COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 04.11.1996 
COM(96) 543 final 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL 
AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 
ON THE EXECUTION OF THE MATTHAEUS-TAX PROGRAMME FROM 
1 JANUARY 1995 TO 31 DECEMBER 1995 
(ARTICLE 11 OF THE COUNCIL DECISION OF 29 OCTOBER 1993) 

INTRODUCTION 
1. The Matthaeus-Tax programme is a small but important cog in the Internal Market 
machine. Since July 1993, it has proved to be a vital tool in fostering the mutual assistance 
and administrative cooperation between national indirect tax administrations, without 
which the Internal Market in the indirect tax area would not work. 
BACKGROUND 
2. The achievement of the Single Market in the indirect taxation area from 1 January 1993 
was based on the establishment of the Value Added Tax (VAT) transitional regime1, the 
harmonised Excise regime2, and the regulation on VAT administrative cooperation3. To 
ensure that the removal of frontier controls which the Single Market entailed did not 
encourage fraud, evasion and distortions of competition, it was necessary to foster a deep 
and enduring cooperation between national indirect tax administrations at all levels. 
Mutual understanding, which leads to mutual confidence, is central to this better 
cooperation. There was therefore a need to deepen the understanding of national indirect 
tax officials, both of the Community dimension of their work and of the organisation and 
procedures of other Member States. 
3. To this end, the Commission proposed a pilot project for the organisation of seminars 
and the exchange of indirect taxation officials4, which took place from 1991 to early 1993. 
The experience of this pilot programme and the similar Matthaeus programme in the 
Customs area led the Commission to propose an action programme for the training of 
indirect tax officials. This "Matthaeus-Tax" programme was adopted by the Council on 29 
October 1993-\ 
4. The objectives of the programme, set out in Article 3 of the decision, were, in 
summary. 
to prepare national officials for the implications of the Internal Market and 
administrative cooperation; 
to make national officials aware of the Community dimension of their work 
and to build mutual confidence between administrations; 
to provide supplementary training for national officials; 
to spread understanding of the indirect tax administrations of the 
Community, thereby improving the management of the Internal Market; 
to stimulate cooperation at all levels of national administrations. 
1 Council Directive 91/680/CEE of 16.12.1991. OJ n° L376 of 31.12.91 
2 Council Directive 92/12/CEE of 25.2.1992. OJ n° L76 of 23.2.1992 
3 Council Regulation 218/92/CEE of 27.1.1992. OJ n° L24 of 1.2.1992 
4 Interfisc programme COM (89) 422 
5 Council Decision of 29.10.1993. OJ n° L280 of 13.11.1993 
3 
5. These objectives were to be achieved through four means: exchanges of officials; 
training seminars; coordinated vocational training programmes; and language training for 
officials likely to participate in exchanges. 
6. These activities began on 1 July 1993. The Commission report to Council and 
Parliament COM (95) 663 covered the programme from 1 July 1993 to 31 December 
1994. 
MATTHAEUS-TAX ACTIVITIES IN 1995 
7. The most important innovation in 1995 was the integration of the three new Member 
States fully into the programme. The details of this are set out below under each activity. 
Exchanges 
Objectives 
8. The main objective of the exchanges is to provide to indirect tax officials a better 
mutual understanding of the organisation, methods and procedures applied in different 
Member States. This understanding should be on both a practical and a theoretical level. 
This encourages better cooperation and the dissemination of best practice. 
Organisation 
9. For 1993 and 1994, the Commission and the Member States agreed, for each Member 
State, both the officials to be sent and the officials to be received. For 1995, the 
Commission and the Member States decided that only half of all the exchanges would be 
pre-arranged in this way. The remaining exchanges were allocated between the Member 
States on a pro-rata basis but the choice of host destination was left open to the Member 
State to agree bilaterally. This added flexibility, reported in the 1993-94 Annual report, 
has permitted the Member States to focus their use of the exchange programme more 
accurately on their priorities. 
10. To ensure that the exchanges better met the needs of the officials participating, the 
Commission and the Member States agreed on changes to the preparation and evaluation 
forms for the exchanges to ensure that the objectives of the official were better 
understood in advance and that performance against these objectives was better 
monitored. 
Activities 
11. 116 exchanges took place in 1995 (95 in 1994, 88 in 1993). Most significantly, the 
three new Member States were smoothly integrated into the exchange programme. The 
total of 20 officials from the new Member States account for nearly all the increase in the 
size of the exchange programme from 1994. More details on the officials exchanged are 
set out in Annex A to this report. 
Evaluation 
12. The exchanges are monitored throughout the year by the Commission and the 
Member States. In addition the evaluation forms completed by the officials provide 
feedback in terms of statistics and comments on their experiences. This feedback has 
already been integrated into the 1996 programme. Details are set out in Annex A. 
13. The general message from the participants is that the exchanges have improved mutual 
understanding. They are now better focused towards the objectives of participants and the 
experience gained has a greater usefulness and applicability at home. The likelihood of 
administrative changes at home resulting from the exchanges has also grown. The written 
comments supplied by the officials give some real examples and suggest improvements. 
The officials want the exchanges to be better prepared in advance, by the host and their 
own administration. They want more practical experience and programmes more targeted 
to their area of expertise. 
Future developments 
14. The Commission and the Member States have made a number of significant 
amendments to the organisation of the exchange programme to meet the criticisms 
expressed by officials. From 1996, the system of "grouped" exchanges of officials (two 
weeks of a general introduction to the host administration) will become less common. 
This system had benefits in administrative terms and in fostering contacts between officials 
from several Member States. However it did not permit the subject matter of the 
exchanges to be sufficiently targeted to the needs of the official nor to be sufficiently 
practical. 
