ARCHIVESHISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(79)102
Vol.1979/0052

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement (CEE, Euratom) n°354/83 duConseil du1erfévrier 1983
concernant l'ouverture aupublic desarchives historiques delaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergie atomique (JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifié par lerèglement (CE, Euratom) n°1700/2003 du22septembre 2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003, p.1),cedossier estouvert aupublic. Lecaséchéant, lesdocuments
classifiés présents dans cedossier ontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article 5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No354/83 of1February 1983
concerning theopening tothepublic ofthehistorical archives oftheEuropean Economic
Community andtheEuropean Atomic Energy Community (OJL43,15.2.1983, p.1),as
amended byRegulation (EC, Euratom) No1700/2003 of22September 2003 (OJL243,
27.9.2003, p.1),this fileisopen tothepublic. Where necessary, classified documents inthis
filehave been declassified inconformity with Article 5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr.354/83 desRates vom 1.
Februar 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI. L43vom 15.2.1983,
S.1),geändert durch dieVerordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr.1700/2003 vom 22.September 2003
(ABI. L243vom 27.9.2003, S.1),istdiese Datei derÖffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit
erforderlich, wurden dieVerschlusssachen indieser Datei inÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel 5
dergenannten Verordnung freigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(79)102 final
Brussels .1final
March 1979
PROPOSAL FOR ACOUNCIL REGULATION (EEC )
AMENDING REGULATION (EEC )No1111 /77LAYING
DOWN COMMON PROVISIONS FOR ISOGLUCOSE
(Presented bythe Commission totheCouncil )
\
\
t
C0M(79 )102 final

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
Conmon provisions forisoglucose were laiddowninRegulation (EEC)NO1111/77»
ASlastamended byRegulation (EEC)NO1298/78.Inparticular these provisions
iraoosed alevy system ,with effect from 1July 1977 >onthewhole ofthe
'Community 'sproduction ofisoglucose .Fortheperiods 1977/78and1978/79the
isoglucose production levywasfixed at5uaper100kgofdrymatter .This
"corresponded tohalftheproduction levyapplicable to"B"quota sugar (i.e.
sugar produced "between basic andmaximum quotas )andrepresented 15$ofthe
intervention price ofwhite sugar .Theprimary objective inintroducing this
system wastoequalise theconditions ofcompetition between sugar andisoglucose
having regard tothegrowth inisoglucose production andtothedifficulties in
disposing ofexisting surplusses ontheCommunity andworld markets insweeteners .
.Additionally ,theisoglucose levy wasintended asacontribution tothefinancing
oftherefunds necessary toexport these surplusses ,refunds which ,since 1977 »
havereached levels between 20and25uaper100kgofsugar .This contribution
wasregarded asjustifiable because theprice ofisoglucose depends directly on
theprice ofsugar ,andthelatter hasbeen fixed atalevel wellabove that
which would have applied intheabsence ofthequota system ,which extends only
tosugar manufacturers .
2.On25October 1978theEuropean Court ofJustice gaveajudgement under Article 177
oftheE33Treaty stating ,inparticular ,thatCouncil Regulation (EEC)NOHll/77
of17May1977wasinvalid totheextent towhich itsArticles 8and9imposed a
production levy onisoglucose of5^Per drymat 'tert
TheCourt didnotuphold themotives which ledtheCommission andtheCouncil
toimpose thislevy .Accordingly theCourt declared thatthelevybreached the
general principle ofnon-discrimination within themeaning ofArticle 40(3)of
theEECTreaty .Itemphasised first andforemost thefactthattheisoglucose
production levywasapplied tototal production whilst thesugar production levy
wasimposed onlyon-B-quota sugar ,also ,itwasonlythesugar manufacturers who,
bylimiting their production ,hadthepossibility ofreducing thecharge re­
presented bythelevy .
Mditionally ,theCourt pointed outthatbyvirtue oftheorganisation ofthe
market inthesugar sector about 60*oftheaverage charge resulting fromthe
production levywasborne bythebeetgrowers ;andthat ,byomitting totake
this factor intoconsideration inthecalculations ,thecharges borne bythe
sugarmanufacturers (thesugar production levyin1977/78was9.85ua100kg
ofwhich 5.94wasbornebythebeetgrowers and3-91bythemanufacturers )

