20. 10. 86 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 263/9 
subparagraph of Article 13 (1), between the price actu­
ally paid or payable for goods and the costs incurred 
in connection with one of the usual forms of handling. A distinction of this kind is required under customs 
value Regulation (EEC) No 1224/80, if these costs are 
to be excluded from the customs value of the goods. 
Done at Brussels, 2 July 1986. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down the provisions applicable to 
goods brought into the customs territory of the Community (*) 
(86/C 263/04) 
On 23 January 1986 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 Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing 
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 May 1986. The rapporteur 
was Mr Broicher. 
At its 238th plenary session (meeting of 2 July 1986), the Committee adopted the following 
opinion unanimously: 
1. General comments 
The Committee welcomes the proposal for a Regulation 
subject to the following comments: 
1.1. The Committee pleads for priority to be given 
to work on a Community Customs Code, or alternative­
ly calls for the simultaneous enactment of all draft 
Regulations still awaiting adoption in the field of 
customs law. 
1.2. The Committee considers that it is also the duty 
of the Community's legislative body to take such action 
in order to help stabilize legislation and save private 
individuals and administrations from being over­
burdened by excessively frequent changes in the law. 
1.3. In seeking to ensure the free movement of goods 
and persons within an expanded economic and uniform 
legal area, one of the tasks of the Community's legislat­
ive body in harmonizing legislation should be to restrict 
administrative formalities to what is strictly necessary 
in the particular area in question. The Committee also 
believes that it is essential to bring policies more into 
line with the actual interests of European citizens if 
large sections of the population are to feel less helpless 
or even downright apathetic about the EEC. 2. Specific comments 
2.1. As far as form is concerned, the Committee 
would like to see: 
— certain passages worded more simply or more con­
cisely (e.g. Articles 1 (1), 3 (1) and 3 (2)), 
— references to other Articles or Directives made 
clearer by indicating the contents of the Articles or 
Directives in question (e.g. Articles 7 (b), 13, 18 (b) 
and 27). 
2.1.1. The language in which legal acts are couched 
is increasingly becoming a question of finding a balance 
between legal precision and general understandability. 
The Committee recognizes that the legally correct 
phraseology has been used in the present case but 
considers, partly for the reasons given in point 1.3, that 
the law-makers should make their choice of vocabulary, 
syntax, length of sentence, logical construction of argu­
ments, or abstractions, more clear and more under­
standable to ordinary citizens who have to observe the 
laws even though they are not themselves versed in 
legal matters. 
2.2. Article 3 (4) and Article 5 
(') OJ No C 356, 31. 12. 1985, p. 31. The Committee considers that derogations from the 
obligations to bring in goods by a specific route 
No C 263/10 Official Journal of the European Communities 20. 10. 86 
(Article 3 (1)) and present goods to customs in a certain 
way (Article 5) should be permitted not only in the case 
of tourist and frontier traffic but also in the case of 
letter and parcel post. In this way it would be possible 
to preserve the autonomous rules of Member States and 
avoid economic and administrative complications. In 
fact although Article 11 permits, in the case of letter 
and parcel post, derogations from the obligation to 
lodge a summary declaration, it does not provide for 
derogations from the requirements on specific routes 
and customs presentation. 
2.3. Article 7 (c) 
Article 7 (c) provides for exonerations in the case of 
goods moving under the transit procedure. In the view 
of the Committee exonerations should also be extended 
to a number of cases not falling within the transit 
procedure, e.g. to goods carried directly through the 
customs territory of the Community by rail, post, air 
and sea. Should these types of carriage not be exoner­
ated also, the moving of goods through the customs 
territory of the EEC would become unnecessarily cum­
bersome, even though there is no need for customs 
supervision in such cases. The same exonerations 
should apply in the case of goods carried through 
the customs territory of the EEC in customs-approved 
pipelines, provided that the person responsible for the 
Done at Brussels, 2 July 1986. 
1. Introduction 
1.1. The present work programme for creating a 
common information market is a continuation of exist­
ing Community policy, which dates back in principle 
to the resolution of the Council of Ministers of 24 carriage keeps records and complies with the other rules 
on customs supervision laid down by the competent 
customs authority. 
2.4. Articles 9 and 10 
The Committee notes that the Commission intends to 
define the term 'summary declaration' more precisely 
by using the phrase 'which contains the particulars 
necessary for identification of the goods' currently used 
in Article 10. 
2.5. Article 23 
The Committee takes it for granted that once the transit 
procedure has been completed, a 'summary declaration' 
may be replaced within the terms of Article 10 by a 
transit document. To demand that a further document 
be presented to customs in addition to the transit docu­
ment already required under transit law would entail 
unnecessary bureaucracy. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
June 1971 on the promotion of the supply and use of 
information by means of coordinated measures taken 
by the Community and the Member States. 
1.2. Following this resolution the Council approved 
three consecutive three-year action programmes for the Gerd MUHR 
Opinion on the Commission communication to the Council on the work programme for 
creating a common information market 
(86/C 263/05) 
On 27 January 1986, the Commission of the European Communities decided to consult the 
Economic and Social Committee on the communication from the Commission to the Council 
entitled 'Work programme for creating a common information market'. 
On 25 February 1986 the Committee's Bureau put the Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts 
and Services in charge of this work, while asking the Section for Social Questions to draw 
up a supplementary opinion in accordance with Article 23 of the Committee's Rules of 
Procedure. 
The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services adopted its opinion on 4 June 1986. 
The rapporteur was Mr Nierhaus. 
At its 238th plenary session (meeting of 2 July 1986) the Committee adopted the following 
opinion unanimously: