Communication from the Commission concerning proposals to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector and Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community
Date: 2007-05-07
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing arrangements, aid for restructuring, common agricultural policy, product diversification, sugar industry

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 7.5.2007 
COM(2007) 227 final 

2007/0085 (CNS) 
2007/0086 (CNS) 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

concerning proposals to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006  
on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector and  
Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme  
for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community 

- Part I -  

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme  
for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 on the common organisation of the markets  
in the sugar sector 

- Part II - 

(presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

The reform of the sugar sector agreed in November 2005 and reflected in Council Regulation 
(EC) No 318/2006 aims at providing a sustainable future for the EU sugar sector. In a future 
context  of  increased  competition  the  progressive  reduction  of  internal  prices  and  of  EU 
production is necessary.  

To  facilitate  the  voluntary  reduction  of  EU  production  a  scheme  was  introduced  offering 
sugar  enterprises  financial  aid  for  restructuring.  If  appropriate,  after  the  end  of  the 
restructuring  period  in  2010,  a  last  adjustment  of  EU  production  will  be  possible  through  a 
linear quota cut decided by the Commission.  

The new sugar regime also introduces a withdrawal mechanism. This management tool aims 
at adjusting production levels on a yearly basis with a view to assuring market balance at a 
level close to the reference price. The new mechanism applies to sugar produced under quota 
and is based on a percentage withdrawal, to be decided in October for the ongoing marketing 
year.  

2. 

FUNCTIONING OF THE NEW SUGAR CMO 

In 2006/2007, the first year of implementation of the reformed sugar CMO, the renunciation 
of  quota  under  the  restructuring  regime  reached  1.5  mio  tonnes.  The  reduction  was  partly 
offset  by  the  allocation  of  1  mio  tonne  of  additional  quota  for  sugar  and  isoglucose,  as 
allowed by the reform.  

As  from  the  reform  exports  are  limited  to  1.374  mio  tonnes  a  year  (instead  of  an  average 
4.6 mio  tonnes  in  previous  marketing  years),  a  market  imbalance  was  anticipated  in  early 
2006.  On  the  basis  of  special  measures  designed  to  facilitate  the  transition  between  the  old 
and  the  new  CMO,  the  Commission  in  March  2006  decided  on  a  one-off  preventive 
withdrawal for the 2006/2007 marketing year with: 

– 

– 

a  threshold,  resulting  from  a  coefficient  applicable  to  the  allocated  quota,  which 
allowed enterprises to limit production under quota at the threshold level, 

a  differentiation  of  threshold  per  Member  State  to  take  into  account  both  their 
response to the restructuring regime and the former "A" and "B" quotas. 

This  measure  resulted  partly  in  a  reduction  of  sugar  production  and  partly  in  sugar  either 
carried forward or available for industrial uses (1.1 mio tonnes). In October 2006, based on 
updated forecasts, the market appeared more or less balanced and no further withdrawal was 
deemed necessary. 

For the 2007/2008 marketing year, the second year of implementation of the reformed sugar 
CMO, decisions to renounce quota under the restructuring regime reached 0.7 mio tonnes, far 
below the expected target of 5 mio tonnes. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
As  a  consequence,  in  early  2007  the  balance  forecast  for  the  2007/2008  marketing  year 
showed an expected oversupply of 4 mio tonnes. On the basis of "special powers given to it 
for  emergencies",  the  Commission  in  March  2007  decided  to  withdraw  an  amount  of  quota 
sugar  corresponding  to  2  mio  tonnes  of  sugar.  By  derogation  from  Regulation  (EC) 
No 318/2006 this special measure included: 

– 

– 

– 

a decision before beet sowings, enabling a reduction of beet and sugar production, 

the  possibility  for  enterprises  which  reduce  production  to  be  exempted  from  the 
obligation to store 13.5% of their quota production, 

a differentiation of threshold per Member State to take into account their response to 
the restructuring regime. 

3. 

ISSUES 

Withdrawal 

Under  Article  19  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  318/2006,  the  Commission  establishes  in 
October  a  percentage  withdrawal  compatible  with  the  market  balance.  Each  enterprise  must 
store,  at  its  own  expense,  a  quantity  of  sugar  corresponding  to  the  established  percentage, 
applied to its production of quota sugar. The withdrawn sugar is considered to be part of the 
following marketing year's production.  

Article 19 would have been appropriate for small adjustments in the level of production under 
quota in the context of what was expected to be only a limited imbalance of the EU market. In 
case of fine tuning, a decision in October, at the beginning of each marketing year, based on 
accurate  production  data,  is  efficient  and  the  obligatory  storage  of  excess  quantities  at  the 
industry's expense does not entail heavy financial burden for producers. 

However,  the  poor  response  to  the  restructuring  scheme  is  resulting  in  significant  market 
imbalances  which  can  be  anticipated  long  before  the  start  of  the  marketing  year  –  once  the 
deadline for applications  for  the  restructuring fund is past. In this context, with the existing 
withdrawal mechanism, all sugar beets needed to the production of the overall quota have to 
be sown, triggering the production of sugar in excess, which then has to be withdrawn from 
the market and stored by the producers at their own cost.  

Restructuring scheme 

The  price  decrease  so  far  has  been  moderate  for  processors  and  has  not  yet  been  felt  by 
growers  (who  receive  payments  for  their  beet  with  considerable  delays  and  in  instalments, 
according  to  the  interprofessional  agreement).  Therefore  producers,  in  particular  sugar  beet 
growers, have not yet been sensitive to sugar market price signals. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
Processors have been discouraged by the Member State's  possibility of reducing their quota 
by up to 25% during the first two years of the restructuring period in order to reallocate it to 
the  other  sugar  producers1.  This  possibility  has  not  actually  been  used,  but  threats  to  do  so 
have allegedly been made. 

Processors are insecure because the Member State can fix the percentage of aid to be given to 
farmers above the 10% minimum; they therefore have to draw up a restructuring plan without 
knowing the exact amount that will be available to them. 

4. 

RESULTS OF CONSULTATIONS WITH THE INTEREST PARTIES 

Consultation of the stakeholders of the markets in the sugar sector took place in the 
Sugar  Advisory  Group  on  12  February  2007  where  participants  were  invited  to 
express their views on how to improve the efficiency of the restructuring fund. CEFS 
(European  Committee  of  sugar  producers)  presented  its  official  proposal.  CIBE 
(European beet growers association) expressed its views as well. 

Several  meetings,  at  different  levels,  took  place  in  February  and  March.  Official 
positions were also received by mail. 

List of meetings 

CEFS: 

13 March 2007 with services 
28 March 2007 with services, together with CIBE 

CIBE: 

14 march 2007 with services, 
20 March with the Commissioner 
28 March 2007 with services, together with CEFS 

AAF – European starch producers: 

28 February 2007 with services 

Mail with official position 

AAF letter from 20 March 2007 

5. 

