fee collected in accordance with points 1
and 2 covers all the inspection costs relating to the checks provided for in
Chapter V of the Annex to Directive 91/493/EEC, the Member State shall
not collect the fee referred to in thispoint.
6. (a) The feesprovided for in points2 and 5 s hall be payable by the operator
or the owner of the establishment carrying out the aforementioned opera-
tions, who may, however, pass on the fee charged for the operation
concerned to the natural or legal person on whose behalf the operation
iscarried out.
(b) In the case of fishery products intended for subsequent preparation and/or
processing within their territories, Member States may collect a total fee
covering the different amounts on a single occasion and in a single loca-
tion.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 8
▼M6
Member States that wish to avail themselves of this possibility must first
inform the Commission.
7. Member States shall put in place systems to check that the fees provided for
in thisChapter have been paid by the operatorsconcerned.
In particular, Member States shall ensure, under their national rules, that
operators receive written attestations or some other proof of individual or
global payment or order for payment of the feesprovided for in point 1 (a)
of this Chapter, unless the fishery products concerned are intended for
preparation or processing within the territory of the Member State where
they were landed, and provided that the full amount of the fee ispaid at the
processing establishment or preparation establishment.
If necessary, detailed implementing rules shall be adopted in accordance with
the procedure laid down in Article 18 of Directive 89/662/EEC.
They shall inform the Commission thereof.
8. Taking into account the structural derogations granted Finland and Sweden in
the context of the common organization of the marketsunder Regulation
(EEC) No 3759/92, and without prejudice to compliance with the fee levels
provided for in thisSection, Finland and Sweden may, in accordance with
the procedure laid down in Article 18 of Directive 89/662/EEC, be author-
ized, on the basis of appropriate supporting documentation, to apply
alternative meansof collection until the outcome of the review provided for
in Article 3 of Directive 96/43/EC.
Section II
Fishery products falling under Chapter II of Directive 91/493/EEC
1. In the case of the fishery products referred to in the second paragraph of
Article 10 of Directive 91/493/EEC, the provisions laid down in point 1 of
Section I of thisAnnex s hall apply.
Member States shall also collect an additional amount to cover inspection
costs inherent in this type of vessel and unloading, with a minimum of
ECU 1 per tonne unloaded.
2. For fishery products other than those referred to in point 1, that is to say all
fishery products which have to go through border inspection posts, the fee
provided for in Article 1 shall be fixed in accordance with Article 5 (1) at
the minimum standard level of ECU 5 per tonne, with a minimum of
ECU 30 per consignment, although, above 100 tonnes, the minimum standard
amount of ECU 5 shall be reduced to:
— ECU 1,5 per additional tonne for fishery products which have undergone
no preparation other than gutting;
— ECU 2,5 per additional tonne for the other fishery products.
3. When the decisions provided for in Article 8 (3) of Directive 90/675/EEC are
adopted and in accordance with the same procedure, the amounts referred to
in point 2 shall be adjusted in the light of the reduced frequency of checks
decided on.
When those decisions are taken, the Commission shall take account in parti-
cular of the guaranteesgiven by third countriesasregardsacceptance of the
principlesof regionalization, equivalence, reciprocity and other Community
principles, in particular where these third countries are covered by a compre-
hensive agreement with the Community on the equivalence of veterinary
guarantees(animal and public health).
Under no circumstances may application of this variation lead to fees of less
than the amountscharged in accordance with Section I (1) (b) and (2) (b) for
products landed from vessels flying Community flags.
Collection of thisfee s hall be without prejudice to collection of the fee
provided for in point 2 (b) of Chapter I in the event of further processing.
For the purposes of implementing this Chapter, Member States shall apply
the fees provided for under Section I to imports landed by vessels flying the
flag of Greenland.
4. Member Statesmay derogate from point 2 by rais ing feesto the level of
actual costs.
5. The fee provided for in point 2 shall be payable by the importer, or his
customs agent, and collected at the customs office responsible for the border
inspection post or directly at the border inspection post.
