Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Proposal for a European Parliament and Council Regulation implementing Article 10 of the United Nations’ Firearms Protocol and establishing export authorisation, import and transit measures for firearms, their parts and components and ammunition - Summary of the impact assessment {COM (2010) 273} {SEC(2010) 662} ***
Date: 2010-05-31
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: export licence, fight against crime, firearms and munitions, illicit trade, import licence, industrial manufacturing, protocol to an agreement

EN 

EN 

   EN 

 
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 31.5.2010 
SEC(2010) 663 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Accompanying document to the 

Proposal for a  

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT and COUNCIL REGULATION implementing Article 10 
of the United Nations’ Firearms Protocol and establishing export authorisation, import 
and transit measures for firearms, their parts and components and ammunition 

SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  

{COM (2010) 273} 
{SEC(2010) 662} 

*** 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
  
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1. 

Background 

The Action Plan implementing the Hague Programme on strengthening freedom, security and 
justice  in  the  European  Union  listed  among  its  actions1  a  proposal  on  the  conclusion  —  on 
behalf  of  the  European  Community2  —  of  the  Protocol  against  the  Illicit  Manufacturing  of 
and  Trafficking  in  Firearms,  their  Parts  and  Components  and  Ammunition  (hereinafter 
referred  to  as  the  ’UN  Firearms  Protocol’  or  ‘UNFP’)3,  supplementing  the  UN  Convention 
against Transnational Organised Crime. Recently, the Stockholm Programme on an open and 
secure Europe, serving and protecting citizens4, highlighted trafficking in arms as one of the 
illegal activities that continue to challenge the internal security of the EU and reaffirmed that 
the  Union  should  continue  to  promote  ratification  of  international  Conventions  (and  their 
Protocols), in particular those developed under the auspices of the United Nations.  

The  Commission’s  Communication  on  measures  to  ensure  greater  security  in  explosives, 
detonators, bomb-making equipment and firearms of 18.07.20055 informed the public of the 
need to implement Article 10 of the UNFP (hereinafter referred to as Art. 10), as part of the 
overall transposition work6, with the final aim of concluding (to ratify) the UNFP on behalf of 
the Union as one of the principal aims of the Commission’s current policy on firearms. The 
proposal that this Impact Assessment accompanies would finalise that work. 

Art. 10 requires contracting parties to put in place/improve procedures or systems to exercise 
effective control over export, import and transit of firearms, their parts and components and 
relevant ammunition. 

The  Commission  negotiated  and  signed  the  UNFP  on  behalf  of  the  European  Community7 
under Articles 95 (internal market) and 133 of the EC Treaty8 (common commercial policy9, 
exclusive competence of the Union, within which Art. 10 provisions fall). The conclusion of 
the UNFP by the Union is pending, represents an international commitment for the EU and is 

1 
2 

3 

4 
5 
6 

7 

8 

9 

OJ C 198, 12.8.2005, point 4.2, International legal Order, (o), p.20.. 
When historical reference is made to the ‘European Community’ the reader should bear in mind that the 
European Union replaced and succeeded the European Community on the date of entry into force of the 
‘Lisbon  Treaty’,  1  December  2009,  pursuant  to  Article  1  third  paragraph  of  the  Treaty  on  European 
Union/TEU (OJ, C115 of 9 May 2008),. 
http://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XVIII-12-
c&chapter=18&lang=en  
EU Council Document 17024/09, CO EUR-PREP 3 JAI 896 POLGEN 229 of 2 December 2009. 
COM(2005) 329 final,. 
Work that included the update of Directive 91/477/EEC on possession and transfers of firearms within 
the  EU,  as  amended  by  Directive  2008/51/EC,  addressing  other  parts  of  the  UNFP  from  the  internal 
market perspective. 
(Council Decision 2001/748/EC of 16 October 2001. OJ European Communities, L 280 of 24 October 
2001). 
Now respectively Art. 114 and 207 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union /TFEU (OJ 
C115 of 9 May 2008). 
According to Article 207 TFEU, the common commercial policy ‘shall be based on uniform principles, 
particularly with regard to changes in tariff rates, the conclusion of tariff and trade agreements…. the 
achievement  of  uniformity  in  measures  of  liberalisation,  export  policy  and  measures  to  protect  trade 
such as those to be taken in the event of dumping or subsidies….’. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

                                                 
consistent  with  the  current  EU  policy  on  measures  aimed  at  reducing  the  proliferation  and 
spread of small arms around the world. 

