COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Detailed information on the implementation of Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal Market Accompanying the document Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the implementation of the Services Directive. A partnership for new growth in services 2012-2015
Date: 2012-06-08
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, administrative formalities, consumer protection, freedom to provide services, national implementing measure, right of establishment, single market, tertiary sector

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 8.6.2012  
SWD(2012) 148 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Detailed information on the implementation of Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the 
internal Market 

Accompanying the document 

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions  

on the implementation of the Services Directive. 

A partnership for new growth in services 2012-2015 

{COM(2012) 261 final} 
{SWD(2012) 146 final} 
{SWD(2012) 147 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

Detailed information on the implementation of Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the 
internal Market 

Accompanying the document 

Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the 
European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions  

on the implementation of the Services Directive. 

A partnership for new growth in services 2012-2015 

This document is a European Commission staff working document for information purposes. 
It  does  not  represent  an  official  position  of  the  Commission  on  this  issue,  nor  does  it 
anticipate such a position 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
CONTENTS 

Introduction 

Chapter I — Economic impact 

1. 

2. 

RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS .................................................................................................7 

SELECTION OF THE MOST RELEVANT SECTORS AND REQUIREMENTS.....................................................9 

3.  METHODOLOGY ...................................................................................................................................9 

3.1. 
3.2. 

DATA GATHERING ..................................................................................................................................... 9 
CALULATION OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT ...................................................................................................... 11 

4. 

ASSESSMENT OF THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF SETTING UP THE POINTS OF SINGLE CONTACT ...............10 

Chapter II – Points of Single Contact 

1. 

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................13 

1.1. 
1.2. 

LEGAL FRAMEWORK................................................................................................................................. 13 
BUSINESSES’ EXPECTATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 14 

2. 

ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF PLAY ..................................................................................................14 

2.1. 
2.2. 
2.3. 

INFORMATION PROVIDED BY PSCS.............................................................................................................. 16 
ELECTRONIC PROCEDURES......................................................................................................................... 17 
USABILITY OF PORTALS ............................................................................................................................. 20 

AWARENESS AND USAGE OF PSCS ......................................................................................................20 

CONCLUSIONS ON THE STATE OF PLAY OF PSCS ..................................................................................20 

3. 

4. 

Chapter III – Implementation and compliance with key provisions 

1. 

2. 

INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................23 

STREAMLINING THE REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT FOR SERVICES .......................................................24 

2.1. 
2.2. 
2.3. 
2.4. 
2.5. 

PROHIBITED ESTABLISHMENT REQUIREMENTS — ARTICLE 14 OF THE DIRECTIVE .................................................. 25 
REQUIREMENTS SUBJECT TO EVALUATION — ARTICLE 15 OF THE DIRECTIVE ....................................................... 30 
TACIT APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR AUTHORISATION — ARTICLE 13(4) OF THE DIRECTIVE............................... 34 
NATIONWIDE VALIDITY OF AUTHORISATIONS — ARTICLE 10(4) OF THE DIRECTIVE............................................... 35 
TOTAL PROHIBITION OF COMMERCIAL COMMUNICATIONS — ARTICLE 24 OF THE DIRECTIVE.................................. 37 

3. 

BOOSTING CROSS-BORDER TRADE — FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES CLAUSE..................................38 

3.1. 
3.2. 
3.3. 
3.4. 
3.5. 
3.6. 

INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................... 38 
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES CLAUSE BY MEMBER STATES ....................................... 39 
ISSUES ARISING FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 16 OF THE DIRECTIVE .................................................. 39 
RULES ON FUTURE LEGISLATION — ARTICLE 39(5) OF THE DIRECTIVE ............................................................... 41 
USE OF DEROGATIONS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 17 OF THE DIRECTIVE............................................................. 41 
IMPOSING SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN ARTICLE 16(2) ON CROSS-BORDER SERVICE PROVIDERS...................... 42 

Chapter IV — Summary of the analysis of the implementation per Member State 

Annex I: Technical annex 

Annex II: Detailed country-specific information 

 
 
Introduction 

The  Services  Directive  is  a  major  step  forward  in  making  the  single  market  for  services  a 
reality.  It  not  only  aims  to  facilitate  operators'  freedom  to  provide  services  across  national 
borders,  but  also  to  ensure  that  the  recipients  of  these  services  can  easily  enjoy  the 
opportunities  brought  about  by  the  single  market.  The  implementation  of  the  Services 
Directive set in motion huge efforts in the Member States to modernise their administrations 
and  the  legal  framework  for  the  provision  of  services  and  to  facilitate  establishment  and 
exercise of service activities across borders. 

Implementation of the Directive has been challenging particularly because of its broad scope. 
It  covers  around  65 %  of  service  activities  within  the  services  sector.  The  activities  covered 
represent  around  45 %  of  total  EU  GDP  and  employment.  They  include  business  services 
(11.7 %  of  value  added),  real  estate  (11.8%),  retail  and  wholesale  distribution  (11.1 %), 
construction  (6.43%)  and  tourism  (4.4%).  Among  the  service  sectors  not  covered  by  the 
Services  Directive  (or  covered  only  marginally,  such  as  energy  and  postal  services),  most 
benefit from specific and comprehensive regulatory frameworks at EU level. This is the case 
for financial and insurance services (5.7 % of value added), network services (4.7%, including 
telecommunications, postal services and energy) and transport (3.1 %). The remaining service 
sectors  are  government  services  (14.4 %  of  value  added,  such  as  defence  and  public 
education) — which in general do not fall within the scope of application of EU law (as ‘non-
economic’ services) — and health services (around 7.6 %), to which, even in the absence of a 
comprehensive  EU  framework,  a  number  of  EU  rules  already  apply,  ranging  from  the 
recognition of professional qualifications to patients’ rights. 

Figure 1: Services covered by the Services Directive (darker part on the right) and other sectors of the 
EU economy in terms of value added by sectors, 20091 

Source: Eurostat, National Accounts Statistics, Gross value added, 2009 

1  Due to data limitations, most of the data cannot be disaggregated by sectors, so that sectors within the scope 
of the Services Directive include also specific activities that are excluded from the scope of the Directive, 
and vice versa. 

4 

 
 
 
                                                 
Furthermore,  the  Services  Directive  required  Member  States  not  only  to  assess  and  where 
necessary  adjust  their  laws  in  many  areas  but  also  to  take  very  concrete  and  practical  steps 
such as setting up Points of Single Contact and making administrative procedures available in 
electronic form. 

This report describes the significant progress achieved but also what remains to be done. At 
this  stage  and  given  that  only  two  years  have  elapsed  (the  implementation  deadline  was 
28.12.2009), it is not feasible to report on all the details of the Services Directive. The report 
therefore concentrates on those issues and sectors which have the most significant impact or 
potential  in  economic  terms:  business  services,  construction,  real  estate,  retail  and  tourism. 
The implementation of the Services Directive is an ongoing dynamic process.  

This  report  builds  upon  the  Handbook  for  the  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive2 
which aimed to give Member States technical assistance by describing appropriate approaches 
to implementation and on the Commission Staff Working Paper setting out the results of the 
mutual  evaluation  process.3  In  addition,  the  assessment  of  the  implementation  in  each 
Member State is based on the information notified to the Commission according to article 39 
of the Directive, the results of the mutual evaluation process and the studies4 that were carried 
out for the Commission. The economic analysis is based on an economic study carried out by 
Commission services.5 

Chapter I assesses the Directive’s economic impact. 

Chapter II describes the state of play in the development of the Points of Single Contact. 

Chapter III gives an overview of the implementation of some of the most relevant parts of 
the Directive, namely the provisions on administrative simplification (nationwide validity of 
authorisations,  tacit  approval),  facilitating  establishment  (prohibited  requirements,  such  as 
discriminations  and  economic  needs  tests,  and  requirements  to  be  evaluated  as  to  their 
proportionality, e.g. on legal form and shareholding, tariffs) and commercial communications. 

2   http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/handbook_en.htm 
3   SEC(2011)  102  accompanying  the  Communication  from  the  Commission  'Towards  a  better  functioning 
Single  Market  for  Services  –  building  on  the  results  of  the  mutual  evaluation  process  of  the  Services 
Directive', COM(2011)20  

4   http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

and  Study 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/implementation_en.htm 

implementation  Measures 

"Assessment  of 

in  Member  States"  published  on 

5   Commission Study 'The Economic Impact of the Services Directive: a first assessment following 

implementation', published on 
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2012/index_en.htm. 

5 

 
 
                                                 
Particular attention is devoted to the implementation of the freedom to provide services clause 
and the situation with regard to cross-border trade. 

Chapter  IV  summarises  the  state  of  implementation  of  the  Directive  per  Member  State.  A 
more detailed analysis per Member State is provided in Annex II. 

Annex I contains information about the sectors covered by the Services Directive as well as 
technical information and data concerning the economic study. 

6 

 
 
Chapter I — Economic impact 

impact 

its  economic 

The  broad  scope  of  the  Services  Directive,  in  terms  of  both  service  activities  and 
legal/administrative  requirements,  means 
is  of  particular 
that 
significance.6  The  economic  assessment  carried  out  by  the  Commission  is  the  first  analysis 
based on information on actual implementation of the Services Directive by Member States 
and the first study to deal not only with its effects on trade and foreign direct investment (i.e. 
foreign  establishment),  but  also  with  its  domestic  effects  via  the  increase  in  productivity  of 
domestic  firms.  The  assessment  is  still  a  forecast  since  the  actual  impact  of  the  changes 
introduced  will  produce  economic  effects  only  over  time.  Effects  of  a  more  ambitious 
implementation  have  also  been  estimated  showing  the  significant  additional  gains  to  be 
reaped.  It  is  important  to  note  that,  although  the  results  presented  below  cover  the  main 
restrictions  under  the  Services  Directive,  data  limitations  mean  that  they  provide  only  an 
estimate of the economic impact of another important provision under the Directive, namely 
the setting up of the Points of Single Contact7. This is mentioned in part 4 of this Chapter. 

1.  RESULTS OF THE ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 

Based  on  the  implementation  measures  adopted  so  far  by  Member  States,  the  Services 
Directive  is  generating  an  additional  0.81 %  of  EU  GDP,  with  the  majority  of  effects 
materializing  during  the  5-10  years  following  implementation  (base-line  scenario).  The 
impact at EU level within the sectors covered by the analysis is estimated at more than 7 % for 
trade, close to 4 % for foreign direct investment (FDI) and above 4.5 % for productivity. The 
domestic impact of barrier reductions turns out to be greater than the international impact, at 
least  in  the  short  run  as  the  analysis  does  not  take  into account,  due  to  data  limitations,  the 
long-term  effect  that  increased  flows  of  trade  and  foreign  direct  investment  could  have  on 
GDP through productivity improvements.      

In  addition  to  the  assesment  based  on  real  implementation  to  date,  a  second  scenario  of  a 
more  ambitious  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  has  been  analysed.  Under  this 
scenario,  each  sector  in  every  country  moves  to  an  ‘ideal’  barrier  profile  where  barriers  are 
equal to the EU average in that sector, or lower (if already achieved). In the case of such ideal 
but  still  conservative  implementation  the  cumulative  long-term  impact  on  overall  GDP 
reaches 1.23 %. The impacts on FDI, trade and productivity would be about one and a half 
times larger than in the base-line scenario. 

6   A  number  of  previous  economic  studies  have  assessed  the  potential  impact  from  a  theoretical  standpoint. 
See in particular Copenhagen Economics, 2005, Economic assessment of the barriers to the internal market 
for services and Bas Straathof, Gert-Jan Linders, Arjan Lejour, Jan Möhlmann, 2008, The internal market 
and  the  Dutch  economy  —  Implications  for  trade  and  economic  growth,  CPB  Document  168.  These 
documents  and  further  studies  are  available  at  http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-
dir/studies_en.htm. 

7  

In particular, this approximation to the economic effect of setting up national Points of Single Contacts is 
based upon the Member States' procedural streamlining efforts as far as setting up a service provider activity 
is concerned, while the dimension of cross-border provision is not covered.    

7 

 
 
                                                 
 
The  differences  in  impacts  across  countries  mainly  reflect  the  extent  to  which  barriers  have 
been reduced: countries with larger barrier reductions import more, attract more inward FDI, 
and  have  a  larger  boost  in  productivity.  Moreover,  the  results  are  influenced  by  the 
geographic  composition  of  the  destination  of  exports  and  outward  FDI,  and  the  barrier 
reductions in those destinations: more exports to or investment in those countries which had 
larger  barrier  reductions  increase  the  effects.  Finally,  with  regard  to  the  overall  impact  on 
GDP,  the  sectoral  composition  of  the  national  economy  explains  some  of  the  differences 
observed  across  Member  States:  a  greater  share  of  services  in  the  economy  means  that  the 
removal of barriers has a greater impact. 

Finally, in a third scenario the ‘ideal’ barrier profile is even lower than in the second scenario: 
barriers  are  reduced  in  each  sector  to  the  average  level  of  barriers  in  the  the  five  countries 
with the lowest levels in that sector, or lower (if already achieved). Under this third scenario 
close  to  the  abolishment  of  almost  all  restrictions  within  the  scope  of  the  Services 
Directive,  the  additional  gain  could  reach  1.8%  of  GDP  compared  to  the  base-line 
scenario, representing total economic gains of 2.6% of GDP. 

The  following  figure  shows  per  Member  State  the  effects  on  GDP  of  the  actual 
implementation (base-line scenario), the additional impact of the second scenario (assuming a 
more  ambitious  but  still  quite  modest  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive)  and  the 
further effects of the third scenario (close to full elimination). 

Figure 2. The GDP impacts of the Services Directive under the base-line scenario and the additional effects of 
the second and third scenarios (in %) 

Source: Commission services 

Note: Yellow and blue (aggregates for Euro Area and EU27) bars = effects of actual implementation (base-line 
scenario); orange bars = additional impacts in the second scenario (assuming a more ambitious implementation); 
red bars = additional impacts in the third scenario (close to full elimination). 

8 

 
 
  
 
2.  SELECTION OF THE MOST RELEVANT SECTORS AND REQUIREMENTS 

For practical reasons and feasibility, it was decided to focus the assessment on the following 
key sectors that are most relevant in economic terms (GDP share, employment, growth) and 
in terms of the  impact of the Services Directive: 

–  professional and business services (legal services, tax advisers, accountants, engineers 

and architects); 

–  construction and crafts; 

– 

– 

– 

real estate; 

retail; 

tourism. 

Thus a number of sectors covered by the Services Directive, representing approximately 20% 
of  EU  GDP,  were  left  out  of  the  economic  assessment.  The  GDP  impacts  presented  above 
have been obtained under the assumption of no barrier changes in those sectors.  

A  certain  level  of  aggregation  and  simplification,  often  requiring  value  judgments,  was 
necessary in the data collection within these ‘priority’ sectors. Thus, if a requirement existed 
in  a  significant  part  of  the  activities  comprised  in  the  sector  (for  example  an  authorisation 
requirement for large-scale retail outlets in the ‘retail’ category), it was considered applicable 
to the whole sector. 

As regards the barriers to the internal market in services, the Services Directive addresses a 
wide range of aspects. The economic assessment focused on those that have a direct impact 
on  reducing  the  administrative  burden  and  on  streamlining  the  regulatory  environment  for 
services  since  these  are  likely  to  have  the  most  significant  economic  impact.  These  are 
requirements dealing directly with access to or the exercise of service activities: authorisation 
regimes,  prohibited  requirements  on  establishment  and  requirements  to  be  evaluated  and 
simplified, and the legal framework for cross-border service provision (see the list of assessed 
requirements  in  Annex  I  b)).  The  effects  of  simplifying  administrative  procedures 
(recognition of foreign documents, tacit approval, etc.) have also been taken into account. 

3.  METHODOLOGY 

3.1. Data gathering 

3.1.1.  Data sources 

The implementation of key provisions of the Services Directive was assessed throughout 2010 
during the process of ‘mutual evaluation’ provided for by the Directive. Most data on barriers 
are  based  on  the  results  of  the  mutual  evaluation.  The  information  gathered  in  this  exercise 
was  supplemented  or  corrected  with  data  from  external  studies8  and  from  other  sources 
(performance checks, complaints and infringement procedures, etc.). 

The economic assessment also used sectoral data from different sources, including Eurostat, 
for the other variables in the analysis (e.g. trade flows, FDI, productivity).  

8  

See http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/updates_and_reports_en.htm.  

9 

 
 
                                                 
3.1.2.  Transformation of qualitative information into quantitative indicators 

Qualitative information on barriers had to be transformed into quantitative information for the 
assessment.  The  rule  followed  was  to  assign  1  to  requirements  that  existed  before  the 
implementation of the Directive and 0 for those that did not. Three different values were used 
to describe what happened to each individual requirement as a result of implementation: 1if 
the requirement was kept; 0.8 if the requirement was made less stringent (signifying a 20 % 
barrier  reduction);  and  0  if  the  requirement  was  abolished.  For  Member  States  with 
decentralised administrations, regional differences in implementation could not be dealt with 
separately.  This  required  some  value  judgments  as  to  which  requirements  at  regional  level 
should be considered as being sufficiently relevant to be taken into account. 

3.1.3.  Description of aggregated data on barriers 

Using  the  collected  dataset,  the  figures  below  show  the  total  absolute  number  of  barriers 
maintained, reduced and eliminated as a result of the Services Directive across sectors in the 
EU.  The  highest  number  of  restrictions  before  the  Directive  existed  in  the  area  of  legal 
services. The highest number of restrictions were abolished in the area of travels agencies and 
hotels, with the lowest in legal services and accounting. 

Figure 3. Barriers across sectors in the EU 

In the order of the number of restrictions before the Directive

In the order of the share of abolished restrictions

Legal services
Small Retail shop
Large Retail (grande surface)
Travel agency
Architects
Accountants
Crafts businesses in construction sector
Construction / Building company
Tax advisers
Real estate agents
Engineers
Tourist guide
Certification service in the area of construction
Restaurants
Hotels

Travel agency
Hotels
Construction / Building company
Real estate agents
Tourist guide
Small Retail shop
Restaurants
Large Retail (grande surface)
Certification service in the area of construction
Crafts businesses in construction sector
Engineers
Tax advisers
Architects
Legal services
Accountants

0

50

100

150

The number of restrictions

0

20

40

60

80

100

Per cent of the number of restrictions

1 − unchanged

2 − partially reduced

3 − abolished

1 − unchanged

2 − partially reduced

3 − abolished

Source: Commission services 

However,  for  the  interpretation  of  the  data  on  barriers,  it  is  important  to  stress  that,  as 
explained in Chapter III, the Services Directive does not require Member States to abolish all 
requirements.  In  many  instances  requirements  can  be  maintained  if  they  are  necessary  to 
protect  a  public  interest  objective  and  are  proportionate.  If  that  is  the  case  keeping 
requirements  or  simplifying  them  (which  would  be  marked  above  as  'partially  reduced') 
instead  of  full  abolishment  does  not  violate  the  Services  Directive.  A  requirement  could  be 
considered  less  stringent  as  a  result  of  administrative  simplification  (recognition  of  foreign 
documents,  tacit  approval,  Points  of  Single  Contact  etc.).  In  other  cases,  legal  form  and 
shareholding  requirements  were  made  less  stringent  in  some  Member  States  by  broadening 
the scope of available company structures for certain professional service providers, without 
abolishing the requirement by giving full freedom. 

Looking  at  the  results  of  barrier  reduction  per  Member  State,  there  is  a  group  of  countries 
(Bulgaria,  Cyprus,  France,  Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Luxemburg,  Portugal,  Romania,  Spain, 
Sweden)  where  a  particularly  high  number  of  restrictions  were  fully  abolished  or  partially 

10 

 
 
 
 
 
changed. At the other end, Member States like Austria, Denmark, Ireland, Malta or the United 
Kingdom had a very low number of restrictions fully abolished or partially reduced. There are 
various reasons for this. For example a high number of restrictions abolished might mean that 
there  was  a  high  number  of  barriers  to  start  with  (e.g.  Greece)  or  that  newly  introduced 
horizontal legislation affected many sectors (e.g. Sweden). On the other hand, a low number 
of  changed  restrictions  might  mean  that  a  low  number  of  restrictions  already  existed  before 
the  Services  Directive  (e.g.  United  Kingdom).  For  a  detailed  picture  on  the  restrictions  per 
Member State, see Chapter IV of this document. 

3.2. Calculation of the economic impact  

Once data on barriers before and after the Directive had been collected, the impacts on foreign 
direct investment, trade and productivity were estimated with regression analysis. 

Barrier  reduction  is  expected  to  influence  productivity  both  directly  (via  its  impact  on 
domestic firms’ productivity) and indirectly, via its impact on foreign direct investment and 
trade  (see  the  conceptual  framework  of  the  economic  assessment  in  Annex  I  c)).  Gravity 
models  were  used  to  estimate  the  effect  of  cross-border  barriers  on  trade  and  of  barriers  to 
foreign establishment on capital flows. Dynamic panel data models were subsequently used to 
estimate the productivity effects of barriers to domestic establishment, of trade and of capital 
flows. 

The impact of barrier changes on productivity, trade and FDI was calculated by multiplying 
the observed change in barriers(which was sector and country-specific information) times the 
estimated elasticities (estimated for the EU average) of each dependent variable (trade, capital 
flows  and  productivity)  to  barriers.  Finally,  the  impacts  on  GDP  were  estimated  using  DG 
ECFIN’s  computable  general  equilibrium  model  QUEST  III  using  as  ‘shocks’  the 
productivity changes resulting from barrier changes.  

4.  ASSESSMENT  OF  THE  ECONOMIC  IMPACT  OF  SETTING  UP  THE  POINTS  OF  SINGLE 

CONTACT 

The aim of this part of the economic assessment was to quantify the economic impact of the 
Points of Single Contact (PSCs) in every Member State. It was carried out for two scenarios: 
the actually achieved procedural streamlining effect linked to the PSCs and a future "what-if" 
situation in which Member States make additional efforts to reach an ideal best performer in 
the EU27 in terms of procedural burdens related to setting-up service activities. 

The methodology provides only a conservative estimate of the actual economic impact of the 
PSCs due to the fact that it covers neither the aspects of cross-border provision of services nor 
some  features  of  the  PSCs  which  are  difficult  to  quantify  (e.g.  technical  accessibility, 
multilingual  platform,  user-friendliness,  etc.).  In  fact,  the  main  data  used  comes  from  the 
World Bank Doing Business 2012 database9 for each EU27 Member State on administrative 
burden related to starting a business (i.e. the number of procedures to start up and operate a 
firm, the average time to deal with each procedure in days, and the related external costs). The 
procedural streamlining indicated for each Member State by the change in these data between 
the  time  periods  corresponding  to  before  the  Services  Directive  (2003  and  2004  data)  and 
after  (2011)  is  assumed  to  be  a  result  of  setting  up  the  PSCs.  The  economic  impact  of  this 

9 

Refer 
Reports/English/DB12-Chapters/starting-a-business.pdf. 

to 

www.doingbusiness.org/data/exploretopics/~/media/FPDKM/Doing%20Business/Documents/Annual-

11 

 
 
                                                 
procedural  streamlining  effort  is  subsequently  adjusted  to  take  into  account  a  set  of 
completion  scores  provided  by  the  Commission  Services,  computed  on  the  basis  of  the 
findings of the Deloitte study10 and own assessment. 

Bearing in mind these limitations, the economy-wide impact of  the  PSCs is estimated to be 
around  0.13%  of  GDP,  while  an  additional  impact  of  further  procedural  streamlining  in 
Member States could reach up to 0.15% of GDP in the medium run (5-year horizon) and up to 
0.21% of GDP in the long run, taking into account that PSCs would have a positive effect on 
the creation of new service businesses. 

10  

"The functioning and usability of the Points of Single Contacts under the Services Directive – State of Play and Way 
Forward" (Deloitte, 2012), commissioned by DG MARKT. 

12 

 
 
                                                 
 
Chapter II — Points of Single Contact 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The Points of Single Contact (PSCs) are a very visible and concrete innovation of the Services 
Directive  for  businesses.  PSCs  aim  to  give  them  access  to  clear,  up-to-date  information, 
together  with  an  easy  means  of  completing  administrative  formalities  both  at  home  and 
abroad. 

The  creation  of  PSCs  has  proven  to  be  a  highly  ambitious  project,  both  in  terms  of  the 
innovation required to bring paper-based systems online and in terms of the complexity and 
number of authorities and procedures to be brought under PSCs. 

1.1. 

Legal framework 

Article 6 of the Services Directive requires Member States to establish PSCs through which 
service providers can complete all procedures and formalities needed to access and exercise 
service  activities  —  such  as  declarations,  notifications  or  applications  necessary  for 
authorisation by a competent authority. 

Article  7  sets  out  the  information  that  should  be  available  to  both  service  providers  and 
recipients  through  the  PSCs.  These  include  information  on  the  requirements  applicable  to 
providers, the contact details of competent authorities, the means of accessing public registers 
and databases of service providers, the means of redress available and the contact details of 
associations  or  organisations  from  which  either  providers  or  recipients  may  obtain  practical 
assistance. 

Article  8  of  the  Services  Directive  requires  that  businesses  be  allowed  to  complete  all  the 
procedures  and  formalities  related  to  the  access  to  and  exercise  of  a  service  activity  at  a 
distance and by electronic means, be it nationally or in another Member State. 

The cross-border completion of e-procedures poses a significant challenge, due in part to the 
lack  of  interoperability  and  differences  in  approach  to  online  public  services  in  Member 
States. In order to facilitate cross-border access to e-procedures, the Commission has adopted 
legal measures11 to improve the cross-border use of e-signatures by requiring Member States 
to  accept  as  a  minimum  certain  e-signatures,12  and  to  put  in  place  the  necessary  technical 
means to be able to validate these, also on a cross-border basis. 

11  Commission  Decision  2009/767/EC  of  16  October  2009  setting  out  measures  facilitating  the  use  of 
procedures by electronic means through the ‘points of single contact’ under Directive 2006/123/EC of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  services  in  the  internal  market    as  amended  by  Commission 
Decision  2010/425/EU  of  28  July  2010  amending  Decision  2009/767/EC  as  regards  the  establishment, 
maintenance  and  publication  of  trusted  lists  of  certification  service  providers  supervised/accredited  by 
Member  States  and  by  Commission  Decision  2011/130/EU  of  25  February  2011  establishing  minimum 
requirements  for  the  cross-border  processing  of  documents  signed  electronically  by  competent  authorities 
under  Directive  2006/123/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  services  in  the  internal 
market. 

12  Advanced  e-signatures  supported  by  a  qualified  certificate,  or  advanced  e-signatures  supported  by  a 

qualified certificate and created by a secure signature creation device, if justified.. 

13 

 
 
                                                 
Businesses’ expectations 

1.2. 
Business organisations have carried out their own reviews of the functioning of PSCs13. These 
reviews  insist  on  the  importance  of  PSCs  and  call  for  Member  States  to  enhance  PSCs  by 
going beyond what is currently required by the Services Directive. In particular, they expect 
PSCs to take a more business-friendly approach by covering the whole business life cycle and 
by providing information and possibilities for completion of administrative procedures also in 
other key areas (such as VAT rules, labour law, social security) that are not covered by the 
Services Directive. 

Also,  businesses  would  expect  PSCs  to  provide  access  to  such  information  in  foreign 
language(s). 

In analysing the effectiveness of PSCs, it is therefore important to look beyond the question of 
compliance  with  the  obligations  under  the  Services  Directive  and  take  into  account  the 
perspective of business users and their actual needs. 

2.  ASSESSMENT OF THE STATE OF PLAY 

The deadline for putting the PSCs in place was end 2009. This means that businesses should, 
as of that time, be able to get all the necessary information to start or carry out their activities 
and  to  complete  the  relevant  formalities  online  (including  to  identify  themselves,  sign  their 
applications,  submit  required  documentation  and  receive  official  documents  by  electronic 
means),  both  within  their  own  and  in  other  Member  States.  The  PSCs  should  in  particular 
make life easier for SMEs who can choose to go through the procedures online saving some 
time and money.  

The responsibility for the development of PSCs lies with the Member State authorities, but the 
Commission  has  adopted  measures  to  facilitate  the  cross-border  aspects  of  e-procedures 
where  the  major  challenges  lie  due  to  technological  divergences.  In  addition  to  the  relevant 
legal measures that aim at enhancing the cross-border accessibility of e-procedures via setting 
clear obligations on the acceptance of e-signatures, making available information needed for 
cross-border validation of e-signatures and obliging Member States to put in place technical 
solutions  for  common  formats  of  e-signatures,  the  Commission  has  been  assisting  Member 
States  with  practical  tools  in  the  form  of  open  source  software  for  e-signatures,  and 
facilitating exchanges of best practices. 

Against  this  background  of  expected  delivery  of  PCSs,  an  extensive  benchmarking  survey 
was carried out by Deloitte Consulting14 in 2011 and Member States participated in a mutual 
test of each other’s PSCs, organised by the Commission. The analysis set out in this report is 
largely  based  on  this  fieldwork  carried  out  in  2011,  complemented  by  results  from  other 
relevant studies15 and additional input from Member States. It cannot, in all cases, reflect all 

13  Business  Europe,  Services  Directive 

Implementation  Report,  November  2011,  available  at 
www.businesseurope.eu, Eurochambres: Services Directive: Points of Single Contact not fully functioning 
across the EU, January 2011, available at www.eurochambres.eu. 

14   http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

15  The  Large  Scale  Pilot  SPOCS  (Simple  Procedures  Online  for  Cross-border  Services)  Points  of  Single 
Contact  Research  Study,  April  2011,  available  at  www.eu-spocs.eu;  the  9th  eGovernment  Measurement 
Benchmark: Digitising Public Services in Europe: Putting ambition into action, December 2010, available at 
http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/newsroom/cf/item-detail-dae.cfm?item_id=6537. 

14 

 
 
                                                 
ongoing  improvements  and  developments16  as  PSCs  are  a  constant  ‘work  in  progress.  The 
primary focus of the survey, studies and mutual testing was the key functions of the PSCs in 
terms of how they are used by businesses. Although some of the information that is required 
under Article 7 to be provided to service recipients through the PSCs was indirectly covered 
by the analysis, it was not examined in depth. A more focused analysis of the implementation 
of Article 7 will be undertaken in the framework of future activities concerning the PSCs.  

Taking  into  account  the  main  aspects  of  PSCs,17  namely  the  availability  of  information, 
availability  of  e-procedures  and  ease  of  cross-border  completion  of  e-procedures,  and  user-
friendliness,  the  Commission  has  established  three  broad  categories  of  PSCs  that  reflect  an 
overall assessment of the state of play of PSCs in the Member States. The green colour in the 
figure below indicates Member States with the most advanced PSCs compared to others and 
the  red  colour  indicates  the  most  problematic  ones,  where  the  development  is  substantially 
lagging  behind  the  average.  The  biggest  number  of  Member  States  falls  into  the  yellow 
category,  which  represents  the  middle  ground.  Being  the  biggest  group,  it  is  rather 
heterogeneous and encompasses both PSCs which are relatively advanced and score relatively 
well for many of the main features and PSCs that underperform in certain categories but do 
better in other areas, e.g. information availability can be very good but the completion of the 
procedures is poor. It should be noted that the green colour does not mean that these PSCs are 
fully  compliant  with  the  Services  Directive  in  absolute  terms:  for  all  PSCs  further 
improvements are needed, but these may be more or less considerable and may also vary as 
regards the areas where currently the deficiencies exist.  

Figure  1:  Categories  of  PSCs  overall  (including  the  availability  of  information,  e-procedures,  ease  of  cross-
border completion of e-procedures and user-friendliness). For Germany it should be noted that PSCs are set up 
and managed by each Land with considerable differences between them as regards organisational structure. 
There is a central portal directing businesses to the relevant PSC.  

16  Romania launched its electronic PSC in late 2011; in January 2012, Slovakia launched its electronic PSC, 
which had only been available in pilot form at the time of the assessment, and Malta launched a substantially 
revamped  PSC.  Some  other  Member  States,  including  Estonia,  Finland,  Luxembourg  and  Portugal,  have 
recently made significant improvements to their PSCs. 

17  Availability  of  information,  availability  of  e-procedures  and  ease  of  cross-border  completion  of  e-

procedures, user-friendliness. 

15 

 
 
 
                                                 
Looking  at  the  PSCs  from  the  businesses'  perspective  the  situation  in  the  bigger  Member 
States could be of particular interest in terms of business opportunities. In this regard it should 
be  noted  that  in  Spain  and  the  United  Kingdom  the  PSCs  are  well  functioning  and  user-
friendly  even  if  cross-border  completion  of  procedures  needs  to  be  enhanced  in  Spain.  In 
Germany the situation is very divergent between the Länder but on average relatively good. In 
France the PSC is well established but not all mandatory information is available nor are all 
procedures  covered  yet.  A  major  disincentive  for  cross-border  use  is  the  lack  of  other 
languages  as  the  portal  is  in  French  only.  Italy  was  late  in  setting  up  the  PSCs  but  is 
improving rapidly. In Poland the situation is relatively good above all for national use, further 
improvements mostly regarding technical accessibility are needed for cross-border access. 

Sections 2.1 to 2.3 below give a more detailed assessment of the degree of sophistication of 
the PSCs. 

2.1. 

Information provided by PSCs 

The following figure gives the categorisation of PSCs for the aspect "availability and quality 
of information": 

Figure 2: The categorisation of the PSCs for the aspect "quality and availability of information". 

2.1.1. 

Scope and availability of information 

As to the overall availability of information, procedures falling under the Services Directive 
are  well  covered  (81 %  of  the  procedures  analysed,  covering  6  business  scenarios  for  3 
sectors).  The  best  performing  Member  States  according  to  the  Deloitte  study  are  Estonia, 
Ireland,  Finland,  Latvia,  Norway,  Portugal,  Spain,  the  Netherlands  and  the  United 
Kingdom.  The  least  information  is  available  through  the  PSCs  of  Bulgaria,  Romania, 
Slovenia and Lithuania. 

Most  information  is  given  on  company  registrations,  permits  and  insurance  issues  (94 % 
coverage  overall).  The  recognition  of  professional  qualifications  is  also  relatively  well 
covered  (more  than  60 %).  Requirements  related  to  the  location  or  the  premises  of  the 
provider  are  less  well  covered.  These  issues  are  often  under  the  responsibility  of  local 
authorities (around 55 %). 

16 

 
 
 
Even though it is not within the scope of the Services Directive, information on taxes is very 
well  developed  (covered  by  76 %  of  PSCs),  as  is  information  on  employment  (76 %)  and 
social  security-related  issues  (64 %).  Many  PSCs  also  provide  advice  on  funding  and 
intellectual  property  rights  issues  (67 %  coverage).  The  three  most  complete  PSCs,  when 
viewed  from  this  wider  perspective,  are  those  located  in  Estonia,  Luxembourg  and  the 
United Kingdom. 

2.1.2. 

Structure of information 

The  most  common  way  of  presenting  the  information  is  either  by  a  thematic  index  of 
procedures  or  service  sectors.  Portals  that  offer  the  best  search  possibilities  are  those  of 
Cyprus, Hungary, Luxembourg, Norway and Sweden. Information is less easy to find on 
the  PSCs  of  Austria,  France,  some  German  Länder  (such  as  Brandenburg  and  Hessen), 
Greece, Ireland and Italy. 

Only  40 %  of  end-users  found  that  the  PSCs  clearly  explained  the  requirements  they  had  to 
fulfil.  Less  than  half  of  PSCs  make  a  clear  distinction  between  requirements  that  apply  to 
establishment and those applicable to cross-border service provision. 

