Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community customs code (transit)` (98/C 73/05)

On 4 December 1997 the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, under Article 100a of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 3 December 1997. The rapporteur was Mr Giesecke.

At its 350th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 1997) the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 106 votes to two with two abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.1. The EC Customs Code, which entered into force on 1st january 1994, establishes the framework for Community customs legislation. Requirements have changed considerably since the Code's entry into force, thereby making amendments necessary.

1.2. Both economic operators and customs administrations consider that the provisions should be made simpler and clearer.

2. Commission proposal

2.1. The proposal for amending Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community customs code makes adjustments to the transit procedure. These adjustments are mainly the consequence of the action plan for transit in Europe ().

2.2. The main aim of the external transit procedure is to make it easier to transport non-Community goods within the Community customs territory. The use of this procedure for Community goods is to remain an exception. Article 91(1)(b) is to be adjusted to meet these requirements.

2.3. The concept of discharge of a transit procedure is to be defined by amending Article 92.

2.4. With regard to the provision of guarantees, shipments by sea are to be treated on a par with shipments by road. The general waiver regarding guarantees is to be abolished by amending Article 94(2).

2.5. Article 95 is to be reworded so that the criteria for waiving guarantees are included in the Customs Code implementing provisions.

2.6. Article 96(2) is to be deleted, since the incurrence of a customs debt as a result of removing goods from customs supervision is regulated elsewhere (Article 203).

2.7. Since there is no scope any more for national transit regulations, the deletion of Article 97(2) will ensure greater transparency and a more uniform application by the Member States.

2.8. The amendment to Article 192 makes allowance for the special requirements with regard to the provision of a security under the international transit procedure.

2.9. The amendment to Article 215 is designed to make it possible to determine exactly who is responsible for the incurrence of a customs debt.

3. General comments

3.1. The Commission proposal intends to eliminate a number of shortcomings in the present Customs Code which came to light recently when checks were made on the operation of the transit procedures.

3.2. The proposed transfer of procedural provisions from the body of law laid down by the Council (Customs Code) to the Commission's sphere of responsibility (Customs Code implementing provisions) has both advantages and disadvantages.

3.3. The swifter and more flexible adaptation of provisions to the needs of economic operators and customs administrations might be beneficial.

3.4. However, frequent changes could be seen as a disadvantage vis-à-vis the stability offered by the Code in the past.

3.5. From the Committee's point of view, the transfer of responsibility for procedural provisions to the Commission could be welcomed if individual decisions are taken properly using the 'comitology` procedure, i.e. after consulting economic operators and customs administrations.

4. Specific comments

4.1. Amendment to Article 91(1)

4.1.1. Presumably, hardly anything is to change in practice. The field of application must, however, be laid down in the Customs Code implementing provisions.

4.1.2. The fact that non-Community goods are what they are, which plays a role especially in the cases of goods subject to a market regime, can only be proven under the transit procedure. The T5 documents used under market regime legislation do not provide an adequate check.

4.2. Amendment to Article 92

4.2.1. The proposed new wording fills a gap in the present definition and is therefore welcomed.

4.3. Amendment to Article 94

4.3.1. The reform of transit by sea is considered by the Commission to be necessary on the basis of the findings of a task force over a period of 21/2 years. Guarantees are now to be required, too, for transit procedures by sea. However, a distinction is to be made between scheduled services (regular services only between ports within the Community customs territory) and non-scheduled services.

4.3.2. In the case of scheduled shipping services - which represent, as it were, an extended bridge - the goods transported are to be assumed to be Community goods just as they are in road transport. Since transit procedures are necessary only in the case of non-Community goods, the proposed amendment to Article 94 will not hamper intra-Community trade in the Committee's view.

4.3.3. The goods carried by non-scheduled services are to be assumed - as in the past - to be non-Community goods (third country status).

4.4. Amendment to Article 95

4.4.1. The proposed amendment to Article 95 is in line with point 4.6.2 of the Committee opinion () on the Commission Communication concerning an action plan for transit in Europe. It is to be welcomed in principle. The criteria for the modular guarantee are to be specified in the Customs Code implementing provisions.

4.5. Amendment to Article 96

4.5.1. The deletion of Article 96(2) has no effect legally, since the incurrence of a customs debt through the removal from customs supervision is regulated in Article 203 of the Customs Code. Non-punishment in the event of deadlines being slightly exceeded must still be ensured. The amendment is welcomed.

4.6. Amendment to Article 97

4.6.1. The deletion of Article 97(2) poses no problems, since there is no scope any more for national transit procedures. The flexibility which Member States also require is guaranteed by the Customs Code (Article 91).

4.7. Amendment to Article 192

4.7.1. The Committee endorses the proposed amendment.

4.8. Amendment to Article 215

4.8.1. The rewording seems advisable because of the differing turnover and consumption taxes in the Member States.

Brussels, 10 December 1997.

The President of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

() COM(97) 188 final.

() OJ C 355, 21.11.1997.