Report from the Commission - Summary report on the communications by the Member States on their inspection activities and findings and questions of principle relating to traditional own resources - 1998 - (article 17(3) of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89)
Date: 2000-02-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU customs procedure, financial control, financial year, fraud, own resources

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES

Brussels, 29.02.2000
COM(2000)107 final

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION

Summary report on the communications by the Member States on their inspection
activities and findings and questions of principle
relating to traditional own resources
- 1998 -

(Article 17(3) of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89)

Summary report on the communications by the Member States on their inspection
activities and findings and questions of principle
relating to traditional own resources
- 1998 -

(Article 17(3) of Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89)

1.

INTRODUCTION

Under Regulation No 1552/891 the Member States are responsible for collecting
1.
"traditional" own resources and are obliged to take all the necessary steps to ensure that debts
due to the Community budget (chiefly import duties) are established, entered in the accounts,
recovered and made available to the Commission.

The Commission is kept informed of these activities by various reports it receives from the
Member States on the basis of Regulation No 1552/89. As regards inspection work in
particular, Article 17(3) of the Regulation provided that Member States must keep the
Commission informed of their activities by means of half-yearly reports.

With the adoption of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1355/96,2 the reports became annual and
the Commission was required to produce a summary of the reports for the budgetary
authority.

2.
These summary reports were intended to take stock of inspection activities and
findings at national level and provide an overall view of the volume of fraud and irregularities
involving the European Communities' traditional own resources. They should also enable the
Commission to conduct an additional documentary check and make optimum use of risk
analysis in drawing up its own inspection programme.

In view of the disappointing experience with the previous half-yearly reports, it was agreed
when Regulation No 1552/89 was amended in 1996 that a solution should be found for the
considerable discrepancies between the national reports and differences in the interpretation
of various basic concepts. After extensive discussion within the Advisory Committee on Own
Resources, a harmonised model annual report was sent to the Member States in March 1997.3
This set out the overall data to be provided on cases of fraud and irregularity and aimed at
greater consistency in the accounting data supplied.

1

2

3

Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89 of 29 May 1989 implementing Decision 88/376/EEC on the system of the
Communities' own resources (new version - Decision 94/728/EC).
Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1355/96 of 8 July 1996 amending Council Regulation No 1552/89 of 29 May 1989.
Commission Decision 97/245, 20.3.97 (C(97) 800 final).

2

As the Member States found it difficult to harmonise the data, there was a considerable delay
before the Commission received the annual reports for 1996. When it examined the
information it had received, the Commission concluded that it was better not to publish its
summary report, as the Member States had failed to follow the model. However, a summary
document was drawn up in May 19984 and examined by the Advisory Committee on Own
Resources on 8 July 1998.

Analysis of the reports for 19975 has shown that the results
largely failed to live up to
expectations: the Commission considered that it couldnot yet reach any completely valid
conclusions in view of the absence of comparable or, in some cases, reliable data.

3.
From the 1997 report analysis the Commission did establish that there had been a net
improvement in the presentation of information by Member States even if supplementary
information had to be requested in some instances. It considered that publication of even an
incomplete and non-standardised report could throw light on current difficulties in connection
with traditional own resources and encourage the Member States to improve the quality of the
information they supply.

It was also planned that there should be an analysis of questions of principle relating to the
problems encountered in applying Regulation No 1552/89, including those raised in matters
in dispute. However, from past experience, the Commission has concluded that any problems
reported by the Member States will be better dealt with by being brought to the attention of
the ACOR as they arise rather than analysed in the summary reports drawn up under
Article 17(3).

This analysis tabulates the key elements of the model report which the Commission has sent
to the Member States. Each table is accompanied by appropriate explanations and gives the
reasons for the production of the indicator.

2.

ANALYSIS OF NATIONAL REPORTS

The analysis of national reports is intended to reveal two main types of information: a general
picture of the Member States' inspection operations and an assessment of measures to combat
fraud and irregularities. For this purpose, data are first compiled concerning inspection
activities in the form of the number of entries processed by each national administration at the
time of importation and at the time of inspection (ex post) and the number of staff assigned to
inspection work. This provides an indication of inspection activity in relation to the volume of
traffic in each Member State.

4

5

XIX/24329/98, 27.5.1998.

COM(1999) 110 final 12.03.1999

3

The national reports then provide the information needed to quantify and categorise the
results of activities to combat fraud and fraudulent practices. Given the cross-border nature of
fraud, and with a view to illustrating the patterns of fraud on the Community's customs
territory, the national figures (number of cases, amounts) are expressed in terms of the totals
for all the Member States. In this analysis a distinction is made in the data between the
different stages of fraud prevention: investigation and detection of cases, determination and
entry of amounts, recovery of duties.

These data are also compared with other information supplied by the Member States on the
entry in the accounts of own resources not collected and on the fraud forms. This comparison
is intended to throw light on disputes involving own resources and reveal any discrepancies in
the establishment and making available of these resources. Finally, the analysis categorises
cases of fraud and irregularity by customs arrangement and by type of fraud.

To produce this analysis of national reports, the Commission used some of the data supplied
in the national reports for previous years, with due allowance for the fact that some of them
were incomplete and that the information supplied by the Member States was not readily
comparable.

Although limited, this comparison between the years concerned nevertheless allows certain
conclusions to be drawn on the development of the Member States' inspection activities and
findings and the main trends affecting the collection of own resources.

2.1.

Inspections by Member States

A general picture of inspection operations can be provided by comparing the entries accepted,
the entries checked after customs clearance and staff specialising in inspections of this kind in
each Member State.

This comparison is set out in Annex 1, which also shows the percentage of entries inspected
and the ratio of entries inspected per person. At the same time this gives an idea of the volume
of transactions on the Community's customs territory.

To place these indicators of inspection activity in perspective, Annex 2 compares overall
inspection activity in the Member States in 1996 and 1998.

The following comments can be made on the two tables in Annexes 1 and 2:

(a)

Number of entries accepted

A total of 95 302 846 entries were accepted in 1998. The number has increased in the great
majority of Member States; in Greece the figure almost doubled. Over the last four years there
has been a slight decline in transactions in Finland, while in 1998 France recorded a more
surprising drop from nearly 10 million in 1997 to less than 7 million.