15. From 1996, officials will tend to take part in "single" or "targeted" exchanges. The 
former will permit the official to work with a suitable opposite number during the 
exchange. The latter will permit the official to study a particular subject of interest in the 
host administration. The objectives of the official will be more clearly communicated than 
in the past and the host administration will create a more individual programme to meet 
the needs of the official. A new evaluation form will also be proposed by the Commission 
to assess the views of the managers of the participants six months after the exchange. 
16. From 1996, the Member States will be permitted to choose the host Member State of 
all of their officials, within certain conditions (to maintain an even geographical spread). 
This will better enable the Member States to select candidates and host Member States 
according to their priorities and personnel, thereby maximising the benefit of the 
programme. A future priority will be to address the need to set Community priorities, to 
ensure a certain level of exchanges in areas of indirect tax administration where there is a 
Community priority. This will happen in 1996 on a pilot basis in the Excise area. 
17. From 1996 the size of the exchange programme will be increased, largely due to the 
better use of resources set out under the section on management below. Even so, the 
Commission believes that the volume of the exchange programme should continue to 
grow. The officials who currently participate in exchanges are a tiny proportion of the 
officials in the Member States with a Community aspect to their work. As this aspect 
continues to grow, the demand for a better understanding of other Member States will 
increase. At present, the Member States have numbers of applicants for exchanges which 
far outstrip the resources available. 
Seminars 
Objective 
18. The objective of the seminar programme is to provide the best forum for the 
structured exchange of ideas between officials from national administrations. The seminars 
provide the opportunity for: the dissemination of best practice among Member States; the 
analysis of common problems and solutions; the training of officials in the Community 
dimension of their work; and the enhancement of administrative cooperation. The 
seminars may also lead to suggestions for the improvement of the Community legal 
instruments in force. 
Organisation 
19. The subjects, dates and host administration for each seminar are set by the 
Commission and the Member States. Seminars are attended by two or more 
representatives of each Member State, some of whom will also make presentations. The 
Commission and the host administration also participate, especially with the aim of 
encouraging the participation of all representatives and drawing conclusions. Finally all 
participants report to their administrations and complete evaluation forms. In due course 
the Commission circulates records of the seminar, together with the working papers, to 
follow-up the results and permit the wider dissemination of the work of the seminar. Six 
months later, each seminar is evaluated by the Member States for its longer term impact. 
Activities 
20. In 1995 ten seminars took place. Amongst these were one seminar each solely for the 
benefit of officials from the three new Member States. The new Member States also 
participated fully in the other seminars. Two more were postponed to early 1996 but are 
covered in this report, as they were funded from the 1995 budget. In addition one seminar 
held jointly with the Matthaeus (Customs) programme took place in 1995. This compares 
to six seminars in the half year of 1993 and 8 in 1994. More details of these seminars are 
set out in Annex B. In total about 350 officials attended the seminars open to all the 
Member States. In addition about 300 officials in total attended the seminars organised for 
the new Member States. 
Evaluation 
21. In general, according to the participants, the seminars have maintained the high 
standards set in 1993-94. The questionnaires completed by participants show that one 
innovation in 1995 has been a particular success. There was a danger that the seminars 
were becoming too passive. Accordingly for 8 of the seminars, a large proportion of the 
time was devoted to "workshops". Following an introduction to the subject from one 
speaker, the seminar sub-divides into three groups, along linguistic lines, to debate the key 
questions. This formula has proved to be more effective in maximising the participation of 
all the delegates. More detail on the evaluation of the seminars is set out in Annex B. 
22. On a policy level, the seminars have proved to be for the Member States and the 
Commission an invaluable forum for sharing approaches to common problems. Mutual 
understanding of the control systems in the Member States has been considerably 
advanced. This mutual understanding has contributed to improved confidence between the 
Member States. On a personal level, the seminars have permitted contacts to be made 
between experts in a wide variety of fields. Frequently the participants have never been to 
a Community meeting before. The benefit of the seminar is maximised by the reports 
produced by the Commission and by the participants themselves. The success of the 
seminars is also demonstrated by the ways in which they have been followed up. Member 
States have arranged further bilateral visits to study systems or procedures. Active cases 
have been pursued bilaterally. On a Community level, seminars have led to several policy 
discussions and proposals. The Commission has also found the seminars invaluable for 
deepening its understanding of the national administrations and for pursuing common 
problems in greater depth with the Member States. 
23. The seminars organised solely for the benefit of the officials from the new Member 
States have played an important part in the successful introduction of the indirect tax 
Internal Market in those Member States. In each case, a significant proportion of all the 
officials of these Member States heard from and questioned Commission and "old" 
Member State experts about the operation of the Internal Market. 
Future developments 
24. 1995 has seen a considerable development in the sophistication of the seminars. This 
has required greater efforts on the part of the Commission, the host Member States and 
the participants. In the future, the Commission will emphasise even greater effort in the 
preparation, execution and follow-up of the seminars. In contrast to the exchange 
programme, the number of seminars should be roughly maintained and the focus of the 
efforts of the Commission and the Member States should be on improving the quality of 
the seminars. This reflects the limits on the Commission's resources (interpretation and 
administration). 
25. The Commission believes that in future the subject areas for seminars should be more 
closely co-ordinated with the areas covered by the exchange programme. The 
Commission will, from 1997, propose an annual plan for the programme to identify the 
key policy areas for the Community, both for exchanges and for the seminars. To an 
extent, the focus since the beginning of the programme on administrative cooperation and 
the control regimes of the Member States have guided these choices. In the future, these 
links should be more explicit. 
Common training programme 
Objective 
26. The Commission adopted a decision6, following consultation with the Member States, 
setting out a common programme of vocational training as required by Article 4 (c) of the 
Matthaeus-Tax decision. The programme sets out the subjects which should be covered 
by the initial training programmes and continuing training programmes of the Member 
States. The aim of the programme is to give Member States' indirect tax officials a basic 
level of uniform training vital to a sound understanding of their duties and to the 
performance of their work. 
Activities 
27. The decision only came into force on 1 June 1995 and therefore it has not been fully 
implemented. However, most Member States had already made a considerable effort to 
implement the common training programme in 1996. Details of this implementation are set 
out in Annex C. 
Evaluation 
28. Of course, the effect of the common training programme has not been to change 
completely the training of indirect tax officials. Important elements of the programme, 
notably training in Community law in indirect taxation (the principles and application of 
Community VAT and Excise law), were already the core of Member States' training of 
their own officials. The most significant effect of the common training programme has 
been to give added emphasis to some basic training in the organisation and policies of the 
Communities, the sources of Community law and the administrative cooperation and 
mutual assistance provisions of Community law. 
Future developments 
29. The common training programme adopted in 1995 is a first step. The Commission and 
the Member States will be considering what value could be added by further common 
training programmes, which would be more explicit about the basic training all officials 
should receive. Responsibility for training officials rests with the Member States, under 
the Matthaeus-Tax decision. 
Language training 
Objective 
30. The Commission's experience of the operation of the indirect tax Internal Market in 
general and the Matthaeus-Tax programme in particular, has confirmed the centrality of 
the need to break down linguistic barriers. Whilst linguistic training is vital for all aspects 
of the operation of the Internal Market, the exchange, and to a lesser extent, the seminar 
part of the Matthaeus-Tax programme are particularly dependent on a reasonable standard 
of linguistic ability of participants. 
Commission Decision 95/279/EC of 12 July 1995 - OJ No L 172 of 22.7.95, p 24 
Activities 
31. The percentage of officials fluent in the language of the host Member State has fallen 
since 1993-94. As the table set out in Annex D shows, figures for the global language 
training carried out by the Member States are still rather patchy. However, the 
questionnaires completed by exchange officials show that 21 per cent of them received 
language training in advance of their exchange and most found it useful. 
Evaluation 
32. The decline in the ability of exchange officials to communicate as well as in the past on 
their exchanges is understandable. This reflects the exhaustion of an initial pool of 
exchange candidates with existing language skills. The Commission has repeatedly urged 
the Member States, who are responsible for language training, to build up a stock of 
suitably trained officials to take advantage of exchange opportunities. The fact that 21 per 
cent of the exchange officials had received language training and that they found it useful, 
is nevertheless encouraging. From a wider perspective it is encouraging to note that all the 
Member States do have policies to fund language training for their officials. This ranges 
from a policy of providing voluntary training to essential post holders in some Member 
States to setting targets in others for each tax unit. 
Future developments 
33. The Commission will encourage the Member States to think in a more long term way 
in providing suitable language training for their officials. This will enable a pool of suitably 
trained candidates to be developed. The greater freedom given to the Member States to 
choose the host administrations of their officials encourages this more long-term thinking. 
In addition the Commission, as part of its broader task to foster administrative 
cooperation will investigate the development of tax-specific linguistic aids. 
MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL ASPECTS 
Management 
34. The management structure established in 1993-94 was broadly continued. The 
programme is run by a central coordinator in each Member State (usually two where the 
Excise and VAT administrations are separate) and the Commission services. The 
Commission and the coordinators met three times in 1995 in the Matthaeus-Tax 
committee. The main business of the committee was the planning and monitoring of the 
1995 exchange and seminar programme and the elaboration of the 1996 programme. The 
committee also discussed the draft Commission decision on the common training 
programme. 
Budget 
35. For procedural reasons, Budget line B5-305I covers both the Matthaeus (Customs) 
and the Matthaeus-Tax programme. In 1995 3,500,000 ecu was allocated to this budget 
line and of this the Commission allocated 712,000 ecu to the Matthaeus-Tax programme. 
100 per cent of these funds were committed on behalf of the Matthaeus-Tax programme. 
Financial Management 
36. As for 1993-94, the Member States received the bulk of funds for the exchanges and 
seminars at the beginning of the year and are responsible for their management. At the end 
of the year the Member States provide the Commission with a recapitulative statement of 
their costs with the necessary justification. 
Future developments 
37. From 1996, the management of the programme has been put on a sounder basis as the 
experience of the first three years has been consolidated. The Commission and the 
Member States have agreed a manual of procedures covering all the practical aspects of 
the exchange and seminar programmes. The manual is largely an aide-memoire for the 
Matthaeus-Tax coordinators but also provides comprehensive guidance and advice for all 
the actors in the programme: potential exchange officials, actual exchange officials, their 
line managers, host officials, organisers of seminars and chairmen of seminars. This 
codification of existing best practice has already considerably helped the execution of the 
programme and improved quality. 
38. For 1996 the Commission and the Member States have also agreed on a more flexible 
management of the resources of the programme to ensure their maximum use. In line with 
the increasing flexibility given to the Member States in choosing the host Member State 
for their exchanges (set out above), exchange resources in 1996 have been allocated in 
terms of ecu, rather than a number of exchanges. Member States are encouraged to use 
these funds to arrange as many exchanges as possible and at least a required minimum. 
This avoids the problem that the cost per exchange can vary considerably. This change in 
the financial management has already led to a few more exchanges being funded by the 
programme than would otherwise have been possible. 
39. The financial control procedures have also been reorganised. The Member States are 
more fully responsible for the use of the funds. However detailed financial returns, on 
computerised forms provided by the Commission, have to be provided twice a year. The 
first form, provided at the half year, contains estimates for the full year expenditure, as 
well as actual expenditure to date. The second form contains the final breakdown of all 
expenditure. Member States are required to keep available for inspection all necessary 
justification for expenditure for five years. 