hadbeenappreciablyover-estimated .Finally,theCourtconsideredthatwithin
thelimitofthewAnand"B"quotasthesugarmanufacturers benefittedfrom
marketguaranteeswhilsttheisoglucoseproducersdidnotenjoysimilarad­
vantages.TheCourtconcludedbystatingthatitwasuptotheCounciltotake
allthenecessarymeasures,compatiblewithCommunitylaw,toensurethat
themarketinsweetenersfurictionedproperly.
.InthelightoftheforegoingtheCommissionbelievesthatsuchmeasuresshould
nowbetakeninrespectoftheperiodJuly1979toJune1980andthatthey
shouldbeanalogoustothosewhichareinforceinthesugarsectorupto
30June1980.Theproposedmeasuresareattachedhereto.
Themostimportantoftheseinvolvestheallocationofabasicquotatoeach
isoglucoseproducer;andinordertoavoiddiscrimination betweenthetwosectors
thisquotashouldbedetermined,asinthesugarsector,onthebasisofeffective
productioninareferenceperiod.Giventhatisoglucoseproductioninthe
Communitybeganonlyin1974/75»andhasdevelopedsuccessivelysincethen,it
wouldbeappropriatetoadoptasareferencetheproductionrealised6incethe
Courtpronounceditsjudgement,suchproductionnothavingbeensubjecttothe
restrainingeffectoftheproductionlevyoriginallyprovidedfor.Andbecause
thisperiodcoversonlyfourmonthsitwouldbeappropriatetomultiplythe
productionthereinbyafactorofthree.Nevertheless ,ifthisreferenceturns
outtobelessfavourablethanonebasedonproductionduringthe.mostrecent
periodof12monthscorresponding tothelastyear(1July1977"to30June1978)»
theperiodinwhichisoglucoseproductionreacheditshighesteverlevel(l),then
thelatterreferenceshouldbeusedtoestablishthebasicquota.TheCommission
considersitnecessarytoprovide,attheCommunitylevel,forareservequantity
inordertotakeaccountoftheparticularsituationofthisorthatunder­
taking,notablythosenothavingbegun,orwhichwillonlybegin,theirpro­
ductionafterthestartofthereferenceperiodofproduction.Asregardsthis
supplementary quantityitisworthrecallingtheprovisionslaiddownin
RegulationNoIOO9/67/EBContheintroductionofthequotaarrangementsinthe
sugarsector.Startingwiththe1968/69sugaryear,thoseprovisionsestablished
basicquotastotalling6.48miotbasedonaproductioninthereferenceperiod
1961/65of5*78miot,withareservequantitytotakeaccountofparticular
cases*
(l)ESCproductionin1976:
EECproductionin1976/77î
EECproductionin1977/78:70i000tdrymatter
82000tdrymatter
102810tdrymatter

The"basicquotaforisoglucosemust"bemultipliedbyacoefficienttodeter­
minethemaximumquota.Suchacoefficientmustcorrespondtothatfixedfor
sugarundertakingsfortheI979/8Osugaryear.
Allisoglucoseproductionexceedingthemaximumquotaofanundertakingmust
beexportedtothirdcountrieswithoutaCommunityguaranteeandmaynotbe
disposedofontheCommunity'sinternalmarket*Thisequateswiththesituation
inthesugarsector.
Inordertostrengthenthemarketguaranteesforisoglucoseproducersitwould
beappropriatetoallowhenceforththatexportsofisoglucoseinthenatural
stateaswellasintheformofprocessedgoodsmaybenefitfromrefunds
corresponding tothoseapplicabletosugarexportedintheformofprocessed
goods.
Initspricesproposalsforthe1978/79sugaryear(l)theCommissioninformed
theCouncilthatitwasinitiatinganenquiryoftheCommunityundertakings
concernedastothecomparativecostsofinvertsugar,liquidsugarandiso-
glucose.TheCommissionundertookto^irtformtheCouncilofanyconclusions
vjhichmightbedrawnfromtheenquiryinamannerwhichwouldenablethem
tobetakenintoaccount.
InthisconnectiontheCommissionwishestopointoutthatforreasonsoutside
theCommission'scontrolthisenquiry,whichwascarriedoutbyaprivatefirm
acceptedbytheinterestedparties,hadtobeconfinedtoasingleMemberState
(Belgium)andtotwoenterprises (RaffineriesTirlemontoise S.A.andG.R.
AmylumN.V.);anditgoeswithoutsayingthatthefiguresobtainedfromthe
twoenterprises oughtnottobecirculated.
Nevertheless ,thefactthatitemergedfromtheenquirythattheproduction
costsofisoglucosewerebelowthoseofinvertsugar,plustheexistenceof
si^iificantunusedcapacitiesinthestarchandglucosesectors,togetherwith
thedifficultiesinthedisposalofsurplusses(whichwillrequireafurther
reductionin"B"quotasinthe1979/80sugaryear),stronglyreinforcethe
Commission'sconvictionthatitsproposedmeasuresarenecessary.
Finally,theComissionwishestoemphasisethatthesemeasureswouldapply
onlyduringtheperiod1July1979to30June1980andwouldbeentirely
withoutprejudicetotheCommission'spositionwithregardtothefuture
policyconcerningthemarketinsweeteners(sugarandisoglucose)#
(l)SeeDocCOM(77)525finalof9.12.1977voiIpage41point4

