WRITTEN QUESTION P-2646/03 by Elizabeth Lynne (ELDR) to the Commission. Customs classification of ostomy appliances.
Date: 2003-08-28
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: CCT duties, Combined Nomenclature, facilities for people with disabilities, health expenditure, medical device

8.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 88 E/425

(2004/C 88 E/0431)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2646/03

by Elizabeth Lynne (ELDR) to the Commission

(28 August 2003)

Subject: Customs classification of ostomy appliances

Is it true that the European Commission is proposing to reclassify ostomy appliances under CN Heading
3926 (general plastic) instead of Heading 9021 (appliances that compensate for a disability)?

Is the Commission aware that in practice this would make ostomy appliances more expensive, because of
import duties, which would be zero-rated if the appliances were classified under Heading 9021?

Is the Commission aware that if the proposed classification is used in the World Customs Organisation, the
access of ostomates to such products in Eastern Europe and developing countries would be extremely
difficult and expensive, due to higher import duties in these countries?

With which organisations has the European Commission consulted when it decided to propose the
reclassification?

Does the Commission agree that ostomy appliances perform the function of the removed part of the gut
or urinary tract?

Could they not be considered ‘appliances which are worn or carried or implanted in the body, to
compensate for a defect and disability’ (CN Heading 9021)?

In any event, what does the Commission intend to do in order to ensure that disabled people (ostomates)
in the EU and developing countries are not affected by this customs classification?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(23 September 2003)

No. The Commission is not proposing to reclassify ostomy appliances. The Commission has taken action
to clarify the classification of the two main components of ostomy appliances which are presented
separately, namely the adhesive wafer and the pouch. Therefore, the Commission adopted in 1999
Decision 2000/41/EC (1) invalidating a number of decisions issued by Member States, so-called binding
tariff information (BTIs) classifying incorrectly certain components of ostomy products under CN codes
9018 90 85 and 9021 90 90. Furthermore, in 2002 the Commission published an Explanatory Note to
the Combined Nomenclature (2) clarifying what is meant by the expression ‘to compensate for a defect or
disability’, the result of which is that the adhesive wafer and the pouch are not classifiable in the
Harmonised System (HS) heading 9021 but according to the constituent material.

Yes. The Commission is aware of the economic consequences of the application of the correct products
classification. However, classification decisions are not taken on the basis of their economic consequences
but in order to ensure the correct and uniform application of the Combined Nomenclature within the
Union.

When determining the duty rate to be applied, correct heading in the nomenclature used in the
Community’s Common Customs Tariff (CCT) (3) in accordance with the General Interpretative Rules, must
be identified. These rules can be found in the introductory part of the tariff. It should be noted that the
duty rates in question are the outcome of tariff negotiations based on the HS nomenclature in the World
Trade Organisation/General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (WTO/GATT).

C 88 E/426

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

8.4.2004

Yes. The Commission is aware that some contracting parties to the HS Convention, such as the United
States and Norway, classify the two main components of ostomy appliance, namely the adhesive wafer and
the pouch, under HS heading 3962 when made of plastics.

None. When the Commission adopts classification measures, this is done to ensure a uniform application
within the Union of the Common Customs Tariff as foreseen by Article 23 of the consolidated version of
the EC Treaty. In order to adopt such measures, the Commission applies the rules for the interpretation of
the nomenclature to the product concerned on the basis of
the available documentation including
laboratory controls.

The products to be classified are the adhesive wafer and the pouch. The Honourable Member will find the
answer in the Explanatory Note referred to above.

At international level the Commission envisages two types of action.

The first will address part of the classification issue by suggesting a transfer of the adhesive wafers from
Chapter 39 to Chapter 30. A transfer of products from one HS heading to another will unfortunately not
resolve all economic issues resulting from the classification of products.

Therefore, a second action will be envisaged when reviewing tariff levels on all products in the context of
the next round of multilateral market access negotiations for industrial products to take into account
demands from European industry.

(1) Commission Decision 2000/41/EC of 29 December 1999 concerning the validity of certain binding tariff

information, OJ L 13, 19.1.2000.

(2) OJ C 256, 23.10.2002.
(3) The CCT rates for 2003 are published in the OJ L 290, 28.10.2002.

(2004/C 88 E/0432)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2661/03

by Ian Hudghton (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(10 September 2003)

Subject: Missing persons in Cyprus

While Cyprus prepares to join the EU next year, and Turkey is an applicant state, the issue of missing
persons, believed to have been killed or apprehended at the time of the Turkish invasion of the island in
1974, is as yet unresolved.

With reference to the Commission’s response of 2 May 2001 to Question E-0506/01 (1), when it was
stated that the ‘matter can be further addressed in the framework of the Union’s enhanced political
dialogue with Turkey’, can the Commission report on what progress has been made on this issue?

(1) OJ C 261 E, 18.9.2001, p. 130.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(1 October 2003)

Mr Clerides and Denktash met in June and July 2002 to exchange proposals on the issue of missing
persons. The basis for this exchange was their agreement of 31 July 1997. The Greek Cypriot side
proceeded with its programme of exhumations and identifications in areas under its control. Investigations
are carried out by the United States (US) funded bi-communal Institute for Neurology and Genetics. The
Turkish Cypriot side has not yet designated scientists who would work with the Institute. Currently, the
United Nations tries to resume work of the Committee of Missing Persons.