4

As in previous years, comparison between Member States reveals a wide discrepancy
between the number of entries accepted by the Netherlands and Germany and those accepted
by the United Kingdom, especially when compared with each Member State's share of
established traditional own resources (amounts entered in the "A" and "B" accounts). The
ratio between this figure and the number of entries is relatively stable (except for the
Netherlands and the United Kingdom), as the following chart shows:

Number of entries/Amounts established in A and B accounts
1998

35.00%

30.00%

25.00%

20.00%

15.00%

10.00%

5.00%

0.00%

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

IT

L

NL

A

P

FIN S

UK

Number of entries
Amounts established

(b)

Post-clearance checks

The data on the number of entries checked cannot be used to make an exhaustive comparison
between the Member States (proportion of entries checked after customs clearance), since
only nine Member States submitted the actual number of entries checked after customs
clearance (see also the explanations in the notes to Table 1 in Annex 1). However, this
represents an improvement on the previous year. Only Portugal and the United Kingdom had
no figures available.

Subject to these constraints, it is worth pointing out that the number of entries checked after
customs clearance increased sharply from 2.3 million in 1997 to 4.6 million in 1998, although
there was a significant drop in Finland and Denmark. This enormous increase in the number
of post-clearance checks in 1998 (+96%) cannot be explained by the increase in staff (+1.1%).

The Commission is currently examining instances where the scale of these changes is not
justified by any variation in transactions. The figures might reflect a decline in inspection
activity (Italy and Finland over the three-year period), a major re-targeting of inspections or
the introduction of new accounting methods (Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Austria and
Sweden).

5

As a result there has also been a general improvement in inspection rates, albeit with major
variations between Member States, for example 25% in Greece, 1.73% in Italy and 1.22% in
Ireland.

(c)

Staff assigned to post-clearance checks

As for the relationship between staff specialising in post-clearance checks and the number
of entries inspected, it is difficult to make comparisons between Member States because of
differences in the internal organisation of national government departments. With the usual
reservations, the total number of customs officers in the European Union comes to 84 116.

The figures set out in Annex 2 show that, apart from a very large increase in the United
Kingdom, the total number of staff assigned to customs services rose slightly in 1998 (up
1.7% compared with a 13% increase between 1996 and 1998). The number of staff assigned
to inspections has followed a similar trend (+15% from 1996 to 1998, +1.1% from 1997 to
1998).

2.2.

Fraud and irregularities

2.2.1.

Amounts established and already recovered in 1998

The annual reports contain two types of statistics on cases of fraud and irregularity: the
volume of cases detected and accounting data. The table in Annex 3 therefore sets out three
series of figures: the number of cases detected, amounts established and amounts recovered.
This gives a picture of the patterns of fraud on the Community's customs territory and the
efforts deployed in combating fraud.

A "rate of recovery" is then calculated to give an initial indication, at the end of the first year,
of the result of the efforts of each Member State to recover the amounts involved in these
cases. The table also shows the amounts established and recovered in each Member State in
relation to the totals for the Community.

It should first be pointed out that the number of cases of fraud and irregularity reported in
column 2 are far from uniform. Sometimes a country's figures are at odds with its intensive
trade in third-country goods (Germany). Numbers in the thousands may mean that
the
Member State has reported all infringements handled in the course of the year by its
government departments. By contrast, the figures for other Member States seem to indicate
that only some of the infringements have been reported.

In the case of amounts established, comparison of the data between Member States reveals
major discrepancies which are difficult to interpret: it is striking, for example, that the
amounts established in Belgium come to double the figure for Germany and the same as for
the Netherlands (column 3) and that the amounts for the United Kingdom (in cases involving
over
10 000 only) are around three times those for the Netherlands. The only explanation for
these discrepancies would be that the concepts of fraud and irregularity have not been
interpreted uniformly or that only amounts over
10 000 have been reported, i.e. those
covered by the fraud forms provided for in Article 6(4) of Regulation (EEC) No 1552/89.

€

€

6

It is worth noting that the recovery rate indicated in column 7 is a “crude” rate (i.e. the
to take account of
amounts established still have to be adjusted, where appropriate,
corrections and cancellations). The recovery figure for the year also covers amounts which
have often been established several years earlier. This rate can therefore serve only as a
indicator, giving a fairly broad picture of the recovery situation before any
statistical
corrections that have to be made.

Given this situation, it can be said that the average recovery rate for all the Member States
combined has risen markedly since 1997 (up from 23.26% to 37.63%). It has been pushed up
by the figures for a number of Member States (Denmark, Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg,
Netherlands, Portugal, Finland and Sweden) which, together, account for almost 30% of
established amounts and have an average recovery rate of 83%.

On the other hand, the rate of recovery is around 20% in a group of countries accounting for
nearly 70% of established entitlements (Belgium, Germany, Greece, France, Italy and United
Kingdom). At first sight, this variation in rate between Member States raises a problem as
regards assessing the efforts made: the shortcomings may be in establishment or in the
recovery of entitlements.

Finally, if the amounts established and recovered in each Member State in 1998 are compared
with the total amounts for all the Member States (columns 4 and 6 of the table), a strange
discrepancy is found between the relative share of some national administrations in the total
amount established and in the overall recovery figures. However, this discrepancy appears to
be caused mainly by the differences observed in amounts established. The percentages
recorded for two Member States in particular (Germany and Netherlands) require some
explanation if they are to be interpreted correctly.

2.2.2. Changes in amounts established and the rate of recovery

As treatment of cases of fraud and irregularity is necessarily cyclical, the table in Annex 4
tries to identify significant trends by examining changes in the volume of fraud over a number
of years. However, to a certain extent, this comparison of data on cases of fraud and
irregularity reported for 1995 to 1998 may reveal changes caused by different factors such as
an improvement
in inspection activity, a temporary increase in fraudulent or irregular
operations or the isolated discovery of cases of fraud or irregularity involving a particularly
high amount.

a.

Cases of fraud and irregularities

The number of fraud cases has increased in the majority of Member States (ten). However, it
has been falling steadily in Germany and sharply in Portugal. The overall increase is 25% on
1997.

The analysis comes up against the problem of the comparability of data, which relate either
exclusively to infringements reported in the fraud forms and thus to amounts exceeding
€
10 000 (United Kingdom and possibly Germany) or to all infringements (the other Member

States). However, the following anomalies should be noted:

7

– In Germany the number of cases is constantly falling with the result that the figure for

1998 is half that for 1995.

– In Denmark the number of cases is six times higher than last year.

– In Austria the number of cases rose suddenly from 64 in 1997 to 15 474 in 1998 (compared
with 47 783 in 1995). This sharp increase, similar to the one recorded in Sweden in 1997
could be a result of including cases involving less than

10 000.

€

Some discrepancies are not merely cyclical and require further explanation from the Member
States (decline in Germany and Portugal, increases in Denmark and Austria).

b.

Amounts established

In absolute terms, the amounts established in the Community as a whole tripled between 1995
and 1998, although there was a slight drop in 1998 (0.78% down on 1997). There are sharp
contrasts, however, in individual trends, with large increases in the United Kingdom, Ireland
and Luxembourg and smaller ones in Finland and Austria (a doubling of amounts
established).

