Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the implementation of Directive 1998/6/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998 on consumer protection in the indication of prices of products offered to consumers
Date: 2006-06-21
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: consumer information, national implementing measure, publishing of prices, selling price, trade regulations, unit price

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 21.6.2006 
COM(2006) 325 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

on the implementation of Directive 1998/6/EC  
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998  
on consumer protection in the indication of prices of products offered to consumers 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
PREFACE 

The  purpose  of  this  Communication  is  to  examine  how  Member  States  have  implemented 
Directive 1998/6/EC on consumer protection in the indication of prices of products offered to 
consumers. It is limited to this question on which public consultation is sought. All interested 
parties are invited to submit replies to the European Commission by 1 September 2006. Please 
send your comments (marked “First consultation on price indications directive”) to either: 

European Commission 

Directorate-General for Health and Consumer Protection 

Rue de la Loi 200 

B-1049 Brussels 

Belgium 

or by e-mail to SANCO-B2@ec.europa.eu  

Responses  and  comments  will  be  made  public  on  the  Internet  site  of  the  European 

Commission, unless the sender explicitly requests otherwise. After the consultation period has 

ended, the Commission will assess the need for organising a public hearing to further debate 

the issues raised in this report further.  

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

on the implementation of Directive 1998/6/EC  
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 1998  
on consumer protection in the indication of prices of products offered to consumers 

(Text with EEA relevance) 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1. 

2. 

3. 

3.1. 

3.2. 

3.3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

Introduction .................................................................................................................. 4 

The Main Provisions of the Directive .......................................................................... 4 

The Regulatory Options ............................................................................................... 5 

The general obligation and its limits............................................................................ 5 

The unit price: cases of exclusion ................................................................................ 6 

The unit price: positive lists ......................................................................................... 7 

The Display Requirements........................................................................................... 7 

Advertising................................................................................................................... 8 

Small Retail Businesses ............................................................................................... 9 

Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 10 

Annex - QUESTIONS FOR CONSULTATIONS ............................................................................... 12 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

All the Member States  have  adopted national legislative measures transposing the Directive 
98/6/EC  on  consumer  protection  in  the  indication  of  the  prices  of  products  offered  to 
consumers. With the present document, the Commission intends to report on the application 
of this Directive, as provided by its article 12.  

At  this  stage,  however,  the  Commission  does  not  consider  appropriate  to  put  forward  any 
proposal under article 12 of the Directive. In fact, the Commission has no evidence that the 
current  divergences  between  national  laws  on  price  indications  raise  significant  internal 
market barriers, which would justify a regulatory intervention. This issue will be decided in 
the light of the consultation. 

According  to  the  Directive,  a  proposal  in  the  field  of  price  indications  should  take  into 
account, in particular, the experience gained in the application of the Directive by small retail 
business,  regarding  inter  alia  technological  developments  and  the  introduction  of  the  single 
currency (recital 14). In order to provide a solid knowledge base to its action, in compliance 
with  the  better  regulation  principles,  the  Commission  has  carried  out  a  study,  which  took 
place prior to enlargement and limited to the 15 old Member States, aimed to assess the actual 
impact of the provisions of article 6 and their implementation on small retail businesses, the 
functioning of the internal market and the overall level of consumer protection1. This earlier 
study usefully highlights various aspects for consultation on the directive.  

The Commission intends to consult the interested parties as to the impact of the Directive on 
the internal market and on the overall level of consumer protection. The annex lists some of 
the questions that need to be addressed in the review process. On the basis of the outcome of 
the  consultation  process,  in  the  light  of  the  result  of  the  ongoing  process  of  review  of  the 
consumer  acquis,  the  Commission  will  consider  the  need  of  further  legislative  initiatives  in 
the  field  of  price  indications.  The  review  of  the  Directive  on  price  indications  is  consistent 
with the better regulation objectives pursued by the Commission in terms of simplification of 
the regulatory environment. 

2. 

