WRITTEN QUESTION E-2752/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(9 October 2001)

Subject: Cost of emission tests on imported cars

Some 500 private importers of cars, have via a company, sued the Swedish State over a sum of millions of kronor (September 2000). They were forced to pay up to 12 600 kronors for emission tests, although according to EU rules the charge should not exceed 900 kronor.

What is the Commission's view on the Swedish rules on emission tests for privately imported cars? Are private importers of cars right in claiming that they are having to pay an exorbitant charge?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 November 2001)

Council Directive 96/96/EC of 20 December 1996 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers(1) and for passenger cars requires that all Member States shall inspect their vehicles at least when the car is four years old and then every two years thereafter. Member States can require stricter standards for their own registered vehicles and around half the Member States require the car to be tested at a greater frequency or at an earlier start date than the minimum of the Directive. The roadworthiness test includes vehicle tail-pipe emission testing, as well as safety inspections for braking and lighting performance, etc.

The Directive, in establishing minimum standards, guarantees free circulation. A vehicle that has a valid roadworthiness certificate from one Member State can circulate in the Community, and elsewhere. However, because the standards are minimal and because Member States can require higher standards for their registered vehicles, then they can, and do require that vehicles pass their own roadworthiness test as a condition of re-registration. Consequently, a car with a valid roadworthiness certificate, from say a German or French testing Authority would need to undergo a further roadworthiness test as a condition of re-registering in Sweden. Consequently, Sweden is within its rights to require cars to undergo their roadworthiness test (under the conditions of Directive 96/96/EC) before the car can be re-registered in Sweden.

Sweden is not within its rights to require any standard that they do not require for their own vehicles. If the first Swedish roadworthiness test commences when their cars are three years old (as opposed to when the car is four years old, which is the minimum start point of Directive 96/96/EC), then Sweden could test cars that are at least three years old as a condition of re-registration. However, they should not, indeed can not legally test cars from another Member State (that are type approved under Community law) any sooner than they would test their own registered vehicles: to do so would be a distortion of competition.

In its case law, the Court of Justice sets out the conditions in which in the absence of complete harmonisation an approval procedure laid down in a Member State for vehicles imported from another Member State and already approved or authorised for use in that State may be considered as being in conformity with Articles 28 to 30 (ex-Articles 32 to 36) of the EC treaty. For instance, the checking procedure should not entail unreasonable cost(2). However, on the basis of the information contained in the Honourable Member's question the Commission cannot assess the special circumstances in which some of 500 individuals mentioned had to pay up to 12 600 kronor.

Had it been established that the amount to be paid for the exhaust emissions test discriminated against or was prejudicial to the imported vehicles compared with similar or competing national vehicles, Article 90 (ex-Article 95) of the EC Treaty prohibiting tax discrimination would then apply. The facts in the Commission's possession do not point to such discrimination.

(1) OJ L 46, 17.2.1997.

(2) See Case 406/85 (Gofette and Gilliard), ECR 1987, p. 2525.