Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code` ()

(96/C 174/04)

On 15 September 1995, 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 8 March 1996. The Rapporteur was Mrs Sigmund.

At its 334th Plenary Session of 27 and 28 March 1996 (meeting of 27 March 1996), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following Opinion by 56 votes with 3 abstentions.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Commission proposal takes account of the results of the Uruguay Round by amending the Customs Code to reflect the obligations entered into within the Uruguay Round framework. Adjustments are also proposed in the light of practical experience gained over the past few years (simplification of formalities, measures promoting the more effective use of customs instruments, etc.)

The proposal as a whole takes account of both political and economic requirements.

The proposed Commission amendment relates to the Customs Code, a set of rules drawn up to consolidate the customs provisions contained in a variety of Directives and Regulations. The Customs Code made the single market a reality in relation to customs. This uniform European customs legislation marks an important step on the road towards completion of the single market.

1.2. The Committee welcomes the Commission's proposal, subject to the following observations:

2. Specific comments

2.1. Article 1(3) (concerning Article 12, Customs Code)

2.1.1. Article 12 of the Customs Code deals with customs authority information, binding both on the economic operator and on the authorities, regarding the customs tariff classification of goods. Binding information on the origin of goods is now also to be introduced. This complies with the WTO/WCO () Agreement, which provides for the world-wide harmonization of rules of origin and the introduction of binding information on origin. The content and to some extent the wording of the new provisions are to a great extent laid down in the WTO/WCO Agreement.

2.1.2. Binding information on origin communicated to an economic operator by the customs authority of an EU Member State must be communicated to the other Member States and is binding on their customs authorities in similar cases. Divergences will be dealt with at Community level.

2.1.3. This rule provides economic operators with a degree of security, particularly at the project planning stage. On the other hand, it places full responsibility and the burden of proof on the applicant, who is required to provide the customs authority with full and accurate information needed for assessing the origin of goods.

2.1.4. The Economic and Social Committee feels that the introduction of binding information on origin under the terms of the WTO Agreement is a first step towards greater legal certainty for economic operators.

The fact that the basic rules governing binding information will in future apply not only to tariff information but also to information on origin is, the Committee feels, a significant regulatory step which will benefit all citizens.

2.1.5. The Committee hopes that still greater certainty will be achieved when the work on the worldwide harmonization of rules of origin is complete, thus also improving the opportunities for the settlement of disputes at WTO/WCO level.

2.2. Article 1(4) (concerning Article 18, Customs Code)

2.2.1. The rate of exchange used to convert ECU amounts into the national currencies for the purposes of all customs regulations (customs tariff, exemptions, other ceilings, etc.) has hitherto had to be adjusted annually. The amendment to Article 18 proposed by the Commission breaks with this single system, in that it provides for monthly adjustment for the application of the customs tariff (i.e. the rates of customs duty) and annual adjustment for the application of all other customs regulations. Thus for goods in respect of which the Common Customs Tariff specifies a rate of duty expressed as an ECU amount per unit, the rate of duty may be adjusted monthly.

2.2.2. The objective here would appear to be to combat diversion of trade flows, particularly in agricultural products, which could result from exchange rate fluctuations in the course of a year.

2.2.3. This provision could place an additional administrative burden on some economic operators, as they might have to make monthly adjustments.

2.2.4. To alleviate the burden on these economic operators, the Committee proposes that the monthly adjustment of the rate of exchange be carried out using the same system (and the same technical means) as used in the conversion of rates of customs duty expressed as ecu amounts, which already has to be done in any case.

2.3. Article 1(11) (concerning Article 112(3), Customs Code)

2.3.1. Where goods are released for free circulation without being presented to customs, the rules of assessment for duty due depend, at the moment, on the time at which the goods were warehoused.

The new provisions allow economic operators to opt between the rules of assessment applicable when the goods were warehoused and those valid when they were released.

2.3.2. The rate of customs duty is not covered by this option and continues to be determined by the time the goods leave the warehouse.

The Committee welcomes this provision from a general economic point of view. It would certainly seem more appropriate to take as the point of reference the moment at which the goods enter into the economy and begin to influence the economic structure. (This applies particularly to anti-dumping duties.)

2.4. Article 1(16) (concerning Article 212A, Customs Code)

2.4.1. The Customs Code makes no provision for customs relief in cases where goods have not been properly released for free circulation. This stringent provision means, for example, that anyone ignorant of or unfamiliar with customs regulations might, under certain circumstances, forfeit any claim to preferential treatment (e.g. if personal property were not properly declared).

2.4.2. The Commission has taken account of this; the proposed new rules create an objective right to claim relief from customs duties.

The Committee supports these measures for the protection of citizens acting in good faith, and points out that infringements are in any case punishable under national law.

2.5. Article 1(18) (concerning Article 220(1), Customs Code)

2.5.1. The new rules will for the first time allow the customs authority to enter estimates of duty into the accounts and communicate them to the debtor. This enables customs authorities to prevent the liability for customs debts expiring simply because the exact amount owed cannot be calculated in time.

2.5.2. This measure is to be welcomed in principle as a way of combating fraud.

2.5.3. However, it seems untenable from the economic operator's point of view that there should be no final expiry date on customs debts. The Committee feels that there must be a time limit on the risk of being confronted with demands for payment of debt arrears.

The Committee feels that economic operators would be unacceptably restricted in their entrepreneurial activities if, at virtually any point in the future, they could be faced with demands for payment of arrears of duty on imports from long ago.

2.5.4. The Committee therefore proposes that the validity of estimates of duty payable communicated to economic operators be limited to a reasonable period.

3. Conclusions

3.1. In connection with this Opinion, the Committee refers to its Opinion of 14 September 1995 () on Customs 2000 and stresses the major importance of uniform application of the Customs Code in the Member States.

Only through uniform interpretation and harmonized administrative procedures will provisions intended to give economic operators greater certainty and to simplify various economic processes bear fruit.

Done at Brussels, 28 March 1996.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Carlos FERRER

() OJ No C 260, 5. 10. 1995, p. 8.

() WTO - World Trade Organization; WCO - World Customs Organization.

() OJ No C 301, 13. 11. 1995.