THE MAIN PROVISIONS OF THE DIRECTIVE 

The main purpose of the Directive is to ensure that the selling price and the price per unit of 
measurement  (unit  price)  are  indicated  for  all  products  offered  by  traders  to  consumers,  in 
order  to  improve  consumer  information  and  to  facilitate  comparison  of  prices.  The  selling 
price must be unambiguous, easily identifiable and clearly legible (article 4). 

The scope of application of the Directive is limited to products. Although the Directive does 
not  contain  a  definition  of  ‘products’,  the  term  can  be  interpreted  with  reference  to  other 

1 

‘Appraisal  of  Directive  98/6/EC  on  consumer  protection  in  the  indication  of  unit  prices  of  products 
offered to consumers’, study prepared by EIM Business & Policy Research.  

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
provisions  of  the  acquis2  as  including  all  movable  goods.  Therefore,  the  Directive  does  not 
apply to services3. 

The  obligation  to  indicate  the  selling  price  and  the  unit  price  for  all  products  offered  by 
traders to consumers is of general application. However, article 3(2) of the Directive allows 
Member States to derogate from this general obligation for products supplied in the course of 
the  provision  of  a  service,  for  sales  by  auction  and  for  sales  of  works  of  art  and  antiques. 
When  making  use  of  this  derogation,  Member  States  can  therefore  decide  that  neither  the 
selling price nor the unit price should be indicated. 

Article 3(3) provides that the selling price does not have to be indicated for products sold in 
bulk,  i.e.  products  which  are  not  pre-packaged  and  are  measured  in  the  presence  of  the 
consumer. Since the selling price of these products cannot be determined until the consumer 
indicates how much of the product is required, only the unit price needs to be indicated.  

Under article 3(1), the unit price does not have to be indicated if it is identical to the selling 
price (e.g. when the quantity of the packaged product equals a single unit of measurement). 
Moreover, under article 5 Member States can waive the obligation to indicate the unit price of 
products  for  which  this  indication  would  not  be  useful  because  of  the  product’s  nature  or 
purpose or would be liable to cause confusion. 

The  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  can  also  be  waived  by  Member  States,  for  a 
transitional  period,  if  it  were  to  constitute  an  excessive  burden  for  certain  small  retail 
businesses, because of the number of products on sale, the sales area, the nature of the place 
of sale, specific conditions of sale where the product is not directly accessible to consumers or 
certain forms of business, such as certain types of itinerant trade (article 6). This derogation 
cannot apply to the unit price of products sold in bulk by these businesses.  

Finally, the Directive provides that Member States may limit the maximum number of prices 
to  be  indicated  (article  4),  in  order  to  ensure  that  the  transparency  of  the  system  is  ensured 
during the introduction of the euro (recital 13).  

A minimum harmonisation clause is contained in article 10 of the Directive, whereby Member 
States are not prevented from adopting or maintaining provisions which are more favourable 
as regards consumer information and comparison of prices, if compatible with the Treaty.  

3. 

THE REGULATORY OPTIONS  

3.1. 

The general obligation and its limits 

The general obligation to indicate selling and unit prices can significantly improve the ability 
of consumers to evaluate and compare prices and make informed market choices on the basis 
of  simple  comparisons,  thus  fostering  competition  between  undertakings  and  products. 
However,  for  some  categories  of  products  the  indication  of  the  selling  and  unit  prices  may 
prove  impossible  or  not  useful,  since  their  price  might  only  be  determined  through  a 

2 

3 

E.g. article 2 of Directive 85/374/EEC on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative 
provisions of the Member States concerning liability for defective products. 
The transposition measures enacted by several Member States, however, are also applicable to services: 
this  is  the  case  of  Belgium,  Germany,  Luxembourg,  Portugal,  Czech  Republic,  Estonia,  Hungary, 
Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
negotiation  process,  or  because  they  cannot  be  easily  compared  with  other  products  of  the 
same  kind.  For  this  reason,  the  Directive  allows  Member  State  not  to  apply  the  general 
obligation in article 3(1) to products supplied in the course of the provision of a service (e.g. 
the  price  of  shampoo  provided  in  the  course  of  hairdressing),  sales  by  auction  and  sales  of 
works of art and antiques.  