Nevertheless, some changes are difficult to explain: the 42% fall in amounts established in
Belgium over the period 1995-1998 is at odds with the twofold increase in the number of
cases, while the 27% fall in Denmark is hard to explain, as the number of cases increased by a
factor of 21. The 58% drop in the Netherlands contrasts with a mere 7% reduction in the
number of cases. In general, despite the large increase in the number of infringements
detected by the Member States in 1998, the total amounts established as a result of these
infringements have, paradoxically, declined.

The case of Germany deserves a special mention here. Amounts established have moved in
parallel with the number of cases, but the Commission is intrigued by the 60% drop in both
figures. For its part, the United Kingdom recorded a threefold increase in amounts established
over the reference period, while there was a steady but slight rise in the number of cases.

The Commission does not have any data to explain these phenomena. The Member States will
be asked to provide any further information required.

c.

Rate of recovery

Between 1995 and 1998, the amounts recovered in the Community as a whole increased
substantially (fourfold in Denmark, tenfold in Austria and by a factor of forty-eight
in
Sweden), although six countries recorded a fall (Ireland, Portugal, Finland and especially
Belgium, Greece and the United Kingdom).

In three Member States (Italy, Finland and the United Kingdom, but not Luxembourg) the
decline in the rate of recovery was accompanied by a drop in the amounts established.
However, the falling rate in these Member States may be due to a number of reasons such as
cyclical factors (types of fraud leading to establishment), changes in establishment procedure
and the correction of establishments or, finally, a drop in recovery itself.

8

2.2.3.

Amounts established and amounts entered in the accounts

All traditional own resources established must be entered in the accounts. Amounts recovered
or guaranteed and not contested are entered in the "A" account (Article 6(2)(a) of Regulation
No 1552/89) and amounts which have not been recovered and are contested, even though a
security has been provided, are entered in the "B" account (Article 6(2)(b) of the Regulation).
Many of the cases of fraud and irregularity detected are contested or are not covered by a
security and are therefore entered in the "B" account.

It is therefore worthwhile comparing the amounts established and mentioned by the Member
States in their annual reports for 1998 with the totals entered in the B account (table in
Annex 5).

In 1998, the total established as a result of fraud and irregularities differed from the total
entered in the B account (containing amounts established but not yet recovered) in eight
Member States. The differences may be due to the fact that these countries reported only
cases of fraud and irregularity involving more than
10 000, contrary to the instructions in the
model annual report.6

€

The following table gives more precise details of the differences noted when comparing the
amounts established and mentioned by certain Member States in their annual reports with the
totals entered in the B account for 1995 to 1998.

Amounts established<Amounts in B account

(EUR)

Member State

Differences

D

EL

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

S

UK

TOTAL

1995

1996

1997

1998

- 93.984.391

- 67.692.435

- 75.721.840

- 105.123.249

- 17.520

- 10.711.597

- 393.152

- 37.253.440

- 5.022.805

- 328.095

-v9.395.515

- 353.094

- 15.931.675

- 13.320.715

- 1.760.482

- 7.307.827

- 27.985.598

- 8.121.325

- 5.226.456

- 27.591.278

- 57.866.009

- 157.106.515

- 133.957.506

- 202.044.339

- 3.471.092

- 32.439.052

- 193.880

- 26.834.436

- 8.378.445

- 4.875.652

- 254.062.472

- 398.834.610

In the case of Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Portugal and the United Kingdom, this
difference has consistently been negative. In 1998 it was negative for even more Member
States.

6

Annex 6, endnote 2, of the Commission Decision of 20 March 1997 laying down the arrangements for the transmission of
information by the Member States under the Communities' own resources system (C(97)800 final) states that all cases are to be
reported, regardless of threshold value.

9

This situation is obviously abnormal since the total amount established in connection with
cases of fraud and irregularity cannot be lower than the amount entered in the separate
account as not all the amounts involved in these cases are contested or without a security.

The Commission considers that this anomaly is due to the incorrect interpretation given by
some administrations to the concepts of "fraud and irregularity". In this connection it has
repeatedly asked the Member States to apply the definitions of these two concepts set out in
Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 19957 on the protection of the
Community’s financial interests or in the Convention of 27 November 1995 on the protection
of the Community's financial interests.8

2.2.4.

Annual reports/fraud forms

Article 17(3) of Regulation No 1552/89 provides for a comparison between the number of
cases of fraud and irregularity contained in the report on inspection activity and the fraud
forms submitted under Article 6(4) of the Regulation (amounts exceeding
10 000 contained
in the IRENE base for the year). This comparison is set out in the table in Annex 6.

€

The problem highlighted in last year's report no longer occurs, i.e. the amount to be recovered
according to the fraud forms received by the Commission (cases involving over
10 000) is
systematically lower than the total amount established as a result of fraud and irregularities.

€

The Commission feels that this pattern is in line with the regulations.

2.3.

Breakdown of fraud and irregularities by customs procedure and type of fraud

Not all customs procedures are equally susceptible to fraud and irregularities;
their
vulnerability may change in the course of time as certain economic sectors are briefly
targeted.

Transit operations have thus been a favourite target of fraud in recent years, particularly as
regards certain sensitive agricultural products.

The table in Annex 7 presents a quantitative picture of how cases of fraud and irregularity
break down by Member State and by customs procedure in order to determine how vulnerable
each procedure was in 1998.

It shows that, as in 1997, external transit (10.6% of cases and 10% of the total amount at
stake) and release for free circulation (80.8 % of cases of fraud/infringements accounting for
81.4% of the total amount at stake) are particularly affected. By comparison, the following
chart shows that other customs procedures and end-uses are only marginally affected.

The figures unfortunately confirm what is already a well-known trend.

7

8

OJ L 312, 23.12.1995, p. 1.
Irregularity: "Any infringement of a provision of Community law resulting from an act or omission by an economic operator
which has, or would have, the effect of prejudicing the general budget of the Communities...".
OJ C 316, 27.11.1995, p. 49.
Fraud: “Any intentional act or omission relating to:
the use or presentation of false, incorrect or incomplete statements or documents which has as its effect the illegal
-
diminution of the resources of the general budget of the European Communities or budgets managed by or on behalf of, the
European Communities,
-
-

non-disclosure of information in violation of a specific obligation, with the same effect,
misapplication of a legally obtained benefit, with the same effect".

10

As regards the breakdown of infringements by Member State, two findings require further
explanation. The amounts established by the United Kingdom concerning release for free
circulation came to nearly four times the figure for the Netherlands (and over ten times that
for Austria), despite a comparable number of cases. In the transit field, Belgium established
one and a half times the amounts established by the Netherlands (
11.145 million as against
€

€

7.25 million), again with a comparable number of cases.