MEASURES PROPOSED 

Withdrawal 

Article  19  should  be  modified  to  introduce  a  system  of  thresholds  –  moving  away  from  a 
system which reduces the level of sugar effectively produced under quota.  

In addition, during the transition period, until the 2009/2010 marketing year:  

1 

The possibility to allow the Member States in agreement with the growers to reduce an undertaking's 
quota by up to 25% and to renounce this quota under the restructuring fund has been analysed. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
•  a  first  decision  should  be  allowed  before  sowing  takes  place,  possibly  completed  by  a 

further withdrawal in October based on updated data; 

•  to  take  account  of  Member  States  that  have  participated  in  the  restructuring  regime  the 
threshold in those Member State should be adapted in proportion to the quota renounced, 
with a modulation between undertakings according to their individual restructuring effort; 

•  the traditional supply needs which are total quantities for which full-time refiners have a 
priority access to preferential imports, should not be reduced in relation of the withdrawal.  

Restructuring scheme 

•  the  percentage  of  the  aid  to  be  given  to  growers  and  contractors  should  be  fixed  at  10% 

with a top-up to growers; 

•  the  improved  conditions  should  be  made  retroactive,  to  avoid  penalizing  growers  and 

enterprises that took part in 2006/2007 and 2007/2008; 

•  growers should be given the possibility of taking the initiative for renouncing quota, within 

certain limits, to avoid endangering the survival of the factory concerned; 

•  if  in  2008/2009  an  enterprise  renounces  at  least  a  certain  amount  of  quota,  it  will  not  be 
subject to the payment of the restructuring amount in 2007/2008 for the part of the quota 
which is concerned by the withdrawal decision; 

•  if there are reliable indications that the quantitative objective of the temporary scheme for 
the  restructuring  of  the  sugar  industry  in  the  Community  will  nearly  be  reached  in 
2008/2009 already, the Commission can extend the application deadline. 

In addition, in the event of an obligatory quota cut in 2010, the cut per Member State should 
reflect their success in reducing national quota under the restructuring regime. 

The modifications described concern Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 for withdrawals and the 
final quota cut and Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 for the restructuring scheme. 

6. 

IMPACT 

Adaptation  of  withdrawal  will  alleviate  the  consequence  of  the  delay  in  the  restructuring 
process. It has no financial impact. 

The  adaptation  of  the  restructuring  scheme  is  drawn  up  to  reach  the  objective  of  a  further 
3.8 mio tonnes of quota renunciation in 2008/2009 and 2009/2010.  

The additional amounts for the restructuring aids can be financed within the restructuring fund 
whose principle of self-financing remains valid. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 

concerning proposals to amend Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006  
on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector and  
Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme  
for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community 

The Commission has on [date] presented to the Council a proposal for a Regulation amending 
Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 of 20 February 2006 establishing a temporary scheme 
for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community2 and a proposal for a Regulation 
amending  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  318/2006  of  20  February  2006  on  the  common 
organisation of the markets in the sugar sector3. 

The  aim  of  the  first  proposal  is  to  make  the  participation  in  the  restructuring  scheme  more 
attractive. To that end, it is proposed to fix the percentage of the restructuring aid to be paid to 
growers and machinery contractors at 10%, thereby removing the uncertainty resulting from 
the current possibility that a Member State might decide to set a higher percentage. Growers 
are instead to receive an additional payment. 

It is further proposed to introduce for the marketing year 2008/2009 a possibility for growers 
to  trigger  the  restructuring  process  by  making  a  direct  application  for  restructuring  aid, 
provided that they renounce their delivery rights in relation to undertaking to which they have 
been  bound  by  delivery  contracts  in  the  previous  marketing  year.  As  a  consequence,  the 
Member  State  should  reduce  the  quota  of  the  undertaking  concerned  correspondingly.  The 
application of the proposed measure is however limited to a quota reduction of up to 10% of 
the  quota  allocated  to  the  undertaking  concerned,  and  the  Member  State's  acceptance  of 
growers’ applications should thus be based on a first-come-first-served list. 

The  amendments  to  Regulation  (EC)  No  320/2006  should  start  to  apply  as  from  the 
2008/2009 marketing year. Considering that the deadline for applications for restructuring aid 
is  31  January  2008,  sugar  undertakings  and  growers  are  advised  to  carefully  analyze  their 
competitive position in the medium and long term and prepare for their eventual applications 
for restructuring aid in due time. 

The second proposal concerns amendments to the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 
governing the instrument of withdrawal. This includes integrating into the Council Regulation 
the criteria laid down in Commission Regulation (EC) No 290/2007 with regard to a possible 
further withdrawal in autumn 2007. It is also proposed to abolish the provision according to 
which  traditional  supply  needs  for  refiners  shall  be  reduced  in  case  of  a  withdrawal.  This 
would apply as from the marketing year 2007/2008. 

2 
3 

OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p.48. 
OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 1. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
2007/0085 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 establishing a temporary scheme  
for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  and  in  particular 
Article 37 thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, 

Having regard to the opinion from the European Parliament4, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

Council Regulation (EC) No 320/20065 was adopted with the aim to enable the least 
competitive  sugar  producers  to  give  up  their  quota  production.  However,  the 
renunciation  of  quotas  under  that  Regulation  has  not  reached  the  level  that  was 
initially expected. 

In  accordance  with  Article  10(2)  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 318/2006  of 
20 February 2006 on the common organisation  of the markets in the sugar sector6, a 
linear  reduction  of  national  and  regional  quotas  is  to  be  carried  out  by  the  end  of 
February  2010  at  the  latest,  with  a  view  to  avoiding  market  imbalances  in  the 
marketing years as from 2010/2011, taking into account the results of the restructuring 
scheme. Such a linear cut may penalize the most competitive undertakings and weaken 
the  industry  as  a  whole.  To  avoid  this,  it  is  considered  necessary  to  improve  the 
functioning of the restructuring scheme, in order to increase the renunciation of quotas 
under that scheme. 

It appears that sugar undertakings have been discouraged from making applications for 
restructuring  aid  by  the  fact  that  there  is  no  certainty  as  regards  the  amount  of 
restructuring aid that they will receive, since Member States can decide to increase the 
minimum percentage of the aid reserved for growers of beet, cane or chicory and for 
machinery  contractors, 
in  accordance  with  Article  3(6)  of  Regulation  (EC) 
No 320/2006. To remove this uncertainty, the amount of aid to be reserved to growers 
and machinery contractors should be fixed at 10% of the aid to be granted to the sugar 

4 
5 
6 

OJ C …, …, p. …. 
OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 42. 
OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No […]/2007 (OJ L …, …, 
p. …). 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

undertakings and the growers concerned should be granted an additional payment for 
the 2008/2009 marketing year. 

