EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 19.12.2011 
SEC(2011) 1615 final 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 
IMPACT ASSESSMENT 
Accompanying the document 
Proposal for a 
REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL 
establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the 
euro against counterfeiting (th e 'Pericles 2020' programme)  
{COM(2011) 913 final} 
{SEC(2011) 1614 final}  
 
EN - 1 -   EN 1. INTRODUCTION (LEGAL BASIS AND MANAGEMENT ) 
1.1. The Pericles programme 
The Pericles Programme is an exchange, assi stance and training progra mme for the protection 
of the euro against counterfe iting. The programme was esta blished by Council Decision 
2001/923/EC of 17 December 2001 and its effects were extended to all EU Member States, 
also including the ones which have not adopted the euro as the single currency, by Council Decision 2001/924/EC of 17 December 2001. Subseque nt amendments to these basic acts by 
Council Decisions 2006/75/EC, 2006/76/EC, 2006/ 849/EC and 2006/850/EC have prolonged 
the duration of the progr amme until 13 December 2013. 
1.1. Management of the programme 
OLAF is the leading service for the progra mme. Continuous contacts with TAIEX/HOME 
and CEPOL are necessary in order to assure coherence with possible actions potentially 
linked to the area of the protec tion of the euro. In particular , it could happen that events 
funded by CEPOL and TAIEX include, among others, th e protection of the euro issue. In such 
a case, specific coordination takes place and OLAF provides its support
1. The same happens if 
HOME or TAXUD are involved. Pericles being  the specifi c EC training tool for the 
protection of the euro, its actions are 100% focu sed on this matter and th eir target are staff 
working in this particular field. 
1.2. Implementation of th e programme (2006-2010) 
From 2006 until 2010, 442 actions were committed: 38 of these actions were implemented in 
the period 2006-2010 and the remaining 6 are scheduled to be implemented in 2011.  The organisers of these actions, co-funded under the Pericles Programme, have consisted of 
16 National Competent Authoritie s from 10 Member States.  
 
 
Actions per Member States
Belgium, 5
Germany, 7
Spain, 6
Hungary, 1Italy, 16Poland, 2France, 3The Netherlands, 1Portugal, 2Estonia, 1
 
Italy implemented the highest number of  actions: 36% of the total actions. 
                                                 
1  E.g.: shaping of the agenda and select speakers. 
2  During the same period of time, The Commission/ OLAF  organised 25 Pericles actions on its initiative. These 
actions are not included in this document.  
 
EN - 2 -   EN The following chart shows a breakdown of the number of actions committed per year. 
 
 
 
The following chart depicts the types of actions  carried out, the most  popular being staff 
exchanges and Seminar/Conferences (toge ther almost 80% of the actions)  
 
 
 
1.3. Value added of the programme 
While the most recent biannual figures for the num ber of counterfeit euro banknotes seized in 
2010 show reductions of 13% and 6% respectively (compared to the previous six months), the 
long-term trend shows an overall increase of 31%  in the last two years (compared to 2007-8). 
The number of counterfeit euro coins removed from circulation in 2010 increased by 8% 
compared to the year before and it s trend has been increasing from 20023. 
The euro continues to appear an interesting target  for organised crime groups active in the 
forgery of money, not only in Europe but also in other regions of the world. The international 
dimension of the threat with respect to eu ro counterfeiting results in the need for a 
                                                 
3  See details in par. 3.2. Type of Actions
Study
2%
Seminar/ 
Conference
36%
Training
20%Staff exchanges
 
42%Actions Committed per Yea r
2009: 8 actions
2008: 8 actions2007: 7 actions2006: 9 actions
2010: 12 actions
 
EN - 3 -   EN supranational coordination in facing it. Thr ough the Pericles programme, OLAF implements 
such a coordination in the specific field of tr aining activities. In part icular, by implementing a 
specific training strategy4 agreed with Member States, the programme complements the 
national training by adding a multidisciplinary and international dimension, provides the 
beneficiaries with the ability to carry on inte rnational trainings and increase the level of 
protection of the euro and the quality of coopera tion outside the European Union by directly 
involving the most sensitive thir d countries in specific traini ng actions (see below "regional 
cooperation").  
2. CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES  
The Pericles programme includes a multi-discipli nary set of actions involving stakeholders 
who are all important in the fi ght against euro counterfeitin g but whose contribution takes 
different forms – technical, legal,  financial and law-enforcement. 
The Commission has collected the opinions of th e stakeholders of the Pericles programme 
through (i) a mid-term evaluation conducted am ong the programme beneficiaries in early 
2011; (ii) the evaluation forms that Pericles action participants fill in following each of the 
events; and (iii) the views expressed by the expe rts in the Euro Counterfeiting Experts’ Group 
(ECEG)5, where implementation of the Pericles progr amme is one of the standard discussion 
items.  
Mid-term evaluation6 
By initiative of the programme manager, a mid-term evaluation was conducted among the 
programme beneficiaries. This mid-term ev aluation supplements the continuous feedback 
received from Member States (included in th e reports of the Euro Counterfeiting Experts 
Group, Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group7, meetings). Participants views are obtained by 
means of the evaluation forms filled in after each event.  
The result of the mid-term evaluation show s broad satisfaction with the Programme. 
Participants, at a percentage of 98%, were satisfied with the programme, whereas all the 
beneficiaries (100%) expressed their sati sfaction and asked fo r prolongation of the 
programme beyond 2013. 
Based on beneficiaries’ opini on and on the experts views: 
• Pericles increases the number of people trained at national level and the quality of 
trainings by adding an international and multidisciplinary dimension; 
• Pericles trainings are complementary a nd additional to the national trainings; 
                                                 
4  See annex. 
5  The Commission/OLAF’s Euro Counte rfeiting Experts Group meets three ti mes a year and brings together 
experts from all MS and relevant disciplines, as well as Europol, Interpol and the European Central Bank. The 
implementation of the Pericles programme is one of the standard items at the meetings of the Group. 
6  Report is in annex. 
7  The ECEG is chaired by Commission/OLAF and me ets three times per year in Brussels; it is a 
multidisciplinary group including experts from Member St ates (police, judicial and financial staff), European 
Commission, Europol, Interpol and European Central Bank. 
 
EN - 4 -   EN • Pericles trainings have a dire ct link with operational results (training of staff directly 
involved in the protection of the euro, such  as police, judicial and financial staff8); 
• Pericles is the instrument fo r providing the beneficiaries wi th the ability to carry on 
their own trainings. 
In addition, all beneficiaries participating on a regular basis in Euro Counterfeiting Experts’ 
Group (ECEG)9 meetings considered that their level of involvement was significant or very 
significant both at the multilateral and the bilateral level. The importance of the coordination by OLAF and the positive contribution of the Pr ogramme in increasing the protection of the 
euro were highlighted. 
The beneficiaries showed high appreciation for the Programme and its management by 
OLAF. The support to the protection of the eu ro is a continuous pr ocess that cannot be 
interrupted without prejudi ce to the entire system. 
Pericles is instrumental in providing the bene ficiaries with the ability to carry on the proper 
trainings and has become a na tural complement to the national training plans of Member 
States. 
Some beneficiaries made specific suggestions for the continuation and management of the 
programme, here below a short list of them
10; 
• Simplification: greater flexibility/ di scretion in using the granted amount 
The beneficiaries refer to the fact that th e Pericles Decision provi des for a rigid split 
between costs to be covered by Commission and costs to be covered by the Member 
States. This split complicates the prepara tion of the budget when the actions are not 
implemented on the beneficiaries’ premises11. 
This request has been taken under serious consideration in th e Commission proposal 
for the renewal of the programme. 
• Evaluation Committee: 
- To limit the evaluation to cost/effectiveness criteria  
- Need for more meetings of the Committee  - More flexibility to increase the amount of the advanced payments 
With respect to these comments, we notice that: - The criteria of evaluation are listed in the Financial Decision and in the Call for 
Proposals; - The number of the evaluation sessions is  strictly linked to the deadlines for 
submission of the applications; this nu mber (3) cannot be further increased; 
- In the second half of 2010, OLAF increased transpar ency and flexibility in 
providing “increased” advanced payments when  needed (the list of cases is within 
the Call for Proposals)  
                                                
 
8  E.g.: investigations against euro counterfeiting started in Colombia after the first Pericles training hold in 
Bogota in 2002. Pericles -trained Colombian staff carried out th e highest number of successful euro-
anticounterfeiting operations during the last 9 years outside EU.  
9  OLAF’s Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group brings toge ther experts from all MS and relevant disciplines, as 
well as Europol, Interpol and the European Central Bank. 
10  The entire document is in attachment. 
11  This is the case of the large majority of the actions. 
 
EN - 5 -   EN • Need for clarification regardi ng the type of documents and final procedures in order to 
avoid long delays in closing the actions  
Based on this, a specific Pericles Work shop took place in Brussels in June 2011. 
• Continuous monitoring and coordination to  avoid possible overlapping with other 
actions of European institutions occurs in the field of protecting the euro.  
This refers to the importance of coordina tion among European institutions in training: 
this is one of the main tasks for the Euro  Counterfeiting Experts Group. In the past 
some overlapping took place due to the fact that Europol di d not inform about its plans 
in advance; in consideration of this, OL AF already asked Europol to discuss all 
training activities in adva nce at the ECEG meetings. 
• Need for more specialised training on the di fferent types of the printing machines used 
by counterfeiters (under discussion at the m eetings of the Euro Counterfeiting Experts 
Group). 
The totality of beneficiaries (100%) reque sted a prolongation of Pericles beyond 2013. 
All the above mentioned feedback has been take n into account in this impact assessment.   
3. PROBLEM DEFINITION AND INTERVENTION LOGIC  
Size of the problem 
The status of euro counterfeiting can be desc ribed as follows: according to Europol Organised 
Crime Threat Assessment12, the euro continues to be a ta rget for organised crime groups 
active in the forgery of money, not  only in Europe but also in other regions of the world such 
as South America and Eastern Asia, which play s an increasing role in the supply of raw 
material and equipment. While the most recent biannual figures for the number of counterfeit 
euro banknotes seized in 2010 show  a declining course  through the year, an overall increase 
of 31% in the last two years (c ompared to 2007-8) was recorded. 
 According to the European Central Bank, more  than 97% of counterfeits removed from 
circulation in the second half of 2010 were found in euro area countries where there is a 
greater possibility for their local distribution; ju st 1.5% was seized in EU MS outside the euro 
area, and another 1.5% in ot her parts of the world.  
 
Organised crime groups involved in euro count erfeiting are character ised by their rigid 
organisation, with a strict dist ribution of tasks to cells opera ting independently in order to 
minimise risk. Organisers fund the activities but  do not take part in the production process; 
printers have very high levels of technical skill s (offset printing or digital printing); high level 
distributors purchase the counterfeits at low pri ces, while low level dist ributors are usually 
unskilled young people who operate in sma ll but flexible temporary networks.  
 Italy, Bulgaria and Colombia are among the fo remost countries for counterfeit currency 
production sites. The production of counterfeits is not limited to illegal laboratories: perhaps 
as a consequence of the global economic crisis, owners and employees of legitimate printing firms have become increasingly invo lved in this illicit activity. 
                                                
 
12  Source: OCTA 2011 https://www.Europol.Europa.eu/content/publication/octa-2011-eu-organised-crime-
threat-assessment-655  . 
 
EN - 6 -   EN  
There is also a dynamic relationship between cr iminal groups.  Counterfeit euro produced in 
Italy are circulated by a wide ra nge of groups active all over Eur ope, but particularly in Italy, 
France and Spain. Itinerant communities have also been identified among the main distributors. Criminal Groups in South Eastern Europe are also prominent in the production of 
counterfeit euro. Bulgarian producers cooperate mainly with Bulgarian, Lithuanian, Turkish, 
Romanian and Albanian criminal groups to  circulate counterfeit  banknotes. Meanwhile 
distributors of counterfeit euro use the same cha nnels for other illicit commodities, as in the 
case of Estonian and Lithuanian organised crim e groups also engaged in the trafficking of 
drugs. These groups are also involved in outs ourcing counterfeit euro distribution to local 
street-level drug dealers, whic h may emerge as an effectiv e long-term modus operandi for 
other groups as well. Moroccan groups involved in trafficking cannabis resin towards Spain 
and France also cooperate with Italian suppliers of counterfeit euro. (Extract from Europol EU 
Organised Crime Threat Assessment 2011). 
Consequences of the problem 
The above scenario, together w ith the appearance of new types of counterfeits also in 2011 
and the continuous seizures of co unterfeits by police, shows that  the level of threat for the 
euro continues to be high.  
The description of crimin al groups made by Europol
13 provide a precise qualitative evaluation 
of the threat as well; in particular descri bing the organised crime groups involved in euro 
counterfeiting as  "characterized  by their rigid organisation, with a strict distribution of tasks 
to cells operating independently in order to mini mize risk". In particular, the "organisers fund 
the activities but do not take part  in the production process; printe rs have very high levels of 
technical skills (offset printing or digital pr inting); high level distributors purchase the 
counterfeits at low prices, while low level di stributors are usually unskilled young people who 
operate in small but flexib le temporary networks.”  
As a result of the coherent m easures taken at EU and Member States level, the number of 
counterfeit euro banknotes and coins is small and remains under control. In  addition, there is a 
continuous discovery of illegal print shops and mints and a large number of counterfeits (both 
coins and banknotes) were seized be fore entering into circulation.  
                                                 
13  Source: OCTA 2011. 
 
EN - 7 -   EN Status of counterfeit euro banknotes (in pieces) 
 Total 
CounterfeitsTotal  
genuine 
circulating 
2010 751 000 13.6 billion 
2009 860 000 12.8 billion 
2008 666 000 11.5 billion 
2007 561 000 11.4 billion 
2006 565 000 10.6 billion 
2005 579 000 10.4 billion 
2004 594 000 9 billion 
2003  551,287 8.7 billion 
2002  167 118 8.2 billion 
 
According to the European Central Bank, during the first half of 2011 " the €20 and €50 
denominations continue to be the most counterfeited. During th e past six months, the share of 
counterfeit €20 banknotes increased and the shar e of €50 banknotes decreased. The two most 
counterfeited denominations together accounted for 79.0% of the total during the first half of 
2011. The €100 banknote is the third most counter feited denomination, accounting for 16.0% 
of the total. The share of the other de nominations (€5, €10, €200 and €500) is very low . 
The table below provides a percentage breakd own, by denomination, of the total number of 
counterfeits withdrawn from circul ation in the first half of 2011.  
Denomination €5 €10 €20 €50 €100 €200 €500
Percentage breakdown 0.5% 1.5% 43.0% 36.0% 16.0% 2.5% 0.5%
The majority (98%) of counterfeit s recovered in th e first half of 2011 we re found in euro area 
countries, with only around 1.5% being found in EU Me mber States outside the euro area and 
0.5% being found in other parts of the world. "14 
The continuous discovery of new dangerous ty pes of counterfeit euro banknotes is a strong 
indicator of the high in terest that criminality has in counterfeiting.  
                                                 
14   Source : ECB:  http://www.ecb.int/press/pr/date/2011/html/pr110117.en.html  . 
 
 
EN - 8 -   EN Status of euro coins (in pieces)  
 
 50-cent 1-euro 2-euro Total 
Counter
feits Total genuine 
in circulation  
(3 denom.)   
2010 24 900 30 800 130 300 186 000 16.1 billion 
2009 18 100 26 500 127 500 172 100 15.4 billion 
2008 16 600 24 500 154 800 195 900 14.8 billion 
2007 13 000 16 200 181 900 211 100 14.1 billion 
2006 8 286 14 099 141 437 163 822 13.2 billion 
2005 3 989 12 771 83 731 100 491 12.4 billion 
2004 950 8 482 65 046 74 478 11.5 billion 
2003  556 6 561 25 642 32 759 10.7 billion 
2002  29 1 105 1 035 2 169 9.7 billion 
 
The number of counterfeit euro coins removed from circulation in 2010 increased by 8% 
compared to the year before and its trend has been increasing from 2002 . Over the last four 
years the total number of count erfeit euro coins removed from circulation has been at the 
same level. In 2010 about 186 000 counterfeit coin s were detected. Since the introduction of 
the euro 16 illegal mint shops  have been dismantled.  
Nevertheless the number of new classes of c ounterfeits remains significant and so is the 
number of still operating illegal mints. This show s that the criminal potential remains and that 
continuous vigilance and coopera tion is necessary to guarantee the confidence in using euro 
coins. The impact of future action will have to be directed towards the increased vigilance by 
law enforcement bodies, including non EU countrie s, the cooperation with mints and private 
industry players in order to en sure the identif ication of counterfeits and the implementation by 
the competent authorities in Member States of  the authentication procedure, which become 
mandatory at the beginning of 2012. 
The 2-euro denomination remains by far the most counterfeited euro coin, representing almost 3 
out of every 4 counte rfeit euro coins. 
Council Regulation (EC) No 1338/2001 as amended by Regulation 44/2009 lays down 
measures necessary for the protection of euro against counterfeiting. Art. 6 of that Regulation 
requires credit institutions and any other related inst itutions to authenticate euro coins and 
banknotes before re-circulating them. For harm onizing authentication pr ocedures related to 
euro coins the European Parliament a nd the Council adopted Regulation 1210/2010 which 
sets the rules for the financ ial institutions for implementi ng art.6 of Regulation 1338/2001.  
 
EN - 9 -   EN Council Regulation (EC) No 2182/2004 as amended by Regulation 46/2009  concerning 
medals and tokens similar to euro coins aims  to avoid confusion between euro coins and 
medals/tokens similar to euro co ins. The regulation is  designed to protect the public from the 
risk of confusion or fraud caused by metallic objects, such as medals and tokens, with 
similarities to euro coins.  
The Regulation contributes to better differentia ting between euro coins and medals or tokens. 
The above indicates that the protection of the eu ro is successful. It al so demonstrates that 
criminality is still a potential thr eat that needs to be checked so as to remain at the present 
levels. Pericles plays an important role in this and is indispensable for maintaining this performance. 
Continuous support 
Protection of the euro against counterfei ting is a continuous process based on close 
cooperation between European Ins titutions and Member States. In  order to be effective, the 
support must be continuously adap ted to the priorities identified by threat analysis made at 
national and European level. Priorities and strategies of implementation are regularly 
discussed at the meetings of the euro Count erfeiting Experts Group. The ECEG assures the 
effective coordination and complementar y implementation of Pericles actions. 
The programme meets the need for continuing vi gilance, training and technical assistance 
necessary to sustain the protec tion of the euro against counte rfeiting, by providing a stable 
framework for the planning of Member States  programmes. This approach has yielded 
substantial results in terms of  number of people trained, quality  of training, complementarity, 
and operational results for th e protection of the euro.  
Drivers 
A number of key drivers have been identified wh ich have a negative eff ect on the joint efforts 
of the Commission and the Member States to work together to protect the euro against 
counterfeiting. 
In particular:  
– the euro continues to be a target for organised crime gr oups active in the forgery of money, 
not only in Europe but also in other regions of the world such as South America and 
Eastern Asia (driver 1); 
– differences in incentives and capacities between countries impede equivalence in the 
protection of euro against counterfeiting (driver 2). 
Driver 1: the euro continues to be a target  for organised crime groups active in the 
forgery of money, not only in Europe but al so in other regions of the world such as 
South America and Eastern Asia  
The following maps show the geographical co rrespondence between Pericles trainings and 
police operations in the South East of Europe. 
 
 
EN - 10 -   EN Latest Pericles actions in th e South East Region (2010-2011)  
 
 
 
 
 

 
EN - 11 -   EN Main police operations in th e South East region (2002-2011)  
 
 
Strategy 
The close correlation between Pericles and concre te protection of the euro in the field (both 
prevention and repression of this crime) relie s on the fact that the strategy for implementing 
the Pericles programme is largely based on the deliberations of the ECEG. Discussions focus 
on defining the specific needs for training and technical assistance, as well as the geographical areas where action needs to be take n; this ensures the efficient implementation 
of the Pericles programme in the EU Member States most affected by euro counterfeiting and 
the active support and involvement  of other Member States.  
With respect to areas outside the EU, priorities are also set on the basis of discussions in the 
euro Counterfeiting Experts Group, with refe rences to risk assessments carried out by 
Interpol/Europol, as well as on the initiative of a Member States or OLAF. Additionally, 
OLAF makes bilateral contacts w ith competent authorities in th e areas/countries determined, 
with a view to specifying the type (conference/se minar, staff exchange, study) or domain (law 
enforcement, judicial, financial, and technical)  of training and technical assistance. In all 
cases, the general lines and each of the individu al projects proposed are described in detail 
and discussed at OLAF’s Euro  Counterfeiting Experts Group. 
 