Only  France  and  Finland  have  decided  not  to  use  the  possibility  to  exempt  these  products 
from  the  general  obligation  to  indicate  the  selling  and  unit  prices.  In  Sweden  the  statutory 
exemption is limited to products sold by auction and similar procedures. In Hungary, products 
sold at auctions are only exempted from the obligation to indicate the selling and unit prices 
when the starting auction price is specified in the auction notice. Belgium excludes products 
supplied in the course of the provision of a service and those sold through public procedures. 
Polish legislation provides that the price of goods can be included in  the price of a service: 
this means that no obligation exists to indicate separately the selling and unit prices of goods 
supplied  in  the  course  of  a  service.  In  Luxembourg,  the  exemption  for  works  of  art  and 
antiques  is  only  available  if  these  products  carry  a  clear  indication,  which  allows  for  their 
identification on a price list which must be exposed in the shop and accessible to consumers. 
The remaining Member States have fully used the derogation. 

3.2. 

The unit price: cases of exclusion 

The Directive acknowledges that for certain products the obligation to indicate the unit price 
would not be useful or would be liable to cause confusion, for instance when indication of the 
quantity  is  not  relevant  for  price  comparison  purposes,  or  when  different  products  are 
marketed  in  the  same  packaging  (recital  10).  For  this  reason,  article  5(1)  allows  Member 
States to waive the obligation to indicate the unit price for these products.  

All Member States have exempted certain goods from the obligation to indicate the unit price. 
The vast majority of Member States have identified some categories of products for which the 
unit  price  does  not  need  to  be  indicated.  Swedish  law  does  not  contain  a  list  of  exempted 
products  but  provides  that  the  unit  price  needs  not  be  indicated  if,  due  to  the  nature  or  the 
purpose of the product, it can be assumed that this indication would not be relevant or is likely 
to  cause  confusion.  The  Maltese  and  Polish  legislations  do  not  list  categories  of  exempted 
products, but empower the competent authorities to waive the general obligation to indicate 
the  unit  price.  Finally,  the  transposition  measures  enacted  by  Cyprus,  Latvia  and  Lithuania 
draw  up  short  open  lists,  giving  examples  of  products  for  which  the  obligation  is  not 
applicable. 

Member  States  have  selected  categories  of  goods  exempted  from  the  general  obligation  to 
indicate  the  unit  price  according  to  widely  diverging  criteria.  Most  national  transposition 
measures waive the obligation for products which comprise an assortment of different items 
sold  in  a  single  package,  echoing  the  example  given  in  the  preamble  of  the  Directive.  The 
indication  of  the  unit  price  is  also  generally  deemed  unnecessary  for  goods  marketed  in 
quantities below certain thresholds (ranging from 5g or 5ml in Cyprus and Lithuania to 100g 
or 100 ml in Luxembourg). Several Member States have exempted some or all products sold 
through  automatic  distributors  and  vending  machines.  In  the  United  Kingdom  and  Estonia  , 
products  pre-packaged  in  a  constant  quantity  offered  for  sale  from  a  vending  machine  are 
exempted  from  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  under  the  national  provisions 
transposing article 6 of the Directive. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
In a number of cases, the list of exempted products also includes products sold individually 
for  immediate  consumption  (i.e.  ice  creams),  complete  ready  meals  composed  of  different 
products, concentrated or dehydrated foodstuff to which water and/or other ingredients must 
be added before consumption, products sold by the unit and special sales at a reduced price of 
foodstuff  whose  sell-by  date  is  getting  near.  Denmark,  Finland,  Estonia  and  Slovakia  have 
explicitly excluded that the unit price be indicated for individually sold products which cannot 
be divided up without altering their quality or nature and for which there is no requirement to 
indicate the net content.  