In order  not  to  penalize  undertakings  and growers who took part in the restructuring 
scheme in the 2006/2007 and 2007/2008 marketing years, the difference between the 
aid amount granted for those marketing years and the aid amount that would have been 
granted for the 2008/2009 marketing year should be paid retroactively to them. 

If  the  Commission  has  reliable  indications  that  the  aim  of  the  restructuring  fund, 
namely the renunciation of 3.8 million tonnes of quota, will be nearly reached in the 
2008/2009 marketing year, the Commission should be given the possibility to prolong 
the deadline for applications in order to accelerate the restructuring process. 

It is considered that the restructuring scheme would give better result if growers were 
able to give up on their own initiative their production of beet or cane intended to be 
processed into quota sugar. To that end, growers should in the 2008/2009 marketing 
year be given the possibility to apply directly for the aid provided for in Article 3(6) of 
Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 provided that they cease to deliver sugar beet or cane to 
the  undertakings  to  which  they  were  bound  by  delivery  contracts  in  the  previous 
marketing  year.  As  a  consequence,  Member  States  should  reduce  the  quota  of  the 
sugar undertakings concerned. 

In  order  to  avoid  endangering  the  economic  viability  of  the  sugar  undertakings 
concerned by growers' aid applications, the quota reduction should be limited to 10% 
of  the  quota  allocated  to  each  undertaking,  which  corresponds  to  the  percentage  of 
quota which the Member State can re-allocate each marketing year in accordance with 
Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006. 

(8)  Where  the  quota  of  a  sugar  undertaking  is  reduced  as  a  result  of  growers'  aid 
applications,  that  undertaking  should  be  granted  restructuring  aid  as  referred  to  in 
Article 3(1)(c)  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 320/2006.  Consequently,  the  aid  amounts 
granted  should  be  those  referred  to  in  Article  3(5)(c)  of  that  Regulation.  However, 
those  amounts  should  be  adjusted  downwards  if  the  undertaking  does  not  take 
measures in favour of the workforce concerned by the reduction of quota production. 

(9) 

(10) 

A  sugar  undertaking  concerned  by  growers'  aid  applications  should  until  31 January 
preceding  the  marketing  year  concerned  retain  the  right  to  submit  an  application  for 
restructuring aid as provided for in Articles 3 and 4 of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006, 
provided  that  it  renounces  a  quota  corresponding  to  at  least  the  same  level  of  quota 
reduction that would have resulted from the applications for aid lodged by growers. In 
that  case  the  sugar  undertaking's  aid  application  should  replace  the  growers' 
applications. 

In  order  to  create  a  further  incentive  to  participate  in  the  restructuring  scheme,  it  is 
considered  appropriate  to  provide  for  the  exemption  of  a  part  of  the  temporary 
restructuring  amount  to  be  paid  in  accordance  with  Article  11  of  Regulation  (EC) 
No 320/2006 for the 2007/2008 marketing year to those undertakings which renounce, 
for  the  2008/2009  marketing  year,  a  percentage  of  their  quota  of  at  least  the 
withdrawal  percentage  applied  to  the  undertaking  in  2007/2008.  The  amount  to  be 
exempted should be proportional to this withdrawal percentage. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
(11)  Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly. 

(12)  Account  should  be  taken  in  this  Regulation  of  the  fact  that  the  total  quota  for 
production  of  inulin  syrup  was  renounced  under  the  restructuring  scheme  already  in 
the  2006/2007  marketing  year.  Hence,  there  is  no  longer  any  need  to  refer  to  that 
product or to the raw material from which it is produced, that is to say chicory, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

Article 3 is amended as follows:  

(a) 

in  paragraph  6,  the  first  and  second  subparagraphs  are  replaced  by  the 
following: 

"An amount of 10% of the relevant restructuring aid fixed in paragraph 5 shall 
be reserved for: 

(a) 

growers of sugar beet and cane having delivered these products during a 
period  preceding  the  marketing  year  referred  to  in  paragraph  2  for  the 
production of sugar under the relevant quota renounced; 

(b)  machinery  contractors,  being  private  persons  or  enterprises  having 
worked under contract with their agricultural machinery for the growers, 
for the products and in the period referred to in point (a). 

After consultation of the interested parties, Member States shall determine the 
period referred to in the first subparagraph." 

(b) 

the following paragraphs are added: 

"7.  For the 2008/2009 marketing year, growers referred to in paragraph 6(a) 
shall  receive  an  additional  payment  of  EUR  237.5  per  tonne  of  quota 
renounced. 

8. 

This paragraph shall apply to  

(a) 

undertakings  having  renounced  quota  under  the  restructuring 
scheme in the 2006/2007 or 2007/2008 marketing year, and 

(b)  growers  and  machinery  contractors  concerned  by  the  quota 

renunciation referred to in point (a). 

Where  the  amounts  granted  in  the  2006/2007  and  2007/2008 
marketing years under paragraphs 1 to 6 to persons covered by the 
previous subparagraph, were less than the amounts that they would 
have  received  under  the  conditions  applicable  in  the  2008/2009 
them 
marketing  year, 
retroactively. 

the  difference  shall  be  granted 

to 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
Where  the  amounts  granted  in  the  2006/2007  and  2007/2008 
marketing  years  to  growers  under  paragraph  7  were  less  than  the 
amounts  that  they  would  have  received  under  the  conditions 
applicable in the 2008/2009 marketing year, the difference shall be 
granted to them retroactively." 

(2) 

In Article 4(1), the following sub-paragraph is added: 

"The  Commission  may  extend  for  the  2008/2009  marketing  year  the  application 
deadline  mentioned  in  the  first  sub-paragraph  for  up  to  20  working  days,  if  by 
31 December 2007 there are reliable indications that the 3.8 million tonnes objective 
of quota renunciation under the temporary scheme for the restructuring of the sugar 
industry in the Community will nearly be reached in the 2008/2009 marketing year. 
The  Commission  shall  make  this  extension  known  by  means  of  a  communication 
published  in  the  C  series  of  the  Official  Journal  of  the  European  Union  before 
1 January 2008.” 

(3) 

The following Article 4a is inserted: 

"Article 4a 
Application for restructuring aid by growers 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

For the 2008/2009 marketing year, any grower of sugar beet or cane intended 
to be processed into quota sugar may submit to the Member State concerned a 
direct  application  for  the  aid  provided  for  in  Article 3(6),  accompanied  by  a 
commitment to cease his delivery of quota beet or cane to the undertaking with 
which he has concluded a delivery contract in the preceding marketing year. 

