No C 225/54 Official Journal of the European Communities 10. 9. 90 
4. Conclusions 
4.1. The proposals to merely fix minimum rates and 
recommend target rates, without any obligation to 
converge, are not commensurate with the aim of harmoniz­
ation. 
4.2. All the points raised in the previous Committee 
opinion (CES 746/88) hold true for this opinion. 
4.3. Rules on customs warehouses, methods of collect­
ing taxes, transport, monitoring and prevention of fraud 
and tax evasion are extremely important. It is very difficult 
to make a detailed assessment of the proposal without 
knowing the Commission's views on these questions. 
1. Commission proposal 
1.1. The Commission's August 1987 proposal on 
mineral oils is also being made more flexible. 
1.2. By analogy with its proposals for other products on 
which excise duty is levied, the Commission is proposing to 
lay down only a minimum rate, to be applied from 1 
January 1993 onwards, for petrol (leaded and unleaded), 
LPG, methane and kerosene used as engine fuel. 
1.3. On the other hand, bands of rates (with maxima 
and minima) are proposed for diesel, heating gas oil and 
heavy fuel oil. 
1.4. The reason given by the Commission for this 
different treatment is that it is necessary to distinguish 
between products which are essentially destined for final 
private consumption and those whose consumption is 
mainly commercial. 4.4. The explanatory memorandum is inadequate, 
particularly as it fails to consider the implications fo 
Member State budgets, consumption and inflation. 
Done at Brussels, 5 July 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
1.5. The proposed minimum rates are as follows: 
— Leaded petrol: ECU 337 per 1 000 litres 
— Unleaded petrol: ECU 287 per 1 000 litres 
— LPG and methane: ECU 84,5 per 1 000 litres 
— Kerosene (propellant): ECU 337 per 1 000 litres. 
1.6. The proposed bands of rates are as follows: 
— Diesel: ECU 195 to 205 per 1 000 litres 
— Heating gas oil: ECU 47 to 53 per 1 000 litres 
— Heavy fuel oil: ECU 16 to 18 per 1 000 kg 
— Kerosene used as fuel for other purposes: ECU 47 to 53 
per 1 000 litres. 
1.7. The Commission is deferring its proposal on the 
benchmark values on which all rates will have to be 
aligned. 
2. Comments Opinion on the amended proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of the rates of 
excise duty on mineral oils 0) 
(90/C 225/19) 
On 22 January 1990, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the abovementioned 
proposal. 
The Section for Economic, Financial and Monetary Questions, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 21 June 1990. The 
rapporteur was Mr Delia Croce. 
At its 278th plenary session (meeting of 5 July 1990) the Economic and Social Committee adopted 
the following opinion by a large majority, with seven votes against and two abstentions. 
(!) OJ No C 16, 23. 1. 1990, p. 10. 2.1. The comments on the previous proposal made in 
Committee opinion CES 745/88 (rapporteur: Mr Broicher) 
10. 9. 90 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 225/55 
still apply almost in full. Explicit reference will be made to 
these comments in the conclusions below. 
2.2. The harmonization of the excise duties on mineral 
oils must take account of not only the effects on national 
budgets, the need to abolish frontier checks and the impact 
on competition but also the great importance of assisting 
the establishment of a Community energy policy, and the 
protection of the environment. 
2.3. Accordingly, the fiscal policy to be adopted towards 
these products should be influenced by energy policy with 
its economic and ecological components. 
When laying down the excise duties, account should also be 
taken of other taxes and duties which in some cases have a 
direct or indirect effect on mineral oils. The uses to which 
the products are to be put should also be taken into 
consideration. For heating, distinctions should be made on 
the basis of the differences in mean temperatures. 
At the same time as harmonizing the excise duties on 
mineral oils, the Commission should undertake to submit 
detailed proposals without delay on the taxation of all 
energy sources and their uses, thereby prompting a general 
debate on this major issue. 
2.4. The Commission makes a few general remarks on 
the matter, but otherwise does not seem to take account of 
this priority demand. Its proposal is based on the 
calculation of arithmetic means. 
The Commission has thus missed a chance to intervene in 
an important area and to gear fiscal harmonization to 
solving major energy consumption issues. 
2.5. The Commission's decision to lay down only 
minimum rates for some products does not seem wise. 
