EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 18.11.2022 SWD(2022) 363 final COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Final Evaluation of Regulation (EU) No 1294/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 establishing an action programme for customs in the European Union for the period 2014-2020 (Customs 2020) and repealing Decision No 624/2007/EC

























Accompanying the document Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the final evaluation of the Customs 2020 Programme {COM(2022) 635 final}



Table of contents 1.Introduction Purpose and scope of the evaluation 2.What was the expected outcome of the intervention? 2.1 Description of the intervention and its objectives 2.2 Point(s) of comparison 3.How has the situation evolved over the evaluation period? Current state of play Implementation of the recommendations from the mid-term evaluation 4.Evaluation findings (analytical part) 4.1.To what extent was the intervention successful and why? 4.1.1. To what extent has the programme contributed to facilitating and enhancing cooperation and exchange of information? 4.1.2. To what extent has the programme supported the preparation, coherent application, and effective implementation of Union law in the field of customs and related matters? 4.1.3. To what extent has the Customs 2020 programme supported legitimate economic activities and prevented illegal ones 4.1.4. To what extent have the Customs 2020 programme’s resources produced best possible results at the lowest possible cost? 4.1.5. To what extent is the Customs 2020 programme coherent with broader EU policies? 4.2.How did the EU intervention make a difference? 4.3.Is the intervention still relevant?

5.What are the conclusions and lessons learned? Annex I: Procedural Information Annex II. Methodology and Analytical models used Approach and method Annex III. Evaluation matrix and, where relevant, Details on answers to the evaluation questions (by criterion) Annex IV. Overview of benefits and costs [and, where relevant, Table on simplification and burden reduction] Annex V. Stakeholders consultation - Synopsis report Annex VI. Assessment of the implementation of the recommendations of the midterm evaluation Annex VII. Key features of Customs EIS and Joint Actions Annex VIII. Member States investments in EIS for customs Annex IX. List of abbreviations



1. Introduction The Customs Union is a foundation of the EU and an essential element in the functioning of the single market. The EU Customs Union territory is governed by common rules and procedures laid down in the Union Customs Code (UCC) . They require proper and uniform interpretation, implementation and application across the Member States. Moreover, customs policy and the customs administrations constantly need to adapt to modern trade realities, increasing responsibilities and modern communication tools. The UCC is a milestone in modernising EU customs, aiming to reach a paperless and fully automated Customs Union. The EU’s Customs 2020 programme is indispensable in supporting its implementation, allocating the necessary resources for the adaptation and functioning of existing European Information Systems (EIS) for customs and for the development of required new ones. The Customs 2020 programme was set up by Regulation (EU) No 1294/2013 of 11 December 2013 as a multiannual action programme for customs in the EU, to facilitate and enhance cooperation between national customs administrations, providing them with the possibility to exchange information, data and expertise. The programme is a key EU tool, striving towards a Customs Union functioning seamlessly as one, instead of a patchwork of 27 separate administrations. It allows for the joint development and operation of major trans-European IT systems, and for the establishment of networks that bring together national officials from across Europe. In accordance with Article 18(1) and (3) of the Regulation, the Commission carried out a final evaluation of the programme. Purpose and scope of the evaluation The purpose of the final evaluation is to assess the programme since its start on 1 January 2014 up to its end on 31 December 2020, or where necessary until 2021. The geographical scope includes all participating countries in the programme, comprising the EU Member States, as well as candidate countries (Albania, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey) and potential candidates (Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo*). The final evaluation builds on the results of the mid-term evaluation performed in 2018 and seeks to shed light on the: (1) achievement of the general and specific objectives and programme’s performance; (2) cost-effectiveness of the different activities funded, with special focus on the European information systems (EIS) for customs; (3) continued relevance of the programme for the Customs Union and customs administrations; (4) coherence and synergies with other EU policies and priorities; and (5) value added of acting at EU level. Moreover, the evaluation examined (6) the implementation and follow-up of recommendations made in the mid-term evaluation. For accountability and learning purposes, the evaluation also identified areas for improvement for the future. These complement the recommendations from the mid-term evaluation and, in some cases, build on measures that are currently ongoing. The evaluation took into account the programme’s full range of funded and management activities, stakeholders and participating countries.

In line with Article 18(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1294/2013, which mandates an independent final evaluation of the programme, Directorate General for Taxation and Customs Union (DG TAXUD) commissioned an external contractor to perform a study in support of the Commission evaluation (hereinafter referred to as ‘the external study’). The external study was carried out between November 2020 and December 2021 and is a key contribution to this staff working document (SWD). The evaluation followed a two-pronged approach with an overall programme assessment, including a desk review of programme documents, in-depth interviews with a number of key stakeholders and a benchmarking exercise, and a contribution analysis through five thematic case studies. The benchmarking exercise aimed to provide suggestions and guidelines for the management of the EIS for customs by comparison with similar IT systems that are comparable in scale and complexity. The five case studies focused on a set of themes, which were primarily based on the IT capacity building activities to allow for insightful analysis of the EIS for customs in conjunction with other Customs 2020 activities. The selected EIS for customs were those particularly relevant in terms of resource allocation. Annex II presents the analytical diagram for the two-pillar approach and details behind the data collection tools and techniques for each pillar. An overview of the benchmarking exercise and the rationale for selecting the thematic case studies is also covered in that annex. The main challenges identified during the evaluation and the measures taken to counterbalance them are summarised below: ·Nature and complexity of the programme – the programme supports a broad range of policy, legislative, operational and IT processes and systems through diverse activities and actions. These in turn contribute to objectives at various levels, but often in indirect ways, alongside other factors such as national administrations’ administrative capacity and priorities, prevailing economic and trading conditions, and potential unexpected factors such as the COVID-19 outbreak. Due to this complex environment, it was difficult at outcome level and close to impossible at impact level to attribute changes in outcome to the functioning of the programme in a precise quantifiable way and to differentiate the programme and its outcomes and impacts from that of the policies it supports. Nevertheless, an in-depth qualitative research was conducted to identify the likely contribution of the programme activities across a wide range of areas. ·Stakeholder bias – an important part of the stakeholders consulted were national customs officials from the participating countries, who are direct beneficiaries of the programme and thus potentially more inclined to positive judgement. To mitigate this risk, their views were triangulated with those of DG TAXUD and other Directorate-Generals (DGs), EU level stakeholders, and economic operators, where possible. ·Timing – this evaluation covers the programming period 2014-2020. However, a significant number of Customs 2020 activities were still ongoing at the end of 2021, and for many recently implemented activities, including notably some EIS, the impacts will not have been realised yet. ·Data limitations - Limited quantitative data on costs and benefits of the EIS for customs, did not allow to carry out a cost-effectiveness assessment of the systems as originally envisaged. As an alternative, a quantitative cost assessment was conducted, contextualised and exemplified by non-quantifiable benefits achieved thanks to the IT systems funded by the programme. In addition, the limitations of the information provided by the Performance Measurement Framework (PMF) of the Customs programme affected the ability to assess the programme’s performance at outcome and impact level. This evaluation could therefore only use a few indicators from the PMF to assess the programme’s performance. 2. What was the expected outcome of the intervention? 2.1 Description of the intervention and its objectives Figur e 1 presents the main features of the Customs 2020 programme in terms of its objectives, supported activities, beneficiaries and overall financial envelope. The intervention logic underpinning the evaluation is presented in Figure 2. Source: DG TAXUD Source: ‘Customs 2020 Programme Progress Report 2020’ The programme’s multiannual budget envelope is implemented through annual work programmes (AWP) providing annual allocations for budget disbursement across the three types of supported activities (IT capacity building, joint actions and human competency building). The Commission directly manages the Customs 2020 programme with assistance of the Customs 2020 Committee. 2.2 Point(s) of comparison It is very difficult to establish points of comparison because the Customs 2020 programme builds upon previous iterations of the programme (see Figure 1) and the Customs programme as such has been in place already for 30 years. The IT systems, constituting approximately 87% of the programme’s expenditure, have long become an integral part of the national and EU customs landscapes. In fact, the programme (and its iterations) has been around too long for most stakeholders to meaningfully consider the situation before it started. The programme has evolved along with changes in the customs landscape including the opportunities for increasing digitalisation and automation. Compared to the previous programme, the Customs 2020 Programme represented a considerable financial increase (61.5%) and was instrumental to implement the new customs' legislative framework (UCC) that started to apply in May 2016. The need to deliver the new UCC rules and particularly to adapt existing IT systems and develop new ones to achieve a fully electronic customs environment, lays at the core of the current programme. Moreover, the programme introduced a new type of joint action, the expert teams, whose results are specifically referenced where appropriate.

