Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the 'Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community customs code (transit)'
Date: 1997-12-10
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: Union transit, carriage of goods, customs regulations, legal code, transit

9.3.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 73/17

3.2.
The ESC particularly welcomes the priorities
which have been set whereby almost half of the funding
is to be allocated to the establishment of the New
Computerized Transit System (NCTS) and for the
purposes of harmonizing-data exchange
facilities
between the Member States and the Commission [Com-
mon Communication Network/Common Systems Inter-
face (CCN/CSI)].

3.3.
The ESC already underlined the importance of
these two objectives in its opinion on the ‘Customs 2000’
action programme and its opinion on the action plan
for transit in Europe (1).

3.4.
computerization projects’, classified by a system,

An ‘indicative breakdown of “Custom 2000”
is

(1) OJ C 355, 21.11.1997.

Brussels, 10 December 1997.

given at the end of the Commission’s document. As
the figures indicated are merely estimates, the ESC
urges that a flexible approach be adopted when
allocating funding, in the light of the needs of the
individual systems.

The ESC requests that it be given annual reports

3.5.
on the targeting and the effectiveness of funding.

These reports should indicate where funds have

3.6.
been switched between systems.

3.7.
The ESC attaches particular importance to the
fact that Community customs applications should be in
line with the internationally recognized UN/EDIFACT
standard. This would also ensure that communication
with economic players is as it should be.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘Proposal for a European Parliament
and Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the
Community customs code (transit)’

(98/C 73/05)

On 4 December 1997 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 3 December 1997. The rapporteur
was Mr Giesecke.

At its 350th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 1997) the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 106 votes to two with two abstentions.

1.

Introduction

2. Commission proposal

1.1.
The EC Customs Code, which entered into force
on 1st january 1994, establishes the framework for
Community customs legislation. Requirements have
changed considerably since the Code’s entry into force,
thereby making amendments necessary.

2.1.
The proposal for amending Regulation (EEC)
No 2913/92 establishing the Community customs code
makes adjustments to the transit procedure. These
adjustments are mainly the consequence of the action
plan for transit in Europe (1).

1.2.
Both economic operators and customs adminis-
trations consider that the provisions should be made
simpler and clearer.

(1) COM(97) 188 final.

C 73/18

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

9.3.98

2.2.
The main aim of the external transit procedure
is to make it easier to transport non-Community goods
within the Community customs territory. The use of
this procedure for Community goods is to remain an
exception. Article 91(1)(b) is to be adjusted to meet these
requirements.

3.5.
From the Committee’s point of view, the transfer
of responsibility for procedural provisions to the Com-
mission could be welcomed if individual decisions are
taken properly using the ‘comitology’ procedure, i.e.
after consulting economic operators and customs admin-
istrations.

The concept of discharge of a transit procedure

2.3.
is to be defined by amending Article 92.

4. Specific comments

2.4. With regard to the provision of guarantees,
shipments by sea are to be treated on a par with shipments
by road. The general waiver regarding guarantees is
to be abolished by amending Article 94(2).

2.5.
Article 95 is to be reworded so that the criteria
for waiving guarantees are included in the Customs
Code implementing provisions.

2.6.
Article 96(2) is to be deleted, since the incurrence
of a customs debt as a result of removing goods from
customs supervision is regulated elsewhere (Article 203).

2.7.
Since there is no scope any more for national
transit regulations, the deletion of Article 97(2) will
ensure greater transparency and a more uniform appli-
cation by the Member States.

2.8.
The amendment to Article 192 makes allowance
for the special requirements with regard to the provision
of a security under the international transit procedure.

2.9.
The amendment to Article 215 is designed to
make it possible to determine exactly who is responsible
for the incurrence of a customs debt.

3. General comments

3.1.
The Commission proposal intends to eliminate
a number of shortcomings in the present Customs Code
which came to light recently when checks were made on
the operation of the transit procedures.

3.2.
The proposed transfer of procedural provisions
from the body of law laid down by the Council (Customs
Code) to the Commission’s sphere of responsibility
(Customs Code implementing provisions) has both
advantages and disadvantages.