40. This procedure enables any underspends to be identified in time for valuable exchange 
resources to be allocated to those Member States better able to utilise them. It also amply 
fulfils the Commission's financial management responsibilities. 
10 
41. To improve the monitoring and evaluation of the programme as a whole the 
Commission and the Member States have agreed on a set of objectives and targets for 
each part of the programme. These are operational objectives, derived from the higher 
objectives of the programme, but which are linked to the responses given in questionnaires 
following exchanges and seminars. They represent a commitment to try to attain a certain 
level of quality in the delivery of the programme, according to its main customers, the 
officials who participate. The Commission will also be able to compare the relative 
performance of the Member States. The Commission will continue to work with the 
Member States to create further methods of evaluation, in particular to better quantify the 
success of the programme in meeting the objectives of the Member States and the 
Community. 
42. Finally, 1996 will see a major new development in the programme in that officials 
from the associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe, Malta and Cyprus will 
participate in the exchange and seminar programmes on a pilot basis. This fulfils the 
commitment of the Commission to pursue preparations for extending the Community 
programme to these countries as stipulated in the White Paper on preparation of the 
associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe for integration into the Internal 
Market of the Union and the Common Resolutions on the establishment of a structured 
dialogue between the European Union and Malta and Cyprus respectively. 
43. The impact of all these developments will be reported in detail in the next annual 
report. 
CONCLUSION 
44. 1995 has been an effective year of consolidation for the Matthaeus-Tax programme, 
building on the experience of the first two years. The seminar and exchange programmes 
have delivered real benefits to the officials who have participated. The benefits of the 
programme have not stopped there: lessons learned have been disseminated throughout 
national administrations to the benefit of the Member States and the Community as a 
whole. The integration of the three new Member States and the development and 
implementation of a common training programme have also been accomplished smoothly. 
The proof of these achievements is in what the Member States and the participants say. 
Objective evidence is harder to quantify. Nevertheless, the use of the Community 
instruments of administrative cooperation (the provision of information in control and 
recovery) has shown a marked growth in recent years. In some part, the Commission 
believes that the Matthaeus-Tax programme has contributed to this greater use and its 
greater effectiveness. 
45. The programme has also represented value for money. Use of the relatively small 
amount of money available for the programme has been maximised in several ways. 
Through the use of follow up reports of seminars and of exchanges the benefit of the 
original travel and subsistence costs of the participants has been multiplied throughout the 
national administrations. The programme has led to real changes in national 
administrations. 
46. 1995 has also been the year of looking ahead. Several new initiatives have been 
devised which will bear fruit in 1996. The aim of these initiatives has been twofold: to 
tailor the programme more closely to the needs of the officials who participate, their 
administrations and the Internal Market; and to make the greatest possible use of the 
limited resources available through careful expenditure and through multiplying the effect 
11 
of the expenditure. 1996 will also see the programme dealing with the challenge of the 
participation of non-EU countries. 
47. The legal base for the programme expires in June 1997. The Commission is fully 
convinced that the programme should be renewed and accordingly will present proposals 
in the second half of 1996. They will build on the achievements of the programme to date 
and the new initiatives which will be implemented in 1996. 
48. The new programme will also be a key part of the first phase of the implementation of 
the common VAT system for the single market. An intense cooperation between 
individuals will be essential to the successful functioning of the new system. This 
cooperation needs to be ingrained as a working habit of the administrations. Clearly this 
needs to be done before the entry into force of the new system, as this part of the new 
system will be built on the spirit of cooperation developed under the current system. It is 
not therefore a question of a new departure but rather an intensification of the current 
aims. The broad methods of encouraging this cooperation developed by the Matthaeus-
Tax programme (structured contact between individuals at seminar or exchanges; 
common training programmes and language training programme) will be the basis of the 
new programme. Finally, the benefits of such a renewed programme would also accrue 
directly to the operation of the existing VAT and Excise tax systems, before the 
introduction of a new VAT system. 
12 
Annex A: Exchanges 
Table I shows the distribution of exchanges between the Member States in 1995, 
aggregating those agreed in advance and those decided upon by the Member States 
themselves. Table 2 aggregates the figures for 1993 and 1994 with those for 1995, 
reflecting the picture since the programme began. It is expected that the completion of the 
1996 exchange programme will mean that an official from nearly all of the Member States 
will have visited every other Member State. 
The breakdown of the officials who participated follows the pattern in 1993-94, with 
some changes. 30 per cent of the participants were women (up from 23 per cent) (table 
3). The average age of participants remained about 40 (table 4). VAT continued to 
account for about 80 percent of the exchanges, Excise duties the balance (table 5). The 
breakdown between officials of different management levels remained broadly unchanged, 
with a reasonable balance maintained (table 6). The new evaluation forms for 1995 give a 
greater insight into the work areas of the participants (table 7). The bulk of participants 
were tax controllers or auditors, which is to be expected and is welcome. The next highest 
group is from central administration. At around 20 per cent of participants, this is about 
the optimum balance between central offices and the field. There seems to be a good mix 
of reasons why candidates were chosen (table 8). 
Evaluation 
Tables 9-18 aggregate the results of participants' answers to the given questions. The 
results are overwhelmingly positive, with some signs that the efforts to improve the 
programme have had an effect. The percentage who feel that the programme should be 
continued as it is (rather than with changes) has risen dramatically from 26 per cent to 58 
percent (table 18). This is supported by the key results: the success in meeting objectives 
(table 10); the relation of the exchange to work (table 11) the usefulness of the experience 
gained (table 12); and the overall value of the exchange to the administration (table 17). 
It is also positive that 99 percent would be able to apply their experience in their 
administrations in some way. Another positive improvement over 1993-94 is the increase 
from 12 to 27 per cent of participants who could foresee administrative change in their 
administration. 70 per cent of the participants in the programme found two weeks to be 
just right and only a few found it too long (table 16). 
