WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2236/96 by Per STENMARCK to the Commission. Shipping Fees
Date: 1996-08-09
Institutions: European Parliament, STENMARCK
Subjects: EEC Treaty, Sweden, application of EU law, charge having equivalent effect, competition, harbour installation, maritime cabotage, service, tax system













EUR-Lex - 91996E2236 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



91996E2236

WRITTEN QUESTION No. 2236/96 by Per STENMARCK to the Commission. Shipping Fees  


Official Journal C 011 , 13/01/1997 P. 0068 





WRITTEN QUESTION E-2236/96 by Per Stenmarck (PPE) to the Commission (9 August 1996)Subject: Shipping FeesIn 1994 the Swedish Government received a 'letter of formal notice' from ESA regarding Swedish shipping fees, which in ESA's opinion have the same effect as a tax. The Swedish domestic shipping lines were at this point exempted from these fees as well as direct calling transoceanic liner shipping.The Swedish Government has now decided to change the system, to the effect that both direct calling transoceanic liner shipping and the Swedish domestic lines have to pay a fee based on the vessel's gross weight tonnage and the number of calls per year. The fee is unique to Sweden and does not exist in any other EU country. The new fee is to be paid twelve times per calendar year for a cargo vessel and eighteen times for a ferry calling at a Swedish port. It is impossible for a transoceanic shipping vessel that perhaps calls a maximum of 10 or 11 times a year at a Swedish port to enter the freeways free. For a ferry in the Sound the 18 calls will already be completed on 1 January each year. Feeder ships may take a few weeks to reach 12 calls. This also discriminates against new ventures and new tonnage using Swedish ports, given the high cash-flow requirements when new traffic is starting up. Moreover, ocean vessels have a much higher gross tonnage than feeder ships but undertake the same transportation work.The Swedish export industry will be charged the additional fee by the ocean lines when shipping their goods out of Sweden with ocean carriers. This will prove a very costly disadvantage for the Swedish export industry compared to the export industry in continental Europe.The Swedish Government states that no exemption from this can be made for the direct calling transoceanic shipping lines due to EU regulations. Can the Commission state whether this is correct? Does the Swedish Government have the right, under EU legislation, to impose fees that are aimed solely at Swedish companies and not other companies which are based within the Union?Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission (7 October 1996)The Honourable Member's questions concern the Swedish system for taxing port services.Under current Community law, Member States are free to establish their own systems for taxing port services provided they keep within certain limits. The taxes must inter alia abide by the provisions of Articles 9 et seq., 92 and 95 of the EC Treaty. In other words, they must not be taxes having an equivalent effect to customs duties, constitute aid for Swedish products or discriminate against products originating in other Member States to the benefit of similar or competing domestic products. A Member State may, if it so chooses, tax its own goods more heavily than those coming from other countries.The Commission has, however, established that the Swedish system for taxing port services contains a 'farledsvaruavgift', a fee levied only on goods originating in or bound for third countries, including other Member States; this fee is therefore a tax having equivalent effect to customs duties. The Commission has contacted the Swedish administration with a view to aligning the situation on Community law. According to the information provided, the matter is now being rectified by the Swedish authorities as part of a review of the taxation system in question due to be completed at the end of the year.