Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - 2008 fast track actions to reduce administrative burdens in the European Union
Date: 2008-03-10
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: European Union, administrative formalities, application of EU law, operating cost, overheads, public office, simplification of formalities

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 10.3.2008 
COM(2008) 141 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

2008 Fast Track Actions to reduce administrative burdens in the European Union 

(presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE 
EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 

2008 Fast Track Actions to reduce administrative burdens in the European Union 

1. 

THE ROLE OF FAST TRACK ACTIONS IN THE ACTION PROGRAMME FOR REDUCING 
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS IN THE EU 

A  key  part  of  the  Action  Programme  on  reducing  administrative  burdens  in  the  European 
Union1 consists of a large-scale measurement of administrative burdens in 2007-2008, to be 
followed by major simplification proposals. However, in order to produce concrete results in 
the  short  term,  the  Action  Programme  also  covers  immediate  measures  that  are  likely  to 
generate significant benefits through technical changes in existing rules. Because of the nature 
of  the  changes  required,  these  measures  can  be  adopted  fairly  quickly.  They  are  therefore 
called ‘Fast Track Actions’ (FTA).  

Ten FTA were tabled in 2007 with estimated savings of € 1,3 billion for EU businesses. All in 
all,  as  of  1  February  2008,  5  of  the  10  actions  have  been  formally  adopted,  thereby  cutting 
administrative  burdens  by  approximately  € 500  million2.  The  European  Parliament  and  the 
Council are likely to adopt the remaining proposals in the first part of 2008. 

As  announced  in  January  20083,  the  Commission  hereby  presents  a  list  of  new  fast  track 
actions  (see  Annex  I)4.  Unnecessary  administrative  burdens  were  identified  on  the  basis  of 
internal review and suggestions received from stakeholders and Member States’ experts.  

2. 

OPINION  OF  THE  HIGH  LEVEL  GROUP  OF  INDEPENDENT  STAKEHOLDERS  ON 
ADMINISTRATIVE BURDENS 

The  Commission  has  sought  the  opinion  of  the  newly  established  High  Level  Group  of 
Independent  Stakeholders  on  Administrative  Burdens  before  finalising  the  list  of  2008  Fast 
Track  Actions.  The  High  Level  Group  adopted  its  opinion  at  its  second  meeting  on  26 
February 2008. The Commission also took into account the comments sent by members of the 
Group of High Level National Regulatory Experts. 

The opinion and the comments received express general support for the 2008 FTA package. 
The High Level Group on Administrative Burdens called in addition for Parliament and the 
Council to introduce new procedures for the adoption of simplification proposals. 

1 
2 
3 
4 

COM(2007) 23. 
For a detailed description of the state of play as of 31 December 2007, see Annex 3 of COM(2008) 35. 
COM(2008) 35. 
Seven  of  these  FTA's  are  part  of  the  Commission's  simplification  rolling  programme.  See  Second 
Progress Report on the strategy for simplifying the regulatory environment, COM (2008)33. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
                                                 
3. 

INTER-INSTITUTIONAL PROCESS 

Several  2008  Fast  Track  Actions  require  a  strong  commitment  by  both  Parliament  and 
Council  in  order  to  be  adopted  by  the  end  of  2008.  The  Commission  therefore  invites  the 
European  Council  to  call  upon  the  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  to  give  special 
priority to the measures set out in Annex I once the Commission has made the corresponding 
proposals.  

The  Commission  also  asks  the  Council  and  the  Parliament  to  develop  urgently  appropriate 
working  methods  to  speed  up  the  processing  of  simplification  proposals,  as  foreseen  in  the 
Inter Institutional Agreement of 2003, in particular for reducing administrative burdens, and 
strongly  recommended  by  the  High  Level  Group  on  Administrative  Burdens.  This  is 
necessary to ensure that a significant number of reduction proposals can be taken forward in 
2008 and 20095 and is a crucial condition for ensuring that the EU will succeed in reaching its 
25% reduction objective by 2012. 