Two areas that have already been identified for improvement in 1996 are the need to set 
objectives for the administration before the exchange (table 9). All participants in 1996 
should agree a set of objectives in advance. They should also all complete a written report 
of their exchange (table 15). 
13 
The written comments attached to the questionnaires give an insight into the concrete 
results of the exchanges. When asked to mention changes which were foreseen as 
resulting from the exchange there was a great variety of answers. For example, a Finnish 
Excise official said that a proposal for a handbook of excise duties for Finnish officials 
would be pursued. A British official said that the UK's Retail Export scheme would be 
completely rethought. A Belgian official said that improvements would be made in the 
control of mineral oil producers. A common remark was that the use of intra-Community 
transaction data (principally the VIES) would be enhanced and that information exchange 
between the Member States would be improved. 
Participants were asked only to suggest ways in which the programme could be improved. 
Nevertheless several commented favourably on the programme: "the programme is perfect 
as it is" said a Greek official. "The stay ... responded completely to my expectations of the 
programme" said a Belgian official. Most of the suggestions for improvement were calls 
for better preparation, more practical content and more targeted towards the individual 
needs of the official. Several officials also found the grouping of their exchange with 
officials from other Member States beneficial. All the innovations in the exchange 
programme for 1996 have these ends in mind. Indeed the feedback from these 
questionnaires and these lessons was relayed to the Member States before the 1996 
programme began. 
Table 1: Breakdown of exchanges in 1995 
Home 
Member 
State 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
TOTAL Number of 
officials 
sent 
8 
7 
11 
9 
8 
8 
5 
11 
3 
7 
7 
8 
6 
7 
11 
116 Host Member State 
B DK D EL E F 
N 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
2 
1 
0 
0 
7 1 
0 
1 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
1 
7 1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
2 
1 
0 
3 
0 
2 
1 
1 
12 0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
4 0 
1 
2 
1 
1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
7 1 
1 
0 
1 
1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
1 
8 IRL I L NL A P FIN S UK 
umber of officials received 
1 
1 
1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
1 
0 
7 0 
1 
2 
3 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
10 0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3 1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
1 
1 
11 1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
6 1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
2 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
6 1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
2 
0 
0 
0 
1 
7 0 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
2 
10 0 
1 
0 
1 
2 
1 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
2 
1 
1 
11 
14 
Table 2: Breakdown of exchanges 1993-95 
Home 
Member 
State 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
TOTAL Number of 
officials 
sent 
24 
21 
29 
23 
24 
26 
18 
31 
11 
21 
7 
18 
6 
7 
33 
299 Host Member State 
B DK D EL E F IRL I L NL A P FIN S UK 
Number of officials received 
1 
-> 
1 
2 
4 
1 
2 
2 
2 
0 
3 
1 
0 
3 
25 2 
2 
1 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
1 
20 1 
2 
3 
2 
3 
4 
2 
2 
3 
0 
2 
1 
3 
31 1 
1 
2 
2 
2 
2 
3 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
2 
17 2 
2 
2 
2 
3 
1 
2 
0 
1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
3 
19 ** 
3 
2 
3 
3 
1 
4 
0 
2 
1 
3 
0 
0 
5 
30 2 
2 
4 
0 
1 
2 
2 
1 
1 
1 
2 
0 
1 
1 
20 1 
2 
4 
5 
2 
2 
2 
0 
3 
0 
2 
0 
0 
3 
26 0 
1 
1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
7 2 
3 
2 
3 
3 
2 
2 
»> J 
1 
0 
2 
1 
1 
4 
29 1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
1 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
6 2 
0 
1 
1 
0 
2 
1 
5 
1 
2 
0 
0 
0 
3 
18 1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
2 
0 
0 
0 
1 
7 0 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
1 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 
0 
2 
10 4 
4 
3 
*> 
j 
5 
2 
1 
9 
7 
7 
0 
4 
1 
1 
34 
15 
Tables 3-18: Profile and evaluation of exchange participants 
NB: Indicators marked with an * do not have comparable figures for 1993-94. 
Table 3: Gender 
1995 I 1993-94 
Male 70% 77% 
Female | 30% 1 23% 
Table 4: Average Age 
1995 I 1993-94 
41 I 39 
Table 5: Work Area 
I 1995 I 1993-94 
VAT 79% 80% 
Excise 18% 20% 
Both 1 3% 1 0% 
Table 6: Grade Code 
I 1995 I 1993-94 
Officials with directing responsibilities 23% 24% 
Officials having management and controlling 48% 40% 
responsibilities, possibly with some operational 
duties 
Officials having only operational responsibilities but 30% 36% 
who may take decisions on the ground 
Table 7: Work in own administration and work undertaken on exchange' 
1995 I Work in own I Work 
administration undertaken on 
exchange 
Tax Audit (Tax Control) 47% 50% 
Tax Collection 5% 10% 
Central Administration 20% 23% 
Heads of Division 9% 4% 
Anti-fraud investigation 4% 1% 
Training 1% 2% 
Others'7 | 14% | 10% ~~ 
7 includes experts in legislation, administrative cooperation and relations with the public 
17 
Table 8: Why do you believe you were you selected? 
1995 1 1993-94 
volunteered 28% 26% 
technical knowledge 22% 24% 
linguistic skills [8% 25% 
function in administration 26% 23% 
other I 5% | 2% 
Table 9: Did you set specific objectives for your administration, in advance, for the 
exchange* 
Yes I 74% 
No I 26% 
Table 10: If yes, were you able to meet these objectives ?' 