F r a u d /ir r e g u la r it ie s b y c u s t o m s p r o c e d u r e

%

1 0 0 , 0
8 0 , 0
6 0 , 0
4 0 , 0
2 0 , 0
0 , 0

P
L

R
T

A
P

P
P

T
A

R
T
N
E

P ro c e d u re s

ES
R
T
U
A

C a s e s

V a lu e

Legend:

LP

TR

Free circulation

External transit

ENTR Warehousing

PA

PP

AT

Inward processing

Outward processing

Temporary admission

Other Other customs procedures and end-uses

If a comparison is now made in this respect between 1997 and 1998, as is done in the table in
Annex 8, it is found that the amounts established have decreased slightly for all procedures,
but particularly in the case of the free circulation and external transit procedures, where there
is a clear contrast between the trend in the number of infringements (which have risen
sharply) and in the amounts established (which have fallen substantially). By contrast, the
amounts established in connection with inward processing have doubled compared with 1997.

The number of cases of fraud and irregularity in connection with the transit and free
circulation procedures have increased (by 42% and 1% respectively), while the amounts
established have fallen (by 16% and 40%). For these two procedures the general trend seems
to be towards an increase in infringements with a lower financial impact. By contrast, in the
case of the inward processing procedure, both the number of infringements and the amounts
involved have increased substantially.

11

The breakdown of cases of fraud and irregularity by Member State and by type of
infringement shown in the table in Annex 9 reveals that the most common cases are
inaccuracies in the description or tariff classification of goods (26.2%), false declarations of
value (23%) and irregular entry into the customs territory of the Community (13% of cases).

impact

However, the infringements with the most
in terms of amounts established are
incorrect description of goods (21%) and false declarations of value (17.1%). These types of
infringement, which are very frequent in Sweden, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and
Austria, sometimes involve large sums, for example in France, the Netherlands and Sweden in
the case of the former and in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom in the case of the latter.
Contraband has reached remarkable levels in Germany (in terms of amounts involved) and
there are many problems with declarations of origin in Italy.

The comparison between 1997 and 1998 in the table in Annex 10 reveals a decline in the
financial impact (but not the frequency) of contraband, while the amounts established in cases
of inaccurate declarations of weight or quantity are more or less back to 1996 levels. This
comparison confirms the trend towards a higher number of infringements with a lower
financial impact, apart from incorrect classification and "other" infringements.

3.

APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 17(2) OF REGULATION (EEC, EURATOM) NO 1552/89

3.1.

Use of the procedure

Article 17(1) states that the Member States must make available to the Commission all the
entitlements they establish. When this is not possible for reasons of force majeure or in
specific cases when recovery is impossible for reasons that cannot be attributed to the
Member State, the entitlement is written off. If the amount of duty exceeds the threshold of
€
10 000, the case is referred to the Commission for examination in accordance with Article

17(2).

In 1998 two Member States notified the Commission of eleven cases in which amounts were
written off. A further fifteen cases relating to 1998 were notified in 1999.

to check all

In addition, the twelve requests to write off own resources shown in the first table in
Annex 11 (including cases notified in previous years but still pending) were examined in
the relevant data which the Member States have to report under
detail
Article 17(2) of Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 1552/89. An interdepartmental working
party, set up for this purpose in 1997, meets regularly to assess each case as effectively and as
quickly as possible. The appropriate Commission departments thus reach a common position.

Of the twelve requests mentioned above, four (including one in part) were accepted by the
Commission which, after a detailed analysis of all the information supplied, considered that
the own resources could not be recovered for reasons which could not be attributed to the
Member State concerned. However, eight requests (including one in part) were rejected as the
Commission considered that the Member State concerned has not displayed due diligence and
had not availed itself of all the powers offered by Community and national law to protect the
Community's financial interests.

12

Finally, one case was considered inadmissible since the Community entitlements for which
the write-off was requested had not been established even though the establishment of
entitlements is a precondition for application of Article 17(2). The Member State has been
held financially liable.

Of the fifteen cases in the second table in Annex 11, seven are still pending. The Commission
has not yet expressed its final position, as the information supplied by the Member States
concerned does not enable it to do so in full possession of the facts. It will complete its
examination on receipt of the information requested from the Member States concerned. In
the other eight cases the request to write-off was rejected following a detailed examination of
all the pertinent facts and with the agreement of all the relevant departments, which were duly
consulted.

Despite the Commission's inspections and the continuous dialogue with the Member States,
there has been no notable change in the number of cases written off by the Member States.
However, seven Member States make regular use of this procedure (Germany, Spain, France,
Netherlands, United Kingdom and, since 1997, Belgium and Denmark).

This is the course advocated by the Commission which considers that this procedure allows a
fair and open examination of the collection of own resources by the Member States and
makes for efficient management of Community entitlements.

3.2.

Comparison of amounts written off

The inspections carried out by the Commission included a comparison of the amounts written
off and included in the report provided for in Article 17(3) of Regulation 1552/89 and the
amounts removed from the separate accounts. Annex 12 sets out
the results of this
comparison, alongside the amounts written off in connection with the reports on fraud and
irregularities.

€

€

By 1 October the Member States had notified for consideration by the Commission a total of
fifteen write-offs for 1998 totalling
4 193 441. The total amounts entered in the separate
account, of which the Commission receives a quarterly statement, and then written off came
4 770 133 in 1998. Although the separate account records all amounts irrespective of
to
thresholds, there appears to be a considerable discrepancy between the amounts notified
10 000) and the accounting entries. Only the amounts for Ireland are
(amounts over
comparable. By contrast,
the amounts entered in the B account by Belgium and the
Netherlands are very small compared with the amounts notified. This is inconsistent with
accounting procedure.

€

€
103.8 million)
The total corrections made to established amounts entered in the B account (
92.5 million) appear to be large when
and those included in fraud forms sent in 1998 (
compared with total amounts written off. From an accounting point of view, it would make
more sense if the real problem concerning fraud and irregularities were in recovery, and be
reflected in amounts written off. Moreover, the corrected amounts in the separate account
must necessarily be higher than those arising from the fraud forms, whereas the opposite
appears to be the case here.

€

This suggests confusion between what is a revision mechanism for established own resources
entitlements and cases where debts are written off because of recovery problems. The
confusion evident in the amounts reported by Italy, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.

13

The Commission will be asking for more information on these discrepancies, which are in
apparent contradiction with Articles 8 and 17 of Regulation 1552/89.

4.

CONCLUSIONS

The Commission concludes from the information supplied that progress has been made in the
way in which the Member States report on their inspection activities and findings.

