EN    EN EN 
EN    EN  COMMISSION OF THE E UROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 2.7.2008 
SEC(2008) 2181 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
 
accompanying the 
Proposal for a  
 
COUNCIL DIRECTIVE  
 
on implementing the principle of equal treatment between persons irrespective of 
religion or belief, disabilit y, age or sexual orientation 
 
Summary of the Impact Assessment  
{COM(2008) 426 final} 
{SEC(2008) 2180} 
EN 2   EN COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
Document accompanying  
the proposal for a Council Directive on the principle of equal treatment 
Summary of the Impact Assessment 
1. INTRODUCTION 
The right to equal treatment is a general principle of Community law1. Article 13 of the 
Treaty specifically allows action to combat discrimination based on sex, racial or ethnic 
origin, religion or belief, disability, age and se xual orientation. This is also recognised by 
Article 21 of the EU Charte r of Fundamental Rights.  
The EU has taken effective action2 on the basis of Article 13 EC, supplementing the already 
existing comprehensive body of gender equality la w. Yet discrimination st ill exists in many 
areas, such as in the access to  and supply of goods and serv ices, housing, education, social 
services and health care.  
The Commission committed itself ear ly in its mandate to examini ng the case for extending the 
legal framework based on Article 13 EC, star ting with the 2004 Green Paper 'Equality and 
non-discrimination in an Enlarged Eur opean Union', the 2005 Commission framework 
strategy on non-discrimination and equal opportunities for all, th e European Year of Equal 
Opportunities for All 2007, and continuing throu gh to its 2008 legislative work programme3. 
2. P RESENT LEGAL FRAMEWORK  
The present EC legal framework provides much more extensive protection from 
discrimination on grounds of sex, race or ethnic origin than from discrimination on grounds of 
religion or belief, disability, age or sexual or ientation, as shown in the table below. These 
directives have now been trans posed into national law, with th e result that protection against 
discrimination has greatly incr eased under national law. In a ddition to legal protection, EU-
level action has resulted in grea ter assistance to victims through the establishment of 'equality 
bodies': 20 Member States had no such body previously.  
                                                 
1 Case 203/86 Spain v Council, (paragraph 25, and Case C-15/95 EARL de Kerlast, paragraph 35), Case 
C-144/04 Mangold (paragraph 75). 
2 Directives 2000/43/EC, 2000/78/EC and 2004/113/EC. 
3 COM (2007) 640. 
EN 3   EN Existing legal framework at European level: 
Grounds 
Field Race Religion Disability Age Sexual 
orientation Sex 
Employment 
& vocational 
training Yes + 
Equality body Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes + 
Equality body 
Education Yes + 
Equality body No No No No No 
Goods and 
services Yes + 
Equality body No No No No Yes + 
Equality body 
Social 
protection Yes + 
Equality body No No No No Yes + 
Equality body 
Although a number of Member States go beyond the minimum standards set out, the level and 
extent of protection against discrimination on the various grounds is very varied. Five 
Member States4 have detailed legal protection against discrimination on grounds of religion or 
belief, disability, age or sexua l orientation in all the areas shown above. Others have more 
general Constitutional provisions or legal protection in some areas, or on some grounds, but not all. 
Differing levels of protection from discrimination influence individuals'  decisions  to make use 
of their rights of fr ee movement, for instance to travel , work or study in another Member 
State. It is also makes it more difficult for pr oviders of goods and services to operate across 
borders. 
3. E
VIDENCE AND CONSULTATION  
The "Mapping study" commissioned by the Commission in 2005 on existing national 
measures going beyond the EU requirements and their impact was received in 20065. In June 
2007 the Commission wrote to the Member Stat es to draw their attention to the study, 
announcing the public consultation, and asking th em to provide further information on 
measures taken or planned to go beyond the 2000 Directives.  
In addition, the Commission commissioned a further study6 in 2007 from the European 
Evaluation Policy Consortium. The result, en titled "Study on discri mination on grounds of 
religion or belief, age, disabil ity and sexual orientat ion outside of employment", looks at the 
nature and extent of discrimination outside employment in the EU, and the potential (direct 
and indirect) costs this may have  for individuals and society.  
The Report takes account of the reports from th e European Network of Independent Experts 
in the non-discrimination field and the results of a spec ial Eurobarometer surv ey carried out in 
                                                 