2.1.3.  Language support 

Providing information in languages other than the language of the Member State of the PSC is 
not a legal obligation under the Services Directive. It is, however, highly useful for end-users. 
The  PSCs  of  20  Member  States  provide  some  information  in  other  languages.  Of  these,  15 
give  information  on  requirements  in  other  languages  and  8  allow  application  forms  to  be 
completed in other languages. The Czech Republic, Poland and Portugal offer a tool for the 
online translation of their web pages. 

2.2. 

Electronic procedures 

There  are  vast  differences  between  Member  States  in  terms  of  coverage  of  procedures.  The 
positive  finding  is  that  more  than  one  third  of  all  PSCs  provide  a  critical  mass  (more  than 
50 %) of e-procedures.  

Taking into account the number of procedures available in Member States and the possibility 
for cross-border users to complete the procedures (both for cases where no technical barriers 
exist and for those where some support is provided also for cross-border e-signatures and e-
identification), Member States can be divided into the following three groups: 

17 

 
 
Figure 3: The categorisation of the PSCs for the completion of e-procedures. 

2.2.1.  Availability of e-procedures 

Overall,  out  of  the  81 %  of  procedures  on  which  information  is  available,  at  least  some 
interaction is possible for 55 % of them18 (as a minimum, downloading forms and submitting 
by email). For another 26 % of procedures only a very low level of information is provided. 

Out  of  the  55 %  of  transactional  procedures,  22 %  are  one-way  interaction  (meaning  that 
forms  can  be  downloaded),  9 %  are  two-way  interaction  (forms  can  also  be  uploaded),  and 
24 % are full case-handling (the procedure can be completed entirely online). 

The  four  websites  with  the  highest  level  of  transactional  procedures  are  in  Estonia,  Italy, 
Liechtenstein and Sweden. As regards the types of procedures, it appears from the Deloitte 
study that company registration is well covered. Less well covered are procedures relating to 
the premises of the provider and to the place where the service is carried out. This seems to be 
due, in many cases, to the fact these types of procedures fall under the responsibility of local 
authorities,  which  in  many  Member  States  have  a  varying,  and  often  lower,  level  of 
e-government maturity. The degree of availability of procedures relating to the recognition of 
professional  qualifications  differs  significantly  between  Member  States.  In  some  cases,  the 
portals  offer  comprehensive  information,  including  the  possibility  to  complete  such 
procedures  online  (e.g.  in  Cyprus,  Luxembourg  and  Sweden).  In  other  cases,  the 
information  available  is  still  patchy  and  it  is  not  yet  possible  to  complete  procedures 
electronically. 

Tax  and  financial  formalities  and  social  security  formalities,  which  are  not  strictly  required 
under the scope of the Services Directive, are relatively well covered. 

18  For  the  procedures  assessed  in  the  Deloitte  study,  namely  those  required  to  offer  services  as  an  architect, 
travel  agent  and  tour  guide  or  restaurant/catering  provider  are  considered.  The  administrative  procedures 
analysed were company registration; obtaining a general business licence; procedures relating specifically to 
the service provider, including recognition of professional qualifications, specific licences to act as a travel 
agent  or  architect,  or  to  sell  alcohol;  tax  and  financial  formalities;  social  security  formalities;  regulations 
relating  to  the  premises  of  the  provider;  procedures  relating  to  the  operation  and  location  of  the  service 
provision,  such  as  licences  for  a  restaurant  terrace; and  procedures  applying  only  or  specifically  to  cross-
border providers. 

18 

 
 
 
                                                 
2.2.2.  Completion of e-procedures 

Even where e-procedures are available, the ease of their completion differs depending on the 
approach  chosen  in  Member  States.  In  Member  States19  where  scanned  copies  of  required 
documents  are  accepted  and  simple  means  are  used  if  identification  is  required  (such  as  a 
simple username and password), no technical barriers exist and the completion of procedures 
is facilitated for businesses. This does not mean, however, that all procedures are necessarily 
available.  In  a  number  of  Member  States  scanned  copies  are  not  accepted  and  more  secure 
means  are  required  to  allow  access  to  personal  data  or  to  ensure  data  authenticity.  In  such 
cases  official  e-IDs  (national  government-issued  or  -guaranteed)  and  e-signatures  are 
required.  The  usability  of  e-procedures,  above  all  across  borders,  depends  greatly  on  the 
capacity of the PSCs to deal with e-signatures and e-identification from other Member States. 
According  to  the  Deloitte  study  and  information  provided  by  Member  States,  at  least  14 
Member  States20  require  the  use  of  official  e-IDs  for  online  procedures,  and  1821  require 
(qualified) e-signatures. However, only around half of these have solutions currently in place 
that allow their cross-border use, at least from some other Member States,22 but never from all 
other Member States. In other words, none of these PSCs allows the completion of procedures 
from  all  other  Member  States  but  at  best  from  a  limited  number  of  Member  States.  This 
means that in many cases businesses are unable to use PSCs in other Member States. 

In summary, 20 Member States make the online completion of procedures available to foreign 
users to some extent, either by relying on simple solutions that create no obstacles to cross-
border  use  or  by  relying  on  more  complex  solutions  where  no  e-identification  or  simple 
identification  (login/password)  is  used  and  no  e-signatures  are  required  or  by  using  more 
complex  solutions  but  having  put  in  place  at  least  some  technical  support  to  allow  also  for 
limited cross-border use.  

Possibility  of  completing  procedures  electronically  across  borders  (i.e.  by  users  from  abroad),  based  on 
Deloitte study and input from Member States 

Online 
procedures 
foreign users 

completion 

is  possible 

Number of PSCs 

Percentage of PSCs 

List of PSCs 

of 
for 

20 

58 % 

AT, BE, CY, CZ, DE, DK, EE, EL, 
ES, FI, FR, IE, IS, LI, LT, LV, NL, 
PL, PT, UK 

By  what  means 
completion 
possible? 

of 

is  online 
procedures 

Number of PSCs 

Percentage of PSCs (% of 
all) 

List of PSCs 

- No technical barriers (no e-ID or 
e-signature is required) 

-  Official  e-IDs  issued  in  other 
Member States are supported (at 

9 

7 

19  AT, BE, DK, FI, FR, IE, IS, UK. 

47 % (27 %) 

BE, 

(for 

e-
DE 
AT, 
identification and depends on 
a  Land)  DK,  FI,  FR,  IE,  IS,  NL, 
UK 

37 % (21 %) 

CY, EE, ES, EL, LI, LT, PT 

20  BG, EE, ES, HU, IT, LT, LU, LV, MT, NL(depends on authorities), NO, PT, SE, SI. 

21  BG, CY, DE, EE, ES, HU, IT, LV, LT, LU, MT, NL (depends on authorities), NO, PL, PT, SE, SI, SK. 

22  CY, EE, ES, GR, LI, LT, PT for e-ID and CY, CZ, EE, ES, GR, LI, LT, LV, PT, SK for e-signatures. 

19 

 
 
 
                                                 
least in part)  

- Qualified e-signatures issued in 
other  Member 
are 
States 
supported (at least in part) 

10 

50 % (30 %) 

CY, CZ, EE, ES, EL, LI, LT, LV, PL 
PT 

2.3. 

Usability of portals 

The usability of portals was assessed by Deloitte, who gathered users’ feedback via end-user 
testing  conducted  in  summer  2011.  Their  analysis  reveals  that,  overall,  40 %  of  businesses 
found  it  very  difficult  to  complete  procedures  online.  Specifically,  in  8  Member  States,  at 
least 50 % of users found the PSC easy/very easy to use (only one quarter of PSCs were found 
to be predominantly easy to use); in 10 Member States, at least 50 % of users found the PSC 
satisfactory  to  use  (one  third  of  PSCs,  was  found  to  be  mostly  satisfactory).  In  12  Member 
States, at least 50 % of users found the PSC difficult/very difficult to use (40 % of PSCs were 
found to be difficult to use). 

A  composite  usability  index  was  used  by  Deloitte  to  measure  the  user's  experience  of  the 
PSCs. The index was composed of four measures: effectiveness and efficiency (whether the 
users can successfully achieve their objectives and, efficiency how much efforts and resource 
is  expended  in  achieving  those  objectives),  satisfaction  (whether  the  experience  was 
satisfactory),  propensity  for  portal  re-use  and  e-accessibility.  The  composite  index  for 
usability  was  generated  by  combining  the  rankings  for  each  of  the  Member  States  studied 
against the fours measures. The index ranks Ireland, Slovakia, Czech Republic, Estonia and 
one  German  Land  (Hessen)  most  highly  for  this  criterion.  Portugal,  Austria,  Greece, 
Slovenia and Lithuania have been placed at the bottom of the ranking of usability23. 

3.  AWARENESS AND USAGE OF PSCS 

The actual usage of PSCs depends greatly on the awareness of their existence and the services 
they  offer  to  businesses.  Overall,  the  level  of  awareness  among  businesses  appears  to  be 
rather low. As an indicator, only 30 % of Deloitte focus group participants were aware of the 
existence of the PSC in their country. Major efforts need to be made to raise the awareness of 
PSCs  among  businesses  at  both  national  and  EU  level.  The  activities  already  undertaken 
include  promotional  campaigns  in  Member  States  and  by  the  Commission,  for  example  via 
leaflets  or  articles,  which  have  often  been  limited  partly  due  to  availability  of  resources.  A 
common  brand  (EUGO)  has  been  created  to  give  PSCs  a  coherent  common  identity,  and 
activities  are  ongoing  to  make  it  easier  to  find  PSCs  online.  A  more  active  role  played  by 
business  organisations  in  the  promotion  of  PSCs  among  their  members  would  enhance  the 
level of awareness. 

The  actual  usage  of  PSCs  is  not  easy  to  measure  due  to  differences  between  the 
methodologies used in Member States, but the data gathered from Member States show that it 
is steadily increasing. The figures vary between Member States (where statistics are collected) 
but  for  example  between  2010  and  2011  a  very  steep  increase  was  noted  in  the  Czech 
Republic (more than 100 %) and Belgium (around 80 %), with significant increases found in 

23   Detailed analysis of other features of the composite usability index can be found in the Deloitte study. 

20 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
Italy,  Latvia  and  the  Netherlands.  Currently  the  rise  is  most  manifest  for  domestic  use 
except for cases where domestic demand has reached a high level (e.g. in the Netherlands), 
further increases are expected from cross-border use. 

4.  CONCLUSIONS ON THE STATE OF PLAY OF PSCS 

The  establishment  of  PSCs  has  posed  a  huge  challenge  to  Member  States.  It  has  involved 
significant  changes  in  administrative  procedures,  in  internal  cooperation  methods  and  in 
technical developments.  

The majority of the PSCs have been built on existing e-Government business websites which 
provide  services  going  beyond  the  Services  Directive  and  take  a  more  holistic  approach  to 
business  needs.  In  seven  Member  States24  entirely  new  websites  were  created.  Most  of  the 
PSCs  serve  primarily  as  gateways  to  relevant  competent  authorities'  websites.  The  level  of 
standardisation and integration of competent authorities varies between Member States. PSCs 
are found to be easier to navigate and use in those Member States where a consistent or more 
standardised  approach  exists  between  competent  authorities  with  regard  to  the  provision  of 
information and the completion of procedures. 

With  regard  to  information  provision,  the  overall  picture  of  PSCs  is  relatively  positive.  A 
large  proportion  of  information  is  provided  by  the  majority  of  PSCs  at  least  for  the  most 
important service sectors, and it often goes beyond the requirements of the Services Directive. 
The  level  of  detail  and  structure  of  the  information  however  varies  and  further  efforts  are 
needed to increase the user friendliness of the information, including via a clearer structure, 
more search functions and more language support. Work in this regard continues at national 
level and also via the EUGO Network. 

When it comes to online completion of procedures, the current picture is less positive. Many 
administrative  procedures  which  are  relevant  are  not  yet  online  and  possibilities  for  cross-
border  completion  of  procedures  are  very  limited.  The  cross-border  completion  is  mainly 
possible  in  Member  States  who  do  not  require  advanced  e-identification  or  electronic 
signatures.  Main  problems  with  online  completion  exist  in  Member  States  who  require 
electronic  identification  and  electronic  signatures  but  do  not  technically  support  these  from 
other  Member  States,  and  this  number  remains  relatively  high  with  one  third  or  even  more.  
At the same time there are signs of progress in a number of Member States and clear plans in 
others to have the necessary technical solutions in place in 2012 or over the coming two years. 
The solutions mentioned rely in several cases on the results of projects financed by the CIP25 
Large Scale Pilots, above all for e-identification26, and the tools provided by the Commission 
for  e-signatures27  in  support  of  Commission  Decision  2011/130/EU  adopted  under  the 
Services Directive. The Commission will continue to assist Member States with the technical 
aspects of PSCs to increase their cross-border access, in particular via open source software 
and best practice sharing in the EUGO network. 

24   Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Ireland, Lithuania, Portugal, Slovenia and Spain 

25  Competitiveness and Innovation Programme  

26  Large Scale Pilot STORK (Secure Identity Across Borders Linked) 

27  Open source software for e-signature creation and validation 

21 

 
 
                                                 
Finally,  more  impetus  should  be  given  to  the  cross-border  use  of  e-identification  and  e-
signatures  in  a  wider  context  with  the  Commission  proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  electronic 
identification and trust service for electronic transactions in the internal market. 

22 

 
 
 
 
Chapter III — Implementation and compliance with key provisions 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

The  Services  Directive  entails  an  ambitious  programme  of  administrative  and  regulatory 
simplification  to  remove  unjustified  obstacles  to  cross-border  service  activities.  The  aim  of 
this simplification is to facilitate market access for businesses, in particular SMEs, across the 
EU, and to offer consumers a broader choice. 

The  Services  Directive  should  be  seen  as  opening  up  possibilities  for  service  providers  to 
develop their activities in a more effectively functioning single market. Cross-border service 
activities remain limited. The ambition of the Services Directive is to boost cross-border trade 
and offer new opportunities to service providers. 

Streamlining  the  regulatory  environment  for  service  providers  is  beneficial  for  service 
providers intending to establish themselves in a Member State by creating a new business or 
by  opening,  for  example,  a  subsidiary  or  a  branch.  These  benefits  accrue  equally  to  service 
providers  seeking  to  become  established  in  another  Member  Stare  and  to  those  setting  up 
business in their own country. 

Service providers established in one Member State, and providing services in another, benefit 
from  the  ‘freedom  to  provide  services’  clause  (Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive).  This 
clause  requires  Member  States  to  refrain  from  imposing  their  own  requirements  on  cross-
border  service  providers  except  where  their  application  is  necessary  for  reasons  of  public 
policy, public security, public health or the protection of the environment. 

The  Services  Directive  facilitates  the  exercise  of  economic  activity  by  EU  companies 
operating  in  the  services  sector,  in  particular  for  SMEs.  Indeed,  the  provisions  on 
administrative  simplification  and  those  facilitating  access  to  foreign  markets  have  a 
significant positive impact on SMEs which have limited resources and technical capacity to 
comply  with  the  administrative  costs  and  various  barriers  to  establishment  and  cross-border 
provision  of  services.  This  is  of  particular  importance  given  that  out  of  21  million  of 
companies  in  the  EU,  over  99%  are  SMEs.  Looking  at  the  number  of  the  companies  in  the 
particular economic sectors, over 75 % of them operate in the sectors covered by the Services 
Directive, again over 99% of these (over 16 million) are SMEs. 

With  a  view  to  enhancing  the  rights  of  recipients  and  strengthening  their  confidence  in  the 
internal market, the Services Directive obliges Member States to remove obstacles for service 
recipients wanting to buy services supplied by providers established in other Member States, 
such as obligations to obtain a specific authorisation to receive such services. It also obliges 
Member States to make general information available to service recipients, including through 
the Points of Single Contact, and to provide assistance on the legal requirements and redress 
procedures applicable in other Member States. Finally, it lays down an obligation on Member 
States  to  ensure  that  discriminatory  requirements  based  on  service  recipients'  nationality  or 
place of residence were put to an end. The latter provision is subject to in-depth analysis in a 
separate document28 (hereafter referred to as the Staff Working Paper on Article 20(2)). Many 

28   Commission  Staff  Working  Paper  with  a  view  to  establishing  guidance  on  the  application  of  Article  20, 

paragraph 2 of Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal market ("the Services Directive").   

23 

 
 
                                                 
Member  States  have  introduced  in  the  horizontal  laws  transposing  the  Services  Directive 
provisions  reproducing  in  full  or  in  part  the  Services  Directive's  provision  on  non-
discrimination.  Others  relied  on  pre-existing  legislation  that  achieves  the  same  end  (see 
Annex I to the Staff Working Paper on Article 20(2)). The national provisions implementing 
Article 20(2) of the Services Directive make the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of 
nationality  or  residence  binding  on  service  providers.  It  is  then  for  relevant  national 
competent  authorities  to  ensure  compliance  with  this  obligation.  In  order  to  perform  this 
assessment, a case-by-case analysis is required in all instances.  

This Chapter does not examine systematically the implementation of all the provisions of the 
Services  Directive.  Member  States  have  dedicated  significant  resources  and  efforts  to 
implementing  the  Services  Directive  in  all  its  aspects.  The  Commission  services  are 
monitoring  the  implementation  process  of  the  whole  Directive.  However  on  this  occasion, 
focus  has  been  placed  on  certain  provisions  which  are  key  to  improving  the  situation  for 
establishment and cross-border service provision with particular regard to important economic 
sectors  with  growth  potential  (professional  services,  construction,  crafts  and  certification 
services, real estate, retail and tourism). 

Chapter III provides an overview of the implementation of these provisions in these sectors. 
Member  States  are  quoted  and  examples  provided.  Chapter  IV  provides  a  summary  of  the 
analysis  of  the  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  per  Member  State.  Issues  where 
action  is  needed  are  identified  for  each  of  them.  More  detailed  information  on  individual 
Member States is given in annex II.  

2.  STREAMLINING  THE  REGULATORY  ENVIRONMENT  FOR  SERVICES:  FREEDOM  OF 

ESTABLISHMENT FOR SERVICE PROVIDERS 

Prior to the implementation of the Services Directive, service providers frequently had to be 
authorised  or  had  to  comply  with  administrative  formalities  to  exercise  activities.  The 
Services  Directive  required  Member  States  to  eliminate  authorisation  schemes  and  other 
burdensome requirements when they were not justified or to replace them with less restrictive 
measures, for instance, notifications or declarations. 

As a consequence of this requirement, Member States have removed a significant number of 
authorisations schemes. Italy has  established a  general  principle that all economic activities 
that previously required an authorisation can be started upon filing a simple declaration with 
the  competent  authorities.  In  Hungary  more  than  50  authorisation  schemes  have  been 
replaced  by  declarations,  for  various  activities  ranging  from  tourist  guides,  through  private 
recruitment agencies to property management. In Spain, more than 30 authorisation schemes 
at national level, in the area of industrial services, have been replaced by declarations, e.g. as 
regards  installing  high-voltage  lines,  high-pressure  equipment  or  lifting  equipment.  In 
Greece,  Malta  and  Slovakia  a  wide  range  of  authorisations  have  been  replaced  by 
declarations.  

Furthermore, Member States had to facilitate and streamline procedures in particular so that, 
(1) where no response to a request for authorisation is provided within the deadline set in the 
national  legislation,  authorisation  is  deemed  to  be  granted  (Article  13(4),  tacit  approval  of  
authorisation)  and  (2)  authorisations  should  allow  providers  to  exercise  their  activities 
throughout the national territory (Article 10(4), nationwide validity of authorisations). 

24 

 
 
2.1. 

Prohibited establishment requirements — Article 14 of the Directive 

Requirements listed in Article 14 of the Directive are discriminatory or particularly restrictive 
and thus have to be removed. 

Before the implementation of the Services Directive, the Court of Justice had already found 
these  requirements  to  be  incompatible  with  Article  49  TFEU.  As  a  consequence,  Member 
States had already removed them to a large extent from their legislation. 

Where  such  requirements  still  existed,  Member  States  have  in  general  repealed  them. 
However, residence requirements, economic needs tests and the involvement of competitors 
in individual decisions still apply in some Member States. 

The obligation imposed on Member States to remove these requirements is precise, clear and 
unequivocal.  

Where Article 14 violations are identified, they must be corrected as a matter of priority. 

2.1.1.  Prohibition of discriminatory requirements based on nationality or residence (Article 

14(1) 

Member States have been active in removing requirements based on nationality or residence 
which are clear violations of EU law.  

For  instance,  Spain  has  removed  nationality  and  residence  requirements  for  casual  trading 
and  the  Netherlands  for  doorstep  selling  as  well  as  for  the  inspection  of  certain  heating 
installations.  Austria  has  removed  a  nationality  requirement  for  chimney  sweeps.  In 
Bulgaria, nationality requirements for cartographers and land registry service providers and 
for  industrial  property  agents  are  in  the  process  of  being  removed.  Poland  has  removed  a 
residence  requirement  for  service  providers  conducting  training  for  drivers  transporting 
hazardous goods. Romania has removed a nationality requirement for tourist guides.  

However, requirements based on nationality or residence are still applied. This means that a 
service provider has to be a national of the country of service provision or be resident in the 
country  to  start  a  business  or,  in  the  case  of  a  company  that  its  registered  office  has  to  be 
located  in  the  Member  State.  This  also  concerns  cases  where  the  legislation  requires  the 
service  provider,  its  staff,  persons  holding  the  share  capital  or  members  of  the  provider's 
management or supervisory bodies to be nationals or to reside in the Member State.  

In the professional services sector, in Malta and Sweden patent agents must be residents in 
the respective Member State. 

In  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  sector,  if  a  nationality  requirement  has  been 
removed for chimney sweeps in Austria, a residence requirement still applies. 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
In the real estate sector, both natural and legal persons must have a registered office or place 
of business in Cyprus. 

In the tourism sector, residence requirements have been identified in Italy for ski instructors 
and in Cyprus and Sweden for car rental services. In particular, Cyprus has introduced this 
requirement with a new legislation adopted at the end of April 2012. 

In  the  education  sector,  discriminatory  requirements  have  also  been  identified  as  regards 
driving schools in Cyprus and Poland. A residence requirement was identified in Lithuania 
for a natural person wishing to provide formal vocational training.  

2.1.2.  Prohibition  of  requirements  limiting  the  choice  of  the  service  provider  between 

principal and secondary establishment — Article 14(3) 

Requirements limiting the choice of the service provider have been repealed in certain regions 
of Austria and of Italy for ski instructors and in France for veterinarians. 

However, service providers still face restrictions as to the type of establishment they want to 
have in another Member State. This is the case in certain regions of Spain for travel agencies. 

In  Hungary,  the  activity  of  issuing  hot  meal  and  holiday  vouchers  (SZÉP  Card) 
cannot be pursued by a branch office of a foreign company.  

In  Romania,  in  the  sector  of  education,  a  provider  already  established  in  another 
Member  State  can  only  choose  to  set  up  a  branch  but  is  not  able  to  set  up  another 
form of establishment.  

2.1.3.  Prohibition of economic needs tests — Article 14(5) 

Access  to  an  activity  cannot  be  subject  to  ‘economic  needs  tests’.  Purely  economic  needs 
tests, i.e. tests that make the granting of an authorisation subject to proof of the existence of 
an  economic  need  or  market  demand,  an  assessment  of  the  potential  or  current  economic 
effects of the activity or an assessment of the appropriateness of the activity in relation to the 
economic planning objectives set by the competent authority, are banned.  

The  obligation  for  service  providers  to  prove  the  existence  of  an  economic  need  or  market 
demand, or to assess the potential or current economic effect of their activity for instance on 
competitors, or to assess the appropriateness of the activity in relation to economic planning 
objectives, hinders or severely delays the establishment of newcomers. The economic studies 
that service providers often have to have carried out are costly and time-consuming. 

These requirements were in force in national legislation relating to the retail sector.  

They  have  been  removed  in  Belgium,  France,  Luxembourg,  Italy,  the  Netherlands  and 
most regions of Spain. 

The  Netherlands  have  explicitly  introduced  in  their  zoning  legislation  a  ban  on  the 
application of economic needs tests. 

In France, economic needs tests previously imposed on retail operators in order to be 
authorised to open new shops or extend existing ones have been abolished. 

26 

 
 
However,  economic  needs  tests  are  still  applied  in  Romania,  Austria,  Greece  and  the 
Netherlands. 

In  Romania  an  economic  needs  test  and  the  involvement  of  competitors  in  the 
authorisation  procedure  are  still  applied  for  the  opening  of  large  retail  stores 
(exceeding 1 000 m2). Any applications for setting up large retail sale structures must 
be accompanied by a market impact survey. 

In  Austria,  an  economic  needs  test  has  to  be  carried  out  before  the  relocation  of  a 
tobacco shop can be authorised. 

In  Greece,  the  delivery  of  authorisations  for  open  air  casual  trading  is  linked  to  an 
economic  test  connected  with  the  opinion  of  a  committee  involving  potential 
competitors. 

In  the  Netherlands,  economic  criteria  are  applied  for  the  establishment  of  certain 
retail outlets at local level despite a clear prohibition in the zoning legislation.  

The absolute prohibition contained in Article 14(5) of the Services Directive does not concern 
planning requirements that serve overriding reasons relating to the public interest. Sometimes 
these  planning  requirements  take  into  account  economic  data  such  as  demand  and  supply 
figures. The use of economic data and criteria as a means to attain other objectives, such as 
the  protection  of  the  environment  or  town  and  country  planning  (e.g.  safeguarding  of  the 
vitality  of  city  centres)  does  not  constitute  an  economic  needs  test  within  the  meaning  of 
Article 14(5) of the Services Directive. In those cases, the use of economic data and criteria 
for  the  purpose  of  serving  other  reasons  in  the  general  interest,  such  as  safeguarding  the 
vitality  of  city  centres  or  protecting  the  environment,  can  be  justified  if  the  restrictions  are 
necessary  and  proportionate  and  the  overriding  public  interests  to  be  served  are  not  purely 
economic (that is, they do not protect existing competitors). Such requirements may have to 
be examined according to other relevant provisions of the Services Directive and the Treaty.  

2.1.4.  Ban of involvement of competing operators in the decisions of competent authorities 

— Article 14(6) 

The  direct  or  indirect  involvement  of  competing  operators,  including  within  consultative 
bodies, in the granting of individual authorisations or in the adoption of other decisions of the 
competent authority is forbidden by Article 14(6) of the Services Directive. This prohibition 
does not concern the consultation of organisations, such as chambers of commerce or social 
partners, on matters other than individual applications for authorisations, or the consultation 
of the public at large. The involvement of competing operators in an individual decision, for 
instance  an  authorisation,  goes  against  the  basic  goal  of  favouring  the  market  entry  of 
newcomers. 

In the retail sector, legislation governing the setting up of large-scale retail establishments in 
certain  regions  of  Spain  and  in  France  have  been  amended  to  remove  the  involvement  of 
competitors in decisions concerning individual operators. 

In  France,  competing  operators  were  previously  part  of  local  committees  granting 
authorisations  for  the  opening  of  retail  shops.  They  have  been  replaced  in  such 
committees by independent experts. 

27 

 
 
However  this  requirement  has  been  maintained  in  this  sector  in  Austria,  Romania  and  in 
Greece.  

In  Greece  the  opinion  of  a  committee  is  required  for  outdoor  casual  trading.  The 
requirement for participation of the Trade association in the authorisation procedure 
was  abolished,  nevertheless  other  potential  competitors,  such  as  the  Federation  of 
professionals and craftsmen of the Prefecture still have to be involved.  

In Romania a ‘socio-economic commission’ has to be involved in the examination and 
approval  of  applications  to  set  up  large  retail  outlets.  This  commission  includes  a 
representative  of  the  economic  operators  in  the  closest  neighbourhood  of  the  large 
retail outlet to be established. 

In  Austria,  the  regional  commission  of  tobacconists,  which  consists  also  of 
competitors of a service provider, has to be consulted. 

In  the  professional  services  sector,  competitors  are  involved  in  individual  decisions  in 
Sweden and in France.  

In  Sweden,  lawyers  already  established  in  Sweden  have  to  confirm  the  good 
reputation of candidate lawyers wanting to establish themselves in Sweden. 

In  France,  committees  granting  authorisation  to  those  organising  and  managing 
events include competitors. 

In  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  sector,  in  Germany  boards  consisting  partly  of 
competing  operators  still  have  to  confirm  to  the  competent  authority  that  an  applicant 
structural  inspection  engineers  fulfils  all  the  necessary  application  requirements  for  being 
authorised. 

2.1.5.  Ban of the obligation to obtain a financial guarantee or insurance from an operator 

established in the same Member State — Article 14(7) 

This  obligation  requires  service  providers  established  in  one  Member  State  to  obtain  a 
financial guarantee or insurance in the Member State where they want to set up a secondary 
establishment. This may force them to duplicate financial guarantees or insurance and could 
be very costly. 

The obligation to obtain financial guarantees in the Member State of establishment has been 
removed  in  Greece  for  the  tourism  sector  and  in  numerous  sectors  in  Portugal,  such  as 
professional services, construction, real estate and tourism. 

In Greece, in the tourism sector, the obligation to obtain an execution bond from the 
Public Deposit and Loans fund or a bank established in Greece has been changed and 
bonds issues by banks established in other Member States are equally accepted. 

In  Portugal,  amendments  to  sector-specific  legislation  for  construction,  real  estate 
and  tourism  for  example,  systematically  include  clauses  specifying  that  the  required 
insurance  for  established  service  providers  can  also  be  hired  from  any  insurance 

28 

 
 
provider in the EEA. The implementation of Article 14(7) of the Services Directive has 
also been ensured through the horizontal law.  

In  the  professional  services  sector  an  obligation  for  accountants,  tax  advisers  and  patent 
attorneys to obtain insurance from an operator who is authorised to exercise in Austria has 
been identified. 

In the tourism sector, in Cyprus the law provides that for the grant of a licence to establish 
and operate a travel agency, a deposit of guarantee by the service provider is required.  

2.1.6.  Ban  of  the  obligation  to  have  been  previously  registered  or  to  have  previously 

exercised the activity for a given period in the same Member State — Article 14(8) 

By nature, requiring previous experience has the effect of hindering newcomers from entering 
the market. 

This  requirement  has  been  identified  in  Greece  in  the  professional  services  sector  and  in 
Hungary in the retail sector. 

In  Greece,  accountants  and  architects/engineers  are  required  to  have  experience  in 
Greece in order to be promoted from one category giving access to a level of activities 
to another category giving access to more activities. 

In  Hungary,  one  of  the  conditions  regarding  the  issuance  of  hot  meal  and  holiday 
vouchers (SZÉP Card) consists in the entity having exercised an activity falling under 
the same category in the Hungarian Income Tax Law for at least two years. 

29 

 
 
2.2. 

Requirements subject to evaluation — Article 15 of the Directive 

Member States had to assess a number of requirements that are frequently present in national 
regulations applicable to services. These requirements have been dealt  with by the Court of 
Justice  on  numerous  occasions.  Some  were  found  to  be  compatible  with  the  fundamental 
freedoms, depending on circumstances and sectors, in so far as they were suitable to pursue 
valid public interest objectives and proportionate.  

Member States were required to asses those requirements. They could only maintain them if 
they  concluded  that,  in  spite  of  their  restrictive  effects,  the  requirements  were  justified  and 
proportionate. Member States had to report to the Commission and the other Member States 
on the results of their assessment. 

Very  often,  Member  States  chose  to  preserve  the  status  quo  and  did  not  go  for  a  more 
ambitious  implementation  of  the  Directive  which  would  have  produced  greater  economic 
impact.  

The  most  common  requirements  maintained  by  Member  States  are  the  obligation  to  take  a 
specific legal form, often coupled with limitations on shareholding, i.e. ownership of shares in 
companies  is  restricted  in  varying  degrees  to  members  of  the  profession.  This  concerns  in 
particular the professional services sector. Quantitative and territorial restrictions, mainly for 
retail are also frequent but they generally concern the sale of very specific products (tobacco, 
alcohol) or certain types of selling (casual trading, market stalls, doorstep selling).  

2.2.1.  Quantitative and territorial restrictions — Article 15(2)(a) 

Quantitative  and  territorial  restrictions  have  been  removed  or  replaced  with  less  restrictive 
measures in the professional services sector in France, in the retail sector in Greece and in 
the  tourism  sector  in  certain  regions  in  Italy  (ski  schools)  and  Austria  (ski  schools). 
Restrictions have also been lifted in Spain (petrol stations). 

In  France,  the  profession  of  ‘avoué’  (specialised  attorneys  who  were  the  only  ones 
authorised  to  submit  writs  to  the  appeals  courts),  for  which  quantitative  restrictions 
were imposed, has been merged with that of lawyer, where no such restrictions exist. 

In  the  retail  sector,  however  with  special  reference  to  the  sale  of  particular  goods  (mostly 
alcohol and tobacco) or to certain types of selling, quantitative or territorial restrictions have 
been  maintained  in  Belgium,  France,  Greece,  Hungary,  Italy,  Luxembourg,  the 
Netherlands and Spain. 

In  the  tourism  sector,  requirements  of  this  kind  have  been  identified  in  certain  regions  in 
Austria (ski guides), in Cyprus (catering) and in certain regions of Italy (ski schools). 

2.2.2.  Obligation for the service provider to take a specific legal form — Article 15(2)(b) 

Requirements  that  service  providers  take  a  specific  legal  form  are  serious  obstacles  to  the 
establishment of service providers from other Member States. They might be forced to change 
their legal form or structure and adapt their business models. There is a wide diversity of legal 

30 

 
 
 
 
form requirements ranging from the obligation to exercise the activity as a natural person to 
limitations  regarding  the  legal  form  available  for  a  legal  person.  For  example,  in  certain 
Member States, lawyers can only exercise as natural person, in others they can also exercise 
under  professional  partnership  while  in  other  Member  States  the  setting  up  of  law  firms  is 
possible. In Member States where law firms are authorised, only certain legal forms may be 
available.  

Restrictions  on  legal  forms  are  closely  related  to  shareholding  requirements.  For  instance, 
when there is a requirement that the activity can only be exercised as a natural person or in a 
partnership between professionals, this amounts to requiring that 100% of the capital is owned 
by the professionals thus excluding non-professional third parties.  

Legal  form  requirements  are  often  but  not  exclusively  found  in  the  professional  services 
sector  where  the  implementation  of  the  Directive  lead  to  the  removal  of  legal  form 
requirements, such as the obligations imposed on providers of certain services to operate as 
natural persons or under specific legal forms. 

This is the case in Belgium for debt recovery activities, in Denmark for real estate agents and 
accountants and in Portugal for real estate agents.  

In other Member States, legal form requirements have been made less stringent.  

This is the case in Poland where lawyers and tax advisers may now exercise their activities as 
a  joint-stock  limited  partnership  while  previously  they  could  only  exercise  them  as  natural 
persons  or  partnerships.  In  Germany,  architects  and  engineers  have  now  a  free  choice  of 
corporate  structure.  In  France,  accountants  can  now  provide  their  services  under  any  legal 
form  except  as  commercial  companies.  Changes  are  pending  in  Cyprus  for  architects  and 
engineers  who  can  only  exercise  their  activities  as  natural  persons.  The  draft  legislation 
proposes that these activities can also be exercised as a company limited by shares. Italy has 
made  requirements  less  stringent  for  all  regulated  professions:  recent  reforms  make  several 
legal forms available, among which limited liability companies. 