In particular, the Commission notes a clear improvement in producing and reporting data
compared with the previous two years. However,
the continuing differences in the
information reported reflect the difficulties in harmonising the basic concepts between the
Member States and, for the Member States themselves, in ensuring the internal consistency of
the information supplied.

The comparability of data thus suffers from considerable differences in the interpretation of
concepts of "fraud and irregularities" which are often incorrect. This gives a sometimes
improbable picture of the volume of fraud detected and makes it difficult to judge the record
of the national authorities.

Moreover, the information supplied by some Member States in their annual report cannot be
reconciled with figures from other sources such as the separate accounts for own resources.
Certain inconsistencies have been found this year.

As regards inspections, the information supplied shows a large overall increase in staff
assigned to this activity together with a sustained increase in the number of entries accepted.
these data do not allow precise assessment of the efforts actually made by
However,
the analysis is undermined by differences in
administrations and the reliability of
administrative organisation.

The quality of the information supplied by the Member States on their inspection findings is
better than for the previous year. However, progress is patchy and divergences between
in particular as regards amounts established.
Member States are difficult
Moreover, some Member States have seen their
in terms of both
establishment and recovery: further information is therefore required, particularly where there
is a considerable discrepancy with the volume of traffic.

results plummet

to explain,

Analysis of the national reports since 1995 gives a fairly clear picture of trends in connection
with fraud. For example, it reveals an increase in the number of infringements detected,
which, however, has had no impact on the level of established entitlements, quite the contrary.
The risk attached to the various procedures is also clearly established, the most vulnerable
being release for free circulation and transit.

As for the procedure for writing off amounts which cannot be recovered, progress remains
limited but seven Member States now use this procedure. At least part of this result can be
attributed to inspections by the Commission and the Court of Auditors in connection with the
separate account and clearance procedures, but it is also the outcome of the continuous
dialogue between the Commission and the national administrations on these matters.

Finally, the Commission would point out that the only real point of this report is to give an
idea of the efforts which the Member States are making to comply with their obligations
under Article 17(3) of Regulation No 1552/89. The document will be put before the Advisory
Committee on Own Resources. The Commission will endeavour to establish the best

14

conditions necessary to ensure that any difficulties arising in the Member States are quickly
resolved.

15

ANNEXES

16

ANNEX 1

Inspections by Member States

Member
States

Entries
accepted

Entries checked
after customs
clearance

% of entries
checked after
customs
clearance

Total number of staff
in customs
departments at
national level

Total number of staff
assigned to post-
clearance checks at
national level

Average number
of entries checked
per person

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)=(3)/(2)

4.349.229

300.756

1.211.011 (1)

79.980 (1)

24.900.000

615.315 (2)

957.634

243.455

4.065.566 (4)

388.609 (5)

9.731.275

698.365 (7)

811.748 (9)

9.950

6.646.156

45.753

114.895

4.277 (10)

31.246.637 (11)

1.732.550 (12)

5.471.853

181.438 (14)

428.310

1.721.554 (16)

1.370.000

5.248.367

(15) ……

93.930

51.000

……

6,92

6,60

2,47

25,42

9,60

11,90

1,22

1,73

9,35

5,54

3,32

……

5,46

3,72

……

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN

S

UK

Notes:

(5)

4.135

743

26.170

3.882

3.964 (6)

19.656 (8)

550

6.142

125

5.481

4.567

1.101

2.327

2.434 (18)

2.839 (19)

(6)

485

45

5.320 (3)

162

284

666

30

829

15

4.603 (13)

182

355

142 (17)

82 (18)

106 (19)

(7)=(3)/(6)

620

1.777

116

1.503

1.368

1.221

332

139

285

376

997

……

661

621

……

Number of tariff headings.
No figures available for the number of entries scrutinised in checks on firms.
Checks at firms only.
This figure includes 1 044 454 import entries.
This figure refers only to import entries checked by sampling methods.
Including 309 persons assigned to central departments and those assigned to surveillance departments.
Post-clearance documentary checks by the specialised regional services (CERDOC), not including general inspections.
Total staff numbers, including senior management and laboratory staff.
This figure includes 470 540 import entries.

(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10) Entries selected by the SADBEL computerised system, manual entries and entries checked by the Inspection d'Audit.
(11) This figure includes 25 420 799 import entries and 3 593 821 transit entries.
(12) This total includes computerised entries and entries in the agricultural sector.
(13) The figure includes 23 persons in the Ministry of Agriculture, but not tax investigation staff (FIOD).
(14) This figure includes 954 cases involving several entries.
(15) There is no reliable inventory of this type of inspection.
(16) This total includes imports and exports, in particular 418 189 transit operations.
(17) Not all staff are assigned full-time to this type of activity.
(18) Expressed in person/years.
(19)

Staff in employment at border and internal customs offices.

17

ANNEX 2

Inspections by Member States

Entries accepted

Entries checked after customs clearance

Total number of staff in customs departments at
national level

Total number of staff assigned to post-clearance checks
at national level

1996

1997

1998

Change

1996

1997

1998

Change

1996

1997

1998

Change

1996

1997

1998

Change

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

….

3.465.188

4.349.229

1.137.522

1.186.024

1.211.011

21.200.000

20.600.000

24.900.000

….

572.600

957.634

3.189.410

3.800.064

4.065.566

8.423.471

9.800.000

6.829.028

617.485

740.501

811.748

4.852.713

5.940.066

6.646.156

27.041

43.629

45.753

NL

21.272.970

25.657.280

31.246.637

A

P

FIN

S

UK

4.845.731

4.536.545

5.471.853

420.775

419.542

428.310

1.762.404

1.736.762

1.721.554

1.194.659

1.287.000

1.370.000

3.933.688

4.633.921

5.248.367

+

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

-

….

838

32.537

….

10.759

211.641

143.858

32.430

7.833

12.636

X

774.384

180.330

….

1.262.397

2.976

….

85.096

3.180

300.756

79.980

615.315

243.455

388.609

813.028

9.950

114.895

4.277 (1)

1.032.399

1.538.103

1.732.550

45.091

27.988

181.438

….

…

…

X

144.309

106.727

93.930

+

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

…

…

1.360

…

51.000

X

…

-

X

X

…

….

815

3.552

4.135

816

743

27.500

26.700

26.170

….

4.073

3.962

4.056

3.882

3.964

18.259

19.679

19.656

1.240

6.135

129

5.387

4.769

915

2.223

2.285

462

1.347

6.491

550

6.142

129

125

5.373

4.584

891

2.282

2.400

429

5.481

4.567

1.101

2.327

2.434

2.839

-

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

=

X

+

X

=

X

X

X

X

X

….