In line with the Commission’s commitment to monitor the EU budget and ensure the accountability for value for money, DG TAXUD developed a framework for monitoring the outputs and results of the programme – the Performance Monitoring Framework (PMF). The PMF was put in place for the current iteration of the Customs programme and its outcome has been taken into account to the extent possible in this evaluation. It includes, for most of the indicators, the corresponding baselines and targets presented in specific references in this report. However, the information provided is limited, in terms of indicators at outcome and impact level. For this reason, and based on one of the recommendations of the mid-term evaluation, DG TAXUD commissioned an external study to reassess the current set of indicators and better align the monitoring results with decision-making needs. The study was finalised in December 2020 and forms the basis for the programme monitoring and evaluation framework (MEF) for the next funding period, which is currently under preparation. 3. How has the situation evolved over the evaluation period? Current state of play The Commission reports on the implementation and performance of the programme annually, through the Annual Progress Reports. The overview of the programme’s implementation presented here is based mostly on the 2020 Annual Progress report, which provides its latest state. The Customs 2020 programme had a committed budget of EUR 531.7 million for the period 2014-2020. This budget is significantly higher than the 272 million committed for the previous programming period (2007-2013). This is mainly due to the increased focus on the development of the EIS for customs in the context of implementation the new legislative framework set by UCC. Table 1 presents the committed expenses per year and by main categories of activities. 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 EIS for customs 57.232.015 61.196.379 59.897.436 82.067.173 71.396.600 67.822.380 64.857.451 Joint actions 6.323.000 5.500.000 5.400.000 5.815.000 5.450.000 6.264.000 5.639.100 Joint Actions - expert teams - - 1.767.365 - 1.726.971 1.450.667 2.100.000 Human competency buiding 1.350.000 995.000 2.646.000 - 1.800.000 1.836.000 1.814.000 Studies and communication 1.184.798 817.233 1.782.025 1.087.965 1.694.366 812.953 720.239 External experts 200.000 200.000 240.000 230.000 255.618 100.000 33.210 TOTAL 66.289.813 68.708.612 71.732.826 89.200.138 82.323.555 78.286.000 75.164.000 Source: data extracted from ABAC As shown in Figure 3 below most of the budget was spent on the development and operation of the EIS for customs (EUR 464.5 million or 87%), followed by the joint actions (EUR 56.8 million or 11%, including expert teams, as well as studies, communication actions and external experts ) and human competency building (EUR 10.4 million or 2%). This is in line with Annex III of the Customs 2020 Regulation, which states a minimum indicative allocation of funds of at least 75% to IT capacity building, a maximum of 20% for joint actions, and a maximum of 5% to human competency building. Source: data extracted from ABAC IT capacity building activities The Customs 2020 programme contributed to financing the development of EIS for customs. In particular, it financed the Union components of new EIS for customs or the upgrades to the existing ones. A brief description of the customs EIS which are referenced in this SWD is provided in Annex VII. Under Customs 2020, the development of most EIS was linked to the implementation of the UCC, as defined in the UCC Work Programme. This was in addition to the development, maintenance, and operation of other systems not governed by the UCC, such as the EU Customs Single Window Certificates Exchange project (EU CSW-CERTEX), COPIS system for anti-Counterfeit and anti-Piracy Information or the VAT e-Commerce. In particular, the UCC Work Programme, defined 17 IT projects for electronic systems aimed at the harmonised exchange of information for customs procedures and authorisations. The IT capacity building activities under the Customs 2020 programme led to the release of nine of these projects. The others are either national systems or their release will happen during the next iteration of the Customs programme. The Customs 2020 programme also financed the operation of the common IT infrastructure on which all the EIS for customs operate – the Common Communication Network/Common Systems Interface (CCN/CSI) and Single Portal for Entry or Exit of Data (SPEED), including their respective evolutions (CCN2 and SPEED2) In addition, the programme financed implied major updates in the field of IT after the United Kingdom’s (UK) Withdrawal Agreement and Northern Ireland Protocol. Joint actions The joint actions bring together officials from participating countries. They include seminars and workshops, project groups, working visits, joint monitoring activities, expert teams, capacity building and supporting actions, studies and joint communication actions. A detailed description of the key features of joint actions is provided in Annex VII. Overall, the number of actions, events and participants remained at a constant high level until 2019, as demonstrated in Figure 4. However, in 2020, the Covid-19 pandemic and the restrictive measures had a strong impact on the number of joint actions organised and the number of participants.

It is also worth underlining that the lower number in 2014 is due to the transition period between Customs 2013 and Customs 2020 programmes. This transition included one month of complete inactivity followed by a slow start for the new joint actions under Customs 2020 in May 2014, which led to fewer activities being organised. Figure 4. Evolution of the number of operational Joint Actions and participants Source: Customs 2020 Programme Progress Reports for 2014-2020 Human competency building activities Human competency building activities consist of common training actions to support the necessary professional skills and knowledge relating to customs. During the Customs 2020 programme, they included the development of eLearning modules, interactive (face-to-face) training courses intended for different audiences (customs officials or economic operators), as well as the development of the EU Customs Competency Framework and Training Curricula, which aims at harmonising and raising customs performance standards throughout the EU. The peak in training expenditure in 2016 was mainly due to development and deployment of an extensive eLearning programme supporting the implementation of the UCC, which entered into force on 1 May 2016. In 2017, there were no commitments as the contracts signed in previous years were of a multiannual nature and the activities carried out in 2017 were funded out of these contracts. In general, DG TAXUD produced over the life of the programme 30 new eLearning modules in English, as well as over 327 translations and updates of existing modules. In 2020 specific training support was provided in the context of the preparation for UK’s withdrawal from the EU, and all the eLearning modules offered by DG TAXUD were adapted and updated to consider Brexit preparedeness. Implementation of the recommendations from the mid-term evaluation The Commission broadly accepted the recommendations of the external mid-term evaluation by adopting in 2019 together with national customs authorities an Action Plan outlining the extent to and ways in which they would be implemented. The mid-term evaluation made thirteen recommendations that were classified in four categories: “programming and design” (five); “implementation” (two); “monitoring and reporting” (three); and “communication” (three). Most of the recommendations have been implemented or are planning to be implemented in the next iteration of the programme. The paragraphs below provide some examples of the improvements and actions taken. A detailed assessment of their follow-up is provided in Annex VI. In terms of programming and design, the Commission has developed a more top-down and strategic design for the next programme, where the planning follows a tree structure, with various policy objectives divided into well-defined policy projects, split into programme actions. Also, for the next funding period the Commission will establish multiannual work programmes, which are more strategic and reflect better the nature of the activities. Technological improvements have also been achieved in the area of eLearning where DG TAXUD is piloting an EU-level Learning Management System for supporting the development and delivery of EU eLearning materials. DG TAXUD has also introduced a new ‘Customs & Tax EU Learning Portal’ to facilitate the access to trainings for customs staff and professionals across the Union. Regarding implementation aspects, the synergies between Customs and Fiscalis programmes are being further exploited and will be extended where possible to the new instrument on customs control equipment. In addition, DG TAXUD has made significant progress in optimising the procedures and resources for the implementation of joint actions, in line with more strategic planning outlined above and simplifying administrative processes and tasks. On monitoring and reporting, the Commission is finalising the new monitoring and evaluation framework for the next funding period on the basis of an external study, as explained in section 2. In terms of communication, DG TAXUD has made efforts in raising the awareness of the programme to national coordinators and other officials by sending quarterly newsletters. The implementation of several other recommendations under this category is still work in progress, including reviewing the programme’s communication strategy and tools, increasing senior-level buy-in and political will, and reviewing the strategy for dealing with economic operators and citizens. 4. Evaluation findings (analytical part) 4.1. To what extent was the intervention successful and why? This section examines the extent to which the programme has achieved its objectives by looking at its three levels of results. The first one about exchange of information and cooperation relates to outputs, the second one about the preparation, implementation and application of Union law concerns its outcomes, and the third one on the support to legitimate activities and prevention of illegal ones refers to the impacts of the programme. Furthermore, this section presents the evaluation findings on the cost-efficiency of the programme activities as well as their coherence with broader EU policies. 4.1.1. To what extent has the programme contributed to facilitating and enhancing cooperation and exchange of information? Customs 2020 programme has largely contributed to facilitating and enhancing cooperation and information exchange through its three types of activities which fully complemented each other. The contribution was strongest from IT capacity building activities and joint actions.