Other  exemptions  are  more  specific.  For  instance,  Danish  law  excludes  non  pre-packaged 
rolls  and  cakes;  Estonia  exempts  chocolate  figure  and  surprise  eggs,  as  well  as  early  fresh 
vegetables, culinary herbs sold in pots, breath fresheners and chewing gum. Finland exempts 
chocolate eggs, decorative sweets and bakery and confectionary products. In the Netherlands, 
Estonia  and  Slovenia,  the  unit  price  needs  not  be  indicated  for  products  used  in  window-
dressing. Poland excludes flowers and plants, live animals, non-pre-packaged foodstuff which 
is sold by the item and goods customarily sold in big quantities, as well as goods offered for 
sale outside the business premises or at a special fair and goods whose selling price is below 4 
zloty. Greece excludes cosmetics, perfumes and toiletry; beverages and chewing tobacco are 
exempted  in  Germany;  finally,  Spain  excludes  wines  and  spirits  with  a  controlled 
denomination of origin or a typical geographic indication. 

3.3. 

The unit price: positive lists 

In order to facilitate the application of the rules by the traders and the competent authorities, 
Member States may draw up a list of non-food products or categories of products for which 
the obligation to indicate the unit price remains applicable, as provided by article 5(2) of the 
Directive. 

Only a few Member States have used the possibility to establish a list of non-food products or 
categories of products to which the obligation to indicate the unit price remains in any case 
applicable,  in  accordance  to  article  5(2).  France,  Belgium  and  Luxembourg  have  enacted 
extensive  positive  lists  on  non-food  products.  Denmark  and  Finland  have  lists  which 
encompass  both  food  and  non-food  items.  Estonian  legislation  provides  that  the  unit  price 
must  be  indicated  as  the  item  price  for  paper  napkins,  tissues  and  diapers,  sanitary  towels, 
panty  liners  and  tampons.  Finally,  Austrian  legislation  does  not  contain  a  list  of  non-food 
products  which  still  have  to  carry  the  unit  price,  but  empowers  competent  authorities  to 
designate these products.  

4. 

THE DISPLAY REQUIREMENTS 

The Directive stipulates that the selling price and the unit price must be unambiguous, clearly 
identifiable  and  clearly  legible  (article  4).  In  particular,  the  selling  price  and  the  unit  price 
must represent the final price (respectively of a unit and of a given quantity) of the product, 
inclusive of VAT and all other taxes (article 2).  

All  Member  States  have  implemented  article  4  of  the  Directive  correctly  and  a  number  of 
them  have  introduced  in  their  national  legislation  additional  specifications  as  to  pricing 
methods and indications. Denmark, Finland, Sweden and France stipulate that any indication 
should create no uncertainty about the products to which products the price applies. Spanish 
law  provides  for  selling  and  unit  prices  to  be  placed  in  the  same  visual  field,  while  Greece 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
requires  them  to  be  the  same  size.  In  Luxembourg,  restaurants,  bars  and  all  establishments 
serving food and beverages should indicate the selling price inclusive of service. 

Article  4  is  intended  to  provide  consumers  with  homogeneous  and  transparent  information. 
However, the Directive acknowledges that the transparency of the envisaged system of price 
indication  could  be  jeopardised  by  the  transition  to  the  euro,  because  consumers  may  be 
confronted  with  several  price  tags  for  the  same  product.  For  this  reason,  article  4(1)  allows 
Member States to provide that the maximum number of prices to be indicated be limited.  

Only  a  few  Member  States  introduced  limitations  in  accordance  with  article  4(1),  namely 
France, Italy and Luxembourg. These limitations were only applicable during the transitional 
period  when  the  euro  was  introduced.  In  particular,  Italy  made  an  exception  for  small 
retailers; Luxembourg set a specific date when all price indications had to be changed from 
the local currency into euros; France provided that the selling price should be indicated both 
in the national currency and in euros, while the unit price had to be indicated in the national 
currency until a specific date and in euros afterwards. 

At the moment, no rules limiting the maximum number of prices to be indicated appear to be 
in  force  in  any  of  the  Member  States,  although  it  cannot  be  excluded  that  as  new  countries 
adopt the euro they may decide to enact specific regulations to deal with this issue. It is worth 
noting that France, Malta and Poland introduced rules whereby identical produces sold at the 
same price and displayed together can bear a single indication of the selling and unit prices. 
These rules, however, allow – rather than impose – a limitation of the maximum number of 
prices to be indicated. 

