WRITTEN QUESTION No. 3122/97 by Armelle GUINEBERTIERE to the Commission. Unequal rights of grower/distillers in the European Union
Date: 1997-10-13
Institutions: European Parliament, GUINEBERTIERE
Subjects: EU Member State, France, VAT rate, alcoholic beverage, application of EU law, derogation from EU law, distillation, excise duty, restriction on competition, tax harmonisation

C 158/38

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

25. 5. 98

(98/C 158/47)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3122/97

by Armelle Guinebertie‘re (UPE) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: Unequal rights of grower/distillers in the European Union

Grower/distillers, farmers who have the right to distill alcohol from some of the fruit they grow, or to have it
distilled on their behalf, are particularly heavily taxed by the French tax system.

Distortions of competition arise at Union level, however, as the right to distill alcohol differs widely from one
Member State to another.There are significant differences, for example, between the liberal Spanish system and
the more rigid French system.

That being so, what action does the Commission intend to take to reduce these differences between national
rules, which are detrimental to the interests of grower/distillers?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(12 November 1997)

Under  the  derogation  set  out  in  Article  22  of  Directive  92/83/EEC  on  the  harmonization  of  the  structures  of
excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages (1), Member States may apply reduced rates of excise duty to
ethyl alcohol produced by small distilleries. The derogation may be applied only within certain production limits
and subject to certain conditions. Provided that Member States special systems remain within the parameters thus
laid down by Community law, the precise manner in which they apply the derogation is not further regulated.

Many Member States choose not to use the derogation, and the Commission is unaware of serious problems
arising in Member States which do take up the option. It does not therefore intend proposing any amendment to
Article  22.  The  Honourable  Member  is,  however,  invited  to  provide  additional  information  on  the  problem
encountered by French small distillers, so that the position may be studied.

As regards distilling rights themselves and different systems in Member States, it should be noted that in the
absence of a common market organization in alcohol each Member State is entitled to lay down provisions on the
production and marketing of ethyl alcohol which must be compatible with the basic provisions of the EC Treaty.

(1)  OJ L 316, 31.10.1992.

(98/C 158/48)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3123/97

by Nel van Dijk (V) and Edith Mu¤ ller (V) to the Commission

(13 October 1997)

Subject: (cid:145)Flower wars(cid:146) in Cologne: interference with freedom of competition

Is the Commission aware of the reports in the German and Dutch press (1) concerning the determined efforts of
Cologne City Council to close a florists(cid:146) business run by two young Dutch entrepreneurs at Cologne(cid:146)s Western
Cemetery?

Is  the  Commission  aware  of  the  illogical  argument  used  by  Cologne  City  Council  to  justify  terminating  the
florists(cid:146) lease and threatening to have their stall forcibly removed, citing (cid:145)serious considerations of city-wide
importance(cid:146) (2) after the florists had allegedly breached a verbal agreement to restrict their selection of goods?

Does the Commission endorse the view of a majority of the Cologne-Ehrenfeld District Council representatives
that  the  termination  of  the  lease  constitutes  an  (cid:145)interference  with  freedom  of  competition(cid:146) (3)  prompted  by
complaints from long-standing competitors about the Dutch florists(cid:146) lower prices?