5 

With  new  European  elections  scheduled  for  June  2009,  the  European  Parliament  announced  that  it 
would not consider new legislative initiatives after March/April 2009. In view of previous changes of 
legislature, normal legislative work might not be back to full speed before November 2009. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
ANNEX I: Items for 2008 Fast Track Actions  

Policy area 

EU act 
concerned 

Agriculture  Commission 

Regulation (EEC) 
No 1722/93 of 30 
June 1993 laying 
down detailed rules 
for the application 
of Council 
Regulation (EEC) 
No 1766/92 
concerning 
production refunds 
in the cereals sector 

Directive 97/68/EC 
of the European 
Parliament and of 
the Council of 16 
December 1997 on 
the approximation 
of the laws of the 
Member States 
relating to measures 
against the emission 
of gaseous and 
particulate 
pollutants from 
internal combustion 
engines to be 
installed in non-road 
mobile machinery 

Industry 
policy 

Description of the current burden, problem and proposed 2008 FTA 

Summary 
Simplification of control procedures on modified starches by increasing the threshold 
below which these procedures do not apply. 

Current burden / Problem 
The special provisions for control on modified starches are designed to ensure that 
modified starch is not reprocessed into a raw material the use of which would give the 
right to apply for a refund more than once. A maximum amount of refund is introduced 
(currently 16 euros/tonne) below which special provisions for control do not apply. 
Considering the current level of the refund and the relatively high costs of reconverting 
modified starches, the threshold of 16 euros/tonne of starch is too low. The operators are 
obliged to fulfil additional administrative requirements every time the amount of refund 
exceeds this threshold even though the risk of speculative reprocessing is very limited.  
Reduction measure 
Raise the threshold (currently 16 €/tonne) below which the special control measures 
provided for in Article 10 of the Regulation 1722/93 shall not apply, to a more reasonable 
level in order to lighten the administrative burden on operators (starch manufacturers) by 
eliminating the controls on modified starches when the risk of speculative processing is, 
for economic reasons, non-existing. 
Summary 
Remove the administrative burdens arising from the notification requirements under the 
flexibility scheme and falling on Member States' approval authorities and manufacturers 

Current burden / Problem 
Under Annex XIII, § 1.5 of the NRMM Directive the original equipment manufacturers 
shall notify the approval authorities of each Member State of the use of the flexibility 
scheme (allowing for a limited number of engines only complying with the previous stage 
of emission limit values to be placed on the market). Furthermore under § 1.7 of this 
Annex, manufacturers have to report every six months to the approval authorities on the 
implementation of the flexibility schemes they are using, including cumulative data on 
the number of engines and NRMM placed on the market under the flexibility scheme, 
engine and NRMM serial numbers, and the Member States where the NRMM have been 
placed on the market. 
These notification requirements create unnecessary burdens to both manufacturers and 
approval authorities, while their added value has not been proven in the years of 
application of the Directive. 
Reduction measure 
Delete the notification requirements in § 1.5 and 1.7 of Annex XIII of the NRMM 
Directive (whilst maintaining § 1.6 specifying that the manufacturer has to provide the 
approval authority with any information connected with the implementation of the 
flexibility scheme that the authority may request as necessary for the decision) 

Industry 
policy 

Directive 
1999/5/EC of the 
European 
Parliament and of 
the Council of 9 
March 1999 on 
radio equipment and 
telecommunications 
terminal equipment 
and the mutual 

Summary 
Reduce the administrative burden for manufacturers arising from the need to notify to 
Member States the intention to place radio-communications equipment on the market 

Current burden / Problem 
Under article 6.4, manufacturers are obliged to notify their intention to place certain types 
of radio-communications equipment to national (frequency management) authorities. This 
applies to equipment operating in spectrum that is not fully harmonised within the EU. 
The procedures implemented by Member States are not harmonised through the 
Directive. On an informal basis some harmonisation of the information to be provided has 
been reached, but the procedures for delivering the information vary. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
Industry 
policy 

recognition of their 
conformity 

Reduction measure 
Implementation of a one-stop electronic notification facility, that relays the information 
from the manufacturer to the member states authorities. The manufacturer thus does not 
need to be aware of the individual addressees within the Member States. 