4 Ireland, Bulgaria, Luxembourg, Slovenia and Hungary. 
5 http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/public/pubst_en.htm#stud  
6 EPEC, Study on discrimination on grounds of religio n or belief, age, disability and sexual orientation 
outside of employment, available at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/org/imass_en.htm  
EN 4   EN March 2008 on discrimination and inequality in Europe7 and a more narrowly focussed 
Eurobarometer flash survey in February 20088. 
Particular mention should be made  of the public on-line consultation9, a survey of the 
business sector10, and a written consultati on of, and meetings with, the social partners and 
European level NGOs active in  the non-discrimination field11. In parallel, the main EU-level 
NGO representing people with di sabilities presented a petition calling for legislation signed 
by some 1.3 million people.  
The results of the public consultation and th at of the NGOs was a clear call for more 
legislation at EU level to incr ease the level of protection agai nst discrimination although some 
argued for ground-specific directiv es in the areas of disabili ty and of sex. The European 
Business Test Panel consultation also indicated th at businesses believe it would be helpful to 
have the same level of protection from di scrimination across the EU, although the social 
partners representing business were against new legislation in principle, which they saw as 
increasing red tape and costs. The trade union s were in favour of prohibiting discrimination 
outside the labour market on groun ds of age, disability, religi on or sexual orientation, and 
pointed out that discrimination out side the labour market affected their members' ability to 
work (e.g. the lack of accessible transport for disabled workers). 
4. B ASE LINE SCENARIO  
The current EC directives woul d continue to apply. Some but not all Member States would 
have detailed national legal provisions protecting people who experience discrimination 
outside the labour market; others have much  more general constitutional provisions.  
Discrimination against individuals on grounds of  age, disability, religion or belief and sexual 
orientation will continue to occur, creati ng distress for the individuals concerned and 
unnecessary costs and burdens for individua ls, businesses and society as a whole. 
The UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities, which the EC and 26 Member 
States have signed, will  need to be implemented by thos e Member States and the EC.  
5. P ROBLEM DEFINITION  
A substantial number of people in the European Union suffer from or are at risk of 
discrimination, as shown by the public consulta tion (35% of respondents claimed to have 
suffered discrimination in education, social protection or health care on grounds of age, 
disability, religion or sexua l orientation; and 20% claimed they had experienced 
discrimination in access to goods, services or housing). According to a Eurobarometer 
survey12 conducted in February 2008, between 8% a nd 16% of EU citizens  said they or a 
member of their family or friends had expe rienced discrimination on grounds of their age, 
                                                 
7 Special Eurobarometer Survey 296 on discrimination in the EU, to be published in July 2008 on the 
following web pages: http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/public/pubst_en.htm  
and http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/archives/eb_special_en.htm  
8 Flash Eurobarometer 232; the full results are available online at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_232_en.pdf  
9 The full results of the consultation can be accessed at: 
http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/news/news_en.htm#rpc  
10 http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ebtp/consultations/index_en.htm  
11 http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/org/imass_en.htm#ar  
12 Flash Eurobarometer 232; 
EN 5   EN disability, religion, sexu al orientation or a combination of  factors. The EPEC study presents 
evidence of the scale of disc rimination on the grounds of religi on and belief, age, disability 
and sexual orientation in a number of areas (access to goods and services, health care, 
education, transport etc). The NGOs that responde d to the consultation also gave specific 
examples of discrimination.  
The legal protection that victims of discrimina tion can expect varies according to the grounds 
of discrimination concerned, whether it takes place in employment or in other areas of life, 
and where they live. This difference in prot ection from discrimination at EU and national 
level has practical consequences: it means that the incidences of discrimination identified in 
the Report are not addressed in a coherent manner and that vi ctims of discrimination have 
unequal means of redress depending on their Member  State. It also means that differences in 
protection afforded by the Member States may affect people's mobility as well as the cross-
border marketing of goods and services. 
6. EU  POLICY RESPONSES  
The objectives of any action would be to st ep up the protection of individuals from 
discrimination, achieve greater social inclusion and full participation by all groups in society 
and the economy, and provide a clear legal fr amework across the Member States that can 
stimulate cross-border trad e and unfetter movement. 
A number of ways of possibilitie s were looked at and after a pr eliminary screening of possible 
policy options, six were sele cted for further analysis: 
• no new action at EU level 
• self-regulation dealing with insu rance and/or banking services 
• a recommendation dealing specifically with th e competences of the equality bodies and 
multiple discrimination 
• a general recommendation  
• single ground directive(s)  
• a multi-ground directive  
7. C OMPARISON OF THE OPTIONS  
Each option was analysed to assess the extent to which it could meet the objectives, and how 
it compares with the baseline scenario of  no new action but "business as usual".  
Economic and social impacts were examined fo r all options, as were environmental impacts 
where relevant. As far as possible, figures are provided to illustrate costs and benefits to individuals, providers of goods  and services, and society as  a whole, although it should be 
pointed out that reliable data on discrimination, and the related co sts, can be difficult to find.  
The option of not taking action would not tackle th e problems which have been identified, 
would mean that the economic and societal costs of discrimination remain, and would 
increase the risk of widening the gap in legal protection.  
The non-legislative options looke d at could not guarantee any cl ear improvement in the level 
of protection against discrimination because it was impossible to foresee to what extent the 
EN 6   EN Member States would take up th ese options and implement them effectively. A dialogue with 
the insurance and banking industr ies was considered a possibly e ffective way of dealing with 
allegations of discrimination in that context. 
Member State action alone, based on national constitutional and legal frameworks, was 
considered to run the risk that differences in th e levels of protection w ould not only be left in 
place but could also widen.  
The only sure way to make clear progress to wards the objectives identified is through a 
legally binding measure at EU level. The expe rience with the existing Directives was positive 
and their transposition resulted in a much highe r level of protection against discrimination in 
many Member States than was the situation previously, or would have been without the 
impetus of EU action.  
The Report also explains that a directive whic h prohibited discrimination based on disability, 
as well as the other gr ounds, could be an effective and cohe rent way for the Member States to 
implement parts of the UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabi lities. In particular, 
by defining what is expected  in terms of "reasonable accom modation" a directive would 
provide greater legal certainty than the Conv ention. In addition a directive would provide 
clearer and more effective mechanisms of  redress for victims of discrimination.  
8. C ONCLUSION  
The Impact Assessment Report comes to the c onclusion that a legally binding measure at 
Community level extending the scope of protection against di scrimination on grounds of age, 
disability, sexual orientation a nd religion or belief would be th e best suited instrument to 
achieve the defined objectives  
9. THE NEW DIRECTIVE  
• would build on the approach and concepts of  the existing Article 13 EC directives and 
notably 2000/43/EC and 2000/78/EC, for example the definitions of discrimination and 
harassment, the obligation to provide reasona ble accommodation, as well as the procedural 
rules; 
• would only prohibit discrimination in the areas that fall within EC competence, so would 
not affect the organisation or content of edu cation (e.g. special needs education), questions 
of marital status (e.g. same sex partnerships /marriages) or family law (e.g. adoption) or 
national rules on the secular nature of the State or its institutions; 
• would lay down minimum prescr iptions, so that Member St ates are free to adopt or 
maintain provisions affording greater protectio n and some Member St ates could, on their 
own initiative, step up the level of  protection provided nationally; 
• would not affect national constitutional provisi ons requiring equal treatment or prohibiting 
discrimination. 
New legislation could be coupled  with a dialogue to look at perceived discrimination in the 
insurance and banking sectors, in order to clarify rules fo r industry and consumers. The 
promotion of non-legal measures to combat di scrimination, such as raising awareness of 
discrimination, training and exchange  of good practice would continue.