Yes, 
completely 
26% Mostly 
61% Partly 
9% No, not at all 
4% 
Table 11: How closely was the exchange related to your work ? 9* 
Very 
closely 36% 42% 18% 5% 0% not at all 
Table 12: How useful was the experience gained from the exchange ? 9* 
Very 
useful 50% 37% 12% 1% 0% not at all 
useful 
Table 13: How much of this experience were you able to apply in your own 
administration ?* 
All of it 11% 26% 47% 15% 1% none of it 
Table 14: As a result of your exchange, can you foresee any administrative changes? 
I Î995 I 1993-94 
Yes 27% 12% 
No 73% 88% 
Table 15: Did you complete a report of your visit 
I 1995 I 1993-94 
- in writing? 52% 64% 
- orally? 1_1% 10% 
- both? 37% 26% 
TOTAL | 100% 100% 
Table 16: Was the length of the exchange * 
just right 
too long 0% 7% 70% 12% 10% too short 
Table 17: Overall, how would you rate the value of the exchange for your 
administration ?* 
28% 39% 27% 6% 1% very high 
Table 18: Do you think the programme should be continued? very low 
I 1995 1993-94 
Yes, as it is 58% 26% 
Yes, with some 42% 74% 
changes 
No 0% | 0% 
19 
Annex B: Seminars 
Activities 
Bruhl (Germany) 25-27 January 1995: "VAT control: integrating Community needs into 
national controls" 
This seminar examined in detail the ways in which the Member States have integrated 
Community aspects into national control systems. The creation of the Internal Market has 
permitted the control of intra-Community trade to be integrated with that of purely 
domestic trade, giving a more coherent control of companies. The VAT Information 
Exchange System (VIES) is the significant tool for controlling this trade. The seminar 
examined and compared the different ways in which the VIES data had been integrated 
into national systems of control. 
Nevers (France) 3-4 May 1995: "The training of VAT officials" 
This seminar brought together heads of training schools and trainers from the Member 
States to compare initial and continuing training programmes. The seminar was 
instrumental in helping to develop the approach to the first common training programme. 
Bad-Hofgastein (Austria) 15-18 May 1995. Stockholm (Sweden) 4-7 September 1995, 
Helsinki (Finland) 11-14 September 1995: "Introduction to the Community for officials 
from the new Member States" 
These three seminars were a series undertaken primarily for the benefit of the new 
Member States. They consisted of two days covering Excise duties and two days covering 
VAT. Representatives from a sample of the Member States (Germany, Spain, the 
Netherlands, the United Kingdom) and the Commission explained how Community law 
had been applied in the Member States. There was a particular emphasis on national 
control regimes and the operation of mutual assistance and administrative cooperation 
between administrations. Officials from the new Member States were given a detailed 
picture of the practical and everyday implications of the Community VAT and Excise duty 
regimes. 
Elsinore (Denmark) 18-20 September 1995: "Quality in indirect tax administration" 
This seminar examined and compared the different systems in place in the Member States 
for ensuring quality in their performance. Several Member States described how, at 
various levels of their administration, management tools were being rethought to ensure 
that objectives were achieved. The seminar split into workshops to examine and compare 
the differing approaches to the problems of setting objectives, monitoring performance, 
evaluation and consequent resource allocation. Case studies of particular areas of 
administration were examined to compare approaches. 
20 
Ravenna (Italy) 18-20 October 1995: "Cooperation between Member States in the Excise 
sector" 
This seminar brought together experts in the Excise area to consider ways to improve 
cooperation between the Member States in the control of Excise duties. The seminar split 
into workshops to consider: the development of simultaneous controls on multinational 
companies operating in several Member States; the gathering and analysis of information 
to develop targeted controls; and the development of a wider and more systematic 
dialogue between the Member States. 
Estoril (Portugal) 19-20 October 1995: "Heads of Central Liaison Offices" 
This seminar brought together the heads of the Central Liaison Offices (CLO's) of the 
Member States to analyse the growth of requests for mutual assistance and the 
implications for the Member States. The seminar also analysed the information needs and 
resources available in the Member States and compared the tasks and evaluation systems 
of the CLO's. 
Crawley (United Kingdom) 23-25 October 1995: "VAT control and the textile sector") 
This seminar brought together control experts to consider the particular problems 
concerned with the control of the textile sector. The seminar considered the most 
commonly encountered methods of fraud in the textile sector and ways to combat these. 
The importance of greater cooperation between the Member States in information 
exchange and simultaneous control were highlighted. 
Elsinore (Denmark) 20-22 November 1995: "The role of an information policy in the 
Customs. VAT Excise control of companies" 
This was a joint seminar between the Matthaeus-Tax and Matthaeus programmes, 
bringing together experts in information policy. The seminar, working largely in 
workshops, sought to establish: the basic principles of an information policy; the 
integration of an information policy with control policy; and evaluation of information 
policy. 
Viterbo (Italy) 14-15 December 1995: "Sanctions applicable in the VAT area" 
This seminar brought together experts in the application of sanctions in the VAT area. 
Splitting into workshops, it compared the different approaches to sanctions in the Member 
States, concentrating on sanctions designed to ensure that traders meet their obligations 
and sanctions designed to deter tax evasion. The seminar also considered the 
repercussions of sanctions in the wider relationship with the trader. 
21 
Malmô (Sweden) 7-9 February 1996: "Computer audit for VAT control" 
The seminar brought together experts in the control of companies using computers for 
their records and the use of computers to cany out controls. Splitting into workshops, the 
seminar compared the different approaches to controlling companies with computer 
records and the implications for exchange of information between administrations and the 
training of staff. The seminar also examined three major computer systems currently used 
in the Member States to assist control. The legal implications of the use of these systems 
were also examined. 