Requirements  limiting  company  structures  are  still  in  place  in  many  Member  States  for 
professional services: Austria (engineers, accountants, patent agents, tax advisers), Belgium 
(lawyers,  architects,  accountants,  tax  advisers  and  driving  schools),  Bulgaria  (lawyers, 
architects,  engineers  holding  specific  company  titles),  the  Czech  Republic  (lawyers), 
Denmark  (land  surveyors,  lawyers),  France  (lawyers,  veterinarians),  Germany  (patent 
agents), Italy (all regulated professions even though requirements were made less stringent), 
Malta  (architects,  engineers),  Poland  (lawyers),  Portugal  (lawyers),  Romania  (lawyers, 
patent  agents,  mediators,  insolvency  practitioners,  veterinarians),  Slovakia  (lawyers,  tax 
advisers,  mediators),  Slovenia  (lawyers  and  collecting  societies)  and  the  United  Kingdom 
(lawyers). 

For example, in the United Kingdom, advocates in Scotland and barristers in Nothern 
Ireland  can  only  operate  as  sole  practitioners,  ruling  out  the  possibility  to  exercise 
this activity through partnerships or company practices. 

In  Bulgaria,  lawyers  can  only  exercise  their  activity  as  sole  practicioners,  in  a 
partnership or through a law firm composed of lawyers. 

31 

 
 
In Slovenia, collecting societies must be non-profit organisation.  

In the retail sector Italy (itinerant sales) and in the tourism sector Spain and Portugal (travel 
agents) have abolished such requirements. 

In the crafts, construction and certification sector, an obligation to take a specific legal form  
has  been  maintained  in  Austria  (chimney  sweeps),  Bulgaria  (maintenance,  repair  and 
modification of high-risk equipment) and Italy (crafts). 

In the real estate  sector, this requirement  applies for  land  surveyors in Belgium, Denmark, 
France and Slovakia. 

2.2.3.  Requirements relating to the shareholding of companies — Article 15(2)(c) 

Such requirements refer for instance to the obligation to have specific qualifications in order 
to hold shares in a company. There is a wide ranging diversity of shareholding requirements 
ranging  from  100%  capital  requirement  to  be  held  by  a  qualified  professional  to  51%  of 
capital and/or voting rights to be owned by qualified professionals (leaving then 49% to third 
parties, i.e. non-professionals). Sometimes, the capital or part of the capital may be  held by 
professionals having the same qualifications or by professionals having related qualifications. 
For instance, in a law firm, the capital may be owned by related legal professions. 

Shareholding requirements are very often closely linked to specific legal form requirements. 

They  are  very  often  applied  in  the  professional  services  sector.  However,  Luxembourg 
abolished a shareholding requirement in the craft/construction and certification sector (before, 
the qualified person/owner needed to have a majority share). 

In the professional services sector, shareholding requirements have been made less stringent 
in certain Member States. Major changes have been made to raise the amount of capital that 
can be owned by third parties in companies providing professional services. For instance, in 
France the part of the capital which can be held by third parties in professional partnerships 
has raised to 49 % from the previous 25%. The same requirement applies in Spain as regards 
professionals exercising their activities in a professional partnership.  

However,  shareholding  requirements  still  apply  in  this  sector  in  Austria  (accountants,  tax 
advisors,  engineers,  patent  agents),  Belgium  (lawyers,  architects,  accountants  and  tax 
advisors),  Bulgaria  (lawyers  and  designers),  Cyprus  (lawyers),  the  Czech  Republic 
(construction engineers, architects), Denmark (lawyers), Estonia (lawyers), France (lawyers, 
accountants, veterinarians, architects, patent agents, land surveyors), Germany (lawyers, tax 
advisors,  patent  agents,  architects,  engineers),  Greece  (lawyers,  accountants),  Italy  (all 
regulated  professions),  Lithuania  (lawyers),  Luxembourg  (lawyers),  Malta  (lawyers, 
accountants, auditors, architects, engineers) , the Netherlands (lawyers, accountants), Poland 
(tax advisors and patent agents), Portugal (lawyers, accountants exercising in a professional 
partnership),  Romania  (lawyers,  patent  agents,insolvency  practitioners),  Slovakia  (lawyers, 
insolvency  practitioners,  tax  advisors,  architects,  engineers),  Slovenia  (lawyers),  Spain  (all 
regulated  professions  exercising 
in  a  professional  partnership),  Sweden  (lawyers, 
accountants) and the United Kingdom (lawyers, auditors). 

32 

 
 
In  the  United  Kingdom,  75 %  of  the  shares  in  a  Legal  Disciplinary  Practice  (LDP) 
must  be  held  by  legally  qualified  persons.  Furthermore,  in  Scotland  and  Northern 
Ireland, all shareholders of a solicitor’s office are required to be solicitors. 

In Portugal, in professional firms providing legal and accountancy services, 100 % of 
the capital must be held by lawyers or the respective professionals. 

In Slovenia, only lawyers may be shareholders or owners of law firms. 

In  the  real  estate  sector,  capital  requirements  have  been  identified  in  France  where  land 
surveyors have to hold 51% of the capital of the company. 

In the crafts, construction and certification sector, such requirements have been identified in 
Italy (crafts) and Portugal (construction). 

Minimum  capital  requirements,  i.e.  the  obligation  to  have  a  minimum  amount  of  capital  in 
order to start a specific activity (whereas a general minimum shareholding requirement such 
as  for  limited  liability  companies  of  any  kind  does  not  fall  into  this  category),  have  been 
abolished  in  the  tourism  sector,  for  instance  for  travel  agencies  in  Belgium  (except  for  the 
Flemish region), Ireland, Portugal and Spain. 

2.2.4.  Ban on having more than one establishment — Article 15(2)(e) 

Requirements  limiting  the  provider  to  only  one  establishment  in  a  given  Member  State  are 
rare. However, in Luxembourg, lawyers can only open one office (‘cabinet’) in the territory. 

2.2.5.  Obligation to apply fixed, minimum or maximum tariffs — Article 15(2)(g) 

Major progress has been made as regards compulsory tariffs.  

Malta removed compulsory tariffs for all services activities.  

Other Member States have removed tariffs for specific service activities.  

For  professional  services,  in  Italy  and  in  Greece,  fixed  tariffs  have  been  abolished  by  a 
horizontal  law  which  may  need  to  be  reflected  in  sector-specific  legislation.  In  Spain 
professional associations are no longer allowed to set indicative tariffs (compulsory tariffs had 
already been abolished). Fixed tariffs have also been abolished for specific services such as 
architects’ services in Belgium and partly in Germany, for veterinary services in Romania, 
for financial auditors in Bulgaria,  

Fixed  tariffs  have  also  been  removed  for  diverse  services:  employment  agency  services  in 
Ireland,  waste  management  services  in  Belgium,  catering  services  in Hungary,  and  tourist 
and mountain guide services in Italy.  

By contrast, fixed tariffs have been maintained in the professional services sector in Bulgaria 
(lawyers,  architects,  engineers  in  investment  design,  cartographers  and  cadastre  service 
providers,  veterinarians),  Cyprus 
insolvency 
administrators,  architects,  engineers),  Poland  (lawyers  and  patent  agents),  Slovakia 
(insolvency  administrators),  Slovenia  (lawyers,  insolvency  practitioners)  and  Sweden 
(professional housing agents). 

(lawyers),  Germany 

(veterinarians, 

33 

 
 
In the tourism sector, compulsory tariffs have been identified in Cyprus and Italy, mostly in 
tourism related professions. 

In the crafts, construction and certification sector, in Germany, many expert services, mainly 
tariffs 
related 
(‘Sachverständigentarife’). 

construction  of  buildings,  have 

specific 

respect 

the 

to 

to 

2.3. 

Tacit approval of applications for authorisation — Article 13(4) of the Directive 

Tacit  approval  of  applications  for  authorisation,  i.e.  silence  from  the  administration  means 
approval,  is  an  important  way  of  cutting  red  tape  as  it  means  that  an  authorisation  will  be 
deemed to have been granted if an application has not received any response within a set time 
period. 

Most  Member  States  have  introduced  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  in  their  horizontal 
legislation implementing the Services Directive. However, in order to provide legal certainty 
and transparency to service providers, these Member States may have to modify accordingly 
sector  –specific  legislation.  Other  Member  States  have  introduced  this  principle  directly  in 
sector specific legislation.  

Irrespective of the way this clause has been implemented; it is important that Member States 
ensure that cases where tacit approval does not apply are limited to matters duly justified by 
overriding reasons relating to the public interest.  

Where Article 13(4) violations are identified, they must be corrected as a matter of priority. 

Tacit approval ensures that silence from the administration means approval, In order to ensure 
that authorities have the time necessary to take a decision, it is for each national legislator to 
set the time period needed for examining an application, taking into account the complexity of 
the  application.  In  any  event,  the  authorisation  procedure  must  be  processed  within  a 
reasonable  period.  The  Directive  also  allows  Member  States  to  put  in  place  different 
arrangements than the acceptance of an application by tacit approval, if this can be justified 
by overriding reasons relating to the public interest. However, different arrangements should 
be the exception rather than the rule, and should not be applied on a case-by-case basis. 

Most  Member  States  have  introduced  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  in  their  horizontal 
legislation  implementing  the  Services  Directive.  Germany,  Portugal,  Romania,  Slovenia 
and  Spain  have  provided  for  tacit  approval  in  other  horizontal  legislation  (e.g.  on  general 
administrative  procedures).  In  some  of  these  Member  States  the  clause  introduced  in  the 
horizontal law should prevail over sector-specific legislation that does not lay down any rules 
on tacit approval or unless sector-specific rules contain explicit provisions to the contrary (e.g. 
Estonia, Finland, Ireland and Latvia). In Italy, the principle of tacit approval has been set in 
the  laws  regulating  the  administrative  system  as  a  horizontal  general  principle  before  the 
adoption  of  the  implementing  law,  which  reiterates  and  confirms  it.  The  principle  has  a 
'horizontal  and  national'  set  of  exceptions,  and  some  of  them  are  set  out  in  special  sectoral 
provisions derogating from the general principle. The situation is however complicated by the 
fact  that  many  sectors  fall  under  the  competence  of  the  regions  where  the  principle  is  not 
systematically provided for. 

34 

 
 
 
 
For  other  Member  States  the  horizontal  law  just  lays  down  the  principle  of  tacit  approval, 
which then has to be made applicable specifically in sector-specific legislation (e.g. Austria, 
the Czech Republic, Germany, Romania and Slovakia). Luxembourg has introduced in its 
horizontal  law  a  list  of  sectors/laws  to  which  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  does  not  apply 
(e.g.  for  waste  management  and  the  fight  against  pollution).  In  the  Netherlands:  the  law 
provides  that  the  decision  will  take  effect  on  the  third  day  after  the  deadline  for  the 
administration to take a decision has expired. 

Three Member  States, namely Denmark, France and  Sweden, have not adopted horizontal 
rules on tacit approval and seem to apply the principle only partially or not at all. In Sweden 
sector-specific legislation has been amended in very few sectors in order to provide for tacit 
approval. In Denmark several laws have been identified where tacit approval does not apply 
such as in some construction or craft related activities. In France, there are laws providing for 
tacit  approval  (e.g.  registration  of  travel  agents  and  tour  operators,  collecting  societies  and 
modelling agencies) but this principle is not imposed in a systematic way. 

2.4. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations — Article 10(4) of the Directive 

The Directive stipulates that the territorial scope of authorisations should extend to the entire 
territory of a Member State. This is an important way of cutting red-tape.  

The  nationwide  validity  of  authorisations  is  particularly  relevant  for  Member  States  with 
decentralised administrative structures. If, in a Member State, the granting of an authorisation 
for a given activity is within the remit of regional or local authorities, the Directive does not 
require Member States to change  this. However,  the  mere  fact  that  the  competence  to  grant 
authorisations lies with local or regional authorities is not in itself a valid reason justifying a 
territorial limitation of the validity of the authorisations. 

Rather, once an  authorisation  has been granted by the competent regional or local authority 
(for example of the place where the provider sets up his establishment), the authorisation will, 
in principle, have to be recognised by all other authorities of the Member State.  

Member  States  must  ensure  that  cases  where  nationwide  validity  of  authorisations  does  not 
apply are limited to matters duly justified by overriding reasons relating to the public interest. 

Where Article 10(4) violations are identified, they must be corrected as a matter of priority. 

Authorisations  that  are  not  granted  for  the  entire  territory  of  a  Member  State  but  only  for  a 
specific  part  are  likely  to  hinder  the  exercise  of  service  activities.  This  is  why,  as  a  general 
principle, the Directive stipulates that the territorial scope of authorisations should extend to 
the entire territory of a Member State. However, Member States may limit the territorial scope 
where justified by overriding reasons relating to the public interest. 

This requirement is particularly relevant for Member States with decentralised administrative 
structures.  The  Commission  has  therefore  examined  the  implementation  of  this  provision  in 
the six Member States of the Union with a federal or regional structure. 

35 

 
 
 
 
In  Austria  and  Germany  there  is  no  horizontal  rule,  but  the  nationwide  validity  of 
authorisations  can  be  found  in  sector-specific  legislation,  which  mainly  provides  for 
automatic  recognition  or  the  possibility  of  recognition  of  authorisations  obtained  in  another 
part of the territory. 

Italy has expressly stipulated the nationwide validity of authorisations in the horizontal law 
implementing  the  Services  Directive  and  the  principle  can  also  be  found  in  sector-specific 
legislation. However, a few provisions where the principle is not applied have been identified 
in both national and regional legislation on tourist guides and travel agencies. In Spain, the 
horizontal law implementing the Services Directive also stipulates that the geographic validity 
of authorisations can be limited to part of the Spanish territory only for overriding reasons of 
public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  the  protection  of  the  environment.  Other 
overriding  reasons  relating  to  the  public  interest  can,  however,  be  relied  on  to  limit  the 
geographic validity of authorisations linked to a physical establishment. 

In  Belgium,  the  principle  of  nationwide  validity  has  been  introduced  in  the  horizontal 
legislation, but does not seem to be guaranteed throughout the country as an exception to this 
principle  is  allowed  for  authorisations  granted  by  authorities  of  the  regions,  communities, 
provinces  and  municipalities.  As  a  consequence,  nationwide  validity  only  applies  if  the 
authorisation is granted by a federal authority. All regional laws identified limit the scope of 
the  authorisation  to  their  own  territory  and  no  mechanisms  have  been  set  up  to  recognise 
authorisations issued in another part of the country. 

In the United Kingdom the horizontal law implementing the Services Directive contains an 
important  exception  whereby  the  territorial  scope  of  an  authorisation  issued  by  an  authority 
whose functions relate only to parts of the United Kingdom is limited to those parts. 

2.5. 

Total prohibition of commercial communications — Article 24 of the Directive 

Providers  need  to  promote  their  services  in  order  to  access  new  markets.  The  Directive 
requires  that  Member  States  remove  all  total  bans  on  commercial  communications  by 
regulated professions.  

The  Court  of  Justice  has  ruled  that  Article  24  requires  Member  States  to  remove  total 
prohibitions on using one or more forms of commercial communication such as advertising, 
direct  marketing  or  sponsorship.  However,  Member  States  retain  the  right  to  lay  down 
targeted prohibitions related to the content or method of a form of commercial communication 
provided  that  they  are  justified  and  proportionate  for  the  purpose  of  ensuring  the 
independence, dignity and integrity of the profession, as well as professional secrecy. 

In the light of the interpretation given by the Court of Justice, where a total ban on a form of 
commercial communication is identified, it must be corrected as a matter of priority. 

Member  States  had  to  remove  all  total  bans  on  commercial  communications  by  regulated 
professions, while at the same time ensuring that commercial communications are compliant 
with the independence and integrity of the professionals. Commercial communication within 
the meaning of the Directive covers any form of communication designed to promote, directly 
or indirectly, the goods, services or image of an undertaking, organisation or person engaged 
in commercial, industrial or craft activity or practising a regulated profession. 

36 

 
 
 
The Court of Justice  has ruled, in its first judgment on a provision of the Services Directive 
(Case C-119/09), that Article 24 of the Directive precludes national legislation which totally 
prohibits the members of a regulated profession, such as qualified accountants, from engaging 
in  canvassing.  According  to  the  Court,  Article  24  requires  Member  States  to  remove  total 
prohibitions on using one or more forms of commercial communication such as advertising, 
direct  marketing  or  sponsorship.  However,  Member  States  retain  the  right  to  lay  down 
targeted prohibitions related to the content or method of a form of commercial communication 
provided  that  they  are  justified  and  proportionate  for  the  purpose  of  ensuring  the 
independence, dignity and integrity of the profession, as well as professional secrecy. 

Most  Member  States  have  adopted  measures  to  implement  these  obligations,  mainly  by 
implementing Article 24 in their horizontal law. 

In  ten  Member  States  questions  concerning  compliance  of  the  national  legislation  were 
identified.  In  nine  of  these  Member  States,  compliance  issues  concern  the  legal  profession 
(Bulgaria, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, France, Ireland, Lithuania, Portugal and the United 
Kingdom),  and 
three  Member  States  have  maintained  restrictions  on  commercial 
communications  by  veterinarians  (Cyprus,  France  and  Portugal).  Furthermore,  restrictions 
have  been  identified  in  Cyprus  regarding  commercial  communications  by  engineers,  in 
France regarding the accounting sector and in Germany in one Land regarding surveyors. 

3.  BOOSTING CROSS-BORDER TRADE — FREEDOM TO PROVIDE SERVICES CLAUSE 

3.1. 

Introduction 

The  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  contained  in  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive 
ensures free access to and free exercise of a service activity in the territory of a Member State 
for  providers  established  in  another  Member  State.  This  means  that  national  requirements 
should  not  be  applied  to  them  unless  they  are  non-discriminatory,  justified  for  reasons  of 
public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  the  protection  of  the  environment  and 
proportionate. Article 17 of the Services Directive contains a list of derogations from Article 
16. 

The  vast  majority  of  Member  States  decided  to  implement  the  freedom  to  provide  services 
clause in a horizontal law and to amend sector-specific legislation, while some Member States 
chose to implement it through sector-specific legislation only. 

In  Member  States  that  have  opted  for  horizontal  legislation  to  implement  the  Services 
Directive,  sector-specific  legislation  would,  as  a  general  rule,  seem  to  prevail  over  the 
horizontal implementing law. In order to provide legal certainty and transparency to service 
providers, these Member States have to modify accordingly sector –specific legislation. Most 
Member States have already adopted or are in the process of adopting such amendments.  

Irrespective of the way the freedom to provide services has been implemented, there is a need 
to ensure that the legal framework is adapted to facilitate cross-border service provision and 
that  there  is  legal  certainty  as  to  which  requirements  apply  to  service  providers  who  are 
established in another Member State and want to provide cross-border services. This requires 
in particular that all relevant service sectors have been addressed and barriers removed. . 

37 

 
 
 
The  implementation  of  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  is  on-going  with  Member 
States  still  amending  sector  specific  legislation.  Member  States  have,  in  general,  taken  a 
conservative  approach  to  the  implementation  of  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause. 
Service  providers  are  often  uncertain  about  the  rules  applicable  to  them  or  are  required  to 
comply with virtually all the legislation of the Member State where they wish to provide their 
services. The Directive would have a much greater economic impact if the freedom to provide 
services is used to its full extent.  

3.2. 

Implementation of the freedom to provide services clause by Member States 

Member  States  can  be  grouped  into  two  categories  depending  on  how  they  chose  to 
implement the freedom to provide services clause: 

•  Member  States  that  have  introduced  a  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  in  a 
horizontal  law:  Belgium  (Walloon  region  and  Brussels  Capital  region),  Bulgaria, 
Cyprus,  the  Czech  Republic,  Denmark,  Estonia,  Finland,  Greece,  Hungary, 
Ireland,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Luxembourg,  Malta,  Poland,  Portugal, 
Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. 

•  Member  States  that  have  not  introduced  a  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  in  a 
horizontal  law  and  chose  to  implement  it  through  changes  to  sector-specific 
legislation  only:  Austria,  Belgium  (Flemish  region),  France,  Germany  and  the 
Netherlands.  

3.3. 

Issues arising from the implementation of Article 16 of the Directive 

3.3.1.  Member  States  that  have  introduced  a  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  in  their 

horizontal law 

The  vast  majority  of  Member  States  chose  to  implement  the  freedom  to  provide  services 
clause through horizontal legislation. 

In most cases, they copied almost literally the text of Article 16, including the four overriding 
reasons  relating  to  the  public  interest  that  could  justify  imposing  national  requirements  on 
cross-border service providers: public policy, public security, public health and the protection 
of the environment, and the principle of proportionality. 

However,  some  Member  States  added  public  interest  objectives  to  the  four  ones  listed  in 
Article 16 or used different terminology to implement Article 16. For example, Sweden added 
animal  protection  to  the  four  overriding  reasons  relating  to  the  public  interest.  In  some 
Member States, the proportionality test is not explicitly mentioned (Hungary, Malta, Poland 
and Slovakia). 

A  horizontal  clause  is  a  positive  signal  regarding  the  commitment  of  national  authorities  of 
the Member State concerned to give full effect to the principle of freedom to provide services 
and a clear point of reference for the authorities and courts applying  and enforcing national 
law. While the Commission encouraged Member States to implement the freedom to provide 
services  clause  through  horizontal  legislation, it  likewise  pointed  out  to  Member  States  that 
they may also need to adapt sector-specific legislation to avoid conflicting national measures. 

38 

 
 
 
Sector-specific  legislation  should  distinguish  between  requirements  applicable  to  service 
providers  wishing  to  establish  and  those  applicable  to  service  providers  not  wishing  to 
establish in the host Member State. 

The  information  available  to  the  Commission  regarding  national  implementation  confirms 
that  in  Member  States  sector-specific  legislation  would  generally  prevail  over  the  free 
movement clause introduced by the horizontal law. In practice this means that, unless sector-
specific  legislation  is  expressly  amended,  the  free  movement  clause  would  not  be  effective 
and  cross-border  service  providers  would,  in  principle,  have  to  comply  with  the  same 
requirements as providers wishing to establish.  

For instance in Italy, while implementation at national level is satisfactory on the whole, most 
of the legislation regulating economic activities lies within the competence of the regions, and 
no specific provision for cross-border services has  been  introduced  by the regions. In many 
other Member States, legislation does not always, if at all, state which requirements apply to 
service providers wishing to become established and which to those wishing to operate on a 
cross-border basis (e.g. in Bulgaria, Finland, Ireland, Latvia, Poland, Romania, Slovenia 
and Sweden). 

Some  Member  States  have  issued  guidelines  on  implementation  at  national  level  for  their 
competent authorities (Sweden and the United Kingdom). However, it would seem that as a 
general  rule  it  would  be  difficult  if  not  impossible  for  competent  authorities  to  use  the 
freedom to provide services clause to set aside a conflicting legal provision in sector-specific 
legislation. The final say on such matters would in general seem to rest with the courts. 

Other Member States decided to strengthen the horizontal freedom to provide services clause 
by  explicitly  providing  for  the  horizontal  clause  to  take  precedence  if  sector-specific 
legislation  conflicts  with  it  (Belgium  (Walloon  region  and  Brussels  Capital  region),  the 
Czech Republic, Hungary, Malta, Portugal and Spain). 

This  approach  is  meant  to  ensure  that  an  administrative  authority  would  be  entitled  to  give 
priority  to  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  over  the  conflicting  rule  unless  otherwise 
stipulated in the sector-specific legislation. In Belgium and the Czech Republic, guidelines to 
explain this mechanism have been issued. 

However,  to  date  there  is  no  information  about  the  practical  application  of  such  a  legal 
framework  and  some  doubts  remain  as  to  the  effects  of  the  power  conferred  on  national 
authorities not to apply a piece of national legislation on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, 
this  rather  complex  situation  raises  issues  of  transparency  and  legal  certainty.  Again,  it 
appears that a final decision as to whether a measure is justified or proportionate could only 
be taken in a judicial procedure. 

In  order  to  address  this  problem  of  possible  conflict  within  a  national  legal  order,  most 
Member States, in parallel with the horizontal clause, have adopted ‘omnibus’ laws amending 
sector-specific  legislation.  Usually  for  activities  within  their  scope  these  sector  laws 
distinguish  between  the  requirements  applicable  to  service  providers  wishing  to  establish 
themselves and those providing cross-border services. 

For example, Greece expressly stipulates that cross-border providers of tourism services are 
not  subject  to  the  authorisation  required  for  established  providers  but  to  a  declaration 

39 

 
 
requirement.  In  the  Czech  Republic  and  Malta  cross-border  providers  no  longer  have  to 
obtain a trade licence. In the craft, construction and certification sector Bulgaria, Estonia and 
Luxembourg  have  replaced  authorisation  schemes  with  notification  or  declaration  schemes 
for service providers from other Member States. Portugal is in the process of undertaking a 
major  reform  of  all  its  sector-specific  legislation  to  specifically  distinguish  establishment 
requirements from those imposed on cross-border service providers 

3.3.2.  Member  States  that  have  implemented  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause 

exclusively through changes in sector-specific legislation 

The approach of implementing Article 16 solely through changes in sector-specific legislation 
means  that  Member  States  had  to  assess  all  relevant  sector-specific  legislation  to  decide 
whether the requirements imposed on cross-border service providers were justified by one of 
the public interest reasons set out in Article 16 and were proportionate. 

As indicated above, a horizontal clause does not by itself provide the required legal certainty. 
However, a purely sector-based approach risks leaving unaddressed sector specific legislation, 
and conflicting rules.  

3.4. 

Rules on future legislation — Article 39(5) of the Directive 

The  Services  Directive  includes  rules  to  safeguard  service  providers’  rights  in  the  future. 
Member States must notify the Commission of requirements they intend to impose on cross-
border  service  providers  and  justify  them  under  the  four  reasons  stated  in  Article  16  and 
ensure that these requirements are proportionate. The Commission communicates them to the 
other Member States. 

This  obligation  is  a  constant  reminder  that new  legislation  should  not  impose  unjustified  or 
disproportionate requirements on cross-border service providers and should ensure the long-
lasting effect of the free movement principle. 

Bulgaria, France, the Netherlands and Lithuania have adopted internal rules on legislative 
drafting,  which  require  the  government  bodies  when  drafting  new  legislative  proposals  to 
ensure that new proposals comply with the freedom to provide services clause 

3.5. 

Use of derogations provided for in Article 17 of the Directive 

Some  Member  States  seem  to  have  made  broad  use  of  the  derogations  from  Article  16 
allowed  by  Article  17  in  relation  either  to  specific  services,  such  as  services  of  general 
economic interest, or to matters covered by other EU  law  instruments, such as Directive  on 
the  recognition  of  professional  qualifications  (2005/36/EC)  or  the  Statutory  Audit  Directive 
(2006/43/EC). 

Bulgaria has excluded from the application of Article 16 all matters relating to financial audit 
and  services  provided  by  persons  with  recognised  qualifications,  Slovakia  has  excluded  all 
the services provided by auditors as well as services involving the verification of measuring 
instruments, and Romania has excluded architects and veterinarians. Sweden and Denmark 
have adopted a broad interpretation of the derogation referring to intellectual property rights 
by excluding from the scope of Article 16 a number of services related to the management of 

40 

 
 
intellectual  property  rights  such  as  the  services  of  patent  agents  in  Sweden  or  those  of 
collective management societies in Denmark and Sweden. 

3.6. 

Imposing  specific  requirements  listed  in  Article  16(2)  on  cross-border  service 
providers 

The  examples  of  requirements  listed  in  Article  16(2)  have  already  been  found  incompatible 
with the freedom to provide services by the Court of Justice in a number of cases. 

Member States have made considerable efforts to abolish or replace these requirements with 
less restrictive measures. However, obstacles to the freedom to provide services still apply to 
many service activities.  

Article 16(2) a) of the Directive prevents a Member State from requiring a service providers 
to be established in its territory to provide a service. Such a requirement makes cross-border 
provision of services impossible. This requirement has a similar effect to the condition to be a 
national or a resident of the Member State concerned prohibited by Article 14(1). Where an 
obligation to have an establishment in the territory where the service is provided is identified, 
it must be adressed as a matter of priority.  

The most common requirements imposed on cross-border service providers are authorisation 
schemes. Horizontal authorisation schemes have been considerably reduced. However, many 
sector-specific authorisation requirements still apply to a broad range of services. 

Notification  and  declaration  requirements  are  in  general  less  restrictive  than  authorisation 
procedures. However, depending on whether they have to be made prior to the actual service 
provision  and  on  the  documentation  to  be  provided,  they  may  be  as  burdensome  as  an 
authorisation  requirement.  In  some  Member  States,  general  notification  systems  applying  to 
all cross-border service providers exist. 

The  following  sections  focus  on  two  requirements  identified  in  Article  16(2),  establishment 
requirements and authorisation schemes. 

3.6.1.  Obligation to have an establishment in the territory of the Member State where the 

service is provided — Article 16(2)(a) 

Requiring service providers to be established in the country before they can provide a service 
negates  the  freedom  to  provide  services.  Where  this  obligation  is  identified,  it  must  be 
adressed as a matter of priority.  

Major changes have been made by Portugal and Sweden, which have abolished cross-cutting 
obligations to be established before being able to provide services.  

Specific  establishment  requirements  have  also  been  abolished  in  the  craft/construction  and 
certification sector in Austria, Germany, Lithuania and Spain, in the professional services 
sector in Greece (lawyers and law firms do not need to be established any longer  in the seat 
of  the  Courts  of  Appeal  where  they  want  to  operate)  and  in  the  tourism  sector  for  travel 
agencies in Belgium (Flemish region), Slovenia and Spain.  

41 

 
 
 
 
Nevertheless, establishment requirements continue to exist: 

-  in  the  professional  services  sector  in  Belgium  (driving  instructors  and  collecting  societies 
which  need  to  have  a  subsidiary  in  Belgium),  Cyprus  and  Romania  (for  a  broad  range  of 
regulated  professions),  Lithuania  and  Slovakia  (insolvency  administrators)  and  Sweden 
(patent agents). 

In  Cyprus  and  Romania,  this  requirement  applies  to  a  broad  range  of  regulated 
professions  such  as  legal  advisers,  tax  advisers  and  patent  agents.  In  Slovakia  and 
Lithuania it applies to insolvency administrators and in Sweden to patent agents; 

-  in  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  sector  in  Austria,  the  Netherlands,  Romania 
(services involving certain equipment) and Slovenia (chimney sweeps). 

In  Austria  and  Slovenia,  this  requirement  applies  to  chimney  sweeps  while  in  the 
Netherlands  it  applies  to  certification  organisations  and  testing  laboratories 
performing certain tasks; 

- in the real estate sector in Finland and Lithuania. 

In Finland registration to provide real estate services can only be obtained by service 
providers who have a registered branch in Finland. 

In Lithuania property assessment services have to be carried out by entities that are 
established  in  Lithuania.  For  the  registration  of  an  entity  in  Lithuania  the  same 
package  of  documents  must  be  submitted  for  cross-border  service  provision  as  for 
establishment; 

-  in  the  retail  sector  in  Ireland,  Hungary  (issuance  of  meal  vouchers),  Lithuania  (sale  of 
alcohol and tobacco) and Romania. 

In Romania there is a general requirement that legal persons involved in retail must 
be established in the country.  

- in the tourism sector in Belgium (Walloon region — travel agents), Bulgaria (tour operator 
and tourist agents), Portugal (car rental), Romania (travel agencies) and Sweden. However, 
it seems that this requirement is in the process of being amended in Bulgaria, Portugal and 
Sweden. 

In  Sweden,  a  responsible  person  domiciled  in  Sweden  must  be  appointed  for  car 
rental services. 

3.6.2.  Obligation  to  obtain  an  authorisation,  including  entry  in  a  register  or  registration 

with a professional body or association — Article 16(2)(b) 

The obligation to be authorised is still the most common one imposed on cross-border service 
providers.  It  is  very  disruptive  as  it  delays  the  start  of  service  provision.  Registration, 
notification  or  declaration  schemes  or  the  obligation  to  hold  a  special  ID  document  are  in 
general less restrictive but may amount to an authorisation scheme depending on whether the 
requirements have to be fulfilled before providing the service and the documentation required. 

42 

 
 
The prior declaration provided for under Title II of the Professional Qualification Directive is 
not  addressed  under  this  section  since  matters  covered  by  Title  II  of  that  Directive  are 
excluded from the application of Article 16 of the Services Directive. 

- Notification and declaration schemes 

As  a  result  of  the  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  horizontal  notification  schemes, 
applicable  to  a  whole  range  of  services,  have  been  repealed  in  Germany  and  in 
Luxembourg.  

Germany  repealed  its  cross-cutting  notification  obligation  for  all  service  providers. 
Luxembourg  amended  its  legislation  so  that  the  previous  broad  notification  system 
applicable  to  all  kinds  of  services,  including  construction,  is  henceforth  limited  to 
professional services. 

However, horizontal notification requirements are still imposed on cross-border providers. 

A horizontal notification system requiring all self-employed service providers to notify 
the  national  authorities  before  actually  starting  to  provide  the  service  has  been 
maintained in Belgium and is currently under scrutiny by the Court of Justice (case 
C-577/10). 

A  similar  system  has  been  introduced  in  Denmark  after  the  implementation  of  the 
Services Directive. 

- Authorisation schemes 

The  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  has  resulted  in  a  reduction  in  the  number  of 
horizontal authorisation schemes applicable to cross-border service providers, i.e. those which 
made  the  exercise  of  a  range  of  service  activities  subject  to  obtaining  a  licence.  This  is  the 
case in Belgium, the Czech Republic, Malta, Poland, Slovenia and Sweden. 

In  many  cases,  horizontal  authorisation  schemes  have  been  replaced  by  sector-specific 
notification  or  declaration  schemes  as  regards  cross-border  service  providers.  In  these 
countries,  a  distinction  is  made  between  the  requirements  applicable  in  an  establishment 
scenario and in a cross-border one.  

In  the  construction,  crafts  and  certification  sector  in  Belgium,  Cyprus  and  Spain, 
authorisation  requirements  have  been  lifted  for  cross-border  service  providers  regarding 
certain specific activities. Bulgaria, Estonia, Luxembourg and Spain replaced authorisation 
schemes  by  notification  or  declaration  schemes  for  service  providers  from  other  Member 
States.  Portugal  is  in  the  process  of  undertaking  a  major  reform  of  all  its  sector-specific 
legislation  to  specifically  distinguish  establishment  requirements  from  those  imposed  on 
cross-border service providers. 

In the real estate sector authorisations have been abolished in Germany for cross-border real 
estate agents. In Slovenia, following the implementation of the Services Directive, the cross-
border providers of real estate agency services do not have to be licensed. 

43 

 
 
In the retail sector, in the Czech Republic and Malta cross-border providers no longer have 
to  obtain  a  trade  license.  Luxembourg  has  amended  its  legislation  to  exempt  cross-border 
trade  activities  and  in  particular  most  retailers  from  registration  or  any  administrative 
authorisations  to  be  granted  by  Luxembourg  authorities.  Germany  has  abolished  an 
authorisation requirement for casual traders from other Member States. 

In  the  tourism  sector,  authorisation  requirements  have  been  lifted  in  Belgium  (Brussels 
Capital region), France and Spain for travel agencies, Malta for tourist guides and Portugal 
for car rental activities (in the process of being amended). In Greece the legislation expressly 
states  that  cross-border  providers  of  tourism  services  are  not  subject  to  the  authorisation 
required for established providers but to a declaration requirement. 

Greece has abolished an authorisation requirement for employment agencies. 

