WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/01 by Nicholas Clegg (ELDR) to the Commission. 'Euro Made Easy' information packs.
Date: 2001-11-14
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: United Kingdom, euro, non-participating country (euro area), public awareness campaign, teaching materials

C 205 E/24

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

29.8.2002

The Declaration on the TRIPs Agreement and Public Health referred to above, and which is in line with the
position adopted by the Community before the Conference, represents a significant step forward in the
debate on access to medicines. It brings clarification with regard to the link between the TRIPs Agreement
and WTO Members’ right to adopt public health measures. In addition, it reflects the consensus reached on
the definition of the flexibility inherent in several relevant TRIPs provisions.

(2002/C 205 E/023)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3100/01

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

Subject: Additional municipal levy on forest products in Greece

(13 November 2001)

In Greece, in addition to normal VAT, a further municipal tax is levied on domestic forest products at the
primary processing (logging) stage. This tax is calculated each year by the Ministry for Agriculture and,
together with VAT, currently amounts to 17 % of the market price.

This additional municipal levy is to the benefit of imported timber and to the detriment of domestic forest
products. It creates serious economic and social problems for forest workers, their cooperatives and the
local economy of the disadvantaged and mountain regions of Greece. What measures will the Commission
therefore take to secure the abolition of the additional municipal tax levied by Greece on domestic forest
products at the primary processing stage, which undermines healthy competition and is contrary to EU
competition policy?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Certain fiscal matters have been subject to harmonisation within the Community. This is the case for
valued added tax and for excise duties on tobacco, alcohol and mineral oils. There has been no
harmonisation of taxes on forest products. The Member States therefore remain free to levy the taxes they
see fit on these products, as long as they respect the general principles of the EC Treaty.

Article 90 (ex Article 95) of the EC Treaty prohibits discriminatory taxation by which a Member State gives
an advantage to its domestic products as compared to the products of other Member States. However, this
article does not prohibit fiscal measures which put a Member State’s own products at a disadvantage
compared to products of other Member States.

In view of this, the Commission has no intention to take measures in respect of the levy on forest products
in Greece.

(2002/C 205 E/024)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3147/01

by Nicholas Clegg (ELDR) to the Commission

(14 November 2001)

Subject:

’Euro Made Easy’ information packs

Are British citizens allowed to receive the ‘Euro Made Easy’
information on the single currency? If not, why not?

information packs produced to provide

29.8.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 205 E/25

Answer given by Mr Solbes Mira on behalf of the Commission

(11 January 2002)

There is no reason whatsoever to prevent British citizens from receiving ‘Euro Made Easy’ information
packs aimed at all European citizens without distinction, if they ask for it. The only reasons for which this
has not happened are that the Commission has until now not been approached by the organised British
civil society to offer supporting materials in the framework of a given action. Even if requests were to
come in after the introduction of the Euro, the Commission will be happy to help, to the extent remaining
stocks allow it.

(2002/C 205 E/025)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3156/01

by Charles Tannock (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(14 November 2001)

Subject: Seizure of suspected contraband by HM Customs at UK points of entry

Does the Commission object to the seizure by HM Customs of large quantities of alcohol and cigarettes at
UK points of entry from individuals suspected of importing these items not for personal consumption but
in order to sell them to others, on the grounds that it violates the presumption of innocence, and, if so,
would it have no objections were HM Customs instead to mark bottles, packets or crates which it suspects
of being destined for sale with visible or invisible markings which could then form the basis of subsequent
prosecutions?

Does the Commission also believe that it would be helpful if the UK Chancellor of the Exchequer were to
reduce the current level of excise duty on these items to nearer the levels on the Continent, to reduce the
incentive for individuals or gangs to bring large quantities into the U.K. for the purposes of illegal sale?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 December 2001)

Under Council directive 92/12/EEC of 25 February 1992 on the general arrangements for products subject
to excise duty and on the holding, movement and monitoring of such products (1), Member States are
required to make a distinction between products subject to excise duty (e.g. tobacco products) when such
products, having been released for consumption in one Member State, are held by private individuals in
another Member State. If the products are held for the individuals’ own use, then the excise duties are due
in the Member State in which the goods were acquired. If, on the other hand, the products are held for
commercial purposes, then the excise duties are due in the second Member State. In order to make this
distinction between goods held for private or commercial purposes, the Member State must follow the
indications laid down in Article 9(2) of the Directive 92/12/EEC. In cases of breach of the excise duty rules,
the Member States are entitled to use such sanctions as they deem appropriate, as long as the sanctions
remain necessary and proportional.

As the Honourable Member is no doubt aware, the Commission recently decided to initiate proceedings
against the United Kingdom under Article 226 (ex Article 169) of the EC Treaty. The Commission has
issued a letter of
formal notice concerning the application of the above mentioned aspects of the
harmonised excise duty rules and the proportionality of certain sanctions applied by the United Kingdom,
and is now awaiting the United Kingdom’s reply to this letter.

As concerns the methods for marking excised goods suggested by the Honourable Member,
the
Commission notes that such measures are not expressly covered by the harmonised rules of Directive
92/12/EEC. The Member States are, in principle, free to determine which methods are best suited to put
the Directives into practice. It must however be emphasised that they may not apply measures which give
rise to formalities linked to the crossing of the borders between Member States.