WRITTEN QUESTION E-3621/01 by Encarnación Redondo Jiménez (PPE-DE), Carmen Fraga Estevez (PPE-DE)and José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Temporary suspension of imports of Spanish clementines into the USA.
Date: 2002-01-08
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Spain, United States, agricultural trade, common commercial policy, export (EU), technical barriers to trade, trade dispute

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/15

In the case of residence in a Member State other than the country of origin, may an individual make a free
choice as to the country in which that individual pays his or her taxes?

If not, is this not contrary to the spirit of the founding principles of the European Union which aim to
enable EU citizens to seek employment and a home wherever they will in the EU?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(8 February 2002)

In the absence of unifying or harmonising measures in the Community, direct taxation falls essentially
within the competence of Member States, subject always to their obligations under the EC Treaty. They
have concluded conventions with a view to avoiding double taxation, and in so doing have allocated tax
jurisdiction between themselves. The legitimacy of that practice has been recognised by the Court of Justice
(Case C-336/96 Gilly [1998] ECR 2793; see in particular paragraph 30).

It follows that an individual having moved residence to another Member State does not have the choice in
which Member State to pay his or her taxes. Nor can this lack of choice be considered contrary to the
founding principles of the Union. A citizen should not, however, incur any double taxation by virtue of
being subject to the tax systems of more than one Member State.

It may be considered that the conclusion of bilateral conventions is an effective method of avoiding double
taxation, since it makes it possible to take into account the interaction of the taxation systems of the
Member States concerned. Nevertheless, as the Commission recognised in its Communication ‘Towards an
Internal Market without tax obstacles’ of 23 October 2001 (1), the current tax treaties of Member States
need to be improved in order to comply better with the principles of the Internal Market enshrined in the
EC Treaty. This issue is being examined further by the Commission as part of the follow-up to that
Communication.

(1) COM(2001) 582 final.

(2002/C 301 E/013)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3621/01

by Encarnación Redondo Jiménez (PPE-DE), Carmen Fraga Estevez (PPE-DE)
and José García-Margallo y Marfil (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 January 2002)

Subject: Temporary suspension of imports of Spanish clementines into the USA

This week it has been reported that imports of Spanish clementines into the USA have been temporarily
suspended and/or banned on the grounds that the US plant-health authorities have allegedly discovered
one live and several dead fruit fly (Ceratitis lapitata) larvae in imports from Spain. Following various
confused reports and a temporary re-opening lasting one hour, the US authorities decided to suspend such
imports sine die. Spanish producers reject the explanations given by the USA, which they believe to be
largely prompted by pressure from US farmers, who are experiencing direct competition from increased
European citrus-fruit exports.

In view of the fact that this illegal means may be used by other countries and in respect of other European
products, would the Commission answer the following questions:

(cid:1) Is it aware of the above threat to European exports?

(cid:1) What action is it intending to take in order to ensure that the rules laid down in agreements with

third countries are strictly observed?

C 301 E/16

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

(cid:1) If it proves to be the case that the grounds put forward by the US authorities are actually trade
barriers, how and by whom is compensation to be paid to European farmers in order to make good
the losses they have suffered in terms both of product value and of market share lost?

Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission

(15 February 2002)

The Commission is aware of this case and officials have been closely monitoring the situation. The
conditions for the exportation of clementines from Spain to the United States are subject to United States
import rules and the Commission’s initial responsibility is to verify that these rules and their application
comply with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreement on Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures.

The apparent disproportionality of the United States ban and potential illegality with the WTO provisions
have been raised separately by the Member of the Commission responsible for Trade and the Member of
the Commission responsible for Health and Consumer Protection when they met Mr Zoellick, United
States Trade Representative (USTR) in December 2001 and by the Commission Delegation in Washington.

Technical discussions are ongoing between the United States and Spanish officials which hopefully will
clarify the factual and technical aspects of the case and possibly resolve the problem. In the event that the
the Commission could consider the possibility of
issue is not resolved rapidly and satisfactorily,
appropriate action within the framework of the WTO,
in particular the Agreement on Sanitary and
Phytosanitary measures.

Exporters who at this stage seek to recover the losses arising from the United States ban should consider
pursuing this on their own behalf in the United States’ domestic courts.

(2002/C 301 E/014)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3637/01

by Fernando Fernández Martín (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 January 2002)

Subject: Diamond trafficking

There are frequent rumours and reports, not all of them confirmed, about the export and fraudulent
marketing of diamonds obtained in equatorial Africa, the countries most often mentioned being the
Democratic Republic of the Congo (Kinshasa), Angola and Sierra Leone. The diamonds are allegedly sold
on the black market in a number of European countries. According to views expressed by the authorities
in the countries mentioned and by some European diplomats with whom the questioner has spoken
personally on several occasions, the profits from the sale of diamonds on the black market are sometimes
used to fund military and guerrilla activities in the African countries.

What does the Commission know about these alleged activities? What steps have been taken in Europe
and the Community to combat these practices?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(25 February 2002)

During the past few years the evidence of rough diamonds fuelling some of the longest and most cruel
conflicts in Africa has become substantial.
In these conflicts rebel movements fighting legitimate
governments are partly financed by the proceeds from sales of rough diamonds mined in areas controlled
by these groups.