The applications referred to in paragraph 1 shall be submitted by 30 November 
2007.  Applications  may  be  submitted  as  from  the  date  of  entry  into  force  of 
this regulation. 

The Member State concerned shall establish a list of applications referred to in 
paragraph 1 in the chronological order of their lodging and shall communicate 
this list to the applicants and undertakings concerned within 10 working days 
following the deadline for submission as referred to in paragraph 2. 

The  Member  State  concerned  shall,  on  the  basis  of  the  chronological  order 
referred to in paragraph 3, accept growers' applications corresponding to up to 
10% of the quota allocated to each undertaking and shall reduce in proportion 
the  quota  of  the  undertaking  concerned  in  accordance  with  Article 11(4)  of 
Regulation (EC) No 318/2006. 

In  the  case  where  the  limit  of  10%  is  reached,  the  Member  State  concerned 
shall totally or partially reject the remaining applications. 

The  undertaking  concerned  shall  establish  and  implement  a  social  plan  as 
referred to in Article 4(3)(f) of this Regulation. 

5.  As  a  result  of  the  Member  State's  acceptation  of  applications  in  accordance 
with  paragraph 4,  the  amount  of  restructuring  aid  to  be  granted  shall  be  as 
follows: 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
 
(a) 

(b) 

for growers, 10% of the relevant aid amount fixed in Article 3(5)(c) and, 
for the 2008/2009 marketing year, the additional payment referred to in 
Article 3(7); 

for  undertakings,  the  relevant  aid  amount  fixed  in  Article 3(5)(c), 
reduced  by  10%,  or  by  60%  if  the  undertaking  concerned  does  not 
respect the requirement set out in the second subparagraph of paragraph 4 
of this Article. 

6. 

Paragraphs 1 to 5 shall not apply in the case where an undertaking submits an 
application  for  restructuring  aid  in  accordance  with  Article  4  by  which  it 
renounces  a  quota  corresponding  to  at  least  the  amount  of  quota  that  would 
have been reduced as a result of the Member State's acceptation of growers' aid 
applications." 

(4) 

In Article 5(1), the following subparagraph is added: 

“Where the Commission extends the deadline referred to in Article 4(1), as provided 
for in the third sub-paragraph of that Article, the deadline mentioned in the first sub-
paragraph of this paragraph is extended automatically by the same length of time.” 

(5) 

In Article 11, the following paragraph is added: 

"6. 

In  the  2008/2009  marketing  year,  undertakings  which  were  subject  to  the 
application of the withdrawal percentage set on 16 March 2007 by Article 1(1) 
or Article 1(2) of Regulation (EC) No 290/2007* and renounce a percentage of 
their quota of at least this withdrawal percentage, shall be exempted from part 
of the temporary restructuring amount to be paid for the 2007/2008 marketing 
year. 

 In  the  case  where  the  conditions  referred  to  in  the  first  subparagraph  are 
fulfilled,  the  reduction  of  the  temporary  restructuring  amount  shall  be 
calculated  by  multiplying  that  amount  by  the  withdrawal  percentage  set  in 
accordance with Article 1(1) or 1(2)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 290/2007. 

* 

OJ L 78, 17.3.2007, p. 20." 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the 
Official Journal of the European Union. 

Article 2 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 

Done at Brussels,  

EN 

For the Council 
The President 

11 

   EN 

 
 
 
2007/0086 (CNS) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 on the common organisation of the markets  
in the sugar sector 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  establishing  the  European  Community,  and  in  particular 
Article 37thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission, 

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament7, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

In  accordance  with  Article  10(2)  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 318/20068,  the 
Commission is to decide by the end of February 2010 to carry out a linear reduction of 
national  and  regional  quotas,  with  a  view  to  adjusting  these  quotas  to  a  sustainable 
level  after  the  expiry  of  the  restructuring  scheme  established  by  Council  Regulation 
(EC)  No 320/2006  of  20  February  2006  establishing  a  temporary  scheme  for  the 
restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community and amending Regulation (EC) 
No 1290/2005  on  the  financing  of  the  common  agricultural  policy9.  In  order  to 
encourage  an  increased  participation  in  that  scheme,  it  is  considered  appropriate  to 
reduce  the  percentage  referred  to  in  Article  10(2)  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 318/2006, 
taking  into  account  the  total  renunciation  of  quota  per  Member  State  under  the 
restructuring scheme as well as to enable Member States to modulate this percentage 
by undertakings according to the individual restructuring effort of each undertaking. 

Article 4a of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 provides for the possibility for growers of 
beet  and  cane  intended  for  quota  production  to  submit  a  direct  application  for 
restructuring aid provided that they cease to deliver sugar to the undertakings to which 
they were bound by delivery contracts in the previous marketing year. Member States 
are  to,  as  a  result  of  the  acceptance  of  such  applications,  reduce  the  quota  of  the 
undertakings concerned within the limit of the 10% referred to in the second indent of 
Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006. It is in this context necessary to amend 
that  Article,  so  as  to  allow  for  the  definitive  reduction  of  quotas  allocated  to  the 
undertakings. 

7 
8 

9 

OJ C …, …, p. …. 
OJ  L  58,  28.2.2006,  p. 1.  Regulation  as  last  amended  by  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No 247/2007 
(OJ L 69, 9.3.2007, p. 3).  
OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 42. Regulation as amended by Regulation …/2007 (OJ L …). 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(3) 

Article  19  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  318/2006  provides  for  the  possibility  to  withdraw 
sugar from the market where it is necessary in order to maintain the structural level of 
the  markets  at  a  price  level  close  to  the  reference  price.  The  application  of  this 
measure  is  currently  based  on  a  percentage,  common  to  all  Member  States  and 
applicable  to  all  production  under  quota.  Recent  experience  has  shown  that  such  a 
linear  application  may  be  counterproductive,  since  producers  are  incited  to  produce 
above their contractual needs as a precaution against a possible compulsory storage of 
the quantities withdrawn. It is therefore considered appropriate to adapt the withdrawal 
instrument  by  replacing  the  linear  percentage  by  a  threshold,  to  be  determined  by 
applying  a  coefficient  to  the  quota  allocated  to  each  undertaking,  above  which  the 
quantities  produced  under  quota  should  be  withdrawn.  In  this  way,  undertakings 
should  be  able  to  avoid  the  consequences  of  a  withdrawal  by  adjusting  their 
production so that it does not exceed the level of the threshold. 