 
EN - 12 -   EN With respect to driver 1, the following points describe the main prob lems and the envisaged 
strategy for facing them: 
Problem 1: Maintaining emphasis on EU Member States 
Within the European Union, Italy and Bulgaria  are the two most high risk countries with 
respect to the protection of  the euro. In particular: 
- About 60% of all offset count erfeit euro notes circulati ng in Europe are suspected 
to be produced by organised crime groups in the south of Italy. In order to respond 
to the high level of counterfeiting, the Pericles programme ha s been intensively 
used by the Italian law enforcement Author ities: Carabinieri, Interpol Rome and 
Ministry of Economy organise regular  trainings and staff exchanges.  
- In Bulgaria, there is a high quality production of counterfeit euro banknotes. 
Among other events, the Bulgarian authorities  participate in the annual Pericles 
Euro South East conference organised by the Bavarian Police (BLKA) and aiming 
at improving the cooperation among the countries of the region. Additional 
emphasis needs to be placed on that area. 
Problem 2: Reinforcing th e protection of the euro  in South East Europe 
The Balkan area and Turkey have been identi fied by Europol/Interpol as one of the most 
'at risk' areas in the EU neighbourhood. OLAF  has taken a number of initiatives in 
Turkey, Former Yugoslav Republic of Ma cedonia, Serbia, Albania, Croatia and 
Montenegro. There is room for further strengthening OLAF and Member State 
cooperation with these countries with a view to raising awareness for the protection of the 
euro and reinforcing the general framewor k for the protection of currency against 
counterfeiting. All these countries have a stra tegic geographical position and considered 
both transit and production areas  for counterfeit euro.  
Problem 3: Expanding coverage in South America 
Thanks to the Pericles trainings and sta ff exchanges organised by the Spanish central 
office, the Brigada Investigación del Banco de Espana, the protection of  the euro in Ibero-
America has been continuous and strong since 2002. 
The closest relations have been built with Co lombia, where the highest  quality and largest 
quantity of counterfeit euros are produced. In particular, following the first Pericles action, 
a Central Office has been established in Colo mbia within the CTI (Technical Investigative 
Corp of the Ministry of Justice). This office carried out many successful operations 
against euro and USD counterfe iting. The Pericles programme directly contributed to the 
operational success of the Colombian police fo rces by delivering  training, raising 
awareness and creating the basis for police cooperation as acknowledged by the Spanish 
National Central Office (e.g. offi cial note distributed by the Brigada de Investigación del 
Banco de Espana following the dismantling of an illegal print shop in Bogota on 7 January 2010.) 
During the last years, euro c ounterfeiting activities increased in  Peru and in Argentina.  
To be noticed that 28 big pol ice operations took place in  South America from 2002 to 
2010. Most of these operations brought to disman tle illegal euro prin t shops and all were 
carried out by staff trained by Pericles. 
 
EN - 13 -   EN Both Colombia and Peru participate, on a regul ar basis, in the Pericles actions organised 
by the Brigada Investigación del Banco de Es pana. In addition, a specific training was 
held in 2010 in Buenos Aires and a second training will be provided in 2011 in Lima. 
Finally, specific attention shall be given to  Brazil, based on the fact that Portuguese 
experts highlighted on several occasions that  Brazil is a threat for possible transit or 
smuggling of counterfeits. This is mainly due to its big si ze in terms of territory and 
population and the relevant amount  of tourism from and to th e euro area. The Portuguese 
Police is actively involving the Brazilian authorities in the training activities financed by Pericles. 
Driver 2: differences in incentives and capaci ties between countries impede equivalence 
in the protection of euro against counterfeiting 
With respect to driver 2, the following points describe the main prob lems and the envisaged 
strategy for facing them:  
Problem 1: How to reinforce weaker links 
Considering that the euro is a global curre ncy and its protection has an international 
dimension, there is a need to expand the geographical coverage of the Pericles 
Programme. Experts from EU countries and Eu ropean/international in stitutions suggested 
a number of areas to be considered in view  of their size, populat ion, tourism flow and 
level of the economy (e.g. Medite rranean area). Italy and France mainly take care of this 
area by organising specific trainings. 
Problem 2: How to face emerging risks 
The increasing involvement of other countries in  counterfeiting the euro  brings to the need 
for further extending the implementation of the Pericles programme outside the EU.  
In particular, the economic and demographi c parameters of some third countries, the 
growing number of tourists and immigrants t ogether with the strong presence of organised 
crime in the region (including importantly all fo rms of counterfeiting) are parameters to be 
taken into consideration in or der to assess the potential thre at for the euro. In 2010 it was 
increased the involvement of Eastern Countries in the protection of the euro by organising 
the Pericles Euro North East conference,  a specific training aimed at reinforcing 
cooperation between Member States  and North Eastern countries. 
Subsidiarity and EU added value  
The protection of money against counterfeiting is a continuous process including prevention 
and repression aspects together w ith organisational, structural and legislative frameworks. In 
compliance with the Geneva C onvention (1929) and the relevant  European legislation, the 
Member States established the structures for combating counterfeiting and the procedures of 
cooperation at national and European  level. In order to maintain  efficiency and effectiveness 
of the system, each competent authority within  Member States implements its own national 
training plan. These plans are usually limited to the national territory with a limited of involvement other competent authorities than th e one organising; in case of Member States 
outside the euro-area, these activities are al ways mainly focused on national currency.  
Considering the wide super-national circulat ion of the euro, the deep involvement of 
international organised crime in its counterfe iting and the importance of its defence, the 
 
EN - 14 -   EN described framework needs to be complemented  in order to assure homogeneous national and 
international cooperation and f ace possible emerging risks coming from outside Europe.   
In this scenario, the EU is best placed to complement the national trainings by adding European and international elements to them. In  particular, Member States profitably use the 
European tool for organising in ternational events involving va rious countries in a view of 
exchanging know-how (mainly with other Memb er States), raising awareness and teaching 
methodologies of work (with third countries) and consequently strengthening cooperation for 
a more coordinated protection of the euro agai nst counterfeiting. The fact that beneficiaries 
openly declare that they would not be able to organise international ev ents without the support 
provided by Pericles (see annexed evaluation repor t) proof the need for a direct intervention 
of EU in this area.  In the case of third countries, since the space fo r the euro protection is  usually residual, the 
Pericles programme becomes the only tool for enhancing the level of protection of the euro 
and raise awareness. This becomes extremely im portant for protecting the euro in sensitive 
third countries such as Turkey, Colombia and the Balkans. 
Areas of possible improvement 
The following areas of possible improvement were identified.  
The number of Pericles actions implemented in third countries increase d during the year and 
passed from 15% in 2002 to 58% in 2010. In fact, while at the beginning priority was given to 
the training of European experts, during the following years the need to protect the euro 
outside the European borders became prominent.  The wording of the financial provisions in 
the Pericles Decisions didn't change during the years and still reflects  the situation in 2002 
when the big majority of actions where taking  place in the own country  of the beneficiaries 
that were hosting the events in their own premis es and using their own fa cilities. In particular 
at that time the discrimination between Commu nity (e.g. travels) a nd non Community costs 
(e.g. conference-rooms rentals and interpreters f acilities, etc.) did not create any problem to 
the beneficiaries hosting events in their premises. The situation changed when the 
beneficiaries started to organise events outside their countries and this discrimination of costs 
complicated the administrative management.  Following the increasing involvement of third count ries it became more and more evident that 
the Pericles Decision presents a shortcoming in that it does not provide for the possibility to 
finance the purchase of equipments to be used  by competent national (t hird country) anti-
counterfeiting agencies for prot ecting the euro against counterfe iting. This financing is very 
useful in the case of specialised agencies operating in sensitive third countries having 
different priorities then fighting against euro counterfeiting. A clear ex ample is Colombia: the 
Colombian organised crime is very well known for drug trafficking and terrorism and the 
Authorities are very much engaged in contras ting these crimes. At the same time few people 
know that Colombia is the country where for many years the highest nu mber of counterfeit 
US Dollars were being produced and where the hi ghest number of euro print shops (outside 
Europe) were dismantled. Since the Colombian specialised anti-counterfeiting agencies 
receive much less resources compared to the one s specialised in drugs and terrorisms, they 
often rely on support from othe r countries (such as  US of America supporting them for the 
fight against counterfeiting of US  Dollar). In this resp ect, the possibility to provide a direct 
support by Pericles to these specialised agenci es would avoid the risk to see a decreasing 
attention with respect to the counterfeiting of th e euro and would contribute to keep the threat 
under control.  
Finally, the continuous clos e collaboration between OLAF and Member States in 
implementing the programme highlighted the fact  that currency and card counterfeiting are 
frequently linked to each other and in many Me mber States handled in the same national 
 
EN - 15 -   EN services, as is also the case in Europol. Cons equently, OLAF faced various request to also 
include references to the protect ion against counterfeiting of other means of payments in the 
funded events. 
A need for more clarity in rules and procedures for submitting the final financial report was 
also perceived; consequently, OLAF organi sed an ad hoc Pericl es seminar in 201115. The 
final report on this event is annexed. 
In addition, there is a need to address the problems caused by the exclusion of VAT from 
eligible costs for the purpose of calculation of the co-financing percentage where national 
administrations are beneficiaries. 
4. OBJECTIVES , IMPACT AND INDICATORS  
4.1. General objective 
The general objective of the Programme shall be  to prevent and combat counterfeiting and 
fraud thus enhancing the competitiveness of  the European economy and securing the 
sustainability of public finances. 
4.2. Specific objective 
The specific objective of the Programme shall be  to protect the euro banknotes and coins 
against counterfeiti ng and related fraud, by supporting and supplement the measures 
undertaken by the Member States and assis ting the competent national and European 
authorities in their efforts to  develop between themselves and with the European Commission 
a close and regular cooperation, al so including third countries a nd international organisations.  
This objective shall be measured, inter alia, through the effectiveness of action by financial, 
technical, law-enforcement and judicial au thorities, as measured through the number of 
counterfeits detected, illegal workshops dism antled, individuals arrested and sanctions 
imposed.  
4.3. Short-term objectives 
 
The short-term objectives of the Programme shall encompass:  
• raising awareness of the Uni on and international dimension of the euro; expanding general 
knowledge related to the protection of the euro; 
• supporting the prevention and contributing to re pression of euro counterfeiting and related 
fraud through specialised training and assistance in these areas; 
• promoting convergence of high-level traini ng activities for tr ainers, taking into 
consideration national operational strategies; 
• encouraging closer cooperation between the structures and staff concerned, developing 
mutual trust and exchanging in formation, inter alia of met hods of action, experience and 
work practices; 
• supporting the development of specific lega l and judicial protection of the euro; 
                                                
 
15 Following this request, OLAF organised one specific workshop "How to apply and report under Pericles"  that 
took place on 8 June 2011 in Brussels. 
 
EN - 16 -   EN • increasing the level of protectio n of the euro in thos e countries that have been evaluated as 
being at risk by supporting the pur chase of specific equipments. 
4.4. Expected result(s) and impact 
The beneficiaries targeted by the proposal ar e exclusively the competent authorities of 
Member States for the protection of the euro. Target groups for the action of the Programme 
are all staff in public and private sector  related to the prot ection of the euro. 
Effects shall comprise:  
• positive impact on national and cross-border actions for prevention and repression of euro 
related counterfei ting and fraud; 
• possibility for the competent authorities of Member States to obtain support in their 
efforts to achieve and mainta in a high and equivalent leve l of protection of the euro 
banknotes and coins; 
• benefit for relevant staff from an appropr iate dissemination of general and specific 
knowledge and the development of cooperation and dedicated networks for the protection 
of the euro banknotes and coins;  
• assistance to Member States and third countri es in improving their institutional and legal 
framework to a harmonised high standard for the protection against currency 
counterfeiting and related fraud. 
4.5. Indicators of results and impact  
Main indicators for monitoring the imp lementation of the specific objective: 
• level of counterfeit euro  banknotes and coins;  
• number of counterfeit workshops dismantled,  
• individuals arrested and  
• sanctions imposed 
The work programmes will specify specific targ ets and key milestones for the implementation 
of the programme.   
5. D
ESCRIPTION OF POLICY OPTIONS  
This section lists and briefl y describes the options.   
5.1. Option 1: Baseline scenario. 
The baseline option is to continue the progra mme and maintain the overall spending at the 
current level.   
 
EN - 17 -   EN 5.2. Option 2: To renew the Pericles pr ogramme with improved objectives and 
methodology 
Based on the requests from the national experts a nd in consideration of the evolution of the 
threat and the above identified areas of improvement the following changes would be 
profitable: 
- adding flexibility   
by including more flexibility in the use of  the granted amount. In  particular, the only 
discrimination applied by the new Pericles will be the one between eligible and not eligible 
costs. This will be achieved by omitting those fi nancial provisions in the Pericles Decision 
obliging the Member States to bear some specific costs and OLAF others16. 
- widening the range of eligible actions   
by including the possibility to finance, by Com mission initiative, the purchase of equipments 
to be used by specialised anti-counterfeiting agen cies of third countries for protecting the euro 
against counterfeiting. 
- increasing the share of co-financing  
by adding the possibility to increase the rate of co-financing up to a maximum of 90% of 
eligible costs, exceptionally, in duly just ified cases. This should be a response to a 
development which has become evident in the r ecent years, namely that Member States are 
less able to co-finance pr ojects due to the general lack of funds of public administrations. The 
higher rate of co-financing will particularly facilitate a more precise geographical location of 
activities by providing ampler po ssibility for Member States to apply. In addition, to increase 
co-financing up to 90%, in exceptional cases, will maintain coherenc e and homogeneity with 
the other programme managed by OLAF (Her cule), for which a similar proposal was 
submitted. 
5.3. Option 3: To merge Pericles with other Commission programmes 
Prevention and fight against crime (ISEC) is a large programme with a budget of 600 million 
for the period 2007-2013. It contributes to citi zens’ security by preventing and combating 
crime in general; the main focus of this pr ogramme is on terrorism, trafficking in persons, 
child abuse, cybercrime, illicit drug a nd arms trafficking, corruption and fraud. 
The Technical Assistance and In formation Exchange instrume nt (TAIEX) supports partner 
countries with regard to the approximation, a pplication and enforcement of EU legislation. 
The TAIEX mandate to provide assistance only covers the following groups of beneficiary 
countries: Croatia, Iceland, Turkey, former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Albania, 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montenegro, Serbia an d Kosovo (as defined in UN Security Council 
Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999), Turkish Cypriot community in the northe rn part of Cyprus, 
Algeria, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Egyp t, Georgia, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya, 
Moldova, Morocco, the Palestinian Authority, Syria, Tunisia, Ukraine and Russia.  
It could be considered to insert a specific section on the protection of the euro in both 
programmes, with an overall increment in budge t of 1 million euro per year. Considering the 
                                                 
16 See articles 8-9-10-11 Council Decision 2001/923/EC  of 17 December 2001. 
 
EN - 18 -   EN specificity of this crime and the limited list of  possible beneficiaries (c ompetent authorities), 
this section would require separate strate gic and administrative management. A close 
coordination with OLAF and its group of expe rts (Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group) shall 
be envisaged. 
5.4. Option 4: To discontinue the Pericles programme 
To discontinue the programme would bring b ack to the situation in place before the 
circulation of the euro, when each Member Stat e was organising trainings at national level for 
protecting its own currency without a harmonise d approach and system atic cooperation at 
European level. The perspective of the introd uction of the euro illustrated the need to 
strengthen international coopera tion also in training, as it was (and still it is) the case for 
another global currency: the US Dollar. In the case of the latt er, one federal agency organises 
training all over the world in order to raise awar eness and establish the basis for an effective 
international cooperation in protecting this currency agai nst counterfeiting. 
Discarded options:  
Another option, which could in theory be co mbined with any other option except total 
discontinuation, could be to comb ine the Pericles and Hercule programmes (Hercule is the 
programme managed by OLAF to promote activit ies in the field of the protection of the 
European Union’s financial interests). There woul d in principle be advantages of management 
and synergy for the Commission and Member Stat es in combining Pericles with Hercule. 
However, this is not possible because of the di fferent legal bases in the Treaty for the euro 
and for the protection of the Budget (Art. 133 TFEU) and because of the problems which 
would arise from the need for separate legislative instrument s for euro and non-euro Member 
States. This option is theref ore not further considered. 
 Finally, another option could be
 to increase the level of spending on Pericles 2020. Over the 
years since the introduction of the euro, there is  a clear tendency for an increase of the number 
of applications received under the programme , actions committed and countries involved. 
This is a consequence of the success of the pr ogramme as well as of the larger number of 
possible beneficiaries due to the enlargement of the EU that took place in the last years. As 
discussed at the 57th ECEG meeting on June 2011 (see an nexed document), it happens more 
and more often that some Competent Authoriti es cannot present appl ications in due time 
because of lack of available funds. However, this would be inconsistent with decisions 
already taken on the Medium Term Financia l Framework in the communication ‘A Budget 
for Europe 2020’ (COM (2011)500), and is  therefore not further considered. 
6. ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS  
6.1. Option 1 
This is the baseline option; c ontinue with the same level of funding and the same approach to 
projects as at present under the current Pericl es. The impact of the baseline option is best 
assessed by reference to the existing programme.  
6.2. Option 2 
Advantages: The existing methodology will be improved. With respect to the budget, the 
relevance of the use of the granted amounts w ill be increased (at the moment, the programme 
limits the type of eligible cost s that Commission/OLAF can bea r). The possibili ty to fund the 
purchase of equipments specifically used for th e protection of the euro  (e.g.: investigative 
 
EN - 19 -   EN tools, GPS, IT devices, software, etc.) will provide Commission/OLAF with an effective tool 
to enhance the protection of the euro in thos e third countries where the lack of resources 
limits the work of the competent national author ities. The consequence of an increase in the 
EU share of financing would be that OLAF will have more flexibility in supporting the 
actions and Member States will be facilitated in presenting projects. This would require prioritisation and tougher choices at the selecti on stage; at present most projects which meet 
the eligibility criteria are accepted.   
The specificity will be maintained. The  progress in the protection of the euro will be 
continued. Disadvantage: rela tively big administrative over head for a small programme. 
Budget wise, it is possible to maintain the cu rrent level of funding an d consequently increase 
the effort of coordination and id entification of the priorities. 
6.3. Option 3 
This merger would result in loss of specific ity and expertise in managing the programme. 
Money counterfeiting is such a specific kind of crime that Member States established highly 
specialised offices to fight it. The actual ma nagement of the Programme guarantees effective 
coordination and implementation of the actions  by profiting from continuous discussions 
taking place at the meetings of national e xperts chaired by OLAF (Euro Counterfeiting 
Experts Group). The merge with Programmes in  other DGs would definitely result in 
efficiency losses: with respect to coordination and evaluation capacity, flexibility of the tool 
and prompt reactivity to upcomi ng new threats, coordination of  the measures at global level 
(in the case of TAIEX, the measures would be limited in terms of beneficiaries).  
6.4. Option 4 
To discontinue the programme would reduce e xpenditure at EU leve l, without however 
creating real economies and offsetting resources at national level or in the framework of 
another EU programme and therefor e put at risk the effective a nd equivalent protection of the 
euro across the Member Stat es and in third countries. 
In particular, there is a contin uing threat for the euro at nati onal and international level that 
requires an adequate and homogeneous re action. A harmonised approach can only be 
achieved at EU level and not by each Member  State individually. The lack of support to 
multinational trainings will push Member States to limit their trainings to the national level and these will not be sufficient to protect a global currency against international organised crime.  
Finally, there is a risk for the Commission to receive certain criticism by the stakeholders 
given the positive impact they gave and the fact that the totality of beneficiaries (100%) requested a prolongation of Pericles beyond 2013. 
7. C
OMPARING THE OPTIONS  
7.1. The situation 
The Pericles programme is the only specialised  programme for the prot ection of the euro. The 
financial reference amount for the implementatio n of the Community programme of action for 
the period from 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2013 was defined to be EUR 7 000 000. (art. 1 Council Decision 2006/850/EC).  
 