Art. 3 and 207 TFEU provide the framework for the proposal, that which should only apply to 
firearms (parts and components, and ammunition) for civilian use (no military purposes). 

1.2. 

Consultation and expertise 

The consultation of stakeholders included questionnaires, invitations to meetings addressed to 
all  EU  Member  States  (MSs)  and  interested  private  parties  (associations  of  manufacturers, 
those engaged in civil commerce of weapons, hunters, collectors, NGOs, research institutions, 
etc.), the opening of a specific e-mail account (JLS-FIREARMS@ec.europa.eu), an external 
study to support the IA10 and a Commission Inter-Service Group. 

2. 

POLICY CONTEXT 

2.1. 

Article 10 

The United Nations Guide on the UNFP points out that: The Protocol requires (Shall – i.e. 
mandatory - provisions) States parties to establish a system to ensure that firearms are not 
exported  to  or  through  countries  that  have  not  authorised  the  transfer;  to  ensure  that  the 
content of the documents used for legal import and export is sufficient to support the offence 
of trafficking; and to enhance the accountability and security associated with the import and 
export  system,  thereby  improving  scrutiny  of  transfers  and  allowing  better  enforcement  of 
laws.  Art.  10  also  allows  (May  –  i.e.  optional  -  provisions)  the  adoption  of  simplified 
procedures for verifiable lawful purposes, such as recreational, repair, exhibition.  

The Commission legislative initiative would address trade/transfers to third countries only. 
Intra-community trade/transfers are excluded.  

2.2. 

Definition of firearms 

The  UNFP  does  not  distinguish  between  firearms  for  civilian  or  military  use.  The  IA  only 
refers to firearms for civilian use. Hence the IA refers to the relevant codes of the Combined 
Nomenclature  and  the  categories  B,  C  and  D  as  mentioned  in  Annex  I,  part  II  of  Directive 
91/477/EC.  

2.3. 

Scale of imports/exports11 

Firearms  for  civilian  use,  their  parts  and  components  and  ammunition  to  and  from  third 
countries in 200712 

Export 
quantity 

Export value 

Import 
quantity 

Import value 

10 
11 
12 

Ernst and Young/Regioplan. 
The following data are extracted from the Combined Nomenclature dataset of the Eurostat database. 
Analysis  of  Regioplan  Policy  Research  (2008)  of  data  extracted  from  the  Combined  Nomenclature 
dataset of the Eurostat database. Other detailed tables on firearms for recreational purposes, revolvers 
and pistols, ammunition, and parts and components are included in the IA. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
EU 27  

10.359.214 

 693.877.545   2.789.587 

 221.552.424 

3. 

DEFINING THE PROBLEM 

3.1. 

Status quo 

National legislations do not fully comply with the provisions of Art. 10. The requirements on 
import licence, transit measures and simplified procedures are not in place in all MSs.  

3.2. 

Legal aspects linked to UNFP 

The Union should fulfil the international obligations following the signature of the UNFP and 
conclude  it.  The  harmonisation  required  by  the  common  commercial  policy  in  the  field  of 
export of firearms for civilian use has not yet been achieved. It is the duty of the Commission 
to  transpose  provisions  falling  within  Union  (formerly  Community)  exclusive  competence 
into Union legislation. 

3.3. 

Security problems 

Combating  firearms  trafficking  is  crucial  in  the  fight  against  insecurity  and  criminality. 
Preventive activities include monitoring legal transfers of firearms, stepping up controls and 
enhancing cooperation between EU national authorities. 

Improving  firearms  tracing  —  from  manufacturer  to  last  legal  purchaser  —  is  a  key 
prevention  objective.  The  majority  of  firearms  on  the  illegal  market  (or  used  in  illegal 
activities) originate in the legal market. Implementation of Art. 10 is one of the ways to meet 
that  need,  as  requested  by  the  international  community.  Firearms-related  crimes  constitute 
serious problems for society. The public also has concerns about the misuse of legally owned 
firearms, as shown in recent tragic events with the loss of human lives. 

3.4. 

