WRITTEN QUESTION E-3842/02 by Paolo Pastorelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission. The province of Novara.
Date: 2003-01-09
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Italy, Piedmont, Structural Funds, application of EU law, competence of the Member States, eligibility criteria, eligible region

C 161 E/154

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

10.7.2003

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2003)

The Sixth VAT Directive (1) currently stipulates that only the standard rate may be charged on compact
discs in all Member States. This already ensures a degree of harmonisation in practice of the taxation of
CDs throughout the Community (in fact the standard rate varies between Member States from 15 % to
25 %). However, the lower rates are optional for Member States and introducing this option on CDs would
only accentuate the differences between the rates applied in the Community.

Lowering the rate of VAT is often cited as a way of tackling the serious problems confronting the music
industry, caused mainly by piracy and the growth of
illicit and alternative markets, a worsening
phenomenon throughout the world in recent years.

Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that lowering the rate of VAT may not be sufficient to combat
organised piracy effectively at the international level.

In many cases a reduction in the rate of VAT is not fully passed on in the final price to the consumer.
Even when it is passed on, the effect is normally only transitory and disappears in time. And even if the
reduction were passed on completely, the price would still be higher than the black market price.

On the specific question of computer piracy by downloading from the Internet, lowering the rate of VAT
is unlikely to prevent consumers from continuing the practice. The equipment required for copying is sold
freely and only a truly deterrent measure would be capable of changing habits. The application of taxes
specifically for this purpose on the equipment and the blank CDs, as some countries already do on audio
cassettes, would probably have a more beneficial effect and help not only offset the loss of royalties but
also penalise the counterfeiters.

As regards the Commission’s intentions, they have not yet been finally decided. Once the evaluation report
on the experimental reduction of the rate on labour-intensive services has been finalised, the Commission
will present an overall report and a proposal for a directive on the field of application of reduced rates at
the end of the first half of 2003.

(1) Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977, as last amended by Council Directive 2002/93/EC of
3 December 2002, to extend the facility allowing Member States to apply reduced rates of VAT to certain labour-
intensive services, OJ L 331, 7.12.2002.

(2003/C 161 E/159)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3842/02

by Paolo Pastorelli (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(9 January 2003)

Subject: The province of Novara

Following the creation of the province of Verbano-Cusio-Ossola (VCO) the province of Novara is now the
only one in Piedmont which does not receive assistance from the Structural Funds granted by the
European Union in accordance with Regulation (EEC) 2081/93 (1), but its exclusion does not automatically
mean that the new province of Novara does not come within the scope of the parameters laid down for
Objective 2 of the Funds, which constitute the main instrument of economic and social cohesion and an
expression of intra-Community solidarity.

The subsidies which the European Union allocates to the industrial sectors in the regions covered by
Objective 2 are precisely designed to slow down, arrest and reverse processes of industrial decline in
regions which have undergone considerable development of the secondary sector. In view of all this, does
the Commission intend to check the data and parameters in its possession in order to ascertain the
possibility of including the province of Novara among the Objective 2 regions?

(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 5.

10.7.2003

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 161 E/155

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(30 January 2003)

The Honourable Member is reminded that the list of areas eligible under Objective 2 is determined by the
Commission on the basis of each Member State’s proposals.

Novara Province was not eligible under Objective 2 during the programming period ending on
31 December 1999, nor does it appear on the list of eligible Italian areas for the period 2000-2006
decided on by the Commission on 27 July 2000. Under Article 4(11) of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 (1)
this list is valid up to 31 December 2006 but during 2003 can be modified by the Commission in
response to a proposal from Italy occasioned by grave crisis in a region.

However no increase in the coverage of each NUTS II region in population terms is permitted.

Thus any addition of territory in Novara Province to the list of eligible areas would have to be offset by
removal from eligibility of another part of Piedmont Region of equivalent population size.

New areas proposed for Objective 2 eligibility must also meet the criteria set in Article 4(1) to (10) of
Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999.

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

OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2003/C 161 E/160)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3862/02

by Ioannis Averoff (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(10 January 2003)

Subject: Funding of a hydroelectric plant at Anilio in the Prefecture of Ioannina

Lakmos Energy Ltd was allocated funding under the second CSF, in particular the Operational Programme
for Energy of the Ministry of Development, to construct a small hydroelectric plant at Anilio in the
Prefecture of Ioannina. However, work was interrupted when the one-member Court of the First Instance
of Ioannina issued a court order, following an appeal
lodged by the inhabitants of Anilio and the
Municipality of Metsovo, who claim that environmental legislation is being violated. A definitive ruling by
the district court of Metsovo is still pending, but the project has already been entered in the third CSF,
notably the Operational Programme for Competitiveness.

Will the Commission say by what precise procedure (invitation to tender or other) the project was entered
in the second and third CSF, what is its overall budget, how funds have been distributed between the two
CSFs and what is the precise percentage of Community, national and private funding for this project?

Answer given by Mr Barnier on behalf of the Commission

(7 February 2003)

Following a call for tenders launched under the ‘Efficient use of energy’ aid scheme approved by the
Commission, the investment project to which the Honourable Member refers was included in the ‘Energy’
operational programme of
framework for Greece. The total
contractual cost was GRD 388 million, of which 54 % was to be provided by the investor, 23 % by the
Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and 23 % by the State.

the 1994-1999 Community support

The opening of judicial enquiries entailed the suspension of work on the project. The relevant national
authorities were informed that the project would be deleted from the programme in preparation for its
closure by the Commission.