However, sector-specific authorisation schemes have also been maintained.  

In the professional services sector, Article 16 of the Services Directive applies in addition to 
Title  II  of  the  Professional  Qualifications  Directive.  In  accordance  with  that  Directive, 
Member States may require a prior annual declaration to and pro forma registration with the 
competent professional organisation or body. However, authorisation schemes can be found in 
Belgium  (driving  schools  need  a  separate  authorisation  for  their  operation,  management 
personnel,  teaching  personnel  and  location),  Bulgaria  (cadastre  engineers,  architects  and 
engineers  in  investment  design),  the  Czech  Republic  (lawyers),  Finland  (registration 
obligation  for  patent  agents),  Greece  (engineers  and  lawyers),  Romania  (legal  advisers, 
architects, tax advisers and patent agents) and Slovakia (architects and patent agents). 

In France the cross-border provision of services by veterinarians as civil companies 
is made subject to the acceptance of the statutes by the Veterinarian Order. 

In the crafts, construction and certification sector, authorisation schemes for various activities 
apply in many Member States. 

In Germany, many authorisation schemes have been abolished, modified or replaced 
under  the  condition  that  the  cross-border  service  provider  possesses  an  equivalent 
authorisation  granted  by  another  Member  State.  However,  depending  on  how  the 
equivalence  requirement  is  applied  in  practice  and  verified  by  the  competent 
authority, this may amount to an authorisation procedure. 

In Bulgaria, providers carrying out technical supervision of high-risk equipment are 
subject  to  licensing,  while  providers  who  carry  out  services  on  maintenance,  repair 
and modification of such equipment are subject to registration. 

In Romania, authorisation and special registration requirements must be fulfilled for 
authorised electricians, specialised technical staff, energy auditors, designers.  

In  Portugal,  an  authorisation  for  cross-border  service  providers  in  the  construction 
sector has been simplified but maintained. It is in the process of further revision. 

In Slovenia, a craft permit is required by law but reported as not being requested in 
practice. Authorisations schemes are in place for cross-border experts or certifiers in 

44 

 
 
environment  (verification  of  environment  reports),  certification  and  testing  of  fire 
protection systems, control and supervision of heating system, certification and testing 
of technical equipment for spraying pesticides, testing and analysis of plant protection 
products and analysers of seed quality.  

In  the  real  estate  sector,  authorisation  schemes  apply  to  cross-border  service  providers  in 
Belgium  (real  estate  agent),  Bulgaria  (providers  of  independent  appraisal  cartography  and 
(real  estate  valuers)  and  Slovakia 
land 
(surveying/cartography services). In Portugal, an authorisation scheme for real estate agents 
has been replaced by notification, which is currently in the process of being further reviewed. 

services),  Denmark,  Latvia 

registry 

In Denmark, cross-border land surveyors have to be registered. 

In Bulgaria, providers of cartography and cadastre services must be registered. This 
applies in addition to the nationality requirement in force for these professions. 

In the retail sector, such requirements are applied in all Member States. These authorisation 
schemes often apply to particular types of selling (casual trading, market stalls and in some 
cases doorstep selling). Authorisations for market stalls aim to ensure equal access to a stall 
(when  their  number  is  limited)  for  all  providers  —  those  established  in  the  Member  State 
where the market takes place and those established outside. 

In Spain a municipal authorisation is required to start any activity concerning casual 
trading (which can only take place in limited space designed for that purpose and to 
which  equal  access  needs  to  be  ensured).  In  Bulgaria,  due  to  the  absence  of 
distinction  between  establishment  and  cross-border  provision  of  services, 
authorisation  schemes  and  registration  requirements  applicable  to  established 
providers seem to be also applied to cross-border providers. 

In the tourism sector, authorisation schemes exist in many Member States. 

In Latvia and Poland cross-border tourist agents and operators need to be registered 
in  specific  databases  and  in  Estonia  they  need  to  be  entered  in  the  commercial 
activities  register.  In  Ireland  cross-border  tour  operators  and  travel  agents  have  to 
hold a licence and are required to meet certain capital thresholds and to take out a 
bond  to  cover  them  in  the  event  that  the  business  is  unable  to  meet  contractual  and 
financial  obligations  as  soon  as  the  activity  originates  in  Ireland.  In  Slovenia, 
authorisation  schemes  are  in  place  for  all  travel  agencies,  tour  operators,  tourist 
guides  (except  for  tourist  guides  which  accompany  tourist  groups  from  abroad)  and 
for  providers  of  sport  activities  for  tourists.  In  the  Netherlands,  an  authorisation  is 
needed for all tours with motor vehicles or for foreshore walking including when they 
are provided across borders. 

3.6.3.  Obligation to obtain a special ID document — Article 16(2)(e) 

This requirement refers to the need to be issued with a special identification document by the 
competent  authorities  of  the  host  Member  State  in  order  to  be  able  to  provide  cross-border 
services. Depending on the documentation required from the service provider to obtain such 
special ID document, this requirement may amount to an authorisation scheme. 

45 

 
 
This requirement has been lifted in France for real estate agents, who are no longer 
required to hold a special ID card following an amendment to the specific legislation. 

This  requirement  does  not  appear  to  be  very  common.  However,  it  has  been  maintained  in 
some Member States and in particular in the crafts, construction and certification and tourism 
sectors. 

In  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  sector,  Germany  requires  inspectors  of  specific 
buildings  to  have  a  specific  identity  card.  In  Romania,  for  some  activities  in  this  service 
sector,  the  providers  must  present  a  specific  identification  card  and  a  special  stamp  (this 
obligation  applies  to  electricians,  operators  responsible  for  technical  supervision  and 
verification  for  the  use  of  installations/equipment,  energy  auditors  for  buildings,  specialists, 
experts and technical auditors in the field of the protection of historic monuments). 

In the tourism sector in Austria, Greece, Poland, Romania and certain regions in Italy and 
Spain, special ID cards are required for travel guides or tour guides. Very often these cards 
have to be worn visibly while on duty. 

In  Greece,  tourist  guides  need  to  hold  a  professional  identity  card  when  they  are 
pursuing their professional activity and to show it upon any conducted control. 

46 

 
 
Chapter IV — Summary of the analysis of the implementation of the Services Directive 
per Member State 

The  assessment  of  the  implementation  in  each  Member  State  is  based  on  the  information 
notified to the Commission according to article 39 of the Directive, the results of the Mutual 
Evaluation process29 and the studies30 that were carried out for the Commission. 

This  analysis  does  not  prejudge  the  assessment  of  the  compatibility  of  other  national  rules 
with the Services Directive or the Treaty. 

29   SEC(2011)  102  accompanying  the  Communication  from  the  Commisison  "Towards  a  better  functioning 
Single  Market  for  Services  –  building  on  the  results  of  the  mutual  evaluation  process  of  the  Services 
Directive) COM(2011)20  

30   http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

and  Study 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/implementation_en.htm 

implementation  Measures 

"Assessment  of 

in  Member  States"  published  on 

47 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  
   AUSTRIA   

Austria adopted the last measures for the implementation of the Services Directive in January 
2012. A total of 52 measures have been communicated to the Commission, some of them so 
called ‘omnibus laws’ amending several sector specific laws. 

However, despite great efforts undertaken in particular by the Länder, the following concerns 
have been identified and must be addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  First of all, prohibited requirements like establishment and seat requirements in the craft 
sector  (chimney  sweeps)  need  to  be  addressed  as  well  as  an  obligation  for  accountants, 
public accountants, tax advisors and patent attorneys to obtain financial guarantees from 
operators authorised to exercise in Austria.  

•  Tacit approval of authorisations is foreseen in sector specific legislation, but not in the 
horizontal  acts  implementing  the  Services  Directive  which  contain  a  so  called  'opt-in'-
provision  to  which  sector  specific  legislation  can  refer.  Although  in  many  cases  tacit 
approval was introduced well before the adoption of the Services Directive, Austria has to 
make sure the instances in which tacit approval is not applied are limited to duly justified 
matters. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  measures  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  have  been  maintained. 
For  instance  legal  form  and  shareholding  requirements  exist  for  civil  engineers, 
accountants,  patent  attorneys  and  tax  advisors  and  a  legal  form  requirement  remains  for 
chimney  sweeps.  Special  attention  will  have  to  be  paid  to  the  fact  that  certain 
requirements concerning mountain guides and ski schools have been abolished in some of 
the Länder, but maintained and justified in others.  

Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  a  wide  range  of  sector-specific 
amendments  have  been  adopted  in  order  to  implement  the  Directive.  However,  several 
remaining  requirements  hindering  free  provision  of  services  have  been  identified  both  at 
federal and at Länder level. This concerns obligations to have an identity card issued by the 
authority  in  the  tourism  sector  for  mountain,  ski  and  cave  guides,  and  authorisation 
requirements  with  regard  to  the  certification  of  construction  products.  Certain  requirements, 
like  authorisation  requirements  for  ski  schools  or  mountain  guides  have  been  abolished  in 
some of the Länder, but maintained and justified in others. 

The  Austrian  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  relatively  well  established.  However  the 
information  provided  is  not  very  clearly  presented  which  makes  it  difficult  to  use  for  non-
nationals.  Language  support  is  currently  very  limited  but  a  clear  commitment  exists  to 
improve this in the near future. Online completion of procedures is well developed, including 
across  borders  where  no  technical  obstacles  exist,  since  neither  e-identification  nor  e-
signature  are  required.  Improvements  should  be  made  above  all  to  increase  the  clarity  of 
information, to distinguish between establishment and cross-border provision of services and 
to extend the availability of other languages than German. 

48 

 
 
 
   BELGIUM   

In Belgium, transposition led to a considerable number of modifications in national laws as 
around 65 national measures were adopted in order to implement the Services Directive.  

Despite the efforts made, the following concerns have been identified and must be addressed 
as a matter of priority: 

•  Prohibited  establishment  requirements  were  maintained,  namely  for  travel  agencies 
who must have premises that are publicly accessible (in Wallonia) as well as for driving 
schools and collecting societies who must have an office in the territory. These should be 
eliminated. 

•  Although  the  different  horizontal  laws  contain  provisions  on  the  principle  of  tacit 
approval of authorisations, it does not apply as a general rule but only in cases specified 
in  sector  specific  legislation.  Belgium  should  ensure  that  the  instances  in  which  article 
13(4) of the Services Directive is not applied are limited to duly justified matters.  

•  The  obligation  concerning  the  nationwide  validity  of  authorisations  as  laid  down  in 
article 10(4) of  the  Directive  has  not  been correctly implemented. This principle is only 
guaranteed  for  authorisations  that  are  governed  by  federal  legislation  while  regional 
authorisations  are  in  general  limited  to  the  territory  of  the  region.  There  are  no 
mechanisms foreseen to recognise authorisations issued in other parts of the country. This 
situation should be corrected. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States to streamline the regulatory environment for the establishment of providers, a 
number  of  cases  that  raise  doubts of compatibility  with article 15 of the Directive exist. 
For  instance,  an  obligation  for  real  estate  agents/surveyors,  driving  schools  and 
accountants/tax advisors to take a specific legal form as well as shareholding requirements 
for lawyers, architects, accountants /tax advisors have been maintained. These should be 
re-examined. 

In  general,  Belgian  legislation  makes  a  distinction  between  cross-border  provision  of 
services  and  establishment.  Some  authorisation  requirements  for  national  providers  are  also 
applied to cross-border service providers. It appears that they need to register in the ‘Banque 
Carrefour  des  entreprises’  if  they  have  to  file  an  application  for  an  authorisation. 
Authorisations applied to incoming service providers concern the activity of butchers, travel 
agents,  real  estate  agents  and  driving  schools.  In  addition,  a  horizontal  prior  notification 
(‘Limosa’) is required from all service providers for commercial, crafts and liberal activities 
wishing  to  exercise  under  free  movement  of  services.  In  so  far  as  this  entails  a  general 
obligation  for  self-employed  persons,  a  case  about  the  legality  of  this  notification  duty  is 
pending before the Court of Justice of the European Union. 

The  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  relatively  well  established  and  overall  provision  of 
information  is  good.  Improvements  could  however  be  made  concerning  the  level  of 
availability  of  information  and  the  degree  of  user  friendliness.  Online  completion  of 
procedures  needs  to  be  enhanced  and  integration  between  the  central  portal  and  the  9 
decentralised business counters has to be improved.  

49 

 
 
 
   BULGARIA   

Bulgaria  implemented  the  Services  Directive  by  adopting  a  horizontal  law  which  contained 
some amendments to specific legislation. The Service Activities Act entered into force on 23 
February  2010.  The  Act  includes  some  amendments  to  specific  legislation  such  as  the 
Tourism  Act,  the  Spatial  Planning  Act,  the  Chamber  of  Builders  Act,  the  Chambers  of 
Architects and Engineers involved in Investment Design Act, the Energy Efficiency Act, the 
Crafts Act and the Consumer Protection Act. 

However,  despite  efforts  undertaken  to  adopt  the  implementing  measures  a  number  of 
restrictions still remain. A limited number of sector-specific legislation has been amended in 
the context of the implementation of the Directive and the horizontal law has no precedence 
over sector specific laws in case of conflict. 

The following concerns have been identified and must be addressed as matter of priority: 

•  Some  prohibited  discriminatory  requirements  have  been  maintained,  namely 
nationality requirements for industrial property representatives, cadastre service providers 
and  cartographers,  as  well  as  a  residence  requirement  for 
industrial  property 
representatives. 

•  Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  a  total  prohibition  of  some  forms  of 

commercial communication remains for lawyers. 

•  Tacit  approval  of  authorisations  has  not  always  been  introduced  in  sector  specific 
legislation,  but  only  in  the  horizontal  implementing  law.  The  relationship  with  sector-
specific laws is unclear. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  measures  have  been  maintained  which  should  be  reassessed.  For  instance,  legal 
form and shareholding requirements have been identified for lawyers, as only lawyers can 
form partnerships or law firms. Fixed minimum tariffs are in force for lawyers, architects, 
engineers in investment design, cartographers and cadastre service providers. 

Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  in  the  absence  of  a  clear  distinction  in 
the  sector-specific  legislation  between  requirements  applicable  to  establishment  cases  and 
those  applicable  to  cross-border  providers,  it  seems  that  authorisation  requirements  for 
domestic providers are also applied to incoming service providers. A clear distinction should 
be ensured in all sector-specific legislation. 

As  a  result  of  bilateral  meetings  between  the  Commission  and  the  Bulgarian  authorities, 
several  draft  laws  are  being  prepared  to  amend  sector-specific  legislation.  They  should  be 
adopted by the National Assembly of Bulgaria by the end of 2012. 

The  Bulgarian  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  mainly  acts  as  a  signpost,  providing 
information  about  administrative  requirements  and  referring  users  to  the  websites  of 

50 

 
 
 
 
competent  authorities  providing  information  on  only  a  limited  number  of  procedures. 
Electronic completion needs to be significantly improved. It is currently possible for a 

limited number of procedures through the websites of the responsible authorities (linked to the 
PSC  portal).  Improvements  should  be  made  concerning  the  possibility  to  complete  online 
procedures  (notably  to  ensure  the  recognition  of  e-signatures  from  other  Member  States), 
concerning  the  clarity  of  information  (distinction  between  establishment  and  cross-border 
provision of services) and with regard to the availability of other languages than Bulgarian. 

51 

 
 
 
   CYPRUS   

Cyprus transposed the Services Directive mainly by way of a horizontal law. Additionally, a 
number  of  sector-specific  amending  laws  and  regulations  are  still  pending  before  the 
Parliament, for professional services (architects, engineers), for the retail and for the tourism 
sector  (tourist  guides,  tourist  agencies).  The  majority  of  amendments  in  sector  specific 
legislation are mainly for the purposes of safeguarding coherence with the horizontal law and 
providing for exceptions, where this is justified, to the rules imposed by the Horizontal Law. 
Serious concerns have been expressed by the Commission services with regard to the length 
of adoption procedures. 

The following concerns have been identified and must be addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Prohibited residence requirements apply to real estate services and to opticians. These 

requirements should be eliminated.  

•  Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  a  total  prohibition  of  some  forms  of 

commercial communication remains for lawyers and veterinarians. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  measures  have  been  identified,  namely, legal form  requirements for  architects  and 
engineers as well as minimum tariffs for lawyers and fixed tariffs for tourist guides. These 
requirements should be re-examined.  

Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  it  seems  that  the  same  authorisation 
requirements  apply  as  for  establishment  purposes.  However,  no  authorisation  requirement 
applies where the relevant profession is also regulated in the Member State of establishment, 
for example in case of architects and tourist guides.  

The  Cypriot  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  provides  a  good  level  of  information  on 
procedures  and  formalities  and  the  portal  is  well  structured.  The  PSC  allows  for  the  online 
submission  of  application  forms  as  well  as  the  tracking  of  on-going  procedures  for  some 
procedures  and  formalities,  including  for  horizontal  procedures  and  temporary  cross  border 
provision of services. The use of official e-IDs and qualified e-Signatures issued in a number 
of other Member States is currently supported, but as e-IDs are not yet issued in Cyprus, the 
option  of  using  this  system  is  not  open  to  Cypriot  nationals.  Further  improvements  are 
necessary to enhance access to online procedures. 

52 

 
 
 
 
 
   CZECH REPUBLIC   

The  Czech  Republic  implemented  the  Services  Directive  through  two  legislative  acts:  a 
horizontal  framework  law  and  an  omnibus  law  amending  numerous  sector-specific  laws, 
mainly  in  order  to  introduce  the  concept  of  tacit  approval.  The  article  on  the  freedom  to 
provide  services  has  been  implemented  both  in  the  horizontal  law  and  in  sector-specific 
legislation. 

The  review  of  the  national  legislation  revealed  that  no  prohibited  requirements  existed  in 
the  Czech  legislation.  However,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Tacit  approval  of  authorisations  is  foreseen  in  the  horizontal  law  implementing  the 
Services Directive. Furthermore, an omnibus law was adopted which amended numerous 
sector-specific laws in order to include the concept of tacit approval. Areas in which no 
tacit  approval  exists  include  the  authorisation  of  those  involved  in  the  restoration  of 
historical  monuments  and  operators  of  zoos.  The  Czech  Republic  has  to  ensure  that  the 
derogations to tacit approval are applied only in duly justified cases. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some measures have been identified that raise doubts as to their compatibility with Article 
15  of  the  Directive.  These  concern  specific  legal  form  requirements  for  lawyers  and 
shareholding  requirements  for  construction  engineers  and  architects.  These  requirements 
need to be re-examined. 

Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  several  remaining  requirements 
hindering  free  provision  of  services  have  been  identified.  Restrictions  exist  on  the  service 
provision  of  lawyers  with  regard  to  real  estate  transfers  and  the  verification  of  signatures. 
Prior  authorisation  is  required  for  land  surveyors  (those  responsible  for  the  verification  of 
survey outcomes) and persons handling raw diamonds. 

The Czech Point of Single Contact (PSC) was launched in January 2010, and integrated into 
an existing government-funded portal. The PSC rates highly in terms of the availability and 
quality  of  information  provided.  It  features  a  large  number  of  the  relevant  procedures,  and 
online forms which are used as central access points to provide information for a variety of 
purposes such as application for a business license and application for VAT and income tax 
registration. In terms of language accessibility, the PSC makes some information available in 
English, but this is not the same content as the information available in Czech. Potential areas 
for  improvement  include  a  clearer  structure  of  the  site,  providing  online  support  tools, 
increasing the number of procedures that can be completed online through the acceptance of 
e-signatures, and increasing the amount of information available in other languages. 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   DENMARK   

Denmark  transposed  the  Services  Directive  within  the  transposition  deadline.  Denmark  was 
the  first  Member  State  to  adopt  a  horizontal  law  for  the  transposition  of  the  Services 
Directive (Law No 384 of 25 May 2009 on services in the internal market). 

Denmark also amended a significant number of provisions in several sectoral laws, such as 
the  Law  on  the  sale  of  real  estate,  the  Law  on  electricians,  the  Law  on  gas  installation,  the 
Law on trade, the Law on maritime training, Law on professional diving activity and diving 
equipment,  the  Law  on  copyright  and  the  Law  on  marketing.  These  amendments  resulted 
mostly  in  the  elimination  and  simplification  of  authorisation  schemes.  A  legal  form 
requirement that was deemed to be unjustified was eliminated in the real estate sector. 

Despite the instances where simplification has been introduced, the following concerns have 
been identified and must be addressed as a matter of priority: 

•   There  is  no  general  rule  in  Denmark  which  lays  down  the  tacit  approval  as  a  general 
principle  for  authorisation  schemes.  Examples  of  the  non-application  of  this  principle 
(which allows for exceptions when justified by overriding reasons and proportionate) have 
been identified mostly in the areas of construction and real estate. The principle of general 
application of tacit approval should be laid down and derogations limited to duly justified 
cases 

•  Some  restrictions  in  the  services  sector  still  remain  for  cross-border  service  providers 
further to the implementation of the Services Directive.  These restrictions consist mainly 
of  a  general  cross-cutting  notification  obligation  for  any  service  provider  from  another 
Member  State  and  in  authorisation  schemes  which  are  applied  to  cross-border  service 
providers  in  the  areas  of  construction  and  crafts  and  collective  rights  management. 
These requirements need to be re-examined. 

Denmark has an established and well-functioning Point of Single Contact (PSC). The portal 
provides comprehensive information on requirements, allows for a personalised approach and 
provides for a variety of search functions. An entirely English version portal is available for 
foreign users. Online completion of procedures is very well covered with a more sophisticated 
approach for nationals and a simplified and user-friendly mode for cross-border users. Some 
further improvements could be made for user guidance and assistance. 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   ESTONIA   

Estonia has transposed the Services Directive on time, via a horizontal law — the European 
Union  Services  Directive  Implementation  Act,  passed  on  10  December  2009.  A  number  of 
sectoral  laws  have  been  modified  with  this  Act  (around  10  legal  acts).  The  amendments 
mostly simplify temporary service provision for service providers who are legally established 
in another Member State.  

Despite  efforts  undertaken,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  A  total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  has  been  identified  for  lawyers  that 

should be eliminated. 

•  Concerning cross-border trade, the main requirement applied in sectors which are subject 
to  specific  requirements,  is  a  registration  requirement.  In  a  number  of  laws  this 
requirement  has  been  replaced  with  a  notification  procedure  for  cases  of  cross-border 
service  provision  (mostly  in  construction  sector  related  activities).  However  the 
registration requirement for trade activities (covering retail, wholesale, and some personal 
services) remains and should be re-examined. A more general concern is the lack of clarity 
and  legal certainty for sectoral laws where  it is not explicitly stated whether the relevant 
requirements  are  also  applicable  in  cases  of  cross-border  service  provision  or  not.  New 
legislation  is  currently  being  prepared  on  all  economic  activities  (Specific  Part  of  the 
Economic  Activities  Code),  which  should  provide  for  more  clarity  and  also  replace  the 
registration requirement for trade activities with a notification.  

The Estonian Point of Single Contact (PSC) provides comprehensive information for service 
providers,  going  beyond  the  requirements  of  the  Services  Directive  by  covering  also  other 
relevant  areas  for  businesses  (social  security,  taxation,  labour  law,  financing,  legal  advice, 
etc.). The information is presented in a clear and simple manner. Different search possibilities 
are provided (based on sector, requirements, business life cycle etc.). Most of the information 
is available both in Estonian and in English, however many forms are in Estonian only, with 
some exceptions (like for company registration). The completion of electronic procedures is 
very  well  covered,  above  all  at  national  level  but  also  for  service  providers  from  a  good 
number  of  other  Member  States.  Some  further  improvement  could  be  achieved  by 
distinguishing  between  establishment  and  cross-border  service  provision.  For  completion  of 
procedures,  completion  from  all  Member  States  should  be  ensured  even  if  many  Member 
States are already covered. 

55 

 
 
 
 
 
   FINLAND   

Finland  transposed  the  Services  Directive  on  time  through  the  horizontal  act  Provision  of 
Services Act (1166/22.12.2009) which entered into force on 28 December 2009. No sector-
specific laws were modified. Some reforms had already been undertaken with the Freedom of 
Enterprise Act, adopted in 1994. 

Despite  the  efforts  undertaken  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers,  not 
many  measures  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  of  the  Directive  have 
been  maintained.  The  only  ones  identified  concern  legal  form  requirements  for  bus  and 
truck training schools and vehicle inspection agencies which can be operated only by legal 
persons. 

•  Concerning cross-border trade, even if the regulatory regime is in general rather light, an 
incompatibility  with  the  Services  Directive  has  been  identified  in  the  real  estate  sector 
where  a  registration  to  provide  real  estate  services  can  only  be  obtained  by  service 
providers  who  have  a  registered  branch  in  Finland.  This  needs  to  be  corrected. 
Authorisations  were  identified  for  the  organisation  of  package  travels  where  the  travel 
manager  needs  to  register  with  the  package  travel  registry  and  for  patent  attorneys  who 
have  to  register  in  order  to  provide  their  services.  These  requirements  need  to  be  re-
examined. 

The Finnish Point of Single Contact (PSC) is part of a wider enterprise Finland portal which 
provides  information  for  businesses  for  all  stages  of  business  life  cycle.  The  amount  of 
information  available  through  the  portal  is  generally  good  and  distinction  is  made  for 
temporary  cross-border  service  provision,  even  if  no  requirement  applies  for  cross-border 
service provision. Information is generally available in both official languages and in English. 
The forms are however in Finnish, with some forms having also translations. The electronic 
completion  of  procedures  is  currently  limited  as  far  as  the  completion  is  rather  one  way 
interaction  whereby  forms  can  be  downloaded  and  filled  in  on  screen.  The  forms  can  be 
submitted mainly via post or partly by e-mail. Improvements should be made to increase the 
possibility of online completion of procedures. 

56 

 
 
 
 
  
   FRANCE   

In France, transposition led to a considerable number of modifications in national laws as 
around 80 national measures were adopted in order to implement the Services Directive.  

Despite the important efforts made, the following concerns have been identified and must be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  A prohibited requirement concerning the direct involvement of competing operators in the 

granting of authorisations for event promoters needs to be eliminated urgently. 

•  Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  total  prohibitions  of  commercial 
communications remain in place  for lawyers and veterinarians. Such was also the case for 
accountants  before  the  European  Union  Court  of  Justice  judged  it  illegal  (Judgment  C-
119/09). 

•  Although  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  of  authorisations  exists  in  the  French  legal 
framework, it does not apply as a general rule but only in cases specified in sector-specific 
legislation. France should ensure that the instances in which article 13(4) of the Services 
Directive is not applied are limited to duly justified matters. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers,  there 
are cases that raise doubts of compatibility with Article 15 of the Directive. For instance, 
although  shareholding  requirements  for  architects,  accountants,  and  land  surveyors  were 
modified in order to reduce the share of the capital of a company that has to be owned by 
professionals to 51%, this has not been the case for lawyers or veterinarians. These should 
be re-examined. Furthermore, regulation of the retail sector was only partly simplified. 

In  general,  French  legislation  makes  a  distinction  between  cross-border  provision  of 
services  and  establishment.  Several  remaining  requirements  applied  to  incoming  service 
providers  and  hindering  the  free  provision  of  services  have  been  identified.  It  appears, 
according to the information available to the Commission, that a prior notification is imposed 
on  cross-border  modelling  agencies  and  event  promoters.  Legal  form  and  shareholding 
requirements  as  well  as  limitations  on  commercial  communications  are  imposed  on 
veterinarians for the cross-border provision of services. Requirements for both insurance and 
financial guarantees are imposed on cross-border real-estate agents. 

The  French  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC),  "Guichet-entreprises.fr",  was  launched  in 
January 2010. Although the provision of information is very good, important improvements 
must  be  made  concerning  the  availability  and  possibility  for  electronic  completion  of 
procedures,  the  user-friendliness  of  the  site  and  the  facilitation  of  access  to  the  portal 
especially  for  foreign  users  (by  increasing  the  amount  of  information  available  in  other 
languages). 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
   GERMANY   

The implementation of the Services Directive, in particular the screening of legislation, was a 
complex exercise in the case of Germany, due to its federal structure and the involvement of 
multiple  actors  at  all  levels  of  government  (federal,  regional,  local,  professional  orders). 
Germany made considerable efforts to ensure correct transposition and has made a substantial 
number of legislative and practical changes. Around 220 national measures have been adopted 
in order to implement the Services Directive. 

The  main  changes  that  Germany  has  made  affecting  providers  already  established  or  those 
wanting  to  establish  in  Germany  include  the  abolition  of  certain  residence  requirements  for 
different  types  of  experts  mainly  in  the  construction  sector.  Germany  has  also  made 
requirements  concerning  legal  form  and  shareholding  for  architects  and  engineers  less 
stringent. 

As  regards  cross-border  trade  and  requirements  imposed  on  incoming  service  providers, 
Germany  has  made  a  number  of  considerable  changes,  such  as  the  abolition  of  the  general 
notification obligation applicable to a wide variety of service activities as well as the abolition 
of  the  obligation  to  obtain  an  authorisation  applicable  to  any  kind  of  itinerant  trade.  In 
addition, Germany has also abolished a number of authorisation schemes concerning specific 
services notably in the real estate sector. 

However, despite efforts undertaken the following concerns have been identified and must be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Tacit approval has been introduced in the federal Administrative Procedures Act and is 
also  explicitly  foreseen  in  the  federal  Trade  and  Crafts  Act.  However,  certain  sector 
specific legislation foresee that tacit approval of authorisations does not apply (e.g. in the 
construction  sector  the  legislation  on  the  recognition  as  a  testing,  inspection  or 
certification  body).  It  further  seems  that  the rules  differ  between  the  Länder:  some  have 
foreseen a tacit approval of authorisations in areas where other Länder do not accept tacit 
approval. Germany has to make sure the instances in which tacit approval is not applied 
are limited to duly justified matters. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  measures  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  article  15  of  the  Directive  have 
been maintained, for instance fixed tariffs for expert services as well as for some regulated 
professions  like  veterinarians.  Shareholding  and  legal  form  requirements  have  been 
maintained for regulated professions in various degrees of restrictiveness. 

• 

In  addition  there  are  some  doubts  as  to  whether  authorisations  applied  to  cross-border 
service providers can be justified by one of the four reasons recognised by the Directive, 
i.e. public policy, public security, public health or the protection of the environment, and 
whether  those  requirements  are  proportionate.  This  concerns  mainly  authorisations 

58 

 
 
 
 
maintained for expert services in the construction and certification sector, but also in the 
education sector, in particular for vocational training. 

The German Point of Single Contact (PSC) is well established with each of the 16 Länder 
having  its  own  portal.  Solutions  chosen  for  the  different  portals  vary  a  lot  and  there  is 
obviously  also  a  difference  in  quality  and  development.  In  general  improvements  could  be 
made concerning the clarity of information, i.e. distinction between establishment and cross-
border  provision  of  services  scenarios,  and  with  regard  to  the  linguistic  availability.  In 
addition there is a need to improve the availability of on-line procedures through the Points of 
Single Contact. 

59 

 
 
 
 
   GREECE   

Greece  transposed  the  Services  Directive  through  a  horizontal  law,  which  gives  multiple 
delegations to the competent ministers to adopt the necessary implementation measures.  

Greece has adopted changes to sector specific legislation in the area of retail, in the tourism 
sector,  for  private  employment  agencies,  for  real  estate  agents  and  for  professional  services 
(lawyers  and  architects).  Also,  different  circulars  and  ministerial  decisions  issued  aim  to 
interpret law 3919/2011 ‘On the principle of professional freedom’ for professions such as tax 
advisors and tourist guides. Measures on implementation are being monitored closely in the 
context of the Memorandum of Understanding with the Greek authorities. 

Despite significant efforts undertaken by the national authorities, the following concerns have 
been identified and must be addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Prohibited  establishment  requirements  have  been  maintained  such  as  a  nationality 
requirement in the education sector. In the retail sector, a priority in obtaining a licence for 
outdoor sales activities is given to specific categories of persons with Greek nationality.  

•  Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  a  total  prohibition  of  some  forms  of 

commercial communication remains for lawyers. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States to streamline the regulatory environment for the establishment of providers, the 
maintained  measures  concern  legal  form  requirements  in  the  retail  sector,  for  casual 
trading.  

Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  a  wide  range  of  sector-specific 
amendments have been adopted in order to implement the Directive in the retail and tourism 
sector.  Law  3919/2011  constitutes  a  more  radical  attempt  to  curb  restrictive  administrative 
requirements,  but  its  scope  is  general.  However,  several  remaining  requirements  hindering 
free provision of services still apply in the education sector. These should be re-examined. 

The  Greek  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  limited  to  providing  information  only  for  the 
specific sector licensing procedures and only serves as an intermediary between the applicant 
and the various administrative authorities. Electronic completion of procedures is only partly 
available even if it is gradually being implemented. Important improvements are needed as to 
the  availability  of  all  relevant  information  and  of  on-line  procedures.  Moreover,  a  clearly 
differentiation should be made between the regime applying to established and cross-border 
service providers. 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   HUNGARY   

Hungary  transposed  the  Services  Directive  through  a  horizontal  law.  In  addition  to  the 
horizontal law, an ‘omnibus’ act modified about 100 existing sectoral laws and an ‘omnibus’ 
decree amended more than 100 pieces of sector-specific secondary legislation. Moreover an 
additional 100 pieces of sector-specific secondary legislation were modified individually. The 
implementation process was completed, inter alia, by the adoption of new legislation on the 
Points  of  Single  Contact,  on  administrative  cooperation  and  on  notification  requirements. 
Hungary was among the first Member States to implement the Directive.  

Overall the Directive has been successfully implemented in Hungary. For instance more than 
50  authorisations  schemes  have  been  replaced  by  declarations,  maximum  tariff  for  service 
fees imposed on restaurateurs has been abolished.  

However,  since  the  second  half  of  2011,  Hungary  has  significantly  restricted  access  to 
markets  which  were  previously  open  and  where  many  foreign  providers  were  present  (big 
retail,  sale  of  tobacco,  meal  vouchers,  waste  management).  For  that  reason  and  despite  the 
efforts  undertaken,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be  addressed  as  a 
matter of priority: 

•  As  regards  requirements  prohibited  by  the  Directive,  according  to  a  recently  adopted 
measure  the  activity  of  issuing  hot  meal  and  holiday  vouchers  ('SZÉP  Card')  cannot  be 
pursued  by  a  branch  office  of  a  foreign  company.  Moreover,  one  of  the  conditions 
regarding the issuance of the SZÉP Card consists in the entity having exercised an activity 
falling under the same category in the Hungarian Income Tax Law for at least two years. 
These  measures  are  incompatible  with  Article  14  of  the  Services  Directive  and  must  be 
corrected. 

•  On  the  other  hand,  as  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of 
appreciation  to  Member  States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the 
establishment  of  providers,  a  few  requirements  which  may  raise  doubts  of  compatibility 
with Article 15 of the Services Directive have been maintained. This concerns restriction 
of market access in big retail (general ban on commercial buildings over 300 m2), sale of 
tobacco  (legal  form  and  strict  territorial  restrictions),  meal  and  holiday  vouchers  (the 
legislator requires an infrastructure that only big nation-wide existing banks possess) and 
waste  management  (at  least  50%  of  the  shares  must  be  owned  by  the  State).  These 
requirements need to be re-examined. 

Hungary  has  transposed  provisions  on  the  cross-border  provision  of  services  through  a 
horizontal  law  and  by  modifying  sector-specific  legislation.  The  selected  legal  technique 
seems  to  create  sufficient  certainty  for  foreign  service  providers  with  regard  to  applicable 
requirements.  Only  a  few  questionable  notification  requirements  can  be  found  in  the 
construction and in the education sector. 

