No C 205/26 Official Journal of the European Communities 9. 8. 82 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 
on the repayment or remission of import or export duties 
The text referred to the Committee has been published in Official Journal of the European 
Communities No C 94 of 15 April 1982, page 7. 
A. LEGAL BASIS FOR THE OPINION 
On 5 April 1982 the Council referred the abovementioned proposal to the Economic and Social 
Committee in accordance with Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community. 
B. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
The Economic and Social Committee prepared its opinion on the above matter at its 198th 
plenary session held in Brussels on 26 and 27 May 1982. 
The full text of the opinion is as follows: 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 
Economic Community, and in particular Article 198 
thereof, 
Having regard to the request made by the Council of the 
European Communities on 5 April 1982 for an opinion 
on the proposal for a Council Regulation amending 
Regulation (EEC) No 1430/79 on the repayment or 
remission of import or export duties, 
Having regard to Articles 18 and 46 of its Rules of 
Procedure, 
Having regard to the oral report made by the 
Rapporteur-General, Mr Broicher, 
Having regard to the discussions during the 198th plenary 
session held on 26 and 27 May 1982, 
HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION 
by 57 votes to 12 with 5 abstentions: 
The Economic and Social Committee welcomes the 
proposal subject to the following comments: 
1. General Comments 
1.1. The Economic and Social Committee supports 
the proposed extension of the scope of Regulation (EEC) 
No 1430/79 to cases where procedural requirements 
governing the repayment or remission of duties have not 
been observed. Obliging Member States to repay or remit 
duties as the case may be in these cases, will help towards the equal treatment of traders in the Community and 
hence towards the creation of uniform terms of 
competition. 
2. Specific comments 
Article 1 
2.1. The Economic and Social Committee thinks that 
non-compliance with the procedural requirements laid 
down in Sections B to D should not be dealt with under 
Section E (Article 13). Instead it should come under 
Title IV, Final Provisions, just like the failure to observe 
the time limits for applications (Article 19), which is 
another case of not complying with a procedural 
requirement. A clearer distinction would be drawn as a 
result between (a) the substantive requirements justifying 
claims for the repayment or remission of duties (as dealt 
with in Sections A to E), and (b) the non-observance of 
procedural requirements in the course of repayment or 
remission proceedings. The new provision would merely 
have to be added to Article 25 (2). 
2.2. Extending the scope of the second paragraph of 
Article 20 of the basic Regulation might pose problems, 
for Member States would be free to act differently and the 
authorities, who as it is are already overburdened with 
paperwork, would have to spend a lot of time processing 
petty claims without traders enjoying any appreciable 
benefits. 
Article 2 
2.3. Limiting the Regulation to applications for the 
repayment or remission of duties entered in the accounts 
9. 8. 82 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 205/27 
on or after the date of the Regulation's entry into force 
would establish a clear-cut time division, but in the 
Economic and Social Committee's view this would not 
always comply with the principle of equal treatment. In 
view of the relatively few cases involved and the brief period for which the basic Regulation has been in force, 
the Economic and Social Committee would recommend 
that the amending Regulation should apply retroactively 
from the date of the basic Regulation's entry into 
force. 
Done at Brussels, 27 May 1982. 
The Chairman 
of the 
Economic and Social Committee 
Tomas ROSEINGRAVE 
APPENDIX 
to the opinion of the Economic and Social Committee 
Defeated amendment 
The following amendment tabled in accordance with the Rules of Procedure was defeated during the 
discussion: 
Point 2.2 to be amended as follows: 
'The Commission proposes that, in response to the request of a Member State, the customs duties levied 
on an article which has not been put into free circulation can be reimbursed by that Member State 
regardless of the amount involved when no blame can be apportioned to the purchaser (for example, 
when a product has been damaged or is unfit for use or when it has been destroyed or 
re-exported). 
This provision would introduce a system under which the Community's own resources levied under 
irregular conditions would remain in the Community's possession in some Member States and would be 
reimbursed in others. 
The Committee cannot approve a policy under which laboriously acquired harmonization would be 
superseded by a wide variety of possible situations. 
For the sake of fairness improperly paid sums should be reimbursed by the EEC in all Member States. 
There is no reason why the EEC should reimburse the citizens of some countries and not others.' 
Reasons 
The amendment is self-explanatory. In addition, points 2.2 and 2.3 in the present text are contradictory 
('the authorities would have to spend a lot of time . . .' and 'in view of the relatively few cases 
involved'). 
Voting 
For: 22, Against: 30, Abstentions: 18.