IT capacity building activities were key to facilitate the secure and efficient information exchange between customs authorities, but also with economic operators and other governmental authorities. As indicated in section 3, this has been achieved mainly by: 1) financing the functioning of the network infrastructure on which all EIS for customs operate (CCN/CSI and SPEED) and upgrading it (CCN2 and SPEED2); 2) developing and upgrading certain systems (in particular those linked to the UCC implementation); and 3) operating all of them. Another important output of the Customs 2020 programme is the increased number of EIS for customs (from 39 in 2014 to 56 at the end of 2020). Their availability is essential as they play a vital role in interconnecting customs authorities within the EU. Table 3 below presents the availability of the New Computerised Transit System (NCTS), the Export Control System (ECS) and the Import Control System (ICS) as well as the centralised IT customs applications between 2014 and 2020, which has steadily improved. These systems allow seamless, automated exchange of information on transit/export/entry movements between Member States and with third countries and other stakeholders of the supply chain at international level. For instance, in 2020, operational exchanges included around 11.2 million transit movements, 14.74 million indirect export movements and more than 50 million entry summary declarations. Figure 5 on the evolution of the messages exchanged through the main EIS for custom is also illustrative of the contribution of these EIS for customs to facilitating the exchange of information continuously. Table 2: Reliability of the common infrastructure (2014-2020) Indicator Target 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Availability of CCN overall (%) 98 99.00 99.97 99.98 99.98 99.98 99.47 99.97 Number of messages on CCN (billions) Grow or stable 2.7 3.2 (↗) 4.5 (↗) 4.3 (≈) 5.8 (↗) 6.9 (↗) 8.4 (↗) Volume of CCN messages (Terabytes) Grow or stable 4.3 4.7 (↗) 5.54 (↗) 22.89 (↗) 29.08 (↗) 32.23 (↗) 42.21 (↗) Availability of SPEED2 (%) N/A 99.85 98.46 99.24 99.51 99.68 Source: Customs 2020 Programme Progress Reports for 2014-2020 Table 3: Availability of the EIS for customs (2014-2020) Indicator Target 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Availability of NCTS, ECS, ICS (%) 99% 99.00 99.00 99.23 99.30 99.26 99.41 99.51 Availability of centralised IT customs applications (%) 97% 99.00 98.95 98.37 98.70 99.68 96.27 99.82 Figure 5: Evolution of messages exchanged by application. Source Table 3 and Figure 5: Customs 2020 Programme Progress Reports 2014-2020 The study emphasised the important contribution of certain EIS to enhancing the exchange of information. The Customs Decision System (CDS) for instance has allowed systematic, standardised and automated consultation to other customs authorities when required by the relevant procedure. The European Binding Tariff Information-3 system (EBTI-3), the electronic system for quota management / allocation (QUOTA) and the integrated Tariff of the European Union (TARIC) are also central databases developed for the explicit purpose of exchanging information between customs authorities in the area of binding tariff information, quota management and classification of goods, respectively. All stakeholders interviewed highlighted the importance and usefulness of these central databases to ensure a uniform approach to the classification of goods within the EU, and were, overall, positive about the information exchanged in terms of content and quality. Timeliness was particularly valued. These systems also supported the exchange of information with economic operators, Moreover, the implementation of the EU Customs Trader Portal (EUCTP) and of the Authorised Economic Operator (AEO), EBTI and INF trader portals specifically allowed automated data exchange between customs authorities and economic operators in a uniform way throughout the EU. They enabled economic operators to submit applications and additional information and to receive notifications from the customs authority. The EU CSW-CERTEX system has contributed to facilitating and enhancing the exchange of information with other (non-customs) governmental authorities. This system has connected on a voluntary basis the national customs system of participating countries to several EU non-customs databases, enabling the automated exchange of information on a number of non-customs regulatory formalities required for the import and export of goods. Some room for improvement in facilitating the exchange of information between customs administrations has been identified in the context of the interim evaluation of the UCC, where eight Member States responding to a survey indicated that the central CDS had poor communication functionalities, pushing Members States to resort to e-mails when they needed to consult others. The Customs 2020 programme, in general, has created a collaborative IT environment, where customs authorities see themselves as working together towards the same end. There is little quantitative evidence to show that the use of customs EIS and the information exchanged through them have resulted in enhanced operational cooperation. Nevertheless, the Customs Risk Management System (CRMS) constitutes an example of the cooperation between customs authorities that stems from the use of the systems. Customs officials interviewed for the Risk Management case study judged the CRMS as vital for exchanging risk-related information. CRMS provides a fast and easy-to-use mechanism to store and exchange risk-related information directly between operational officials and risk analysis centres in the Member States. It facilitates EU-wide customs intervention for the highest risks at the EU’s external borders and within its borders. Joint actions provided a platform for exchanging knowledge and good practices between customs authorities and their officials and to promote their cooperation.

An example of positive impact of joint actions in enhancing the exchange of information and good practices is the AEO network, gathering relevant experts from all Member States. It was highly valued by interviewees, both in the context of this evaluation and in the UCC interim evaluation, as a forum to exchange expertise and to find practical solutions to problems arising in the implementation of the AEO programme. This work has crystallised in practical guidelines. Adding to this, working visits were also a vehicle to facilitate the exchange of information and expertise in a tailor-made way. For instance, Czech officials visited their counterparts in Germany to exchange experiences in the field of authorisations (CDS) and so did Portuguese officials who visited Spain and Italy on the Single Window area. Overall, the evidence collected through the interviews showed that the contacts established through joint actions led to durable professional relationships and fostered information exchange beyond the specific activities. This was confirmed by the data collected through the event assessment forms (EAF), which evidence the high degree of networking generated through joint actions. Between 95.5% and 96.5% (2014-2019) of participants filling in the EAF indicated that joint actions provided a good opportunity to expand their network and contacts with officials abroad. In addition, most participants (between 70% and 77.7% for 2014-2019) reported that they had been in contact for work purposes with the officials they had met during a joint action since it ended. These figures dropped in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic to 81.1% and 54.9% respectively in 2020. This could be due to traveling and meeting restrictions and/or to an unclear understanding/adjustment period to alternative ways to “be in contact”, which increasingly include collaborative tools beyond the traditional contacts. Indeed, interviewed customs officials noted that the increased virtuality of exchanges and meetings brought by the pandemic had affected networking opportunities which were easier during face-to-face exchanges. In terms of enhancing cooperation, all joint actions brought together national customs officials from participating countries for cooperation purposes. As presented in section 3, the customs authorities’ participation rate has increased throughout the life of the programme. Monitoring data from the PMF also show that all countries that could participate did so. Moreover, the countries with the highest level of participation in joint actions were usually those with the largest customs administrations, like Germany and France. Countries with the lowest level of participation were usually those with significantly smaller customs administrations. In 2017, for example, Estonia had the lowest level of participation with 15 officials involved in joint actions. For the other years of the programme, it was usually a candidate or potential candidate country that had fewer officials involved, although overall they have increasingly participated in joint actions. Albania then had the lowest level of participation in joint actions in 2018 and 2019. Nevertheless, some smaller Member States had a notable participation in joint actions relative to the size of their administrations. For example, Estonia, the participating country with the lowest absolute number of participants in 2017, had 2.57% of its customs staff participating that year. This was less than 1% in the case of Germany in 2018, when they had the highest absolute number of participants. So, in relative terms, Estonia showed higher levels of participation of its customs staff in joint actions than countries with the largest customs administrations. Cyprus, Luxembourg, and Slovenia provide similar examples of high participation relative to the size of their administration. In 2018 for example, there were 89 participants from Luxembourg, namely 20% of its staff. As shown in Figure 6, the reported level of achievement of joint actions in enhancing cooperation between customs authorities and between their officials was above the target from 2015 onwards. The average indicator is however not representative of all joint actions as the form was not filled in systematically by the respective action managers. Source: Based on Customs 2020 Programme Progress Reports for 2014-2020. Amongst joint actions, expert teams, the new collaboration tool between Member States aiming at pooling resources to perform tasks in specific domains or to carry out operational activities, provide the best example in terms of enhancing cooperation: ·Customs Laboratories Expert Team (CLET) was signalled by consulted stakeholders as the “best example of successful cooperation” where one Member State helped the customs authority of another that did not have the means to conduct the analysis of a product. This expert team, launched at the beginning of 2017, counts the participation of 11 Member States. It pools expertise and equipment in a network (meta-laboratory) to analyse samples and share analytical results; ·Customs Eastern and South-Eastern Land Border Expert Team (CELBET) was also identified as a platform of expanding cooperation. This expert team pools expertise and makes proposals for further improvement of the operational management in EU Eastern and South-Eastern land border; ·The Expert team on new approaches to develop and operate Customs IT systems (ETCIT) constitutes an additional example of the programme contribution to cooperation enhancement. This expert team created in 2018 currently involves around 40 experts from 16 Member States and explores new approaches to develop and maintain decentralised customs IT systems, which fall under the responsibility of the Member States. The main issue identified in relation to expert teams was the difficulty to find a Member State to take the lead. Taking leadership was considered as an extra-burden as it meant complying with procedures that are heavier than for other joint actions. Moreover, it entailed a legal responsibility, as the lead is also the grant coordinator. Joint actions have also supported the exchange of information and cooperation with other governmental authorities. This was the case of Prohibitions and Restrictions Customs Controls Strategy (PARCS) expert group that gathers customs and other competent authorities responsible for regulatory formalities applicable to the import and export of goods, the project group on best working practices related to non- compliance with import requirements of F-gas legislation, or several joint actions supporting the development of the EU Single Window Environment for Customs (SWE-C) initiative. Finally, there is evidence of customs authorities cooperating with third countries to tackle common challenges through joint actions. Data from the Activity Reporting Tool (ART) indicates that 46 out of 945 joint actions (5%) involved third countries. Consultations with customs officials corroborated this and referred to the project group on EU/Hong Kong Cooperation on intellectual property rights customs enforcement as example. The human competency building activities did not aim at enhancing exchange of information and cooperation between authorities. By nature, they target individuals who benefit personally through increasing their understanding, knowledge and capacity, and in turn this is expected to improve competences in administrations. This is especially the case for eLearning modules which do not entail at all discussion among participants. Nevertheless, several training activities funded by the programme have enabled a better use of the EIS for customs and in this way indirectly contributed to these objectives. 4.1.2. To what extent has the programme supported the preparation, coherent application, and effective implementation of Union law in the field of customs and related matters? As presented in the intervention logic, the programme aimed to address shortcomings related to the uniform implementation of the EU law by customs authorities, including difficulties in uniform implementation of interconnected IT systems and incoherent application of EU policies related to safety and security. More generally, it also pursued to support a modern customs that responds and adapts to changing policy context and environment. In this vein, the evaluation analysed the contribution of the programme to the preparation, effective implementation and coherent application of EU law in the field of customs and related matters. The three types of activities contributed to and complemented each other in the preparation, implementation and application of customs legislation and related matters. While joint actions particularly supported the preparation of Union law, the IT capacity building activities were instrumental to the implementation of the UCC and the human competency building activities favoured its coherent application, as explained below. Joint actions played a crucial role in supporting the preparation of Union law in the field of customs and related matters. They led in some cases to tangible results, in the form of specific proposals. In others, the joint actions contributed to the discussion of legislative issues, and the identification of changes and adaptations needed.