2.6. The proposed minimum rates are very high on 
average and very close to the single rates proposed in 1987. 
The minimum rate for diesel is even well above the single 
rate proposed previously. The Committee would also stress 
the case for not levying a duty on LPG. 
2.7. The bands of rates are certainly a wiser choice 
because both countries with low and countries with high 
rates will be forced to bring their rates closer together. 
2.8. In contrast with its submissions for alcohol and 
tobacco, the Commission has merely spelt out the principle 
of benchmark values, though it has committed itself to 
submitting a proposal by 31 December 1990. Irrespective of 
whether the principle of benchmark values should be 
accepted, it must be pointed out that lack of knowledge 
about the proposal adds to the confusion. If the benchmark values are important, they should be made known 
immediately; if they are not, the whole proposal is 
weakened, to say the least. 
3. Conclusions 
3.1. The main points of the opinion on the previous 
proposal (CES 745/88, rapporteur: Mr Broicher) should be 
summarized at this point: 
— there would seem to be a case for harmonizing duties on 
mineral oils at the lowest possible level, bearing in mind 
Member States' budgetary requirements, 
— it would be advisable to abolish all excise duties on 
heavy fuel oils used purely for production purposes, 
— it is questionable whether a specific tax on heating oil is 
acceptable and whether all energy sources should not be 
treated equally, 
— tax advantages already granted by Member States for 
some economic sectors or specific uses should be 
harmonized, 
— the taxation of vehicle fuels cannot be dealt with in 
isolation. Road tax and other charges relating to the 
possession and use of vehicles must also be taken into 
consideration. 
3.2. The present Commission proposal's aim — but not 
its means — can be endorsed. 
3.3. The bands should be adopted for all products, with 
the compulsory maxima and minima being quite close to 
each other. 
3.4. Some derogations — albeit limited in time — could 
be provided for countries which run into serious difficulties 
because of their budgets or differences in the systems. 
3.5. The rates should be as low as possible, while 
making due allowance for general and ecological require­
ments. The inflationary effect of price variations is a point 
to be borne in mind, too. 
Done at Brussels, 5 July 1990. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
No C 225/56 Official Journal of the European Communities 10. 9. 90 
APPENDIX 
The following amendment was rejected during the debate, but received at least 25 % of the votes cast. 
Page 3, add a new paragraph 
'2.9. In order to prevent serious disturbances in trade in mineral oils, especially in frontier regions, private 
individuals should not be allowed — even for their personal use — to transport them across frontiers in 
trailers or commercial vehicles (which could easily be hired even with a driver). 
Authorization should be confined to the content of vehicles' tanks, with spot checks being carried out within 
frontiers to detect infringements.' 
Voting 
For: 20; against: 24; abstentions: 21. 
Opinion on 
— the amended proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of taxes on cigarettes 
— the amended proposal for a Council Directive on the approximation of taxes on manufactured 
tobacco other than cigarettes (*) 
(90/C 225/20) 
On 22 January 1990 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under 
Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, on the abovementioned 
proposals. 
The Section for Economic, Financial and Monetary Questions, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 21 June 1990. The 
rapporteur was Mr Delia Croce. 
At its 278th plenary session (meeting of 5 July 1990), the Economic and Social Committee adopted 
the following opinion by a large majority, with five dissenting votes and no abstentions. 
1. The Commission proposal 
1.1. As for other goods subject to excise duties, the 
Commission has modified its position and abandoned the 
idea of having a single rate. It now proposes that minimum 
mandatory rates should be introduced on 1 January 1993. 
The period after that date will see gradual alignment on 
benchmark values known as 'target rates'. 
1.2. The proposed rates are tabulated here: Cigarettes 
(1 000) 
Cigars and 
cigarillos 
Smoking tobacco 
Snuff Previous 
proposal 
ECU 19,5 + 
52-54 % 
retail price 
34-36 % 
54-56 % 
41-43 % Minimum on 
1 January 
1993 
ECU 15 + 
45% 
retail price 
25% 
50% 
37 % Target 
ECU 21,5 + 
54% 
retail price 
36% 
56% 
43% 
(!) OJ No C 12, 18. 1. 1990, pp. 4 and 8. 1.3. The Commission thus proposes a mixed tax (fixed 
specific duty plus ad valorem duty) for cigarettes, and an ad