Economic problems 

Export  and  import  procedures  for  firearms  vary  between  MSs.  The  UN  has  stressed  the 
importance of standardised procedures and documents, that may also increase the degree of 
security as required by Art. 10, paragraph 5, and reduce costs13. Consideration should also be 
given to the costs of crime, expressible or not in cash terms: for law enforcement, insurance, 
health care, injury, loss of lives, reduction of job opportunities in high-crime areas, emotional 
and physical impacts of crime. 

3.5. 

Defining the problem and its underlying drivers/causes 

General problems: 

•  The Union has not yet fulfilled its international obligations with regard to Art. 10. 

•  The  Union  has  not  yet  accomplished  the  common  commercial  policy  with  regard  to  the 

establishment of uniform principles on export, import and transit. 

13 

Legislative guide for the implementation of the UNFP, chapter 4, p.441, paragraph 103 D. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

€
€
                                                 
•  The risks to security linked to export, import and transit.  

Specific problems: 

•  Diversion from the legal market.  

•  Inefficient cooperation between MSs on tracing firearms. 

•  Inequalities between businesses acting in different MSs.  

•  Costs of crime. 

3.6. 

Subsidiarity 

The  subsidiarity  principle  does  not  apply  in  the  case  of  Art.  10  due  to  the  exclusive 
competence of the Union.  

4. 

SETTING THE OBJECTIVES 

General objectives: 

•  To fulfil international obligations of the Union with regard to implementation of Art. 10. 

•  To ensure accomplishment of the Common Commercial Policy, exclusive competence of 

the Union. 

•  To contribute to the improvement of security. 

Specific objectives: 

•  To ensure uniform principles of approach in all MSs regarding Art. 10. 

•  To limit (possible) diversion from the legal market and to ensure tracing. 

•  To contribute to counteracting inequalities for EU businesses with regard to export, import 

and transit procedures. 

Operational objectives: 

•  To ensure an efficient and safe export-import regime. 

•  To ensure efficient and safe transit. 

•  To ensure a certain level of harmonisation in the least burdensome way. 

With regard to security, the objective of limiting diversion and of ensuring better tracing is the 
objective of the UNFP as a whole.  

EN 

5 

   EN 

5. 

DEVELOPING POLICY OPTIONS 

Option 1) No EU action (status quo): The identified problems would not be addressed, Art 
10  would  not  be  implemented  and  the  UNFP  would  not  be  concluded  (ratified).  The  Union 
would  not  honour  its  political  and  international  commitments.  Option  2)  Regulation 
focusing  on  effectiveness  to  achieve  optimal  security:  Establishment  of  a  strict  effective 
system.  Only  the  ‘Shall’  provisions  of  Art.  10  would  be  implemented  (no  simplified 
procedures).  Option  3)  Regulation  focusing  on  efficiency  for  private  parties:  Privilege 
given to the efficiency of the system, with a view to keeping the burden for private parties to a 
minimum.  The  ‘May’  provisions  on  simplified  procedures  would  be  allowed.  Option  4) 
Regulation  focusing  on  efficiency  for  States’  authorities:  focus  on  the  efficiency  of  the 
system, with a view to keeping the burden for public authorities to a minimum. 

COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT OF POLICY OPTIONS 

6. 

. 

Assessment criteria14 

Policy 
Option 1 

Policy 
Option 2 

Policy 
Option 3 

Policy 
Option 4 

Relevance 

0 

0 

To fulfil international obligations of 
the  Union  with 
to 
implementation  of  Art.  10  of  the 
UNFP 

regard 

To  ensure  accomplishment  of  the 
Common  Commercial  Policy  as  a 
matter  of  exclusive  competence  of 
the  Union  with  respect  to  export, 
import  and 
transit  measures  for 
firearms for civilian use  

√√ 

√√ 

√√ 

√√ 

√√ 

√√ 

To contribute to the improvement of 
security  with  respect  to  firearms  for 
civilian use 

0 

√√ 

Feasibility  

The difficulty/risks of transposition 

Social/Security 
impacts 

Impacts  on  crime,  terrorism  and 
security 

Economic 
Impacts 

The  financial  and  administrative 
costs 

Not 
applicable 

- 

0 

0 

√√ 

-- 

√ 

- 

√ 

- 

√ 

0 

√ 

- 

14 

Policy  options  assessed  according  to  a  ranking:  more  positive  (√√),  positive  (√),  neutral  (0)  and 
negative  (-)  or  more  negative  impacts  (-  -),  for  each  of  the  assessment  criteria.  Some  options  could 
imply  trade-offs  and  thus  have  both  positive  and  negative  impacts  with  regard  to  an  assessment 
criterion. The definition of net impact used here is positive impact minus negative impact. 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Impacts  on  competitiveness,  trade 
and investment flows 

0 

- 

√ 

- 

6.1. 