66

915

65

485

45

5.180

5.400

5.320

….

240

441

….

754

15

36

240

643

31

852

15

162

284

666

30

829

15

4.202

4.270

4.603

175

132

157

91

118

177

172

148

90

106

182

355

142

82

106

+

X

X

X

=

=

X

X

X

=

-

X

X

X

=

X

=

X

X

=

(1)

In 1998, 5854 physical checks were made, equivalent to 12.8% of the total entries handled.

18

ANNEX 3

Fraud and irregularities: amounts established and already recovered

Number of cases

Amounts
established

Establishments as
% of EU 15 total

Amounts already
recovered

Establishments as
% of EU 15 total

"Crude" recovery
rate

(Amounts in EUR)

(1)

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN (2)

S

UK (3)

(2)

12.701

3.498

290

1.781

12.828

12.243

1.159

4.414

8

16.641

15.474

463

5.024

25.936

13.194

EUR-15

125.654

(3)

43.340.242

19.120.826

24.236.751

5.242.674

21.412.278

42.198.908

5.405.318

26.599.948

85.120

43.654.564

12.539.555

202.348

3.047.336

14.367.089

112.511.528

373.964.485

(4)

11,59

5,11

6,48

1,40

5,73

11,28

1,45

7,11

0,02

11,67

3,35

0,05

0,81

3,84

30,09

(5)

8.299.009

16.515.907

5.095.808

295.671

14.582.067

8.760.277

3.610.475

5.065.210

73.383 (1)

(6)

5,9%

11,74%

3,62%

0,21%

10,36%

6,22%

2,57%

3,6%

0,05%

37.561.204

26,68%

6.105.713

171.754

2.668.209

13.887.633

18.047.642

4,34%

0,12%

1,9%

9,87%

12,82%

100,00%

(7)=(5)/(3)

19,15%

86,38%

21,03%

5,64%

68,10%

20,76%

66,79%

19,04%

86,21%

86,04%

48,69%

84,48%

87,56%

96,66%

16,04%

37,63%

100,00%

140.739.962

The euro exchange rate used in the tables is the average rate for 1998.

Notes:

(1)

(2)

This total includes around
goods.

€

3 000 corresponding to the proceeds of public auctions following the confiscation of

The computer system does not distinguish between the recovery of amounts evaded through fraud and of other
€
recovered amounts. Amounts in cases involving less than

10 000 are assumed to have been recovered.

(3) Columns 3,5 and 6 relate only to debts of over

€

10 000.

19

Fraud and irregularities: amounts established and recovery rate - Change

ANNEX 4

Number of cases

Amounts established

"Crude" recovery rate

(Amounts in EUR)

1995

1996

1997

1998

Change

1995

1996

1997

1998

Change

1995

1996

1997

1998

Change

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN

S

UK

11.258

12.701

6.507

167

726

1.042

8.617

9.932

500

1.300

14

…

47.783

415

1.811

9.485

6.820

7.052

593

657

384

1.257

1.792

10.759

12.636

10.870

12.752

594

4.232

10

1.104

4.264

21

17.931

14.002

64

1.002

3.835

28

398

4.513

3.412

3.498

290

1.781

12.828

12.243

1.159

4.414

8

16.641

15474

463

5.024

23.394

25.936

12.137

12.115

13.093

13.194

↑ ↑ ↑

↑ ↓ ↑

↑ ↓ ↓

↑ ↑↓

↑ ↑ ↑

↑ ↑ ↓

↑ ↑ ↑

↑ ↓ ↑

↓ ↑ ↓

↓ ↑

…
↓ ↑ ↑

↓ ↑ ↓

↑ ↓ ↑

↓ ↑ ↑

↓ ↑ ↑

74.151.928

40.532.767

65.710.653

43.340.242

26.103.970

17.946.990

7.309.440

19.120.826

60.413.609

38.323.565

28.473.160

24.236.751

4.095.480

7.868.906

15.733.057

5.242.674

21.147.076

21.971.279

24.354.357

21.412.278

34.457.403

32.668.325

40.961.412

42.198.908

1.424.848

3.204.644

5.887.044

5.405.318

19.725.560

48.289.595

106.587.889

26.599.948

17.866

3.526

37.853

85.120

….

104.826.310

36.014.402

43.654.564

5.937.332

1.344.518

6.036.675

12.539.555

2.964.195

2.855.173

8.261.544

202.348

1.365.885

6.973.097

3.712.886

3.047.336

3.975.905

5.572.753

-389.758

14.367.089

36.639.485

33.898.722

131.425.991

112.511.528

↓ ↑ ↓

↓ ↓ ↑

↓ ↓ ↓

↑ ↑ ↓

↑ ↑ ↓

↓ ↑ ↑

↑ ↑ ↓

↑ ↑ ↓

↓ ↑ ↑

↓ ↑

…
↓ ↑ ↑

↓ ↑ ↑

↑ ↓ ↓

↑ ↑ ↑

↓ ↑ ↓

8,13%

18,35%

18,28%

19,15%

32,30%

83,40%

62,10%

86,38%

…

3,23%

10,18%

21,03%

8,03%

2,65%

3,68%

5,64%

41,29%

49,42%

52,31%

68,10%

…

80%

21,56%

19,97%

20,76%

84,05%

73%

66,79%

1,53%

6,28%

3,89%

19,04%

100%

100,00%

100%

86,21%

…

…

90,99%

84,96%

86,04%

17,50%

10,64%

48,69%

8,54%

…

2,59%

84,48%

…

…

100%

76,77%

92,58%

87,56%

…

…

…

96,66%

22,57%

16,04%

↑ ↓ ↑

↑ ↓ ↑

↑ ↑

…
↓ ↑ ↑

↑ ↑ ↑

↓ ↑

…
↑ ↓ ↓

↑ ↓ ↑

↔ ↓ ↓

↓ ↑

…

↓ ↑

…
↓ ↑

↑ ↓

…

…
↓ ↓

20

ANNEX 5

Amounts established/Amounts entered in the accounts

Amounts established (Table 3)

Amounts entered in B account

(Amounts in EUR)

Difference

Amounts established< amounts in B
account

(5)

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

(1)

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN

S

UK

TOTAL

1998

(2)

43.340.242

19.120.826

24.236.751

5.242.674

21.412.278

42.198.908

5.405.318

26.599.948

85.120

43.654.564

12.539.555

202.348

3.047.336

14.367.089

112.511.528

373.964.485

1998 (1)

(3)

23.549.000

6.779.000

129.360.000

5.232.000

10.760.000

45.670.000

791.000

59.039.000

279.000

70.489.000

20.918.000

5.078.000

1.435.000

284.000

(4)=(2)-(3)

19.791.242

12.341.826

- 105.123.249

10.674

10.652.278

- 3.471.092

4.614.318

- 32.439.052

- 193.880

- 26.834.436

- 8.378.445

- 4.875.652

1.612.336

14.083.089

366.574.000

- 254.062.472

746.237.000

- 372.272.515

(1) Amounts corrected because of differences in rates and divergences in quarters.