(4)  Member  States  are  to  decide  on  the  granting  of  restructuring  aid  under  Regulation 
(EC) No 320/2006 by the end of February 2008 and 2009 as provided for in Article 5 
of  that  Regulation.  Once  their  decisions  are  taken,  it  will  be  possible  to  establish 
forecasts  with  a  high  degree  of  probability  as  regard  the  market  balances  in  the 
following  marketing  year.  In  this  context,  it  is  considered  that  the  objective  of 
withdrawal will be better achieved if the withdrawal coefficient for the 2008/2009 and 
2009/2010 marketing years can be temporarily and preventively fixed by mid March 
of  the  previous  marketing  year,  since  this  will  enable  beet  growers  to  adapt  their 
sowings to the forecast balance sheet. 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

In order to take into account updated market data on production, provision should be 
made  for  the  temporary  and  preventive  withdrawal  coefficient  fixed  in  March  to  be 
reduced if necessary for the marketing year concerned. 

It  is  necessary  to  limit  the  scope  of  the  obligation  provided  for  in  Article  6(5)  of 
Regulation (EC) No 318/2006, so as to avoid imposing on sugar undertakings to pay 
the minimum price for quantities of beet corresponding to their entire quota, including 
those quantities which may be produced beyond the threshold. 

Article  19(3)  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 318/2006  provides  that  withdrawn  quantities 
which are not marketed as industrial sugar or isoglucose are to be treated as the first 
quantities  produced  under  quota  for  the  following  marketing  year.  This  rule  could 
mean  that  undertakings  wishing  to  participate  in  the  restructuring  scheme  in  the 
2008/2009  and  2009/2010  marketing  years  are  prevented  from  benefiting  fully  from 
that  scheme.  In  order  to  avoid  hampering  the  restructuring  of  the  sugar  sector,  it  is 
considered  necessary  to  provide  for  an  exemption  from  the  withdrawal  in  the 
2007/2008 marketing year or from a possible withdrawal in the 2008/2009, marketing 
year for those undertakings which in the marketing year of withdrawal concerned have 
successfully  applied  for  restructuring  aid  under  Regulation  (EC)  No 320/2006  and 
which  as  a  result  are  going  to  renounce  their  total  quota  in  the  following  marketing 
year. 

(8) 

In  order  to  encourage  an  increased  participation  in  the  restructuring  scheme,  it  is 
considered  appropriate  to  provide  for  an  increase  of  the  coefficient  in  relation  to  the 
total  renunciation  of  quota  per  Member  State  under  the  restructuring  scheme, 
modulated  by  the  Member  State  for  each  undertaking  according  to  its  individual 
restructuring effort.  

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
(9) 

Import licences under certain preferential  arrangements are to be issued only to full-
time refiners within the limit of the traditional supply need provided for in Article 29 
of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006. This prerogative should not be reduced in relation to 
the  application  of  a  withdrawal,  considering  that  refiners  do  not  have  the  same 
possibility as sugar producers to adapt their production to the withdrawal thresholds. 

(10)  Article  1(1)  of  Commission  Regulation  (EC)  No  290/2007  of  16  March  2007 
establishing,  for  the  2007/2008  marketing  year,  the  percentage  provided  for  in 
Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 318/200610 fixed the withdrawal percentage for that 
marketing  year  at  13.5%.  Article  1(2)  of  that  Regulation  provides  for  a  derogation 
consisting of a threshold for applying the withdrawal percentage, thereby limiting the 
withdrawal requirements for those undertakings which do not contribute to the surplus 
production. In addition, the withdrawal percentage is reduced in the case of Member 
States which have made particular efforts under the restructuring scheme. In order to 
avoid confusion as a result of the changes to the withdrawal instrument introduced by 
this  Regulation,  it  should  be  specified  that,  for  the  2007/2008  marketing  year,  the 
percentage  provided  for  in  Article  1(1)  of  Regulation  (EC)  No 290/2007  should  be 
converted into an equivalent coefficient. 

(11)  Article  6  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  318/2006  lays  down  rules  applicable  to 
interprofessional  agreements.  In  accordance  with  paragraph  6  of  that  Article, 
agreements within the trade may derogate from some of these rules. The possibility to 
derogate from the obligation for sugar undertakings which have not signed pre-sowing 
contracts for a quantity equivalent to their quota sugar to pay the minimum price for 
all  beets  processed  into  sugar  should  be  provided  for,  as  was  the  case  until  the 
application of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006. 

(12)  Article 10(1) of Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 provides for a yearly adjustment of the 
national and regional quotas set out in Annex III to that Regulation, as a result of the 
application of different mechanisms through which the quotas allocated to individual 
undertakings  are  either  increased  or  reduced.  Article  10(1)  of  Regulation  (EC) 
No 318/2006  also  refers  to  Articles  14  and  19  of  that  Regulation,  which  concern 
respectively the carry forward of surplus sugar and the withdrawal of sugar from the 
market. However, the application of those Articles does not result in either an increase 
or a reduction of quota. The reference in question should therefore be deleted. 

(13)  Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 should therefore be amended accordingly. 

(14)  Account  should  be  taken  in  this  Regulation  of  the  fact  that  the  total  quota  for 
production of inulin syrup was renounced in the 2006/2007 marketing year under the 
restructuring scheme established by Regulation (EC) No 320/2006, 

10 

OJ L 78, 17.3.2007, p. 20. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
                                                 
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

In Article 6, paragraph 6 is replaced by the following: 

"6.  Subject to the approval of the Member State concerned, agreements within the 

trade may derogate from paragraphs 3, 4 and 5." 

(2) 

Article 10 is replaced by the following: 

"Article 10 
Quota management 

1. 

2. 

In accordance with the procedure referred to in Article 39(2), the quotas set out 
in  Annex III  shall  be  adjusted  by  the  end  of  February  at  the  latest  of  the 
previous marketing year for each of the 2008/2009, 2009/2010 and 2010/2011 
marketing years. The adjustments shall result from the application of Articles 8 
and 9  of  this  Regulation,  of  paragraph  2  of  this  Article,  and  of  Articles  3 
and 4a(4) of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006. 

Taking  into  account  the  results  of  the  restructuring  scheme  provided  for  in 
Regulation  (EC)  No 320/2006,  the  Commission  shall  decide  by  the  end  of 
February  2010  at  the  latest,  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in 
Article 39(2) of this Regulation, the common percentage needed to reduce the 
existing  quotas  for  sugar  and  isoglucose  per  Member  State  or  region  with  a 
view  to  avoiding  market  imbalances  in  the  marketing  years  as  from  the 
2010/2011  marketing  year.  The  Member  States  shall  adjust  the  quota  of  each 
undertaking accordingly. 

By  way  of  derogation  from  the  first  subparagraph,  for  Member  States  for 
which the national quota has been reduced as a result of renunciations of quota 
in accordance with Articles 3 and 4(a)4 of Regulation  (EC) No 320/2006, the 
applicable percentage shall be fixed in accordance with the criteria laid down 
in  Annex VIII  to  this  Regulation.  Such  Member  States  shall  adjust,  for  each 
undertaking in their territory holding a quota, the percentage derived from the 
application  of  Annex VIII  in  proportion  to  the  individual  renunciation  of 
quotas within the restructuring scheme for the undertaking concerned, in such a 
way that the total reduction of quotas in the Member State resulting from the 
percentage referred to in the second subparagraph remains unchanged.  