Assessment of stakeholders’ consultations 

MSs  and  NGOs  believe  that  Art.  10  is  useful  for  preventing  diversion  of  firearms  from  the 
legal market. The private parties say that legislation is sufficiently strict in the MSs and that 
implementation  of  Art.  10  would  have  negative  consequences  for  SMEs.  Concerns  were 
expressed  with  regard  to  transit  measures.  Licences  for  multiple  shipments  and  maximum 
duration for processing applications were seen as an advantage by private parties and NGOs. 
Private stakeholders favoured simplified procedures for temporary imports/exports. Some of 
the MSs would prefer the simplified procedures to be limited to hunters and sport shooters. 

7. 

THE PREFERRED POLICY OPTION 

The preferred policy option is based on an assessment of the identified policy options and the 
consultations with private and public stakeholders.. 

Main field of 
the EU 
intervention 

Scope of the 
authorisations 

Conditions 
for 
application of 
authorisations 

Key features of the preferred policy option 

Regulation  implementing  the  ‘Shall’  provisions 
of Art. 10/UNFP throughout the EU 

Simplified  procedures  (‘May’  provisions)  for 
temporary  import/export,  for  verifiable  lawful 
purposes  such  as  hunting,  sport  shooting, 
evaluation, exhibitions and repairs 

The  private  parties  to  acquire  ‘notice  of  no 
objection’  of  the  transit  State  and  provide  it  to 
the exporting State 

Use of open licence for multiple shipments 

Use  of  silent  consent  with  regard  to  transit 
requirements 

MSs to appoint an official/office/department for 
the authorisation procedures 

Conditions 
for processing 
authorisations 

Limited duration of the licensing process  

Electronic documents may be introduced 

Documents may be standardised 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
7.1. 

Assessment of the preferred option 

Relevance/Objectives to achieve: International obligations  of the  EU;  a  coherent  EU  trade 
regime;  enhanced  cooperation  between  MSs;  a  common  commercial  policy  in  the  field; 
stronger control of exports/imports; fewer opportunities for diversion. Feasibility: Due to the 
‘Shall’  provisions,  some  MSs  could  find  it  necessary  to  adapt  their  national  of  the  work. 
Social/Security impacts: The ‘Shall’ provisions have a positive security impact since the risk 
of  diversion  from  the  legal  market  would  be  diminished.  The  silent  consent  would  slightly 
mitigate that positive impact. The preferred option is likely to enhance internal security and 
security  of  citizens  in  the  EU  and  third  countries.  Administrative  burden  and  financial 
costs: The ‘Shall’ requirements could impose administrative costs on businesses, mitigated by 
the ‘May’ provisions and other proposed measures such as: silent consent, authorisations for 
multiple  shipments;  maximum  duration  for  processing  requests.  The  silent  consent  would 
neutralise  the  risk  of  delays  in  cases  of  transit.  Small  negative  impact  on  MSs’  public 
authorities  that  do  not  already  apply  the  ‘Shall’  provisions  is  foreseen.  Impacts  on 
competitiveness,  trade  and  investment  flows:  The  implementation  of  uniform  provisions 
can have a positive impact due to reduction of the number of diverging rules now in place in 
the MSs, which potentially create distorted competition. The simplified procedures could have 
a positive impact as well. Impact on third countries: A positive security impact can also be 
expected on third countries. Security is a precondition for economic and social development. 

8. 

ASSESSMENT  OF  FINANCIAL  AND  ADMINISTRATIVE  COSTS  OF  THE  PREFERRED 
POLICY OPTION 

The assessment is based on the (limited) data made available by public authorities and private 
parties, plus figures extracted from the EUROSTAT database. 

