WRITTEN QUESTION E-1817/01 by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission. Protection of stamps of origin.
Date: 2001-06-21
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: fraud, import (EU), industrial counterfeiting, intellectual property, proposal (EU), trade mark

C 40 E/112

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

(2002/C 40 E/111)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1817/01

by Giovanni Pittella (PSE) to the Commission

(21 June 2001)

Subject: Protection of stamps of origin

Counterfeiting and pirating of products are a recurrent danger in the world trade system. The trade in
products with fake stamps of origin accounts for between 5 % and 7 % of world trade and is worth
between € 200 billion and € 300 billion. Large quantities of semi-processed or finished products flood into
European territory from Middle Eastern markets and are subsequently passed off as European products.
The problem arises primarily because some Member States have commercial policies based on high
volumes of trade and flexible checks, making it easy to import finished or semi-processed products without
a stamp of origin. Once they have been released on to the European market, these goods compete with
products made entirely in Europe, giving rise to unfair competition. Their low cost is very often due to the
fact that they have been made by child labour.

What steps will the Commission take to avert the problem referred to above?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2001)

To combat infringements of intellectual property rights at the EU(cid:146)s external borders, the Council adopted
Council Regulation (EC) 3295/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down measures to prohibit the release for
free circulation, export, re-export or entry for a suspensive procedure of counterfeit and pirated goods (1). It
was amended by Council Regulation (EC) 241/1999 of 25 January 1999 (2) in order to widen its scope to
enable customs authorities to intervene even before the goods have cleared customs. They can now carry
out checks as soon as the goods are in customs custody (in bonded warehouses before customs clearance,
docked vessels, transhipment, free zones, free warehouses, etc.). Regulation (EC) 241/1999 also extends the
powers of customs administrations to protect
intellectual property rights by including patents and
complementary protection certificates.

The results recorded by the EU customs administrations for the year 2000 are proof that combating
counterfeiting and piracy and improving administrative control are taken very seriously. Nearly 68 million
counterfeited or pirated items were intercepted in 2000, up by 168 % on 1999.

Rights holders can guard themselves against this scourge by applying to the customs authorities for
intervention. This application means rights holders can warn the authorities that their goods are under
threat, give them the technical specifications of the goods and provide a contact person within the firm.
The customs units at the EU(cid:146)s external borders can then start checking the loads they suspect to be
infringing the holder(cid:146)s rights. This procedure is straightforward, cheap and efficient, but it is not being
used enough: in the year 2000, only 981 applications for intervention were submitted altogether.

On the single market front, the Commission adopted a communication on 30 November 2000 entitled
Follow-up to the Green Paper on combating counterfeiting and piracy in the single market (3). Among the
initiatives proposed in this action plan, there is a proposal for a Directive which will be presented in early
legislation on the means for enforcing intellectual
2002, aimed at harmonising the Member States(cid:146)
property rights.

However, none of these measures as they stand apply to goods bearing fake origin markings or none at all.
Moreover, there are no harmonised EU rules on origin marking for goods marketed in the EU; this is

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/113

subject to the Member States(cid:146) national rules. Neither is there a consensus among the EU business
community on making origin marking compulsory, which would have to apply both to imported goods
and to goods manufactured in the EU.

(1) OJ L 341, 30.12.1994.
(2) OJ L 27, 2.2.1999.
(3) COM(2000) 789 final.

(2002/C 40 E/112)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1821/01

by Jan Mulder (ELDR) to the Commission

(21 June 2001)

Subject: Cost of combating and preventing BSE in the European Union

Can the Commission indicate the approximate costs of BSE tests as carried out in the different

1.
Member States of the EU?

Can the Commission state by whom those costs are borne in the different Member States of the EU:
2.
by cattle owners, by processing undertakings, by the consumer, or by regional or national governments?

Can the Commission state what rules are applied in the different Member States of the EU to
livestock,

3.
compensation to farmers whose holdings have been infected by BSE (destruction of
compensation for loss of earnings)?

4.

Can the Commission state who pays for the destruction of the carcasses of BSE-infected herds?

Can the Commission state what the costs are of the non-use followed by destruction of animal meal,

5.
and by whom those costs are borne in the different Member States of the EU?

Does the Commission consider that it can be concluded from the answers to the above questions

6.
that cattle holders in the EU are operating under equal conditions of competition?

Answer given by Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(3 September 2001)

At present, the Commission does not have information concerning all Member States. On the basis
1.
of available information, costs of bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)-detection (sampling at slaughter
line, transportation, purchase of test-kit, laboratory analysis, etc) are estimated by Member States to vary
from ca € 43 to € 90, going up to € 350 in the United Kingdom.

2. Member States have introduced different systems for financing these costs. In some Member States,
they are fully paid by the government or regional authority. In other Member States, producers and/or
slaughterhouses and/or all operators in the chain pay part or all of the costs. The Community participates
at a rate of 100 % of the costs (VAT excluded) of the purchase of the test kit and reagents, up to a
maximum of € 15-30 per test, depending on the target group where the test was carried out.

3.
Several Member States have notified. State aid regimes compensating farmers for the the value of
animals destroyed because a case of BSE has been detected on the farm, as well as for the cost of sanitary
measures necessary on such a farm, for restocking the herd, and possibly aid for income foregone before
and during restocking. Member States frequently also take over the cost of the destruction of the animal,
and costs linked to this like transport costs. Since 1 July 2001, Article 13 (4) of Regulation (EC) No 999/
2001 of the Parliament and of the Council laying down rules for the prevention, control and eradication of
certain transmissible spongiform encephalopathies (1) provides that owners shall be compensated without
delay for the loss of the animals that have been killed or products of animal origin destroyed following
detection of a positive BSE case.