6. Member Statess hall be authorized to apply until 31 December 1999 the fees
provided for under Section I to imports landed from fishing vessels belonging1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 9
▼M6
to joint venturesregis tered in accordance with the relevant Community
provision.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 10
▼M6
ANNEX B
FEES INTENDED TO ENSURE THAT THE CONTROLS ON LIVE
ANIMALS AND PRODUCTS OF ANIMAL ORIGIN PROVIDED FOR
INDIRECTIVE96/23/EECARECARRIEDOUT
1. The fee referred to in Article 2 shall be fixed as follows:
(a) for live animalsfor s laughter and meat covered by Chapter I of Annex
A: ECU 1,35 per tonne of slaughtered meat;
(b) for aquaculture productscovered by Chapter III of Annex A: ECU 0,1
per tonne of marketed product;
(c) for milk and milk products: ECU 0,02 per 1 000 litres of raw milk;
(d) for egg products: the amount corresponding to the actual cost of the
control;
(e) for honey: Member Statesmay charge an amount covering the actual
cost of the inspection or control.
2. In compliance with the levelsfixed in point 1, Member Statesmay opt for
one of the following schemes:
(a) the fee referred to in point 1 is collected in full in an establishment
forming part of the chain of production:
— slaughterhouse in the case of the fee provided for in point 1 (a),
— establishment carrying out preparation and/or processing in the case
of the fee provided for in point 1 (b),
— raw milk collection establishment in the case of the fee provided for
in point 1 (c);
(b) a proportion of the fee referred to in point 1 iscollected at every s tage in
the chain of production, including the rearing stage, in accordance with
criteria to be defined by the Member States.
3. The fee referred to in point 1 shall be payable by the operator or the owner
of the establishment or establishments concerned, who may, however, pass
on the fee charged to the natural or legal person on whose behalf the opera-
tionsconcerned are carried out.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 11
▼M6
ANNEX C
FEESTOBECHARGEDFORLIVEANIMALS
CHAPTERI
Live animals and products of animal origin covered by Directive 90/425/
EEC
1. To finance controlsat origin a fee mus t be charged.
2. The scope and the level of the fee, the detailed rules for its application,
including in particular the determination of those liable for payment, and
any exceptionss hall be laid down in accordance with the procedure in
Article 8.
CHAPTERII
Liveanimalsintendedforimportationcovered byDirective 91/496/EEC
1. The fee referred to in Article 3 isfixed:
(a) for animalsof the s peciesreferred to in Chapter I of Annex A at the
standard rate of ECU 5 per tonne liveweight with a minimum amount
of ECU 30 per consignment;
(b) for animals of other species at the actual cost of inspection expressed
either per animal or per tonne imported, with a minimum of ECU 30
per consignment it being understood that this minimum does not apply
to imports of species referred to in Commission Decision 92/432/EEC.
However, Member States may by way of derogation increase these amounts
to the level of actual costs.
2. For importsfrom any of the countrieswhich asat 20 February 1995 have
begun negotiationswith the European Union with a view to concluding a
comprehensive agreement on the equivalence of veterinary guarantees
(animal health and public health) based on the principle of reciprocal treat-
ment and with which such an agreement has been concluded before 31
December 1996, Member Statesmay, until 30 June 1997, maintain this
reduced level of fees.
The amount of the fee to be charged on importsfrom any of the third coun-
tries referred to in the first subparagraph shall be fixed in the comprehensive
equivalence agreement with the said third country taking into account the
following principles:
— the frequency of checks,
— the level of the fee applied by the said third country to imports origi-
nating in the European Union,
— abolition of other charges levied by the third country, such as compulsory
lodging or collection of a health bond.
3. The fee referred to in point 1 ispayable by the importer or hiscus tomsagent
and collected at the customs office responsible for the border inspection post,
or directly to the border inspection post.
4. At the request of a Member State, accompanied by appropriate supporting
documentsand in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 18 of
Directive 89/662/EEC, a lower level of feesmay be applied to importsfrom
certain third countries.
5. Member Statesmay allocate part of the yield of the feesprovided for in this
Chapter to a health solidarity fund designed to strengthen the veterinary
services to allow them to react more effectively to any appearance of anexotic disease.1985L0073 — EN — 01.07.1996 — 006.001 — 12