The case studies and the interviews provided the following examples: The Financial risk management project group (CPG/076) provided an important input for the drafting of the Financial Risk Criteria (FRC) Implementing Decision, adopted by the Commission in May 2018. The preparation of the Proposal for a Regulation establishing the EU SWE-C was supported through different joint actions, which gathered the input from Members States and economic operators and served as target consultation activities for the initiative. In this particular case, the programme also funded an IT solution, the already mentioned EU CSW-CERTEX project that contributed to the legislative design of the EU SWE-C. The combination of the outputs of the related IT capacity building activities and joint actions ensured that the legislative proposal was based on solid grounds. The AEO Network in its turn fed into the preparation of Union law by helping the Commission to align specific legal provisions of the AEO concept with the civil aviation trusted trader programme for regulated agents or known consignor. Furthermore, the AEO Network also actively supported the negotiation processes for the Mutual Recognition Agreement (MRA) Project groups in general also supported the preparatory work of comitology committees, which assist the Commission in exercising implemented powers granted in EU law. For example, the reports issued by the Classification of products in the Harmonised System and Combined Nomenclature (HS/CN) project groups supported the work of the Customs Code Committee (CCC). Other project groups, worked directly with the CCC and Customs Expert group (CEG) through joint meetings supporting the process on e-customs legislation. More generally, certain joint actions aimed at gathering participants’ experiences on the implementation and application of the UCC fed into some of revisions of the UCC legal package. This was for instance the case of the project group on UCC delegated and implementing acts (UCC DA/UCC IA) Data Annexes Revision for Harmonisation of Customs Data Requirements (CPG/176) whose work contributed to the amendments of the UCC delegated and implementing acts adopted in early 2021. Finally, candidate countries consulted considered the joint actions as crucial for closing negotiation chapters in their accession process. The IT capacity building activities mainly supported the effective implementation of Union law and in particular the UCC, enabling the development and operation of multiple IT systems, without which many of the UCC rules would not have become a reality. The programme thus helped to modernise, computerise, and harmonise customs procedures, as per the objectives of the UCC. As reflected in Table 4, most of the budget of the IT capacity building activities was indeed dedicated to UCC projects. Although none of the stakeholders consulted questioned the importance of the Customs 2020 programme in implementing the UCC, there were delays in the stipulated deployment timeframes, which led to the revision of the Code. Table 4: UCC projects in the Customs 2020 budget dedicated to the development of Union components of the EIS 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total UCC projects 3 846 623 8 631 000 5 691 000 6 676 537 14 429 997 9 547 000 3 324 350 52 146 507 Total customs projects 5 646 623 10 431 000 7 941 000 8 526 537 17 261 347 13 347 000 5 904 350 69 057 857 Proportion 68% 83% 72% 78% 84% 72% 56% 76% Based on 2014-2020 e-customs annual progress reports A 2018 audit from the European Court of Auditors (ECA) looked at whether the Customs 2020 programme was likely to support the delivery of the IT systems necessary for implementing the UCC on time. According to the audit, the delays were due to several factors, including changing project scope, insufficient resources allocated by the EU and the Member States, and a lengthy decision-making process stemming from the multi-layered governance structure. The audit also noted that the Commission did not report appropriately on delays, and that the Customs 2020 programme objectives and reporting arrangements were not suitable for monitoring the implementation of the IT systems properly. However, it should be noted that the original planning for the deployment of the EIS for customs were extremely tight both in terms of time and budget. The Customs 2020 programme therefore did support the implementation of the UCC, but not within the timeframes that were originally planned. The UCC was amended in 2019 to postpone the deadline for the deployment of three national systems to 2022 and of six trans-European systems to 2025. This implies that the implementation of the UCC is not yet completed and the new iteration of the Customs programme will have to cover the development of the postponed EIS after 2020. In addition, following the amendment of the UCC, the Commission has to inform annually the European Parliament and the Council on the progress in the IT implementation of the UCC. The 2020 progress report identified the risks associated with the developments of the UCC EIS and outlined the mitigating actions envisaged to address them. In addition to the UCC, some of the systems funded by the programme have supported (or will support) the implementation of other regulations, mainly related to non-customs formalities required for the import or export of goods. This is the case of the EU SWE-C, including the EU CSW-CERTEX system, which, as explained before, supports the customs enforcement of regulatory formalities concerning animals and plants’ health, the import of timber and organic products. In addition, the Customs 2020 programme has funded the initial work to put in place an IT system to implement the new Regulation on the import of cultural goods. Complementing the IT capacity building activities, the joint actions that were most supportive of the effective implementation of Union law were those focused on the development of the customs EIS. Interviewed customs authorities stressed the usefulness of project groups, as they served to discuss the technical aspects of the UCC and IT projects specifically. The case studies provided specific examples: ·Member States considered that the project group for the Shared Trader Interface (STI) was crucial to prepare the effective phased deployment of ICS2, which they expect to play an important role in ensuring the effective implementation of Union law (entry formalities) across the 27 Member States; ·The Project Group on the Import of Cultural Goods (CPG 185) supported the implementation of Regulation (EU) 2019/880 on the introduction and import of cultural goods, enabling discussions on business process models to develop the necessary IT solutions; ·The High-Level Project Group (HLPG) on the implementation of the UCC and e-Customs as crucial in supporting coordination of all the different activities linked to the UCC and the e-Customs Decision. It allowed for strategic oversight of the effects of the implementation of the UCC on the governance of the Customs Union; ·Project groups on Mutual Recognition of AEO – Implementation of the MRA with China (CPG/104), Implementation of the MRA with US (CPG/125), and Implementation of the MRA with Japan (CPG/141) – also supported the implementation of the agreements with these countries; ·The workshops in EU Member States and regional seminars in the Western Balkans on the AEO programme also supported the implementation of the latter, for example in Montenegro since 2019.

