WRITTEN QUESTION P-0436/02 by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission. Tax on cars in Denmark.
Date: 2002-02-12
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Denmark, consumer protection, fiscal policy, free movement of goods, used goods, vehicle fleet, vehicle tax

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/39

1. What is the Commission’s view of the proceedings to ban the pro-Kurdish HADEP party?

2. What is the Commission’s assessment of the constitutional amendments in Turkey, which are
supposed to make it more difficult to ban parties in Turkey?

3.

Is the Commission aware of the arrest of the students?

4. What is the Commission’s assessment of the constitutional amendments on the use of the Kurdish
language?

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(22 March 2002)

1.
Like the Parliament, the Commission is monitoring closely the developments related to the judicial
proceedings against the Halkin Demokrasi Partisi (HADEP) party in the Constitutional Court. A hearing
took place on 1 March 2002. During this hearing, HADEP presented its defence. In spite of several
attempts it proved impossible for the Commission to attend this hearing as the session was entirely behind
closed doors.

In 2001, the Turkish Parliament amended the constitution to strengthen human rights in Turkey.
2.
However, it left the grounds for closure of political parties unchanged. The current provisions are not in
line with Union standards.

The Commission has been monitoring the activity of certain students about receiving education in
3.
their mother tongue.
In this context, the Commission is concerned by the reaction of the Turkish
authorities with respect to the exercise of the right of petition by the students, especially as the right of
petition has been broadened by a recent amendment of Article 74 of the Turkish constitution.

As regards cultural rights, the Commission noted in its Regular Report of 13 November 2001 (1) that
4.
the amendment to Articles 26 and 28 of the Constitution can be considered as progress. The constitutional
provisions forbidding the use of languages prohibited by law has now been abolished. As a next step,
changes in restrictive legislation will be needed to ensure these rights can be enjoyed in practice.

(1) COM(2001) 700 final.

(2002/C 301 E/041)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-0436/02

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(12 February 2002)

Subject: Tax on cars in Denmark

Denmark maintains a very high level of tax on cars and motorbikes, resulting in an approximately 200 %
increase in dealers’ selling prices which consists partly of registration tax and partly of VAT.

It therefore has a higher proportion of small and older cars than comparable countries. It is a well-known
fact that old and smaller cars present a higher risk of accident than new and larger cars, and that older cars
cause more pollution.

The Commission has presumably noted the effects its proposal for new rules on selling cars in Europe will
have on the car trade in Denmark and on Danish consumers. If the proposal is implemented, the selling
price of a medium-sized car in Denmark will typically rise by 37 %, thus adding to the problems faced by
Danish consumers.

The Commission is presumably also aware that imports of second-hand cars into Denmark from other EU
Members States are limited by a tax which always brings the consumer’s total expenditure up to the price

C 301 E/40

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

5.12.2002

payable for a similar, Danish second-hand car, but which can also exceed the rate of tax on new cars,
because second-hand car prices are falling relatively faster in most other Member States than they are in
Denmark.

As Denmark is not a car-producing country, the level of taxation on cars probably cannot be classified as a
technical barrier to trade, but it does enormously restrict consumers’ freedom of choice and it is impeding
the free movement of goods in the EU.

The Commission’s proposal to amend the current rules on selling cars in the EU, as well as a reduction in
Danish taxes, will obviously mean losses for Danish car dealers. The proposed new EU rules will increase
car prices in Denmark so much that car sales are expected to fall by up to half, and the standardisation of
taxes on cars in Denmark will mean car dealers make a loss on their stocks of second-hand cars, which are
generally bought at three times the average price paid in other EU Member States. Changes to the rules on
selling cars and to the tax regime in Denmark must therefore be considered together and need to be
planned carefully.