Pharmaceutical 
legislation: - 
Directive 
2001/82/EC of the 
European 
Parliament and of 
the Council of 6 
November 2001 on 
the Community 
code relating to 
veterinary medicinal 
products- Directive 
2001/83/EC of the 
European 
Parliament and of 
the Council of 6 
November 2001 on 
the Community 
code relating to 
medicinal products 
for human use  

Summary 
Review the legal bases of the Variations Regulations in order to bring full harmonisation 
of the variations rules within the EU. This will allow to make the regulatory framework 
governing changes to medicinal products (e.g. change in the packaging, in the address of 
the manufacturer, ...) clearer, simpler and more flexible. 
Current burden / Problem 
Medicines are regulated throughout their entire lifetime. All changes subsequent to their 
placing on the EU market (e.g. change in the production process, change in the 
packaging, change in the address of the manufacturer) are defined in legal terms as 
‘variations’, and must be handled according to a complex legislative framework: the 
‘Variations Regulations’.  
Variations pose a considerable administrative burden, both to the industry and to 
competent regulatory authorities. It is estimated that their management mobilise more 
than 60% of the human resources and financial costs of companies’ regulatory 
departments. A significant part of the burden stems from the fact that in the majority of 
Member States, the national rules vary from one country to the other, leading to 
disharmonised requirements and an unnecessary administrative burden. While regulating 
variations is essential to ensure that medicines remain safe and effective, the burden it 
entails can also hinder the introduction of certain changes that are beneficial to patients in 
particular, and to society in general. Today, this burden constitutes a barrier to innovation 
and competitiveness. 
Reduction measure 
Amend Article 39 of Directive 2001/82 and Article 35 of Directive 2001/83 so that the 
variations rules can be fully harmonised within the EU. 

Environment  Commission 

Decision 
2002/739/EC of 3 
September 2002 
establishing revised 
ecological criteria 
for the award of the 
Community eco-
label to indoor 
paints and varnishes 
and amending 
Decision 
1999/10/EC. 

Environment  Directive 

2006/66/EC of the 
European 
Parliament and of 
the Council of 6 
September 2006 on 
batteries and 

Summary 
Harmonisation of VOC-definitions 

Current burden / Problem 
The definition of a volatile organic compound (VOC) varies unnecessarily between 
legislative instruments. It is generally not helpful to have differently worded definitions 
where they cover the same enterprises/activities.  
Examples: 
In Directive 2004/42/EC a VOC is defined as: "…any organic compound having an initial 
boiling point less than or equal to 250°C measured at a standard pressure of 101,3 kPa." 
In Commission Decision 2002/739/EC a similar but differently worded definition is used: 
"…a volatile organic compound is any organic compound with, at normal conditions for 
pressure, a boiling point (or initial boiling point) lower than or equal to 250 °C." 

Reduction measure 
The definitions should be harmonised to be clear to enterprises, particularly because of 
the interfaces between the instruments. Commission Decision 2002/739/EC should be 
amended to follow the VOC definition in Directive 2004/42/EC. The Fast Track proposal 
should reduce the administrative burdens for both companies and implementing bodies. 
Summary 
Clarifying that batteries lawfully placed on the market before 26 September 2008 do not 
have to be withdrawn from the market or relabelled after this date.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
accumulators and 
waste batteries and 
accumulators and 
repealing Directive 
91/157/EEC 

Statistics 

Regulation (EC) No 
638/2004 of the EP 
and of the Council 
on Community 
statistics relating to 
the trading of goods 
between Member 
States 

Current burden / Problem 
Article 6(2) of the battery Directive 2006/66/EC sets out that batteries that do not fulfil 
the requirements of the Directive must not be placed on the market after 26 September 
2008 or they need to be withdrawn from it. This can be understood to entail that batteries 
which were lawfully placed on the market before 26 September 2008, still on the market 
after this date and do not meet the requirements of the Directive, also need to be 
withdrawn from the market. If the provision of the Directive is read as above, it would 
result in that batteries that were legally placed on the market would become waste 
prematurely, which is contrary to the principle of waste minimisation. In addition to this, 
withdrawing these batteries from the market or making them compliant with the Directive 
would cause considerable administrative burden both for the Member States and the 
industry. The effect of Article 6(2) remaining unchanged would involve the labelling of 
batteries that are still on the market and not labelled with the wheeled bin and chemical 
symbols or withdrawing them from the market. This would also involve the withdrawal 
from the market of specific portable batteries that contain more than the cadmium 
allowed by Directive 2006/66/EC. 
Reduction measure 
Amending Article 6(2) to make clear that batteries lawfully placed on the market before 
26 September 2008 and which are not compliant with Directive 2006/66/EC do not have 
to be withdrawn from the market. 
Summary 
Simplification of Intrastat with a view to alleviate the statistical reporting of economic 
operators, in particular SMEs 