Human capacity building activities also supported indirectly the effective implementation of Union law by reinforcing customs officials’ skills and competences on how to use the new EIS for customs, therefore improving their use and increasing the benefits. Table 5 provides an overview of the number of IT trainings organised as well as the feedback from participating customs officials, which was generally positive, both in terms of usefulness and expectations. Table 5: PMF indicators related to IT trainings (2014-2020) Target 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Number of IT training sessions organised for given systems/ components Grow or stable 22 45 58 40 39 46 6 ↗ ↗ ↘ ≈ ↗ ↘ Number of customs officials trained in IT trainings Grow or stable 124 293 374 472 503 722 273 ↗ ↘ % of officials who found that the IT training met their expectations 'fully' or 'to large extent' Grow or stable 95 92.0 87.0 89.0 92.1 89.3 89.1 ↘ ≈ % of officials who found the IT training were 'very useful' or 'useful' Grow or stable 99 98.0 97.0 97.0 100 98.3 97.8 ≈ Source: Customs 2020 Programme Progress Reports for 2014-2020 Customs 2020’s activities were complementary in supporting the coherent application of Union law. The evaluation identified several examples of the important role that the EIS for customs played in supporting Member States’ coherent application of Union law. For instance, the TARIC central database, including all measures related to EU customs tariff, commercial and agricultural legislation, automatically updates the national systems, reducing human error, and strengthening the coherent and correct application of union law in the field of classification of goods. The CDS enables that all Member States customs authorities responsible for granting authorisations handle them in the same way, increasing consistency in the interpretation of the UCC. In addition, the CRMS has been recognised as important in ensuring consistency in the area of risk management. Furthermore, the EU CSW-CERTEX system, which standardises processes for customs authorities to verify compliance with non-customs formalities is another example where the EIS for customs have enabled greater coherence in the enforcement of certain prohibitions and restrictions at the border. The programme’s joint actions were an important tool to provide practical guidance for the correct and harmonised interpretation of legal provisions. The guidance documents resulting from some of these actions, such as the guidelines produced by the Project Group on Customs Debt and Guarantees under UCC (CPG/159), were indeed helpful in ensuring a coherent application of the UCC rules and would not have been possible without the collective knowledge of participating experts. The AEO Network is another example where outputs, like the EU AEO Guidelines and various guidance material on different aspects of the AEO programme, proved instrumental to support the coherent application of Union law. Expert teams and working visits were also considered important in supporting a more coherent application of Union law. For instance, the expert team on binding tariff information decisions (BTI) resulted in clear definitions that can be applied in the same way by all Member States, and CELBET expert team led to a closer harmonisation of customs procedures at Eastern and South-Eastern land border crossings. Officials from Czechia, for example, highlighted working visits under this programme as a vehicle to gain a clearer understanding of how another Member State applies the same rules, which benefits the coherent application of Union law promoting greater consistency through the introduction of good practices learned. Human competency building activities are key to promote uniform application of Union law. Under the Customs 2020 programme, the eLearning modules were specifically aimed at promoting a common interpretation and coherent application of the new customs regulatory framework (UCC) throughout the EU. Looking at the data from the PMF provided in Table 6, 2016 marked a change in the programme in terms of training, increasing by more than seven times the number of customs officials trained. This corresponded to the entry into force of the UCC on 1 May 2016, and to the introduction of related training material. The number of eLearning modules produced doubled those of 2015 (from 15 in 2015 to 30 in 2016). Generally, customs officials appreciated the Customs 2020 programme’s human competency building activities, especially in countries where there is no dedicated place to learn about Union law in the field of customs and related matters. Table 6: PMF indicators related to eLearning modules (2014-2020) Target 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Number of EU e-learning modules produced Grow or stable 9 0 35 129 32 48 104 ↘ ↗ ↗ ↘ ↗ ↗ Number of customs officials trained using EU common training material Grow 4 776 3 092 23 685 34 214 17 547 40 400 18 109 ↘ ↗ ↗ ↘ ↗ ↘ Number of EU e-learning modules used by participating countries Grow 174 183 305 271 279 377 321 ↗ ↗ ↘ ↗ ↗ ↘ Average training quality score by customs officials (on a scale of 100) Grow 73.3 70.3 74.3 73.1 72.9 75.0 78.6 ↘ ↗ ↘ ↘ ↗ ↗ Despite of the effective support of the programme to the coherent application of the customs law presented above, there is evidence of discrepancies in the application of Union law in areas that were the focus of some Customs 2020 activities. This is particularly the case of customs controls, as recently pointed out by ECA in the Special report 04/2021 on customs controls. While uniform application of controls is necessary to prevent fraudulent importers from targeting border entry points with lower level of controls, ECA found that Member States apply the financial risk framework in different ways, resulting in a lack of harmonisation of controls that hampers the EU financial interests. 4.1.3. To what extent has the Customs 2020 programme supported legitimate economic activities and prevented illegal ones It is challenging to measure the contribution of the programme to the long-term results it is intended to achieve. Firstly, the achievement of policy objectives is incremental by nature because it is the result of many subsequent policy actions and IT developments and it is thus difficult to quantify the exact benefits of this cycle of the programme with precision, plus there are conceptual challenges when translating certain type of benefits into quantifiable values. Secondly, even if these impacts could be quantified, it would be very difficult to give a precise indication of the programme contribution to them, also because the programme is not implemented in isolation of other policy actions. For these reasons, the analysis is mostly supported by specific examples from the conducted case studies. The Commission intends to address these limitations under the next programme by establishing a policy structure framework for the programme actions (see the section “implementation of the recommendations from the mid-term evaluation) that should allow the programme to be much more policy driven than activity driven. Support to legitimate economic activities The evidence collected shows that the Customs 2020 programme has primarily supported legitimate trade by developing, maintaining and operating the EIS for customs. The digitalisation of customs procedures has simplified and harmonised these procedures, reducing compliance costs and increasing legal certainty for importers and exporters. Although it was not possible to quantify these impacts, as digitalisation of customs processes is complex and has happened progressively for more than 20 years now, the following examples extracted from the case studies demonstrate these benefits. The TARIC and QUOTA databases provide economic operators with a clear view of measures and quotas in place when importing or exporting goods into or from the EU. They therefore support legitimate businesses by enabling economic operators to correctly codify their goods. The EBTI3 system stores binding tariff information decisions issued by national customs authorities (BTIs) and contributes to eliminating differences in the application of classification rules amongst different economic operators within the EU, thus ensuring legal certainty for the operators and equality among them. In 2019, the EBTI3 system was updated and linked to the Trader Portal, simplifying communication between the applicants and national customs authorities.

The updated AEO system, with the implementation of the EU AEO Direct Trader Access, allows economic operators to submit requests (and additional information) and receive notifications from the decision-taking customs authority. As recognised by national customs administrations, the central AEO system and its update have resulted in the improvement of the business processes for granting the AEO status and contributed to more efficient, simplified, and standardised customs decision-making process. The EU CSW-CERTEX project has also brought trade facilitation benefits in the participating Member States. By enabling the quick sharing of electronic data between different governmental authorities involved in goods clearance, this system has largely replaced manual documentary controls, which are time and resource consuming for both authorities and businesses, by automated ones. Although both customs authorities and economic operators interviewed agreed that the programme IT capacity building activities had contributed to the harmonisation and simplification of customs processes and therefore the facilitation of trade, economic operators also noted that digitalisation was still a slow and ongoing process. Many benefits, like full digitalisation, harmonised data requirements and centralised clearance, have not materialised yet. Furthermore, economic operators also raised some challenges related to the more complex IT environment and the additional burden and technical difficulties that it represents. In particular, they referred to the increasing data requirements and obligations. These have been especially challenging for small companies which do not have the resources necessary to adapt to these changes quickly. In addition, certain economic operators expressed concerns that Member States did not always implement the new EIS for customs in the same timeframe, resulting in differences in their level of digitalisation that distorted competition. They also highlighted the lack of updated information on the timeframe for the deployment of the customs EIS by Member States, and on the technical guidelines and specifications on the EIS under development. However, these issues are beyond the scope of the Customs 2020 programme. Indeed, the implementation of national components of the EIS is the responsibility of Member States, and they can make use of a deployment window that explains the referred timing differences. Also, it is the responsibility of Member States to communicate with economic operators on the deployment of IT systems at national level, together with their technical guidelines and specifications. Beyond the notion of responsibility, better engagement and information sharing with economic operators is an issue which could be addressed by the programme in the future. Although less prominently, joint actions and human competency building activities have also contributed to support legitimate economic activities. Through the identification, development and application of best working practices and administrative procedures, joint actions have improved the administrative capacity of the customs authorities and the conditions and procedures for undertaking trade. Both national customs authorities and economic operators pointed at the guidance and coordination in ensuring the correct interpretation of customs procedures and processes as the main benefit of joint actions. They also highlighted that joint actions have helped to arrive to a common understanding of procedures which has translated into the design, development and functioning of the related EIS, such as the planned Centralised Clearance for Import system. The BTI Expert Teams project on divergent tariff classification, is another good example of this contribution. By pooling expertise from the Commission and Member States to handle cases of divergent classification of BTIs, the project contributed to increasing the number of cases closed in the Committee, as well as reducing the average time it takes to close a case. This project group thus facilitated trade by increasing legal certainty. Finally, the Customs 2020 programme provided funding for eLearning modules and training activities to enhance and align the competences of both customs officials and economic operators. The latter accessed the eLearning courses on the Europa website and used them mostly to train their staff involved with customs matters. Therefore, these activities supported legitimate economic activities by ensuring that businesses have access to the information they needed to operate efficiently and effectively. As explained in section 4.1.2, these activities also helped legitimate trade by enhancing legal certainty through improving the coherent application of customs law Evidencing the above, Table 7 shows that the number of eLearning courses downloaded by economic operators and others multiplied by ten between 2014 and 2020. The increase is particularly high in 2016, coinciding with the entry into force of the new customs legislative framework (UCC) on 1 May 2016 and also in 2020, coinciding with the launching of new courses especially relevant to traders, like UCC – Level 3: 'eAEO Trader Portal' and 'eBTI Trader portal'. Moreover, the improvements done on the Europa website download portal allowed the download of multiple courses at once. The perception on the quality of the training also improved during this period and interviewed economic operators particularly recognised the value and usefulness of e-learning courses, such as those on Brexit. Table 7: PMF indicators related to publicly available e-learning courses (2014-2020) Target 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Number of downloaded e-learning courses on the Europa.eu website Grow or stable 3 219 3 202 12 920 11 807 10 449 10 529 30 408 ≈ ↗ ↘ ↘ ≈ ↗ Average training quality score by other users (on a scale of 100) >70 64 69.2 78.5 73.1 72.9 75 78.6 ↗ ↗ ↘ ↘ ↗ ↗ Source: Customs 2020 Programme Progress Reports for 2014-2020 Contribution to the prevention of illegal activities Although it is not possible to assess by means of quantitative analysis the extent to which the Customs 2020 programme has contributed to prevent illicit activities, some of the activities funded by the programme are preventive in nature and it can be assumed that they allowed to detect non-compliance, thus contributing to fighting illicit activities. In this regard, the digitalisation process supported by the programme provides as such the possibility to automate checks and perform data validation, cross-verification and analysis, increasing risk management and control capacities of customs administrations. National customs authorities also highlighted the benefit of the EIS for customs in ensuring greater harmonisation and the coherent application of Union law, which supported the prevention of illegal activities. Certain EIS have specially contributed to the prevention of illegal activities by ensuring the timely and secure exchange of fraud-related information between the competent national and EU administrations, or the exchange, storage and analysis of relevant data. For instance, the Customs Risk Management System plays a key role in this regard and was assessed positively by interviewed national customs authorities. The EU CSW-CERTEX, in its turn, contributes to enhancing the security and safety of the EU and the protection of the environment, by enabling customs to automatically verify compliance with a number of formalities required for the import or export of goods in different policy areas. SURV3 brings also important benefits in terms of data analysis capabilities at EU level, which are highly important in terms of fraud detection. Joint actions were positively considered by interviewees as supporting the prevention of illegal activities. Expert teams constitute a good example of this. CELBET for instance coordinated controls in 174 crossing points throughout the EU and trained 300 officers from all CELBET participating Member States on x-ray, mobile control, enhanced cooperation between Customs and border guards, car search, bus search, sniffer dogs and customs control process. Interviewees from national customs authorities all highlighted the positive impact of the work of CELBET in improving the control of external borders and preventing illegal economic activities. Customs Laboratories Expert Team (CLET) pooled in a network the expertise and equipment of 10 EU customs laboratories, to analyse samples, share results of analysis, elaborate an operational harmonised approach for analysis, contributing also to fight against fraud and contraband on the basis of seizures. By sharing the identification of potential noxious substances, CLET has for instance helped EU customs authorities to better protect the safety and security of the EU citizens. Finally, human capacity building activities have also contributed to the prevention of illegal activities by enhancing the competences of customs officials in certain areas (i.e., in-person trainings which helped participants to rummage ships and cars better) Undervalued or counterfeit goods from China, specially linked to e-commerce, were highlighted by interviewed economic operators as an issue where the programme could play a stronger role by proposing more cooperation activities with third countries where these issues originate. The issue of e-commerce was also raised in a 2019 study from the European Parliament on the protection of EU financial interest, which recommended the development of an IT system for analysing financial transactional third-party data to detect fraud and in particular fraud related to e-commerce. 4.1.4. To what extent have the Customs 2020 programme’s resources produced best possible results at the lowest possible cost? The external evaluation found it difficult to measure the extent to which the programme’s resources had produced the best possible results at the lowest possible cost. As it was not possible to monetise the benefits of the Customs 2020 activities, the findings on effectiveness presented above were considered alongside with the costs. Due to the high proportion of the budget spent on the customs EIS, the assessment was particularly focused on the funding of the functioning of existing customs EIS and the development of new ones.