3.3.
The swifter and more flexible adaptation of
provisions to the needs of economic operators and
customs administrations might be beneficial.

3.4. However, frequent changes could be seen as a
disadvantage vis-à-vis the stability offered by the Code
in the past.

4.1. Amendment to Article 91(1)

4.1.1.
Presumably, hardly anything is to change in
practice. The field of application must, however, be laid
down in the Customs Code implementing provisions.

4.1.2.
The fact that non-Community goods are what
they are, which plays a role especially in the cases of
goods subject to a market regime, can only be proven
under the transit procedure. The T5 documents used
under market regime legislation do not provide an
adequate check.

4.2. Amendment to Article 92

4.2.1.
present definition and is therefore welcomed.

The proposed new wording fills a gap in the

4.3. Amendment to Article 94

4.3.1.
The reform of transit by sea is considered by
the Commission to be necessary on the basis of the
findings of a task force over a period of 2` years.
Guarantees are now to be required, too, for transit
procedures by sea. However, a distinction is to be
made between scheduled services (regular services only
between ports within the Community customs territory)
and non-scheduled services.

4.3.2.
In the case of scheduled shipping services —
which represent, as it were, an extended bridge — the
goods transported are to be assumed to be Community
goods just as they are in road transport. Since transit
procedures are necessary only in the case of non-
Community goods,
to
Article 94 will not hamper intra-Community trade in
the Committee’s view.

the proposed amendment

4.3.3.
The goods carried by non-scheduled services
are to be assumed — as in the past — to be non-
Community goods (third country status).

4.4. Amendment to Article 95

4.4.1.
The proposed amendment to Article 95 is in
line with point 4.6.2 of the Committee opinion (1) on the
Commission Communication concerning an action

(1) OJ C 355, 21.11.1997.

9.3.98

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 73/19

plan for transit in Europe. It is to be welcomed in
principle. The criteria for the modular guarantee are
to be specified in the Customs Code implementing
provisions.

4.5. Amendment to Article 96

The deletion of Article 96(2) has no effect
4.5.1.
legally, since the incurrence of a customs debt through
the removal from customs supervision is regulated in
Article 203 of the Customs Code. Non-punishment in
the event of deadlines being slightly exceeded must still
be ensured. The amendment is welcomed.

Brussels, 10 December 1997.

4.6. Amendment to Article 97

The deletion of Article 97(2) poses no problems,
4.6.1.
since there is no scope any more for national transit
procedures. The flexibility which Member States also
require is guaranteed by the Customs Code (Article 91).

4.7. Amendment to Article 192

4.7.1.
ment.

The Committee endorses the proposed amend-

4.8. Amendment to Article 215

4.8.1.
The rewording seems advisable because of the
differing turnover and consumption taxes in the Member
States.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Tom JENKINS

Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the ‘XXVIth Report on Competition
Policy (1996)’

(98/C 73/06)

On 24 April 1997, the Commission decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee,
under Article 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the ‘XXVIth Report
on Competition Policy (1996)’.

The Section for Industry, Commerce, Crafts and Services, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee’s work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 3 December 1997. The rapporteur
was Mr Simpson.

At its 350th plenary session (meeting of 10 December 1997) the Economic and Social Committee
adopted the following opinion by 98 votes to two with four abstentions.

1. Preliminary comments

1.1.
The Economic and Social Committee (ESC) has,
each year, taken the opportunity to comment on the
report prepared by the European Commission on Com-
petition Policy.

1.2.
The report on developments in 1996, the XXVIth
in the series, was published in April 1997, within days
of the separate publication of the Fifth Survey on State
Aid in the European Union. The report on State aid,
containing information for the years 1990 to 1994,
updates the last survey published in 1994.

1.3.
Because of the close relationship between the
policy questions raised by the analysis in the Fifth Survey
and the review of policy and decisions on State aid in
the Competition Policy report, the ESC decided to
prepare one opinion dealing with both documents.

1.4.
These reports offer a valuable insight into many
of the difficult questions faced by the Commission in
the evolution and promotion of competition policy and
the application of State aids.

The ESC commends the Commission on the

1.5.
expeditious publication of both documents.