(3) 

Article 11 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

the title is replaced by the following: 

"Article 11 
National quota reallocation and reduction of quotas" 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
(b) 

the following sentence is added to paragraph 1: 

“In doing so, the Member States shall apply objective and non discriminatory 
criteria.” 

(c) 

the following paragraph is added: 

"4.  By way of derogation from paragraph 3, where Article 4a of Regulation 
(EC) No 320/2006 is applied, Member States shall adjust the sugar quota 
allocated to the undertaking concerned by applying the reduction defined 
under paragraph 4 of that Article, within the limit of the percentage fixed 
in the second indent of paragraph 1 of this Article. 

(4) 

In Article 15(1), point (c) is replaced by the following: 

"(c)  sugar,  isoglucose  and  inulin  syrup  withdrawn  from  the  market  in  accordance 
with  Articles  19  and  19a  and  for  which  the  obligations  provided  for  in 
Article 19(3) are not met." 

(5) 

Article 19 is replaced by the following: 

"Article 19 
Withdrawal of sugar 

1. 

2. 

3. 

In order to preserve the structural balance of the market at a price level which 
is  close  to  the  reference  price,  taking  into  account  the  commitments  of  the 
Community  resulting  from  agreements  concluded 
in  accordance  with 
Article 300  of  the  Treaty,  the  Commission  may  decide  to  withdraw  from  the 
market, until the beginning of the following marketing year, those quantities of 
sugar  or  isoglucose  produced  under  quotas  which  exceed  the  threshold 
calculated in accordance with paragraph 2. 

The  withdrawal  threshold  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  shall  be  calculated,  for 
each  undertaking  holding  a  quota,  by  multiplying  its  quota  by  a  coefficient, 
which  shall  be  fixed  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in 
Article 39(2)  by  31 October  of  the  marketing  year  concerned,  on  the  basis  of 
expected market trends during that marketing year. 

Each undertaking provided with a quota shall store at its own expense during 
the period of withdrawal the sugar produced under quota beyond the threshold 
calculated in accordance with paragraph 2. 

The sugar or isoglucose quantities withdrawn during a marketing year shall be 
treated as the first quantities produced under quota for the following marketing 
year. However, taking into account the expected sugar market trends, it may be 
decided,  in  accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in  Article  39(2),  to 
consider, for the current and/or the following marketing year, all or part of the 
withdrawn sugar or isoglucose as: 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
(a) 

(b) 

surplus sugar or surplus isoglucose available to become industrial sugar 
or industrial isoglucose, or 

temporary quota production of which a part may be reserved for export 
from 
resulting 
respecting 
agreements concluded in accordance with Article 300 of the Treaty. 

the  commitments  of 

the  Community 

4. 

If  sugar  supply  in  the  Community  is  inadequate,  it  may  be  decided,  in 
accordance  with  the  procedure  referred  to  in  Article 39(2)  that  a  certain 
quantity of withdrawn sugar may be sold on the Community market before the 
end of the period of withdrawal." 

(6) 

The following Article 19a is inserted: 

"Article 19a 
Withdrawal of sugar in the 2007/2008, 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 marketing years 

1. 

By way of derogation from Article 19(2), and in accordance with the procedure 
referred  to  Article 39(2),  the  Commission  may  decide  to  fix  the  coefficient 
referred  to  in  Article 19(2)  for  the  2007/2008,  2008/2009  and  2009/2010 
marketing  years  by  16 March  at  the  latest  of  the  previous  marketing  year, 
taking  into  account  the  result  of  the  reduction  in  each  Member  State  of  the 
national sugar quota as fixed in Annex III to this Regulation compared to the 
version  of  Annex III  applicable  on  1 July  2006.  For  those  Member  States 
which  were  not  members  of  the  Community  on  1 July  2006,  the  comparison 
should take account of the version of Annex III applicable on the date of their 
accession to the Community. 

For the application of this Article, the withdrawal percentage for the 2007/2008 
marketing  year  provided  for  in  Article 1(1)  of  Commission  Regulation  (EC) 
No 290/2007* shall be converted into a coefficient of 0.865. 

2.  On the basis of updated market trends, it may be decided, by 31 October of the 
marketing year concerned and in accordance with the procedure referred to in 
Article 39(2), to reduce the coefficient fixed in accordance with paragraph 1 of 
this Article. 

3. 

4. 

The  coefficients  referred  in  Article  19(2)  and  in  paragraphs  1  and  2  of  this 
Article  shall  in  the  marketing  year  concerned  not  apply  to  an  undertaking 
which in accordance with points (a) or (b) of Article 3(1) of Regulation (EC) 
No 320/2006  renounces,  with  effect  from  the  following  marketing  year,  the 
total quota assigned to that undertaking. 

For  the Member States where the national sugar quota has been reduced  as a 
result of renunciations of quota as provided for in Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 
No 320/2006,  the  coefficients  fixed  in  accordance  with  Article 19(2)  or 
paragraphs  1  and  2  of  this  Article  shall  be  adjusted  in  accordance  with 
Annex IX to this Regulation. 

EN 

17 

   EN 

 
Such Member States shall adjust, for each undertaking in their territory holding 
a  sugar  quota,  the  coefficient  derived  from  the  application  of  Annex IX  in 
proportion to the individual renunciation of sugar quota within the restructuring 
scheme  for  the  undertaking  concerned,  in  such  a  way  that  the  applicable 
coefficient for that Member State as a whole, as defined in Annex IX, remains 
unchanged. 

* 

OJ L 78, 17.3.2007, p. 20." 

(7) 

In Article 29(1), the first subparagraph is replaced by the following: 

"A  traditional  supply  need  of  sugar  for  refining  is  fixed  for  the  Community  at 
2 324 735 tonnes per marketing year, expressed in white sugar." 

(8) 

In  Annex  V  point  VI,  the  reference  to  Article 10(3)  is  replaced  by  a  reference  to 
Article 10(2). 

(9) 

The text in the Annex to this Regulation is added as Annexes VIII and IX. 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the third day following that of its publication in the 
Official Journal of the European Union. 

Article 2 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 

Done at Brussels,  

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
 
ANNEX 

"ANNEX VIII 

CALCULATION OF THE PERCENTAGE APPLICABLE TO MEMBER STATES 
FOR WHICH THE NATIONAL QUOTA HAS BEEN REDUCED 

1. 

For the purpose of the calculation set out in point 2, the following definitions shall 
apply: 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

"applicable percentage" means the percentage applicable in each Member State 
to the quotas allocated to each undertaking; 

"common  percentage"  means  the  common  percentage  established  by  the 
Commission in accordance with the first subparagraph of Article 10(2); 

"reduction"  means  the  figure  obtained  by  dividing  the  total  renunciation  of 
quotas in the Member State by the national quotas as fixed in Annex III to this 
Regulation in the version applicable on 1 July 2006. For those Member States 
which  were  not  members  of  the  Community  on  1  July  2006,  the  reference  to 
Annex III concerns the version applicable on the date of their accession to the 
Community. 

2. 

The  applicable  percentage  is  equal  to  the  common  percentage  multiplied  by  1  – 
[(1/0,6) x the reduction].  

When the result is below zero, the applicable percentage is equal to zero.  

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
ANNEX IX 

CALCULATION OF THE COEFFICIENT APPLICABLE TO MEMBER STATES 
FOR WHICH THE NATIONAL SUGAR QUOTA HAS BEEN REDUCED  

1. 

For the purpose of the calculations set out in points 2 and 3, the following definitions 
shall apply: 

(a) 

(b) 

"applicable coefficient' means the coefficient applicable in each Member State 
to the quotas of each undertaking; 

"reduction"  means  the  figure  obtained  by  dividing  the  total  renunciation  of 
sugar  quotas  in  the  Member  State,  including  renunciations  in  the  marketing 
year to which the withdrawal applies, by the national sugar quotas as fixed in 
Annex III to this Regulation in the version applicable on 1 July 2006; for those 
Member States which were not members of the Community on 1 July 2006, the 
calculation  should  take  account  of  the  version  of  Annex  III  applicable  on  the 
date of their accession to the Community;  

(c) 

"coefficient"  means  the  coefficient  established  by  the  Commission  in 
accordance with Article 19(2) or 19a (1) and (2). 

For  the  2007/2008  marketing  year,  the  applicable  coefficient  shall  be  equal  to  the 
coefficient increased by [(1/0,5) x the reduction] x (1 – the coefficient). 

When the result is above 1, the applicable coefficient is equal to 1. 

For the 2008/2009 and 2009/2010 marketing years, the applicable coefficient shall be 
equal to the coefficient increased by [(1/0,6) x the reduction] x (1 – the coefficient). 

2. 

3. 

When the result is above 1, the applicable coefficient is equal to 1." 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
FINANCIAL STATEMENT 

1. 

BUDGET HEADING (nomenclature 2007): 

APPROPRIATIONS 
(budget 2007): 
323 Mio€ 
pm Mio€ 
pm Mio€ 

2. 

3. 

4. 

05 02 05 
05 02 16 
680 
TITLE: 
–  Council  Regulation  amending  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No 320/2006  establishing  a  temporary 

scheme for the restructuring of the sugar industry in the Community; 

–  Council  Regulation  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No 318/2006  on  the  common  organisation  of  the 

markets in the sugar sector 

LEGAL BASIS: 
Articles 36 and 37 of the EC Treaty  
AIMS: 
– 

to  improve  the  voluntary  restructuring  scheme  in  the  sugar  sector  and  create  a  further  incentive  to 
participate in this scheme; 
to  preserve  structural  market  balance  by  refining  the  rules  on  temporary  sugar  withdrawal  in  the 
2007/08, 2008/09, 2009/10 marketing years. 

– 

5. 

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 

5.0 

CHARGED TO THE EC BUDGET 

EXPENDITURE 
– 
(REFUNDS / INTERVENTIONS) 
– 
– 

NATIONAL AUTHORITIES 
OTHER 

12 MONTH 
PERIOD 
(EUR million) 

FINANCIAL 
YEAR 2007 
(EUR million) 
– 

FINANCIAL 
YEAR 2008 
(EUR million) 
+ 332 

5.1  REVENUE 

– 

– 204 

OWN RESOURCES OF THE EC  

– 
(LEVIES / CUSTOMS DUTIES) 
– 

NATIONAL 

5.0.1  ESTIMATED EXPENDITURE 
5.1.1  ESTIMATED REVENUE 
5.2  METHOD OF CALCULATION: 

See calculations in the annex. 

2009 
+ 62 
– 136 

2010 
– 

2011 
– 

2012 
– 

6.0  CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED FROM APPROPRIATIONS ENTERED IN THE 

RELEVANT CHAPTER OF THE CURRENT BUDGET? 

6.1  CAN THE PROJECT BE FINANCED BY TRANSFER BETWEEN CHAPTERS OF 

THE CURRENT BUDGET? 

6.2  WILL A SUPPLEMENTARY BUDGET BE NECESSARY? 
6.3  WILL APPROPRIATIONS NEED TO BE ENTERED IN FUTURE BUDGETS? 

YES NO 

YES NO 
YES NO 
YES NO 

OBSERVATIONS: 

The  principle  of  self-financing  of  the  temporary  restructuring  Fund  is  still  valid  under  these  new  rules.  The 
granting of any aid referred to in Council Regulation (EC) No 320/2006 is only possible within the limit of the 
appropriations available in the Fund. A simulation of the financial situation of the Fund under these new rules is 
provided for in the annex (point 5). 

Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 is aimed at improving the market balance in case of potential surplus of 
sugar on the internal market, and as such will not lead to any additional budget expenditure. 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX 

1 – Foreseen available resources in the restructuring Fund at the end of the 2007/08 marketing year (current regime) 

(€mio) 

2006/07 marketing year 
2007/08 marketing year 

Expenditure 

1 358 
573 

Revenue 
2 145 
2 866 

balance 

cumulated balance 

787 
2 293 

3 080 

2 – Cost of exoneration of the 2007/08 levy for the quantities withdrawn (in case of renouncement of quotas in 2008/09 

at least equal to the quantities withdrawn) 

Maximum reduction of levy in the 2007/08 marketing year = €173,8/t x 12% x 16,1 mio t: around €340 mio 
This exoneration would have an impact in: 
–  March 2008 (2008 budget) for the payment of the 1st instalment (60%) of the temporary restructuring amount:  

340*60% = €204 mio 

–  November 2008 (2009 budget) for the payment of the 2nd instalment (40%) of the temporary restructuring amount:  

340*40% = €136 mio 

Cumulated balance at the end of the 2007/08 marketing year: 3 080 – 340 = €2 740 mio 

3 – Cost of retroactive increase in years 1 and 2 of beet grower's part 
Cost of this measure: around €373 mio (see detailed calculations below) 
Cumulated balance at the end of the 2007/08 marketing year: 2 740 – 373 = €2 367 mio 