IT capacity building activities As mentioned before, the Customs 2020 Programme spent EUR 464.5 million on IT capacity building, accounting for 87% of the programme’s budget expenditure. In addition to the budget spent at EU level, the Member States invested resources at national level to run the national components of the customs EIS. To assess the value for money of these activities, the external evaluation analysed the following systems in detailed, on the basis of the thematic case studies conducted: ICS2, SURV3, EBTI3, CDS, EU CSW-CERTEX, and AEO upgrade. Table 8: Commission committed budget to the development of specific IT projects 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Total Total IT projects 5 646 623 10 431 000 7 941 000 8 526 537 17 261 347 13 347 000 5 904 350 69 057 858 ICS2 N/A N/A N/A 600 000 3 250 000 2 700 000 1 080 000 17 313 087 7% 19% 20% 18% 11% SURV3 200 000 400 000 800 000 N/A 800 000 300 000 200 000 2 700 000 4% 4% 10% 5% 2% 3% 4% EBTI3 350 000 300 000 200 000 500 000 300 000 200 000 100 000 1 950 000 6% 3% 3% 6% 2% 1% 2% 3% CDS 800 000 2 750 000 750 000 500 000 2 200 000 1 600 000 600 000 8 600 000 14% 26% 9% 6% 13% 12% 10% 13% AEO upgrade 100 000 100 000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 200 000 18% 1% 0% EU CSW-CERTEX N/A N/A N/A 200 000 924 350 650 000 1 450 000 3 224 350 2% 5% 5% 25% 5% Source: e-Customs annual progress reports 2014-2020 Most of the information used to evaluate these systems was gathered through a survey targeting national authorities. It is important to take into consideration that the cost data provided by the respondents varied widely across national authorities and the response rate remained low. This data was also complemented with high-level cost information available at Commission level and with the input from interviews conducted with both national authorities and Commission DGs. The table below shows the programme expenditure on the development of the specific customs EIS covered in the case studies and their percentage of the total Commission committed budget for the development of these systems. The costs of the customs EIS seem to be reasonable for national authorities, as most of them are covered by the European Commission through the Customs 2020 programme. According to the survey results, the ICS2 system is the costliest for Member States in general and, in particular, in relation to one-off development costs and one-off and ongoing support costs. One-off development costs were higher than average also for the CDS. Meanwhile, SURV3 is the most expensive in terms of infrastructure costs, both one-off and ongoing. However, this has to be put into context with the scope of the different EIS, their size and complexity. ICS2 and CDS for instance, are complex systems, implementing many functional requirements, and, therefore, imply different costs from a database such as the SURV3. Customs authorities that responded to the cost-benefit survey considered all systems to be moderately cost-effective, except the SURV3, which appears to be only partly cost effective. This perception could be influenced by the intrinsic nature of this system, which records and centralises import and export data transmitted by the national customs authorities and therefore, unlike other systems, is not meant to reduce costs of customs administrations or to support their work but to increase data analysis capabilities at EU level. In addition, the system is not yet delivering its full potential as data continues to be gathered in different formats until all Member States align their systems to the UCC data requirements by end 2022 as provided by the UCC as amended in 2019. The survey confirmed that all selected EIS have brought relevant benefits to national authorities. As presented in Figure 7, and in line with what has been explained earlier in the section (see 4.1.1, 4.1.2 and 4.1.3), the benefits experienced by most national authorities are: ·Automated processes contributing to more efficient, simplified, and standardised customs procedures; ·More effective implementation and coherent application of Union law in the field of customs; ·Increased interoperability and information sharing between customs authorities. Figure 7: key benefits deriving from selected Customs EIS

The answers provided by respondents were rated following a 1-5 rating scale: 1=Not at all; 2=To a limited extent; 3= To some extent; 4=To a moderate extent; 5=To a great extent. Eight of the benefits are system-specific, which explains why the figure presents values only for one system. Source: Based on the survey to national customs authorities. According to the respondents, the benefits of SURV3, EBTI3, CDS and the AEO upgrade, outlined above have not resulted in increased or decreased costs regarding the time staff dedicated to their tasks and other costs associated with the processes that the EIS supported. Meanwhile, the benefits of ICS2 have resulted in an increase in costs of up to 25% in comparison with the previous situation for most respondents (33% of responses, 5 of 15) regarding labour costs and other operating costs associated with the system. The main benefits associated with the EU CSW-CERTEX as identified in the evaluation of the project included in Annex 14 of the impact assessment of the EU SWE-C initiative are: ·the time savings in the clearance of goods (for both authorities and economic operators) derived from the exchange of electronic data between competent authorities that enables to automate documentary controls, and; ·the more effective implementation and coherent application of Union law in the field of customs and related matters (namely the non-customs regulatory formalities covered), and the subsequent increase in safety and security. In conclusion, although it is not possible to determine whether the analysed EIS for customs have achieved value for money, the findings related to the cost-effectiveness of the six EIS for customs and the respondents’ perceived benefits of these systems, provide a positive picture of their efficiency. This positive assessment is also reinforced by the fact that the EIS for customs have contributed to economies of scale, compared to a situation where the Member States would have developed their own systems. In addition, certain of the realised benefits would not have been achieved in that case. For instance, the possibility to apply for and authorise multi-Member States customs decisions, which would not be possible without the CDS. Joint actions The Customs 2020 Programme spent EUR 56.8 million on joint actions (including external experts), accounting for around 11% of the programme’s expenditure. The breakdown of this expenditure by main type of joint action (expert teams, external experts, studies and communication, and “other types of joint actions”) is provided in Figure 8 below. The analysis of the efficiency of joint actions was particularly focused on expert teams and “other type of joint actions”, which accounted for 93% of the expenditure under this category and represented activities directly aimed at bringing together participating countries to cooperate towards the programme’s objectives. Expert teams are a new type of joint action introduced by the Customs 2020 programme. The first one was launched in 2016 and since then, there have been nine expert teams covering four topics . The entire expenditure on expert teams amounted to EUR 7 million (12% of joint actions’ expenditure). As previously highlighted (see sections 4.1.1, 4.1.2 and 4.1.3), expert teams have been perceived positively by stakeholders for their contribution to the programme’s objectives. They have provided a place for national customs authorities to work together towards solutions in a practical way on a regional or thematic basis. CLET, CELBET and ETCIT expert teams are good examples of this cooperation. Although the different nature of this newly implemented activity (and therefore different monitoring data) makes it difficult to conclude on their cost-effectiveness in comparison to other joint actions, the cost efficiency of expert teams was highlighted by some stakeholders interviewed, as they provide the opportunity for Member States to pool resources and expertise rather than acting separately. Most of the programme expenditure on joint actions (71%) relates to the category “other”, which includes seminars and workshops, project groups, working visits, monitoring activities, capacity building and supporting actions. The total expenditure on these types of actions amounted to EUR 40.4 million. Between 2014 and 2020, 1.117 joint actions were set up of which 948 incurred costs. The monitoring data extracted from ART (Table 9) reveal that most of the budget was spent on project groups (76%), followed by workshops (9%) and seminars (6%).