A. Current situation 

I. Estimation of the number of licences 

Based on the a) licences issued in the MSs that provided data (approx. 14 000), b) the quantity 
of imports and exports in those Member States (5 806 736) and c) the quantity of imports and 
exports in the entire EU = 13 148 80115 , and assuming that the 16 other MSs have similar 
licensing procedures, the total number of licences in the 27 MSs would be around 35 000 (14 
000 x 2.5). 

The estimation of the yearly number of licences would therefore add up to 25/30 000, a figure 
indirectly confirmed by a private party who referred to 15/20 000 licences for exports and 5 
000 licences for imports, per year.  

II. Estimation of current costs for businesses 

The preparation of an application takes between 1 and 4 man-hours, i.e. 2 hours on average. 
If  a  standard  tariff  of  50  euros/hour  is  used,  the  total  administrative  burden  is  100 
euros/licence.  The  estimation  of  current  administrative  costs  for  businesses  ranges  from  €  2  
500 000 to € 3 000 000 per year . 

15 

Taking into account that the Member States that replied to the consultation account for more than 40 
percent of the import and export total. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

                                                 
III. Estimation of current costs for public authorities of Member States 

None of the interviewed authorities could provide an estimation of the necessary capacity in 
man-hours per licence, due to a lack of available data. 

B. Future situation 

•  Estimation of impacts of the ‘Shall’ provisions of the preferred policy option 

Estimation  based  on  total  duration  for  applying  the  provisions  is  between  5  and  10  hours 
depending  on  the  involvement  of  transit  countries,  which  corresponds  to  an  administrative 
burden per licence of 250 to 500 euros. 

•  Impacts of implementing the ‘Shall’ provisions on Member States 

The majority of the MSs believed that the impact on the structural administrative costs would 
be slight.  

•  Estimation of impacts of ‘May’ provisions and other mitigating measures  

Implementation  of  the  ‘May’  provisions  and  of  the  other  accompanying  measures  would 
mitigate the financial and administrative costs as shown in the estimations that follow. 

•  Estimation of total costs of the preferred policy option for businesses 

Transit  apparently  involves  only  10%  of  shipments;  the  use  of  standardised  or  electronic 
documents  and  open  licences  for  multiple  shipments  would  result  in  a  decrease  by 
approximately 30%16 in the number of licences issued. The total cost of the preferred policy 
option would therefore range from € 3 850 000 to € 4 620 000 per year.

•  Estimation of total costs of the preferred policy option for public authorities 

Each policy option would entail a series of ‘no recurring’ costs (implementation of the new 
Regulation, familiarisation with the new provisions, training of staff). Most of the consulted 
representatives  of  MSs  believed  that  no  immediate  or  long-term  budgetary  consequences 
would occur. 

C. Comparison of estimated costs for businesses and public authorities between current 
and future situation 

Based  on  the  above-mentioned  estimations  the  increased  administrative  costs  for  all  EU 
businesses due to the preferred policy option would range from € 1 350 000 17 to € 1 620 000.  
Financial  costs  for  businesses  getting  accustomed  to  the  new  Regulation  will  probably 
increase  as  well.  Only  a  small  increase  (if  any)  in  costs  for  public  authorities  of  MSs  is 
expected. 

16 

17 

Prudent estimation that takes into account comments by representatives of the EU private stakeholders 
who stated that the total amount of licences is that of the shipments. 
This estimation would mean that the increase in financial and administrative costs would represent only 
0.19% of the total value of exports in 2007. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Proportionality.  A  Regulation  is  the  legislative  instrument  needed  to  address  commercial 
policy matters. Proportionality is ensured by limiting the proposal to the mandatory provisions 
of Art. 10 UNFP. The preferred option takes account of the existing legislations of the MSs 
and does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objective with the exception of those 
measures aimed at addressing - where possible - the concerns of private stakeholders. 

9. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

Based on an identified list of indicators aimed at assessing the progress and the effectiveness 
of  the  preferred  option  in  achieving  the  main  policy  objectives,  monitoring  could  involve 
reporting  activities  (Commission  and  MSs).  The  Commission  could  report  on  the  status  of 
implementation after five years. An overall evaluation of the measures adopted could follow. 
Comparing  ‘results  achieved’  against  ‘objectives’  would  allow  the  Commission  to  decide 
whether proposals for amendments should be put forward. 

EN 

10 

   EN