-4-
TheCommissionisequallyinfavouroftheeliminationofimpediments
totheutilisation ofisoglucosewhichexistatpresentasaresult,
ontheonehand,ofnationallegislationincertainMemberStatesand,
ontheotherhand,offiscalmeasures(excisedutiesandothertaxen)
appliedinthecaseofsucroseandisoglucose.
InthisrespecttheCommissionwouldpressMemberStatestoeliminate
theseimpediments asquicklyaspossibleandtoapply,whereandtothe
extentnecessary,afiscaltreatmentwhichdoesnotdiscriminate between
surcroseandisoglucose.

PROPOSAL FOR ACOUNCIL REGULATION (EEC )
amending Regulation (EEC)No1111 /77Laying down common
provisions forisoglucose
THECOUNCIL OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
having regard totheTreaty establishing theEuropean Economic Community ,
and inparticular Article 43thereof .
Having regard totheproposal from the Commission ,
(1)Having regard totheOpinion oftheEuropean Parliament ,
Having regard totheOpinion oftheEconomic andSocial Committee ^,
Whereas Articles 8and9ofCouncil Regulation (EEC )No1111 /77of17May
1977laying down common provisions forisoglucose ^^,aslastamended by
(4)Régulation (EEC )No1298 /78 ,provide for asystem ofproduction levies
applicable until 30June 1980 ;
Whereas the Court ofJustice oftheEuropean Communities delivered ajudge­
ment on25October 1978 stating that Regulation (EEC )No1111 /77isinvalid
inasmuch asArticles 8and9thereof impose alevy ontheproduction ofiso-
glucose offive units ofaccount per100kilograms ofdrymatter forthe
period corresponding tothe1977 /78sugar year ;
Whereas theCourt decided that this levy system infringed thegeneral prin­
ciple ofnon-discrimination within themeaning ofArticle 40(3 )oftheEEC
Treaty ;whereas thediscrimination arises from thefact that theisoglucose
levy applies tototal production tut thesugar levy applies only to
production exceeding thebasic quota without exceeding themaximum quota ;
Whereas themost appropriate means foravoiding inequality oftreatment istosubject
isoglucose production torules analogous tothose atpresent applying tosugar pro­
duction until 30June I98O ;whereas this isparticularly neces­
sary inview oftherestricted outlets atpresent available onthemarket
forsweeteners ;whereas this implies therefore ,theintroduction ofatemporary
system forisoglucose production analogous tothat applied tosugar pro­
duction byvirtue ofCouncil Regulation (EEC)No3330 /74of19December 1974
(5)onthecommon organization ofthemarket insugar ,aslastamended by
Regulation (EEC)No1396/78^^;
(1)0JNoC
(2)0JNoC
(3)0JNoL134,.28.5.1977 ,p.4(4)0JNoL160,17.6.1978 ,p.9
(5)0JNoL359,31.12.1974 ,p.1
(6)0JNoL170,27.6.1978 ,p.1

Whereas,sincethemanufactureofisoglucosebeganintheCommunityonly
in1974/751i"tisfairtoallot/eachmanufacturerabasicquotaaccording
tohisoutputduringthemostrecentpossibleperiod,namelyaquantity
equaltothreetimeshisoutputintheperiod1November1978to28February
1979»orhisoutputintheperiod1July1977to30June1978ifthatwere
themorefavourablereferenceperiodfortheundertailcing concerned;whereas
itisappropriatetoallocatebasicquotasfortheperiod1July1979to
30June1980Jvrhereas,moreover,inordertotakeintoaccounttheparticular
circumstances ofthisorthatundertaking ,particularly onewhichbegan
productiononlyrecently,itisappropriatetoprovidethepossibility offixing
basicquotasatahigherlevelwithinthelimitof10-Joofthesumofthose
quotas;
Whereas,withthesameneedforanalogywiththesystemappliedtosugarpro­
ductionandforequalityoftreatment,itisnecessarytofixaspecificanount
oftheproductionlevyapplicabletoisoglucoseproductionexceedingthebasic
quotawithoutexceedingthemaximumquotaandwhichtakesaccountofthefact
thatparticipation bytheproduceroftherawmaterialisnotpossible;whereas,
therefore,itisappropriatetotakeintoconsideration theshareofthepro­
ductionlevybornebysugarmanufacturers ;
Whereas,intheaforementioned judgement,theCourtdecidedalsothattheiso-
glucoseproducersdidnotbenefitfromguaranteessimilartothoseprovidedfor
sugarmanufacturers ;whereas,therefore,itisappropriatetoprovidethat
restitutions corresponding tothoseprovidedfortheproductsreferredtoin
Article1(l)(d)ofRegulation(ESC)Wo3330/74mayapplytoexportsofisoglucose
thenaturalstateaswellasintheformofthegoodslistedintheAnnexto
Regulation(ESC)NOllll/77»
KA3ADOPTEDTHISREGULATION :