5. 

ADVERTISING 

The obligation to indicate the unit price applies also to any advertisement which mentions the 
selling price of products covered by the Directive, as specified by article 3(4). This provision 
has not given rise to any particular transposition problem. It is worth noting, however, that the 
United  Kingdom  has  chosen  to  waive  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  for 
advertisements which is broadcast on TV, shown in a cinema or inside a small shop. 

Article 3(4) impose a specific content for advertising of consumer products which will need to 
be coordinated with the general rules in Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices. 
Article  7(1)  of  the  Directive  stipulates  that  a  commercial  practice  shall  be  regarded  as 
misleading if, in its factual context, taking account of all its features and circumstances and 
the limitations of the communication medium, it omits material information that the average 
consumer  needs,  according  to  the  context,  to  take  an  informed  transactional  decision  and 
thereby causes or is likely to cause the average consumer to take a transactional decision that 
he would not have taken otherwise. Article 7(5) further clarifies that information requirements 
established  by  EC  law  in  relation  to  commercial  communication  including  advertising  or 
marketing shall be regarded as material. Article 3(4) of the Directive on price indications is 
expressly  quoted  in  Annex  II  of  the  Directive  on  unfair  commercial  practices:  therefore, 
failure  to  indicate  the  unit  price  in  the  advertising  of  consumer  products  covered  by  the 
Directive on price indications will entail per se a breach of the Directive on unfair commercial 
practices. 

The  Commission  is  aware  that  the  lack  of  convergence  in  the  scope  of  application  of  the 
national transposition measures may entail that some advertisements for certain categories of 
products  could  be  subject  to  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  only  in  some  Member 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
States but not in others. The Commission intends to verify whether this circumstance is likely 
to  hinder  the  objectives  of  market  integration  and  consumer  protection  pursued  through  the 
full harmonisation of the rules on unfair commercial practices at EU level. 

6. 

SMALL RETAIL BUSINESSES 

The  Directive  acknowledges  that  for  some  small  retail  businesses  the  obligation  to  indicate 
the  unit  price  might  sometimes  represent  an  excessive  burden,  because  of  the  number  of 
products on sale, the sales area, the nature of the place of sale or the form of the business itself 
(e.g. certain types of itinerant trade). For this reason, article 6 allows Member States to waive 
the obligation to indicate the unit price for goods sold by these businesses, other than products 
sold  in  bulk.  This  waiver  is  only  allowed  for  a  transitional  period,  to  be  determined  by 
Member States.  

Several  Member  States  have  opted  to  implement  the  derogation  for  small  retail  businesses 
envisaged by article 6 of the Directive. However, the criteria selected by national legislators 
to  define  the  scope  of  application  of  this  derogation  are  not  convergent.  The  majority  of 
Member  States  considers  the  total  sales  area  and  identifies  a  threshold  below  which  the 
obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  is  no  longer  applicable.  The  relevant  thresholds  range 
from 50 m2 in Greece to 500 m2 in Slovenia. 

Some  Member  States  have  chosen  to  exclude  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  for 
shops where customers are served over the counter (as opposed to self-service outlets): this is 
the case, for instance, of the Netherlands, Slovakia and Greece (in the latter case, only for pre-
packaged  food  and  drinks).  In  France  the  derogation  is  only  available  for  non  self  service 
retail outlets with a sales area not exceeding 120 m2. 

Austria exempts sole traders with up to nine employees and traders operating in the form of a 
business  with  up  to  50  employees.  Traders  with  up  to  five  full  time  employees  are  also 
exempted  in  the  Netherlands.  The  Irish  transposition  measures  waive  the  obligation  for 
premises in which the trader does not make use of equipment for printing shelf labels or for 
point  of  sale  scanning.  Specific  derogations  also  exist  in  the  Netherlands  for  products 
marketed at the homes of regular customers, in vehicles or at a street or water market. 

