WRITTEN QUESTION P-2969/02 by Bert Doorn (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Binding tariff information (BTI) database.
Date: 2002-10-16
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Combined Nomenclature, access to EU information, customs document, customs formalities, customs harmonisation, customs regulations, database, restriction on competition, single market

7.11.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 268 E/23

‘compensation’ may need to be negotiated with Members
the modification or withdrawal. On request,
whose trade is affected. This does not mean monetary compensation, but
the
withdrawn commitment by another of equivalent value. Any compensatory adjustments shall be made on
a most-favoured-nation basis.

the replacement of

The GATS agreement is an integral part of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) Agreement, and binding
on all WTO Members (Article II of the WTO Agreement). It is therefore not possible for a Member to
withdraw from the GATS as a whole without also withdrawing from the WTO. A Member wishing to
withdraw from the WTO must, according to Article XV of the WTO Agreement, notify the Director-
General of the WTO at least six months before the intended date of withdrawal.

(2003/C 268 E/027)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2969/02

by Bert Doorn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(16 October 2002)

Subject: Binding tariff information (BTI) database

When new products are imported into the internal market they have to be classified for taxation purposes.
For some products, ‘binding tariff information (BTI)’ is issued. Sometimes, different customs services issue
different BTIs for the same products, and sometimes the classification assigned, and hence the BTI, is
incorrect. This situation is an obstacle to the internal market, distorts competition and is damaging to
European industry. To a large extent it could be remedied by establishing a directly accessible database on
the Internet, so that businesses which had suffered could take action quickly.

Towards the end of 2000, Commissioner Bolkestein promised industry in the Netherlands in a letter that a
BTI database which could be consulted via the Internet would be set up shortly. That was nearly two years
ago, and there is still no such database for use by those involved in international trade.

Now the CD-ROM version is no longer being published, either. This makes it very difficult for industry to
ascertain what products have been registered.

Is the Commission aware of the unclear situation which currently exists regarding the registration of
binding tariff information?

Is the Commission aware of
information and the economic damage they may suffer as a result?

the difficulties experienced by businesses in obtaining binding tariff

When will the Commission keep its promise to establish a BTI database which is up to date and can be
consulted direct, via the website, by those involved in international trade?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 November 2002)

Binding Tariff Information (BTI) is regulated by Article 12 of the Community Customs Code (Council
Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 of 12 October 1992 establishing the Community Customs Code (1)) and
Articles 5-14 of the corresponding Implementing Provisions (Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of
2 July 1993 (2)).

Binding Tariff Information is a classification decision issued (cid:1) prior to an envisaged importation or
exportation (cid:1) by a national administration for one specific product in favour of an economic operator
(holder). It is an instrument designed to assist economic operators in obtaining the correct classification of
their goods in the tariff and statistical nomenclature when filling in their import or export declaration and
to give them legal security. It is generally valid for six years in all Member States, regardless of the Member
State that issued it.

C 268 E/24

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

7.11.2003

If divergences arise, due to differing interpretations of the Tariff and Statistical Nomenclature by national
administrations, they are dealt with in the framework of the Customs Code Committee and appropriate
measures to end the differing interpretations (for example, a classification regulation or explanatory note)
are taken. This might lead to the revocation of a BTI. In this case, a period of grace of up to six months is
granted in order to allow the economic operator to adapt to the harmonised interpretation of the Tariff
and Statistical Nomenclature, in accordance with Article 12(6) of the Customs Code.

All BTIs issued by Member States, containing both confidential and non-confidential data, are stored in a
central database managed by the Commission and accessible to all national administrations. A thesaurus
facilitates the understanding of BTIs issued in the various Community languages. In addition, in the past,
the Commission made publicly available a CD-ROM containing an extract of the database (not showing the
confidential data such as the data about the holder or detailed information about the composition of the
goods). Currently, this CD-ROM is no longer issued for technical and budgetary reasons.

However, the Commission agrees with the Honourable Member on the importance of public access to the
classification decisions stored in the database, as it may be helpful for economic operators when making
their import or export declaration. The Commission is, therefore, in collaboration with Member States,
working on the contents of the database as well as on the updating of its thesaurus, in order to allow all
operators to consult the Binding Tariff Information issued in the various Community languages. Public
access to the database (non-confidential data) is scheduled towards the end of 2003.

(1) OJ L 302, 19.10.1992.
(2) OJ L 253, 11.10.1993.

(2003/C 268 E/028)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3000/02

by Sir Robert Atkins (PPE-DE), Guido Bodrato (PPE-DE)
and Malcolm Harbour (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(23 October 2002)

Subject: Unfair competition on the market for aluminium scrap

The OEA (Organisation of European Aluminium Refiners and Remelters), an organisation representing 175
companies which produced a total of approximately 2 900 000 tonnes of aluminium in 2001, has drawn
attention to the situation set out below. Aluminium scrap prices are more or less the same everywhere on
the world market. However, Russia and Ukraine are out of step with the market price, given that in 2000
Ukraine imposed a total ban on exports of aluminium scrap and that Russia has steadily increased the
duties it levies, thus making it impossible for European producers to obtain supplies on these markets. This
situation is distorting competition: Ukrainian producers have a ready supply of cheap scrap on their
domestic market and face no competition whatsoever, while the duty payable on imports into the EU of
alloys produced in Russia and Ukraine stands at 6 %.

In view of the wholly justified concern expressed by the OEA, how does the Commission intend to put an
end to this serious distortion of competition?

Would it not agree that it should propose that the barriers imposed by Russia (30 % duty) and Ukraine to
trade in scrap should be removed, that the duty levied be brought into line with that in force for imports
of finished products into the EU market (6 %) or even that, taking a leaf out of the USA’s book, a 100 %
levy should be imposed on imports of aluminium alloys for pressure die casting produced in Ukraine and
Russia?