Rovaniemi (Finland) 28-29 March 1996 
This seminar brought together experts in the control of Excise dutiable products. Working 
in workshops, the seminar: considered the role of the Accompanying Administrative 
document (AAD) in the control of intra-Community movements; examined the problems 
associated with the misuse of the AAD; explored ways to solve these problems; and 
compared the different approaches to sanctions in this area. 
Evaluation 
The principal evaluation method of the seminars is through a one-page evaluation 
questionnaire completed by participants at the end of the seminar. Table 19 which follows 
shows the aggregated responses to the questionnaire for the 1995 seminars, compared to 
the 1993-94 seminars. In making a comparison it should be noted that data for only six of 
the fourteen seminars in 1993-94 was available, whilst data for nine of the twelve sole 
Matthaeus-Tax seminars is included for 1995. 
The questionnaire as a method of evaluation has merits and weaknesses. Its main merit is 
its simplicity, which ensures easy data gathering and manipulation. There are however 
limits as to what the responses to the questions say about the seminar. On a basic level 
however, the questionnaires do give a simple signal about the quality of the seminar 
product as viewed by its main clients, the participants. The Commission reports these 
results with its record of the seminar and uses them together with the impressions of the 
Commission representatives to make an immediate evaluation of the seminar. These 
evaluations then feed into the ongoing management of the seminar programme by the 
Commission and the Member States. The change to a more workshop-based approach is 
partly a result of this evaluation. 
The global results of this evaluation set out in table 19 are nevertheless interesting. The 
key questions (1, 2 and 7) which express the overall view of the seminar, are 
overwhelmingly positive and are either about the same or marginally improved in 1995 
over 1993-94. On a positive note, the reduction in the number of presentations (question 
3) in favour of workshops has clearly been welcomed. On the other hand, the slight 
reductions in satisfaction with some aspects of the organisation of the seminars (questions 
4,5 and 6) show that even more effort needs to be put into their organisation. 
22 
In addition there is further evidence that each seminar has had a direct effect on policy 
development at a Community and Member State level as the results of the seminars. For 
example, the seminar in Estoril has launched a debate about the resourcing of the CLO's 
which are at the heart of mutual assistance. The seminar in Malmo has led to several 
bilateral contacts between Member States interested in the audit software and techniques 
developed by other Member States. The Commission is also pursuing this at Community 
level. The seminar in Elsinore has encouraged a cross-fertilisation between the Member 
States on how to obtain quality from their administrations and has led to follow-up visits. 
The seminar in Rovaniemi has laid the foundations for the development of a mutual 
assistance liaison network for Excise duties. The seminar in Crawley led to exchanges of 
information between two Member States about suspicious textile companies trading 
between them. Finally the seminars for the new Member States have played a vital part in 
the training of their officials and therefore the successful introduction of the indirect tax 
Internal Market. 
In 1995 it was agreed that the Member States would complete another evaluation form 
for each seminar on behalf of their administration. This is to be done six months after the 
end of the seminar in order to quantify the long term benefits of the seminar and the 
follow-up carried out. Due to the six month delay, the results of these evaluations of the 
1995 seminar programme are not available for this report. The results will however be 
evaluated by the Commission and the Member States, particularly with a view to 
preparing the 1997 seminar programme. This new evaluation tool will permit a better 
evaluation of the longer term value of the programme to the Member States. 
23 
Table 19: Participants' evaluation of seminars (all fîgures are in percentages) 
1. Did the seminar meet (or 
exceed) your expectations? 
2. Did the seminar cover the 
subjects you expected it to? 
3. Were there too many 
presentations? 
4. Was there enough time for 
discussion? 
5. Was there enough time to 
talk to delegates from other 
Member States? 
6. Were there enough 
documents available? 
7. Would you say that overall 
the seminar was useful to 
your administration? 
8. Was it a good environment 
for the seminar? 
9. Were the translation 
facilities satisfactory? yes 
93-94 
74 
67 
19 
70 
71 
85 
74 
82 
69 95 
67 
72 
4 
60 
63 
63 
72 
87 
56 mostly 
93-94 
22 
25 
4 
16 
16 
7 
17 
15 
17 95 
27 
23 
2 
21 
21 
16 
21 
12 
21 partly 
93-94 
4 
9 
8 
9 
9 
7 
9 
3 
7 95 
6 
5 
7 
12 
11 
14 
6 
1 
14 no 
93-94 
1 
0 
68 
5 
4 
0 
0 
0 
6 95 
0 
1 
87 
7 
5 
7 
0 
0 
9 
24 
Annex C: The Common training programme 
Following extensive consultation at the seminar in Nevcrs, the Commission services drew 
up a draft common training programme as required by Article 4(c) of the Matthaeus-Tax 
decision. The Matthaeus-Tax committee was consulted and approved the draft decision 
unanimously. It was adopted by the Commission on 12 July 19958. 
The decision is aimed primarily at new indirect tax officials undergoing initial training and 
is designed to provide them with a common basis of training and one which will help them 
understand the Community dimension of their work better. The decision lists the subjects 
to be covered in the initial training of all new indirect tax officials. These subjects will also 
form the basis of continuing training for officials. 
Although the decision only came into force during 1995, by the end of the year most of 
the Member States had implemented it. All the Member States already included a large 
proportion of the programme's contents in their training programme, notably Community 
indirect tax law. The most significant effect of the programme has been to give an added 
emphasis to the general context of the Community (the sources of Community law, the 
institutions and Community policies) and to Community legal instruments for 
administrative cooperation and mutual assistance. 
Table 20 sets out such figures for the implementation of the programme that the Member 
States currently have. Whilst some Member States have difficulties in collecting this data 
on a common basis, it appears that, even in 1995, a significant number of new officials 
received training on the subjects of the common training programme. It is encouraging to 
note that few new officials received training which was not linked to the common training 
programme. 