-3-
Article 1
Thetext ofArticle 4(1)ofRegulation (EEC)No1111 /77isreplaced bythe
following :
Article 4
1.Provision maybemade foranexport refund fortheproducts listed in
Article 1when unprocessed andforisoglucose falling within subheading
17.02 DIexported intheform ofthegoods listed intheAnnex .
The level oftherefund shall bedetermined per100kilograms ofdry
matter ,taking into account thefollowing inparticular :
(a)theexport refund fixed byvirtue ofArticle 19(1 )ofRegulation
(EEC)No3330 /74fortheproducts referred toinArticle 1(1)(d)
ofthat Regulation ;
(b)theeconomic aspects oftheproposed exportation s.
When therefund isbeing fixed ,account may betaken oftheneed to
establish abalance between theuseofCommunity rawmaterials inthe
manufacture ofprocessed goods forexport tonon-member countries and
theuseoftheproducts ofsuch countries brought inunder inward
processing arrangements .".
Article 2
1.Theprovisions ofTitle IIofRegulation (EEC)No1111 /77arehereby
repealed with effect from 1July 1977 .
2. i%asures consequent upon therepeal inparagraph 1shall be
adopted inaccordance with theprocedure laid down inArticle 12of
Regulation (EEC )No1111 /77.
Article 3
Thefollowing Title isinserted after Article 7ofRegulation (EEC)
No1111 /77:
"TITLE II
Quota arrangements
Arti eie 8
1.Article 9shall apply fortheperiod 1July 1979 to30June 1930 .

-4-
2.Thearrangements applicablefrom1July19o0shallbeadoptedbythe
Councilbefore1January1980inaccordancewiththeprocedurelaid
downinArticle43(2)oftheTreaty.
Article9
1.Abasicquotashallbeallottedtoeachisoglucoseproducingundertaking
established intheCommunity.
2.Thebasicquotaofeachsuchundertakingshallboequaltothreetinesits
production,asdeterminedforthepurposesofthisRegulation,duringthe
period1November1978"to28February1979»expressedasdrymatter.
Nevertheless ,iftheproductionofisoglucoseresultingfromtheapplication
oftheprecedingsubparagraph islessthanthat,asdeterminedforthepur­
posesofthi3Regulation,bythesameundertaking ,duringtheperiod1July
1977to30June1973thelatterquantityshallconstituteitsbanicquota.
Moreover,areservequantityequalto10:joofthesumofthebasicquotas
resultingfromtheapplication oftheprecedingsubparagraphs maybeused
forthepurposeofallocatingsupplementstobasicquotas.
3.FortheperiodreferredtoinArticle8(l)theseshallalsobeallotted
toeachundertaking havingabasicquotabyvirtueofparagraphs 1and2
amaximumquotaequaltoitsbasicquotamultipliedbyacoefficient .
Thiscoefficientshallbethatfixedbyvirtueofthesecondsubparagraph
ofArticle25(2)ofRegulation(iSSC)Ho3330/74fortheperiod1July1979
to30June1980.
4»Thequantityofisoglucoseproducedduringtheperiodreferredtoin
Article8(l)which:
-exceedsthemaximumquotaoftheundertaking
or
-wanproducedbyanundertaking nothavingabasicquota
maynotbedisposedofontheCommunity'sinternalmarketandmustbe
exportedinthenaturalstatetothirdcountrieswithouttheapplication
ofArticle4«