21

ANNEX 6

Annual reports/Fraud forms

Annual reports - Article 17(3)
of Regulation 1552/89

Fraud forms - Article 6(4)
of Regulation 1552/89

Fraud and irregularities - Cases/total amounts
(irrespective of amount involved in individual
cases)

Fraud and irregularities - Cases/total amounts(1)
(> ECU 10 000)

Number of cases

Amounts

Number of cases

Montants

(Amounts in EUR)

Amounts given on
fraud forms >
Amounts given in
annual report

(1)

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN

S

UK

(2)

12.701

3.498

290

1.781

12.828

12.243

1.159

4.414

8

16.641

15.474

463

5.024

25.936

13.194

(3)

43.340.242

19.120.826

24.236.751

5.242.674

21.412.278

42.198.908

5.405.318

26.599.948 (2)

85.120

43.654.564

12.539.555

202.348

3.047.336

14.367.089

112.511.528

Total

125.654

373.964.485

(4)

345

131

154

2

73

212

24

173

0

210

147

18

42

96

499

2.126

(5)

12.663.823

14.702.123

14.029.860

312.760

3.338.526

14.327.051

862.568

22.986.641

0

1.846.880

6.710.265

21.509

1.682.245

8.357.308

99.068.587

200.910.147

(6)

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

(1) Net amount to be recovered, adjusted after corrections, cancellations, etc.

(2)

This figure includes five cases of fraudulent consumption involving over
€
(

1 126 812) was not entered in the accounts until 1999 for procedural reasons.

€

10 000, where the total amount at stake

22

Vulnerability of customs procedures to fraud and irregularities

ANNEX 7

Free circulation

External transit

Warehousing

Inward processing

Outward processing

Temporary admission

Other procedures

(Amounts in EUR)
Total

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

N° cas

Montant

N° cas

Montant

N° cas

Montant

N° cas

Montant

8.594

2.806

216

857

8.108

9.511

501

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

29.270.660

3.330

11.145.330

15.612.673

20.749.756

4.492.202

?

58

18

13.533.735

567

233.965

1.912.978

46.076

946.426

31.706.191

2.010

6.565.179

2.448.216

4.208

19.295.695

4

81.706

NL

12.474

32.654.478

A

P

FIN

S

UK

11.302

9.433.214

401

170.951

3.767

2.496.562

25.645

12.402.695

13.194

112.511.528

291

132

0

3.980

2.754

6

34

175

…

714.809

6.429.680

0

7.256.853

2.248.996

512

187.423

179.018

…

530

16

3

1

18

82

5

3

0

80

88

3

21

11

…

2.376.299

4.510

253.468

67

30.045

742.924

98.139

10.568

0

351.226

148.930

25.395

6.917

92.988

…

37

464

4

43

427

42

348

30

0

55

457

12

428

70

…

3.367.736

748.848

320.508

95.577

712.741

244.173

2.108.112

256.494

0

3.050.764

193.489

3.615

248.339

1.668.232

…

Total

101.588

306.860.262

13.355

37.867.245

861

4.141.476

2.417

13.018.628

39

28

5

0

45

8

0

3

0

3

30

1

147

0

…

309

4.584

153.987

730.187

0

75.113

170.015

0

47

0

4.538

60.846

56

21.038

0

…

92

2

4

76

169

76

14

4

4

2

19.629

39.923

269.854

32.338

282.092

84.772

36.042

10.944

3.414

0

799

247.431

11

53

35

…

0

9.459

24.157

…

79

182

0

786

3.494

514

0

34

0

47

44

29

574

0

…

156.003

12.701

46.340.241

2.326.920

3.498

19.120.826

0

290

24.236.751

576.413

1.781

5.242.673

5.832.125

12.828

21.412.277

2.685.654

12.243

42.198.908

0

596.520

0

1.159

4.414

8

5.405.318

26.599.948

85.120

336.705

16.641

43.654.564

201.649

15.474

12.534.555

1.818

77.598

0

…

463

202.347

5.024

3.047.336

25.936

14.367.090

13.194

112.511.528

1.220.411

1.341

1.060.055

5.783

12.791.405

125.654 376.959.482

Impact
on total

80,8%

81,4%

10,6%

10%

0,6%

1,1%

1,9%

3,5%

0,2%

0,3%

1,06%

0,3%

4,6%

3,4%

100%

100%

23

ANNEX 8

Vulnerability of customs procedures to fraud and irregularities

Free circulation

External transit

Warehousing

Inward processing

Outward processing

Temporary
admission

(Amounts in EUR)

Other procedures

Total

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

1995 (1)

Impact

1996

53.528

210.383.644

7.621

90.366.720

845

2.767.720

300

8.433.675

347

5.893.995

153

1.099.310

5.774

15.690.244

68.568

334.635.376

Impact

78,07%

62.87%

11,11%

27,%

1,23%

0,83%

0,44%

2,52%

0,51%

1,76%

0,22%

0,33%

8,42%

4,69%

8.058.039

1,7%

100 %

87.622

100%

100 %

456.152.006

100%

12.791.405

125.654

376.959.482

3,4%

100%

100%

1997

71.284

364.576.179

12.313

63.788.955

538

9.652.450

924

6.995.687

Impact

81,3%

80%

14%

14%

0,6%

2,1%

1,1%

1,5%

1998

101.588

306.860.262

13.355

37.867.245

861

4.141.476

2.417

13.018.628

Impact

80,8%

81,4%

10,6%

10%

0,6%

1,1%

1,9%

3,5%

275

0,3%

309

0,2%

1.655.875

1.016

1.589.085

0,3%

1,2%

0,3%

1.220.411

1.341

1.060.055

0,3%

1,06%

0,3%

1.272

1,5%

5.783

4,6%

(1)

The data available are not comparable.