Current burden / Problem 
Intra-Community trade statistics records physical flows of movable goods between 
Member States. Data are collected monthly from companies by the national statistical 
authorities. Currently, Member States set their thresholds at a level which guarantees the 
coverage of their trade of at least 97 % of value. As a consequence, at the end of 2005 
about 78 % of the businesses that trade with other Member States were exempted from 
the reporting obligation. But there is still scope to reduce the minimum coverage rate and 
exempt additional companies from the obligation to report to Intrastat. 
Reduction measure 
It is proposed to reduce the trade coverage for arrivals to 95 % and to keep the current 97 
% trade coverage for dispatches. The potential to reduce the reporting burden especially 
for small and medium enterprises (SMEs) is significant because of the structure of 
reporting companies on the arrival side: it is dominated by SMEs.  

Internal 
Market 
(company 
law) 

First Council 
Directive 
68/151/EEC of 9 
March 1968 on co-
ordination of 
safeguards which, 
for the protection of 
the interests of 
members and 
others, are required 
by Member States 
of companies 

Summary 
Eliminate the costs of publishing, in the national gazette, information that has already 
been disclosed in the commercial register. 

Current burden / Problem 
Companies have to disclose the same particulars in the commercial register and in the 
national gazette. However, as commercial registers are electronic, they can be easily 
accessed online. In a number of Member States companies have to pay both for disclosure 
in the register and publication in the national gazette.  

Reduction measure 
Allow Member States to keep the obligation of publishing company particulars in the 
national gazette only if they do it free of charge. 

Internal 
Market 
(company 

Eleventh Council 
Directive 
89/666/EEC of 21 

Summary 
Member States should not require the translation and the certification of the translation to 
be made in their respective country. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
law) 

Internal 
market 
(accounting) 

Internal 
market 
(accounting) 

December 1989 
concerning 
disclosure 
requirements in 
respect of branches 
opened in a Member 
State by certain 
types of company 
governed by the law 
of another State 

Fourth Council 
Directive 
78/660/EEC of 25 
July 1978 based on 
Article 54 (3) (g) of 
the Treaty on the 
annual accounts of 
certain types of 
companies 

Seventh Council 
Directive 
83/349/EEC of 13 
June 1983 based on 
the Article 54 (3) 
(g) of the Treaty on 
consolidated 
accounts  

Current burden / Problem 
When registering a branch, some documents and particulars of the (mother) company 
have to be filed. Some Member States require that the translation and/or the certification 
of the translation should be carried out by translators recognised by their own public 
authorities. Companies could reduce costs by being able to choose where to have the 
documents translated and use the same translation in several Member States. 

Reduction measure 
Require that Member States accept translations made and certified in another Member 
State if they are accepted by the public authorities in that other Member State. 

Summary 
Elimination of certain disclosure requirements from the Directive. 

Current burden / Problem 
The Directive requires companies to disclose in the notes to the accounts an explanation 
on formation expenses (Article 34(2)), and a breakdown of net turnover into categories of 
activity and geographical markets (Article 43 §1 (8)). These disclosures are clearly 
excessive for SMEs.  
Reduction measure 
The Commission propose to delete the above mentioned disclosure from the text of the 
Directive. The information could still be provided on voluntary basis. 

Summary 
Clarification of the relationship between the IAS Regulation 1606/2002 and the Seventh 
Directive. 
Current burden / Problem 
It is not precisely stated whether parent companies with no material subsidiaries (Article 
13) fall under the IAS Regulation and thus have to prepare IFRS financial statements. 

Reduction measure 
The Commission proposes to state clearly that above mentioned companies do not fall 
under the IAS Regulation 

EN 

7 

   EN