In view of this, will the Commission explain what options it is considering for making Denmark change
the way it taxes cars?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(13 March 2002)

The draft Regulation recently adopted by the Commission on a block exemption for motor-vehicle
distribution and servicing concerns the application of Article 81 of the EC Treaty, which covers agreements
between undertakings, not legislative or regulatory provisions per se. This Article stipulates that such
agreements must, if they are to be eligible for an exemption from the prohibition of such agreements in
the Community, allow consumers a fair share of
in
distribution.

the benefit resulting from any improvement

The Commission’s evaluation report on the working of the current Commission Regulation (EC) No
1475/95 of 28 June 1995 on the application of Article 85(3) of the Treaty to certain categories of motor
vehicle distribution and servicing agreements (1) concludes that tax is not the only factor behind price
differences in the internal market. Other factors include the pricing strategies of players on the market,
which depend, among other things, on the competition rules governing distribution. The draft Regulation
is therefore aimed at stimulating competition to benefit the EU’s consumers, in accordance with Article 81.
As for the situation on the Danish retail and servicing markets, the Commission has seen the report drawn
up by Denmark’s competition authorities in June 2001. The report cites Regulation (EC) No 1475/95 as
one of the main reasons for the relative lack of competition on the Danish market. As for possible price
increases in Denmark, the Commission has seen no evidence to suggest that prices will rise, and still less
that they will rise by the amounts suggested in the question. It notes, however, that the relatively low
concentration of supply in Denmark would allow competitors to respond to individual price rises by a
given manufacturer.

On the specific issue of taxation, the overall level of Danish taxes is not in itself incompatible with the
provisions of Articles 23, 25 and 90 of the EC Treaty. On 15 February 1988 the Commission applied to
the Court of Justice for a ruling that Denmark had failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 90 of the EC
Treaty on the grounds that its excessive taxation of new vehicles on registration compromised the free
movement of goods in the Community and was incompatible with Article 90.

The Court of Justice considered the registration tax applied by Denmark at that time to new vehicles and
ruled that Article 90 of the EC Treaty ‘does not provide a basis for censuring the excessiveness of the level
of taxation which the Member States might adopt for particular products in the absence of discriminatory
or protective effect’ (2).

5.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 301 E/41

Lastly, as Community law stands, there is no rule of secondary law concerning the harmonisation of
motor-vehicle taxation that obliges Member States to reduce the overall level of the taxes concerned.

The Commission would point out that Denmark, to comply with Article 90(1) of the EC Treaty, must not
subject second-hand cars and motorcycles shipped to its territory from another Member State to a
registration tax which, even in a limited number of cases, exceeds the amount of residual tax incorporated
in the value of similar vehicles already registered in the national territory. The latter have already been
taxed on registration in the national territory and such tax represents part of their value when they cease
to be new. As the vehicle is used,
tax diminishes in step with its value. To avoid
discrimination against ‘imports’, the reduction in the tax applicable to the ‘imported’ second-hand vehicle
(compared with the tax due on such a vehicle if new) must therefore be proportional to its true
depreciation.

this residual

On 22 February 2001 the Court of Justice issued another long-awaited ruling in a similar case. This ruling,
which concurs with the Commission’s point of view, calls for a number of Member States to revise their
current system for calculating the assessment basis for second-hand vehicles (3). The expected revision will
be more advantageous for EU citizens and the traders concerned.

(1) OJ L 145, 29.6.1995.
(2) Case C-47/88 Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Denmark ECR [1990] p. I-4509.
(3) Case C-393/98 Ministério Público and António Gomes Valente v Fazenda Pública ECR [2001] Page I-1327.

(2002/C 301 E/042)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0445/02

by Eluned Morgan (PSE) to the Commission

(21 February 2002)

Subject: Regional and minority languages

How does the Commission intend to spend the money that has been allocated to budget line B3-1007 in
the EU budget for 2002?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(17 April 2002)

In a letter of 29 November 2001 to Mr Terry Wynn, Chairman of the Committee for Budgets, the Member
of the Commission responsible for the Budget, informed the Parliament that the Commission would not be
in a position to implement the appropriations under budget line B3-1007 (Preparatory actions concerning
promotion and safeguard of regional and minority languages, dialects and cultures)
in view of the
restrictions on preparatory actions set out in the Interinstitutional Agreement of 6 May 1999 between the
Parliament, the Council and the Commission on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary
procedure. The Commission regrets to inform the Honourable Member that it can find no means of
executing this line while respecting its obligations vis-à-vis the Parliament and the Council under the said
Agreement.

Preparatory actions for safeguarding and promoting regional and minority languages and cultures were
suspended after 2000 because there was no prospect of the legislative procedure for a legal base being
concluded before the end of the third financial year of preparatory actions. This objection still stands.

The Commission has announced that it will conduct a thoroughgoing evaluation of the European Year of
Languages 2001 from which it will draw conclusions with a view to presenting proposals for actions in
favour of linguistic diversity and language learning in 2003.