31. 12.80 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 358/31 
II 
(Preparatory Acts) 
COURT OF AUDITORS 
Opinion of the Court of Auditors of the European Communities on the proposal for a 
Council Regulation introducing a tax on catches of salmon in the Baltic Sea by 
Community vessels 
THE COURT OF AUDITORS OF THE EUROPEAN 
COMMUNITIES, 
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the Euro­
pean Economic Community, and in particular to 
Article 209 thereof, 
Having regard to the Decision of the Council of 
27 October 1980 to consult the Court of Auditors of 
the European Communities on the proposal for a 
Council Regulation introducing a tax on catches of 
salmon in the Baltic Sea by Community vessels, 
Whereas it is necessary, when imposing a tax, to 
draw up a legal instrument that sets out without am­
biguity the nature of the tax, the taxable event, the 
mechanism for its collection and the obligations 
falling on the taxpayer; whereas it is therefore desir­
able to introduce greater precision into the proposal 
for a Regulation, in the interests of avoiding legal 
disputes and of guaranteeing equal treatment of tax­
payers ; 
Whereas, by virtue of Article 3(1) of the Financial 
Regulation of 21 December 1977 (l), all revenue 
must be used to cover all expenditure; whereas, 
therefore, allocation of revenue to particular 
purposes is not possible; 
Whereas revenue accruing to the Community should 
be collected and paid over to the Commission 
without undue delay; 
Whereas the Article in the Budget to which the 
revenue is to be credited should permit the proceeds 
of the tax to be distinguished clearly from other 
revenue of the Community, HAS ADOPTED THE FOLLOWING OPINION: 
The Court of Auditors 
The tax mechanism 
— suggests that in Article 1(1) 'Community vessels' 
should be further defined, as is done in Article 1 
of Regulation 753/80 of 26 March 1980 laying 
down detailed rules for the recording and trans­
mission of information concerning catches taken 
by fishing vessels of the Member States (2); 
— considers that the Regulation needs to impose a 
clear obligation on a person to pay the tax, and 
that to this end Article 1 (2) should be supple­
mented by a definition of the taxable person; 
suggests furthermore that to guarantee the fulfil­
ment of this obligation the Regulation should 
enjoin Member States to adopt appropriate 
provisions for dealing with cases of failure to pay 
the tax; 
— points out that the time of the declaration re­
ferred to in Article 1 (3) is not defined with any 
precision in Regulation (EEC) No 753/80, and 
that the application of Article 4 of that Regula­
tion could lead to confusion where the declara­
tion is made from a vessel still at sea; proposes 
therefore that more precise rules be drawn up to 
define the tax point in these cases; 
— considers that Article 1 (4) should specify the 
nature of the tax (that is, chargeable as an 
amount of ECU per kg) and should lay down 
rules for the conversion of the amount expressed 
in ECU into national currencies; 
— suggests that special rules be incorporated for the 
determination of the tax rate for 1981, since the 
deadline of 1 November 1980 cannot be met; 
(')OJNoL 356,31. 12. 1977. (2) OJ No L 84, 28. 3. 1980. 
No C 358/32 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 80 
Allocation of revenue 
— considers that the revenue from the proposed tax 
should accrue to the general budget of the 
Community, and that the use of the term 'to 
offset' in the final clause of the preamble is 
ambiguous, and could be undertstood as 
earmarking revenue for a particular purpose, in 
contravention of Article 3 (1) of the Financial 
Regulation of 21 December 1977; proposes that 
to remove this ambiguity the final part of the 
clause in question, from 'and intended to ...' to 
the end, be deleted; 
— is concerned lest the use of the word 'constitutes' 
in the English version of Article 1 (5) should 
imply the earmarking of revenue, and suggests 
that the words 'is equal to' be used instead; 
Transmission of the revenue to the Commission 
— considers that there is no reason why the 
Member States should have the use of the revenue accruing from the tax for the period laid 
down in paragraph 6; proposes therefore that '60 
days' in Article 1 (6) be replaced by the shortest 
possible period compatible with accounting 
procedures in the Member States; 
Entry in the Budget 
— considers that Article 999 of the Budget is not an 
appropriate heading for the proceeds from this 
tax, containing as it does miscellaneous revenue 
from other sources, and proposes that a new line 
be created in Title 9 specifically for this tax. 
This opinion was adopted by the Court of Auditors 
at its meeting on 18 December 1980. 
Luxembourg, 22 December 1980. 
For the Court of Auditors 
The President 
Michael N. MURPHY