Finally,  a  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  has  been  set  up  in  Hungary.  A  lot  of  detailed 
information can be found on the website. The use and usability is satisfactory. The connection 
to  the  competent  authorities  is  relatively  good.  However,  not  all  required  procedures  are 

61 

 
 
 
 
supported  online.  Users  often  need  to  send  supporting  documents  by  post  or  to  present 
themselves in person. The search facility, FAQs and other information are 

only available in Hungarian and there is only little information aimed at helping cross-border 
service  providers.  Moreover,  Hungarian  electronic  signatures  are  needed  to  access  services. 
Hungarian  PSC  is  therefore  of  limited  use  to  cross-border  service  providers  and  thus  need 
substantial further improvement in this regard. 

62 

 
 
 
   IRELAND   

Ireland implemented the Services Directive through a horizontal framework law (‘ministerial 
regulation’). Since its adoption, and in the context of its obligations under the Memorandum 
of  Understanding  for  the  EU/IMF  Programme  of  Financial  Support  for  Ireland,  Ireland  is 
making  changes  to  sector-specific  legislation.  These  changes  will  include  the  areas  of  the 
legal profession, in order to make it possible for lawyers to participate in multi-disciplinary 
practices. In relation to the retail sector caps on retail floor space have been raised. 

Despite significant efforts undertaken, the following concerns have been identified and must 
be adressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Tacit approval of authorisations is foreseen in the horizontal legislation implementing 
the  Services  Directive  in  Ireland,  but  sector-specific  legislation  to  put  alternative 
arrangements  in  place  has  not  been  amended.  Ireland  has  to  make  sure  that  instances  in 
which tacit approval is not applied are limited to duly justified matters.  

•  Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  a  total  prohibition  of  some  forms  of 

commercial communication remains for lawyers. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some requirements  have been maintained which should  be reassessed.  These concern  the 
travel  sector,  in  particular  requirements  that  travel  agents  and  tour  operators  have  a  set 
minimum capital investment in their business. The proportionality of these requirements in 
achieving the objective of consumer protection should be reviewed.   

Concerning the cross-border provision of services, it seems that authorisation requirements 
for  national  providers  are  also  applied  to  incoming  service  providers.  For  instance,  tour 
operators  and  travel  agents  operating  in  Ireland  are  obliged  to  hold  licenses  issued  by  the 
Commission  for  Aviation  Regulation.  Vocational  education  providers  such  as  occupational 
first aid training provider, manual handling instructors and lifeguard trainers are required to 
register with the relevant statutory bodies. Licenses are required to engage in occasional and 
casual trading. These should be re-examined. 

Significant  efforts  have  been  made  in  establishing  the  Irish  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC) 
but  important  improvements  need  to  be  made  in  terms  of  the  electronic  processing  of 
procedures,  expanding  the  range  of  procedures  beyond  initial  establishment  of  a  business, 
enhancing integration with information on offer from relevant bodies, increasing awareness of 
the portal and improving the search function. 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   ITALY   

The  Services  Directive  has  been  implemented  in  Italy  through  'Decreto  Legislativo  26 
marzo  2010,  n.  59'.  The  implementation  law  is  one  legislative  instrument  of  horizontal 
scope, which also includes sector-specific changes. 

Apart  from  some  concerns  regarding  the  completeness  and  thoroughness  of  the 
transposition  into  sector-specific  legislation,  the  transposition  is  satisfactory  at  national 
level. However, under the Italian constitutional system the subject matter of the Directive 
partly falls within the legislative competence shared by the State and its Regions. National 
legislation  sets  the  main  principles,  whereas  regional  law  regulates  the  details.  This 
creates issues of legal certainty because, even though the national law should prevail over 
conflicting  regional  norms,  this  hierarchical  relationship  is  only  implicit.  Only  national 
courts can set regional conflicting norms aside a posteriori. 

The  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be  addressed  as  a  matter  of 
priority: 

•  The sector-specific analysis identified a few prohibited requirements. In the tourism 
sector,  authorisations  for  ski  schools  and  instructors  are  linked  to  residence 
requirements  in  Bolzano,  Lazio,  Lombardia,  Abruzzo  and  Emilia  Romagna.  These 
incompatibilities must be corrected as a matter of priority. 

•  The  principle  of  tacit  approval  was  set  in  the  laws  regulating  the  administrative 
system as a horizontal general principle before the implementing law, which reiterates 
and confirms it. The principle has an horizontal and national set of exceptions. These 
exceptions are not always based on overriding reasons of public interest. The situation 
is complicated by the fact that many sectors fall under the competence of the regions, 
which  have  introduced  several  unjustified  exceptions  to  the  principle,  particularly  in 
the  tourism  (ski  schools  and  instructors,  hotels  and  guest  houses)  and  retail  sector 
(large retail facilities and trade in public areas). Italy must therefore make sure that the 
instances in which tacit approval is not applied are limited to duly justified cases. 

•  The implementation law correctly transposes the provisions of the Services Directive 
on  nationwide  validity  of  authorisations  in  a  horizontal  way.  This  ensures 
nationwide  validity  in  most  cases.  However,  the  fact  that  regions  are  competent  in 
regulating certain sectors and in granting most authorisations creates legal uncertainty. 
A few provisions where the principle is not applied have been identified in connection 
with tourist guides and travel agencies. In this context, it's worth stressing that recent 
legislative  developments  have  provided  a  legal  basis  for  the  Government  to  produce 
laws  aiming  at  abrogating  non-proportionate  restrictions,  authorisations  and 
prohibitions for the start-up of economic activities. 

•  As regards requirements where the Directive left a margin of appreciation to Member 
States to streamline the regulatory environment for the establishment of providers, 
quantitative and territorial restrictions were noted in the implementation law regarding 
itinerant  sales,  trade  activities  in  public  areas,  newsagent's  shops.  In  Veneto  and  in 

64 

 
 
 
 
Bolzano,  limitations  linked  to  the  number  of  existing  ski  schools  in  the  regional 
territory  are  still  in  place,  Some  restrcitions  concerning  shareholding  requirements 
remain, even after a few recent reforms which repealed legal form requirements in the 
retail sector (itinerant sales) and also made legal form and shareholding requirements 
less rigorous for all regulated professions.  

A number of authorisation, registration or licensing requirements that also apply to cross-
border  providers  were  identified,  especially  in  the tourism  sector.  These  authorisations 
have in many cases been replaced by less burdensome notification obligations. However, 
procedures through which requirements can be imposed on cross-border service providers 
and authorities in charge of deciding on the imposition of these requirements often remain 
unidentified.  

As for Points of Single Contact (PSC), the situation has considerably improved recently. 
The Italian portal provides a good degree of information on required formalities although 
it does not yet allow for the completion of all administrative procedures required by the 
Services Directive. A particular issue is the lack of possibility to complete procedures that 
fall  under  the  competence  of  local  or  regional  authorities.  The  Italian  Point  of  Single 
Contact is also difficult to use for cross-border providers, both for linguistic and technical 
reasons. Further improvements are needed here. 

65 

 
 
 
   LATVIA   

Latvia  adopted  the  horizontal  law  transposing  the  Services  Directive  ('Law  on  the  Free 
Provision of Services') with some delay, on 20 April 2010. The horizontal law transposes the 
main  principles  of  the  Services  Directive.  However  the  Law,  as  first  adopted,  contained  a 
number  of  provisions  which  did  not  transpose  the  Services  Directive  correctly.  Major 
amendments  have  been  made  to  the  law  (adopted  on  15  March  2012)  which  ensure  better 
compliance with the Directive. 

Some modifications have been made to a number of sectorial laws which above all simplify 
the administrative procedures. 

Despite  the  efforts  undertaken,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Tacit approval of authorisations was initially lacking in the horizontal law but has been 
introduced  in  the  amended  version.  Work  is  underway  to  have  the  provisions  on  tacit 
approval  included  also  in  sectorial  legislation  (around  12  amendments  foreseen).  Lativa 
has  to  make  sure  that  the  instances  in  which  tacit  approval  is  not  applied  are  limited  to 
duly justified matters. 

For cross-border provision of services, Regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers still need to 
be adopted as foreseen by the 'Law on the Free Provision of Services' but these may finally be 
replaced by guidelines and specific amendments to sectoral legislation. Some concerns exist 
as  to  a  possibly  wide  use  of  declarations  in  cases  that  could  not  be  justified  under  the  four 
reasons in Article 16. Compliance with the Services Directive needs to be checked once these 
changes have been made. Currently, requirements have been identified in the tourism sector 
where tourist agents and operators need to be registered and in the construction sector where 
economic operators who employ persons of regulated professions, i.e. builders and architects, 
have to be registered. These requirements need to be re-examined. 

The  Latvian  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  provides  relatively  good  information  and  goes 
beyond the Directive by offering also information on other areas. The information is partially 
available  in  English  but  not  the  forms.  As  for  electronic  completion  of  procedures,  a  good 
portion  of  administrative  requirements  can  be  completed  online  but  only  at  national  level. 
Efforts are still needed to enable cross-border completion of procedures, as well as increasing 
the number of electronic procedures available.   

66 

 
 
 
 
 
   LITHUANIA   

Lithuania  transposed  the  Services  Directive  on  time  via  a  horizontal  law  ('Law  on  Services 
No. XI-570 of 15 December 2009'). The law follows very closely the Services Directive and 
covers  almost  all  of  its  provisions,  including  the  main  principles  relating  to  the  Points  of 
Single  Contact  and  administrative  cooperation.  It  also  sets  out  conditions  for  exercising  the 
freedom  of  establishment  and  the  freedom  to provide services across borders and simplifies 
some  administrative  measures.  The  horizontal  law  prevails  over  sectoral  laws  except  when 
priority is explicitly given to the provisions of other laws. 

A  number  of  sectoral  laws  have  been  modified  in  the  real  estate,  tourism  and  business 
services  sector.  However,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  need  to  be 
addresses as a matter of priority:  

•  A  prohibited  requirement  was  identified  in  the  latest  amendment  to  the  Law  on 
Vocational Education, which foresees that in order to provide formal vocational training a 
natural  person  from  another  Member  States  must  have  its  residence  in  Lithuania.  This 
must be corrected. 

•  Concerning  cross-border  provision  of  services,  an  establishment  requirement  has  been 
identified  in  the  professional  services  sector  for  administration  of  company  bankruptcy 
and  for  company  restructuring,  in  the  real  estate  sector  concerning  services  for  property 
assessment activities, in the retail sector (for specific products like alcohol and tobacco) 
and  in  the  education  sector  for  the  provision  of  higher  education  services.  These 
requirements need to be corrected. 

•  A total prohibition of commercial communication has been identified for lawyers. This 

requirement should be eliminated. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
only  a  few  of  the  requirements  listed  in  Article  15  have  been  identified.  A  minimum 
number  of  employees  is  still  foreseen  in  the  professional  services  sector  for  company 
restructuring  and  company  bankruptcy  administration.  Legal  from  requirements  exist  in 
the tourism sector for tourism information service providers which can be provided by a 
legal person only. A shareholding requirement has been maintained for lawyers where the 
capital of professional partnerships has to be owned 100 % by professional members. 

Lithuanian Point of Single Contact (PSC) was set up on time. Overall the information and 
structure of the portal is good. The PSC could however be further improved, in particular with 
regard to making forms available in another language than Lithuanian and by putting in place 
solutions  for  cross-border  access  to  electronic  procedures.  For  e-procedures  the  main 
problems are linked to the fact that only national e-identification and e-signature solutions are 
supported, without any alternatives for foreign users. 

67 

 
 
 
 
 
   LUXEMBOURG   

The  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  in  Luxembourg  changed  the  existing 
legislative  framework  on  services  considerably  and  major  efforts  were  undertaken  to 
correctly reflect the principles of the Directive. One of the most important changes is the new 
law regulating access to the professions of craftsmen, traders, retailers, industrialists and other 
liberal  professions.  By  removing  obstacles  consisting  of  numerous  formalities,  Luxembourg 
opened up the market and made access easier for service providers from other Member States.  

Despite the efforts made, the following concerns have been identified and must be addressed 
as a matter of priority:  

•  Tacit  approval  of  authorisations  applies  as  a  general  rule  and  was  introduced  in  the 
horizontal law. A list of exceptions however was included where tacit approval does not 
apply such as trade in weapons and in general for authorisations relating to the protection 
of environment. Luxembourg has to make sure the instances in which tacit approval is not 
applied are limited to duly justified matters.  

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some measures have been identified which may raise doubts of compatibility with Article 
15  of  the  Directive.  Quantitative  restrictions  have  been  maintained  for  places  selling 
alcoholic beverages and there is a ban on having more than one establishment for lawyers. 
Shareholding  requirements have been maintained for lawyers from other Member States 
registered  at  the  Bar  in  Luxembourg  and  belonging  to  a  company  that  includes  non-
lawyers: they are not allowed to set up a subsidiary branch in Luxembourg. This situation 
should be corrected.  

Concerning the cross-border provision of services, Luxembourg amended its legislation to 
limit  the  previous  broad  notification  system  applicable  to  all  kind  of  services,  including 
construction, to professional services. However, the requirement to obtain an authorisation in 
the  education  sector,  e.g.  for  summer  course  as  well  as  the  need  for  an  authorisation  for 
providers  carrying  out  technical  studies  and  verifications  in  the  field  of  the  environment 
should be re-examined.  

The  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  in  Luxembourg  is  very  well  established.  Information 
provided  is  comprehensive  and  goes  beyond  the  requirements  of  the  Services  Directive  in 
terms of areas covered. Interactive forms exist in many cases even in three languages.  The 
online  completion  of  procedures  has  been  made  rather  simple  and  no  advanced  technical 
solutions  are  used  which  makes  the  completion  possible  also  across  borders.  Some 
improvements can still be made concerning the availability of more on-line procedures. 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   MALTA   

Malta  transposed  the  Services  Directive  within  the  transposition  deadline  leading  to  a 
considerable number of modifications in national laws. Malta has adopted a mix of horizontal 
and  sector  specific  measures,  in  particular  by  a  so  called  ‘omnibus-law’  containing  a 
horizontal law as well as amendments to 16 sector-specific pieces of primary legislation and 
many other subsidiary pieces of legislation.  

In  particular,  Malta  has  changed  its  trading  system  for  activities  which  are  not  covered  by 
sector specific legislation by introducing a system of notification within 30 days from start of 
activity, which should make it simpler for business to start operating in Malta. Other sector 
specific  authorization  schemes  were  reviewed  and  simplified.  An  important  number  of 
changes also concern the introduction of new provisions to cater for situations of cross-border 
provisions as those situations were in many cases not specifically foreseen in the legislation. 
This should ensure easier access for service providers from other Member States.  

However,  despite  great  efforts  undertaken,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and 
must be addressed as a matter of priority:  

•  First  of  all,  a  prohibited  residence  requirement  was  identified  in  the  professional 

services sector for patent agents. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  measures  have  been  identified  which  may  raise  questions  of  compatibility  with 
Article  15  of  the  Directive.  They  concern  notably.  legal  form  and  shareholding 
requirements for architects and civil engineers and lawyers. 

Concerning  cross-border  trade,  it  is  not  clear  whether  authorisations,  registration  or 
licensing  requirements  foreseen  in  sector  specific  legislation  are  also  applied  to  incoming 
services providers. This concerns for instance authorisation requirements in the tourism sector 
like  the  need  of  a  licence  for  a  travel  operator  or  the  reservation  of  certain  tourist  guide 
services to holders of a specific licence. This should be re-examined and clarified. 

The implementation and setting up of the Maltese Point of Single Contact (PSC) has taken a 
slow  start  and  the  first  portal  set  up  did  not  live  up  neither  to  expectations  nor  to  the  legal 
obligations  as  defined  by  the  Services  Directive.  However  in  January  2012,  a  new  portal, 
Business first, has been launched and significantly improves the performance of the Maltese 
PSC.  Overall  the  information  provision  is  good  and  goes  beyond  the  Services  Directive  by 
providing  also  other  key  services  to  businesses  (social  security,  tax  related  procedures). 
Information  and  forms  are  available  in  English.  Some  information  is  however  still  missing. 
Online  completion  of  procedures  is  available  for  a  big  number  of  procedures  but  not  yet 
covering all the necessary procedures and mainly limited to nationals due to lack of technical 
support  for  cross-border  use  of  e-signatures  where  required.  Further  improvements  are 
necessary  both  in  terms  of  information  coverage  and  availability  and  accessibility  of  online 
completion of procedures. 

69 

 
 
 
 
 
   NETHERLANDS   

The  Netherlands  was  one  of  the  first  Member  States  to  achieve  full  transposition  of  the 
Services Directive and they did so by using different ways for its implementation. The general 
aspects  were  laid  down  by  the  Services  Act  in  order  to  create  a  general  framework  for 
services.  This  however  did  not  include  transposing  Article  14,  15  and  16  as  such.  Instead, 
national  law  was  thoroughly  screened  to  remove  provisions  that  were  in  violation  with  the 
Services  Directive.  Together  with  an  amendment  of  the  non-binding  Instructions  for 
legislation and the Amendment Decree Services Directive it is ensured that future legislation 
respects the requirements of the Services Directive. 

Despite  great  efforts  undertaken,  a  number  of  concerns  have  been  identified  mainly  in  the 
retail and professional services sector, and must be addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  First of all, these concern prohibited requirements including a residence requirement for 
market stands at local level and application of economic criteria for the establishment of 
certain retail outlets at local level despite a clear prohibition in the spatial planning Decree 
(BRO). These should be eliminated. 

•  As  regard  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  requirements  which  may  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  of  the 
Directive  have  been  identified.  Shareholding  requirements  have  been  maintained  for 
lawyers  and  accountants  such  as  the  obligation  for  a  majority  of  the  shares  of  an 
accountants 'office to be held by registered accountants. For lawyers, all shares in the legal 
practice must be owned by lawyers who practice law in the partnership in question except 
for holding companies, foundations and persons employed by the legal partnership as non-
lawyer and holding no more than one tenth of the capital. This should be re-examined.  

Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  a  wide  range  of  sector-specific 
amendments have been adopted in order to implement the Directive. The Amendment Act and 
Amendment Decree Services Directive changed the rules on doorstep selling and arbitration 
in  civil  procedures.  In  addition,  certain  authorisation  requirements  and  requirements  on  the 
use  of  equipment  were  abolished  in  the  construction  and  environmental  legislation. 
Requirements that are still remaining are the obligation to have an authorisation or registration 
for cross-border service providers wanting to provide street selling, the need for establishment 
of  certification  organisations  and  testing  laboratories  and  an  authorisation  for  vocational 
education institutes. These requirements should be re-examined. 

The  Dutch  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  very  well  established  with  a  comprehensive 
provision  of  information,  easy  search  facility,  and  extensive  assistance  as  key  attributes. 
Language  support  for  general  information  is  good,  with  some  variations  at  the  level  of 
competent authorities and with regard to forms. The possibility to complete procedures online 
is relatively well covered, and accessible also cross borders, above all where no e-signatures 
are required.  An active role was played by the Netherlands in supporting other member states 
to  develop  PSCs  in  a  uniform  and  efficient  way  by  providing  for  instance  software 
applications. In general improvements could be made concerning the clarity of information, in 
particular  the  distinction  between  establishment  and  cross-border  provision  of  services 

70 

 
 
 
scenarios, and with regard to the linguistic availability. In addition the availability of on-line 
procedures through the PSC could be further improved. 

71 

 
 
   POLAND   

Poland  transposed  the  Services  Directive  through  a  horizontal  legislation,  the  Act  on 
Provision of Services (PSA) in the Territory of the Republic of Poland which was adopted on 
the 4 of March 2010 and came into force on 10 April 2010. The PSA applies to all services, 
except those explicitly  excluded from  its  scope.  Several  sectoral laws  were modified by  the 
PSA in order to make them compliant with the Services Directive.  

Despite  the  progress  made,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  A  prohibited  requirement  has  been  maintained  in  the  education  sector  where  driving 
schools can be operated only by service providers having a seat or place of residence in 
Poland. This requirement must be corrected as the matter of priority.  

•  The principle of tacit approval of authorisations has been introduced by amending the 
Act  on  the  Freedom  of  Economic  Activity,  which  is  the  main  act  governing  the 
performance of economic activities in Poland. Derogations to the principle can be made in 
specific acts if justified for overriding reasons of public interest. The law provides for an 
exception to the rule on tacit approval. Poland must make sure that the instances in which 
tacit approval is not applied are limited to duly justified cases. In addition Poland has to 
ensure that clear and binding time limits for the authorities to take a decision are foreseen 
in the legislation. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
few  requirements  have  been  identified  in  the  Polish  legislation.  They  concern  notably 
legal  form  and  shareholding  requirements  for  legal  professionals  and  tax  advisors.  The 
changes introduced by the means of the PSA made them less stringent. The provisions on 
minimum tariffs were kept for advocates, solicitors and patent agents. These requirements 
should be re-examined.  

•  Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  the  transposition  of  Article  16  into 
the  Polish  horizontal  legislation  does  not  provide  for  legal  certainty  with  regard  to  the 
requirements that are applicable to cross-border service provision. The PSA states only a 
general  rule  that  service  providers  from  other  Member  States  may  temporarily  provide 
services in the territory of Poland, without having to be entered in any business register. 
They  may  however  be  subject  to  the  requirement  to  obtain  a  certificate,  concession, 
licence,  authorisation,  approval  or  enter  into  register  of  regulated  activities.  These  are 
usually  stipulated  in  sectoral  legislation.  Poland  has  introduced  provisions  for  the 
temporary  provision  of  services  in  only  some  sector  specific  legislation.  Most  of  the 
legislation analysed does not contain the distinction between the establishment and cross 
border  provision  of  services,  leaving  it  open  which  rules  are  applied  to  the  cross  border 
provision of services.  In most cases the restrictions found in the Polish legislation concern 
the education, tourist and crafts, construction and certification services sectors. 

72 

 
 
 
 
The  Polish  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  still  undergoing  major  changes  and  its  full 
operability is expected by the end of 2013. Currently the information provision is relatively 
good and goes beyond the requirements of the Services Directive in terms of 

areas covered but some mandatory information is still missing, and the level of detail is not 
always  satisfactory.  Language  support  is  provided  via  unofficial  translations  (based  on 
Google translate). Online completion of procedures is available but limited to national users 
due to advanced e-signature requirements where only national means are currently supported. 
Several  improvements  must  take  place  concerning  the  quality  and  organisation  of 
information,  availability  and  possibility  for  electronic  completion  of  procedures,  user-
friendliness and enhancing access to the portal especially for foreign users 

73 

 
 
   PORTUGAL   

The main act transposing the Services Directive into Portugal is a horizontal law (Decreto-
Lei 92/2010)  whose  provisions prevail over sector-specific laws, either national, regional or 
local regulating specific services. In addition, the Portuguese authorities are finalising a very 
significant  number  of  sector-specific  amendments  in  the  context  of  the  follow-up  of  the 
Memorandum  of  Understanding  for  Portugal  on  specific  economic  policy  conditionality 
(MoU). It is of utmost importance that sector-specific amendments which have accumulated 
significant delay are completed as soon as possible. The on-going state of these reforms does 
not allow to give a clear-cut picture of the situation. 

However the following concerns have been identified and must be addressed as a matter of 
priority: 

•  Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  can  still  be  found  in  the  statutes  of 
professional orders (for example, that of lawyers and veterinaries) and should be addressed 
in  the  context  of  the  on-going  reform  for  professions  whose  regulation  involves  a 
professional  body  which  is  currently  under  preparation  in  the  context  of  the  MoU.  An 
establishment  requirement  that  existed  in  the  car  rental  sector  is  in  the  process  of  being 
eliminated.  

•  Tacit approval has become the general rule. Exceptions to it, which may be justified by 
overriding  reasons  of  general  interest,  remain  in  the  areas  of  construction  and  education. 
The  principle  of  national  validity  of  authorisations  has  also  become  the  general  rule 
under Decreto-Lei 92/2010. The Portuguese authorities are planning to extend the national 
validity  to  other  procedures  such  as  the  notifications  foreseen  in  the  Professional 
Qualifications Directive in the context of reforms monitored under the MOU. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
measures  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  of  the  Directive  have  been 
maintained.  Shareholding  and  legal  form  requirements  apply  for  certain  highly  regulated 
professions. These requirements are to be reviewed in the context of the pending reform of 
the regulated professions. 

The Portuguese legislation has traditionally made no difference between requirements that can 
be  applied  to  established  service  providers  and  those  that  can  be  applied  to  cross-border 
service providers. As a result of the yet unfinished implementation of the Services Directive, 
the  cross-border  provision  of  services  is  in  the  process  of  being  rendered  much  easier.  A 
cross-cutting establishment requirement has been removed. An authorisation for cross-border 
service  providers  remains  in  a  simplified  form  in  the  area  of  construction  and  needs  to  be 
eliminated. Similarly, several authorisations previously applied to cross- border in the sector 
of  real  estate  and  tourism  have  been  replaced  by  declarations,  some  of  which  are  in  in  the 
process  of  further  simplification.  Insurance  requirements  applicable  to  cross-border  service 
providers are also being removed in some cases. 

74 

 
 
 
 
Work for the setting-up of the Point of Single Contact (PSC) is currently being undertaken in 
the  context  of  the  follow-up  of  the  MoU.  Information  is  available  for  many  sectors  and  it 
gives  a  clear  view  of  requirements  applicable  to  established  and  to  cross-border  service 
providers. Online procedures are available for a number of services but work to extend them 
further should be continued and enhanced. 

75 

 
 
 
   ROMANIA   

Romania  transposed  the  Services  Directive  within  the  transposition  deadline  leading  to  a 
considerable number of modifications in national laws. Romania has adopted a horizontal law 
as well as sector-specific laws, mainly in the following service sectors: construction, services 
for installations and equipment, tourism and some regulated professions. 

Despite the efforts made, the following concerns have been identified and must be addressed 
as a matter of priority: 

•  Prohibited requirements in the retail sector with the existence of economic needs tests 
and the involvement of competitors in the authorisation procedure for the opening of large 
surface retail stores.  

•  Although  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  of  authorisation  has  been  introduced  in  some 
sector specific legislation,  doubts remain whether in most of the services sectors (where 
no specific provisions exist), the general tacit approval principle provided in the horizontal 
law would be applicable in practice. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
only  a  few  of  such  requirements  remain  except  for  the  legal  form  requirement  which 
seems to be applied in cases of professional services that rely on the personal involvement 
of the professional (such as services provided by lawyers or tax advisers) and where they 
are doubled by shareholding requirements. These requirements should be re-examined. 

Regarding  cross-border  trade,  concerns  are  raised  by  the  fact  that,  where  sector-specific 
laws are silent about cross-border provision, it is unclear which rules would be applicable and 
how the different competent authorities should interpret the relationship between the different 
provisions  of  the  Romanian  legislation,  notably  the  relationship  between  the  generally 
applicable  laws  on  company  registration  which  would  require  an  establishment  and 
registration with the Romanian trade register and the horizontal law implementing Article 16 
of  the  Services  Directive.  This  concerns  for  instance  retail  and  travel  agencies,  A  clear 
identification  of  rules  applicable  in  case  of  cross-border  provision  of  service  should  be 
ensured in all sector-specific legislation. 

The Romanian Point of Single Contact (PSC) is not yet fully operational: for the time being, 
only a limited number of procedures are available online and mainly provide for downloading 
the forms. Moreover, online completion of procedures is not accessible for users from other 
Member  States  where  advanced  e-signatures  are  required.  Even  if  technically  the  PSC  is  in 
place,  the  major  problem  is  the  lack  of  content  in  the  PSC.    Significant  improvements  are 
needed to cover all the necessary information and procedures and to ensure the cooperation of 
competent authorities. 

Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) 

Romania has signed a MoU with the European Commission and the International Monetary 
Fund,  which  provides,  as  part  of  the  structural  reforms  that  need  to  be  undertaken,  the 
removal  of  the  economic  needs  test  and  the  involvement  of  competitors  for  the  opening  of 
large retail stores as well as the setting up of the Point of Single Contact. 

76 

 
 
 
   SLOVAKIA   

Slovakia  implemented  the  Services  Directive  through  a  horizontal  framework  law. 
Amendments  were  also  made  to  relevant  sector-specific  legislation  in  order  to  implement 
Articles  14,  15  and  16(2)  of  the  Services  Directive.  A  specific  issue  for  service  providers 
wishing  to  engage  in  cross-border  service  provision  in  Slovakia  is  an  apparent  conflict 
between  the  country’s  Commercial  Code  and  the  horizontal  law  implementing  the  Services 
Directive,  as  the  Commercial  Code  requires  foreign  legal  persons  to  register  in  the  Slovak 
Commercial Register as branches or legal persons. 

Despite  significant  efforts  undertaken,  some  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  Tacit approval of authorisations is foreseen in the horizontal legislation implementing 
the Services Directive, which has left open the possibility for competent authorities to put 
different arrangements in place. Areas in which there do not appear to be any possibility 
for  tacit  approval  include  the  authorisation  of  architects,  insolvency  practitioners,  patent 
agents, interpreters and translators, urban planners and construction engineers, geological 
excavation and mining practitioners, geodesists, cartographers and metrologists, education 
and  further  education  providers  and  driving  schools.  The  public  interest  justification  for 
this should be reviewed. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some measures have been identified that raise doubts of compatibility with Article 15 of 
the Directive. Specific legal form requirements apply to lawyers (advocates), insolvency 
administrators  and  tax  advisors,  land  surveyors  and  cartographers  and  health  and  safety 
training  bodies.  Specific  shareholding  requirements  also  apply  to  lawyers  (advocates), 
insolvency  administrators  and  tax  advisors,  architects  and  engineers.  Insolvency 
administrators have fixed maximum tariffs. These should be re-examined. 

Concerning the cross-border provision of services, it seems that authorisation requirements 
for  national  providers  are  also  applied  to  some  incoming  service  providers.  For  instance, 
insolvency  administrators  are  required  to  register  in  the  list  of  insolvency  administrators. 
Authorisation is required for architects and patent attorneys and for a variety of construction-
related  crafts  services.  Authorisation  is  also  required  in  order  to  provide  vocational  training 
services on a wide variety of subjects 

Slovakia  was  among  the  last  Member  States  to  establish  a  functioning  electronic  Point  of 
Single  Contact  (PSC),  which  was  made  available  to  the  public  in  January  2012.  The  new 
Point  of  Single  Contact  features  a  large  number  of  the  relevant  procedures,  and  very  useful 
bilingual  online  forms  which  collate  relevant  information  and  send  it  to  the  appropriate 
competent  authority.  Potential  areas  for  improvement  include  a  clearer  distinction  of  the 
requirements  applicable  to  cross-border  service  providers  as  opposed  to  businesses 
considering  permanent  establishment,  more  information  on  procedures  managed  by  local 
authorities  and  on  recognition  of  qualifications,  and  further  translation  of  important 
information into languages other than Slovak. 

77 

 
 
 
 
   SLOVENIA   

The Services Directive has been implemented in Slovenia via a horizontal law accompanied 
by  amendments  to  sector-specific  laws.  Around  20  national  measures  have  been  notified  as 
implementing  measures.  Changes  adopted  concern  notably  construction,  services  for 
installations and equipment, real estate and land surveying. 

Despite  great  efforts  undertaken,  the  following  concerns  have  been  identified  and  must  be 
addressed as a matter of priority: 

•  The tacit approval of authorisations has been introduced by the horizontal implementing 
law  as  well  as  in  some  sector-specific  legislation  where  it  applies.  However,  doubts 
remain as to the practical effects of this principle in sector-specific legislation when tacit 
approval  is  not  explicitly  stated.  Slovenia  has  to  make  sure  that  the  instances  in  which 
tacit approval is not applied are limited to duly justified matters. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some measures have been identified which should be reassessed. They concern legal form 
and capital ownership requirements where only lawyers may be shareholders or owners of 
a law firm, as well as minimum tariffs for lawyers.  

•  Concerning  the  cross-border  provision  of  services,  concerns  exist  where  the  sector-
specific legislation does not explicitly provide for cross-border service provision and the 
sector-specific  legislation  is  applied  in  the  same  way  to  cross-border  providers  as  for 
established providers. Only 12 legal acts have been adopted to implement the distinction 
whereas  220  services  are  regulated  activities  in  Slovenia.  Concerns  remain  notably  for 
tourism,  operational 
industrial  property  representatives,  crafts  and  construction, 
monitoring services. A clear distinction should be ensured in all sector-specific legislation. 
Moreover,  the  establishment  requirement  that  remains  for  chimneysweepers  should  be 
eliminated. 

The Slovenian Point of Single Contact (PSC) cannot be considered as fully functioning yet. 
The PSC is based on the e-Government portal available for online registration of businesses. 
The portal does not provide a high level of information from the Services Directive point of 
view  and  it  also  has  a  relatively  low  degree  of  readiness  of  e-procedures  for  domestic  and 
practically  none  for  cross-border  users.  The  portal  supports  information  and  procedures  for 
registration of businesses and most common supporting procedures for domestic users. It also 
provides  some  basic  information  for  cross-border  users.  However,  the  new  PSC  under 
development is planned to profoundly modify this situation and to provide full information for 
home and foreign users in Slovene and English.  

78 

 
 
 
 
 
   SPAIN   

Spain transposed the Services Directive within the transposition deadline. Implementation of 
the Services Directive led to the adoption of a horizontal law at national level (Ley 17/2009) 
and to a very high number of legislative modifications in national and regional laws. The 
task was undertaken ambitiously and the regulatory business environment in Spain has been 
significantly simplified to facilitate both establishment and access for service providers from 
other Member States. However, it appears that the reform of  rules governing  the profession 
issued by professional associations must be completed as a matter of urgency to ensure their 
full compatibility with the Services Directive and the national rules implementing it.  

The obligations laid down in Articles 10(4) and 13(4) of the Services Directive seem to have 
been  correctly  implemented  in  Spain.  The  authorisation  schemes  which  have  remained  in 
legislation  have  been  considerably  simplified.  Tacit  approval  of  authorisations  which 
contributes  to  reduce  administrative  burden  was  already  of  general  application  before  the 
implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  but  the  principle  has  been  reinforced  afterwards. 
The  national  validity  of  authorisations  has  been  ensured  by  means  of  the  horizontal  law. 
The  horizontal  law  has  opted  for  an  ambitious  implementation  of  this  principle  and  it  only 
allows  for  reasons  of  public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  and  the  protection  of  the 
environment  to  limit  the  geographical  scope  of  authorisations  which  are  not  linked  to  a 
specific physical establishment. To ensure that this ambitious implementation takes full effect, 
it  would  be  desirable  to  reinforce  this  rule  with  internal  mechanisms  for  administrative 
cooperation  between  regions  to  ensure  that  the  complexity  of  the  Spanish  administrative 
structure does not result in administrative burden for businesses. It is also important to ensure 
that  all  the  rules  governing  the  professions  issued  by  professional  associations  are  fully 
adapted to this principle. 

Further  to  the  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive,  no  relevant  examples  of  prohibited 
requirements  are  to  be  signalled  in  national  sector-specific  legislation.  However  local 
regulations which in some cases still require a Spanish identification card for the completion 
of some procedures must be corrected. In the tourism area, a restriction could still remain in 
one  autonomous  community  related  to  the  freedom  of  the  provider  to  choose  between 
establishment  in  the  form  of  an  agency,  branch  or  subsidiary.  Although  the  horizontal  law 
would prevail over this provision, this inconsistency must be corrected as a matter of priority 
to ensure legal certainty for providers in the market. 