Itinerant traders are exempted from the obligation to indicate the unit price in Austria, Ireland 
and  Luxembourg.  The  United  Kingdom  only  exempts  itinerant  traders  when  offering  bread 
made  up  in  a  prescribed  quantity  or  any  products  pre-packaged  in  a  constant  quantity.  In 
Estonia,  this  exemption  is  available  for  pre-packaged  goods  of  identical  volume  or  weight, 
offered or sold in a mobile shop, kiosk or a street stall. 

Finally,  the  Maltese  legislation  does  not  grant  derogation  directly,  but  empowers  the 
competent  administrative  authority  (the  Director  of  Consumer  Affairs)  to  determine  the 
conditions under which small retail businesses or other categories of traders may be exempted 
from the obligation to display the unit price when this would prove excessively onerous. 

Denmark, Finland, Sweden, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland have chosen not to enact 
specific  rules  aimed  at  small  retail  businesses.  Belgium,  Italy,  Portugal  and  Spain  initially 
implemented an ad hoc regime for small retail businesses, but decided not to renew it once the 
transitional period foreseen for the introduction of the euro had expired. Cyprus has recently 
amended national legislation to eliminate the derogation. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
According to the Directive, Member States can only waive the obligation to indicate the unit 
price for products sold by small retail business for a transitional period. However, the Czech 
Republic  is  the  sole  Member  State  whose  implementing  legislation  quotes  a  precise  expiry 
date for this derogation, namely 1 May 2014. In Greek law, the duration of the exemption is 
defined with reference to the wording of the Directive: thus, the obligation to indicate the unit 
price  is  waived  pending  Community  re-examination  of  the  issue  pursuant  to  article  12.  The 
German  transposition  measures  mention  the  transient  nature  of  the  exemption,  without 
specifying for how long it will be available. The remaining Member States do not appear to 
mention  that  the  derogation  is  only  granted  for  a  transitional  period,  though  some  of  them 
have expressly clarified that it is not intended as a permanent derogation. 

In accordance with article 12 of the Directive and its preamble, the Commission has carried 
out a study to assess the impact of the Directive, with particular reference to the application of 
price  indication  requirements  by  small  retail  businesses.  The  study  identified  the  potential 
barriers for small retailers to indicate the unit price, which may arise from pricing instruments 
and  methodologies.  In  particular,  manual  pricing  systems  adopted  by  small  retailers  with 
preference over computerised systems might entail an additional burden to calculate, modify 
and  indicate  the  unit  price.  While  new  technologies  become  rapidly  available,  high  costs, 
insufficient  turnover  and  complexity  of  the  systems  make  the  smallest  retailers  unlikely  to 
reap the potential benefits of these developments. 

There appears to be evidence, however, that this burden might not be excessive vis-à-vis the 
consumer protection aims pursued by the Directive. The study carried out by the Commission 
shows  that  only  a  substantial  minority  (39%)  of  small  retail  businesses  in  the  fifteen  old 
Member States regards unit pricing as a burden for small retailers. The majority of small retail 
businesses  in  the  fifteen  old  Member  States  agree  with  a  unit  price  indication  for  all  retail 
stores, regardless of their size. Retailers that already indicate the unit price are keener to have 
unit pricing obligatory for all retailers than enterprises who benefit from the derogation. 

The  Commission  does  not  consider  the  gathered  evidence  as  conclusive,  in  the  light  of  a 
possible  revision  of  the  Directive.  First  of  all,  the  study  had  to  be  conducted  on  a  standard 
definition  of  small  retail  businesses  (0-20  employees),  whereas  –  in  the  absence  of  a 
harmonised notion at Community level – the definitions of small retailers in the national legal 
systems of the Member States are rather diverging. Secondly, the study did not cover the new 
Member  States,  where  smaller  retailers  may  face  specific  problems  (although,  as  it  was 
mentioned above, four of them have decided not to make use of the possibility of derogation 
in article 6).  

7. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The  Directive  did  not  give  rise  to  any  major  transposition  problems  in  any  of  the  Member 
States. It has been implemented by all Member States, though in some cases after the date set 
by article 11(1) - that is 18 March 2000. The study carried out by the Commission shows a 
wide  agreement  that  the  Directive  has  contributed  to  increase  the  protection  of  consumer 
economic interests, although the actual extent of its impact remains unclear.  

The  Directive  allows  Member  States  a  remarkable  level  of  discretion  when  drafting  their 
transposition  measures.  Several  articles  introduce  open  regulatory  options  for  national 
legislators:  as  a  result,  national  laws  implementing  the  Directive  are  for  some  aspects 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
significantly  diverging.  This  is  not  always  the  case,  however:  for  some  provisions,  the  vast 
majority of Member States have adopted the same normative solutions at national level. 

As  a  result  of  this  discretion,  Member  States  have  not  relied  extensively  on  the  minimum 
harmonisation clause in article 10, whereby they can adopt or maintain provisions which are 
more  favourable  as  regards  consumer  information  and  comparison  of  prices  than  those 
contained in the Directive. In the light of a possible revision of the Directive, the Commission 
intends therefore to consider whether there is a need to maintain the minimum harmonisation 
clause in article 10. 

As far as the possibility to waive the obligation to indicate the unit price of products for which 
this  indication  would  not  be  useful  because  of  their  nature  or  purpose,  the  transposition 
checks reveal a very fragmented scenario: while some categories of products are exempted in 
most  Member States, there are a number of quite specific exceptions, which are  not always 
readily justifiable under the wording of article 5(1). This creates an unwelcome inequality in 
the  level  of  consumer  protection  across  Europe,  which  may  require  further  guidance  as  to 
what  products  or  categories  of  products  may  be  subjected  and/or  exempted  from  the 
obligation to indicate the unit price.  

Finally, as it was mentioned above, the Commission intends to hear the view of the interested 
parties  on  the  application  of  article  6,  with  particular  reference  to  its  impact  on  the 
commercial  activity  of  small  retail  businesses.  The  Commission  welcomes  particularly  any 
submission  on  the  continuing  need  for  the  temporary  derogation  provided  in  the  Directive 
and/or the opportunity to introduce a European definition of small retailers in the legislation.

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
Annex 

QUESTIONS FOR CONSULTATIONS  

Question A: Should the derogation in article 3(2) be maintained?  

Option 1: It could be argued that the indication of the unit price for the products mentioned in 
article  3(2)  is  not  relevant  to  enable  consumers  to  make  informed  choices  on  the  basis  of 
simple price comparisons. In fact, most Member States have excluded these products from the 
scope of application of national transposition measures. France and Finland, which have not 
used  this  possibility,  enacted  positive  lists  of  product  categories  to  which  the  obligation  to 
indicate  the  unit  price  remain  applicable:  as  a  result,  in  most  cases  the  unit  price  of  the 
products  indicated  in  article  3(2)  will  not  need  to  be  indicated  even  in  these  countries. 
Therefore, it could be appropriate to exclude these products from the scope of application of 
the Directive and eliminate the derogation. 

Option 2: It is also possible to maintain that – since Member States remain free under article 
5(1)  to  waive  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  of  products  for  which  this  indication 
would not be useful – there is no need to exclude these goods from the scope of application of 
the Directive. Article 3(2) would be repealed altogether and Member States would be free to 
determine whether the unit price of these products should be indicated under article 5(1).  

Option 3: A third alternative would be to keep the derogation in its present form.  

Question B: For which products should there be an obligation to indicate the unit price? 

Option 1: Member States have taken different views as to which products do not need to carry 
the  indication  of  the  unit  price,  since  such  indication  would  not  be  useful  because  of  the 
products’ nature and purpose or would be liable to create confusion. Although this could be 
justified to a certain extent taking into account national specificities, there is arguably a clear 
need to provide some guidance. For instance, it would be possible to enact at European level 
an indicative or exhaustive list of product categories for which the indication of the unit price 
is not necessary. If such an exhaustive list is established, article 5(1) could be repealed. 