24

ANNEX 9

Free circulation: Types of fraud and irregularities

Undeclared imports

Incorrect description of goods
or wrong CCT classification

Origin

Value

Weight / Quantity

Other

Cases

Amount

Cases

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

IRL

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN

S

UK

277

49

151

9

124

766.084

2.023.853

12.402.251

733.581

206.979

7.437

4.672.678

11.732

741.597

61

2

976

1

1.224

2.129

25

165

557

5

2.441

1.123

33

204

Amount
1.993.295

3.879.261

4.098.295

1.016.814

3.081

5.142.753

921

420

733

0

14.939.341

2.325.854

2.662.176

0

Cases

148

681

15

443

546

128

1

529

2

472

Amount

1.399.499

3.990.408

990.893

2.219.747

1.039

728.967

29

14

41

3.471.944

3.161.377

127.897

911.374

2.137

3.567.044

3.244.108

957

521

73

3.449.597

98.920

10.077.738

1.166

3.150.696

66.771

1

14.874

2.703.169

4.605

10.514.088

10.608

715.697

90.157

96

719

25.562

419.846

4.271

849.638

783

0

15.345

17

66.767

282.375

0

37.942

0

774.149

5.020

3.303

0

15

0

1

1

40

24

0

295

0

830

7

30

0

27

1.209.778

4.473

12.497.561

2.323.919

1.822

2.211.785

1.017

1.873.139

4.485

1.313.859

2.537

203.819

598.137

2.368.524

103

1.247

8.001

2.025

65.916

764.842

8.677.893

4.052.037

30

714

816

532

(Amounts in EUR)
Total

Cases

Amount

8.594

2.806

216

857

8.108

9.511

501

29.270.660

15.612.673

20.749.756

4.492.202

13.533.735

31.706.191

2.448.216

Amount
24.382.033

2.247.207

81.594

394.146

5.118.092

10.752

2.180

3.638.819

4.674

924

2

159

480

5

509

0

870

2.625.546

4.208

19.295.695

0

4

81.706

4.955.734

1.842

1.705.492

117

922

63.025

392.359

12.474

11.302

401

3.767

32.654.478

9.433.214

170.951

2.496.562

1.480.309

4.219

21.788.444

134

0

6.279

82.822.215

13.194

112.511.528

226.679

11.973

1.960.191

25.645

12.402.695

TOTAL

13.131

28.265.530

26.627

64.327.823

6.074

29.7740574

23.416

52.682.753

1.404

1.412.380

30.936

130.397.205

101.588

306.860.262

Impact
on total

13%

9,2%

26,2%

21%

6%

9,7%

23%

17,1%

1,4%

0,5%

30,4%

42,5%

100%

100%

25

ANNEX 10

Free circulation: Types of fraud and irregularities

Undeclared imports

Incorrect description of goods
or wrong CCT classification

Origin

Value

Weight / Quantity

Other

(Amounts in EUR)
Total

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

Cases

Amount

1995 (1)

Impact

1996

14.044

36.318.871

10.819

47.198.747

Impact

26.24%

17,26%

20,21%

22,43%

1997

10.642

36.579.518

Impact

14,8%

10,04%

1998

Impact

13.131

28.265.530

13%

9,2%

16.810

23,6%

26.627

26,2%

51.133.326

14,03%

64.327.823

21%

(1)

The data available are not comparable.

5.137

9,60%

6.246

8,8%

8.074

6%

48.707.825

10.946

37.295.743

23,15%

20,45%

17,73%

38.726.962

10,6%

29.774.574

9,7%

12.605

17,7%

23.416

23%

62.943.033

17,2%

52.682.753

17.1%

862

1,61%

1.128

1,6%

1.404

1,4%

1.623.394

11.720

39.239.061

0,77%

21,90%

18,65%

89.513.115

24,5%

23.853

33,5%

90.787.372

24,9%

53.528

100%

71.284

100%

210.383.641

100%

364.576.179

100%

1.412.380

30.936

130.397.205

101.588

306.860.262

0,5%

30,4%

42,5%

100%

100%

26

ANNEX11

Cases of written-off own resources handled in 1998

Reasons given

Amount

State of play

Bankruptcy

Insolvency

Accepted

Rejected

Observations

ES

ES

UK

UK

UK

UK

FR

BE

UK

UK

BE

UK

TOTAL

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

7

902.857 (1)

1.555.753 (2)

576.925 (2)

481.063 (2)

116.862 (2)

356.381 (3)

10.734 (3)

35.910 (3)

639.434 (4)

150.622 (4)

13.390 (4)

1.152.850 (4)

X

X

X

X

4

X

X

X

X

x

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

Amount paid

Rejected for euros 25.728 (paid) Accepted for euros 455.335

Amount paid

Not admissible. Amount not established (paid)

Amount paid

Old regulations

Letter being sent to Member State

(1) Case relating to 1994
(2) Case relating to 1995

(3) Case relating to 1996
(4) Case relating to 1997

Cases of written-off own resources –1998 (reported in 1999)

Reasons given

Amount

State of play

EM

BE

UK

UK

UK

UK

NL

NL

NL

NL

NL

NL

NL

NL

IR

ES

Bankruptcy

Insolvency
X

X

X

X

X

172.192

14.650

824.190

22.585

24.183

329.372

111.837

148.250

33.907

24.551

33.471

75.357

70.040

708.824

23.079

TOTAL

1

4

2.616.488

Accepted
X

Rejected

Observations

Letter being sent to Member State

Further information requested

Letter being sent to Member State

Letter being sent to Member State

Old case

Further information requested

Further information requested

Further information requested

Further information requested

Letter being sent to Member State

Letter being sent to Member State

Letter being sent to Member State

Further information requested

Further information requested

X

X

X

X

X

X

X

8

27

ANNEX 12

Corrected amounts and amounts written-off

Article 17(3) report write-offs

number

amounts

B

DK

D

EL

E

F

Irl

I

L

NL

A

P

FIN

S

UK

1

0

0

0

1

0

1

0

0

8

0

0

0

0

4

EUR 15

15

1.703.522

29.042

700.035

818.117

942.725

4.193.441

written off

42.368

11.770(2)

0

151.547

100.016

21.826

718.081

831

0

58.855

0

-3.833 (3)

6

1.075.556

2.593.110

4.770.133

B account

corrections

33.694.264

2.083.654

0

3.448.010

4.848.184

13.909.360

791.607

5.990.781

0

20.829

3.135.381

489.387

28.539

-318.549

35.765.782

103.887.229

Amounts in EUR

corrections

-4.616.880

-154.146

0

0

Ownres(1)

number

87 C

6 C

0

0

written off

0

0

0

0

-14.758

3C, 2NV

30.137

69

0

-16.941.194

0

7C

0

49C

0

0

0

0

0

-13.147.517

130C, 4NV

58.673

293.956

-273.952

0

0

-57.637.434

-92.491.856

29C

4C

0

0

71C

0

0

0

0

0

88.810

(1)
(2)
(3)

Updated figures as at 1 October 1999.
This amount is entered as a negative figure in the statement for the first quarter (impact here cancelled out).
Including a negative amount of

4 147.92 (impact here cancelled out).

€

28