A  very  significant  degree  of  administrative  simplification  has  been  achieved  with  the 
implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  in  Spain.  Many  authorisation  schemes  have  been 
replaced by prior declarations, in particular in sectors such as tourism or crafts. However, it is 
worth  noting  that  there  is  room  for  further  simplification  in  administrative  procedures  at 
local  level,  in  particular  as  regards  authorisations  that  affect  amongst  other  the  small  retail 
sector. 

Cases  of  requirements  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  remain  in  certain 
pieces of sector-specific legislation in particular those related with shareholding requirements 
for professional partnerships in certain activities such as real estate. Similarly, further to the 

79 

 
 
 
 
implementation of Article 16 of the Services Directive through a horizontal law and through 
the amendment of sector-specific legislation, it can now be 

concluded  that  a  significant  part  of  the  Spanish  legal  order  has  been  simplified  to  reduce 
burden imposed on cross-border service providers. Restrictions whose justification raises 
some  concerns  are  still  imposed  on  cross-border  service  providers  in  sectors  such  as  crafts 
and real estate. 

information  provided 

The  Spanish  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  very  well  established  both  in  terms  of 
information  provision  and  completion  of  procedures.  The 
is 
comprehensive  and  goes  beyond  the  Services  Directive  by  covering  the  whole  business  life 
cycle. Clear distinction is made between establishment and cross-border service provision and 
an  interactive  search  tool  is  available  that  is  tailored  to  users'  needs  for  specific  activities, 
legal  form  and  geographical  location.  The  Spanish  PSC  is  available  also  in  other  foreign 
languages,  above  all  for  information,  and  sometimes  also  for  forms.  Online  completion  of 
procedures is available, as well as a tracking system that allows progress of applications to be 
monitored.  Work  should  however  be  continued  to  facilitate  cross-border  completion  of 
procedures that currently is rather limited and to ensure that procedures to start a business or 
to  provide  services  have  a  sufficient  degree  of  detail  and  of  electronic  availability  in  all 
locations, types of activity and competent authority. 

80 

 
 
 
   SWEDEN   

Sweden has transposed the Services Directive via a horizontal law adopted in 2009, as well as 
via  amendments  to  sector-specific  laws.  All  in  all,  around  60  national  measures  have  been 
adopted  in  order  to  implement  the  Directive.  In  particular,  Sweden  has  modified  its  law  on 
foreign  branches.  By  removing  obstacles  consisting  of  numerous  formalities  and  a  cross-
cutting establishment requirement, Sweden opened up the market and made access easier for 
service providers from other Member States. 

However, despite great efforts undertaken, some concerns have been identified and must be 
addressed  as  a  matter  of  priority.  They  seem  to  concern  in  particular  car  rental  activities, 
patent agents, real estate services and driving schools. 

•  Prohibited  requirements  were  identified  concerning  residence  requirements  for  car 

rental services and patent agents. 

•  Tacit  approval  does  not  apply  as  a  general  rule  in  Sweden.  If  some  sector  specific 
legislation was amended in order to specify where tacit approval applies, it seems that it 
was a deliberate decision that tacit approval should not apply to the construction sector in 
its entirety. Sweden has to make sure the instances in which tacit approval is not applied 
are limited to duly justified matters. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers, 
some  measures  were  identified  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  of  the 
Directive. These concern shareholding requirements for lawyers and auditors. This should 
be re-examined. 

Concerning cross-border trade, it is not clear whether the requirements that were maintained 
and will be applied to incoming service providers can be justified by one of the four reasons 
recognised by the Directive, i.e. public policy, public security, public health or the protection 
of  the  environment,  and  whether  they  are  proportionate.  This  concerns,  for  instance,  prior 
authorisation for cross-border providers offering real estate or driving school services. 

The  Swedish  Point  of  Single  Contact  (PSC)  is  very  well  established.  It  takes  a 
comprehensive  approach  and  goes  beyond  the  Services  Directive  both  with  regard  to  areas 
covered and available procedures. The PSC provides most of the information and forms also 
in  English.    Online  completion  of  procedures  is  well  covered  but  cross-border  access  is 
limited  where  e-identification  or  e-signatures  are  required  where  only  national  means  are 
currently  supported.  Some  improvements  could  be  made  concerning  the  clarity  of 
information, such as the search function and to enhance the ease of procedure completion for 
foreign  users,  including  developing  means  to  accept  foreign-issued  e-Identification  and  e-
signatures. 

81 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   UNITED KINGDOM   

The  United  Kingdom  implemented  the  Services  Directive  mainly  by  a  horizontal  law 
covering the core provisions of the Directive (‘Provision of Services Regulations 2009’). 

In general, few sector specific amendments were made, the UK claiming to have a light touch 
regulatory regime. A few changes have been identified in the retail and professional services 
sectors. They concerned mostly amendments regarding aspects of authorisation schemes and 
availability  of  procedures  electronically.  Furthermore,  the  requirement  that  companies  or 
individuals doing business in the UK must have an address in the UK was abolished. 

However, the following concerns have been identified and must be addressed as a matter of 
priority. 

•  The  obligation  to  ensure  nationwide  validity  of  authorisations  has  not  been  correctly 
implemented. The horizontal law explicitly limits the validity of authorisations granted by 
devolved  administrations  (England  and  Wales,  Northern  Ireland  and  Scotland)  to  their 
respective territory and there is no mechanism of recognition of authorisations granted by 
one devolved administration by the others.  

•  Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  a  total  prohibition  of  some  forms  of 

commercial communication remains for lawyers. 

•  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  establishment  of  service 
providers, some remaining restrictions have been identified in the UK. The most severe 
ones  concern  the  legal  form  and  shareholding  requirements  for  lawyers  in  Scotland  and 
Northern  Ireland:  advocates  in  Scotland  and  barristers  in  Northern  Ireland  can  only 
exercise  their  activities  as  sole  practitioners.  Solicitors  in  Scotland  can  form  a  limited 
liability  company  but  all  members  and  directors  must  be  solicitors;  in  Ireland  solicitors 
can use a company structure in so far as it is recognised to provide solicitor services and 
all members and shareholders must be solicitors or recognised bodies. 

The UK Point of Single Contact (PSC) is well established and the UK belongs to the group 
of Member States with the best PSCs. It has a very high degree of readiness for domestic and 
cross-border  users.  The  advanced  search  function  is  also  a  very  important  asset.  However, 
improvements could be made concerning the on-line availability of procedures. 

82 

 
 
 
 
 
Draft report on the implementation of the Services Directive  

ANNEXES 

83 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Annex I – Technical annexes 

84 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX  I A)   - EU LEGISLATION APPLYING TO SERVICES SECTORS  

Main sectors covered by the Services Directive (2006/123/EC) 

•  Business Services including professional services (, lawyers, architects, accountants, tax advisers, consulting agencies, communication and marketing agencies, patent 

agents, certification services, sport intermediaries, artist managers, recruitment agencies, interpreters, veterinaries, land surveyors …) 

•  Construction services and crafts acitivites 
•  Retail 
•  Real-Estate 
• 
• 

Tourism (Hotels, restaurants, cafés, travel agents, tourist guides…) 
Private Education 

Services Sectors 

Main EU legal instruments covering the sector 

Energy 

Internal market for natural gas 

•  Directive 2003/55/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2003 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing 

Directive 98/30/EC. 
Internal market in electricity  

•  Directive 2009/72/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in electricity and repealing 

Directive 2003/54/EC (Text with EEA relevance). 
Internal market in gas 

•  Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 concerning common rules for the internal market in natural gas and repealing 

Directive 2003/55/EC (Text with EEA relevance). 

Action plan for Financial Services and follow-ups 
(Directive 2006/43/EC, Directive 2006/46/EC, Directive 2007/63/EC, Directive 2007/44/EC, Directive 2009/14/EC, Directive 2007/36/EC, Directive 2007/64/EC, 
Directive 009/111/EC, Directive 2009/44/EC, Directive2010/76/EU, Directive 2009/49/EC, Directive 2011/61/EU, Directive 2011/89/EU) 

•  Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 March 2011 on the application of patients’ rights in cross-border healthcare. 
•  Directive 2005/36/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 September 2005 on the recognition of professional qualifications 

Financial Services 

Healthcare 

85 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Postal Services 

Telecom 

•  Directive 97/67/CE  
•  Directive 2002/39/CE  
•  Directive 2008/06/CE 

•  Regulation (EC) No 1211/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 establishing the Body of European Regulators for Electronic 

Communications  

•  Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002  on universal service and users' rights relating to the electronic communications 

networks and services as amended by Directive 2009/136/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009  

•  Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks 

and services as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 

•  Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services as 

amended by Directive 2009/140/EC. 

•  Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and 

associated facilities as amended by Directive 2009/140/EC. 

•  Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 July 2002 concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the 

electronic communications sector as amended by Directive 2006/24/EC and Directive 2009/136/EC 

Transport 

Road transport 

•  Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international road haulage 

market 

•  Regulation (EC) No 1073/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 October 2009 on common rules for access to the international market for coach 

and bus services 

•  Regulation (EC) No 1370/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2007 on public passenger transport services by rail and by road and 

repealing Council Regulations (EEC) Nos 1191/69 and 1107/70 
Maritime transport 

•  Council Regulation (EEC) No 4055/86 of 22 December 1986 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport 
•  Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 of 7 December 1992 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States 

(maritime cabotage) 
Rail transport 

•  Council Directive 91/440/EEC of 29 July 1991 on the development of the Community's railways, OJ L 237, 24.8.1991, p. 25. 
•  Regulation (EU) No 913/2010 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 concerning a European rail network for competitive freight 

86 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Air transport 

•  Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the 

Community 

•  Council Directive 96/67/EC of 15 October 1996 on access to the ground handling market at Community airports) 

Inland navigation 

•  Council Regulation (EC) No 1356/96 on common rules applicable to the transport of goods or passengers by inland waterway between Member States with a view to 

establishing freedom to provide such transport services 

•  Council Regulation (EEC) No 3921/91 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may transport goods or passengers by inland waterway within a 

Member State 

Sectors not covered as such by secondary EU legislation 

•  Gambling 
•  Activities which are connected with the exercise of official authority (as set out in Article 51 of the Treaty) 
• 
•  Notaries, bailiffs 
• 

Private security services 

Taxis and port services 

87 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX I B)   - REQUIREMENTS ASSESSED FOR THEIR ECONOMIC IMPACT 

1) Article 9 authorisations 

a) Prior autorisation to access the activity? 

b) for retail only: licences relating to outlet siting? 

c) for retail only: specific authorisations linked to the sale of certain products? 

d) for retail only: economic needs test? 

2) Article 14 requirements 

a) Knowledge of (abolished) discriminatrory or nationality/residence requirements? 

b) prohibition on having an establishmentin more than one member state? 

c) Involvement of competitors in granting of authorisations? 

d) obligation to provide or participate in a financial guarantee or to take out local insurance? 

3) Article 15 requirements 

a) quantitative or territorial restrictions? 

b) legal form requirement? 

c) shareholding requirements? 

d) ban on having more than one establishment?  

e) requirements on minimum number of employees? 

f) minimum and/or maximum tariffs? 

4) Article 16 requirements 

a) establishment requirement? 

b) prior authorisation? 

c) notification/registration? 

d) insurance requirement? 

e) tariffs? 

f) general free movement clause in horizontal law ? 

5) Article 25 requirements 

Restrictions on multidisciplinary activities? 

88 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX I C)  - CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK OF THE ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT 

89 

 
 
 
 
 
 
ANNEX II: Detailed analysis per Member States ("Country fiches") 

The assessment of the implementation in each Member State is based on the information 
notified  to  the  Commission  according  to  article  39  of  the  Directive,  the  results  of  the 
Mutual Evaluation process31 and the studies32 that were carried out for the Commission. 

This  analysis  does  not  prejudge  the  assessment  of  the  compatibility  of  other  national 
rules with the Services Directive or the Treaty. 

31   SEC(2011)  102  accompanying  the  Communication  from  the  Commission  "Towards  a  better 
functioning Single Market for Services – building on the results of the mutual evaluation process of 
the Services Directive) COM(2011)20  

32   http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 
implementation  Measures 

and  Study  "Assessment  of 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/implementation_en.htm 

in  Member  States"  published  on 

90 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
  
   AUSTRIA   
_______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

Austria has set up nine points of single contact, one for each of the nine Länder. All of 
them are connected to the national PSC portal (www.eap.gv.at) which offers access to the 
nine portals following the geographical locations selected by the end-users. PSCs can be 
contacted by phone or in person. 

The  degree  of  information  offered  on  the  Austrian  PSC  is  good,  although  an  improved 
search function could help users to find the relevant information easier and faster.  This 
seems particularly important for service providers from other Member States which are 
generally less familiar with the legal or administrative system in Austria.  

The  development  of  the  PSC  has  also  led  to  standardisation  and  simplification  of 
processes  and  to  the  development  of  more  than  100  new  e-forms.  This  is  a  very  good 
example of administrative simplification for businesses which benefits both national and 
foreign service providers.  

The most important procedures are available online and procedures for online completion 
are  also  accessible  to  users  from  abroad.  Certain  improvements  on-line  completion  of 
procedures can still be made, but it has to be noted that, where available, the usability of 
online forms is very good and highly developed.  

An electronic assistant, the so called "Dienstleistungsassistent" is available at the general 
portal and guides providers through the different steps of the procedure in German and 
English. However it seems that it was difficult to locate and use this function for users 
who started their search directly in one of the geographical PSC.  
Concerning the linguistic availability the study33 established for the Commission clearly 
indicated that the use of the PSC was considered rather difficult for service providers not 
familiar  with  German.  However,  it  seems  that  in  the  meantime  some  of  the  nine  PSC 
provide all the information available in English and there is a formal commitment of all 
PSC  to  provide  the  information  in  English.  Depending  on  the  geographical  location, 
some of the PSC also offers information in other languages.  

In addition, direct assistance to users is provides by phone and  by  mail in German  and 
English and if possible also in other languages.  

The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  Austrian  PSC  is  above  average.  However, 
improvements  could  be  made  concerning  the  distinction  regarding  information  on 
permanent establishments or temporary provision of services even if some progress has 
been noted.  

33 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

91 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

After a very promising start, the implementation work got seriously delayed mainly for 
political  reasons  not  linked  to  the  Services  Directive.34  Austria  finally  adopted  the  last 
measures for the implementation of the Services Directive in January 2012.  

A horizontal (federal) law was adopted in November 2011, however without covering 
the  core  provisions  of  the  Directive  on  the  freedom  to  provide  services.  Austria 
considered that these provisions were better implemented by amending existing laws at 
federal and Länder levels. 

In  general,  few  legislative  changes were  made  to  federal  legislation35,  whereas  with  45 
measures  adopted  to  implement  the  Services  Directive  changes  at  Länder  level  were 
more  substantial.  The  most  important  matters  which  are  within  the  legislative  and 
executive  power  of  the  Länder  and  where  changes  were  made  concern  the  following 
sectors:  construction  and  certification  sector  and  the  conduct  of  certain  professional 
activities (e.g. ski instructors, mountain guides, chimney sweeps, dancing schools). 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Austria 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The evaluation of the implementation of the Services Directive has revealed, on the one 
hand,  that  requirements  prohibited  by  article  14  of  the  Directive  can  still  be  found  in 
Austrian legislation, in sectors of economic importance as well as for economically less 
important activities. On the other hand, as regards requirements where the Directive left a 
margin of appreciation to Member States to streamline the regulatory environment for the 
establishment of providers and which are mainly dealt with in article 15 of the Directive, 
a  few  of  such  requirements  have  been  maintained.  They  concern  basically  the  same 
sectors where prohibited requirements still exist. 

Concerning  professional  services,  there  is  an  obligation  for  accountants,  public 
accountants, tax advisers and patent attorneys to obtain insurance from an operator who 
is  authorised  to  exercise  in  Austria.  This  requirement  could  in  its  factual  consequences 
raise  issues  of  compatibility  with  article  14(7)  of  the  Directive,  which  prohibits  any 
obligation  to  obtain  financial  guarantee  or  insurances  from  operators  established  in  the 
same Member State, given that it is highly likely that insurance companies authorised in 
Austria are also established in Austria. 

In  addition  an  obligation  for  service  providers  to  take  a  specific  legal  form  has  been 
maintained  for  civil  engineers,  accountants,  patent  attorneys  and  tax  advisors. 
Shareholding requirements have been maintained for the same professions. The fact that 

34  A draft horizontal law had been pending in the Austrian Parliament since December 2009 but could not 
get the 2/3 majority required for its adoption. Given the delay in the implementation, the Commission 
decided on 27 October 2011 to refer Austria to the Court of Justice over incomplete transposition of 
the  Directive  (IP/11/1283).  Following  the  adoption  and  the  notification  of  the  last  implementing 
measures the Commission has decided on 25 April 2012 to close the case against Austria.  

35  Concerning the federal state, Austria has reported the adoption of the horizontal law in November 2011 
implementing Articles 1 to 8, 13 and 28 to 33 of the Services Directive, as well as the amendments of 
the Law on unfair commercial practices and the law concerning patent agents. 

92 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
in  the  same  sector  and  for  the  same  professions  prohibited  requirements  as  well  as 
requirements which had to be evaluated by Member States have been maintained, might 
lead  to  the  conclusion  that  the  screening  has  not  been  done  thoroughly  concerning  the 
laws  and  regulations  governing  those  professions  or  that  requirements  have  been 
maintained on purpose.  

Concerning crafts, in particular chimney sweeps, the situation is quite similar. First of all 
the  requirement  to  have  a  seat  in  Austria  as  well  as  the  requirement  for  established 
chimney  sweeps  to  restrict  the  core  activities  to  a  certain  area  was  not  abolished.  In 
addition  the  need  for  a  specific  legal  form  for  the  activity  of  chimney  sweeps  was 
maintained. The justification for keeping these requirements has to be put in question. 

As far as the retail sector is concerned, prohibited requirements have been found notably 
in  the  legislation  concerning  the  so  called  "Tabakmonopol":  tobacco  shops,  where  an 
economic  needs  test  might  be  carried  out  and  where  the  regional  Commission  of 
Tobacconists which consists also of competitors of a service provider has to be consulted 
for the authorisation or relocation of a tobacco shop.  

In the tourism sector, the assessment of the implementation revealed the interesting fact 
that some Länder have abolished requirements which have been maintained and justified 
by  other  Länder.  This  concerns  in  particular  ski  schools  and  mountain  guides.  In  two 
Länder ski schools may accept clients only in the territory where the ski resort/territory is 
located.  One  Land  foresees  an  obligation  of  a  ski  school  to  inform  another  ski  school 
prior  to  providing  ski  education  in  the  ski  school  area  of  the  latter,  whereas  this 
requirement has been abolished by other Länder. And finally in one Land there is still a 
ban on having more than one establishment as a permit for running a ski school may be 
granted  only  if  the  person  is  not  yet  holder  of  a  ski  school  permit  in  this  Land. 
Concerning  mountaineering  schools  one  Land  has  kept  the  obligation  that  the  school 
needs  to  be  managed  by  the  holder  of  the  permit  himself  which  might  constitute  a 
requirement contrary to article 15(2) e) of the Directive. In any case, similar provisions 
were  abolished  by  other  Länder.  It  is  equally  interesting  to  note  that  while  several 
prohibited requirements concerning the need for an establishment or for the indication of 
an address have been abolished in the tourism sector, the federal law on crafts remains 
ambiguous  as  to  whether  there  is  an  establishment  requirement  for  tourist  guides.  This 
might need clarification. 

The  situation  in  the  education  sector  concerning  dancing  schools  is  similar  to  the 
tourism sector. Whereas some Länder have changed the legislation on dancing schools to 
bring it in line with the Services Directive, others have maintained the requirement that 
training  in  dancing  skills  shall  be  provided  personally  by  the  natural  person  who  is 
theoretically and practically sufficiently skilled. This requirement could be considered a 
legal form requirement as it seems to exclude the provision of service by legal persons. 

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

Authorisations which are not granted for the whole territory of a Member State but only 
for  a  specific  part  are  likely  to  hinder  the  exercise  of  service  activities.  Austria  is  a 
federal  State  with  nine  Länder  and  it  is  thus  important  that,  as  a  general  rule,  the 
authorisation received by one Land is also valid or can be recognized in another Land.  

There is no horizontal rule concerning the nationwide validity of authorisations.  

93 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Article 10(4) of the Services Directive has not been transposed by the federal horizontal 
law, which means that nationwide validity of authorisations has to be foreseen in sector 
specific legislation.  

legislation 

transposing  directive  2005/36/EC  on 

Some of the Länder have included the nationwide validity as a general principle in the 
the  recognition  of 
horizontal 
professional qualifications which applies to most of the important economic sectors. For 
those Länder which have not adopted a horizontal act for the implementation of Directive 
2005/36,  there  are  basically  two  possibilities  foreseen  in  different  legislations:  either 
automatic  recognition  of  qualifications  acquired  in  another  Land  or  other  Member 
State  is  explicitly  foreseen  or  the  law  provides  for  the  possibility  to  have  those 
qualifications recognized. 

3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval, an important mean to cutting red tape as it foresees that an authorisation 
will  be  deemed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  provider  in  case  an  application  has  not 
received any response within the set time period, is not foreseen in a horizontal act of 
law, but in sector specific legislation.  

For  example,  tacit  approval  has  been  specifically  foreseen  for  authorisations  in  the 
following  sectors  and  legislations:  opening  of  a  kindergarten  in  the  education  sector  or 
issuing certificates in the construction sector. 

However, it has to be noted that in many cases tacit approval has been introduced in the 
legislation well before the adoption of the Services Directive.  

At the same time, sector specific legislation has been identified where tacit approval has 
not  been  specifically  foreseen  (e.g.  use  of  explosives,  funeral  facilities).  It  is  also 
interesting to note that differences between the Länder have been identified with regard 
to  sector  specific  legislation:  comparable  legislation  foresees  or  does  not  foreseen  tacit 
approval of authorisations (e.g. in the tourism sector there are differences concerning the 
authorisations  of  ski  schools).  The  justification  of  such  differences  will  have  to  be 
verified.  

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The  core  chapter  of  the  Directive  on  the  freedom  to  provide  services  has  not  been 
introduced in the horizontal law which was adopted to implement the Services Directive. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  Austria  considered  that  a  horizontal  provision  would  not  have  any 
additional value and that rules concerning the cross border provision of services had to be 
implemented by amending existing laws at the federal and the Länder levels.  

94 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  probably  most  important  rule  applying  to  cross  border  services  is  contained  in  the 
Federal  Commerce  and  Industry  Regulation  Act  (“Gewerbeordnung”)  which  covers 
the  majority  of  commercial  and  crafts  activities.  As  a  general  rule,  service  activities  in 
the  scope  of  the  Act  must  be  notified  to  the  competent  authority  which  has  to  assess 
whether  the  legal  requirements  (e.g.  legal  age,  professional  qualification  for  regulated 
professions) for the specific commercial activity are fulfilled. The operator can start the 
activity  on  the  day  of  registration,  provided  that  the  documents  required  by  law  are 
submitted  in  full.  This  was  considered  in  compliance  with  EU  law  and  therefore 
maintained.  For  certain  sectors,  such  as  master  builder,  chemical  laboratories,  gas  and 
sanitation 
installations  engineering,  debt  collection  services,  chimney  sweeps, 
commercial  and  financial  consultants  and  arms  trade,  which  are  considered  sensible 
acitivites among  “regulated professions” an authorisation is necessary in order to legally 
start  that  activity.  However  the  Act  also  contains  a  specific  rule  for  the  provision  of 
cross  border  services  which  has  been  introduced  in  order  to  implement  Directive 
2005/36/EC.  According  to  this  provision,  nationals  of  an  EU  Member  State  or  EEA 
country,  who  are  established  in  another  Member  State  of  the  EU  or  EEA  and  are 
providing services there on a legal basis, can  provide services  on a non-permanent and 
occasional  basis  under  the  same  conditions  as  domestic  traders.  So  far  there  is  no 
jurisprudence  concerning  the  interpretation  neither  of  “non-permanent  and  occasional 
basis”  nor  about  what  has  to  be  understood  under  “the  same  conditions  as  domestic 
traders”. 

Similar rules as the one concerning commercial and craftsmen activities can be found in 
other  sector  specific  laws  at  federal  level,  like  the  Act  on  Public  Accountants  and  Tax 
Advisors, the Act on Balance Accountants or the Act on Civil Engineers. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

A  part  from  the  examples  mentioned  above,  legislation  in  general  does  not  distinguish 
between  a  service  provider  that  wants  to  establish  a  business  in  Austria  and  a  service 
provider wishing to provide temporary cross border services.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The  federal  legislator  did  not  consider  that  a  lot  of  legislative  changes  were  needed  to 
achieve compliance with the Services Directive. On its website the Ministry of Economy, 
which  was  coordinating  the  implementation  work,  states  that  in  Austria  the  need  for 
amendments was assessed as being low.36  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

Finally  in  the  professional  services  sector  the  relevant  law  only  provides  for  rules  for 
cross-border activities of balance accountants and not for other accountants which seem 
to  imply  that  all  the  requirements  applied  for  established  providers  will  also  apply  to 
incoming services providers.  

In  the  construction,  certification  and  crafts  services  sector,  all  Länder  laws  foresee 
authorisation  requirements  with  regard  to  the  certification  of  construction  products.  An 
establishment requirement for chimney sweeps has been identified which implies that the 

36 http://www.bmwfj.gv.at/wirtschaftspolitik/standortpolitik/seiten/eu-

richtlinie%C3%BCberdienstleistungenimbinnenmarktundihreumsetzungin%C3%96sterreich.aspx. 

95 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
cross border provision of such services is prohibited in Austria. The obligation of house 
owners  to  contract  chimney  sweeps  exclusively  from  their  respective  territory  in  some 
Länder may also constitute a prohibited restriction in terms of the Services Directive. 

Concerning  the  retail  sector,  products  with  medical  effects  might  only  be  sold  after 
having obtained a specific authorisation.  

Most requirements which have been maintained concern the tourism sector, where it can 
be  observed  that  requirements  and  justifications  seem  to  differ  between  the  Länder. 
Service providers from other Member States wishing to provide temporary cross border 
services in some Länder still need to have an authorisation, e.g. for running ski schools 
and  engaging  as  ski,  cave  or  mountain  guide,  whereas  in  other  Länder  for  those  same 
activities a notification regime has been maintained. For some of those activities there is 
also an obligation to wear special badges or to have a special identity card.  

Finally,  there  is  also  an  establishment  requirement  for  tourist  guides  or  at  least  an 
ambiguity in the legislation which should be clarified. 

As  far  as  the  education  sector  is  concerned  authorisations  are  needed  for  training  in 
dancing.  

96 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   BELGIUM   
__________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  Belgian  point  of  single  contact  consists  of  a  central  PSC  website,  called 
www.business.belgium.be  and  nine  so-called  ‘enterprise  counters’,  which  have  online 
portals and physical offices. Those enterprise counters are managed by private operators, 
but are recognized/mandated by the Belgian authorities. This cluster of business counters 
was developed already before the adoption of the Services Directive in order to execute a 
number of tasks for businesses that previously were performed by different authorities.  

The  provision  of  information  is  generally  good  because  of  the  assistance  by  the 
'procedure  guide'.  Improvements  could  however  be  made  concerning  the  availability  of 
information by providing a real one-stop source for information and procedures instead 
of  being  obliged  to  visit  other  sites  for  transactions.  The  structure  and  overview  of  the 
website could be improved in order to allow users to find back quickly relevant (sector-
specific) information. Another improvement could consist in a clear differentiation for all 
administrative  formalities  applicable  to  businesses  wanting  to  enter  Belgium  on  a 
temporary basis.  

The  electronic  completion  of  procedures  is  the  weakest  point  of  the  Belgian  PSC.  The 
purpose of the business.belgium portal is rather to give information and to redirect users 
to other websites, and therefore does not allow for documents and forms to be retrieved 
electronically, or for the submission of signed electronic documents. This is the case for 
some  procedures  on  some  of  the  business  counter  portals.  Furthermore,  the  required 
infrastructure  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  Commission  Decisions  governing  cross-
border  acceptance  of  eSignatures  is  currently  not  foreseen  on  the  business  counter 
portals. This is however not problematic since eSignatures are at any rate not required of 
service providers at the moment.  

Assistance  to  PSC  users  is  provided  by  the  ‘procedure  guide'.  Here  anyone  can  find 
information  about  applicable  procedures  and  requirements  by  filling  in  the  business 
activity, the sector and the location. For individual assistance businesses have to turn to 
the business counters.  

The portal is available in Dutch, French, English and German. It should be noted that not 
all information is available in those four languages. English is not always supported and 
foreign  businesses  that  find  English  information  on  the  business.belgium  portal  might 
then be referred to French or Dutch webpages at the level of the business counters.  
The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  Belgian  PSC  is  above  average.37  However, 
improvements  could  be  made  concerning  the  availability  of  information  (more  user 
friendly),  enhancing  online  completion  of  procedures,  integration  between  the  central 
portal  and  the  9  decentralised  business  counters,  and  promoting  awareness  of  the  PSC 
among business users.  

37 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

97 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The  federal  as  well  as  regional  levels  have  adopted  a  horizontal  law,  containing  the 
general provisions, as well as sector-specific laws, which should align existing legislation 
with the Services Directive. 

A  horizontal  federal  law  was  adopted  in  26  March  2010  which  serves  as  a  framework 
law; together with a vertical law of 22 December 2009 which amends around 10 existing 
acts in conformity with the Services Directive.  

At the level of the Communities and Regions, all regional authorities opted for horizontal 
as well as sectorial texts in order to ensure correct transposition of the Services Directive,   

In  general,  most  legislative  changes  were  adopted  on  regional  level  apart  from  some 
substantial  changes  on  Federal  level.  The  most  important  changes  were  made  in  the 
following  sectors:  travel  agencies  in  Flanders  and  Wallonia,  obligatory  registration  of 
building  contractors,  registration  in  the  commercial  register  (CBE)  and  commercial 
establishments (licence). 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Belgium (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

Concerning professional services, shareholding and legal form requirements were found 
to exist in the legislation governing lawyers, architects, accountants and tax advisors.  

For architects, natural persons who are mandated to exercise the profession of architect 
and who are registered with the Body of Architects must have, directly or indirectly, at 
least  67  %  of  the  shares  (the  Act  of  20  July  2006)  as  well  as  the  voting  rights  of  an 
architectural  company.  Only  persons  whose  profession  are  compatible  with  the 
profession of architects and who must be notified to the Body of Architects can hold the 
other shares. For lawyer, the majority of capital must be held by qualified lawyers. 

In  order  to  use  the  title  of  accountant  or  tax  advisor,  the  majority  of  voting  rights  and 
shares must be in the possession of accountants or tax advisors who are members of the 
Institute of Accountants. There is also an obligation for the accountants/auditors and tax 
advisors to take the specific legal form of a civil company established in the form of a 
commercial  company  in  accordance  with  Belgian  law,  or  a  company  established  under 
foreign law and authorised to provide accountants/auditors or tax advisors services in the 
Member State of establishment  

Other  requirements  which  have  been  removed  or  made  less  stringent  concern  the  legal 
form requirement for recovery of debt services and tariffs for architects in Belgium.  

No  requirements  have  been  identified  in  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification 
services sector. Tariffs for waste management services for instance have been abolished. 

In the real estate sector, the Act on the protection of the title of surveyor foresees that 
only  natural  persons  can  exercise  the  profession  of  surveyor.  There  is  however,  a 
possibility  for  legal  persons  to  exercise  the  profession,  but  the  professional  liability 
arising from the duties is reserved to the surveyor personally and cannot be restricted. 

98 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
As  regard  the  licence  for  commercial  establishments  in  the  retail  sector,  Belgium  has 
made  many  efforts  to  bring  this  legislation  in  line  with  the  Services  Directive  and,  in 
particular, to eliminate economic need tests such as the assessment of impact on existing 
retail  stores.  It  is  still  to  be  assessed  whether  the  decision  to  regionalise  the  licensing 
system would bring further simplification. 

In  addition  accreditation  is  needed  for  natural  and  legal  persons  that  want  to  provide 
services  creating  new  jobs,  mainly  for  long-term  unemployed  persons  that  meet  local 
needs. One of the criteria for this accreditation is ‘the integration of the service provider 
in local social and economic life’. It is worth noting that a high degree of integration is 
possible  almost  exclusively  for  natural  and  legal  persons  already established  for  a  long 
time in Belgium, a condition which could be considered discriminatory against incoming 
service providers. 

With regards to exercise and organisation of fairs and ambulant activities, the Mayor may 
determine  the  location,  days,  hours  and  specialisation  of  ambulant  activities  and  might 
even reduce the number of pitches per company to maintain the diversity of the supplied 
services. This could be considered as a territorial/quantitative restriction. In addition, the 
establishment  and  operation  of  night  shops  and  private  telecommunications  offices  can 
be restricted by the Mayor to certain parts of the municipality. Also, the accreditation of a 
service  that  creates  jobs  for  long-term  unemployed  persons  (“local  service  economy”) 
may only be granted to those entities specified in the Belgian legislation, which could be 
considered to be an obligation to take a specific legal form.  

No  forbidden  requirements  were  identified  in  the  legislation  in  Flanders,  Wallonia  and 
Brussels,  regarding  the  tourism  sector.  Recently  a  shareholding  requirement  for  every 
person  wanting  to  start  a  travel  agency38  has  been  abolished  for  the  Flemish  region39. 
This  requirement  has  also  been  abolished  for  the  Walloon  Region40.  However  this 
restrictive  requirement  is  still  in  place  for  the  Brussels-Capital  Region.  A  minimum 
capital  requirement  for  travel  agents  has  been  abolished  in  Belgium,  except  for  the 
Flemish region.  

A  number  of  requirements  reserving  an  activity  to  a  particular  service  provider  and 
placing  an  obligation  on  a  provider  to  take  a  specific  legal  form  were  identified  in  the 
education sector. These relate to vocational training courses for continuing education for 
SMEs  where  there  is  the  obligation  that  courses  have  to  be  organised  by  an  appointed 
Institute  by  the  Government.  Driving  schools  need  to  be  run  by  natural  persons  or 
commercial companies, excluding civil companies. There is also the requirement to take 
the  form  of  a  non-profit  organisation,  which  was  found  to  apply  in  relation  to 
organisations  verifying  the  quality  of  education  in  the  Flemish  region,  and  centres 
offering adult education in the German-speaking Community.  

38 Article 8 of the Royal Decree of 30 June 1966 on travel agencies, Belgisch Staatsblad 27-07-1966.  

39 By Article 36 of the Decree of the Flemish government implementing the Decree of 2 March 2007 on 

travel agencies.  

40 By Article 29 of a Decree of 27 May 2010.   

99 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Driving  instructors  are  obliged  to  have  an  establishment  unit  in  Belgium.  In  addition  a 
driving  school  is  obliged  to  have  an  authorisation  for  the  operation,  its  management 
personnel, its teaching personnel and the location.   

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

Belgium  is  a  federal  state  with  political  power  spread  into  three  levels:  federal  level, 
Community level and the level of the Regions. From a legal point of view, all levels are 
equal  and  each  of  the  Belgian  legislators  is  competent  to  implement  the  Services 
Directive to the extent that the matter falls within its responsibilities.  