While in absolute terms the most expensive “other” joint action type is project groups (EUR 120 800 per project group), this is mainly due to the high number of participants. By contrast, the average cost of a project group meeting by participant was only EUR 676, which represents the lowest cost per participant of all joint actions. The average expenditure by participant of the different actions is about the same or up to 10% less than what was reported in the mid-term evaluation, with the exception of project groups which on average cost 22% less than what was reported at mid-term (EUR 676 instead of EUR 868). This reduction in cost may partially be due to the cost reduction from April 2020 onwards as meetings were held online due to the COVID-19 restrictions. Table 9: Joint actions expenditure, number, and participants (2014-2020) Type of joint action Total budget spent (€) % budget spent Number of joint actions % of joint actions Average budget/ action (€) Number of participants % of total Average expenditure/participant (€) Project groups 22 350 028 76% 185 20 120 811 33 043 83 676 Workshops 2 788 777 9% 100 11 27 888 2 816 7 990 Working visits 1 933 100 7% 605 64 3 195 1 641 4 1 178 Seminars 1 777 891 6% 28 3 63 496 1 620 4 1 097 Capacity building 381 276 1% 12 1 31 773 371 1 1 028 Communication 206 637 1% 5 1 41 327 251 1 823 Monitoring 134 768 0% 13 1 10 367 97 0 1 389 Total expenses 29 572 477 100% 948 100 31 195 39 839 100 742 Source: Budgetary data extracted from ART as provided by DG TAXUD One of the issues raised by consulted stakeholders was the need for invitations to be sent out more in advance. The short notice makes it difficult for the participating countries to find the right expert(s) and increase the travelling cost. In addition, national authorities bear certain expenses (i.e., the VAT incurred by the organising Member State, interpretation costs, participation of additional participants, informal activities linked to the formal event) or burdens (i.e., complexity of declaring expenses for expert teams or time spent by administrative staff overseeing the programme budget and producing final reporting) that they would like to see either covered by the programme or reduced. Despite these observations, and as evidenced in sections 4.1.1, 4.1.2 and 4.1.3, the joint actions have produced a great amount of added value, enhancing cooperation and working relationships among participants. They have also supported the preparation of Union law and the effective implementation of the legislation in force through the development of the customs EIS and best working practices for administrative procedures. They have ultimately contributed to the support of legitimate trade and, in certain cases, the prevention of fraud. The overall opinion was that the cost of these actions was proportionate to the generated benefits. Human competency building activities Overall, the Customs 2020 programme spent EUR 10.4 million on human competency building, accounting for only 2% of the programme budget. These activities included the development of eLearning modules, face-to-face training courses intended for different audiences (customs officials and economic operators) as well as the development of the EU Customs Competency Framework and Training Curricula. Table 6 (see section 4.1.2) and 7 (see section 4.1.3) provide an overview of the reported outputs. As evidenced in those sections, the main benefits of Customs 2020 training activities are linked to a more coherent application of customs law and ultimately a more effective and efficient functioning of the Customs Union, as they enhance the capacity of customs officials to perform their duties, as well as the understanding of customs rules by economic operators. Most stakeholders did not specifically comment on the value for money of the training organised and/or eLearning modules produced. Nevertheless, as presented in previous sections, the participants in the activities perceived them as useful. Some national customs officials even highlighted human competency building as one of the key benefits of the programme, due to its important role in supporting and reinforcing the skills of customs authorities. Although this type of activity only consumes about 2% of the total programme budget, it can be considered to have one of the highest value for money, as it has produced a great number of training materials that can be used over and over without incurring any additional cost (with the exception of making the necessary updates). In response to the mid-term evaluation recommendation to “Refine the strategy for development and promotion of eLearning modules”, the Commission has reinforced structured consultations with national administrations to identify training needs and has developed an EU-level learning management system (Customs & Tax EU Learning Portal). These developments are expected to improve the value for money of training activities under the next iteration of the programme. 4.1.5. To what extent is the Customs 2020 programme coherent with broader EU policies? While the results of the mid-term evaluation on the strong internal coherence between the different levels and components of the programme and its design remain valid, the final evaluation has focused on the external coherence of the programme in the broader EU policy context. The Customs 2020 programme is designed to support specific policies in the customs area and is therefore coherent with the priorities of the Customs Union. Beyond that, the programme has supported the work of other Commission services in EU policies and priorities outside the customs sphere. This is particularly the case of policy areas that impose regulatory requirements for the import and export of certain goods, in order to protect the environment, human, animal and plant health, cultural and economic interests or other public policies in the area of safety and security. Customs authorities conduct customs controls, whereby the enforcement of these measures and the cooperation with the respective governmental authorities becomes crucial. It was therefore important to ensure that the programme aligned with and supported these policies. The impact assessment for establishing the next Customs programme, as well as the mid-term evaluation of the Customs 2020 programme and the interviews conducted for this final evaluation, lead to multiple examples in which the programme, through its different activities, has contributed to or benefited from other EU initiatives: ·By supporting the development of the EU SWE-C, the programme has enhanced coherence with multiple policy areas imposing regulatory requirements for the import and export of specific goods, as explained before. This has improved the implementation of the specific non-customs measures, facilitating their consistent application and enforcement at the border; ·In line with the above, the programme supported the prevention of illegal trade of fluorinated greenhouse gases (F-gases), which pose a significant risk to the environment, by bringing together customs, environmental and surveillance national authorities in a project group on these substances (CPG/183). One concrete output of this group was a checklist for customs authorities with concrete instructions on what they need to do when confronted with the import of F-gases. The checklist has proved to be a useful tool for customs officials and is being broadly used. The work of the project group also supported the review of the 2015 F-gases Regulation and the follow-up legislative proposal to update it, with the aim to make the enforcement by customs easier and more effective, ultimately supporting the EU broader policy objectives related to protecting the environment and combating climate change; ·The Structural Reform Support Programme (coordinated by DG REFORM) provided tailor-made support to Member States, contributing to develop national customs administrations’ capabilities needed for delivering the Customs 2020 objectives, especially in the areas of anti-fraud activities and customs controls. This includes, for example, equipment for border customs officials and funds for feasibility studies and mandatory IT systems. At the same time, the Customs programme also contributed to boosting capabilities of Member States through its own capacity building activities and therefore there are strong complementarities and linkages between the two programmes;