5.Forthequantityofisoglucoseproductionwhichexceedsthebasicquota
withoutexceedingthemaximumquotaMemberStatesshallchargeaproduction
levyontheisoglucoseproducerconcerned.Fortheperiodreferredtoin
Article8(l)theamountoftheisoglucoseproductionlevyshallbeorrual
totheshareofthesugarproductionlevy,asfixedforthe1979/80sugar
yearbyvirtueofArticle28ofRegulation (ESC)Fo3330/74,bornebythe
sugarmanufacturers .
6.TheCouncil,actingbyaqualifiedmajorityonaproposalfromtheComnission,
shallallocateasnecessarythereservequantityreferredtoinparagraph2
andshalladoptgeneralrulesfortheapplicationofthisArticle.
7.DetailedrulesfortheapplicationofthisArticle,whichshallinparticular
provideforthelevyingofachargeonthequantityofisoglucosereferred
toinparagraph4whichhasnotbeenexportedinthenaturalstateduring
theperiodreferredtoinArticle8(l)andfixtheamountoftheproduction
levyreferredtoinparagraph 5»shallbeadoptedinaccordancewiththe
procedurelaiddowninArticle12.".
Article4
ThisRegulationshallenterintoforceonthethirddayfollowingitspubli­
cationintheOfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCornmunitieg .
Itshallapplyfrom1July1979-
ThisRegulationshallbebindinginitsentiretyanddirectlyapplicablein
allMemberStates.
DoneatBrussels, FortheCouncil

FINANCIAL STATEMENT
Date2.1.79
I.BUDGETHEADING :Article 112Receipts
Anproon ations:7.2MEUA
2.TITLEoftheproject :Proposed Regulation amending Regulation (EEC)No1111/77
layingdowncommonprovisions forisoglucose (amendingArticles 4,8and9
thereof ).
3.LEGALBASIS:/\rticle43oftheEECTreaty
4.AIMSOFPROJECT:joestablish atemporary production quotasystemforisoglucose ,
following theEuropean Court'.s Judgement of25.10.78 whichinvalidated the
presentproduction levy.
(Repealofsaidlevywitheffectfrom1.7.77(1))
!5.FINANCIALIMPLICATIONSs.oEXPENDITURE chargedto
TOTHEECBUDGET
(REFUNDS/INTERVENTIONS )
-NATIONAL budgets
I-OTHERsectors5.1RECEIPTS
-OWNRESOURCES OFTHEEC
(LEVIES/CUSTOMS DUTIES)
-NATIONAL-NATIONALJPERIODOF1?MONTHSCURRENT FINANCIAL YEAR
<1979))·ΙΙΙΜΙ·Ι·1ΙΙΙΙΙ·–––
FOLLOWING FINANUAI .VFAP *
(1980 ) î
+1.3MEUA -6.7MEUA(3)+0.8MEUA l
5.0.1ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE
S.1.1ESTIMATED RECEIPTS Project coniinedtothemarketing year1979/80
5.2METHODOFCALCULATION _Isoglucose levy,=40%ofsugarlevy,wouldapplyto
isoglucose production betweenthebasicquotaandthemaximumquota,i.e."B"
isoglucose .
-Sugarlevy1979/80=10.05ua/100kg;isoglucose levy1979/80=4.02ua/100kg.
-Maximumsugarquota1979/80=120%(2);Bisoglucose 1979/80=ca27000tonn
Β
? ·
6.0CANTHEPROJECTBEFINANCEDFROMGR'0Pr-j ™ERELEVANT CHAPTER THECURRENTBUDGET?
YESW0X
6.3WILLFUTURE BUDGET BENECESSARY ?
appropri ationsYEsXftôX
OBSERVATIONS| "(1)Therepealofthepresentlevyof5UA/100kg,witheffectfrom||theCourt'sjudgement.Withanactualproduction between1.7.77and30.6.78of
102800t(thelevyhasbeensuspendedsincethelatterdate)thefinancialconsequence j
sjoftherepealamountsto5140000UA.• j
|(2)Assumingthatthe"B"sugarquotaisreducedto20%ofthebasicsugar I
1 quota.
I(3)Withrespecttothe1979Budget.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT (continued )
Following theCourt'sJudgement ,andinordertocontinue tocontrolthe
marketinsweeteners andensureequality oftreatment between sugarand
isoglucose ,theCommission isproposing thataquotasystembeintroduced
intheisoglucose sector.Fromthefinancial anglethiswouldmeanthat,
outsidebasicproduction ,partofthecostofmanaging thesweeteners market
wouldbebornebytheindustry uptoacertainlevelofproduction beyond
whichtheindustry wouldbearthewholecost.Theproduction betweenbasic
quotasandthatlevelinvolved charging aproduction levyof1.3MEUAper
annum(0.5MEUAin1979);ontheotherhand,atcurrentlevelsofrefunds,
thatsameproduction involved costsamounting to7.5MEUA.
The1979Budget,whichwasdrawnupbeforetheCourtissueditsJudgement ,
providedforachargeof7.2MEUAforthisoperation .Thelossofownresources
in1979wouldbe6.7MEUA.