Consequently, nationwide validity of authorisations is guaranteed by authorisations that 
are  governed  by  federal  legislation  while  the  validity  of  regional  authorisations  is  in 
general  limited  to  its  territory.  The  horizontal  decrees  of  the  Flemish  Region  and  the 
Wallonia  Region  for  example  ensure  right  of  access  and  exercise  of  services  activities 
throughout the territory of the Flemish Region and the Wallonia Region41. The German-
speaking  Community  however  guarantees  nationwide  validity  of  their  authorisations  as 
the service provider has the right to exercise the activity throughout the Belgian territory. 

3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The  different  horizontal  laws  have  implemented  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  of 
authorisations, but it does not apply generally. Sector specific legislation was amended in 
order  to  specify  where  tacit  approval  applies.    For  example,  it  has  been  explicitly 
introduced for the authorisation to operate as a travel agent in the Flemish region. 

Considering that an exception could be justified by overriding reasons of general interest, 
tacit approval does not apply in the following sectors: construction sector, travel agents, 
tourist  accommodation  and  camping  parks  in  Wallonia,  food  and  beverage,  education 
services, debt collecting activities.    

However, in sectors where the principle of tacit approval does not apply there are general 
commitments that the application process should be easy, as quickly as possible and at a 
reasonable cost.    

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. 

41 Decree of 25 June 2010 partially transposing Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and the 
Council of 12 December 2006 on Services in the Internal Market, Belgisch Staatsblad 2-08-2010 and 
Decree of 10 December 2009 transposing Directive 2006/123/EC of the European Parliament and the 
Council of 12 December 2006 on Services in the Internal Market concerning the matters referred to in 
Article 138 of the Constitution, Belgisch Staatsblad 24-12-2009.  

100 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The  federal  government  and  each  regional  authority  implemented  Article  16  of  the 
Services  Directive  by  means  of  horizontal  legislation  together  with  changes  in  some 
sector-specific  laws.  The  Flemish  government  however  has  only  introduced  sector-
specific changes.  

The  Walloon  region  and  Brussels  Capital  region  expressly  provided  that  the  horizontal 
decree on services will prevail over sector specific legislation in case of conflict. In this 
case  cross-border  service  providers  can  rely  on  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause 
even if sectorial provisions say otherwise.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

Concerning cross-border trade, it seems that some authorisation requirements for national 
providers are also applied to incoming service providers. In general, Belgian legislation 
makes  a  distinction  between  the  two.  In  addition,  it  seems  doubtful  whether  those 
authorisations applied to incoming services providers can be justified by one of the four 
reasons under Article 16 (public policy, public security, public health or the protection of 
the  environment)  and  whether  they  are  proportionate.  This  concerns  for  instance, 
authorisation  for  ambulant  and  fair  activities,  authorisation  for  the  activity  of  butcher, 
obligation for travel agents to have premises in the territory, authorisation for real estate 
agents,  establishment  and  authorisation  requirements  for  driving  schools,  and 
authorisation and shareholding requirements for architects, accountants and lawyers.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

In Belgium, a general requirement for business registration at the 'Banque Carrefour des 
enterprises'  exists  for  the  establishment  of  service  providers.  Enterprises  (natural  and 
legal persons) that want to establish in order to provide services on the Belgian territory 
have  to  be  registered  at  the  CBE.  It  appears,  according  to  the  information  of  the 
Commission, that cross-border service providers need to register in the CBE if they have 
to file an application for an authorisation that is covered by the Services Directive. 

A  horizontal  prior  notification  (‘Limosa’)  is  required  from  all  service  providers  for 
commercial,  crafts  and  liberal  activities,  including  activities  in  the  construction  sector, 
wishing to exercise under free movement of services. The Limosa notification entails a 
horizontal  obligation  also  for  self-employed  persons  providing  cross-border  services  in 
Belgium to file a prior notification with the Federal Service for Social Security. A case 
about the legality of this notification duty is pending before the Court of Justice of the 
European Union.42 

42 

Case 

C-577/10, 

IP/10/680; 
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/10/680&format=HTML&aged=1&langua
ge=en&guiLanguage=en. 

Commission 

Belgium; 

release 

press 

see 

v 

101 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the professional services sector, collecting societies must be established in Belgium. 

Concerning the construction and crafts sector there is an authorisation requirement for 
contractors. 

Real  estate  agents  are  allowed  to  provide  their  services  on  occasional  and  temporary 
basis in Belgium only after they have obtained permission from the Professional Institute 
for Real Estate Agents. Each real estate agent is obliged to make note of his number of 
permission  obtained  from  the  Professional  Institute  on  all  his  documents  and  on  his 
website.  No  justifications  for  this  authorisation  requirement  were  provided  in  the 
legislation. For surveyors, registration at the Federal Council of Surveyors is needed for 
all service providers.  

As far as the tourism sector is concerned, in the Wallonia and Brussels-Capital Region, 
travel  agents  must  have  premises  in  their  territory,  which  must  be  accessible  to  the 
public. The former authorisation requirement for travel agents has been replaced by a less 
stringent notification system. 

Finally,  in  the  education  sector,  driving  schools  are  required  to  have  at  least  one 
establishment  unit  in  Belgium  and  must  obtain  several  authorisations  such  as  for  the 
operation, the managing personnel, the teaching personnel and its location and physical 
premises. As such, cross-border provision of services for driving schools does not seem 
to  be  possible  in  Belgium.  Centres  providing  training  to  environmental  specialists  and 
laboratories that analyse water, air and soil in the Flemish region, need to be accredited.   

102 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   BULGARIA   
________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  Bulgarian  portal  does  not  give  access  to  the  electronic  services,  but  provides 
information to complete the relevant types of administrative requirements. It mainly acts 
as  a  signpost,  providing  information  about  administrative  requirements  and  referring 
users to the websites of competent authorities and provides information on only a limited 
number of procedures. The level of information provided is low and can be considered 
not sufficient for the services providers.  There is no physical point of single contact. 

On-line  completion  of  procedures  needs  to  be  significantly  improved.  Electronic 
completion is currently possible for a limited number of procedures through the websites 
of the responsible authorities (linked to the PSC portal). In many cases, however, the use 
of paper forms and non-electronic procedures is still required. Electronic signatures are 
required  for  the  submission  of  forms  and  related  documentation,  however  only  the 
Bulgarian electronic signature is accepted.  

The Bulgarian PSC provides some facilities to help users obtain information. When users 
encounter problems a telephone number and e-mail are provided. However they are not 
easy  to  detect  on  the  website.  Moreover  the  contacts  provided  are  not  the  ones 
responsible for the content of the website, but mainly for technical questions.  

Regarding  the  linguistic  availability,  the  PSC  is  accessible  only  in  Bulgarian. 
Improvements in this area are necessary to enable foreign users the access to the content 
and the use of the portal. 
The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  Bulgarian  PSC  is  perceived  to  be  average.43 
However,  improvements  could  be  made  concerning  the  availability  of  procedures  and 
information,  the  clarity  and  accessibility  of  the  information  provided  (notably  ensure  a 
clear and distinct information on requirements applicable in case of establishment and the 
ones  applicable  in  case  of  cross-border  provision  of  services).  Another  area  noted  for 
improvement  is  the  lack  of  information  on  municipal  regulation  and  specifically  the 
registration regimes.  

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The Bulgarian horizontal implementing law, the Service Activities Act, entered into force 
on 23 February 2010. The Act includes some amendments to specific legislation such as 
the Tourism Act, the Spatial Planning Act, the Chamber of Builders Act, the Chambers 
of  Architects  and  Engineers  involved  in  Investment  Design  Act,  the  Energy  Efficiency 
Act, the Crafts Act and the Consumer Protection Act. 

In  general,  few  legislative  changes  were  made  to  sector-specific  legislations  with  the 
amendments of only the 7 sector-specific laws mentioned above.  

43 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

103 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Bulgaria (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The evaluation of the implementation of the Services Directive has revealed, on the one 
hand, that some requirements prohibited by Article 14 of the Directive can still be found 
in  Bulgarian  legislation  in  the  area  of  professional  services.  On  the  other  hand,  as 
regards, requirements where the Directive left a margin of appreciation to Member States 
to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers  and  which 
are  dealt  with  in  Article  15  of  the  Directive,  a  few  of  such  requirements  have  been 
maintained in the area of professional services. 

Concerning  professional  services,  the  most  striking  requirement  prohibited  by  the 
Directive and maintained in Bulgaria is the nationality requirement for cartographers and 
cadastre  service  providers,  as  well  as  industrial  property  representatives.  In  addition, 
industrial  property  representatives  must  have  their  residence  in  Bulgaria.  Those 
requirements  are  clearly  against  article  14(1)  of  the  Services  Directive  which  prohibits 
requirement based on nationality and residence. However, those laws are currently under 
review and should be amended in the course of the year. 

In addition, an obligation for service providers to take s specific legal form and to respect 
rules  relating  to  the  shareholding  of  companies  has  been  maintained  in  the  legal 
profession, as well as in architectural/engineering professions holding specific company 
titles only. Fixed minimum tariffs are still in force for lawyers, architects and engineers 
in  investment  design,  cartographers  and  cadastre  service  providers  whereas  the 
Professional  Organisation  of  Veterinarians  is  entitled  to  determine  the  minimum  prices 
for carrying out veterinary activities. Minimum tariffs for independent financial auditors 
were abolished through the implementation of Services Directive. 

Concerning  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services,  an  obligation  for  service 
providers  to  take  a  specific  legal  form  has  been  maintained  for  persons  who  carry  out 
technical  supervision  of  high-risk  equipment  and  persons  who  carry  out  services  on 
maintenance,  repair  and  modification  of  such  equipment.  According  to  the  Technical 
requirements  of  Products  Act,  the  providers  must  be  legal  persons,  registered  in  the 
Commercial Register (Article 34a and 36).  

In the area of education, an obligation to take a specific legal form has been maintained. 
Bulgarian  private  schools  with  foreign  participation  may  be  opened  by  associations 
registered  in  Bulgaria  between  Bulgarian  and  foreign  individuals  and/or  legal  persons; 
foreign  private  schools  may  be  opened  only  by  foreign  legal  persons.  In  addition,  only 
legal entities can open vocational training centres. The vocational centres can be opened 
by associations registered in Bulgaria between Bulgarian and foreign individuals and/or 
legal persons or in cases of foreign vocational centres, by foreign legal persons.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit  approval  has  been  implemented  via  the  Services  activities  Act  (the  horizontal 
implementing law of the Services Directive). However, sector specific legislation was not 
always amended in order to specify where tacit approval applies.  

104 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Tacit  approval  does  not  apply  in  the  following  sectors  in  their  entirety:  tourism, 
construction,  education,  crafts  and  business  services.  This  raises  some  doubts  as  to  the 
use of the exception under Article 13(4) of the Directive and the relationship between the 
horizontal implementing law and sector-specific laws.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No  amendment  has  been  adopted  to  sector-specific  legislation.  Rules  applicable  to 
commercial  communications  for  regulated  professions  are  not  known.  Prohibitions  for 
some forms of commercial communications remain for lawyers and constitute thereof an 
infringement of Article 24, paragraph 1 of the Services Directive. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The  core  chapter  of  the  Directive  on  the  freedom  to  provide  services  has  been 
implemented  in  the  horizontal  implementing  law.  Article  19  of  the  Services  Activities 
Act  implements  the  principles  set  out  in  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive,  i.e.  that 
requirements  can  be  imposed  on  incoming  service  providers  only  if  such  requirements 
are non-discriminatory, are justified for reasons of public policy, public security, public 
health,  or  the  protection  of  the  environment,  and  are  proportionate  to  the  pursued 
objectives.  

In addition, the Transitional and Final Provisions of the Services Activities Act require 
that national competent authorities undertake all those measures necessary to ensure that 
existing authorisation schemes and requirements for service providers are in conformity 
with the provisions of the Services Activities Act within two months from its entry into 
force. 

A  specific  provision  in  the  horizontal  implementing  law  lays  down  a  mechanism  to 
control the process of creating new statutory instruments that introduce requirements for 
access to services or the exercise of service activities. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The transposition approach in the sector-specific legislation is rather divergent.  Some of 
the  Acts  (the  Tourism  Act,  the  Spatial  Planning  Act,  the  Chamber  of  Builders  Act,  the 
Chamber  of  Architects  and  Engineers  involved  in  Investment  Design  Act,  the  Energy 
Efficiency Act, the Crafts Act and the Consumer Protection Act) have been amended by 
the  Transitional  and  Final  Provisions  of  the  Services  Activities  Act  itself  while  others 
(like  the  Professional  Qualifications  Recognition  Act  and  Independent  Appraisers  Act) 
were  subsequently  amended.  Thus,  special  provisions  on  the  freedom  of  establishment 
and on cross-border service providers have been introduced. However, even though most 
of the necessary changes are being prepared, the majority of the relevant sector-specific 
legislation has not yet been amended. As a result, these Acts make no distinction between 
the requirements applicable to the cross-border service providers and those established in 
the  territory  of  Bulgaria.  Thus  it  seems  that  these  requirements  (authorisations, 
registrations) could apply for both categories of service providers.  

105 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Serious  concerns  are  raised  by  the  fact  that  it  seems  that  the  sector-specific  legislation 
does  not  distinguish  between  requirements  applicable  to  establishment  and  to  cross-
border provision of services.  

Bulgaria  has  interpreted  the  provision  in  Article  17(6)  of  the  Services  Directive  by 
excluding  from  the  scope  of  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  all  the  services 
provided  by  regulated  professions  whereas  the  exclusion  foreseen  in  the  Services 
Directive covers only matters linked to the recognition of professional qualifications (title 
II of Directive 2005/36). Similarly, the exclusion of audit services is broader than the one 
foreseen  under  Article  17(13)  by  excluding  all  audit  services  and  not  only  matters 
covered by Directive 2006/43.  

The scope of the derogation foreseen for intellectual property rights (Article 17(11)) has 
also been broadened by excluding services in the field of intellectual property rights. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the sector of professional services, there are no specific provisions concerning cross-
border  provision  of  services  in  sector-specific  legislation,  neither  in  the  Services 
Activities Act for regulated professions. The implementation of Article 16 of the Services 
Directive  for  regulated  professions  and  matters  not  covered  by  title  II  of  Directive 
2005/36  is  lacking  in  the  Bulgarian  legislation.  Some  sector-specific  laws  are  in  the 
process of being amended such as the veterinary law. However, in other laws such as the 
law  on  architects  and  engineers  in  the  investment  design  or  the  Bar  Act,  a  clear 
distinction between establishment and cross-border provision of services is still missing 
but is foreseen in the draft amendments to the laws.  

Concerning  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services,  the  Chamber  of  Builders 
Act  was  amended  and  now  the  registration  of  service  providers  in  registries  in  their 
Member  State  of  establishment  is  recognized  as  equivalent  to  the  registration  required 
under the Bulgarian law. Similarly, for crafts, the authorisation scheme that was in place 
for cross-border service providers in the area of crafts was removed and was replaced by 
an  obligation  to  notify.  Notifications  must  include  details  such  as  the  address  of  the 
service  provider  in  the  Member  State  of  establishment;  the  address  where  the  craft 
activity  will  be  carried  out  in  Bulgaria;  evidence  of  the  formal  qualification  as 
craftsperson.  Providers  carrying  out  technical  supervision  of  high-risk  equipment  are 
subject to licensing, while providers who carry out services on maintenance, repair and 
modification of such equipment are subject to registration.  

In  the  real  estate  sector,  persons  providing  independent  appraisals,  cartography  and 
cadastre  services  must  be  registered.  Cross-border  providers  are  prevented  from 
providing services by the nationality requirement currently in force for cartographers and 
cadasters. This legislation is under review and should be amended in the course of this 
year. 

In  the  retail  sector,  authorisation  schemes  and  registration  requirements  applicable  to 
established providers seem to be also applied to cross-border providers in the absence of 
clear  distinction  between  the  provisions  applicable  to  established  providers  and  cross-
border service providers. Authorisation schemes or registration requirements are set out 
for  the  sale  or  distribution  of  a  number  of  specific  products  such  as  grain,  veterinary 

106 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
products, tobacco, alcohol, precious metals and stones, plant protection products, cultural 
objects,  trade  of  ferrous  and  non-ferrous  metal  waste,  duty  free  trade.  There  is  also  an 
obligation to register merchandisers and branches of foreign merchandisers in Bulgaria, 
as well as commercial sales.  The municipalities have also laid down requirements for the 
provision  of  retail  services  in  their  territory  through  the  adoption  of  local  ordinances. 
Authorisation  schemes  are  set  out  for  outdoor  sales  in  local  markets  and  public  areas 
(ambulant sales) as well as for the sale of tobacco articles; some municipalities have laid 
down notification schemes for wholesale and retail services. 

As far as the tourism sector is concerned, some issues with requirements prohibited by 
Article  16(2)  were  noted.  They  concern  the  requirement  for  a  tour  operator  or  travel 
agents, established in a Member State of the European Union or EEA country, also to be 
established  in  the  territory  of  Bulgaria.  The  registration  procedure  foreseen  for  tour 
operators and travel agents has been repealed and replaced by an obligation to register ex 
officio  upon  submission  of  documentation,  certifying  their  right  to  carry  out  such 
activities  in  another  Member  State  and  a  certificate  or  document  issued  by  a  credit 
institution  or  insurance  company,  containing  evidence  of  professional  insurance.  But 
cross-border  tour  operators  and  tourist  agents  carrying  out  activities  in  Bulgaria  must 
enter into agreements with registered tour operators and travel agents, licensed insurers 
and  carriers,  guides,  animators,  mountain  guides,  ski  teachers,  etc.  as  well  as  with 
persons,  who  carry  out  tourist  activities  in  categorized  tourist  sites.    However,  the 
Tourism Act is currently under review and expected to be adopted by mid-2012. 

In  the  education  sector,  a  decision  of  the  Parliament  is  necessary  to  open  higher 
education  institutions.  Similarly,  a  decision  of  the  Council  of  Ministers  is  necessary  to 
open  private  schools.  The  vocational  training  centres  are  subject  to  licensing  by  the 
National  Agency  on  professional  education  and  training.  An  authorisation  from  the 
Minister of Transport is necessary to operate a driving school (the applicant should have 
the  necessary  expertise  and  knowledge  to  provide  driving  lessons  and  practice).  Those 
requirements  seem  to  be  applicable  to  cross-border  service  providers  in  the  absence  of 
explicit provisions on cross-border services in the sector-specific laws.  

107 

 
 
 
 
 
   CYPRUS   
______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  PSC  in  Cyprus  has  been  established  based  on  the  decision  of  the  Council  of 
Ministers  of  the  16th  of  December  2009  and  the  articles  6-9of  the  law  for  the  free 
establishment of service providers and the free movement of services (16/07/2010),and 
operates within the auspices Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Tourism. 

The PSC Cyprus portal provides information and application forms regarding procedures 
and formalities needed for the access to and exercise of service activities that fall within 
the scope of the Services Directive and information regarding the horizontal procedures 
and formalities related to the setting up of a business in the Republic of Cyprus (income 
tax registration, VAT registration, social security registration, registration of companies, 
temporary residence and employment permits). Furthermore application forms for some 
procedures  required  for  the  access  to,  and  exercise  of,  service  activities  and  for  some 
horizontal  procedures  related  to  the  establishment  of  a  business  in  the  Republic  of 
Cyprus (social insurance) can be submitted online. 

Overall,  information  regarding  the  application  procedure  (application  forms,  list  of 
supporting  documents,  onsite 
inspections  –  examinations,  applicable  deadlines, 
applicable  fees,  licence  duration),  eligibility  criteria,  contact  details  and  link  to 
competent authority, obligations and supervision, contact details of related professional 
associations, legislation, Public Registry where applicable, and links related procedures 
are included in the information content. 

One of the most positive aspects of PSC of Cyprus use the numerous navigation tools for 
searching procedures (i.e. drop down menu by service sector, index by alphabetical list 
of procedures, index by service sector, search engine for procedures, general site search 
engine)  whereby  a  clear  distinction  of  procedures  related  to  establishment  and  cross 
border service provision is provided. Also, the provision of customized online tracking, 
through  the  personal  space,  of  the  on-going  procedures  (applications  submitted 
electronically) is well-structured and sufficient; supporting documents can be submitted 
along with the online application forms. Specifically, registered users can electronically 
submit  application  forms  online  through  direct  data  entry  attach  supporting  documents 
including the receipt of payment and electronically sign the whole package. Through the 
"Personal Space", service providers can view the application form submitted as well as 
track the progress of their on-going procedures. 

Potential  areas  for  improvement  include  online  payment  via  enabling  e-signatures  and 
certifying users digitally and the development of the site in the Greek version, since now 
it  is  only  available  in  English.  In  parallel,  the  launching  of  electronic  submission  of 
application  forms  and  electronically  tracking  the  on-going  procedures  through  the 
personal  space  of  the  Cypriot  PSC,  is  expected  to  contribute  to  simplification  of 
procedures and reduction of administrative burden.44 

44 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

108 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Cyprus 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The evaluation of the implementation of the Services Directive has revealed that quite a 
number  of  requirements  prohibited  by  article  14  of  the  Directive  can  still  be  found  in 
Cypriot legislation, in  sectors of economic importance  as  well as for economically  less 
important  activities.  As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of 
appreciation  to  Member  States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the 
establishment of providers and which are mainly dealt with in article 15 of the Directive, 
a number of such requirements have been maintained. Although the Commission services 
have  been  in  contact  with  the  Cypriot  authorities  in  order  to  eliminate  those 
requirements,  draft 
the  requirements  has  been 
legislation  concerning  most  of 
communicated to this end but it has not been adopted yet. 

Concerning professional services, shareholding requirements have been maintained also 
for lawyers, where only lawyers can be shareholders of a lawyers’ company. For lawyers 
minimum tariffs seem to have been maintained as well. 

Concerning  crafts  and  construction  services,  no  evidence  has  been  found  of  the 
existence of such requirements.  

In the real estate sector, both natural and legal persons must have a registered office or 
place of business in the Republic of Cyprus. The registration of a legal person as a real 
estate  provider  is  done  separately  from  the  registration  of  a  natural  person  that  is  also 
required in parallel.  

As far as the retail sector is concerned, prohibited requirements have been found notably 
in the legislation concerning opticians where there is an obligation to have a permanent 
establishment in Cyprus.  

In the tourism sector, the Travel Agencies and Travel Guides Law provides that for the 
grant of a licence to establish and operate an agency, a guarantee of 20.500 EUR must be 
deposited  by  the  entrepreneur.  For  the  renewal  of  an  existing  operation  licence,  it  is 
required  that  the  guarantee  already  in  force  for  the  said  equal  amount,  be  valid  in 
accordance with the following provisions:  Provided that, in the case of a licensed Office 
which  takes  over  the  organization,  the  promotion  and  the  execution  of  programs  of 
organized excursions and tours abroad, by any means of transportation, the deposit of an 
additional guarantee of twelve thousand pounds shall be required.  

Regarding car rental services, obligation for a permanent residence in Cyprus still apply 
after the legislation adopted at the end of April 2012.  

Finally,  with  regard  to  private  universities  in  the  education  sector,  the  person 
establishing the university must be a legal person registered in Cyprus. Also, there are a 
number  of  requirements  in  place  with  regard  to  legal  form  (only  by  legal  person)  and 
shareholding,  where  for  the  preliminary  registration  of  the  private  universities  it  is 
required  to  include  at  least  seven  (7)  persons  proposed  as  members  of  the  Temporary 
Governing Body.  

109 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The concept of tacit approval was introduced in the horizontal law and more specifically 
in Article 13(4) of Law 76(I)/2010 provides that any other laws may provide for different 
arrangements when this is justified by overriding reasons relating to the public interest, 
including a legitimate interest of third parties. Areas in which the provisions of Article 
13(4)  of  the  Directive  are  not  directly  transposed,  are  those  involving  gas  stations,  real 
estate agents, travel agencies and tourist guides, car rental services, hotels and rooms for 
tourists, private schools, private universities (the Law on higher education refers to a time 
limit  of  four  months  within  which  the  Ministry  of  Education  and  Culture  is  obliged  to 
reply), protection  of  beaches, protection of animals.  The  above  mentioned  areas  do  not 
foresee the tacit approval.  

Nevertheless, for most service sectors no specific provisions on tacit authorisations were 
adopted and  serious  doubts  remain as  it is not clear how  the general tacit  authorisation 
principle mentioned in the horizontal act would be applicable in practice. 

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

A number of total prohibitions of commercial communication were identified. Following 
contacts  between  Commission  services  and  the  Cypriot  authorities  draft  legislation  to 
eliminate most of the requirements has been communicated but it has not been adopted 
yet. 

Regarding  lawyers,  the  law  prohibits  any  advertising  to  be  made  in  newspapers  or 
magazines, on the radio or television and to appear in posters or on advertising board. 

The current code of conduct for engineers prohibits any direct or indirect advertisement. 

Also, for veterinarians, advertising via the press or via any other means is prohibited with 
the exception of some limited circumstances.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Cyprus  transposed  Articles  16(1)  and  (2)  through  sections  16(3)  and  16(4)  of  the 
horizontal law of 2010, Law 76(I)/2010 (the Law).   

The transposition of Article 16 of the Services Directive is, in general, literal. The only 
apparent  difference  in  wording  is  the  fact  that  Article  16(1)(b)  has  not  been  literally 
transposed  and  the  relevant  transposing  section  of  the  national  law  (section  16(3)(b)) 
does not use the wording ‘public policy’ as an overriding reason, but the words ‘public 
order’ instead.  

Where the requirement to obtain a licence is concerned, the legislation does not make a 
distinction between established or cross-border providers. The applicable Horizontal Law 
is drafted in a general manner; it applies to any service and does not provide for a list of 
requirements to be applied by competent authorities to cross-border services in specific 
areas, such as retail, tourism, etc. According to section 5(3) of the Law, the provisions of 

110 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
the Law, unless otherwise provided, prevail over any contrary provision of any other law 
in the Republic.   

As the situation now stands, other national laws have not yet undergone any legislative 
changes in order to clearly specify which rules do or do not apply to specific cross-border 
services.  Thus, it appears that it is for the competent authorities to decide in each case 
whether a rule complies with these requirements or not. This would seem problematic in 
view of legal certainty and effectiveness of the implementation.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

In the vast majority of legislation no difference is made between a service provider that 
wants  to  establish  a  business  in  Cyprus  and  a  service  provider  wishing  to  provide 
temporary cross border services. The PSC gives a clear indication either about the rules 
that apply for an establishment in Cyprus and the rules for temporary services provision, 
however very often the same rules apply.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

As  regards  the  Article  16  requirements,  a  number  of  authorisation,  registration  or 
licensing requirements that presumably apply also to cross-border providers apply in the 
retail,  tourism,  education,  construction  service  sectors  and  in  the  professional  services. 
However, it is noted that with respect to those activities that are classified  as regulated 
professions  in  Cyprus,  the  relevant  requirements  are  generally  equivalent  to  those 
foreseen  by  Article  7  of  Directive  2005/36/EC  and  benefit  from  the  derogation  from 
Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  as  provided  by  Article  17(6)  of  the  Services 
Directive.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the construction sector, as far as the planning, design, installation and maintenance of 
electrical and mechanical machinery and systems are concerned, licence or authorisation 
requirements  are  maintained  for  the  purpose  of  preserving  the  quality  of  services  to  be 
provided by qualified persons having adequate education and experience.   

Real estate agents from an EU Member State, wishing to provide cross-border services 
in  Cyprus  may  provide  such  services  subject  to  a  prior  written  notification  to  the 
registration Council of Real Estate Agents. 

Concerning the retail sector, obligation to obtain an authorisation or a registration apply 
to the marketing of veterinary products, sale of firearms and explosives, trade in motor 
vehicles and general establishment of a business or trade in a municipality.  

In  the  tourism  sector,  for  tourism  services  on  beaches  licence  or  authorisation 
requirements remain in place for cross-border service providers.     
For car rental services, the new legislation adopted at the end of April 2012 provides that 
for  the  temporary  provision  of  cross-border  services  an  authorisation  (approval)  is 
required together with the obligation to be established in Cyprus. A minimum number of 
the cars, which have to be registered in Cyprus, is required (more than 15).   

111 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   CZECH REPUBLIC   
________________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  Czech  electronic  Point  of  Single  Contact  was  launched  in  January  2010,  and 
integrated  into  an  existing  government-funded  portal  providing  advice  to  businesses, 
BusinessInfo.cz. The Czech PSC is above average in terms of the availability and quality 
of information provided.  

The  Czech  PSC  offers  comprehensive  information  on  the  majority  of  procedures  that 
businesses  would  need  to  complete,  even  going  beyond  the  requirements  under  the 
Services Directive to meet businesses' needs in providing information on social security 
and  tax  formalities.  Only  in  the  provision  of  information  to  the  restaurant  and  catering 
sector,  which  falls  largely  under  the  responsibility  of  local  authorities,  is  the  situation 
with regard to information provision less positive.  

As regards language accessibility, the Czech PSC makes some information available in 
English, but this is not the same content as the information available in Czech. Google 
Translate is used as a support tool.   

The  PSC  features  online  forms  which  are  used  as  central  access  points  to  provide 
information  for  a  variety  of  purposes  such  as  application  for  a  business  license  and 
application  for  VAT  and  income  tax  registration.  In  terms  of  electronic  completion  of 
formalities,  the  integrated  online  forms  are  used  to  centralise  the  information  collected 
and  to  forward  it  on  to  the  relevant  competent  authorities  for  further  processing.  This 
system is perceived as very user-friendly. Some electronic procedures (e.g. for architects) 
are dealt with on websites linked to the PSC, but the user is automatically redirected to 
them. Procedures that cannot be dealt with through the online form system and for which 
there is no electronic support concern mainly those dealt with by local authorities, which 
offer  one-way 
forms.  E-signatures  are  not 
implemented as an internal application for services in the portal and thus cannot be used 
to  complete  electronic  procedures  via  the  portal.  However,  e-signatures  can  be  used 
while  submitting  a  completed  form  via  e-mail  to  the  PSC  or  competent  authority. 
Electronic payment is not supported.  

through  downloadable 

interaction 

In terms of user-friendliness, the sheer volume of information on the Czech PSC portal 
can  be  confusing  for  users,  and  the  planned  clearer  structuring  of  the  site  will  be 
beneficial.  Furthermore,  user  testing  of  the  PSC45  indicated  that  there  is  no  clear 
distinction  made  between  foreign  businesses  considering  permanent  establishment  and 
those considering temporary cross-border service provision. 

Potential areas for improvement include a clearer structure of the site, providing online 
support tools, increasing the number of procedures that can be completed online through 
the  acceptance  of  e-signatures,  and  increasing  the  amount  of  information  available  in 
English.   

45 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

112 

 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The Czech Republic implemented the Services Directive in 2009 through two legislative 
acts; a horizontal framework law and an omnibus law amending numerous sector-specific 
laws,  mainly  in  order  to  introduce  the  concept  of  tacit  approval.  The  article  on  the 
freedom to provide services was implemented  both in the  horizontal law and in  sector-
specific  laws.  The  Czech  authorities  also  produced  guidance  on  the  national 
implementation of the Services Directive, including on the interpretation of the principles 
of non-discrimination, necessity and proportionality set out in the Directive.  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in  the 
Czech Republic (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers  and 
which  are  mainly  foreseen  in  article  15  of  the  Directive,  there  are  a  number  of 
requirements in place in the Czech Republic with regard to legal form and shareholding, 
particularly in the professional services sector. 

For instance, in the professional services sector, legal services can only be provided by 
attorneys (natural persons) or by unlimited companies, limited partnership companies or 
limited liability companies established by attorneys. Other forms of legal person, such as 
joint  stock  companies  or  cooperative  societies  are  prohibited  from  providing  legal 
services.  Similarly,  cooperative  societies  are  prohibited  from  providing  the  service  of 
patent attorney. 

However, it seems that legal persons established on other EU Member States can provide 
the services of lawyer or patent attorney regardless of legal form, so these restrictions are 
applicable only to Czech firms. But established "foreign companies" must meet another 
requirement, namely that the provision of legal services be their only activity. 

Requirements  that  limit  the  shareholding  by  third  parties  have  been  identified  in  the 
Czech  legislation  on  the  legal  profession,  on  certified  architects  and  engineers,  and  on 
patent  attorneys,  whereby  only  lawyers  can  be  partners  of  companies  providing  legal 
services,  and  only  authorised  architects  or  authorised  engineers  can  be  partners  of 
unlimited  companies  providing  services  in  their  profession.  Other,  but  less  stringent, 
requirements  apply  to  architects  and  engineers  as  partners  in  limited  partnership 
companies.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval, an important mean to cutting red tape, as it foresees that an authorisation 
will  be  deemed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  provider  in  case  an  application  has  not 
received any response within the set time period, is was introduced in the horizontal law 
amending  implementing  the  Services  Directive  in  the  Czech  Republic.  Furthermore,  an 
omnibus  law  was  adopted  which  amended  numerous  sector-specific  laws  in  order  to 
include the concept of tacit approval. Consequently, tacit approval has been introduced in 
the  approval  process  for  energy  auditors,  construction  safety  specialists,  those 
responsible  for  geological  works,  those  involved  in  nature  and  birdlife  conservation, 
experts in the calibration and repair of metrology instruments 

113 

 
Areas  in  which  there  do  not  appear  to  be  any  possibility  for  tacit  approval  include  the 
authorisation of those involved in the restoration of historical monuments and operators 
of zoos. Furthermore, given the fact that entry to the profession relies on the passing of 
examinations organised by professional chambers, tacit approval of architects, engineers, 
construction technicians  and the regulated profession ‘verifier of land survey outcomes’, 
it is not practically possible to apply the principle of tacit approval.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The article on the freedom to provide services was implemented in the Czech Republic 
both in the horizontal law and in sector-specific laws. The competent authorities in the 
field of services, and their competences in each relevant area, are defined in the sector-
specific legislation. The Czech Ministry of Industry and Trade has published guidelines 
to assist service providers and  responsible public authorities in the interpretation of the 
principles of non-discrimination, necessity and proportionality.   

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

A  distinction  is  made  between  the  requirements  applicable  to  foreign  service  providers 
wishing to establish in the Czech republic and those wishing to offer their services on a 
temporary cross-border basis, as the horizontal law states that requirements imposed by 
the  Czech  legislation  on  cross-border  service  providers  are  considered  as  met  if  the 
provider  meets  equivalent  or  essentially  comparable  requirements  in  another  Member 
State.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The  Czech  horizontal  law  implementing  the  Services  Directive  states  that  a  provider  is 
entitled  to  provide  cross-border  services  on  the  basis  of  authorisation  granted  by  the 
Member  State  of  establishment.  However,  it  also  states  that  other  national  legislation 
may regulate otherwise, without mentioning the specific justification reasons of defines 
the  principles  of  public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  the  protection  of  the 
environment. The specific justification reasons are defined in detail in binding guidance 
on the national implementation of the Services Directive. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the real estate area, cross-border service providers in the area of verification of land-
survey  outcomes  for  the  purpose  of  exercise  of  public  authority  (land  register, 
administrative  proceedings  in  construction,  maps  for  defence  purposes)  (a  regulated 
profession in the Czech Republic) must apply for an official license, rather than simply 
notify their intention to provide services, as is the case for other activities in this sector. 

In the retail sector, persons wishing to handle raw diamonds must register, or prove that 
they have an equivalent license issued by another EU Member State. Persons involved in 

114 

 
 
the  handling  of  sources  of  ionizing  radiation,  including  the  selling,  export  and 
distribution of such nuclear products, must obtain a license from the Czech State Office 
for  Nuclear  Safety,  even  if  they  already  have  an  authorisation  for  the  same  kind  of 
activities issued by the Member State of establishment.  