The figures on continuing training are even more patchy and difficult to interpret. 
Anecdotal evidence suggests that the Member States have been making an effort to 
broaden the Community dimension of the training of their officials, in particular in the use 
of the mutual assistance and administrative cooperation instruments, which is of 
immediate practical use. 
In the future the Commission will endeavour to establish with the Member States a better 
statistical basis for the evaluation of the common training programmes. Better evaluation 
will also permit reflection on the next stage in the common training programmes, in 
particular whether the common training programme should be deepened, to include details 
of the key elements in each subject area to be included in each training programme. 
Commission decision 95/279/EC of 12 July 1995 OJ No L 172 of 22 July 1995, p 24 
Table 20: Initial and continuing training in the Member States. 
1995 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
Fab 
IRL 
Ie 
Ld 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK INITIAL TRAINING 
TOTAL NUMBER OF OFFICIALS 
HAVING RECEIVED TRAINING 
622 
114 
4800 
not available (n/a) 
483 
449 
52 
1607 
39 
255 
775 
0 
100 
n/a 
84 OFFICIALS TRAINED UNDER 
COMMON TRAINING 
PROGRAMME 
622 
114 
4800 
n/a 
483 
388 
0 
407 
20 
255 
190 
0 
100 
100 
84 CONTINUAL TRAINING ON SUBJECTS OF COMMON 
TRAINING PROGRAMME 
OFFICIALS ELIGIBLE 
2300 
1400 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
7800 
69 b 
n/a 
0a 
n/a 
2000 
n/a 
300 e 
n/a 
n/a OFFICIALS HAVING RECEIVED 
TRAINING 
2300 
350 
n/a 
950 
2751 
n/a 
69 b 
713 
0a 
n/a 
820 
n/a 
120 e 
2013 
n/a 
a only VAT officials 
b These figures include direct tax as well as VAT officials, as they cannot be identified separately 
c Includes only figures for VAT officials of the Ministrv of Finance and the Guardia di Finanza 
d Includes customs officials as well as VAT and Excise officials 
e onlv includes Excise officials 
25 
26 
Annex D: Language training 
Article 6 of the Matthaeus-Tax decision says that the Member States are responsible for 
providing the necessary language training for those of their officials likely to participate in 
the programme. 
The evidence from the questionnaire's submitted by participants in 1995 (set out in table 
21) show that the fluency in the language of the host country has dropped. Nevertheless 
the ability to communicate (table 24) is high. 21 percent of the participants (table 22) did 
participate in a language training course before the exchange and these courses seem to 
have been very important to those who went on them (table 23). 
Table 25 provides some basic statistics on the language training the Member States 
provide for their officials. Whilst the figures are incomplete and difficult to compare, there 
is evidence of a consistent effort by some Member States to promote linguistic training. 
The Member States do all have a policy of language training. In some Member States this 
may simply be making available a programme on a voluntary basis. In other Member 
States targets are set for all units in the administration. Policy on specific training for 
Matthaeus-Tax candidates varies. Most Member States simply integrate this training into 
general training. Others offer voluntary specialist training, especially when the language of 
the host Member State is one of the less widely spoken Community languages. 
Again the Commission will need to work with the Member States to provide a better 
statistical basis for evaluation of language training efforts. The Commission will continue 
to encourage a long term approach to language training to provide a sufficient pool of 
candidates for the exchange programme. 
Profile of linguistic abilities of exchange participants 
Table 21: Could you speak the language of the host country? 
I 1995 I 1993-94 
Yes, fluently 45% 66% 
Basic level only 26% 13% 
No 1 29% 21% 
Table 22: Did you follow a language training course to participate in the 
Matthaeus-Tax programme ?* 
Yes I 21% 
No 79% 
Table 23: If you did follow a language course, how useful was it to your exchange ?' 
very 
useful 52% 26% 4% 15% 4% not at all 
useful 
Table 24: To what degree did you feel you were able to communicate in the host 
country ?* 
very well 54% 33% 12% 1% 0% not at all 
Table 25: Overall language training in the Member States 
1995 
English 
French 
German 
Spanish 
Other 
Total 
Average number of officials 
hours/official 
number of officials 
hours/official 
number of officials 
hours/official 
number of officials 
hours/official 
number of officials 
hours/official 
number of officials 
hours/official B 
103 
50 
75 
75 
35 
58 
20 
112 
29 
80 
262 
66 DK 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a D 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
-
-
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
1200a 
n/a ELa 
15 
n/a 
3 
n/a 
1 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
4 
n/a 
22 
n/a E 
183 
92 
66 
130 
3 
88 
-
-
-
-
252 
102 pbc 
n/a 
n/a 
-
-
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
80 
n/a IRLb 
-
-
58 
118 
17 
118 
9 
118 
5 
118 
89+66S 
118 Id 
437 
n/a 
116 
n/a 
87 
n/a 
93 
n/a 
-
-
733 
n/a L* 
4 
300 
- . 
-
-
-
2 
300 
-
-
6 
300 NL 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a A 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
150 
n/a P 
88 
n/a 
41 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
129 
n/a FINa 
143 
30 
67 
30 
29 
30 
2 
30 
n/a 
n/a 
241 
30 Scf 
80 
31 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
n/a 
80 
31 UK 
-
-
346 
60 
20 
80 
107 
80 
10 
65 
527 
60 | 
Includes only Customs and Excise data 
only VAT officials 
These figures include direct tax as well as VAT officials, as they cannot be identified separately 
Includes only figures for VAT officials of the Ministry' of Finance and the Guardia di Finanza 
Includes customs officials as well as VAT and Excise officials 
includes 6 months of 1994 as well 
66 excise officials 
27 

X 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(96) 543 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 16 09 04 10 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-96-549-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-10741-7 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg