Commission Regulation (EC) No 1550/2007 of 20 December 2007 amending Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers
Date: 2007-12-20
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU control, aid system, aid to agriculture, common agricultural policy, production aid, terms for aid

21.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 337/79

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1550/2007

of 20 December 2007

amending Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of cross-
compliance, modulation and the integrated administration and control system provided for in
Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing common rules for direct support schemes
under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 of 29
September 2003 establishing common rules for direct support
schemes under the common agricultural policy and establishing
certain support schemes for farmers and amending Regulations
(EEC) No 2019/93, (EC) No 1452/2001, (EC) No 1453/2001,
(EC) No 1454/2001, (EC) No 1868/94, (EC) No 1251/1999,
(EC) No 1254/1999, (EC) No 1673/2000, (EEC) No 2358/71
and (EC) No 2529/2001 (1), and in particular of Article 145 (c),
(da), (l), (m) (n) and (p) thereof,

Whereas:

(1)

(2)

the Commission has

In the report to the Council (2) on the implementation of
cross-compliance,
identified a
number of possible improvements in terms of efficiency
and simplification of the rules governing this implemen-
force,
tation.
Commission Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 (3) needs to
be amended in several respects.

improvements

those

into

put

To

Article 143bb of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003
provides for a separate fruit and vegetables payment in
Member States applying the single area payment scheme
provided for in Article 143b of that Regulation. This
payment is, due to its nature, not related to agricultural
area, which is why the provisions concerning the single
application pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 do
not apply to that payment scheme. Hence, the definition
of
amended
schemes
accordingly and provision should be made for an appro-
priate application procedure.

area-related

should

aid

be

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

The provisions concerning the sugar payment provided
for in Chapter 10e of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003
have become obsolete and should be deleted.

The date for the establishment of the ratio of permanent
pasture to be maintained at Member State level needs to
be established for Bulgaria and Romania. The latest date
for which information about this ratio shall be com-
municated to the Commission should also be provided.

Following the introduction of the transitional fruit and
vegetables payment provided for in Chapter 10g of Regu-
lation (EC) No 1782/2003 and the transitional soft fruit
payment provided for in Chapter 10h of that Regulation,
Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 needs to be amended in
respect of the application procedure.

Following the introduction of the single payment scheme
and the decoupling of area related payment it is no more
necessary for on-the-spot checks for those payments to
be unannounced in all cases. It should also be clarified
when on-the-spot checks concerning cross-compliance
need to be unannounced,
in particular with a view to
avoid a concealment of a non-compliance or irregularity.

Experience has
flexibility when
shown that more
reaching the minimum control rate for checks of cross-
compliance is needed. The Member State should have the
option to fulfil the minimum rate not only at the level of
the competent control authority but also at the level of
the paying agency or at the level of an act or standard, or
group of acts or standards. Furthermore, when a sample
has to be extended beyond the minimum control rate
following a high number of non-compliances found, that
extension should be targeting the acts or standards
to cross-
concerned and not
compliance. Therefore
in
the
Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should be amended
accordingly.

the whole area subject

provisions

relevant

(1) OJ L 270, 21.10.2003, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by
L 284,

(EC) No 1276/2007 (OJ

Commission Regulation
30.10.2007, p. 11).

(2) COM(2007) 147 final, 29.3.2007.
(3) OJ L 141, 30.4.2004, p. 18. Regulation as last amended by Regu-

lation (EC) No 972/2007 (OJ L 216, 21.8.2007, p. 3).

(8)

Furthermore, experience has shown that the selection of
control sample for on-the-spot checks can be improved
by allowing such sample not only to be selected at the
level of the competent control authority but also at the
level of the paying agency, or per act and standard.

L 337/80

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.12.2007

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

The existence of differing control rates provided for in
specific legislation concerning the control of cross-
compliance makes it more difficult
the Member
to organise the controls. Therefore a single
States
regarding cross-
control
compliance should be introduced. Nevertheless, any
instance of non-compliance detected in the course of
on-the-spot checks under the sectoral legislation should
be reported and followed-up under cross-compliance.

rate for on-the-spot checks

for

The sampling of on-the-spot checks for cross-compliance
can be improved by allowing to take into account into
the risk analysis the farmers participation in the farm
advisory system provided for in Articles 13 and 14 of
Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 as well as farmers par-
It should
ticipation in relevant certifications systems.
however be demonstrated when taking that participation
into account
the farmers participating in those
schemes represent a lesser risk than farmers not partici-
pating in those schemes.

that

selected for on-the-spot

To assure an element of representativeness in the sample
cross-
to be
compliance, a certain part of
the sample should be
selected randomly. In the case when the number of on-
the-spot checks for cross-compliance is increased,
it
should also be possible to increase the percentage of
farmers randomly selected for those checks.

checks

for

In order to make it possible to start the on-the-spot
checks for cross-compliance as early as possible in the
year, also before all information on the application forms
is available,
it should be possible to make a partial
selection of the control sample based on the already
available information.

for

checks

require several visits on the same farm.

cross-compliance would in
(13) On-the-spot
In
general
order to reduce the burden of
the checks for both
farmers and administrations, the checks may be limited
to one control visit. The timing of that visit should be
clarified. Nevertheless, the Member States should ensure
that
the
requirements and standards remaining to be checked
shall be carried out within the same calendar year.

and effective

representative

check of

a

the
when the sample check reveals non-compliances,
sample actually inspected should be extended. This
principle
legislation
applicable to the act and standard provides for such a
check.

should also apply where

the

(15)

(16)

To simplify the on-the-spot checks and to make better
use of existing control capacities, it should be provided,
when the effectiveness of the controls is at least equal to
the one achieved when the checks are carried out by on-
the-spot checks,
farm level by
to replace controls at
administrative checks or checks at the level of under-
takings.

It should furthermore be possible for the Member States
to make use of objective indicators specific to certain
requirements or standards when performing the on-the-
spot checks. Those indicators should however be directly
linked to the requirements or standards they represent
and cover all elements to be checked.

(17) Article 66 of Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 provides that
a possible
reduction following a determined non-
compliance shall be applied the same calendar year as
the application is submitted. Logically, the on-the-spot
check has to be carried out the same year where the
application is lodged. This should be clarified in Regu-
lation (EC) No 796/2004.

(18)

(19)

The farmers should be informed about any possible non-
compliance determined following an on-the-spot check.
It is appropriate to provide for a certain time limit within
which the farmers
information.
However, exceeding such time limit should not entitle
the farmers concerned to avoid the consequences that
the determined non-compliance would otherwise trigger.

should receive this

The current provisions concerning reductions
to be
applied in case of repeated non-compliances do not
take into account any improvement or worsening of
to encourage
the repeated non-compliance.
improvement
the
of
situation, the percentage to be fixed and multiplied by
the factor three, for the first repetition should take such
changes into account.

discourage worsening

In order

and

(14)

Concerning on-the-spot checks of eligibility criteria, the
possibility to limit actual inspections to a sample of the
area to be checked has proven efficient. Therefore it is
appropriate to extend this possibility, where applicable,
to the on-the-spot checks for cross-compliance. However,

(20)

The introduction of new aid schemes for direct payments
requires an updating of the references to the budgetary
ceilings referred to in Article 71a of Regulation (EC) No
796/2004.

21.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 337/81

(21)

In certain cases, unduly allocated entitlements correspond
to very small amounts and a substantial administrative
burden is required to recover those entitlements. In light
of simplification and the balance between the adminis-
trative burden and the amount to be recovered, the intro-
duction of a minimum amount
that may trigger a
recovery is justified.

(22)

The amendments provided for in this Regulation concern
aid applications relating to years or premium periods
starting as of 1 January 2008. This Regulation should
therefore apply as of 1 January 2008.

(23)

Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 should therefore be
amended accordingly.

(24)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in
the Management
accordance with the opinion of
Committee for Direct Payments,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulation (EC) No 796/2004 is amended as follows:

1. Article 2 is amended as follows:

(a) point 12 is replaced by the following:

‘12.

referred to in the

“Area-related aid schemes”: shall mean the single
payment scheme, the hops payment to recognised
producer groups
second
paragraph of Article 68a of Regulation (EC) No
1782/2003 and all aid schemes established under
Titles IV and IVa of that Regulation, except those
established under Chapters 7, 10f, 11 and 12 of
that Title IV, except the separate sugar payment
established in Article 143b(a) of that Regulation
fruit and vegetable
and except
separate
payment established in Article 143bb of
that
Regulation;’

the

(b) point 32 is replaced by the following:

‘32.

“Act”: shall mean each of the individual Directives
and Regulations listed in Annex III to Regulation
(EC) No 1782/2003; however, the Directive and
the Regulations listed in points 7 and 8 of Annex
III to that Regulation shall establish one single
act;’

2.

in Article 3, the following paragraph is added:

For Bulgaria and Romania, the reference ratio shall be

‘7.
established as follows:

(a)

the land under permanent pasture shall be the land
under permanent pasture declared by the farmers in

2007 in accordance with Article 14(1) of this Regu-
lation;

(b) the total agricultural area shall be the total agricultural

area declared by the farmers in 2007.’;

3.

in Article 13, the following paragraph is inserted before
paragraph 14:

‘13a.
fruit and
In case of application for transitional
vegetables payments provided for in Chapter 10g of Title
IV of Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 or application for
transitional soft fruit payments provided for in Chapter
10h of that Title, the single application shall contain a
copy of the contract for processing or the commitment
to supply pursuant to Article 171db of Regulation (EC)
No 1973/2004.

Member States may provide that the information in the
first subparagraph may be submitted separately by a later
date which shall not be later than 1 December the year of
the application.’;

4.

in Title II of Part II, the heading of Chapter IIIa is replaced
by the following:

‘AID FOR SUGAR BEET AND CANE PRODUCERS,
SEPARATE SUGAR PAYMENT AND SEPARATE FRUIT
AND VEGETABLES PAYMENT’;

5. Article 17a is amended as follows:

(a)

the heading is replaced by the following:

‘Requirements pertaining to aid applications for the
aid for sugar beet and cane producers, the separate
sugar payment and the separate fruit and vegetables
payment’;

(b) in paragraph 1, the introductory words are replaced by

the following:

‘Farmers applying for the aid for sugar beet and cane
producers provided for in Chapter 10f of Title IV of
Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003, farmers applying for
the separate sugar payment provided for in Article
that Regulation and farmers applying for
143ba of
the separate fruit and vegetables payment provided
for in Article 143bb of that Regulation shall submit
an
information
necessary to establish eligibility for the aid, and in
particular:’

application

containing

aid

all

L 337/82

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.12.2007

(c) paragraph 2 is replaced by the following:

provided for in Article 42, this minimum control rate may
however be reached at the level of each Paying Agency.

‘2.
The aid application for the aid for sugar beet and
the separate sugar payment or the
cane producers,
separate fruit and vegetables payment
respectively
shall be submitted by a date to be determined by the
Member States which shall not be later than 15 May
and, in the case of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, not
later than 15 June.’;

6.

in Chapter I of Title III of Part II, the following Article 23a
is added:

‘Article 23a

Provided that

1.
is not
the purpose of
jeopardised, on-the-spot checks may be announced. The
announcement shall be strictly limited to the minimum
time period necessary and shall not exceed 14 days.

the control

However, for on-the-spot checks concerning livestock aid
applications, the notice mentioned in the first subparagraph
shall, except in duly justified cases, not exceed 48 hours.
Furthermore, where the legislation applicable to the acts
and standards relevant
to cross-compliance requires the
on-the-spot check to be unannounced, those rules shall
also apply in the case of on-the-spot checks related to
cross-compliance.

2. Where appropriate, on-the-spot checks provided for
in this Regulation and any other checks provided for in
Community rules shall be carried out at the same time.’;

7. Article 25 is deleted;

Where the legislation applicable to the act and standards
already fix minimum control rates, that rate shall insofar be
applied instead of the minimum rate mentioned in the first
subparagraph. Alternatively, Member States may decide that
any instances of non-compliance detected in the course of
any on-the-spot checks under the legislation applicable to
the acts and standards which are performed outside the
sample mentioned in the first
shall be
reported to, and followed up by, the competent control
authority in charge of the act or standard concerned. The
provisions under this Title shall apply.

subparagraph,

Should on-the-spot checks reveal a significant degree
2.
of non-compliance with a given act or standard,
the
number of on-the-spot checks to be carried out for this
act or standard in the following control period shall be
increased.

Article 45

Selection of the control sample

control

authority in any other way,

1. Without prejudice to checks carried out as a follow-
up of non-compliances brought to the attention of the
competent
the
selection of each of the samples of farms to be checked
in accordance with Article 44 shall be based, where
applicable, on a risk analysis according to the applicable
legislation, or on a risk analysis appropriate to the
risk analysis may be
requirements or
based on the level of an individual farm or on the level
of categories of farms or geographical zones or, in the case
of point (b) of the second subparagraph of paragraph 3 of
this Article, on the level of undertakings.

standards. That

8. Articles 44 and 45 are replaced by the following:

The risk analysis may take into account one or both of
following:

‘Article 44

Minimum control rate

1.
The competent control authority shall, with regard to
the requirements and standards for which it is responsible,
carry out checks on at least 1 % of all farmers submitting
aid applications under support schemes for direct payments
within the meaning of Article 2(d) of Regulation (EC) No
1782/2003 and for which the competent control authority
in question is responsible.

The minimum control rate referred to in the first subpara-
graph may be reached at
the level of each competent
control authority or at the level of each act or standard
or group of acts or standards.
In the cases where the
controls are not carried out by the Paying Agencies as

(a) a farmer’s participation in the farm advisory system
provided for in Articles 13 and 14 of Regulation (EC)
No 1782/2003;

(b) a farmer’s participation in a certification system if the
scheme in question is relevant for the requirements and
standards concerned.

the

element of

To provide

representativeness,
1a.
between 20 % and 25 % of
the minimum number of
farmers to be subject to on-the-spot checks as provided
for in the first subparagraph of Article 44(1), shall be
selected randomly.

21.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 337/83

However, if the number of farmers to be subject to on-the-
spot checks exceeds the minimum number of farmers to be
subject to on-the-spot checks as provided for in the first
subparagraph of Article 44(1), the percentage of randomly
selected farmers in the additional sample should not exceed
25 %.

A partial selection of the control sample may, where
1b.
appropriate, be made before the end of the application
period in question, on the basis of available information.
The provisional
sample shall be completed when all
relevant applications are available.

9. Article 47 is amended as follows:

(a)

in paragraph 1, the following subparagraphs are added:

‘Notwithstanding the first
subparagraph, where the
minimum control rate is reached at the level of each
act or standard or group of acts or standards as
provided for in the second subparagraph of Article
44(1),
selected shall be checked with
regard to their compliance with the act or standard
or group of acts and standards in question.

the farmers

2.
The samples of farmers to be checked in accordance
with Article 44 shall be selected from the samples of
farmers which were already selected pursuant to Articles
26 and 27 and to whom the relevant requirements or
standards apply.

In general, each farmer selected for an on-the-spot
check shall be controlled at a time when most
requirements and standards for which he was selected
may be checked. However, Member States shall ensure
that an appropriate level of control for all requirements
and standards is achieved during the year.’;

3.
By way of derogation from paragraph 2, the samples
of farmers to be checked in accordance with Article 44
farmers
may be selected amongst
submitting aid applications under support schemes for
direct payments within the meaning of Article 2(d) of
Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 and who are under the
requirements or
obligation to respect
standards.

the population of

relevant

the

In that case:

(a) where it is concluded, on the basis of the risk analysis
applied at farm level, that non-beneficiaries of direct aid
represent a higher risk than the farmers who applied
for aid, farmers who applied for aid may be replaced by
non-beneficiaries;
in that case, the overall number of
farmers checked shall, nevertheless, attain the control
rate provided for in Article 44(1); the reasons for such
replacements
shall be properly justified and docu-
mented;

(b) if more effective, the risk analysis may be performed at
the level of undertakings, in particular slaughterhouses,
in that
traders or suppliers rather than at farm level;
case, the farmers thus checked may be counted towards
the control rate provided for in Article 44(1).

4.
It may be decided to proceed by a combination of the
procedures set out in paragraphs 2 and 3 in the case where
such a combination increases
the
control system.’;

the effectiveness of

(b) the following paragraph is inserted after paragraph 1:

checks

shall, where

‘1a.
applicable,
On-the-spot
cover all the agricultural
land of the holding. Never-
theless, the actual inspection in the field as part of an
on-the-spot check may be limited to a sample of at
least half of the agricultural parcels concerned by the
requirement or standard on the holding provided that
such sample guarantees a reliable and representative
and
in respect of
level of
check reveals non-
standards. When this
compliances,
parcels
agricultural
actually inspected shall be increased.

sample
of

requirements

control

sample

the

Furthermore, where the legislation applicable to the act
or standards provides so, the actual inspection of the
compliance with the requirements and standards as part
of an on-the-spot check may be limited to a represen-
tative sample of the objects to check. However, the
Member States shall assure that the checks are carried
out on all requirements and standards for which the
compliance may be checked at the time of the visit.’;

(c)

the following paragraphs are added:

‘3.
Provided that the Member State ensures that the
effectiveness of the controls is at least equal to the one
achieved in the case where the controls are carried out
by on-the-spot checks, controls at farm level may be
replaced by administrative checks or checks at the level
of undertakings as referred to in point (b) of the second
subparagraph of Article 45(3).

L 337/84

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

21.12.2007

to

certain

In performing the on-the-spot checks, Member
4.
indicators
States may make use of objective control
standards
specific
and
provided they ensure that
the
control of the requirements and standards concerned
is at
to on-the-spot checks performed
without the use of indicators.

the effectiveness of

requirements

least equal

indicators

shall have

link to the
The
requirements or standards they represent and cover all
elements to be checked when controlling that or those
requirements or standards.

a direct

checks

On-the-spot

sample
5.
provided for
in Article 44(1) shall be carried out
within the same calendar year where the aid appli-
cations are submitted.’;

related

the

to

10. Article 48(2) is replaced by the following:

12.

in Article 71a(2), the first subparagraph of point (d)
replaced by the following:

is

‘With regard to aid schemes listed in Annex I to Regulation
(EC) No 1782/2003 for which a budgetary ceiling is fixed
in accordance with Articles 64(2), 70(2), 71(2), 110p(1),
143b(7), 143ba(2) and 143bc of
the
Member State shall sum up the amounts resulting from
the application of points (a), (b) and (c).’;

that Regulation,

13.

in Article 73a, the following paragraph is inserted after
paragraph 2a:

‘2b. Member States may decide not to recover unduly
allocated entitlements where the total amount unduly
allocated to the farmer is EUR 50 or less. Furthermore,
when the total value referred to in paragraph 2a concerns
EUR 50 or less, Member States may decide not to carry out
the recalculation.’;

‘2.
The farmer shall be informed of any determined non-
compliance within three months after the date of the on-
the-spot check.’;

14.

in Article 76(2), the following subparagraph is added:

11.

in Article 66(4), the first subparagraph is replaced by the
following:

‘4. Without prejudice to cases of
intentional non-
compliance in accordance with Article 67, where repeated
non-compliances have been determined, a percentage fixed
in accordance with paragraph 1 with regard to the repeated
non-compliance shall, in respect of the first repetition, be
multiplied by the factor three. For this purpose, the Paying
Agency shall, in the case where that percentage was fixed in
accordance with paragraph 2, determine the percentage that
would have been applied to the repeated non-compliance
with the requirement or standard concerned.’;

‘However, Bulgaria
send to the
and Romania
Commission a communication about that proportion of
land under permanent pasture in the reference year 2007
referred to in Article 3(7) by 31 March 2008 at the latest.’

shall

Article 2

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

It shall apply to aid applications relating to years or premium
periods starting from 1 January 2008.

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

Done at Brussels, 20 December 2007.

For the Commission

Mariann FISCHER BOEL
Member of the Commission