·By managing with similar structures both Customs and Fiscalis 2020 programmes, DG TAXUD optimises efficiency and achieves complementarity and synergies between the two programmes. Furthermore, both programmes share some operational features that they co-fund and which are available for both customs and tax administrations (i.e., the CCN network). The mid-term evaluation pointed at some opportunities for coordination and cross-fertilisation in areas like excise duties as well as for shared approaches to human capacity building and training; ·In the case of Hercule III programme administered by the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), both the interviews conducted under this evaluation and the evidence collected in the mid-term and final evaluation of that programme confirmed that there are both formal and informal mechanisms across DG TAXUD and OLAF to avoid overlaps and facilitate synergies between the two programmes. Their respective Annual Work Programmes are subject to inter-service consultation and there are fora, such as the Customs Cooperation Working Party (CCWP), where representatives of both Commission services are involved, allowing for opportunities to exchange information, reduce potential overlaps and look for synergies across the Customs and Hercule programmes. New measures have also been taken to ensure future coherence and avoid potential overlap between the successor programmes. Nevertheless, the mechanisms established have been more effective in avoiding overlaps, but, reportedly, there is still some room for improvement in terms of ensuring synergies, for instance by developing repositories of data that are useful for the two programmes as well as analysing the data jointly. Overall, the evaluation identified the following mechanism as currently used to ensure the external coherence of the Customs 2020 programme: ·Inter-DG meetings and inter-service consultations, which have strengthened cooperation and communication between relevant DGs; ·Project and expert groups, such as PARCS bringing together Commission officials and Member States authorities from different policy areas. In areas where both customs and other governmental authorities are competent for the enforcement of specific legislation, mixed project groups proved to be very fruitful. They have enabled sharing of best practices, development of joint documents and guidelines in cooperation with other authorities or provision of customs expertise and advice in the application and review of non-customs legislation when needed; ·Participation of Commission officials as observers in customs project group meetings and activities. In cases where the DGs are not formal members of the project groups, they were still able to participate in several project group meetings as observers, bringing advice and knowledge; ·Assessment of project proposals by officials from different DGs. To avoid overlaps of funding and maximise synergies and efficiencies, projects submitted to DG REFORM by Member States are reviewed by staff from other DGs (TAXUD, ECFIN). This also ensured that projects served the Commission common priorities; Despite the positive outcomes presented above and apart from the observations raised in relation to Hercule III, this evaluation (and previous analysis) also found room for improvement in: ·Reinforcing the cooperation with third countries’ authorities, especially for supporting the delivery of EU environmental goals and related multilateral environmental agreements and strengthening coherence between Member States and the Commission’s positions at international fora such as the World Customs Organization (WCO), as suggested by some customs administrations; ·Further structuring or formalising cooperation with other Commission DGs, providing a more formal framework for discussions between DGs. This was suggested by Commission interviewees and was also highlighted as an area for improvement during the mid-term evaluation; ·Raising the visibility of the programme and of complementary EU funding instruments within the Member States. National authorities consulted both in the context of the final and the mid-term evaluation pointed at room to strengthen cooperation between DGs for raising the visibility of the Customs programme and for providing more information about other complementary EU funding instruments to national customs authorities and economic operators. IT synergies with other EU programmes that run significant electronic systems, in particular those impacting on business, could also be exploited by the Customs 2020 programme. 4.2. How did the EU intervention make a difference? The Customs Union is an essential and integral element of the functioning of the Single Market. By virtue of being an exclusive EU competency, customs legislation is adopted at the EU level, but it is implemented by the Member States. Thus, cooperation is required to ensure a harmonised implementation and application. The programme’s role in the development, maintenance and operation of the customs EIS has particularly contributed to the simplification and harmonisation of customs processes and procedures at EU level. The upgraded paperless environment has significantly increased efficiency and effectiveness. Customs EIS have enabled the implementation of the new customs legislative framework (except for those systems and related provisions that were delayed), leading to economies of scale that would not have been possible if each Member State had developed similar IT systems on its own. Table 10 provides a number of examples evidencing that Member States working alone could not have achieved the same result. EIS for customs IT Systems added value TARIC: multilingual database that centralises all measures relating to EU customs tariff, commercial and agricultural legislation. Increase in effectiveness: The most effective way of securing a uniform presentation and coherent application of the customs Union law is for these measures to be integrated and coded at central level. Through TARIC and the Customs 2020 programme, the Commission provides all economic operators and customs officials within the EU a clear view of the measures to be undertaken when importing/exporting in/from the EU. Increase in efficiency: The day-by-day changes in Union legislation are recorded in the TARIC central database which is continuously updated. The Member States are given prompt daily electronic updates which feed into their national systems for customs clearance, with the goal of maximising automatic clearance. All stakeholders recognised the EU added value of the TARIC central database. Interviewees highlighted the reduction in errors, the increase in speed and the reduction in burden and cost as contributing factors to the added value of TARIC. Stakeholders consulted also recognised the coherent and harmonised application of EU law, the provision of harmonised and compatible data (which would not be the case if each Member State were to rely on national TARIC systems alone) and the collection of EU wide statistics. EBTI3: centralises and stores all binding tariff information applications and decisions across the EU and acts as a reference point for Member States. The EBTI supports the uniform tariff classification of goods in the EU and the application of the customs legislation which would not be possible without the existence of a central system at the EU level. It reduces the potential for issuing divergent BTI decisions and facilitates communication between stakeholders to a greater extent than could be achieved by Member States acting alone. EU CSW-CERTEX links Member State customs systems to EU systems/databases managing non-customs requirements, such as TRACES The EU CSW-CERTEX provides quicker and more efficient sharing of electronic data between customs and other competent authorities involved in goods clearance at the border. It increases efficiency by enabling customs authorities to automatically verify the compliance with EU non-customs formalities. It also improves the effective enforcement of non-customs policies by allowing national authorities to properly monitor and control the quantities of authorised goods imported or exported in the EU (EU wide quantity management), which could not be achieved by Member States acting alone UUM&DS: ensures the uniform authentication and authorisation of economic operators, enabling their direct unified access to a number of central Customs EIS, by federating MS Identity and Access Management systems. The UUM&DS links to central systems, such as the CDS, EORI or AEO systems, which are operated at the EU level. Its development required extensive cooperation between Member States, which was only possible thanks to the Customs 2020 programme. Similarly, to other systems, it is an EU level central tool, which Member States could not have built alone in an interoperable way across the Customs Union. Customs Decision System (CDS): harmonises the processes for application and management of customs decisions across the EU The centrally developed CDS brings EU added value compared to what Member Sates acting alone could achieve, as it allows economic operators to apply for and manage their customs decisions through a single EU interface and enables national customs authorities to consult each other on the granting and management of authorisations that are valid in more than one Member States. It provides system-to-system access for import, export and transit systems to authorisation data, allowing to automatically check their existence and validity. Customs Risk Management System (CRMS) and Import Control System 2 (ICS2) The CRMS and ICS2 facilitate the exchange of information for risk management purposes. The added value lays at their potential to generate a concerted and coordinated EU-wide approach to risk management that would otherwise not be achieved by a single Member State acting independently. SURV3: collects information provided in the customs declarations and stores it in a central database. According to the survey results, the most relevant benefit and added value of SURV3 is the improvement of existing data mining capabilities at EU level. It centralises in one place the relevant information related to imports and exports in the EU, supporting the identification of fraud trends and patterns, providing insights on trade flows to better understand relations between the EU and other trading blocks, collecting statistics on specific goods requested by other DGs, etc. In the context of joint actions, the programme has regrouped the expertise of participating countries, providing the opportunity for Member States to access a wider pool of knowledge and experts than if they had acted at individual level, particularly smaller Member States. The project group on enhancing the uniform tariff classification throughout EU and improving the functioning of the BTI system was highlighted as a successful example in this regard. Increased cooperation and communication provided Member States with valuable insights into the functioning of the other Member States’ customs and introduced a forum for the exchange of best practices and solutions for a more efficient and effective Customs Union. This added value was highlighted by all interviewees. This was particularly relevant for certain topics or activities which might not have had received the same level of attention at a national level. For instance, the Canine Unit Network (CUN) enabled Member States with a small number of customs dogs and/or limited experience in the field of customs dogs to participate and learn from other Member States’ experiences.

Joint actions have also ensured the uniform application of EU legislation in all Member States, such as the rules of origin, and classification of goods. The Customs Project Group on the classification of products in the HS/CN nomenclature serves as a good example. It enabled the sharing of information and knowledge between the Member States and the Commission, leading to a uniform application of common provisions, which would have been more difficult to achieve without the programme’s activities. Human capacity building activities have in its turn contributed to a better understanding of EU customs legislation and related EIS and therefore to enhance uniformity, ultimately improving effectiveness and efficiency of customs throughout the EU. ELearning modules accessed by a wide range of customs officials and economic operators have been critical for this. These are benefits that would not have been possible to achieve by national administrations acting on their own. Building on the previous analysis, the evaluation looked at the consequences of discontinuing the programme. Consulted stakeholders found it difficult to imagine alternative ways of operating and cooperating, in particular with regard to the management of the customs EIS and the central role that they play in the Customs Union. In their view, these are the main potential impacts of discontinuing the programme’s support: ·The discontinuation of the programme would require Member States to replace customs EIS systems that are managed by DG TAXUD through the programme. It would entail stopping the operation of the common IT infrastructure and components, which are the backbone of customs procedures, therefore causing a major disruption of EU international trade. Moreover, it will increase the cost and burden on Member States and reduce the effectiveness of having central harmonised IT systems. ·The cooperation element of the Customs programme’s joint actions is critical in enhancing the uniform application and implementation of customs legislation, processes and procedures. The discontinuity of the programme and therefore, of its joint actions would considerably affect this harmonisation, eventually resulting in an uneven playing field for economic operators and distortion of competition in the internal market. ·More generally, the absence of co-funding mechanisms as currently provided through the Customs 2020 programme would increase the burden and cost on Member States, reducing economies of scale and resulting in a less efficient Customs Union. 4.3. Is the intervention still relevant? As indicated previously, the Customs Union is an area of exclusive Union competence where the Union shares the responsibility for its implementation with the Member States. The direct needs to make the Customs Union work seamlessly are therefore predominantly on the side of customs administrations, which operate in conditions of increased necessity to exchange information, cooperate and build their administrative capacity. Secondary target audiences whose needs should be considered are also economic operators. The relevance of the Customs programme was confirmed by the mid-term evaluation, which concluded that the programme’s specific and operational objectives were relevant to the needs of stakeholder and that ambitious policies would not have been possible without the programme. The final evaluation has therefore focused on continued relevance in light of the developments that happened since the mid-term review, in particular Brexit and the COVID-19 pandemic. This asssessment is particularly important as needs may have evolved and new needs may have emerged due to these events. Moreover, the evaluation examined whether the programme is aligned with the problems and actions identified in the 2020 Customs Action Plan “Taking the Customs Union to the next level” which proposes a revised Customs Union strategy. During the final evaluation of the programme, all different groups of stakeholders consulted agreed that the programme continues to be both relevant and necessary and that stakeholders’ needs have remained largely unchanged since the mid-term evaluation. The Impact Assessment for the post-2020 customs programme, also confirmed these needs. Adding to this, the 2020 Customs Action Plan proposed a set of actions that link to the specific and operational objectives of the programme, therefore corroborating their continued relevance. The proposed actions, which align well to the objectives of the programme, were in the areas of risk management, management of e-commerce, promotion of compliance, and operational cooperation between customs authorities . There was overall consensus among stakeholders, and especially among customs authorities, that the programme was relevant to addressing the needs related to the problems mentioned above. The continued relevance of the programme was particularly highlighted in relation to the need to harmonise the application and effective implementation of the Customs Union rules. Customs authorities, but also economic operators, considered that Member States were increasingly “on the same page” and that this was due to a large extent to the programme’s activities. Networking and exchange of ideas were seen as important aspects of all programme activities, as well as the customs EIS which enable the exchange of information required by EU law, and ultimately its practical implementation. In particular, according to customs authorities, the guidance documents produced in project groups, which clarify different aspects of the legislation and illustrate them with concrete examples, have played a major role in addressing the need to harmonise the application of customs rules by Member States. Customs authorities also considered that the formulation and definition of common standards has been critical to align the different approaches that Member States have applied to date. Moreover, customs authorities confirmed the continued need for the programme to support Member States in the digitalisation and modernisation of customs procedures such as updating customs IT systems and adapting them to new requirements, for which they need the support of the programme. Indeed, digitalisation is an ongoing process and therefore the programme’s focus on IT systems is still very much relevant and necessary. On the side of economic operators, customs rules and procedures are mainly associated with ad