EN    EN  
 EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 19.12.2011 
SEC(2011) 1614 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING PAPER 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 
Accompanying the document 
Proposal for a EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND COUNCIL Regulation 
establishing an exchange, assistance and training programme for the protection of the 
euro against counterfeiting (the 'Pericles 2020' programme) 
 
{COM(2011) 913 final} 
{SEC(2011) 1615 final}  
 
This report commits only the Commission’s services involved  in its preparation and does not prejudge the final form of 
any decision to be taken by the Commission. 
 
EN 2   EN Executive summary of the Impact A ssessment on the Pericles programme  
1. POLICY CONTEXT AND CONTRIBUTION TO EU PRIORITIES  
The Pericles programme is an exchange , assistance and training programme  for the 
protection of the euro against counter feiting. It is administered by OLAF. 
The Treaty reflects concerns about  the protection of the euro by providing for the measures 
necessary for its use as a single currency (A rticle 133 TFEU). Council Regulation (EC) No 
1338/20011 lays down measures necessary for the pr otection of the euro against counterfeiting 
and provides for exchanges of information, cooperation and mutual assistance, thereby 
establishing a harmonised framework fo r the protection of the euro.   
The proposed budget for Pericles 2014-2020 is €  1 million per year. 
2. CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES  
The impact assessment reflects consultations with  stakeholders, especially in Member State 
operational services, other Commission servic es and other EU bodies, and also OLAF’s 
operational experience and th e Commission’s experience in managing the programme. It 
incorporates material from the mid-term eval uation of the programme that was completed in 
early 2011. 
3. PROBLEM DEFINITION AND INTERVENTION LOGIC  
3.1. Scale 
Protection of the euro against counterfei ting is an unremitting effort based on close 
cooperation between European institutions an d Member States. The Pericles programme 
meets the need for the continuing vigilance, tr aining and technical assistance necessary to 
sustain the protection of the eu ro against counterfeiting, by pr oviding a stable framework for 
the planning of Member States’ activities. 
The Euro Counterfeiting Expert s Group (ECEG) coordinates a nd is associated with the 
implementation of Pericles activities. 
3.2. Drivers 
The impact assessment identifies the followi ng key drivers which Pericles 2020 should 
address: 
– the euro continues to be a ta rget for organised crime groups active in counte rfeiting money, 
not only in Europe but also in other regions  of the world such as South America and 
Eastern Asia; 
                                                 
1 OJ L 181, 4.7.2001, p. 6. 
 
EN 3   EN – differences in incentives and capacities betw een countries impede uniform protection of 
the euro against counterfeiting. 
3.3. Problems 
Under each driver, specific problems are identified. These include: maintaining the priority 
that EU Member States attach to the fight  against euro counterfeiting, reinforcing the 
protection of the euro in South-East Europe and expanding coverage in South America, and 
identifying areas where a risk is emerging. 
4. PROGRAMME OBJECTIVES  
4.1. General objective 
The general objective of the Programme shall be  to prevent and combat counterfeiting and 
fraud thus enhancing the competitiveness of the European ec onomy and securing the 
sustainability of public finances. 
4.2. Specific objective 
The specific objective of the Programme shall be to protect the euro banknotes and coins 
against counterfeiting and related fraud, by supporting and supplement the measures 
undertaken by the Member States and assis ting the competent national and European 
authorities in their efforts to develop between themselves and with the European Commission 
a close and regular cooperation, al so including third countries a nd international organisations.  
This objective shall be measured, inter alia, through the effectiveness of action by financial, 
technical, law-enforcement and judicial aut horities, as measured  through the number of 
counterfeits detected, illegal workshops dismantled, individuals arrested and sanctions 
imposed. 
5. SUBSIDIARITY AND EU ADDED VALUE  
The euro continues to be an  attractive target for orga nised crime groups active in 
counterfeiting money, not only in Europe but also in other regions of the world. The 
international dimension of the threat with respec t to euro counterfeiting calls for supranational 
coordination in facing it; thr ough the Pericles programme, the Commission conducts such 
coordination by way of exchanges,  training activities and techni cal assistance. In particular, 
by implementing a specific training and assistan ce strategy agreed with Member States, the 
programme complements nationa l training by adding a multidisciplinary and transnational 
dimension. It offers beneficiaries the opportunity  to take part in in ternational training, and 
raises the standard of cooperation outside the European Union by directly involving the most 
sensitive third countries in specific training activities.  
6. DESCRIPTION OF POLICY OPTIONS  
Option 1: Continue the programme with the same level of funding (baseline scenario). 
 
EN 4   EN Option 2: Renew the Pericles programme  with improved objectives and methodology, 
including in particular an increa sed maximum rate of co-financing. 
Option 3: Merge Pericles with  other Commission programmes. 
Option 4: Discontinue the Pericles programme, a nd leave it for Member States to organise 
activities at national level for protecting the euro. 
In the light of past experience, which is clos ely linked to the activities of both the Member 
States and the Commission in pr otecting the euro, as well as the expected impact, including 
through developing activities, the option to re new the programme with improved objectives 
and methodology is preferred. This option has a budgetary allocation in real prices that 
remains similar to the current allocation (approximately one million euros per year). It adds flexibility in determining the amount of the gr ant by simplifying the determination of costs to 
be borne by Member States
2; it broadens the range of eligible activities by making it possible 
to finance the purchase of equipment to be used  by specialised anti-counterfeiting agencies in 
third countries for protecting the euro against counterfe iting; and it increases  the rate of co-
financing up to a maximum of 90  % of eligible costs, in duly substantiated exceptional cases. 
This should provide a response to  a trend that has emerged in recent years, whereby Member 
States are less able to co-finance projects due to the general lack of f unds available to public 
administrations. The higher rate of co-financing will particularly facilitate a more balanced 
geographic distribution of activities by offeri ng wider scope for Memb er States to apply. 
In contrast, discontinuing the programme would reduce expenditure  at EU level, but without 
generating real savings and offs etting resources at national level or in the framework of 
another EU programme, and would therefore put at risk the effective and uniform protection 
of the euro across the Member States and in third countries. 
7. LINKS WITH OTHER POST -2013  INITIATIVES  
The necessary coordination has taken place betw een OLAF and other Commission services to 
avoid overlaps or confus ion between programmes. 
8. SIMPLIFICATION AND REDUCTION OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE BURDEN  
Based on the results of the mid-term evaluation, the programme will make it simpler for 
competent national authorities to prepare applic ations. To simplify procedures and reduce the 
administrative burden, the calcul ation of the amounts to be gran ted will be made clearer and 
the programme more user-friendly. The legislati on will be amended to allow more flexibility 
in the use of the granted amount; this objectiv e will be achieved by simplifying those financial 
provisions in the programme which define stri ctly the specific costs to be borne by the 
Member States and by the Commission. 
Another simplification measure envisaged involves directly informing and consulting the 
Member States’ representatives in the Euro C ounterfeiting Experts Group (ECEG) at different 
stages of implementation of the programme. 
                                                 
2 See Articles 8-11 of Council Decision 2001/923/EC  of 17 December 2001. 
 
EN 5   EN 9. MONITORING AND EVALUATION  
Annual reports on results, incl uding consistency and comple mentarity with other EU 
programmes, will be made to the European Parl iament and to the Council; in addition, an 
independent assessment of achievement of the objectives of the programme — mid-term 
evaluation — is planned (not later than 31 December 2017). Also, a final report on the 
achievement of the objectives of  the programme will be  sent to the budgetary authority by the 
end of 2021.