EN - 20 -   EN Other Commission programmes potentially rele vant to this domain include the general 
programmes against criminality, as well as the programmes for support to candidate and third 
countries. 
The specificity  of the envisaged actions does not allo w the consideration of entrusting this 
activity to other services or organisations or to leave it to National Authorities. In particular, 
by creating this instrument and entrusting it to  the EU Anti-fraud Office together with other 
activities in the same domain, the Commission ha s put emphasis on the protection of the euro. 
This could no longer be ensured if the progr amme were merged in a broader programme. 
Considering the protection of currency against counterfeiting as a very  specific field it is 
necessary to take into consideration the expe rience from Member States. All Member States 
have specialised offices dealing with this sp ecific issue: National Central Offices and often 
special operational units within the police, Nati onal Analysis Centres for coins and banknotes 
in the Mints and Central Banks. In some cases there are also specialized prosecutors dealing 
with the crime of money counterfeiting (e.g. Spai n). The situation is similar at European and 
international level: both Interpol and Europol have specific units responsible for this crime 
with specific supporting tools17. The particularities of this activity reduce the number of 
players at international level to a restricted circle of specialized staff that has its main strength 
factors in the continuous excha nge of know how and in mainta ining an effective network.  
Consequently, the effectiveness of the prot ection of the euro can be assured only by 
maintaining its specificity also with respect to the supporting tools, such as the Pericles 
Programme. The possible merging of Pericles in  a broader programme would definitely risk 
to compromise the flexibility required by the evolution of the threat and to significantly 
decrease the capacity to effectively meet the specific needs of the beneficiaries. These two 
elements proved to be the key of success of this programme. 
7.2. Expected positive effects of continuing  the programme and risks in case of 
discontinuing 
The expected effects (value added)  of continuing the programme can be listed as follows:  
• increased number of people trained at national level;  
• increased quality of trainings by adding an international and multidisciplinary 
dimension; 
• increased awareness; 
• reinforced framework for the protection of the euro; 
• establishment of a training framework comp lementary and additional to the national 
trainings; 
• direct link with operational re sults, e.g. in the case of police activi ties, staff trained 
by Pericles gave its direct contribution to the most succe ssful operations against euro 
counterfeiting; 
                                                 
17 E.g.: Europol has a specific budget line for financial support to police operations in the area of money 
counterfeiting 
 
EN - 21 -   EN • continuous and flexible support to  Member States activities; 
• essential instrument to provi de the beneficiaries with the ability to carry on the 
proper trainings. 
In case of discontinuing, these are the expected effects: 
• decreasing in number and quality of trai ning actions organised by Member States 
(mainly the international aspect wi ll disappear- see evaluation report); 
• limitation of trainings to the national level and loose of international coordination 
and consequent homogeneous level of protection; 
• insufficient protection of the euro ag ainst international organised crime; 
• risk of criticism by the stakeholders. 
In addition, to merge Pericles with ot her Commission programmes (Option 3) has the 
advantage of reducing the overall number of such  programmes, but this is the only clear value 
added of this option. Further effects of this op tion  would result in lo ss of specificity and 
expertise in managing the programme and conse quently in loss of effi ciency and coherence 
with respect to coordination and evaluation cap acity, flexibility of the tool and prompt 
reactivity to upcoming new threats,  coordination of the measures at global level. This would 
not be the case of options 1 and 2, both considering the specific management of the programme by OLAF in close contact w ith the experts of Member States. 
7.3. Envisaged improvements of the new Pericles 
It is envisaged to furthe r improve the programme by  
• simplifying it and reducing th e administrative burden (see above areas of possible 
improvement). Based on results of the mid-term evaluation, the programme will 
improve simplicity in the preparation of applications by the Competent National Authorities. The calculation of the amounts to  be granted will become clearer and the 
programme will become more users friendly. In order to achieve this goal, OLAF 
intends to simplify the legislation and incl ude more flexibility in the use of the 
granted amount; this objective will be achieved by omitting those financial provisions in the Pericles Decision obliging the Member States to bear some specific 
costs and OLAF others
18. All applicants will benefit from these simplified 
procedures as well as the OLAF staff i nvolved in the administrative management of 
the programme. 
• including the possibility to purchase equipments specifically used for the protection 
of the euro against counterfeiting for compet ent authorities in third countries. Based 
on continuous contacts with experts from th ird countries, it is clear that the limited 
resources at disposal of some competen t national authorities result in a loss of 
effectiveness of their work. This becomes quite dangerous when it happens in areas 
where there is a big risk for the euro, but th e Authorities give prio rity to fight “more 
social alarming” kind of crime such as te rrorism or drug trafficking. This could be, 
                                                 
18 See articles 8-9-10-11 Council Decision 2001/923/EC  of 17 December 2001 
 
EN - 22 -   EN for instance, the case of South America in general and Colombia or Peru in 
particular. In order to avoid the risk of a lower attention of the national authorities 
with respect to the crim e of money counterfeiting, the US Secret Service19 
traditionally funds the purchase of equipmen ts for protecting the US Dollar and this 
policy proved to be very successful. In order to achieve this goal, Commission/OLAF intends to include th e possibility to fund, under Commission 
initiative, the purchase of equipments used by competent national authorities in 
sensitive third countries for protecting the euro ag ainst counterfeiting. These 
additional eligible actions will directly benefit the specialised agencies in third countries and indirectly the competent nati onal authorities closel y cooperating with 
them; finally the highest advantage will be the concrete increase in the level of the 
protection of the eu ro outside the EU. 
• introducing the possibility to increase the ra te of co-financing up to a maximum of 
90% of eligible costs, exceptio nally, in duly justified cases.  
Budget wise, maintaining the current level of funding would result in a need for 
increasing the effort of coordination and id entification of the priorities. This in 
consideration of the fact th at option 2 enlarges the possi ble means of support to the 
protection of the euro. In particular, the only additional budget spending item under option 2 is the “purchase of equipments”. The inclusion of equipments entails the 
risk of not having enough resources to face all needs, but in th e meantime provides a 
very effective tool to enhance the protecti on of the euro in sens itive third countries. 
Considering the importance of this tool, it ca n be taken in consideration to slightly 
modify the type of support to some third countries by substituting some training with 
the purchase of equipments. 
7.4. Comparative table on the different options. 
Options/effects Level of euro 
protection  Effectiveness of  
Management Flexibility of the 
programme  Capability to 
meet the needs of stakeholders 
1 stable  stable stable stable 
2 increasing  stable  increasing  increasing 
3 decreasing decreasing  decreasing decreasing  
4 decreasing decreasing  decreasing decreasing 
Option 2 presents the highest number of advantages. 
7.5. Preferred option 
In view of the past experience, which is clos ely linked to the activities of both the Member 
States and the Commission to protect the euro currency, as well as the expected impact, 
including through developing ac tions, option 2 (to renew the programme with improved 
objectives and methodology) is the preferred option with a budgetary  envelope in real prices 
which remains similar to the current envelope (approximately one million euro per year). This 
                                                 
19 Agency in charge of the protection of the US Dollar against counterfeiting. 
 
EN - 23 -   EN option adds flexibility in the determination of the amount of the grant by simplifying the 
determination of costs to be borne by Member States20; it broadens the range of eligible 
actions by including the possibili ty to finance the purchase of  equipments to be used by 
specialised anti-counterfeiting agencies of thir d countries for protecting the euro against 
counterfeiting; and includes the possibility to  increase the rate of co-financing up to a 
maximum of 90% of eligible costs, exceptionall y, in duly justified cases. This should be a 
response to a development which has become evident in the recent years, namely that 
Member States are less able to  co-finance projects due  to the general lack  of funds of public 
administrations. The higher rate of co-financing will particularly facilitate a more precise geographical location of activit ies by providing ampler possibi lity for Member States to 
apply. 
8. M
ONITORING AND EVALUATION  
8.1. Reports 
Annual information on results, including consistency and comp lementarily with other EU 
programmes will be provided to the European Pa rliament and to the Council; in addition, an 
independent assessment of the implementation of  the objectives of the programme – mid term 
evaluation - is foreseen (no la ter than 31 December 2017). Also a final report to the budgetary 
authority will be made on the achievement of the objectives of the Programme by the end of 
2021. 
Overall, the implementation of the Pericles pr ogramme should be assess ed on the basis of the 
following criteria: 
• compliance with the geographical perspectives , as described in th e Pericles strategy 
paper21; 
• compliance with the Work Programme; 
• diversification of type of action; 
• maintenance of the level of participation at  least at the current levels of about 500 
participants a year, in a steady-state situation; and 
• maintenance of the current high level of  credit consumption – at least 80%. 
The internal reorganisation of OLAF at the beginning of 2012 will concentrate the 
management of Hercule (and Pericles) in a single unit in order to reinforce programme 
management skills, including capacity to evaluate. 
8.2. Feedback 
Feedbacks from participants and beneficiaries will be continuously di scussed at the ECEG 
meetings. 
                                                 
20  See articles 8-9-10-11 Council Decision 2001/923/EC  of 17 December 2001. 
21 Based on the discussion taking place with the experts at the ECEG meetings, OLAF prepares a yearly strategy 
paper containing a risk analysis for the euro and the priorities of the programme. 
 
EN - 24 -   EN 9. ANNEXES  
(1) Pericles Decisions 
(2) Pericles Mid-term Strategy 
(3) Pericles Mid-term evaluation 
(4) Pericles tables of implementation (2002-2010) 
(5) Reports of the Euro Counterfeiti ng Experts Group meetings (2006-2010) 
(6) Annual report of the European  Technical & Scientific Ce ntre on euro coins (2010)  
(7) Report of the Pericles Workshop on financial issues 
 
          
 
EN - 25 -   EN  
ANNEX I  
COUNCIL DECISION of 17 December 2001 estab lishing an exchange, assistance and training 
programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the ‘Pericles’ programme) 
(2001/923/EC) 
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriS erv.do?uri=OJ:L:2001:339:0050:0054:EN:PDF  
 
 
COUNCIL DECISION of 17 December 2001 extendi ng the effects of the Decision establishing an 
exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against 
counterfeiting (‘Pericles’ programme) to the Member States which have not adopted the euro as the single currency 
(2001/924/EC) 
http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/prog rammes/pericles/decision_en.pdf
 
 
 
COUNCIL 
COUNCIL DECISION of 30 January 2006 ame nding and extending Decision 2001/923/EC 
establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro 
against counterfeiting (the ‘Pericles’ programme) 
(2006/75/EC) http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/prog rammes/pericles/2006/36-40.pdf
 
 
COUNCIL DECISION of 30 January 2006 extending to the non-participating Member States the 
application of Decision 2006/75/EC amending and extending Decision 2001/923/EC establishing 
an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the ‘Pericles’ programme) 
(2006/76/EC) 
http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/prog rammes/pericles/2006/36-42.pdf
 
 
COUNCIL DECISION of 20 November 2006 amending and extending Decision 2001/923/EC 
establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro 
against counterfeiting (the Pericles programme) (2006/849/EC) 
http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/prog rammes/pericles/decision1.pdf
 
 
 
COUNCIL DECISION of 20 November 2006 extending to the non-participating Member States 
the application of Decision 2006/849/EC am ending and extending Decision 2001/923/EC 
establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the euro against counterfeiting (the Pericles programme) 
(2006/850/EC) 
http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fraud/prog rammes/pericles/decision2.pdf
 
 
 
EN - 26 -   EN ANNEX II 
  
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE  (OLAF) 
 
Operational & Policy Support  
Protection of the EURO; Hercule & Pericles Programmes  
 
Brussels,  
OLAF/YX/LUP  I(2010) 2074 
 
  
 
NOTE FOR THE FILE  
 
Subject:  Update on the Medium-term strategy for the Pericles programme  
 
 
This note updates the Pericles st rategy note of 12 May 2009 (I 5534/2009). 
The strategy for implementing the Pericles progra mme is largely based on the deliberations of 
OLAF’s Euro Counterfeiting Experts’ Group (ECEG) , bringing together experts from all MS 
and relevant disciplines, as well as Europol , Interpol and the ECB. The discussions are 
generally based on notes prepared by OLAF and b ilateral preparations with potential Pericles 
beneficiaries. Discussions fo cus on defining the specific need s for training and technical 
assistance, as well as the geographical areas where action needs to be taken,  This ensures the efficient implementation of the Pericles progr amme in the EU MS most affected by euro 
counterfeiting and the active suppor t and involvement of other MS. 
With respect to areas outside the EU, priorities are also set on the basis of discussions in the 
ECEG, with references to risk assessments ca rried out by Interpol/Europol, as well as on the 
initiative of a MS or OLAF. Additionally, OL AF makes bilateral contacts with competent 
authorities in the areas/countries determin ed, with a view to specifying the type 
(conference/seminar, staff exchange, study) or do main (law enforcement, judicial, financial, 
technical) of training and technical  assistance. In all cases, the general lines and each of the 
individual projects proposed are descri bed in detail and approved by OLAF’s ECEG. 
The present note describes the ge neral lines of the Pericles st rategy defined in that way, 
mainly focusing on the geographical orientation. These ideas have generally been discussed 
and approved at the ECEG; we expect they w ill be globally re-confirmed at the next 
meeting, on 18 March 2010. 1. Maintaining emphasis on most sensitive EU Member States 
Within the European Union, Italy and Bulgaria  are the two most sensitive countries with 
respect to the protection of  the euro. In particular: 
-  Italy is a big producer of c ounterfeit euro and law enforcement is also very active. In order 
to better understand the strategic importance of Italy in the fight agai nst counterfeiting it is 
important to point out that about 60% of all offset counterfeit euro notes circulating in 
Europe are part of the so called “Napoli Gr oup” (from the suspected place of production). 
Pericles is systematically used by the Italian Authorities: Carabinieri, Interpol Rome and Ministry of Economy organise regular trainings and staff ex changes. In addition, national 
 
EN - 27 -   EN training plans are in place. The high level of participation in Pericles by Italy will be 
maintained by strengthening cooperation between national a nd international level with 
specific attention to multidisciplinary aspect s (e.g. a joint Franco-Italian police seminar 
will be organised in Sicily in 2010; financial intermediaries from Italy and Mediterranean 
countries will gather in Libya for an awareness-raising actio n; two police staff exchanges 
organised by the Italian authorities started in  2009 and will continue in 2010). The judicial 
and financial sectors were also  actively involved thanks to th e initiative of  the Italian 
Ministry of Finance that organised the Conference “A Community strategy for the 
protection of the euro” in Rome in December 2009. 
-   Concerning Bulgaria, the situa tion is rather different: this c ountry is much suspected to be 
producing high quality counterfeit euro banknotes, but, for the moment, it is very difficult, 
because of the turnover of staff, to find a reli able contact for devel oping a specific training 
approach in view of supporting police investigations. Particul arly during the last months, 
further personnel changes took place within the Ministry of  Interior. In 2009 Bulgarians 
participated in a staff exchange organised by th e Italian Ministry of In terior, the 'Pericles' 
judicial seminar on the status of counterfeits in criminal pr oceedings, and – as usual – to 
the annual Pericles Euro South East c onference organised by the German BLKA. 
Considering that Germany seems to be in the be st position for co-organising events in this 
country, Unit C5 is in cont act with the BKA for organisi ng a training in Sofia during 2010 
. In parallel further effort is made in or der to involve more st rongly the Bulgarian 
authorities in the protection of the euro events  prepared under Pericles (Bulgarian staff will 
be invited to participate in Pericles  actions in Skopje and Antalya).  
2. Consolidating the protection of the eu ro in the Balkan area and Turkey 
The Balkan area and Turkey have been identifie d by Europol/Interpol as one of the most 'at 
risk' areas in the EU neighbourhood. OLAF has taken a number of in itiatives in Turkey, 
Croatia and Montenegro, as well as numerous other contacts. There is room for further 
strengthening OLAF and MS cooperation with these countries with a view to raising 
awareness for the protection of the euro an d reinforcing the general framework for the 
protection of money against count erfeiting. All these countries have a strategic geographical 
position and are considered both transit a nd production areas for counterfeit euro.  
2.1 Turkey 
Turkey has a status of EU candidate country  and is making effort to establish a legal 
framework for the protection of the currency si milar to the European one. At the moment, 
the Interpol/Europol - Sirene Department has been appointed as National Central Office 
(by reference to the Geneva Convention of 1929) but does not have the legal status and 
required prerogatives for being in line with Regulation 1338/2001. As a result, it can not 
effectively centralise all information related to  seizures carried out by police forces in 
Turkey, because Turkish law enforcement has no formal obligation to immediately inform 
the Department about seized counterfeit mone y. Concerning the financial system, work is 
in progress at Ministry level to create le gislation obliging banks to withdraw suspect 
money from circulation. One of the main areas where ac tion in Turkey is necessary is improving cooperation, both 
among Turkish law enforcement agencies and w ith the rest of the world (in particular 
Europe and neighbouring countries). Thanks to the Pericles actions addressed to Turkey, 
the relevant competent authori ties are aware of the urgent ne ed to improve cooperation at 
national and European/international level.  The Pericles Programme will continue promoting the development of the Turkish Central Office and the other mechanisms for cooperation by providing support to the Turkish Authorities in preparing the necessary legi slation and by strengthe ning contacts with EU 
 
EN - 28 -   EN Member States and European institutions. A Pericles conference initiated by the Bavarian 
Landeskriminalamt was carried out in Nove mber 2009 in Istanbul and a study visit of 
relevant Turkish staff to the BKA, OLAF , ECB and Europol took place in September 
2009 organised as a Commission initi ative in the framew ork of the Pericles programme.  
In 2010, Unit C5 started a medium-term collabora tion with the Turkish authorities with a 
view to complementing their national tr aining programmes by  organising regional 
seminars covering specific regions of Turkey  and neighbouring countries. The aim of this 
collaboration is to support the centralisati on of operational informa tion from Turkey and 
neighbouring countries within th e Turkish Central Office. A fi rst seminar will take place 
in Antalya in April 2010 and will see the partic ipation of police and judicial staff from the 
South West of Turkey as well as from neighbouring countries as Georgia, Iran, 
Azerbaijan, Armenia, etc. In addition Turkish officials w ill continue to take part in staff exchanges and seminars 
organised by MS in the framework of Pericles  (e.g. as in 2008, also in 2009 Turkish staff 
is participating in staff exchanges orga nised by the Italian police authorities). 
Finally, in view of further strengthening coope ration, OLAF invited representatives of the 
relevant Turkish Authorities to particip ate in the ECEG mee ting of November 2009. 
2.2 Balkan area 
o Montenegro 
In Montenegro the euro is the only official  currency in use. Duri ng the last years, 
Montenegro proved to be a usual transit ar ea for counterfeits with respect to Italy. 
Following the first Pericles action focusi ng on police officers in  the field, a second 
practical training has been delivered in Ju ly 2009 to bank cashiers. The activity of 
Pericles in Montenegro aims  at strengthening the know-how of front-line staff (police 
officers and bank cashiers) in order to st op the possible circulat ion and traffic of 
counterfeits. In this pers pective, an operational suppor t meeting was organised and 
chaired by OLAF in September 2009 followi ng a specific request from Interpol 
Podgorica. Staff from OLAF, the German Police, Europol and the ECB gathered 
together with the Montenegrin Authoritie s and made an evaluation of operational 
information in possession of the Montenegrin Police. As a result, a joint investigation team was established between Germany, Montenegro and Europol. OLAF is also supporting Montenegrin author ities in establishi ng a comprehensive 
national training plan. In the framework of the prospects for accession of Montenegro 
to the EU, further actions aimed at s upporting the development of the relevant 
Montenegrin legislative fram ework might be envisaged.  
In 2009 Montenegrin, Croatian and Slovak expert s from the official Mints took part in 
a study visit to the ETSC. In the near future, Montenegro will continue to be invited to 
Pericles staff exchanges orga nised by the Member States. 
o Croatia 
Pericles adopted a direct approach to Cr oatia by approaching all the main sectors 
relevant to the protection of the euro. Fo llowing a first awareness-raising conference 
celebrated in 2008, Unit C5 organised two t actical/technical trai nings addressed to 
staff working in the field and being in the first line against euro counterfeiting: the 
first action (February 2010) mainly addresse d to police officers and prosecutors and 
the second one (March 2010) to bank and motorways cashiers. 
The participation of Croatian Central Bank staff in the ETSC study visit and in the 
Technical training on printi ng techniques organised by th e Dutch police in 2009 is 
complementary to the overall approach to the country.  
 
EN - 29 -   EN In view of further strengthening cooperation, OLAF invited representatives of the           
relevant Croatian Authorities to partic ipate in the ECEG meeting of June 2009. 
In 2010, Unit C5 envisages to involve Croa tia in staff exchanges with neighbouring 
MS, for instance Italy. 
o Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kos ovo UNSCR1244 and the former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia 
OLAF has close direct contacts with the re levant authorities of all aforementioned 
countries in view of implemen ting specific actions. The aim of these actions will be to 
support the creation and consolidation of Na tional Central Offices and to establish a 
permanent network for collaboration among Balkan countries and European 
Institutions.  Officials from Serbia, B&H, Albania and FY RoM usually participate in all Pericles 
actions addressed to the Balkan area. Contacts are ongoing with the Serbian Authorities (Inter pol Beograd, Central Bank 
and Prosecutor Office) in order to organise  training in Serbia before the end of 2010. 
A technical-tactical training, organised by Un it C5, will take place in Skopje in April 
2010, mainly addressed to police officer s from FYRoM and the Kosovo UNSCR1244 
(thanks to the close collaboration ongoing between the police of FYRoM and 
Kosovo). In this area, Kosovo needs a special mention: as it is the case in a few other 
countries, also here the euro is the only o fficial currency in use. The information 
circulating is poor and the political situ ation still “under cons truction”. OLAF will 
take the occasion of the training in Skopje for further developing contacts with the 
Kosovan authorities. Albania will be the partner of German BLKA in the next Euro South East conference 
All Balkan countries and Turkey  participate in the annual Euro South East conference 
organised by the German BLKA. 
3. Expanding coverage in South America 
3.1 Promoting relations with Colombia, Peru and Argentina 
Thanks to the Pericles trainings and sta ff exchanges organised by the Spanish central 
office, the BIBE, the protection of the euro in Ibero-America has been continuous and strong since 2002. The closest relations have been built with Co lombia, where the highest  quality and largest 
quantity of counterfeit euros are produced a nd discovered. In particul ar, following the first 
Pericles action, a type of 'Central Office' has been established in Colombia within the CTI 
(Technical Investigative Corp of the Ministry  of Justice). This o ffice carried out many 
successful operations against euro (and US D) counterfeiting. The Pericles programme 
directly contributed to th e operational success of the Colombian police forces by 
delivering training, raising awareness and cr eating the basis for police cooperation as 
pointed out in many official occasions by th e Spanish NCO (e.g. official note distributed 
by the BIBE following the last dismantling of an illegal print shop in Bogota on  last 7 
January 2010.) According to intelligence gathered from Latin American Authorities, mainly thanks to the 
strong repression operated in Colombia, in the close future we could face a migration of 
counterfeiters from Colombia to other Amer ican countries as, fo r instance, Peru and 
Argentina. Peru is also very active in the protection of the euro a nd is the only country having 
established a real National Ce ntral Office within the meaning of the Geneva Convention.  
Peru, together with Argentina and Colombia, participated in a Pericles staff exchange 
 
EN - 30 -   EN organised by the Spanish Authorities in 2009. OL AF established a direct contact with the 
Peruvian NCO that is considered a good exampl e for all Latin American countries (in the 
framework of the above mentioned staff ex change, OLAF staff visited the Peruvian 
Authorities in Lima and Per uvian experts visited OLAF). 
Both Colombia and Peru participate, on a regul ar basis, in the Pericles actions organised 
by the BIBE. Considering the strategic importa nce of Latin America, and particularly 
Colombia, for the protection of the euro, there is a need for OLAF to further strengthen direct contacts  with these countries in orde r to have the possibility to complement the 
actions organised by the Member States in this  area when these show to be inadequate or 
insufficient Moreover, a better knowledge of the existing structures will facilitate the 
identification of areas for effective future collaboration, as for example operational cooperation, with a possible use of Pericles in  financing operational meetings and a direct 
technical support by ETSC experts in case of investigation on coins. Finally, the specific situation of Argentina must be menti oned. In this country a real 
Central Office does not exist and there is not yet a known threat for the euro but recently 
Argentina started to have a ce rtain number of operational links with Peru with respect to 
counterfeit euro investigations . It is worth monitoring the situation and being ready to 
intervene with Pericles when needed. Following exchanges of views with OLAF, the Spanish NCO (BIBE) expressed the 
intention to organise three Pericles actions addressed to  Latin America in 2010, namely: 
- a workshop gathering representatives from Latin American 'Central Offices'. This 
action will probably take place in Colombia and aims at exchanging best practices and 
supporting Latin American countries in esta blishing National Central Offices with all 
the requirements of  the Geneva Convention; 
- a staff exchange aiming at stre ngthening operational cooperation; 
- a training seminar mainly addressed to Ar gentinean and Colombian police officers. 
This action will probably take place in Bue nos Aires and aims at specialising police 
officers and strengthening operational li nks between Colombia and Argentina. 
In addition to the above mentioned actions, Un it C5 will start medium term collaboration 
with the Colombian authorities with a view of complementing the Spanish initiatives by 
organising “regional” technical- tactical trainings covering sp ecific areas of Colombia. The 
aim of this collaboration is to train police officers working in 'at risk' areas as Cali, 
Medellin and Pereira. In view of further strengthening cooperation, OLAF invited representatives of the relevant 
Colombian Authorities to participat e in the ECEG meeting of March 2009. 
In all Latin America, where n eeded, Pericles is ready to support further development of 
relevant legislation and technical su pport (software, studies, etc.). 
3.2 Brazil 
Portuguese experts highlighted on several occas ions that Brazil is a threat for possible 
transit or smuggling of counterfeit s. This is mainly due to its big size in  terms of territory 
and population and the relevant amount of t ourism from and to the euro area. The 
participation of one Brazilian expert in th e trainings organised by the Spanish BIBE in 
Colombia was not enough for establishing effective cooperation with the national 
authorities and being aware of what happens  within this very large country: Brazil 
deserves specific Pericles attention.  The Portuguese National Central Office and National Central Bank will organise a 
Pericles Seminar in Brasilia in March 2010. Th e action, the first in Brazil focusing on the 
 
EN - 31 -   EN protection of the euro, is mainly addressed to  staff from the Brazilian Federal Police and 
the Brazilian Central Bank. Part icipation from other Portugues e speaking countries as well 
as from Italy, France and Sp ain is envisaged t oo. The intention of the Portuguese 
Authorities is to duplicate the strategy already used in Colombia by Spain: to start by 
raising awareness and to conti nue by delivering training and creating the basis for possible 
future operational collaboration.  
4. Reinforcing weaker links 
Considering that the euro is a global curre ncy and its protection has an international 
dimension, there is a need to expand the geogr aphical coverage of the Pericles Programme. 
The experts from EU countries and European/international institutions suggested a number of 
areas to be considered in view of their si ze, population, tourism flow and level of the 
economy: China, the Caribbean and the Me diterranean area, as  well as Russia. 
4.1 China 
The economic and demographic parameters of Ch ina, the growing number of tourists and 
immigrants together with the strong presence of organised crime in the region (including 
importantly all forms of counterfeiting) give to this country a prominent place as a potential threat for the euro. Recent experience shows that Chin a is indeed a threat for the 
euro: in 2009, the Spanish NCO carried out a successful operation involving holograms 
produced in China and used on counterfeit eu ro notes. The participation  of Chinese 
experts in Pericles events (e.g. Rome 2008) represents a first bridge to the Chinese 
authorities, but much more is needed in order to establish the right contacts for organising 
an awareness-raising event also in Chin a. OLAF together with France and The 
Netherlands continue to support the Italian NC O in its efforts for organising a specific 
action in collaboration with the Chinese G overnment; but for the moment, due to the 
complexity and slowness of the Chinese admi nistration, no concrete  steps forward have 
been achieved in this area. 
4.2 Caribbean and Mediterranean  
Based on French initiatives, awareness on the pr otection of the euro has been raised in the 
Caribbean area and in the northern African / Mediterranean region. These two areas have 
not been identified as major risk areas for the protection of the euro; however, no action 
had been taken and the ECEG approved the French Pericles proposals, taking into account the geographical proximity and the strong tour ism and trade links be tween these countries 
and the EU. Thus, during the last three year s, two seminars were  c a r r i e d  o u t  i n  t h e  
Caribbean (2008 and 2009) and one seminar in France (2007) involving North African 
states.  The ECEG meeting in March 2009 concluded th at the two Caribbean actions are for the 
moment sufficient. However, action concerni ng sensitive African areas should continue, 
since these areas are known to be areas of tr ansit and relay of co unterfeits. In this 
perspective, more added valu e comes from the already men tioned Franco-Italian police 
seminar that will be implemented in Sicily  in 2010 and from the seminar for financial 
intermediaries from Italy and Mediterranean Countries planned by the Italian Ministry of 
Finance (Libya, 2010). Mediterranean countries are also the focus of a staff exchange 
currently being run by th e Italian Carabinieri. 
4.3 Russia 
The Italian NCO is currently organising a Pe ricles Seminar in Moscow; the action will 
probably take place at the end of June 2010 an d will be the first Pericles action mainly 
addressed to Russian staff. Until now no Pericles action has taken place in Russia and 
 
EN - 32 -   EN very few Russians have participated in Peri cles actions. Russia is a known producer of 
counterfeit USD; as was the case elsewhere; counterfeit euro should not be far behind. 
None of the ECEG participan ts has developed ideas or co ntacts for organising awareness 
raising events in Russia but the issue wa s addressed at the meeting of March 2009. 
The objectives of the Pericles programme descri bed above are set out in order of priority. 
Thus, it is highest priority to maintain the thru st on the existing MS, particularly the sensitive 
areas; then Balkans and Turkey; and subsequently South America.  
5. Involving Member States that ha ve not yet organised projects 
The seven years of Pericles implementation show that the main beneficiaries of the 
Programme are the authorities from a small number of MS with a strong tradition in 
protecting money against counter feiting: Italy, France, Spain and Germany. A certain number 
of other countries directly be nefited by the programme during th e last years in a discontinued 
or sporadically way: Greece, Portugal, Belgiu m, Finland, Poland, Hungary and Austria. The 
rest of the MS never applied for the Progra mme, although they frequently participate in 
actions organised by others (MS or Commission). According to th e experts, the main reasons 
for this difference are shortage in money and st aff: smaller MS have more limited financing; 
they are more averse to taking even small fi nancial risks and have a limited number of staff 
dealing with money protection. This situation should change in view of a more balanced 
sharing of responsibility in protecting the single currency. 
In order to encourage those countries to get more invol ved in Pericles, OLAF needs to 
improve their knowledge on how to manage a pr oject co-financed by Pericles delivering 
examples of simple and effective projects havi ng limited financial risks and staff needs. One 
example of such successful coope ration is the di gital reproduction project currently elaborated 
by the Netherlands with OLAF cooperation. Furthe r examples are staff exchanges in general: 
these are easy to organise and proved to be  relatively less expensive and effective in 
supporting cooperation among different countries. Generally, a friendly and effective support 
to the financial management of the projects by MS is a useful method for increasing the 
number of applicants. During 2009 the implementation of the Pericl es programme included again the active 
participation as beneficiaries of  Belgium (for the second year in a row), The Netherlands and 
Portugal. 
6. Further diversification of types of action 
In view of enhancing the multidisciplinary char acter of Pericles, further steps for further 
diversification in term s of type of actions and kind of  participants will be taken.  
• Actions 
The main part of Pericles actions consists of  Seminar/Conference type of actions and staff 
exchanges. Only few studies were co-financed  in the framework of the programme. This 
is mainly due to the fact that emphasis initially needed to be placed on seminars and staff exchanges; as a result, the technical assist ance part was not as well understood by the MS. 
Currently, OLAF has undertaken an effort to increase the numb er of co-financed studies. 
This was recently the case for Belgium, which is now implementing a technical study on higher security features for future euro coin s, as well as the conduc tivity study on the 
initiative of the Commission. The conductivity study continued to be financed also in 
2009.  
During the last 2 years Pericles financed th e publication of the “Bas ic Manual: Counterfeit 
euro? What to do” and the “Counterfeit Euro  Experts Manual”. Upon MS request, the 
“Counterfeit Euro Experts Manual” is now ge tting translated into four more national 
languages , using Pericles.  
 
EN - 33 -   EN In the near future, Unit C5 is planning to co-finance a study on links between 
counterfeiting and major events (study propos ed by Italy with the support of the ECEG) 
and, possibly, a social analysis on the crime of  counterfeiting together with Europol (in 
order to explore the key factors identifying th e counterfeiter and the reasons behind the 
different modus operandi). In addition OLAF sees the need for improving databases on 
counterfeit banknotes and coins, a classificatio n assistant specifically  for coins, a coin 
authentication learning tool, a re gister for illegal mints etc. 
In 2009 a specific effort has been  made in order to use the programme for a closer support 
to operations, as for the meeting organised in Montenegro (see 2.2); this  particular use of 
the Programme showed to be effective but it is  important to underline that the possibility 
to implement this kind of actions mainly de pends on MS and third countries' initiatives. 
This again shows the actual need to establis h even closer contacts between the OLAF and 
investigative units from 'at risk' countries; this could be possibl y achieved by increasing 
the participation of OLAF staff in Pericles staff exchanges organised by the police or by 
organising joint missions with Europol. The important role played by the Pericles 
programme in supporting operations is underlined  in an official information note issued 
by the Spanish NCO following the recent disman tling of an illegal print-shop in Colombia 
(Bogota, 7 January 2010 - see 3.1). 
• Participants 
Due to reasons of prio rity, in the seven years of impl ementation, the large majority of 
participants were police officers. In recent years an increasing number of staff from the 
financial and judicial sector is participating. Today we need  an extra effort for involving 
also other staff concerned: further diversific ation of participants from the public sector, 
through the involvement inter alia  of customs officers, and fresh attention to the private 
sector. This was already the case for the last seminar orga nised by the German BKA with 
the printing industry and for the training for cas hiers from private banks in Montenegro.  
Also technicians from Mints were more ac tively involved in Pericles 2009: the Belgian 
CNAC organised its second Pericles staff ex change (this time with France), while the 
ETSC organised a study visit involving Cr oatia, Montenegro and Slovakia and a 
workshop for technicians.   In 2010, Pericles  will be further diversified by delivering a 
training for cashiers in Croatia (March 201 0), co-organising the Italian “financial 
intermediaries conference” in Libya (May 2010)  and including a bigger number of judicial 
and financial staff in the events ma inly addressed to police officers. 
Judicial staff was the special focus of the Pe ricles Seminar “Handling of evidence in the 
context of Reg. 1338/2001” celebrated in Brussels in November 2009.  
Both judicial and financial staff were the main audience at the Conference “A Community 
strategy for the protection of the euro” organi sed by the Italian Ministry of Finance in 
Rome in December 2009 (see 1.1.). 
7. Performance indicators 
Overall, the implementation of the Pericles pr ogramme should be assessed on the basis if the 
following criteria: 
− compliance with the geographical pe rspectives, as described above; 
− diversification of type of  action, as mentioned above; 
− maintenance of the level of participation at  least at the current levels of about 500 
participants a year, in a steady-state situation; and 
− maintenance of the current high level of  credit consumption – at least 80%. 
 
EN - 34 -   EN The quality of implementation will be  verified with a user satisfa ction survey; this is planed 
for 2010. A continuous assessment is taking place, on the above basis at each of the meetings of the 
ECEG. MS have, on this occasion, systematical ly expressed satisfaction on the effects and 
management of the Pericles programme. 
Yannis XENAKIS  
Head of Unit 
 
 Copies
: N. Ilett, K. Larsson, S. Combeaud 
                           
 
EN - 35 -   EN  
  ANNEX III  
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE  (OLAF) 
 
Operational & Policy Support  
Protection of the euro; Hercule& Pericles Programmes  
 
 
 
NOTE TO FILE 
 
Subject : Pericles programme – Mid-Term Evaluation 2006-2010 
 
 
1. Introduction 
The Pericles Programme was established in 2001 and was originally scheduled to run until 
2005. However, due to its success, its ope ration was extended until the end of 2013. 
A mid-term evaluation started in  2010 in order to assess the e ffectiveness of the Programme 
halfway through its 2007-2013 extension. A questionna ire was distributed to the beneficiaries 
of Pericles funds and the feedback will be used  as a basis to identify the target areas for 
improvement and determine whether Pericles should continue beyond 2013. Considering that 
the last evaluation took place at the end of 2005, it was decided to evaluate the 
implementation of the programme starting from 2006.  
 
2. Implementation 2006-2010 
From 2006 until 2010, 4422 actions were committed to: 38 of these actions were implemented 
in the period 2006-2010 and the remaining 6 ar e scheduled to be implemented in 2011.  
The organisers of these actions, co-funded under the Pericles Programme, have consisted of 
16 National Competent Authorities23 from 10 Member States.  
 
 
                                                 
22 During the same period of time, The Commission/ OLAF organised 25 Pericles actions on its initiative. These 
actions are not included in this document.  
23 We received 15 replies (Polish Police is missing, they presented for the fi rst time a Pericles application in 
2010 for an action to be implemented in 2011) 
 
EN - 36 -   EN Actions per Member States
Belgium, 5
Germany, 7
Spain, 6
Hungary, 1Italy, 16Poland, 2France, 3The Netherlands, 1Portugal, 2Estonia, 1
 
Italy implemented the highest number of  actions: 36% of the total actions. 
The following chart shows a breakdown of the number of actions committed per year.  
Actions Committed per Year
2009: 8 actions
2008: 8 actions2007: 7 actions2006: 9 actions
2010: 12 actions
 
 
The following chart depicts the types of actions  carried out, the most  popular being staff 
exchanges and Seminar/Conferences (toge ther almost 80% of the actions)  
 
 Type of Actions
Study
2%
Seminar/ 
Conference
36%
Training
20%Staff exchanges
 
42%
 
EN - 37 -   EN  
3. Responses to the Questionnaire  
The statistical data gathered from the re sponses to the questio nnaire are as follows: 
 
3.1.Coordination and Development  
How would you grade your level of involve ment in establishing the priorities of 
Commission/OLAF tr aining strategies? 
 
 Non-
Existent Not 
Significant Significant Very 
Significant
1. At the multilateral level (ECEG)? 124 23 6 6 
2. At the bilateral level? 13 13 7 5 
 All beneficiaries participating on a regular basi s in ECEG meetings (more than 80%) replied 
that their level of involvement was significant or very significant both at the multilateral and 
the bilateral level.   
3.2.Commission/OLAF Support in  Preparation and Evaluation
 
 
All beneficiaries considered th e pre-application phases to be  good or very good, with the only 
exception of Spain. The same applies with the ti mely evaluation and conclusion of contracts. 
3 beneficiaries (20%) would welcome shorter de lays for the final evaluation and closure of 
the action. The overall negative evaluation of  OLAF suppor t received by Spain follows the fact that: 
• one application from BIBE was refuse d by the evaluation committee in 2009; 
• the low quality of the financial reports received from Spain obliges Unit D6 to ask for 
complementary documentation and delay the final payments. 
 
3.3.Efficiency and Effectiveness
 
To what extent do you agree with the following statements? 
 Strongly 
Disagree Disagree Agree Strongly 
Agree 
1. The financial support provided by the  - 4 11 
                                                 
24 This is the case of those beneficiaries not partic ipating in the Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group (ECEG), 
such as Bank of Italy, National Bank of Poland and Royal Mint of Belgium. 
 
 
 
 
4 ES - BIBE 
5 ES – BIBE, NL - Police 
6 PT – Policía Judiciaria  Insufficient Sufficient Good Very 
Good 
1. Pre-application phases 14 - 3 11 
2. Timely evaluation and conclusion of contracts 1
4 - 5 9 
3. Timely final evaluation and payments 25 16 5 7 
 
EN - 38 -   EN Commission/OLAF has been instrumental in 
giving my organisation th e ability to carry out 
training activities with a European dimension aimed at the protection of the euro. - 
    
2. With regard to the planning of the training 
action, the support provided by the Commission/OLAF in terms of coordination/organisati on was satisfactory.  - 
 - 
 6 
 9 
 
3. (If applicable) Attend ance at the action and 
coverage of issues by the Commission/OLAF was 
satisfactory. - 
 - 
 5 
 8 
 
4. The support provided overall by the 
Commission/OLAF met expectations. - 
 - 
 4 
 11 
 
5. (If applicable) The action improved the way in which my organisation works overall. - 
 - 
 5 
 7 
 
6. The procedure for applying to Pericles is easy to carry out. 1
7 - 7 7 
7. Pericles legislation is  sufficiently clear and 
coherent. 17 - 5 7 
 Do you intend to submit further applications for financing to the Commission/OLAF, under Pericles? 
 
Yes 12 Maybe  1  No 0     no reply  2 
80% of the beneficiaries are planni ng to submit further applications. 
 
In your opinion, is there a need for the P ericles Programme to continue in the future?
   
Yes 15 No 0 
100% of beneficiaries recommend the c ontinuation of the Programme beyond 2013 
 
3.4.Further Comments
 
Do you have any further comments in te rms of the general implementation of 
Commission/OLAF training activities? If yes,  please specify what we could change to 
further improve these activities.  
 
Simplification : greater flexibility/ discretion in using the granted amount 
The beneficiaries refer to the f act that the Pericles Decision pr ovides for a rigi d split between 
Community costs (to be covered by OLAF) and non-Community costs (to be covered by 
Member States). This split complicates the prep aration of the budget when the actions are not 
implemented on the beneficiaries’ premises8. 
UCAMP, CCAFM , UCIFM, BIBE 
This request received from the most experienced users of Pericles shall be taken underserious 
consideration in view of the possibl e extension of the programme beyond 2013 
                                                 
7 ES - BIBE 
 
 
8 This is the case of the large majority of the actions   
 
EN - 39 -   EN  
Evaluation Committee: 
- To limit the evaluation to cost/effectiveness criteria  
- Need for more meetings of the Committee  
- More flexibility to increase th e amount of the advanced payment 
BIBE 
With respect to the comments rece ived by the BIBE, we notice that: 
- The criteria of evaluation are listed in the Financial Decision and in the Call for Proposals; 
-  The number of the evaluation se ssions is strictly linked to the deadlines for submission of 
the applications; this number (3 ) cannot be further increased; 
- In the second half of 2010, OLAF increased transparency and flexibility in providing 
“increased” advanced payments when needed (the list of cases is within the Call for 
Proposals) 
 
Please add any further comme nts you would like to make. 
Need for clarification regarding the type of documents and final procedures in order to avoid 
long delays in closing the actions  
PJ, BIBE 
Some beneficiaries had the feeling that interp retation of financial rules changed during the 
years; therefore they would welcome a clarificat ion in order to avoid financial risks and 
delays in final payment. In this respect a spec ific meeting in Brussels together with OLAF 
Budget Unit (D6)could be envisaged. 
-------- 
It should be avoided that overlap ping with other actions of Eur opean institutions occurs in the 
field of protecting the Euro.  
BLKA 
The German colleagues under line the importance of coordination among European 
institutions in training: this is one of th e main tasks for the ECEG. In the past some 
overlapping took place due to th e fact that Europol didn’t info rm about its plans in advance; 
in consideration of this,  OLAF already asked Europol to discuss all training activities in 
advance at the ECEG meetings. 
-------- 
“I would expect the specialise d training on the different types of the printing machines used 
by counterfeiters”  
NBP 
To be discussed at the ECEG 
 
4. Conclusions 
Based on the received replies, the foll owing issues shall be pointed out. 
 
Beneficiaries’ satisfaction: 
• The beneficiaries feel to be really involved in the implementation strategy of the Pericles 
programme and appreciate th e support provided by OLAF; 
• The Programme is instrumental in giving the be neficiaries the ability to carry out training; 
• The Programme positively contributed in increasing the protection of the Euro; 
• 100% of beneficiaries recommend the c ontinuation of the Programme beyond 2013. 
 
The above statements show high appreciati on for the Programme and its management by 
OLAF. 
 
EN - 40 -   EN  
Areas of possible improvement:  
• In case of continuation of the progra mme beyond 2013 (as suggested), OLAF shall 
consider a simplification of the legislation by including more flexibility in the use of the 
granted amount 
• There is a need for more clarity in rules and procedures for submitting the final financial 
report; OLAF shall organise an ad hoc Pericles seminar in 2011. 
 
Next step:  
Given that discussion on the financial perspe ctives for 2014-2020 is due to begin in 2011, the 
outcome of this questionnaire will be discussed together with the Member States at the ECEG 
meeting and matched with the evaluations provided by participants in the events9.  
The outcome of this exercise will be used: 
• as guidance for introducing possi ble modifications to enhance the effectiveness and quality 
of implementation of the Programme before 2013; 
• to suggest improvements to the Programm e in case it would be extended beyond 2013.   
 
            
Luca Pierini 
(signed) 
  
Copies:  G. Kessler, C. Arwidi, Y. Xenaki s, C. Chatzipazarlis, K. Ennis 
                       
                                                
 
9 these are included in the final technical  reports provided by the beneficiaries 
 
EN - 41 -   EN  
ANNEX IV  Pericles tables of implementation (2002-2010)  http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/2006/award2002.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/2006/award2003.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/2006/award2004.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/2006/award2005.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/award2006.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/award2007.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/ pericles/2009/table-2008.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/ anti_fraud/programmes/pericles/ 2010/Pericles-implementation-2009.pdf
 
 http://ec.europa.eu/anti_fr aud/programmes/pericles/2011/ Annex6-budget-implementation-
2010.pdf  
   
 
                    
 
EN - 42 -   EN  
 ANNEX V  
DRAFT REPORT  
55th Meeting of the “Euro Counterfeiting  Experts Group” of 9 November 2010  
Attendance  (See attached list) :  
• 41 participants: 23 from Member States (Luxemburg, Romania, Slovak Republic, and 
Sweden excused)  
• One external expert from Portugal  and three from Poland   
• Representatives from the European Central Bank (ECB) (1) , Europol (1), Interpol (1)  
• Six members of European Commission/OLAF staff   
 
This meeting took place in Brussels, Belgium and was chaired by Mr. Y. Xenakis, Head of Unit 
C.5, OLAF/European Commission.  
1 Approval of the agenda and the report of the previous meeting  
The Chairman welcomed the participants to the 55th meeting of the Euro Counterfeiting Experts 
Group (ECEG) and introduced the agenda, highlighting the presence of guest speakers from 
Poland and an external expert from Portugal, explaining that an expert from Spain was not available for today’s meeting.  
The report of the 54th meeting of the "Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group" of 26 June 2010 was 
approved (the latter with modifications from ECB and Europol). The final report of 26 June 
2010 is now available on the CIRCA Website.   
2 The effectiveness of anti-counterfeiting legislation:  
 
  
2.1 The state of play in Portugal  
Mr. V. Magalhaes (Portuguese State Prosecutor) introduced the legislation in place in Portugal 
aimed at combating currency counterfeiting. Moreover, he described the  
Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Be lgium. Telephone: (32-2) 299 11 11. 
Office: J-30 10/62. Telephone: direct line (32-2) 2993483. Fax: (32-2) 2921884.  
E-mail: yannis.xenakis@ec.europa.eu  
 
EN - 43 -   EN  structures in place in Portugal to carry out investigations and technical analysis of counterfeit 
banknotes and coins. Statistics regarding the quantity of counterfeits identified from 2002 to the 
present were also provided.   
The Chairman thanked Mr. Magalhaes, noting the significant figures: 11,000 cases investigated, 
81 closed. The Chairman invited the prosecutor to address the group at a future date on the topic 
of sentencing practices, describing major sentences imposed and the average lengths of imprisonment. The presentation is found on CIRCA.   
‘Pericles’ Programme  
3.a. The implementation of 2010 budget – state of play  
The Chairman pointed to the enthusiasm of applicants in 2010, highlighting the fact that the 
Pericles programme budget is likely to be committed in full again this year.   
Mr. L. Pierini (OLAF/European Commission) gave  an overall description and appraisal of the 
projects in the pipeline for implementation in 2010. Underlining the fact that despite the reduction 
of the 2010 budget to 900,000 €, Mr. Pierini reported that 17 actions are nevertheless expected to 
be financed, the same number of actions as in 2009. The average cost of actions in 2010 was less than that of 2009. It has been necessary to postpone certain actions until 2011, due to the shortage 
of 2010 budget. To date, 14 actions have been committed and three are in the pipeline. 
Applications from Portugal, Poland, and the Italian Carabinieri have been submitted for the last call for proposals. The total number of approved actions is expected to be 17. The amount 
committed for 14 actions is 725 021 €.  
A comprehensive list of approved actions is found on the CIRCA website. Mr. Pierini was pleased 
to underline that two new member states have s ubmitted applications, Estonia a staff exchange 
and Poland a seminar/staff exchange, noting, moreover, that the programme’s users are becoming more diversified, ensuring a more thorough protection of the euro.  
1. Belgium – Conclusions of the Staff Exchange between the Belgian NCO (police) and the 
CNAC (Mint) with Spain  
This was a coordinated action between Belgian police and Mint with the goal of observing how 
the authorities, the NAC and the NCO in Spain work together and to learn how handling of 
counterfeits, both banknotes and coins, is conducted. Belgian authorities plan to closely associate 
the NCO (Police) and NAC of the National Bank, by putting them in the same locale in order to 
improve cooperation. Observations of the handli ng of counterfeit coins in Spain have already 
been presented to the CCEG by the Royal mint.   
Mr. Peeters told that their reception by Spanish authorities was very welcoming, noting all 
questions were answered and all material and equipment was available for consultation. Upon reflection, he mentioned that all material, equipment and trained personnel were in place, as were 
all procedures necessary for counterfeit detection. However, he observed that not all coins were 
tested, not all sorting machines were correctly  adjusted and seemingly the responsibility for 
checks was not clearly defined. It is his opinion that the new European regulation introducing 
obligations to authenticate euro coins and penalties would assist in avoiding this difficulty. 
Transposing the European regulation into a precise, comprehensive and practical national law 
 
EN - 44 -   EN  outlining procedures and responsibilities concerning the authentication process would be useful. 
Lastly, Mr. Peeters commented on the constructive working relationship between the Spanish 
police and analysis centre. Guidance provided by the scientific analysis to the police was integral 
to focusing investigations and assisting with priority setting. Noting that the Spanish NAC provided much more guidance to the police than in the case in Belgium, he found that the working 
relationship impressive. It is this complementar y relationship he would like to see created in 
Belgium when the two units, NCO and NAC, are put together. The Chair commended the excellent conclusions of the Belgian initiative and underlined that this was best practice to be used 
as an example of successful staff exchange.  
Action
: OLAF/Commission will ensure that the conclusions of this staff exchange are put on 
CIRCA  
2. Conclusions of the Seminar “Euro South East” Tirana, Albania (OLAF, BLKA, DE)  
The Chairman explained that BLKA representatives were not presented at the ECEG today 
because they were celebrating Mr. Edi Liedgens’ retirement. On behalf of the group, the Chair acknowledged the enormous contribution that Mr. Liedgens made to the protection of the euro in 
terms of police action, prevention and also awareness-raising. He represented a voice of reason in 
the group and will certainly be missed by the members. Mr. Xenakis wished to express his personal gratitude and expressed his hope that Mr. Liedgens visit the group in the future.  
Mr. Pierini presented a brief summary of the “Euro South East” seminar that took place in 
Albania from 18-22 October. Roughly 70 participants attended from southeast Europe, from 
Turkey, Germany, Austria, Italy and the Balkans. The action was very successful in terms of 
updating the status of the protection of the euro and the enlargement and reinforcement of the network of professionals. The action included a simulation of an international investigation. 
While its focus was German or Austrian e xperience, the audience benefitted from the 
observations and the simulated investigation. A fulle r description of this successful event and the 
conclusions will be made at the next ECEG meeting in March.  
The Euro South East is strategically important ensuring the thorough protection of the euro while 
establishing fruitful working relationships am ong police authorities of the region. Despite Mr. 
Liedgens’ retirement, Commission/OLAF counts on the series focusing on the South east 
continuing given its important strategic significance.   
The Chairman informed that the euro is  a transaction currency in Albania. 
Nevertheless, their legislat ion is has not yet been adapted to allow for the adequate 
protection of the euro. On an official level, the use of euro is not controlled or actively 
protected against counterfeiting. While appropriate measures  are taken when a 
counterfeit is identified, proactive measur es to protect against counterfeiting are not 
taken. Therefore, given that authorities did expres s eagerness to improve the 
situation, the chairman expr essed the intention to invite an Albanian delegation for 
them to describe the cu rrent legal situation, with a view to amelioration.  Mr Pierini 
informed that Albania will be listed among priorities for Pe ricles implementation in 
2011.  
3. Conclusions of the conference: “Reinforcing the protection of the euro: a shared 
responsibility” 28-29 October 2010, Brussels  
 
EN - 45 -   EN  This joint conference was co-organised by Commission/OLAF, European Central Bank (ECB), 
the European Payments Council (EPC) and the European Security Transport Association (ESTA). 
70 participants mainly from EPC and ESTA, comm ercial banks and cash-in-transit industry, as 
well as member states gathered on 28-29 October in Brussels. The conference was viewed as a follow-up to that organised in 2005 and aimed to take stock of progress made in the protection of 
the euro and to identify challenges in the years to come.  The two day conference covered 
legislative changes aimed at the protection of the euro, including new, legally binding authentication procedures for euro banknotes and coins. DG ECFIN presented its 
Recommendation on legal tender of euro banknotes and coins. Europol presented technical and 
law enforcement measures to protect the euro. ECB talked about the second generation of euro banknotes. Training aspects under the Pericles programme were summarised and success stories 
from the Italian NCO were also presented. Cash-in-transit issues focused on the need for greater 
support from law enforcement to prevent attacks. And DG ECFIN also summarised its proposal for a Regulation on cross-border transport of euro cash. The ECB gave enlightening presentations 
on the topic of communication with the public, discussing various awareness campaigns. Austria, 
Portugal and the UK added to the communication panel outlining measures taken in their countries.   
The chair wished to underscore the successful cooperation with the ECB which undertook this 
joint seminar and appointed a senior advisor to deliver the opening speech, while Mr Nicholas 
Ilett, acting Director-General of OLAF, delivered the closing address. This type of inter-
institutional cooperation is integral to promoting a cohesive strategy of protecting the euro. Furthermore, the close engagement of the private sector is becoming ever more important as the 
authentication legislation involves their compliance. The private sector outlined concrete ideas for 
the future. These will be reported and shared with the group.  
3.b Pericles Programme - Perspectives for 2011  
Mr. Luca Pierini tabled a room document outlining initiatives planned by Member States under 
the Pericles Programme in 2011, highlighting the need to maintain efforts in Italy and to involve 
Bulgaria more closely. It was reported that Pericles’ 2011 budget should be 1.000.000 €. Other areas of concern continue to be the Balkan countries, Turkey and South America; weaker links in 
China and the Mediterranean remain to be reinforced. During a round table discussion, Member 
States were invited to comment and describe the focus of their actions in order to ensure coherence and to avoid duplication especially in terms of subjects covered and participants. It was 
emphasised that the Italian action foreseen in Turkey in 2011 by UCAMP will focus on the 
financial sector, compared to the police focus of the OLAF/Commission exercise in Antalya. This document can be found on the CIRCA website. He emphasised that the next Pericles call for 
proposals is foreseen for 1 April 2011. OLAF plans to organise a small event for applicants to 
provide guidance for applications and financing in the Pericles programme.    
The Italian Carabinieri and the Portuguese PJ described their lastest applications for 
staff exchanges underlining the strong cont ribution of these actions to their 
operational work. The experts gave their ov erall agreement on the perspectives of 
Pericles implementation in 2011.  
Highlighting inter-institutional cooperation, Europol described some of its upcoming initiatives 
and geographic areas of concentration. Europol will continue to give prominence to its WeBTEG 
initiative (Western Balkans and Turkey) and will carry out an international conference during 
2011, a biennial event. It is possible that these operational meetings could be jointly organised together with OLAF and financed by Pericles in the future. Commission/OLAF conveyed its 
 
EN - 46 -   EN  willingness to co-organise the international conference with Europol and ECB. Moreover, Mr. 
Buttenberg told of the specific focus of Europol on the following two schemes:    
Europol ‘Social Study of Counterfeiting’  
Work on the Europol ‘Social Study of Counterfeiting’ is planned to be carried out in conjunction 
with Dutch national authorities: the Central Bank, the NCO and the Police Academy. It is now planned to conduct a first pilot phase in the Netherlands, to in order to gather information and to 
determine feasibility. After the first stage, the scope of the study will be refined to carry out 
European-wide research. Europol will keep OLAF informed of the Terms of Reference and the advancement of the study.  
Europol Bitmap Training  
Europol would like to continue its Bitmap training but in a more centralised way. Portugal 
expressed its willingness to host a basic training, this initiative was welcomed by 
Commission/OLAF and Europol. Europol asked to the German BKA to play a role as possible organiser of a possible second level training and agreed to send a request to Commission/OLAF 
concerning the two levels of training. The modalit ies will then be discussed with Portugal and, 
possibly, the German BKA.   
Action
: OLAF will circulate an e-mail to the ECEG to request interest in Bitmap training to 
establish the need to organise training in the short term.   
International conference on the protection of the euro  
The chairman requested information on the prospects for the next biennial conference on the 
protection of the euro. He opined that the next conference be organised as a joint initiative 
Europol/ECB/OLAF. The Europol representative will convey this idea to his hierarchy.  
3.c. Polish training activities in 2011 (Polish NCO)  
The Polish delegation reported on its upcoming training activity to focus on the protection of the 
euro in north east Europe. The action comprises three phases, first, in February 2011 a three day working group meeting for 27 people from Member States plus Ukraine, Belarus and Russia. A 
detailed questionnaire has been forwarded to all Member States in order to determine the level of 
protection of the euro in each state in order to id entify best practices. Following an analysis of the 
responses, a seminar-type event will be held, with working group sessions aimed at discussing the 
application of Regulation 1338 and other methodol ogical themes concerning the functioning of 
NCOs. It will be followed in April-March by a staff exchange, first hosted in Warsaw involving 4 persons each from: Lithuania, Spain, Slovakia, Ukra ine and Germany to meet with representatives 
of Polish national authorities. Then Polish repr esentatives will travel to Vilnius, Madrid, 
Bratislava, Kiev and Berlin. Finally, the police propose to produce an information brochure in Polish, German, Russian and English. The Chairman thanked Poland for its initiative noting that 
the focus will be on Eastern border countries. He requested that the questionnaire be modified to 
remove the elements that are already known and distributed to the ECEG group. Further, it was suggested that MS interested in participating in the action could contact the Polish NCO. Given 
the ambitiousness of the action, OLAF/Commission offered to collaborate closely with Poland for 
its implementation.   
Action
: OLAF will prepare a new version of the Polish Questionnaire and circulate it by e-mail to 
 
EN - 47 -   EN  the ECEG experts to request their comments.  
 
3.d. Euro Counterfeit Currency Manual  
The finalisation of French, German, Italian a nd Spanish versions is underway. We are awaiting 
final approval from two Member States.   
4. Organisational and methodological developmen ts in the fight against counterfeiting 
(Carabinieri)  
Mr. Gentili gave a presentation entitled “Organisational and methodological developments in the 
fight against counterfeiting”. It has been upl oaded onto the CIRCA website. The Chairman 
thanked the speaker for his presentation and expressed his wish for continuous close co-operation 
and coordination of training actions.  
5. Legislative issues  
a. Implementation of modified  Regulation 1338/2001 – update  
i. Procedures for banknote authentication (ECB)  
The ECB reported on Decision ECB/2010/14 of 16 September 2010 on the authentication and 
fitness checking and recirculation of euro banknotes which has now been published. Ms. Sophie 
Bening gave a detailed presentation on the provisions which is now found on the CIRCA website.  
Following a question from Cyprus, the ECB confirmed that each MS is responsible to decide the 
amount of financial sanction to apply in case of non-compliance.   
ii. Progress with regard to coin authentication procedures (OLAF)  
The Commission (Ms. Kanellopoulou) reported on euro coin authentication procedures. This 
presentation is found on the CIRCA Website.  The Chairman noted that the coin authentication 
regulation will be published before the end of the year. Addressing a question from France, the 
Commission revealed that work on guidelines for the implementation of authentication procedures 
will commence shortly.  ETSC work teams have been established to undertake this project and 
will meet for the first time on 30 November; discussions will take place within this framework. 19 MS have requested to participate in these work  teams, to treat various themes, for example, 
technical instructions or training needs. Mr. Mueller believes a first draft will be ready for 
circulation within Commission services by mid-April 2011, this is an informal deadline. However, it is still to be determined what type of instrument the Commission will use to issue the 
aforementioned guidelines.   
6. Status of euro counterfeits (ECB, Europol, OLAF/ETSC, Interpol)  
European Central Bank (ECB) 
 
 
EN - 48 -   EN  Ms. Bening related a message from Mr. McCallum concerning the statistics of euro banknote 
counterfeiting based on the two page table furnished to the group. Counterfeiting has steadily 
declined over a one year period to a level of 762,480 or 63,500 per month. The main component 
of the fall is a decline in the counterfeiting of the 20-euro banknote however, counterfeiting of the 50-euro note is the most numerous. The number of the high quality P3 remains at a much lower 
level than expected from the runs of the serial numbers. Over 2/3 of counterfeits belong to the so-
called ‘Napoli’ classes. Lastly, counterfeit recognition training has taken place in Estonia to improve readiness for the introduction of the euro.  
European Technical and Scientific Centre (ETSC) 
 
The ETSC briefed the group on the statistical trends of counterfeit euro coins. Mr. Mueller 
informed that the last 6 months of 2009 and the first six months of 2010 showed a level of 180,000 coins detected in circulation, up from the pr evious year of 170,000. It nevertheless seems 
significant that Germany detects more counterfeit coins than it does banknotes, and that Spain, 
while detecting counterfeit banknotes, does not detect coins. The counterfeit 50-cent piece is becoming more widespread, matching the level of the 1euro cent. Significantly, half of all 
counterfeit 50-cent pieces are detected in France, the reason for this is unknown. It is supposed 
that this is due to flows from Italy.   
Europol 
 
Mr. Buttenberg gave handouts of tables providing a statistical overview of police actions from 
January-September 2010. He noted the two peaks during the year which corresponded to two 
significant cases in Italy and Colombia. Briefly presenting the most recent case, the Italian Carabinieri shut down a printshop producing the 50P5 in August 2010 in Naples. This important 
operation is likely to aid all European countries affected by this class of counterfeits. There is 
clear evidence that the dye used for the hologram of this class was found in this printshop. Another major case was the discovery of the printshop for the 100P15 class in Bulgaria. The 
mother class has now been dismantled based on th e material discovered. Europol is involved with 
three working groups: “Peninsula” involving Italy, France and Spain which has led to improved information flows and cooperation, ‘South America’ which supports staff exchanges and training 
measures, and the ‘Balkan’ working group which currently focuses on measures to track and 
prevent the production of the 100P12, P13, P15, and 50P26. The statistics provided by Europol, besides outlining major initiatives, describe suspect nationalities. For the moment most 
counterfeiters are born in Bulgaria but migrate and most often are of Italian nationality. This 
could be a topic of the upcoming social study. Europol told of the increased quantities of counterfeits in Belgium, the creation of a targeted working group including the NCO and the 
National Central Bank, and its ongoing action plan of awareness-raising. It is hoped the 
dismantling of the print shop in Italy will contribute to a decrease in counterfeits circulating in Belgium.  
Interpol 
 
Ms. Dzidrovska reported on counterfeit euro notes reported by Interpol member countries for the 
period 2008-9, the period of 2010 is still ongoing and will be reported at the next meeting. Of 
respondents, 87 member countries answered 63 were non-European Union Member countries. In 
2008, 40 million counterfeit euros were seized, of these 11 million from Colombia and 900,000 
reported by Algeria. Two million counterfeit euros were reported by members outside the euro zone in 2009. This number is significantly lower than the previous year because it excludes 
 
EN - 49 -   EN  Colombia, whose numbers have yet to be verified. In 2009, Serbia reported 500,000, followed by 
Switzerland and Peru. Counterfeit euros registered by African countries include 180,000 by 
Tunisia, followed by Morocco and Algeria; in Asia 70,000 were reported by Jordan followed by 
Israel and Hong Kong. With regard to counterfeit US dollars, in 2009, 45 million printed notes with a value of 64 million have turned up. In 2008, this number for US dollars was 72 million 
passed, with 107 million seized. Significant finds were reported from Portugal, Belgium and 
Russia. As for Canadian dollars, counterfeits were found by Switzerland, Poland, Portugal and Serbia.  
Commission/OLAF 
 
Ms. Korinthios presented a paper “Effectiveness of action against euro counterfeiting 2007-2009”. 
The objective of the brief report was to underline the effectiveness of law enforcement action in the fight against euro counterfeiting. Three indicators were analysed; the number of arrests, of 
illegal print shops and mints discovered, and the number of counterfeits seized before circulation. 
It is evident that each year there has been progress in combating euro counterfeiting and removing counterfeiters from action. The Group agreed on the usefulness of the approach; consequently, the 
Commission will extend the scope of this study to  all Member States and will refine methodology 
so as to ensure reliable conclusions.  
7. Miscellaneous  
The proposed dates for meetings in 2011:  15 March, 21 June and 10 November   
 
EN - 50 -   EN   
Belgium  Mr. J. Peeters;  
Bulgaria  Mr. K. Kostadinov;  
Czech Republic  Mr. J. Moravec;  
Denmark  Mr. R. Jensen; Mr. S. Jensen;  
Germany  Mr. D. Dominicus; Mr. F. Müller; Mr. O. Rump;  
Ireland  Mr. D. Heneghan;  
Estonia  Ms. K. Kirsel;  
Greece  Ms. D. Koutsotoliou;  
Spain  Mr. J.F. Bañuelos Fernández; Ms. L. Diz Lozano  
France  Ms. M. Carruba; Mr. J.-L. Perrier;  
Italy  Mr. F. Carpenito; Mr. A. Gentili; Mr. P. Marraffa;  
Cyprus  Mr. C. Ktoris  
Latvia  Mr. E. Berzins;  Mr. A. Taurins;  
Lithuania  Ms. N. Baltruniene;  
Luxembourg  excused  
Hungary  Mr. T. Goricsan;  
Malta  Mr.K. Mifsud; Mr. I.J. Abdilla  
The Netherlands  Mr. M. Naber;  
Austria  Mr. F. Hammerschmidt; Mr. G, Boden  
Poland  Ms. E. Szegidewicz, Ms. E. Kozlowska-Osuch; Mr. T. Malczyk; Mr. J. 
Dobrolecki  
Portugal  Mr. V. Magalhaes; Ms. P. Silveira;  
Romania  excused  
Slovenia   Ms. I. Kure; Ms. N. Kupic;  
Slovak Republic  excused  
Finland  Mr. P. Somerkoski  
Sweden  excused  
United Kingdom  Mr. S. Norton  
Commission   
ECB  Ms. S. Bening  
Europol  Mr. T. Buttenberg  
Interpol  Ms. D. Dzidrovska;  
 
EN - 51 -   EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION  
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE  (OLAF)  
Operational & Policy Support  
EURO Protection; Hercule & Pericles Programmes  
Brussels, 16 June 2010 (revision) 
D/004777 OLAF C5/KE D(2010) 4906  
DRAFT REPORT  
53rd Meeting of the “Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group” of 18 March 2010  
Attendance  (See attached list) :  
• 46 experts, 38 from Member States (Hungary, Ireland, Luxemburg, and the Slovak 
Republic excused)  
• One expert from France and one from Italy  
• Representatives from the European Central Bank (ECB), Europol and Interpol  
• Seven members of European Commission/OLAF staff  
 
This meeting took place in Brussels, Belgium and was chaired by Mr. Y. Xenakis, Head of Unit 
C.5, OLAF/European Commission.  
1 Approval of the agenda and the report of the previous meeting  
The Chairman welcomed the participants to the 53nd meeting of the Euro Counterfeiting Experts 
Group (ECEG) and introduced the agenda, highlighting the presence of magistrates from France 
and Italy as guest speakers.  
The agenda and the report of the 52st Meeting of the "Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group" of 10 
November 2009 were approved without amendments.  
 
2 The effectiveness of anti-counterfeiting legislation:  
 
2.1 The state of play in Italy  
 
 
EN - 52 -   EN  Mr. A. Galanti (Ministry of Justice, Rome) introduced his findings on the state of implementation 
of anti-counterfeiting legislation in Italy. The presentation has been uploaded on to the CIRCA 
website.  
 
2.2 The state of play in France  
Mr. S. Almaseanu (Ministry of Justice, DACG, Paris), provided the most recent data available 
concerning currency counterfeiting, convictions and sentencing. “Effectiveness of anti-
counterfeiting legislation in France” is available on the CIRCA website.  
The discussion following the two presentations highlighted the need to raise the profile of the 
seriousness of currency counterfeiting among justi ce officials, perhaps through the training of 
judges and magistrates. Furthermore, a wider understanding of sentencing for counterfeiting 
crimes is needed on a European level. A cooperative effort to render legally prescribed penalties 
for counterfeiting uniform is warranted. To progress in this, the involvement of Eurojust in the 
medium, if not short term should be envisaged. Since it is the integrity of the currency that is the 
object of protection, the ECB argued that different  penalties should not be prescribed for it.  
Austria volunteered to make a presentation on this topic in June. Finland will also consider 
making a presentation in the future.  
‘Pericles’ Programme  
 
3.1.a The implementation of the 2009 budget  
Mr. L. Pierini (OLAF/European Commission) presented a general overview of the projects 
financed by the ‘Pericles’ Programme in 2009. 17 actions were co-financed, 8 seminar/training, 5 staff exchanges, 2 workshops, 1 study and 1 technical support meeting. 1,000,000 euro, or 100% 
of the budget was consumed. The actions approved have covered diverse geographical areas: 
Balkans and Turkey, Russia, South America and the Mediterranean, including North Africa. Police forces remain the largest focus of Pericl es actions, though a multidisciplinary approach is 
assured by including representatives of financ ial institutions and the judiciary. One action 
specifically oriented to the judicial sector was organised, focusing on the issue of handling evidence. In Croatia and Montenegro, seminars on the recognition of counterfeits were given to 
the financial sectors; a specific technical semina r was also organised by the ETSC on euro coins. 
The group expressed its approval of this report on the implementation of 2009. A complete list of 2009 Pericles Programme is on the CIRCA website.  
 
3.1.b  Prospects for implementation of the 2010 budget  
A document was prepared identifying ongoing 2009 actions and those foreseen for 
implementation in 2010, highlighting the current strategic framework. It is important to maintain 
emphasis on the most sensitive EU states of Italy and Bulgaria, especially to counter illegal print shops in the region. Turkey and the Balkan area are of strategic importance to the programme. In 
2009, Montenegro and Croatia have been the focus of Pericles actions and this emphasis 
continues in 2010. Croatia has expressed an interest in participating in staff exchanges with member state national banks. Serbia, Bosnia Herzegovina and the former Yugoslav Republic of 
Macedonia and Albania will be featured during 2010. Serbia will be highlighted for an action by 
 
EN - 53 -   EN  the Dutch central bank.  
 
EN - 54 -   EN  Albania has been selected by the BLKA as the centre of the Euro Southeast. Other geographical 
areas have been identified by Pericles partners, notably Brazil and Russia, Latin 
America/Columbia and China. Mr. Perini announced that the following applications had already 
been received and were due to be evaluated: Euro  Southeast in Albania (BLKA), two applications 
from Belgium for staff exchanges in Spain, an awareness-raising action in Libya (UCAMP) and a 
staff exchange between BIBE and Peru, Colombia and Argentina.  
The Chairman noted that the Pericles budget for 2010 was slightly less, €900,000. A roundtable 
revealed the plans of members state applications : the BKA intends an ac tion in Bulgaria; UCIFM 
plans an action in Russia, is holding meetings with  Chinese officials, and foresees a study on the 
relationship between major events and counterfeiting;  the Italian Carabinieri intend to carry out an 
exchange of officials for Malta, Cyprus, Egypt, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria.  
3.2 Conclusions of the Seminar “A Community strategy to protect the euro”  
This conference held in Rome 30 November – 1 December 2009 by UCAMP, was organised for 
magistrates, police forces and representatives of  the national central bank. Participants came from 
Italy, Spain, Greece, Malta and Cyprus and Europ ean institutions. 82 participants attended. The 
main conclusions confirm the importance of e ffective cooperation between authorities protecting 
the euro. Central bank authorities noted that measur es to authenticate the euro have led to good 
results. Moreover, analyses of concrete cases were made, focusing on judicial decisions and sentencing in France and Italy. Participants called for an increase the opportunities to attend 
events, continued flows of information and, further training possibilities should be assured.  
3.3 Conclusions of the judicial seminar on the to pic of the status of counterfeits as evidence  
Mr. Kasimis presented the conclusions of the semi nar “Judicial Issues and Criminal Proceedings 
in relation to the Protection of the euro”. The event took place from 24 to 25 November 2009 in 
Brussels and was financed under the Pericles programme.  
The action brought together 20 experts (mainly magist rates with participation of police officials) 
from 10 Member States (Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Luxemburg, Portugal and Spain), one representative from the European Central Bank (ECB) and 
4 officials from OLAF.  
The main objective of the seminar was to analyse national legislation in order to propose a 
framework for making available counterfeits to ECB/ETSC while a penal procedure is pending, in 
view of achieving the appropriate balance between, on the one hand, the effective transmission/transport of counterfeit notes or coins to the competent European or national 
authorities and, on the other hand, the coherent and efficient functioning of the criminal 
proceedings before the national courts.  
The Chairman noted that the ECB and European Commission could envisage a draft 
communication which would formally inform the Presidents of each national Supreme Court of the requirements of Regulation 1338/2001. Eurojust and JLS could be asked to participate in the 
preparation of a text to be considered with national authorities, and then sent by the appropriate 
channels.  
 
EN - 55 -   EN  3.4 Conclusions of the Seminar “Cooperating in the protection of money against 
counterfeiting” Brazil  
The Policia Judiciaria presented the conclusions of the seminar “Cooperating in the protection of 
money against counterfeiting”. The event took place from 8 to 12 March 2010 in Brasilia, Brazil, 
financed under the Pericles programme.  
The action brought together 73 experts (Brazil, Portugal, Spain, France, Italy, Angola, Cape 
Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Saint Tome and Principe, Macau, Mozambique), one representative from 
the European Central Bank (ECB) and 2 officials from OLAF.  
Besides, awareness-raising, the issue of informatio n centralisation remained the focal point of the 
seminar. Contact between Polícia Judiciária and the Departamento de Polícia Federal do Brasil (DPF) and Banco Central do Brasil (BCB) revealed that Brazil does not have a centralised system 
for the gathering and treatment of information related to money counterfeiting. The police forces 
started to cooperate and exchange information immediately.  
The other Portuguese speaking countries represented at the seminar were very active in the 
debates, expressing their will to start cooperating with the Portuguese and European authorities in 
the fight against money counterfeiting. As a direct result of the seminar, a common paper was 
signed between the four entities that organized and co-organized the seminar (Polícia Judiciária, 
Banco de Portugal, Departamento de Polícia Federal do Brasil and Banco Central do Brasil) expressing their intention to increase the level of cooperation and the information exchange 
between them. The paper also referred to the other CPLP countries, encouraging them to provide 
more detailed information concerning the situation of euro counterfeiting in those countries in order to elaborate a threat assessment and consider possible needs for action.  
3.5 Euro Counterfeit Currency Manual  
The English version of the Euro Counterfeit Currency Experts’ manual has now been distributed. 
260 manuals were delivered to those countries/institutions requesting copies. 40 have been kept 
by OLAF. Plans are being made to produce the French and German, Italian and Spanish versions, 
as well as the electronic English version.  
3.6 Europol proposal for a social analytical , multidisciplinary study of counterfeiting  
Recognising that banknote counterfeiting is incr easing and that distribution of banknotes is 
largely a phenomenon associated with France, Spain and Italy, Europol proposes to study the 
factors surrounding this phenomenon. Also noteworthy is the significantly large numbers of detected counterfeit coins in Germany compared to other similarly large countries. The objective 
of the study is to enhance the knowledge of counterfeiting and the factors that facilitate 
distribution in some countries, while not in others. Social analysis will be used to obtain quantitative evidence, using political, economic, social, technical and legal information to draw 
conclusions. It was noted that the idea of the study was positively received by the Steering 
Committee of the ECB, Europol and OLAF. Overall,  the group agreed to the need for a scientific 
approach to gain a better understanding of the situation with regard to counterfeiting. The 
Chairman proposed that Europol, the ECB and OLAF meet to formulate a draft Terms of 
Reference with a view to presenting a more concrete proposal to the ECEG in June.  
 
EN - 56 -   EN  4. Dismantling of an illegal print shop for Algerian Dinars in France  
Mr. Perrier described an investigation which involved the production of counterfeit 1000 Algerian 
dinars in Lyon. This seizure involved authentic paper that was stolen from a lorry in Marseille in 2006; 18,000 tons (44 bobbins) disappeared, of which, probably 38 are still missing. Dinars’ 
security depends largely on authentic paper. Criminals in Naples were discovered in 2008 
producing dinars and stopped. In 2009 the police from Lyon discovered that criminals bought paper from Marseille and were working in an official commercial print shop to produce false 
dinars. 14 people were arrested in Lyon, and criminals in Marseille were also apprehended for 
stolen papers, though many got away probably to Italy.  
This case involved a four colour printing offset  and a scanner/computer which made plates 
directly without having to produce films. This is the first time in France that this technique has 
been seen. It enables counterfeiters to sp eed up production significantly and renders film 
redundant. These machines are not expensive, approximately €25,000, and are widely available. It 
is impossible to distinguish between the offset pr int and the inkjet print without careful scrutiny 
with a microscope. This is a new phenomenon in counterfeiting. A complete visual report was 
shown of the investigation site.  
5. Legislative issues  
a. Implementation of modified  Regulation 1338/2001 – update  
i. Procedures for banknote authentication  
The ECB reported that lawyers have now proposed the final draft of the two instruments with 
which the ECB intends to implement the framework as a binding legal act to the banknote 
committee. The framework is known, exceptions for remote branches and extreme circumstances 
will be included. In order to re-circulate euro s there will be an obligation to use machines 
successfully tested by the ECB; there will also be a mechanism for surveillance of these 
obligations. The timeframe of spring/summer 2010 still stands for approval, at the very latest by 
the end of the year. Responding to a question from the chairman, the ECB noted that annexes to these legal texts exist.  
ii. Progress with regard to coin authentication procedures  
The Commission reported that a proposal was adopted and presented to the Council in November 
2009. It was discussed with the Swedish presidency of the Council and is currently under discussion with the Spanish presidency in collaboration with the Bank of Spain. An unexpectedly 
large number of modifications were proposed. Now it is in discussion with the European 
Parliament, under the ordinary procedure of co -decision. It will be a Regulation of both the 
European Parliament and the Council. Final adoption is expected for the second half of this year.  
 
EN - 57 -   EN  b. Monitoring of sanctions under framework decision of 29 May 2000 and Article 6 of 
Regulation 1338/2001 - update  
Referring to the presentations of the morning, Mr. Kasimis noted that all countries have 
legislation pertaining to the crime of unintentionally receiving counterfeit euros and subsequently returning them into circulation. OLAF/Commission vi ews it appropriate to focus efforts on raising 
awareness of ‘intermediaries’, both financial and individual, that this is a crime of counterfeiting. 
Intermediaries behave in this manner to avoid financial loss nevertheless, it is also appropriate to consider raising sanctions associated with this  behaviour. The group will revisit this topic.  
6. Status of euro counterfeits  
Interpol briefed the group on two projects: ‘S- print’ by which second-hand intaglio printers are 
tracked worldwide, and security substrates, in co operation with the printing industry. Interpol is 
organising two conferences, one on counterfeit documents another on financial crimes.  
Mr. McCallum presented a room document of the usual data on counterfeits, noting its availability 
on the CIRCA website. The general monthly trend has been going down since September 2009; 
the actual number of counterfeits has stabilised, though at a higher number than previously. The 
total figure ending 15 March 2009 for the running year was 861,628, a bit down from the end of 2009. Approximately one-third comes from France, one-third from Italy and Spain together, and 
the last one-third from the rest of Europe combined. Unfortunately, the last few weeks have seen 
more activity in the high quality class of the 200P3A. A new print run has been produced with 
new plate numbers and serial numbers. It is still called variant A, because it is not technically 
different from the previous print run. It seems that there are 80,000 which have been produced, 
possibly more.  
Europol informed that Council Decision establishing European Police office entered into force on 
1 January 2010, replacing the Europol Convention. Its mandate has been extended to include not only organized crime, but also all forms of serious crimes affecting member states. A new 
structure and new financing provisions are in place. The forgery of money unit has not been 
affected and is operating as usual.  Recent operations have included the seizure of 25,000 pieces of counterfeit notes in France and the dismantli ng of a print shop in Colombia together with 
Spain’s BIBE and Europol resulting in the seizure of 22,000 pieces of 50€ notes and 15,000 
Colombian pesos.  
The Chairman thanked Europol for its report and requested that for the next meeting, in order to 
have more global data and to trace general trends, that Europol present a table highlighting: number of arrests/year, number of illegal workshops dismantled/year, number of banknotes seized 
before circulation/year for each year 2002-pres ent. The Commission emphasised it was requesting 
only non-personal, non-operational information not related to current cases. If this information could be gathered and shared, it could be useful for the group to support legislative initiatives. 
Europol will attempt to prepare a table for discussion at the ECEG.  
 
EN - 58 -   EN  The ETSC briefed the group on the statistical trends of counterfeit euro coins. There is a shift 
within the denominations that is being observed, with a decrease in 2€ coin counterfeiting, while a 
slight increase of 50-cent and 1 € coins. Nevertheless, the 2€ coin remains the most frequently 
counterfeited. Also, it remains significant that most coins are detected in Germany, while not nearly so many are detected in Italy and Spain, whereas Italy and Spain detect many counterfeit 
banknotes.  
The Chairman addressed a question relating to discrepancies of data between Europol and ETSC. 
He explained that Europol relies on the CMS database for figures, whereas ETSC, in order to 
avoid revisions, contact CNACs in order to foresee the numbers which will later appear in the CMS after classification.  
7. Miscellaneous  
The next meeting will take place 24 June, the following is pencilled for 9 November.  
 
EN - 59 -   EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION  
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE  (OLA F) Operational & Policy Support  
Protection of the EURO  
Brussels, 30.04.2008  (update D003534) 
OLAF C5/KE D(2008) 3229  
DRAFT REPORT  
Subject: 47th Meeting of the “Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group” in the framework of 
the Anti-Fraud Advisory Committee (Cocolaf) of 13 March 2008.  
Participants: Y. Xenakis (Chairman Commission), 38 experts from 22 Member States 
(Estonia, Luxemburg, Portugal, Hungary and Romania excused); two representatives from the ECB, one from Europol and one from Interpol attended. See attached list.  
1. Approval of the agenda and report of the previous meeting  
The Chairman briefly introduced the agenda which was approved by the group. The draft 
report of the ECEG meeting of 13 December 2007 comprising modifications submitted by the ECB was also approved.  
2. ‘Pericles’ Programme  
 Implementation 2007 (OLAF) Ms. Skocinska presented a general overview of Pericles 2007 
implementation. The Pericles call for proposals was extended until 31 March 2008 in order to avoid an uncovered period, while awaiting publication of the new financial decision. Twelve 
actions were organised under the 2007 budget including 7 conducted by Member States and 5 Commission initiatives. One additional application for a staff exchange by the Belgian CNAC 
was submitted and is expected to be approved. The members of the ECEG accepted this report of 
the Pericles 2007 implementation. A more detailed report outlining participants and other facts will be presented at the June meeting.  
• Conclusions of the Euro-Caribbean seminar, Guadeloupe (France)  
 
The action in the French department  of Guadeloupe focused on awareness-
raising of the crime of c ounterfeiting in the region. The aim was to study the 
circulation of counterfeit  money, eventual links betwe en counterfeit distribution 
and other crimes such as drugs and hum an trafficking, in order to obtain an 
evaluation of the threat to  the euro in the region, and to the local economies. 
Considerable discrepancies between coun tries were reported by the various 
delegations. Some countries reported having much experience protecting 
currency, such as the tourist destinat ions of the Dominican Republic and St. 
 
 
 
EN - 60 -   EN  Martin’s and producer regions such as Guyana and Guadeloupe, others admitted 
less experience. Discussions included a wi de range of topics; speakers from 
Colombia and Venezuela even address ed the issues of manufacture and 
distribution in their respective countrie s. Improvements in cooperation among the 
various countries in the region has alre ady been noted following the seminar, and 
contacts with European count erparts, the Netherlands,  Spain, the UK, Italy, 
Portugal and France have been enhanced. Further training on operational and 
technical issues was requested by the parti cipants and it is t hought that ideas for 
improving structures in t he judiciary, central bank and police would eventually be 
sought.  
France announced its intention to build upon this programme to organise a second seminar, 
focussing on technical and operational training, in conjunction with Dutch colleagues. In 
preparation to its introduction of the euro, and in its capacity as a maritime and aviation hub, the 
venue would be St. Martin’s.  
 European Counterfeit Currency Manual (state of play)  
Progress on the layout of the Experts’ manual has encountered some delays due to end of the year 
budget procedures. We now, however, have the approval for work to begin with the printing 
services of the Commission (OPSCE) and have allocated a budget of nearly €  
60.000 to assist with layout and production into EN, FR and DE. We expect that work on the layout of this manual will advance to a point that we can hold a first meeting for revision and 
editing in June, possibly 11 or 12 June.  
Due to various technical difficulties, OPSCE has had many hurdles dealing with the production of 
the Basic Manual. Progress has been made in the French, German and English versions. At the 
last minute, however, it has been thought prudent to make slight modifications to the text, adding additional references to euro coins. Slight delays have occurred due to this, though they are 
manageable.  
 Workshop on judicial issues and criminal proceedings  
The Commission reported on the responses to its questionnaire regarding Art. 4 and 5 of 
Regulation 1338/2001. The responses revealed that legi slation in MS does not explicitly give the 
possibility to magistrates to liberate counterfeits from criminal procedures for technical processing. There is a need to verify the approach in MS to this problem.  
The ECB requests that there is a harmonisation of the manner in which evidence is treated in 
criminal proceedings, allowing for the analysis of counterfeits. The ECB would favour a seminar 
or workshop on the topic – it being understood, however, that such a seminar alone is merely a 
first step towards the above-proposed solution.  
Italy, Germany and Belgium favoured a workshop. Belgium insisted that direct dialogue is 
necessary as a follow up to a workshop.  
The Commission intends to present a repor t, at the June ECEG meeting, to be 
considered for the organisation of the wo rkshop leading to best practices in handling 
evidence; this might be in the second half of the year.  
 
EN - 61 -   EN   
 Seminar in Croatia The Commission is organising a seminar in Zagreb the month of June. 
Contacts with the Central Bank of Croatia, the Ministry of Justice and AFCOS have been made. 
We will inform of further details.  
• Seminar in Montenegro  
 
Montenegro has been highlighted by Europol as a priority in the fight against counterfeiting. 
Based upon the threat posed by the Western Balkans, the Commission is supporting a Pericles 
action for training in Montenegro. Both Interp ol and Europol voiced their support of this 
initiative. Europol suggested that the event should be extended to at least three days, given the numerous topics to cover and discuss, both in terms of technical knowledge and 
investigative/operational information. The ECB mentioned its interest to take part in this event 
and would encourage contacts with the national central bank. It also mentioned that in following up a High Level Group action point, the ECB recently undertook an evaluation of the legal 
framework of protection from currency counterfeiting in the western Balkans, (incl. Montenegro) 
which it would 
communicate in due course to the Commission and Europol.  
Mr. Leidgens (BLKA) mentioned that through the Euro-Southeast, a lot of information regarding 
the Western Balkans has already been garnered. Useful facts and contacts are already known or have been made; he suggested close contact with the Commission/OLAF in order to structure the 
upcoming event. He reiterated that the event should be longer in length and should allow time for 
in depth explanations.  
The Netherlands informed the group that Montenegrin authorities will attend a 
cooperation/training event at the Dutch Central Bank in the autumn.  
The Chairman summarised that there is an urgent need for an operational training of police. 
Moreover, a need for a medium to high level awareness-raising training also exists. The Commission/OLAF will revise the agenda, lengthening the event and taking into consideration 
advice from the BLKA. Further developments in will be communicated to the group.  
 Pericles Programme 2008 – Prospects  
A list, updated following the ECEG meeting is attach ed in annex. Fourteen actions are foreseen.  
Germany
 will continue its Euro East South-east progra mme, its sixth event will be held in Cyprus 
tentatively scheduled for 22 September.  
Spain  confirmed two actions, its sixth training/seminar in Colombia is planned for December 
2008, and a staff exchange with experts from Latin America (Argentina, Colombia, Peru and 
Venezuela) should take place at the end of 2008 or beginning 2009.  
France  voiced its intention to carry out a second Euro-Caribbean seminar in March 2009 in St. 
Martin. And it confirmed its intention to study the production of a police kit for counterfeits.  
 
EN - 62 -   EN  Italy (UCIFM) mentioned its ongoing consideration of holding an awareness raising and training 
event in China for trainers of police and bank operato rs. Official letters have been sent to China, 
Italy is awaiting a response from Chinese authorities. If approved, the hope is to organise the 
event in time for the Olympics. This timing seems tenuous.  
Based upon its recent threat assessment, Interpol voiced its support for such an event in China. 
Though China does not provide statistics concerning the level of counterfeiting, evidence gathered from ICPO members of seized counterfeit notes suggests that counterfeits from China could pose 
a threat. Europol noted that China has not agreed to have a Europol liaison officer; it supports the 
initiative to conduct a training event. The ECB reported that it has conducted training of cashiers from the People’s Republic of China on the recognition of counterfeits which was well received 
however it has not had contact with law enforcement authorities.  
Spain supported an initiative in China citing that China produces technology which produces 
counterfeit holograms. France noted that on a monthly basis, counterfeit Yuans taken from 
circulation are increasing.  
The Commission welcomed the idea.  
Italy
 (UCAMP) intends to hold a seminar focused on Central Bank officials and the processes of 
counterfeit withdrawal from circulation. It hopes to involve Spain, France, Greece, Malta and 
Cyprus to participate in this seminar highlighting an exchange of experience.   
Italy (CCAFM) will hold a training seminar on tec hnical and operational activities such as phone 
tapping and gathering evidence based on best practices. It would like to involve scientific investigators from other countries.  
The Netherlands
 police will organise a training series on digital technologies. It should consist of 
three three-day sessions beginning in September 2008. It aims to highlight cooperation between 
public and private sectors in the fight against counterfeiting.  
The Commission/OLAF also announced its plan to organise a seminar in Turkey later in the year. 
This is based on direct contacts made concerning the new Turkish lira. A study visit to Brussels 
will also be organised for Turkish representatives.  
The Chairman welcomed the various projects and agreed the prospects for Pericles 2008.  
3. Authentication of euro coins (OLAF)  
 Progress in implementation procedures National Central Banks agreed on a common European 
procedure for testing coin processing machines. These procedures were harmonized for coin 
processing devices during the workshops of December 2007/January 2008. A modified test set, 
now including all known classes, was approved and applied to machines. Advances were made with cooperation from the private sector.  
 List of coin-processing machines online A list of coin-processing machines successfully tested 
is now available on-line on the OLAF website. The list indicates the type of machine, the date of 
its test and the length of the validity of the testing. The ETSC would appreciate feedback on the 
list.  
• Functioning of the Commission recommendation  
• A review of the current Recommendati on will eventually be made with a view 
 
EN - 63 -   EN   
4. Database on illegal print shops and mints (Europol and Italy)  
The Europol representative gave an update of the action implemented through the ETSC work 
team, underlining its intention to expand existing Europol databases on counterfeit currency in order to include data on illegal print shops and mints. The next meeting of the work team will be 
held at The Hague on the 18 March 2008.  
Mr. Marraffa of UCIFM presented Italy’s information on illegal mint discoveries. It includes 
summaries of cases, lists of materials discovered as well as a geographical analysis of discovered 
sites.  
The presentation was appreciated by the members of the ECEG and was cited for its very high 
quality and practical usefulness. Questions arose,  however, concerning possible users and access; 
in particular, it was underlined that these data should be available not only to police, but also to 
other disciplines concerned such as central banks and ministries. Suggestions were made for improvements such as more precise descriptions of the counterfeits, the police operation and more 
‘soft data’. The Italian representative noted that the database summarises operational, non-
personal, information and that this data can be had immediately. Following Italy’s suggestion, the ECEG agreed that this information should be uploaded onto CIRCA. If an NCO would like to use 
or update data, they are able to access via CIRCA. It is not overlapping with the Europol work 
team project.  
Europol stated that the task of preparing a propo sal for a database on illegal mints and print shops 
has been entrusted to the specific work team (functioning in the context of the ETSC work team) 
under the leadership of Europol. The presentation of Italy should be considered in the context of the next meeting of the work team.  
Following discussions, the chairman concluded that the ETSC work team should indeed take up 
the issue using the Italian raw data, in the CIRCA,  as a basis for the preparation of the eventual 
database.  
5. Legislative issues  
– Update on the proposal for modification of Council Regulation 1338/2001  
The ECB declared that its position has been adequately summarised in previous meetings of the 
ECEG and is well known.  
The Commission/OLAF related the various st eps which will be taken for the adoption 
of these modifications and the calendar invo lved, to the best of its knowledge. The 
opinion of the European Parlia ment is provisionally sc heduled to be voted at the 
plenary of 2 September  2008. Subsequently, assuming t he EP issues a final opinion 
on the matter, it will be taken up by the gr oups of the Council. At the Council,  
adoption could be made rapidly, perhaps by the end of the year , or it could be 
delayed by discussions and agreements to  negotiate on contentious points. One 
such point that could require further elabo ration is whether ther e efforts to detect 
counterfeit euros should be taken up by noneuro area Member States in which it 
circulates nevertheless. Further developments will be communicated in the next 
meeting of the ECEG.  
 
EN - 64 -   EN  – Prospects for publication of an updated list of Competent National Authorities according to Art. 
2 of Regulation 1338/2001 (OLAF) Mr. Kasimis (OLA F) reported that most information for a list 
has been communicated to the Commission/OLAF, though eight MS have not yet responded to 
requests. The Commission requested that all Member States verify the list and provide the name of the national organisation, address, phone, fax and e-mail address contacts.  
– Prospects for modification of Regulation 2182/20 04 concerning medals and tokens similar to 
euro coins (OLAF)  
 
Outlining the current features of the legislation, Ms. Raiah (OLAF) explained that it currently 
bans production and distribution of medals and tokens similar to euro coins, banning the use of the words ‘euro’, ‘euro cent’ and the ‘€ symbol’. At the same time, bans are placed on coins or 
tokens having a similar size or design to euro  coins. Nevertheless, po ssibilities for derogations 
exist, authorised by the Commission.  
Plans are in place to amend the Regulation and agreements have been made between OLAF and 
the Mint Directors’ Working Group to modify th ree areas. The modified Regulation will clarify 
the word ‘design’ by defining characteristics to be banned, such as the use of twelve stars 
representing the EU and geographical representations of the EU, as well as effigies, coats of arms, 
mint works and other features of sovereignty. A second step would be to specify the derogation procedures by the Commission in conjunction with the Counterfeits Coin Experts Group. The 
third category of amendments addresses commercial characteristics, number produced, price and 
way they are presented to the public.  
These amendments are at the stage of internal discussions, and the amendment procedure has not 
yet been formally launched.  
The Chairman noted that this legislation pertains to coins, and while coins are not directly the 
responsibility of the ECEG, it seems important nevertheless to inform all parties concerned with legislative developments. These proposed amendments will be discussed with the Euro Coin Sub 
Committee.  
Czech Republic requested if the Collector Coin sub-Committee was informed on these changes. 
The Commission/OLAF noted that its input had been sought and assured that it would be 
consulted at the text developed.  
Italy requested that final decisions be comm unicated. This was noted by Commission/OLAF.  
6. Currency Counterfeiting at in ternational level (INTERPOL)  
The CSDB of Interpol will be welcoming a new seconded o fficial in April 2008 from 
Peru.1 This colleague is a forensic expert an d a law enforcement official. The CSDB 
team will now consist of a team  leader plus four professionals. As a point of interest, 
please consult the public web pages and t he secure web pages for recently made 
updates and updated fact sheets.  
Following the agreement on coordination and communication between the two organisations, Mr. 
Krivak announced that the message flow between Interpol and Europol in 2007 increased. The 
message flow increased 165%, 70% of this had to do with counterfeit currency issues.  
Reporting on the trends of US currency activity, Mr. Krivak reported that in 2007, 765 billion US 
banknotes were in circulation worldwide, up 15 billion from 2005. Of these he reported, 66% of 
all US banknotes are held abroad. More specifica lly, 75% of all 100 US dollar bills are overseas. 
One in 12,000 US dollar notes are counterfeit. 2007 was characterised by an increase in 
 
EN - 65 -   EN  counterfeit notes in circulation, with face value up to nearly 150 million worldwide, whereas from 
2003-2006 it was around 100 million yearly.  
It is important to note that 2007 counterfeiting of the USD was up, domestically, overseas and in 
Europe. In 2007 seizures of US counterfeit currency seizures before circulation jumped in Europe, especially with important seizures in Germany, Turkey, Russia and Portugal. This indicates that 
efforts to curtail the professional grade counterfeits emanating from Europe and Colombia are 
working and there are reasons to be cautiously optimistic. Cooperation and work with law enforcement, the security printing industry an d National Central Banks on the protection of 
currency seems to be fruitful.  
Regarding the IPCO community, other global currencies that are counterfeited outside their 
boarders exist, the top four currencies are the Canadian dollar, the British pound, the Turkish lira 
and the Chinese yuan. The Canadian authorities agreed to share information; the high of nearly 
600,000 pieces in 2004 has now dropped to just under 175,000 pieces. The Bank of England is 
also experiencing a slow down in counterfeiting, indicating a decrease of 28% from 2006 to 2007. 
Australia has experienced counterfeiting outside of its borders. Generally they experience very 
little counterfeiting, with 6 piece per million, but sometimes a large seizure will increase the numbers. In 2007, the counterfeiting was nevertheless low for the Australian dollar. Interpol 
hoped to highlight that the measures are in place and are working to protect international 
currencies.  
7. Status of euro counterfeits (ECB, OLAF/ETSC)  
The ECB announced that the annual total of counterfeits recovered remains around 570,000 
pieces or 48,000 pieces per month. A new development, however, appears to be occurring:  the 
face value has increased slightly, due to counterfe it 200€ banknotes in some countries. In previous 
years, the annual face value for counterfeiting was between € 30-32m, whereas now it is about 
€40m. Certain countries in particular are faced with this rise in 200€ counterfeits, Austria, 
Belgium and Germany. While for these countries, the 200€ is not the most numerous counterfeit, it is nevertheless, significant, second only to counterfeit 50€ notes.  
1 As of 30 April 2008, due to financial and administrat ive reasons, the seconded 
forensic expert and law enforcement official fr om Peru has yet to arrive in France in 
order to start work at IPSG-CSDB.  The evolution of counterfeiting on a mo nthly basis averaged over six months 
demonstrates that the number of pieces generally remains u nder 50,000. The graph 
similarly shows that the counterfeit 200€ is growing in significance. While in 2004-
2005 the class of 200P3 was the most signi ficant, it is now the 200P3A and 200P4. 
There is little report with r egard other new classes.  
The Chairman asked about the ‘double mountain’ effect of the graph, notably that 20€ 
counterfeits increase every two years. The ECB maintained that one cannot generalise, but noted 
that just five high volume classes together account for over half of all the counterfeits received. When the print shop 
for one of these classes is closed down, or a new production commences, the 
effect on the counterfeit statistics is readily perceptible.  
The ETSC presented its new format of reporting. Overall, the number of counterfeit coins 
detected in circulation in 2007 increased significantly compared to 2006. It noted that in 2007, 
more than 85% of all counterfeit coins seized were 2€ coins. The detection of class 24 saw a steep 
 
EN - 66 -   EN  increase in 2007. At the same time, counterfeiting of the 50 cent piece is increasing. Detection has 
been increasing throughout the year in most Member States. However, the amount seized in 
illegal mints remains low. 72 classes and variants have been created in 2007. Nevertheless, the 
main classes of counterfeits from previous years continue to represent the large majority of counterfeits fount in circulation.  
8. Miscellaneous  
– Communication among ECEG members (CIRCA forum) Ms. Skocinska noted that the system is 
in place and working. Access is based on a transaction number and a logon password. The 
Commission will communicate details.  
– Next Meeting  
 
Following serious hesitations to hold the next ECEG meeting in July, it is now rescheduled for Wednesday 25 June.  
 
EN - 67 -   EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION  
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE  (OLA F) Operational & Policy Support  
Protection of the EURO  
Brussels, OLAF C5/KE D(2008) 656  
DRAFT REPORT  
Subject: 46th Meeting of the “Euro Counterfeiting Experts Group” in the  
framework of the Anti-Fraud Advisory Committee (Cocolaf) of 13  
December 2007.  
Participants: Y. Xenakis (Chairman Commission), 37 experts from 24 Member States  
(Poland, Portugal, and Romania excused); two representatives from the  
ECB, one from Europol attended. See attached list.  
1. Approval of the agenda and report of the previous meeting  
The Chairman briefly introduced the agenda which was approved by the group. The draft report 
of the ECEG meeting of 2 October 2007 comprising modifications from the ECB was also approved.  
2. ‘Pericles’ Programme  
 Implementation in 2006 – final report (OLAF)  
Ms. Skocinska presented complete statistics of Pericles 2006 implementation.  
94% of Pericles budget for 2006 was committed and twelve training actions were cofinanced or 
financed. Out of them 9 emanated from Member States (Belgium, Germany, Spain, Hungary, Italy and Poland) and 3 were organised by ETSC and OLAF.  
Six actions were seminar/conference type, two -trainings, two -staff exchanges and two studies. 
Five actions were fully implemented in 2006 and seven in 2007 (three actions: Study on 
reinforcing the security characteristics of future euro coins by Belgium, conductivity study and 
ETSC work team meetings for technical investigation are still ongoing).  
632 people benefited from the Programme tr aining actions: most of them were 
representatives of law enfor cement services (495), 64 representatives of judicial 
sector, 45 representatives of  national central banks, 19  mint and 9 people coming 
from ministries of finance. Out of 632 part icipants, 190 came from Euro zone Member 
States, 221 form non Euro zone Member  States and 221 ca me from non EU 
countries (mostly Latin American, Ba lkan and Mediterranean C ounties and Eastern 
  
 
EN - 68 -   EN  Europe).  
-Implementation in 2007  
Regarding the Pericles 2007 budget, eight actions have been committed for a total of 
approximately €574.000. Five of them have been completed and others will be carried out in the 
first months of 2008. UCIFM (IT) and BKA (DE) express the willingness to send grant 
applications in December or January 2008.  
In order to assure continuity of training acti ons the necessary funds will be already committed 
from the remaining Pericles 2007 budget.  
 Implementation and prospects (OLAF)  
– Conclusions of the Euro North-East conference in Tallinn, Estonia (Germany, BKA)  
This action took place in Tallinn from 8-11 October 2007 in cooperation with the Estonian 
Criminal Police which provided exceptional support. Counterfeit experts from the police, judiciary and banking sectors from Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Finland, Latvia, Lithuania, 
Norway, Poland, Sweden, Russia and Belorussia attended. The intention was to invite 
participants from countries who may in the future introduce the euro and to highlight the problem of counterfeiting in border countries. The North-East area of the European Union is a focal point for efforts to combat count erfeiting since cross-border activities are highly 
influenced by organised crime. Preventative strategies, aims to align police measures, 
training and information exchange were highlighted during the conference. In addition to 
national participants, OLAF, Europol, Inter pol, Eurojust and the US Secret Service 
participated.  
High level dignitaries and Ministers of Estonia, BKA and OLAF attended and made 
presentations. Interesting aspects of security features were highlighted and skilfully presented. The ECB introduced the latest trends in counterfeiting and related technical information. Various case scenarios were treat ed including judicial aspects of cross-border 
investigations and joint investigations teams.  
This action led to the commitment of Estonian authorities to align legislation regarding the 
implementation of the Framework Decision on criminal sanctions for counterfeiting.  
– Conclusions of the seminar on use technical and personal databases in combating euro 
counterfeiting in Rome (Italy, UCIFM)  
This seminar took place 29-30 Oct ober in Rome. Focusing on technical 
databases, UCIFM concentrated on inviti ng participants from the Western 
Balkans. Italian, Spanish and French authori ties cooperated quite effectively to 
demonstrate the workings and advantages of using technical databases related 
to counterfeiting. Databases function in the euro zone at nationa l level, and that 
generally, their structure is similar. It  has become apparent t hat the NCOs could 
benefit from a direct link to the Europol database.  
For actions during 2008, UCIFM is considering focusing on China, given the upcoming 
Olympics.  
 
EN - 69 -   EN  Responding to French comments, the Chairman noted that perhaps the Commission would 
consider an obligation to create and maintain nationa l databases, especially since it is a useful tool 
for monitoring and investigations.  
– Conclusions of the 5th seminar for Latin American countries in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia 
(Spain, BIBE)  
This event took place from 26-30 November and incl uded representatives from police and Central 
Banks from eighteen Latin American countries. This  series of seminars in Colombia has been 
running since 2002 and has underpinned improved communication and cooperation between the 
EU, the United States and Latin America in efforts to prevent currency counterfeiting. This year 
the seminar concentrated on the practical dimension of conducting investigations. On the last day of the seminar the Colombian authorities described some of their operations which had been the 
focus of media attention. This presentation concentrated on a number of large seizures of 
counterfeit euros and dollars and resulted in the destruction of printing and production centres. Mention was also made of discoveries of large quantities of Spanish two-euro counterfeit coins, 
illustrating the extent to which the euro has spread, and the attempts counterfeit it. Participants 
reacted positively to the event and emphasised the relevance of the seminar given the increasingly frequent use of the euro.  
The Chairman noted that the BIBE actions in Colombia have resulted in concrete structural 
reforms in Latin America, aiding in the establishment of National Central Offices, Colombia, 
Peru, Uruguay, for example. The overall level of awareness of the euro and of counterfeit euro has been raised considerably throughout the region. The need for a continued effort remains with 
regard security characteristics, investigation practices and operational methods.  
– Conclusions of study visit for coin experts from Cyprus, Greece and Portugal in Pessac 
(OLAF/ETSC) This three day event included two police officers from Cyprus and Greece and one 
representative of the Central Bank of Portugal. The technical visit is to train technicians to carry out technical analysis and detailed classification of counterfeit coins. The participants seemed to 
benefit greatly from the explanations and practical exercises provided by ETSC. A basic training 
for technical analysis aimed at law enforcement officers exists and is also available and carried 
out, in general, once a year. The ETSC welcomes expressions of interest for such trainings, either 
specific or basic and will attempt to fulfil requests.  
– Conclusions of the ETSC workshop on authentication of euro coins and handling euro unfit for 
circulation in Mainz, Germany (OLAF/ETSC)   
From 23-25 October a workshop  on euro coin authenticati on took place in Mainz, 
Germany. The aim of the workshop was to solicit feedback on the implementation of 
the 2005 Recommendation on aut hentication and handling of unfit euro coins with a 
view to reviewing the various provisions as  well as to oversee a similar procedure for 
sorting machine testing. During the wo rkshop four different sorting machines 
produced by different manufacturers were te sted. The conclusions were reassuring; 
comparing the results, they were all capa ble of detecting counterfeits with similar 
precision. A list of tested machines is av ailable to the CNACs and will be published. 
This work was carried out in cooperation with the private sector to encourage the 
production of machines which are able to detect even the most sophisticated 
counterfeits. To date this work is quite  encouraging. Additionally, the group went 
forward with the revision of the Recommen dation by identifying areas in need of 
 
EN - 70 -   EN  particular attention.  
– Conclusions of TAIEX seminar on operational issu es related to money counterfeiting in Ankara, 
Turkey (OLAF) This seminar, financed by the TAIEX programme involved 120 Turkish police 
officers from the Turkish ‘KOM’ service focusing on financial crime. The focus of the seminar was on operational issues involving the counterfeiting of the euro and Turkish Lira; Member 
States, the Commission, the ECB and Europol all participated. The evaluation was favourable.  
– Prospects for seminar in Croatia (OLAF) OLAF  will consider future actions with Europol 
following contacts with the Minister of Interior of Croatia. The Western Balkans is considered a 
very sensitive area for the threat of counterfeiting.  
– Workshop on judicial issues and criminal proceedings –state of play (OLAF)  
 
Mr. Kasimis presented a brief table indicating the progress made in establishing the foundations for this workshop. The Commission issued a questionnaire to all MS in October 2007. The 
answers to this questionnaire will provide the ba sis for discussion and topics of an eventual 
workshop. The Commission noted that most MS replied, but in some cases the contact person was lacking or the questionnaire had only brief answers. The Commission encouraged all 
delegations to provide details of an appropriate contact person.  
Action
: the Commission will resend its e-mail to NL and Finland.  
– European Counterfeit Currency Manual -state of play (OLAF)  
Basic Manual  
The Commission/OLAF has foreseen a co mmitment of 105.000€ for production and 
distribution costs under the Pericles bu dget. Pre-ordered manuals for 26 Member 
States amount to 415.000 units.  To date,  Commission/OLAF has sent the following 
languages to the printer for layout:  EN (UK,  IE), DE (DE, AT, LX), FR (FR). First 
versions of the lay-out were received. Bu t technical problems due to the cover-page 
have caused some unexpected and lengthy delays. ‘OK to print’ orders have been 
received from the UK and Ireland. Once the difficulties with the cover-page are 
resolved, other languages will be s ent for lay-out and production.  
Experts Manual  
The Editorial Board requested that the Commission/OLAF assume the task of final editing and 
coordinating the lay-out of the contributions into a coherent Experts’ Manual. During the last 
meeting of the Editorial Board, 2 October 2007, most chapters were approved in terms of 
content. OLAF has begun this editing and work on is ongoing. OPSCE will provide an 
estimate for production costs of the Experts’ Manual.  As a first run, we have estimated for 300 EN, 100 DE and 100 FR versions. These will be produced in full-colour, A4 paper with a CD-
Rom annex. A preliminary budget of 250,000 has been foreseen.  
 Prospects for 2008 (roundtable)  
– Cyprus Staff Exchange – Cyprus will need to consider whether this can be carried out.  
– Cooperation in the fight against counterfeit currency (Turkey) Responding to a request from 
Turkey, this Commission initiative will be carried out with considerable involvement from 
 
EN - 71 -   EN  Europol. A number of police forces within Turkey; it could be foreseen that MS make 
presentations on the communication and responsib ilities between police offices at national level 
and the creation and functioning of National Central Offices.  
– Seminar in Croatia  
 
The Commission requests assistance with making appropriate contacts with Croatia. Europol, as 
the European Central Office is keen to participate in third countries and has permanent contacts 
with Croatia on the operational level. This event can be prepared jointly.  
The Commission noted that the elections have stalled preparations for this event, but when the 
time is appropriate, contacts will be resumed. Perhaps an on-site visit can be carried out in cooperation with Europol.  
– Seminar in Montenegro The Commission would like to carry out a joint activity with Europol. 
Europol has recently participated in an awaren ess raising activity in conjunction with the anti-
money laundering programme and learned of the clear need for training and of the willingness on the part of the Montenegran authorities to supp ort training on euro counterfeit prevention. The 
Commission would like to move rapidly on this and would like to support a preparatory visit.  
– Workshop on the authentication of euro coins  
 
Each area previously identified will be treated and a report submitted by April or May in order to 
streamline procedures for authenticating coins.  
Further Prospects 2008 (Roundtable)  
– Italy Italy will organise a seminar involving Ma lta and Cyprus in preparation for the upcoming 
adoption of the euro.  
– Germany  
BKA will hold a seminar on cooperation wit h print-shops; monitoring will be the 
theme. It will be planned for the second half 2008. The aim is a practical event 
planned for representatives of police, judi ciary and relevant banks. The focus will be 
the production of banknotes. The idea is to establish new starting points for 
investigations from monitoring numberi ng and types of paper used, etc. The ECB 
welcomes this initiative.  
BLKA will organise the 6th Euro South-East Conference together with Cypriot colleagues in 
Cyprus during the second half of 2008. It will involve representatives of police, judiciary, CNACs 
and NACs; around twenty countries are expected to attend. The focus will be the means of production of counterfeits and how correct analysis, research and technical interpretation can lead 
to a good investigation. This is especially important for prosecutors to understand because it 
occurs that improper decisions are made based on a lack of knowledge of the topic.  
– France  
France will consider opportunities to conduct an acti on in China perhaps in cooperation with Italy. 
The Euro-Carribean seminar will take place in Ja nuary. This is the first attempt to conduct an 
awareness raising activity in this region. It will be conducted with the support of the Netherlands 
and our British colleagues who are widely present in the region.  
France also voiced the intention to produce a police kit to detect counterfeit euro coins in 
collaboration with industry. The Chairman noted that Pericles could finance conception work, 
 
EN - 72 -   EN  study and prototype, but not production of such a kit.  
The Chairman noted the various expressions of interest regarding counterfeiting in China and 
added that we should study the need for increased attention. Germany added that the BKA has liaison offices in China and to date has only registered one case of counterfeiting of the euro. It 
noted that China applies the death penalty for counterfeiting.  
– Spain  
Spain will organise the 6th seminar in Cartegena, Colombia in October 2008 as a continuation of 
its series of cooperation with Latin America.  
3. Legislative issues  
 Update on the proposal for modification of Council Regulation 1338/2001  
The Chairman presented a working document concerning the Commission’s proposal 
for a modification of this Council  Regulation on 17 September 2008. The 
modifications proposed aim to ensure t hat euro banknotes be authenticated in all 
countries where it circulates within the EU . This proposal still has to be approved by 
the Council. It was noted, however that c oncerns have been voiced by non-euro zone 
countries that measures to ensure authentication could incu r considerable costs. The 
Czech Republic requested t hat the last sentence of the second paragraph be 
deleted, the sentence referred to ‘Thus…is not founded.’ He noted that the euro is 
protected according to the Geneva Conv ention and according to Regulation 1339 
and that employees of commercial banks and exchange offices are trained for the 
recognition of counterfeit euro. It al so questions the effectiveness of these 
modifications. Discussion showed a possibi lity for non-euro area MS to consider 
practical ways of complying with the obligat ion to ensure authenticity, in line with the 
circulation of the euro in these countries.  
The ECB requested that such documents be circulated prior to meetings to allow for reflection. 
The ECB questions whether modifications should be made and whether the utility of such changes has been established. It requested that the last paragraph of the introductory paragraph be 
deleted ‘This is compounded…Member States.” It noted the general agreement that the euro 
should be protected; however, a qualitative difference must be made according to the notion of legal tender in euro zone and non-euro zone countries. In non-euro zone countries such as the 
Czech Republic, the National Bank does not have the information to allow it to authenticate the 
euro, noting as well that the Czech Republic need not authenticate euros because it is not obliged 
to accept euro as payment. Accordingly, the ECB stated that the euro should not be authenticated 
in the countries outside the eurosystem.  
The ECB further disagreed with paragraph 3 “these articles establish a dynamic evolution of the 
euro…”, stating the Treaty of Lisbon demonstrates a clear retrench, the euro is the single currency 
of the Euro Monetary Union, not the European Uni on. It further outlined that the protection of the 
euro is ensured through the protocols of the Geneva Convention, the free movement of 
counterfeits, cooperation between judicial and pol ice authorities and through training. The notion 
of legal tender precludes more stringent measures such as authentication. Finally, the ECB wanted to stress that it does not recommend machines for verification and requested that the last 
paragraph be revised.  
 
EN - 73 -   EN   Prospects for publication of updated list of national Competent Authorities according to art. 2 of 
Regulation 1338/2001  
The Commission would like to ensure the most complete details and will resend the request to 
Member States.  
4. Status of euro counterfeits (ECB, OLAF/ETSC)  
The ECB noted that the trends have remained remarkably stable, though increasing slightly. 
50,000 units per month has been typical for four years. The tables distributed indicate counterfeits by country and denomination. The ECB will issue its press release on 10 January. Certain waves 
seen in the charts are accounted for by the rise and fall of particular classes. Print shops are 
dismantled, stop production, then reappear and commence production this was true of the 20P2.  
The ETSC noted an increasing amount of counterfeit coins throughout 2007. Over 180,000 units 
will be seized in 2007. The 2€ remains the most common counterfeit.  Since the authentication 
procedures which began in mid-2005 there has been a pronounced increase in the identification of 
counterfeit coins especially in Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands and more recently France. The Commission would like to see better implementation by Spain.  
 France requested that information regarding the capacities of the machines be diffused. The 
CNACs want to know that sorting machines can detect even the most sophisticated variants. The Commission noted this and reiterated that this capability is very recent and is a result of the work 
conducted at Mainz.  
The BLKA requested that information regarding the number of seizures and confiscations also be 
made available to the group in order to provide a more complete overview of the counterfeiting 
situation. Europol stated that it could provide this at the next meeting.  
5. Miscellaneous  
 Communication among ECEG members (CIRCA forum) – state of play Ms. Skocinska reported 
that documents related to the ECEG have been uploaded to the Circa forum, and that an explanatory e-mail will be sent to explain access to members.  
• ECEG meetings for 2008: 13/03; 4/07 to be reconsidered, 20/11  
 
         
 
EN - 74 -   EN   
      
 
EN - 75 -   EN   
 ANNEX VI  
Brussels, 04th May 2011 OLAF/C5/  
THE PROTECTION OF EURO COINS IN 2010  
 
 
 
EN - 76 -   EN  TABLE OF CONTENTS  
1. Introduction 3  
2. Situation with regard to counterfeit euro coins 3  
 
2.1 Counterfeit coins seized in circulation 3  
2.2 Counterfeit coins seized before circulation 5  
2.3 Common classes (stamped counterfeit coins) 6  
2.4 Local classes (cast counterfeit coins) 9  
3. Regular activities of the ETSC 9  
3.1 Counterfeit Coin Experts Group (CCEG) 9  
3.2 Other groups 10  
4. Specific initiatives concerning the protection of euro coins 11  
4.1 Pericles actions for the protection of euro coins 11  
4.2 Coin-related legislative developments 12  
4.3 Cooperation with third countries 12  
4.4 Other potential threats to euro coins 12  
5. Conclusions 14  
 
EN - 77 -   EN  1. INTRODUCTION  
This report presents the activities of the European  Technical & Scientific Centre (ETSC) and of 
the situation as regards coin counterfeiting.  
The report is structured according to the above-mentioned double requirement. Section 2 gives 
first a detailed overview of the evolution of euro coin counterfeiting in 2010. Sections 3 and 4 
then present the regular and specific activities that the ETSC has carried out in 2010 in order to 
reinforce the protection of euro coins.  
2. S ITUATION WITH REGARD TO COUNTERFEIT EURO COINS  
A distinction that has to be made on counterfeit euro coins between those detected in circulation 
and those seized before circulation. The counterfeit coins detected before circulation are usually 
seized by police before causing financial damage, whereas the counterfeit coins detected in circulation are generally detected in coin sorting centres, operated by National Central Banks or private sector CIT (cash-in-transit) companies.  
 
2.1 Counterfeit coins seized in circulation  
The total number of counterfeit euro coins removed from circulation in 2010 reached 186 
000, an increase of about 8% from 2009.  
The breakdown by denomination of counterfeits found in circulation for the last four years is 
shown below:  
 
 
When compared to 2009, among the 3 highest coin denominations, the number of 2-euro 
counterfeits increased by over 2%. Is spite of rapid increase in numbers of counterfeit 
coins of 50-cent and 1-euro (38% and 16% respectively), 2-euro remains by far the most 
counterfeited euro coin, constituting 85% in value terms. Overall, nearly 1.150.000 counterfeit euro coins have been removed from circulation since the introduction of the 
euro coins in 2002.   50-cent  1-euro 2-euro Total  
2010  25 100  31 000 129 700 185 800  
2009  18 100  26 500 127 500 172 100  
2008  16 600  24 500 154 800 195 900  
2007  13 000  16 200 181 900 211 100  
* The figures comprise both stamped counterfeits (common classes) and cast counterfeits (local 
classes).  
 
EN - 78 -   EN  The evolution since the introduction of euro coins in 2002 is given in the following 
chart:  
Progress shown in removing counterfeit euro coins from circulation reflects the 
efforts made by Member States to authenticate euro coins. To assist in these 
efforts, the European Parliament and the Council adopted the Regulation No 
1210/2010 of 15 December 20101 proposed by the Commission on the 
authentication of euro coins. This Regulation was published on 15 December 2010 and sets out the rules for financial institutions to ensure that all euro coins which 
they put back into circulation are genuine.  
In 2010, countries with the highest level of detected counterfeits (Germany and 
France) , registered a slight fall in quantities. At the same time, countries where the stricter controls had been imposed (Portugal, Spain, Italy) showed a sharp rise in quantities.  
Counterfeit euro coins were found in all Member States of the euro area in 2010, 
with the exception of Cyprus. Germany remains the country where most counterfeit coins are found. Its share had come down the last years to 36% due to progress 
made in other countries. Small numbers of counterfeit euro coins were also detected 
in Member States which do not belong to the euro area and third countries.  
Overall, the number of counterfeit coins detected in circulation in 2010 remains very 
small by comparison to the total of 92 billion genuine euro coins in circulation 
including 16 billion of the three highest denominations.  
1 Regulation (EU) No 1210/2010 of the Eu ropean Commission, Parliament and of 
the Council of 15 December 2010 concerning authentication of euro coins and 
 
 
EN - 79 -   EN  handling of euro coins unfit for circulation  
 
EN - 80 -   EN  2.2 Counterfeit coins seized before circulation  
In addition to the counterfeit euro coins removed from circulation, counterfeits are regularly 
seized before they enter into circulation, mainly in the framework of police operations and 
investigations. These activities include dismantling of clandestine mints, but also seizures of 
significant quantities from individuals, that might, in one way or another, be involved in the distribution of counterfeit coins. These seizures occur irregularly therefore the number of counterfeits seized before circulation varies significantly from year to year.  
The number of counterfeit coins seized before circulation in 2010 was under 600. The breakdown 
per denomination of counterfeit euro coins found be fore circulation for the last four years is 
shown below:  
 
 
     For the second consecutive year no illegal mint has been dismantled by law 
enforcement, neither large seizures were made. Overall, about 290.000 counterfeit euro 
coins have been seized before circulation since 2002.  
The development of the number of counterfeit coins detected before circulation since the 
introduction of euro coins in 2002 is presented in the following chart:   50-cent  1-euro 2-euro Total  
2010  0  14 555 571  
2009  5  2 579 8 477 11 061  
2008  1  2 11 200 11 203  
2007  8  66 700 23 200 89 908  
* The figures comprise both stamped counterfeits (common classes) and cast counterfeits (local 
classes).  
 
EN - 81 -   EN   
2.3 Common classes (stamped counterfeit coins)  
Counterfeit coins detected in the Member States are analysed by the Coin National Analysis 
Centres (CNACs). They are classified by reference to already identified counterfeit types. Counterfeits that cannot be classified to one of the already identified types are sent to the ETSC in order to create a new class or variant.  
A distinction is made between common classes and local classes. Local classes correspond to cast 
counterfeit coins, usually produced in smaller quantities. These are dealt within the next section.  
Common classes are counterfeits made with a stamping process, similar to the one used in official 
minting. With such processes, larger amounts of counterfeits can be produced and this is the reason for which a monitoring on the EU level has been applied. Stamped classes usually bear defects which are characteristic of the tools used to produce them. Stamped counterfeit coins are classified into classes and variants according to these defects, because similar defects may 
indicate that the counterfeits have been produced by the same tools, indicating possibly the same 
illegal mint. New variants of classes indicate a development in production tools. Variants 
therefore provide useful indications of the development in counterfeiting activity.  
 
 
EN - 82 -   EN  2.3.1 Overall analysis  
Creation of common classes  
The total number of families of counterfeits (common classes) created by the ETSC continued to 
rise in 2010, indicating a potential increase in the number of illegal mints producing counterfeit euro coins. In particular, 11 common classes were created in 2010, the lowest number since 2002, which reflects the fact that most of the classes that had been created are still in circulation and the 
efficient deterring does not “encourage” the creation of the new mints or tools. The number of 
common classes created by the ETSC each year since the introduction of euro coins is indicated in 
the table below:  
 
 
        The total number of classes has now risen to 134. Despite the large number of common 
classes, the bulk of counterfeit coins is still concentrated. In particular, one common class (2-euro class 6) represented in 2010 more than 31% of the total number of registered 2-euro counterfeits (a drop from 41% in 2009). For the 50cent denomination, almost half of the counterfeits found in circulation belongs to a single class (common class 1). In total, six classes are responsible for around half of the total number of 
counterfeits found in circulation. Except for the 50-cent common class 1, no illegal mint 
has been dismantled for any of those classes.  
Of the total number of classes, 17 were proven to be connected to the clandestine mints 
that have been dismantled until now. For the remaining classes, evidence was found for 
seven classes, following their creation, de monstrating that they are linked to another 
class. This leads to the conclusion that there are illegal mints that are producing or have 
produced up to 111 classes of counterfeit euro coins and that remain undiscovered to 
date.  
 Number of newly identified common classes  
 50-cent 1-euro 2-euro   TOTAL 
2002  1 5 5   11 
2003  6 4 5   15 
2004  11 3 8   22 
2005  9 3 6   18 
2006  6 5 3   14 
2007  7 6 2   15 
2008  6 2 4   12 
2009  3 5 8   16 
2010  6 3 2   11 
TOTAL  55 36 43   134 
 
EN - 83 -   EN   
       ANNEX VII  
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
EUROPEAN ANTI-FRAUD OFFICE  (OLAF) 
 Operational & Policy Support  
EURO Protection; Hercule & Pericles Programmes  
 
 
 
NOTE TO FILE  
 
 
Subject: Pericles programme- Workshop “How to Apply and Report under 
Pericles”, 8 June 2011, Brussels  
 
OBJECTIVES  
The mid-term evaluation of the Pericles Programme25 which was carried out during the last at 
the end of 2010, revealed a need for more clarity and simplification with respect to procedures 
and rules for submitting applications and preparing final financial reports for Pericles. The above-mentioned seminar was geared for experts from Member States dealing with the preparation of Pericles grant applic ations and final financial reports.  
The experts, at the 56
th Meeting of the "Euro Counterfei ting Experts Group", last 22 March, 
welcomed the idea of organising a specific se minar on this issue. A similar workshop took 
place in 2006 to explain the new rules of Pericles 2007-2013, it was considered useful and successful. Since 2006, a high turnover of staff w ithin the National Competent Authorities has 
had an impact on the quality of Pericles applicat ions and of the final financial report. Member 
States voiced eagerness for clarification and for closer contact especially with the financial 
unit.   
The main objectives of the seminar were: 
 - to facilitate the preparation of  Pericles applications in order to further increase the quality of 
the implementation, 
                                                
 
25 see note No ARES(2011) 331408 of 25/03/2011  
 
EN - 84 -   EN   
- to avoid misunderstandings re garding financial issues, and 
 - to further improve the effective coopera tion between OLAF and Competent National 
Authorities from Member States with re spect to the management of Pericles. 
 
CONDUCT OF THE ACTION  
Unit C5 presented four presentations, simulati ng applications of a staff exchange and an 
international seminar, and the final technical re port. Unit D6 focused on the contents of the 
grant agreement, eligible co sts and final financial report26. Budget issues were taken up 
throughout the seminar. Question and answer pe riods were lively and added to a productive 
information exchange. The content of the presen tations and concrete examples were prepared 
based on frequently seen errors, and were also geared to address frequently asked questions 
by Member States. 
EVALUATION OF THE PARTICIPANTS  
43 participants (representatives from Member States’ Competent National Authorities – list attached) attended.  Participants overwhelmingl y reported high satisfaction, most indicated 
‘very good’ and three participan ts indicated ‘good’ regardin g content, documentation and 
method of answering questions. Quite a few ev aluations indicated that the workshop was 
better than expected.  Below is a chart of the responses of questions 1-8. 
    Insufficient    Sufficient        Good Very good 
1. Welcome  0 0 7 31 
2. General organisation 0 0 10 31 
3. Accommodation 0 0 9 27 
4. Food and beverages 0 4 16 18 
5. Language facilities 0 0 8 30 
6. Relevance of the 
subject matter 0 0 4 34 
7. Documentation 0 0 6 32 
8. Overall impression of 
the seminar 0 0 8 30 
TOTAL: 0 4 58 230 
 
CONCLUSIONS  
Four issues emerged for further consideration:  
                                                 
26 See agenda in attachment 
 
EN - 85 -   EN  (1) OLAF will verify the daily allowance limits  indicated in the Call for Proposals in 
order to possibly update them. 
(2) In order to speed up and simplify the manage ment of applications , OLAF will require 
electronic versions of applic ations to be sent on the da te of the postal deadline. 
(3) The issue of VAT tax needs to be reworded  in the call. A public body must provide 
proof that it cannot recuperate VAT in order to request it in the budget. 
(4) The Final Financial excel-sheet prepared by D6 will be posted on the internet as soon 
as approval is had. 
Overall, the Pericles event was carried out successfully, the relevant goals completely 
achieved and its results were in line with  the Pericles criter ia and strategy.  
 
Kristin Ennis