4 – Cost of retroactive increase in years 1 and 2 of undertaking's part 
Cost of this measure: around €22 mio (see detailed calculations below) 
Cumulated balance at the end of the 2007/08 marketing year: 2 367 – 22 = €2 345 mio 

These retroactive payments amount (beet grower + undertaking parts): 

€291 mio 
€104 mio 

for the 2006/2007 marketing year. It is most likely that they will occur during the 2008 budget year  
for the 2007/2008 marketing year. The impact will occur in:  
June 2008 (2008 budget) for 40%: 
November 2008 (2009 budget) for 60%: 

€41 mio 
€62 mio 

5 – Simulation of the situation of the Fund with 625 €/t for quota abandonment in the 2008/2009 marketing year, of which 

10% for beet grower + top-up for beet growers of €237.5/t 

The Fund would be fully spent with around 3,85 mio t of quotas renounced in year 3 (residual balance: around only €54 mio) 

EUR mio 

Expenditure 

Revenue 

Balance 

Cumulated balance 

2006/07 marketing year 
2007/08 marketing year 
2008/09 marketing year 
2009/10 marketing year 

1 649 
677 
3 730 

Total 

6 056 

2 145 
2 526 
1 439 
No levy 
6 110 

496 
1 849 
–2 291 
0 

2 345 
54 
54 
54 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
Detailed calculations 

Cost of retroactivity on beet grower's aid 
Aid for beet grower 2008/09 (a) 
Top-up for beet grower (b) 
Total amount beet grower: (a) + (b) 

62,5  = €10%*625/t 

237,5 
300 

=> %tage of 2006/07 restructuring aid (€730/t) 

41,10 

2006/07 
IR 
SV 
IT 

ES - Linares 
ES - Ciudad Real 
PT 

BE-NL inuline * 
FR inuline * 

target: 

41,10% 

recorded rate 

difference with 
target 

32,3** 
12,5 
10 

10 
15 
10 

10 
10 

8,80 
28,60 
31,10 

31,10 
26,10 
31,10 

31,10 
31,10 

quantities 
concerned (tons) 
199260 
42562 
778737,2 

75325 
17793,5 
35218 

296195,8 
24521 

total 

Cost of retroactivity: percentage of difference x 
quantities x restructuring aid 2006/07 

12 794 485 
8 884 818 
176 773 344 

17 098 775 
3 389 662 
2 798 070 

50 427 335 
5 566 267 

277 732 755 

* No information being available on the part given to beet growers and machinery contractors, the minimum rate of 10% has been retained 
** Not yet final 

target: 

41,10% 

recorded rate 

2007/08 
IT 
PT 
ES - Linares 
ES - Ciudad Real 
FI 
HU 
CZ 
SK 
EL 
SL 
LV 
Isoglucose pas concerné par ces 10% au moins 

10 
28 
10 
15 
17 
27 
29,3 
20 
17 
10 
20 

difference with 
target 

31,10 
13,10 
31,10 
26,10 
24,10 
14,10 
11,80 
21,10 
24,10 
31,10 
21,10 

quantities 
concerned (tons) 
24860,499 
19500 
12186,6 
4492,2 
56087 
108093 
102472,793 
70133 
158800 
52973 
66505 
total 

total for the 2 marketing years: 

Cost of retroactivity: percentage of difference x 
quantities x restructuring aid 2007/08 

5 643 333 
1 864 200 
2 766 358 
855 764 
9 865 703 
11 122 770 
8 823 932 
10 800 482 
20 949 690 
12 024 871 
10 241 770 
94 958 874 

372 691 629 

EN 

23 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
Cost of retroactivity on undertaking's aid 
Undertaking's part for the 2008/2009 marketing year = 90%*625 = 562,5 €/t 

target: 

562,5 

2006/07 
IR 
SV 
IT 
ES - Linares 
ES - Ciudad Real 
PT 
BE-NL inuline 
FR inuline 
Isoglucose not concerned 

Amount per ton 
received = recorded 
rate x restructuring aid 
2006/07 

recorded 
rate 

67,7 
87,5 
90 
90 
85 
90 
90 
90 

494,21 
638,75 
657 
657 
620,5 
229,95 
492,75 
657 

target 

562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
196,875 * 
421,875 ** 
562,5 

total 

Cost of retroactivity = difference 
between the target and the amount 
actually received x quantities concerned 
13 607 465 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
13 607 465 

* No dismantling of the production facilities (Articles 3–5(c) of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006) 
** Partial dismantling of the production facilities (Articles 3–5(b) of Regulation (EC) No 320/2006)  

2007/08 
IT 
PT 
ES - Linares 
ES - Ciudad Real 
FI 
HU 
CZ 
SK 
EL 
SL 
LV 
Isoglucose not concerned 
** Partial dismantling of the production 
facilities (Art 3–5(b) Reg (EC) 320/2006) 

Amount per ton 
received = 
recorded rate x 
restructuring aid 
2007/08 

657 
525,6 
657 
620,5 
605,9 
532,9 
516,11 
584 
454,425 
657 
584 

recorded rate 
90 
72 
90 
85 
83 
73 
70,7 
80 
83 
90 
80 

target 

562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
562,5 
421,875 ** 
562,5 
562,5 

Cost of retroactivity = difference 
between the target and the amount 
actually received x quantities concerned 
0,00 
719 550,00 
0,00 
0,00 
0,00 
3 199 552,80 
4 753 712,87 
0,00 
0,00 
0,00 
0,00 
8 672 816 

total 

total for the 2 marketing years: 

22 280 281 

Total 2006/2007 marketing year (beet grower + undertaking):  
Total 2007/2008 marketing year (beet grower + undertaking):  

291 340 221  € 
103 631 689  € 

EN 

24 

EN 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Simulation for the 2008/2009 marketing year 

Expenditure  

Hypothesis quotas renounced 2008/09 – tons 
Restructuring aid – undertaking's part – €mio (a) 
Restructuring aid – beet grower's part – €mio (b) 
Diversification aid – €mio (c) 

3 850 000 
2 101 
1 120 
361 

Additional aid for diversification – €mio (d) 

148 

Revenue  
Sugar quotas at the end of the 2007/08 
marketing year (a) 
Hypothesis quotas renounced (b) 
Temporary restructuring amount (c) 

Sugar revenue – €mio 
(d) = (a–b)*c 
Isoglucose quotas at the end of the 2007/08 
marketing year (e) 
Temporary restructuring amount (f) 

Isoglucose revenue – €mio 

(g) = (e)*(f) 

TOTAL: (a) + (b) + (c) + (d) 

3 730 

 Total 2008/2009 revenue: (d)+(g) 

16 108 940,8 
3 850 000 
113,3 €/t 
1 389 

880 092,8 
56,65 €/t 
50 

 1 439 

EN 

25 

EN