WRITTEN QUESTION E-2625/02 by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission. VAT on postal services.
Date: 2002-09-18
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: European Commission, VAT, postal service, proposal (EU), restriction on competition, tax exemption

C 192 E/68

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

14.8.2003

In view of all this, can the Commission say whether the superhighway is being financed by the structural
funds? Does it consider that the project submitted by the government is sufficient to meet the social and
economic needs and protect the environment and landscape of the Morrazo peninsula? Is the Commission
aware of the circumstances of the study and the implementation of the project? Does the environmental
impact study submitted by the government meet the requirements of EU directives? Has the Commission
analysed whether the final version of the project meets its own requirements concerning environmental
impact assessment? Is that the Commission willing to consider the statements submitted by the inhabitants
of Morrazo? Does the Commission know that the Galician government is refusing the dialogue requested
by the inhabitants of Morrazo who submitted objections to the superhighway project? Is it willing to
promote this dialogue?

Supplementary answer
given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2003)

The Spanish authorities have informed the Commission that they intend to include in measure 6,1 (Roads
and trunk roads) of the Galicia 2000-2006 Operational Programme a project to build a 21 km long super
highway, estimated cost EUR 70 003 700,4, on the Morrazo peninsula.

Work was scheduled to begin between December 2002 and February 2003 and last until 2006.

They have also stated that an environmental impact assessment has already been made for the project, for
which the corresponding declaration issued by the Directorate-General for Public Works of the Xunta de
Galicia and dated 27 July 2001, was published in Official Journal of Galicia No 158 of 16 August 2001.
Since the Commission has not yet received the assessment it cannot at present comment on its content or
compliance with the requirements of Directive 85/337/EEC (1), amended by Directive 97/11/EC (2).

Since the project cost is more than EUR 50 million the approval procedure for major projects has to be
used (see Articles 25 and 26 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (3)).

(1) Council Directive 85/337/EEC of 27 June 1985 on assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects

on the environment (cid:1) OJ L 175, 5.7.1985.

(2) Council Directive 97/11/EC of 3 March 1997 amending Directive 85/337/EEC on assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment (cid:1) OJ L 73, 14.3.1997.

(3) Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (cid:1)

OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2003/C 192 E/067)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2625/02

by Markus Ferber (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 September 2002)

Subject: VAT on postal services

The Commission has announced on several occasions that it will be presenting a proposal on the
introduction of VAT on postal services.

Now that the Postal Services Directive has been adopted, when may we expect to see a Commission
proposal to this effect?

What stage have discussions reached? What is the Commission’s current thinking on this matter?

14.8.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 192 E/69

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(21 November 2002)

The Commission remains concerned that the current VAT exemption for postal services gives rise to
significant distortion of competition and is therefore no longer appropriate. In line with its objective to
modernise the VAT system, it is considering making a proposal to rectify this situation. It is hoped that
such a proposal will be made early 2003.

(2003/C 192 E/068)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2626/02

by Klaus-Heiner Lehne (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(18 September 2002)

Subject: Customs classification of granules, containing sugar, for the manufacture of lemon tea drinks

For German suppliers, the Commission classifies lemon tea under Customs Tariff No 21069098 ‘Food
preparations containing more than 5 % sucrose’, and for Polish suppliers under CCT No 2101209092,
‘preparations with a basis of extracts, essences or concentrates of tea or mate’.

This classification means that Polish lemon tea can be imported free of customs duty from Poland. The
price of sugar in Poland, which is considerably lower than that in the EU, and the lack of a compensation
in the form of
the customs duty which would be incurred by correct classification under CCT
No 21069098, results in Polish suppliers being able to supply a comparable lemon tea product at a
significantly lower price than firms producing the product in Germany.

The same distortions of competition arise between German and Slovenian drinks manufacturers, because
the latter’s competitive advantages are also not levelled out by customs duty. The parties who suffer as a
result of this classification are the German firms, who will eventually cease to be competitive, leading to
their closure and to higher unemployment in the EU.

1.
How does it come about that a lemon tea drink comprising 90,1 % sugar and 2,5 % instant tea,
produced in Poland and imported into Germany, is classified under the customs-free CCT No 2101209092,
while tea produced in Germany comprising 95 % sugar and ca 1,2-1,8 % tea extract is classified under CCT
No 21069098, which does attract customs duty?

2.

How can this action by the Commission be justified under Article 27(b) of the EC Treaty?

3. Will the Commission be improving the CCT classification of granulates for European firms in future,
thereby creating balanced conditions of competition, e.g. by amending the CCT and statistical
nomenclature?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(29 October 2002)

In order to eliminate divergences in the tariff classification of sweet preparations based on tea extract,
classified by some Member State customs authorities under heading 2101 20 92, by others under
2106 90 98, on 12 February 2001 the Commission adopted Commission Regulation (EC) No 306/2001 of
12 February 2001 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature (1) which
classifies a product known as ‘lemon tea’, in powdered form, comprising 90,1 % sugar, 2,5 % tea extract
and lemon flavouring under heading 2101 20 92. Under the EC-Poland and EC-Slovenia Agreements, this
heading qualifies for exemption from import duties.

As regards the two products mentioned by the Honourable Member, and on the basis of the information
provided, the Commission considers that the two products comprising 90,1 % sugar and 2,5 % tea extract
and 95 % sugar and 1,2 to 1,8 % tea extract, respectively, can be classified under heading 2101 20 92 on
the basis of the abovementioned Regulation.