Option 2: An alternative option would be to establish at European level a list of products or 
categories  of  products  to  which  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  is  applicable.  Such 
positive list would in fact define the exact scope of application of the Directive and eliminate 
any legal uncertainty for consumers as well as undertakings. If such list were enacted, article 
5 could be repealed. 

Option  3:  a  third  possibility  would  be  to  elicit  the  criteria  Member  States  must  take  into 
account  when  implementing  article  5(1).  This  would  limit  the  wide  discretion  enjoyed  by 
Member States, without leading to the elimination of article 5. 

Question C: Should specific rules on advertising be maintained in this context? 

Option 1: It could be argued that the Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair business to consumers 
commercial practices ensures that consumers are adequately protected against any advertising 
which could mislead them as to the price of products. If so, article 3(4) could be repealed. In 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
 
this  case,  the  competent  national  authorities  will  have  to  assess  whether  advertisements 
mentioning the selling price – but not the unit price – of products covered by the Directive on 
price  indications  are  likely  to  affect  the  economic  behaviour  of  the  average  consumers, 
inducing them to take a transactional decision they would not have taken otherwise.  

Option 2: If the indication of the unit price in advertising is considered in any case essential to 
ensure a high level of consumer protection, article 3(4) could be repealed and a corresponding 
provision  could  be  added  to  the  black  list  of  practices  which  are  always  considered  unfair 
under the Directive 2005/29/EC. However, in order to ensure an even application of the black 
list,  a  core  list  of  products  should  be  identified,  for  which  the  omission  of  the  unit  price  in 
advertising would always be considered unfair.  

Question D: Should the derogation for small retail businesses become permanent? If so, 
should  a  European  notion  of  small  retail  business  be  introduced?  How  should  it  be 
formulated? 

Option  1:  The  Directive  allows  Member  States  to  waive  the  obligation  to  indicate  the  unit 
price for small retail businesses only for a limited period of time, to be specified in national 
legislation.  A  first  option  would  be  to  exclude  altogether  small  retail  businesses  from  the 
scope of application of the Directive. However, such option rests on the assumption that the 
obligation  to  indicate  the  unit  price  of  consumer  goods  constitutes  an  excessive  burden  for 
such undertakings. At the moment, the Commission has no evidence that this is the case: both 
the outcome of the study and the choice operated by many Member States who have not made 
use  of  the  derogation  rather  suggest  that  said  obligation  represents  an  additional  burden, 
though  not  excessive  or  disproportionate.  If  small  retail  businesses  are  to  be  excluded  from 
the scope of application of the Directive, a precise European definition of such undertakings 
could be developed in order to ensure legal certainty.  

Option 2: It could be argued that the indication to indicate the unit price does not constitute an 
excessive  burden  for  small  retail  businesses.  If  so,  the  derogation  in  article  6  could  be 
disposed of altogether. 

Option 3: Finally, the possibility of derogation contained in article 6 could be further extended 
for a defined period, with a view to re-assessing in the future whether technical developments 
ease the burden faced by small retail businesses in order to indicate the unit price. Also in this 
case, it could be necessary to identify the period when the derogation would remain available 
as well as the undertakings which could benefit from it.  

Question E: Should the minimum harmonisation clause be maintained?  

Option  1:  It  could  be  argued  that,  since  Member  States  have  hardly  made  any  use  of  the 
possibility  to  introduce  or  maintain  more  stringent  consumer  protection  rules  in  the  domain 
harmonised by the Directive, there is scope to move towards a fully harmonised regime for 
price  indications,  thus  combining  a  high  level  of  consumer  protection  with  full  market 
integration. 

Option 2: The elimination of the clause in article 10 would reduce the discretion of Member 
States  when  implementing  the  Directive.  Moreover,  at  this  stage  the  Commission  has  no 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
conclusive  evidence  that  existing  divergences  in  national  laws  on  price  indications  for 
consumer goods create significant internal market barriers and discourage cross-border trade.  

EN 

14 

   EN