115 

 
 
   DENMARK   
________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The Danish Point of Single Contact is well established.  

A business portal (www.virk.dk) had already been established in Denmark in 2003 and it 
has  been  upgraded  several  times  since  then.  This  portal  is  almost  entirely  in  Danish, 
although forms are sometimes available in English and in other languages. The portal is 
primarily was made for entrepreneurs established in Denmark, with the aim of having a 
one-stop shop for businesses in dealing with the government.  

With a view to fully implementing the Services Directive, a separate portal integrated in 
(BID) 
ww.virk.dk  was 
(www.businessindenmark.dk). This portal is entirely in English and is directed at foreign 
companies looking to do business in Denmark. BID carries the EUGO logo and is part of 
the EUGO network.  

launched  on  31  December  2009,  BusinessInDenmark 

In  terms  of  information  provision,  it  would  seem  that  the  Danish  PSC  performs  well 
and it even goes beyond the minimum legal requirements. It also offers information on 
for  example  tax  requirements.  However,  it  would  seem  that  there  is  room  for 
improvement of the search function.  

There are also a very significant number of online procedures available. Completion 
of these procedures is easy and involves no barriers for cross-border providers. A tool for 
signing documents with e-signatures as well as a validation tool for the e-signatures will 
be implemented on the portal during May 2012. 

Finally,  the  content  of  a  form  or  information  on  an  obligation/procedure  in  the  Danish 
PSC  are  the  responsibility  of  the  relevant  authorities.  Overall,  the  administration, 
organization and back office of the points of single contact seem to be good but efforts 
should be continued to enhance the integration of all relevant authorities in the portals.46 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The  main  act  transposing  the  Services  Directive  in  Denmark  is  a horizontal  law  (Law 
No 384 of 25 May 2009 on services in the internal market).  

The Danish implementation of the Services Directive has also required amendments to a 
substantial  number  of  sector-specific  legal  acts,  such  as  the  Law  on  the  sale  of  real 
estate, the Law on electricians, the Law on gas installation, the Law on trade, the Law on 
maritime training, Law on professional diving activity and diving equipment, the Law on 
copyright  and  the  Law  on  marketing.  In  particular,  a  legal  form  requirement  regarding 
real  estate  agents  was  abolished,  an  authorisation  requirement  for  land  surveyors 
providing  their  services  on  a  temporary  basis  was  lifted,  a  ban  on  issuing  discount 
coupons for "temporary service providers" was lifted, and an obligation for providers of 

46 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

116 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
certain  types  of  commercial  flying  activities  to  have  their  principal  establishment  in 
Denmark was abolished. 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Denmark (Articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The implementation of the Services Directive has led to the elimination of administrative 
burden in several authorisation schemes applicable to providers established in Denmark. 
While  authorisation  schemes  for  stockbrokers,  auctioneers  and  shipping  agents  were 
abolished,  other  authorisation  schemes  were  simplified  (a  limitation  in  time  of 
electricians authorisations was removed, the requirement that gas-fitters and professional 
divers may not have any debt to the public authorities was abolished). 

As  regards  Article  14  of  the  Services  Directive,  Article  10  of  the  horizontal  law 
implementing  the  Services  Directive  (Law  384/2009)  reproduces  the  list  of  prohibited 
requirements  laid  down  in  that  provision.  It  would  appear  that  currently  no  other 
prohibited requirements of this type have been identified in sector-specific legislation. 

As  regards  Article  15  requirements,  which  need  to  meet  the  tests  of  justification  on 
overriding  reasons  of  general  interest  and  proportionality,  the  Danish  legislation  has 
chosen not to transpose Article 15 of the Services Directive in the horizontal law itself. 
The  requirements  have  been  put  down  in  an  administrative  act  instead  (Adm.  Act 
1361/2009). It would appear that certain Article 15 requirements have been maintained in 
the Danish legislation. 

In the field of professional services, a requirement for law firms to take a special legal 
form as well as a shareholding requirement for law firms has been maintained. 

In  the  construction/crafts  sector  services  provided  by  authorised  energy  consultants 
carrying out energy labelling of buildings and services provided by boiler and by heating 
system consultants have been maintained.  

In the real estate sector a requirement on land surveying businesses to take special legal 
form and a shareholding requirement have been maintained. A requirement for real estate 
agencies to take a special legal form was however abolished. 

In the tourism sector a quantitative and territorial restriction applies to renting of holiday 
homes, but the justification would appear to be related to the Danish reservation pursuant 
to Protocol 32 on the Acquisition of Property in Denmark. 

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit  approval  for  authorisation  requests  does  not  apply  as  a  general  rule  in  Denmark. 
The horizontal law has not implemented the provisions of Article 13(4) of the Directive.  
Instead the principle of tacit approval has been implemented in sectoral legislation where 
relevant.  In  future  legislation,  competent  authorities  are  instructed  on  the  principle 
through the law making process.  Considering that an exception could be justified, tacit 
approval  does  not  apply  for  the  following  sectors:  for  certain  authorisation  schemes 
applicable in the construction sector and for certain environmentally hazardous activities. 

117 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation 

The  horizontal  law  implementing  the  Services  Directive  (Law  384/2009)  contains  a 
provision  which  implements  Article  16(1)  of  the  Services  Directive.  The  Act  does 
however  not  list  all  the  prohibited  requirements  mentioned  in  Article  16(2)  of  the 
Services Directive, as this follows indirectly from the relevant provision in the horizontal 
law.  

As regards the derogations to Article 16 of the Services Directive, it would appear that 
Denmark  has  interpreted  the  provision  in  Article  17(11)  of  the  Services  Directive  on 
intellectual property rights broadly. The potential conflict of these provisions with Article 
16 of the Services Directive was addressed explicitly by the Danish Minister for Culture 
in  her  explanatory  notes  to  the  proposal  for  amendment  of  the  Copyright  Act,  which 
aimed  at  transposing  the  Services  Directive.  The  view  expressed  by  the  Danish 
authorities  on  this  derogation  are  incompatible  with  both  Articles  16  and  17(11)  of  the 
Services  Directive.  As  a  result  of  this  interpretation,  Article  75a(1)  of  the  Danish 
Copyright Act (LBK202/2010) requires representatives of copyright owners who – on a 
commercial basis – make agreements regarding the public performance of musical works 
to obtain a prior authorisation from the Danish Minister for Culture.   

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

There  is  no  evidence  indicating  that  this  distinction  is  problematic  in  Denmark.  Law 
384/2009 contains definitions which should ensure a correct application of the concept of 
cross-border service provider/provision in line with the Services Directive.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause 

Despite  the  implementation  of  Article  16  in  the  Danish  legal  order  by  means  of  a 
horizontal  provision  and  by  means  of  sector-specific  amendments  (for  example,  the 
obligation  for  providers  of  certain  types  of  commercial  flying  activities  to  have  their 
principal establishment in Denmark was abolished in the context of the implementation 
of  the  Services  Directive),  a  number  of  requirements  applicable  to  cross-border  service 
providers  have  remained  in  sector-specific  legislation  despite  the  fact  that  their 
justification and proportionality could be questioned. 

The first requirement concerns a cross-cutting notification obligation, the extension to 
self-employed service providers established in other Member States of the obligation to 
send a prior notification to the Danish Registry of Foreign Services (RUT) at the latest by 
the time they start providing services in Denmark pursuant to LBK256/2011. The Danish 
authorities have justified the obligation on the need for a possibility to carry out effective 
control to supervise compliance with certain rules on taxes as well as on health and safety 
at work that apply to the self-employed ensuring both public security and public safety. 

118 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Several  authorisation  requirements  that  are  applied  both  to  established  and  to  cross-
border service providers have also been identified in the area of construction and crafts 
for  certain  specific  activities  that  are  regulated  professions.  The  authorisation  schemes 
would appear however to go in some instances beyond the requirements allowed by the 
Professional Qualifications Directive. The common denominator of these requirements is 
that they seem to have been justified on the protection of the service recipient. 

Finally, the Danish Copyright Act requires representatives of copyright owners who – on 
a  commercial  basis  –  make  agreements  regarding  the  public  performance  of  musical 
works  to  obtain  a  prior  authorisation  from  the  Danish  Minister  for  Culture.  A  similar 
authorisation  requirement  applies  to  performing  artists  and  record  companies.  These 
groups may only raise claims for payment related to the public use of their works through 
a collective organization authorised by the Danish Minister for Culture.  

119 

 
 
 
 
   ESTONIA   
_______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact 

The Point of Single Contact in Estonia http://www.eesti.ee/eng/topics/business, is part of 
the general e-government portal in Estonia www.eesti.ee.  

The  Estonian  portal  provides  comprehensive  information  and  services  to  fulfil  the 
requirements  falling  under  the  Services  Directive  and  beyond,  in  terms  of  areas  and 
topics covered. The portal takes a business perspective and covering the whole business 
life cycle (from starting to winding up), and covering also information on social security, 
taxation, labour law, legal and financial aid etc.  

Information  about  the  applicable  requirements  and  on  how  to  complete  administrative 
procedures  can  be  accessed  or  searched  in  a  number  of  different  ways  which  include 
searching/access by type of user, stage in the business life cycle, by a thematic index of 
procedures  (company  registration,  tax,  etc.),  by  sector  and  by  an  index  of  competent 
authorities. Information per sector is presented in a clear and easy manner, and contains 
information  from  legal  requirements  to  details  on  the  procedures  to  be  followed, 
including payment of state fees and contact details for submission of applications, where 
applicable.  

The  majority  of  the  information  is  available  also  in  English,  besides  Estonian.  Some 
interactive tools that are meant to assist users (like a portal guide) are available only in 
Estonian. Web forms exist partly in English (e.g. for company registration, registration in 
the  economic  activities  register).  Official  forms  are  mainly  available  in  Estonian,  but  a 
limited number of forms are also available in English. 

For  completion  of  procedures,  e-identification  and  e-signatures  are  often  necessary, 
mainly  for  authorisation  procedures.  eID  is  mainly  required  for  fully  interactive  online 
services  which  facilitate  the  completion  of  procedures  (company  registration).  With 
respect to the eID cards, currently e-identification from 11 Member States is available, in 
addition to various e-identification means available in Estonia. Web forms can be signed 
online  and  electronically  signed  documents  can  be  sent  to  the  authorities  via  e-mail 
(editable  PDF  forms).  Tracking  possibilities  are  available  for  obtaining  information  on 
the  state  of  submitted  applications/forms  and  sent  forms  are  accessible  in  a  secure 
environment. 

Online  assistance  to  service  providers  is  available  in  a  variety  of  ways  (downloadable 
guides  and  demos).  The  available  sources  of  help  are  generally  good  and  easy  to  use. 
Online  help  is  available  by  email  and  at  the  end  of  sector  specific  information  contact 
details are given for further assistance.  

Overall  the  Estonian  PSC  seems  to  have  the  required  information  available,  to  a  large 
extent also in English, and allows the majority of procedures to be completed online. The 
completion  of  procedures  is  nearly  100%  available  nationally.  For  cross-border  cases  a 
good number of non-national e-identification tools are supported and electronic signing is 
possible either on web forms or on documents that can also be submitted, e-signed, via 
email to the competent authorities.  

More than 120 competent authorities are linked to the PSC. 

120 

 
 
 
According  to  the  Deloitte  study47,  which  carried  out  some  user  testing  of  PSCs,  the 
overall use and usability of the Estonian PSC was perceived to be high.   

Most  of  the  user  group  found  that  the  way  the  information  was  provided  (in  terms  of 
layout and web design) was of good quality and user friendly. Navigating the portal was 
generally thought to be easy. It was noted that there was sufficient information on where 
to find more information (and links to other websites were provided). 

Further  improvements  could  be  done  above  all  for  cross-border  service  provision,  to 
make a clear distinction between establishment and cross-border service provision even if 
no requirements apply to the latter.  Some further efforts should also be undertaken for 
cross-border access to e-procedures. 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Estonia 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

No prohibited requirements were identified in Estonian legislation. 

In the education sector, a legal form requirement exists for private schools (which cover 
all  types  of  education  institutions  from  nurseries  to  higher  education,  adult  education 
institutions) which have to be either an agency of a public limited company or a private 
limited company registered in the Commercial Register or an agency of a foundation or 
non-profit association.  

2.  

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The principle of tacit approval has been implemented via the horizontal law transposing 
the Services Directive (European Union Services Directive Implementation Act). In some 
laws  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  is  clearly  stated  but  in  some  sectoral  laws  where 
authorisations exist, no specific mention of tacit approval is made. In these cases the tacit 
approval should be applicable via the horizontal law. In some cases a different approach 
has  been  taken,  justified  by  protection  of  environment  and  public  security,  and  tacit 
approval does not apply.  

3.  

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

A total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified for lawyers. 

47 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

121 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
B. 

1.  

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Article 16 has been implemented by way of a clause in horizontal law (Section 17 of the 
European Union Services Directive Implementation Act/EUSDIA), without copying the 
list  of  prohibited  requirements  of  Article  16(2).  It  also  provides  that  restrictions  to  the 
freedom  to  provide  services  may  be  established  by  law,  that  these  must  be  non-
discriminatory, justified for reasons of public policy, public security, public health or the 
protection  of  the  environment  and  be  proportional.  Exceptions  in  Article  17  of  the 
Services Directive are directly referred to.   

2.  

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

However  there  are  a  number  of  relevant  laws  that  impose  authorisation,  registration  or 
notification procedures. Some of these laws do not explicitly state whether the relevant 
requirements are also applicable in cases of cross-border service provision or not.  

3.  

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The horizontal law provides for the principle of freedom to provide services, but due to 
the  hierarchy  of  legal  norms  specific  requirements  would  still  apply  (based  on  the  lex 
specialis derogat  lex generali  principle). Some of  these laws therefore may not respect 
the  conditions  for  imposition  of  an  authorisation  requirement  on  cross-border  service 
providers.  This  concerns  for  example  the  Trading  Act,  the  Weapons  Act,  the  Tourism 
Act,  laws  on  safety  (mostly  those  linked  to  crafts  and  construction  services  where 
notification is required).  

More clarity and better transposition of the Services Directive, including for cross-border 
service provision, will be ensured however, via the General Part of Economic Activities 
Code (GPEAC) which has been adopted in February 2011, but will only enter into force 
on 1 January 2014. This Code is a framework law and establishes  the principle that its 
provisions apply in all service sectors, not only those covered by the Services Directive, 
unless  the  sector-specific  legislation  provides  otherwise.  The  GPEAC  codifies  the 
general  requirements  (including  licensing  or  registration  requirements)  imposed  by  the 
Economic  Law  in  Estonia.  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  is  covered  by  GPEAC. 
GPEAC  (Article  22)  specifies  that  cross-border  service  providers  who  provide 
temporarily  services  in  Estonia  are  excluded  from  the  obligation  to  obtain  a  licence  or 
register  the  activity  and  no  restrictions  referred  to  in  Article  16(2)  of  the  Services 
Directive can be imposed. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

A number of requirements apply to incoming service providers.  

In  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services  sector,  the  transposition  of  the 
Services Directive led to the abolition of the registration requirements under the Building 
Act48,  the  Pressure  Equipment  Safety  Act,  the  Lifts  and  Cableway  Installations  Safety 

48 The Building Act covers the activities of building, designing, conducting site investigations, exercising 
owner  supervision,  performing  expert  assessments  of  building  design  documentation,  evaluating 
construction works and engaging in project management. 

122 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Act,  the  Gaseous  Fuel  Safety  Act,  the  Electrical  Safety  Act,  and  the  Machinery  Safety 
Act.  These  were  replaced  in  each  case  by  a  simplified  notification  procedure.  The 
notification  procedure  requires  a  formal  notification  of  the  Technical  Surveillance 
Authority,  without  any  legally  binding  form  of  notification.  It  is  not  clear  whether  this 
notification procedure is linked to professional qualifications.  

In the Pressure Equipment Safety Act, the Lifts and Cableway Installations Safety Act, 
the  Gaseous  Fuel  Safety  Act,  the  Electrical  Safety  Act,  and  the  Machinery  Safety  Act, 
different safety requirements related to the use of equipment have been maintained due to 
health and safety considerations, which could fall under the exemption in Art 16(2)f.  

In  the  retail  sector  a  general  requirement  for  traders  exists  to  be  registered  in  the 
Register  of  Economic  Activities.  As  far  as  nothing  is  specifically  said  on  cross-border 
service  provision  with  regard  to  that  requirement,  it  could  be  deduced  that  it  may  be 
applied also to cross-border service provision despite the horizontal law that establishes 
the freedom to provide services.  

The Act covers retail and wholesale of goods and personal services (like hairdressers) in 
its  different  forms,  including  street  selling,  markets.  Street  and  market  traders  need  to 
obtain  a  trading  permit  and  must  perform  their  activities  at  locations  authorised  by  the 
local government.  

Some special requirements are maintained as regards trade in some specific products, like 
alcohol,  tobacco,  weapons,  food,  liquid  fuel.  All  these  trade  related  requirements  apply 
both to domestic and cross-border providers.  

In  the  tourism  sector,  an  undertaking  may  only  operate  as  a  travel  undertaking  in 
Estonia if it is registered in the commercial activities register. This requirement applies 
also for cross-border service provision. Tour guides and guide interpreters need to prove 
their professional competence, but how this is to be done is not very clearly specified. 

In  the  education  sector,  an  activity  licence  is  required  for  training  drivers  of  power-
driven  vehicles  including  for  cross-border  service  provision  in  the  traffic  act  and  they 
need to be registered. 

123 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   FINLAND   
________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact 

a 

is 

in 

PSC 

Finland 

The 
Finland 
(http://www.yrityssuomi.fi/web/enterprise-finland)  portal  which  is  structured  based  on 
the  company  lifecycle.  The  PSC  takes  a  comprehensive  approach  and  provides 
information  on  the  entire  business  life  cycle,  except  social  security  formalities. 
Information on service activities on the PSC is presented on the basis of sectors and the 
type.  

Enterprise 

part 

the 

of 

One  aspect  that  could  be  improved  is  to  indicate  the  absence  of  requirements  where 
appropriate, as this is also a valuable information for service providers. 

The PSC portal is available in the official languages, Finnish and Swedish, and to a large 
extent in English. Official forms are available in Finnish and Swedish (only forms in the 
official  languages  can  be  submitted)  but  for  some  forms  translations  are  available  as 
comments on the online form that do not appear when printing the form out (particularly 
for  those  required  to  establish  a  company).  On  the  municipality  level  no  additional 
language assistance is provided. 

In  general  the  only  possibility  to  complete  procedures  online  consist  of  downloading  a 
PDF format (from eForms repository), which can be electronically filled in but needs to 
be sent via regular mail or in some cases via e-mail to the competent authority.  

Most procedures are free of charge, except for company registration where no direct e-
payments are available. Users have to pay through a web-bank or other means, and attach 
a proof of payment with their registration documentation.  

Currently  no  tracking  system  is  available  and  businesses  receive  replies  from  the 
authorities via e-mail. 

However, basic e-procedures are currently under development, which would include an 
e-Office for businesses that contains also e-identity and e-delivery functions. 

The  Finnish  PSC  provides  assistance  to  users  through  a  dedicated  phone  service  and  a 
Service Request form. The phone service is available in Finish and English. Additional 
information can be requested through the Service Request form. 
According  to  the  Deloitte  study49,  which  carried  out  some  user  testing  of  PSCs,  the 
overall use and usability of the Finland PSC was perceived to be average.   

Further  improvements  should  be  undertaken  to  allow  electronic  completion  of 
procedures.  From  the  users'  perspective,  an  interactive  search  tool  would  be  useful 
helping to find information specifically needed for  a  particular case and the PSC could 
have a less “bureaucratic” feel. 

49 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

124 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Finland 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

No  prohibited  requirements  were  identified  for  mainland  Finland.  For  Åland,  service 
providers must be residents or have their domicile when they want to provide services in 
retail and food and beverages sectors. 

In retail, despite the 2011 law on land use planning and construction, there is still scope 
for further simplification through a less restrictive zoning and planning regime. 

In  the  education  sector,  a  legal  form  requirement  exists  for  bus  and  truck  training 
schools which can be operated only by legal persons. 

2.  

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The principle of tacit approval has been implemented via the horizontal law transposing 
the  Services  Directive  (Services  Act).  No  specific  mention  of  tacit  approval  has  been 
made in sectorial laws. At the same time no clear exceptions or provisions going counter 
to  the  tacit  approval  principle  seem  to  have  been  established  either.  In  the  majority  of 
cases where authorisations exist the legislation does not specify the applicable conditions 
for authorisation and the horizontal law is applicable. 

3.  

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibitions of commercial communications have been identified.  

B. 

1.  

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation 

Implementation of Article 16 is done by way of a clause in the horizontal law (Section 5 
of  the  Provision  of  Services  Act)  which  contains  the  principle  of  freedom  of  service 
provision.  It  also  provides  that  restrictions  may  be  established,  if  compliant  with  the 
conditions  set  in  Article  16,  by  a  court  or  competent  authority  who  could  only  restrict 
temporary  provision  of  a  specified  service  under  specific  powers  granted  to  them.  The 
powers  of  the  authority  concerned  must  therefore  be  based  on  a  provision  laid  down 
elsewhere in legislation.  
Article  16(2)  or  the  prohibited  requirements,  has  not  expressly  been  transposed.  
However, it seems that Finnish legislation does not contain any prohibited requirements.   

2.  

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

Sectorial  laws  imposing  obligations  on  economic  operators  do  not  make  a  distinction 
between establishment and cross-border service provision.  

125 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3.  

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The  main  issue  is  the  compliance  of  sectorial  laws  with  Article  16  of  the  Services 
Directive.  Namely,  as  sectorial  legislation  does  not  distinguish  between  establishment 
and  cross-border  service  provision,  these  should  contain  only  restrictions  that  can  be 
justified in cases and under conditions set out in Article 16 which may not always be the 
case. 

The  Provision  of  Services  Act  (1166/22.12.2009)  refers  to  the  Business  Act  and 
explicitly declares that the same business rights apply to cross-border services.  Both the 
Business Act and the Provision of Services Act are horizontal by nature and they have an 
equal  hierarchical  value.  The  Business  Act  declares  in  Section  3  that  certain  listed 
business activities (like services related to electrical installations and equipment, housing 
agents,  entertainment  services,  accommodation  and  restaurant  services  etc.)  are 
submitted to additional sector-specific laws. These activities as a rule require a licence or 
a permit. Since Section 3 of the Business Act does not distinguish between establishment 
and  cross-border  service  provision  services,  it  applies,  with  all  the  sector-specific  laws 
listed in this provision, to both cases.  

The provincial horizontal legislation in Åland consists of the Business Act (Landskapslag 
1996:47  om  rätt  att  utöva  näring).  This  Act  limits  the  right  to  carry  out  a  business  to 
natural persons having a residential status and to legal persons having their domicile in 
the Province.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In real estate, providing real estate services is subject to registration. The application for 
registration  must  also  include  information  on  the  registered  branch  in  Finland  and  its 
location. It seems therefore that only service providers who have a registered branch in 
Finland can apply for registration. 

In  the  Province  of  Åland,  only  registered  agents  can  provide  services  in  the  real  estate 
market. The registration implies that the applicant has passed a professional examination 
and represents a company with a registered branch in Finland. The real estate office must 
appoint a responsible manager with a qualification of a registered agent. 

In  the  tourism  sector  the  organisation  of  package  travels  requires  registration  of  the 
travel manager with the package travel registry, which is kept by the Consumer Agency.  

The  Province  of  Åland  has  a  permit  obligation  for  non-residential  service  providers  to 
enter the market in the tourism sector.  

126 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   FRANCE   
______________________ 

I. 

Point of Single Contact  

The French authorities have chosen to implement both a physical Point of Single Contact 
("PSC"), system (through the network of Business Formalities Centres "CFE / Centre de 
Formalités des Entreprises") and an electronic PSC called "Guichet Entreprises" (www. 
guichet-entreprises.fr), which has been in place since January 2010. 

The  "Guichet  Entreprises"  website  provides  a  high  quality  information  service. 
Comprehensive information on the rules applicable to the establishment and the exercise 
of service activities is available on "Guichet Entreprises". The information is classified 
by occupations and professions and therefore easily understood by operators wishing to 
establish  or  do  business  on  a  temporary  basis  in  France.  Specific  headings  indicate  the 
obligations imposed on operators wishing to provide a temporary service. 

Moreover, this site is accessible by individuals and businesses living in France as well as 
by  those  from  other  EU  Member  States,  allowing  for  the  online  completion  of  the 
business  creation  procedure  and  a  number  of  other  administrative  procedures  but  their 
number is quite limited. 

However, improvements could be made in terms of usability: the information provided is 
almost  complete  but  the  sorting  and  search  functions  could  usefully  be  improved.  It  is 
often  difficult  to  access  the  relevant  information.  In  addition,  the  site's  accessibility  to 
cross-border providers is not optimal, with information available only in French. 

Regarding  the  assistance  provided  to  users,  since  France  has  chosen  to  establish  a 
physical PSC network throughout its territory, personalised assistance is possible, at least 
within  France.  These  PSCs  (the  so  called  "Centre  de  Formalités  des  Entreprises")  are 
able to accommodate and guide service providers in the completion of procedures both 
for  establishing  and  exercising  their  activities  in  France.  However  these  physical  PSCs 
are only partly operational. Better visibility of the support tools available to users on the 
"Guichet-Entreprises.fr" website would be beneficial.  

Overall, although French PSCs offer comprehensive information on a very wide range of 
service activities, significant improvements could be made in terms of user-friendliness 
and the provision of information in other official languages of the European Union. The 
roll-out of new procedures that can be completed online will also have to be accelerated 
significantly. 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Unlike  the  majority  of  Member  States,  France  has  not  transposed  the  Directive 
through  a  horizontal  law.  Certain  provisions  of  a  horizontal  nature  (information 
obligations towards service recipients, provisions on administrative cooperation and the 
use  of  IMI,  and  the  implementation  of  Points  of  Single  Contact),  whose  applicability 
covers  the  entire  field  of  the  Services  Directive,  were  adopted  on  the  occasion  of  the 

127 

 
 
 
 
 
 
adoption  of  certain  sectoral  laws.  The  assessment  of  compliance  with  the  Services 
Directive has been done through a review of sectoral laws governing service activities. 

As  the  French  legal  and  administrative  system  is  based  on  a  significant  degree  of 
centralisation,  service  activities  are  governed  by  rules  with  national  scope.  There  has 
been  no  regulatory  intervention  at  the  local  or  regional  level.  However,  as  part  of  the 
implementation  of  the  Directive,  close  to  80  regulatory  measures  (including  13 
legislatives acts) were adopted as part of the transposition of the Services Directive and 
over a hundred business services have been reformed. 

France  made  considerable  efforts  to  ensure  consistent  implementation  of  the  Directive 
and has carried out major legislative or administrative changes. The regulation of some 
activities  has  been  substantially  reformed  or  their  exercise  considerably  simplified.  For 
instance,  in  the  field  of  professional  services,  the  profession  of  "avoués"  has  been 
abolished  by  a  merger  of  its  activities  with  those  performed  by  lawyers.  Also,  the 
minimum level of a company's capital that has to be controlled by professionals has been 
reduced  to  51%  for  land  surveyors,  accountants  and  architects.  In  the  retail  sector, 
legislation  regarding  store  opening  was  relaxed.  In  the  tourism  sector,  the  specific 
authorisation  required  to  open  hotels  was  eliminated.  Travel  agents'  activities  and  the 
classification  of  tourist  accommodations  have  been  significantly  simplified:  the  four 
that  existed  before  (license,  "habilitation",  approval  and 
authorisation  schemes 
authorisation)  have  been  replaced  by  a  new,  simplified  system  and  the  obligation  for 
travel agents to exercise their activity on an exclusive basis has been done away with. 

In  general,  it  appears  that  the  screening  process  was  carried  out  in  an  efficient  and 
systematic way. The entire scope of service activities was covered. However, regarding 
the  effects  of  this  screening  process,  although  French  authorities  reformed  many 
professions  and  simplified  numerous  services  activities,  these  simplifications  were  not 
always carried out to the maximum extent. Therefore, the proportionality and necessity 
of  certain  remaining  requirements  can  be  debated.  For  instance,  in  the  retail  sector, 
regarding  the  authorisation  for  store  opening,  although  the  "loi  de  Modernisation  de 
l’Economie  n°  2008-776  du  4  août  2008"  raised  the  threshold  above  which  an 
authorisation is still required from 300 m2 to 1000 m2, a derogation was introduced in 
order to give municipalities with less than 20,000 inhabitants the possibility to maintain 
the authorisation procedure for premises over 300 m2. 

1.  

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in France 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The screening and elimination of prohibited requirements seems to have been done in a 
thorough way. The only such requirement identified concerns the direct involvement of 
competing  operators  in  the  granting  of  authorisations  for  event  promoters.  This 
requirement needs to be eliminated urgently. 

As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States to streamline the regulatory environment for the establishment of providers, cases 
that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with  Article  15  of  the  Directive  exist.  For  instance, 
regarding  professional  services,  although  shareholding  requirements  for  architects, 
accountants and land surveyors were modified in order to reduce the share of the capital 
of the company that has to be owned by professionals to 51%, this has not been done for 
lawyers or veterinarians. These should be re-examined. Legal form requirements are also 
imposed, again notably on lawyers and veterinarians. 

128 

 
 
2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Although  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  of  authorisations  exists  in  the  French  legal 
framework,  it  does  not  apply  as  a  general  rule  but  only  in  cases  identified  in  sector 
specific legislation. France should ensure that the instances in which article 13(4) of the 
Services Directive is not applied are limited to duly justified matters. 

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

Contrary  to  Article  24  of  the  Services  Directive,  total  prohibitions  of  commercial 
communications remain for lawyers and veterinarians. 

For  accountants,  in  2011  the  Court  of  Justice  of  the  European  Union  made  its  first 
judgment50  on  the  provisions  of  the  Services  Directive  in  the  context  of  a  preliminary 
ruling  aiming  at  clarifying  the  scope  of  Article  24  of  the  Directive  on  commercial 
communications and its application to regulated professions. The issue in question was to 
clarify whether a Member State (France) could maintain a total ban on canvassing for a 
regulated profession (accountants). In light of the provisions of the French legislation in 
question, the Court noted that it included a total ban on any canvassing activity regardless 
of  its  form,  its  content  or  the  means  employed.  So  this  ban  corresponded  to  the 
prohibition  of  all  means  of  communication.  The  Court  held  that  the  provisions  in 
question were covered by Article 24(1) of the Services Directive prohibiting a total ban 
to  perform  acts  of  solicitation  for  regulated  professions.  In  France,  the  legal 
consequences of this judgment do not seem to have been applied to regulated professions 
other than accountants, notably veterinarians or lawyers. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation 

Certain  authorisation  procedures  that  are  still  imposed  on  cross-border  providers  raise 
doubts  as  to  their  proportionality  and  their  justification  with  regards  to  the  four 
compelling  reasons  of  general  interest  listed  in  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive 
(public  order,  public  safety,  public  health  and  environmental  protection).  This 
particularly  concerns  the  obligations  of  insurance  or  financial  guarantee  imposed  on 
cross-border  operators  (in  the  real  estate  sector)  or  prior  declaration  requirements  that 
remain in force (for modelling agencies or event promoters). 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

In general, French legislation makes a distinction between the cross-border provision of 
services  and  establishment.  The  French  authorities'  decision  not  to  implement  the 
Directive through a horizontal law but to ensure compliance with the Services Directive 
through  a  revision  of  the  various  sectoral  laws  regulating  the  activities  of  services 
allowed for a clear legal distinction to be made between the situations of establishment 
and the temporary cross-border provision of services. 

50 CJUE C-119/09  

129 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Indeed, each national law governing a service activity has been specifically modified and 
the  two  legal  situations  have  been  addressed  specifically.  It  is  thus  possible  to  know 
which provisions are applicable to operators wishing to establish themselves and which 
rules apply to operators willing to engage in cross-border provision of services in France. 
The legal clarity and predictability are thus fully insured. Moreover, the French Point of 
Single  Contact  ("Guichet  Entreprises"),  on  its  website,  provides  comprehensive 
information  on  the  legal  requirements  applicable  to  the  professions  in  which  the 
situations of establishment and cross-border of services are clearly distinguished. 

It is highly important to ensure long-term compliance with the obligations set up by the 
Services Directive regarding the freedom to provide services. If national laws had to be 
modified during the implementation process, it is also necessary to guarantee that future 
legislation  will  not  contravene  the  principles  of  the  Directive  (particularly  when  the 
possibility  to  appeal  to  the  administration  or  judge  appear  relatively  limited).  In  this 
perspective,  the  French  authorities  have  adopted  an  inter-ministerial  circular  to  ensure 
that  new  legislation  and  regulations  that  have  to  be  notified  to  the  Commission  and 
Member  States  (under  the  procedure  provided  by  Articles  15(2)  and  39(5)  of  the 
Directive)  are  subject  to  a  centralised  review  to  ensure  proper  compliance  with  the 
requirements  of  the  Directive.  It  can  therefore  be  reasonably  estimated  that  the 
compliance of new legislation will be ensured. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

In  the  construction  sector,  the  main  requirement  imposed  on  cross-border  service 
providers  is  an  obligation  to  have  insurance  that  provides  ten-year  liability  cover  for 
buildings. 

In  the  real  estate  sector,  a  requirement  for  a  financial  guarantee  is  also  imposed  for 
certain activities (involving money management). 

to 

For professional services, professional liability insurance requirements are imposed on 
architects,  land  surveyors,  accountants,  lawyers  and  veterinarians.  Restrictions  with 
regard 
legal  form  and  capital  ownership  and  prohibitions  on  commercial 
communications  are  also  imposed  on  cross-border  veterinarians.  A  prior  notification 
requirement  is  also  imposed  on  modelling  agencies  and  event  promoters  performing 
cross-border services. 

130 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   GERMANY   
___________________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

Germany has one portal (www.dienstleisten-leicht-gemacht.de) that links to the portals of 
the  16  Länder  which  each  has  its  own  portal  solution.  The  various  portals  differ  quite 
substantially, some of them are part of a larger e-governement portal, others are managed 
by regional councils. 

The  level  of  information  available  has  generally  been  considered  very  good  and  the 
structure  of  the  information  provided  as  well  as  the  quality  of  the  navigation  and 
assistance facility have been praised for more than one portal.  

It seems that eSignatures of other Member States might be used to sign an application but 
that  it  not  yet  always  guaranteed  that  the  signature  can  actually  be  verified.  In  case  of 
doubt, applicant might therefore have to be contacted to send a signed application by post 
or mail. 

The development of the PSC has also led in general to standardisation and simplification 
of  processes  which  has  resulted  in  more  use  of  eSignatures  and  improvement  in 
operational processes.  

Assistance  to  users  varies  according  to  the  portal,  but  some  of  the  portals  tested  have 
been  praised  for  their  assistance  to  users,  for  instance  by  providing  a  checklist  to 
providers helping them to address problems or to find further information. Other portals 
offer  guides,  FAQ's  and  downloadable  guides.  Assistance  has  generally  been  qualified 
good, easy to use and comprehensive. There is also assistance by phone or by mail.  
The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  German  PSC  is  above  average.51  However, 
improvements could be made concerning the presentation of different business situations, 
i.e.  in  particular  the  distinction  between  establishment  and  cross  border  provision  of 
services, which is of special importance for users of the portal from other Member States 
and less familiar with the German legal and administrative system.  

Other necessary improvements concern the availability of on-line procedures as on-line 
completion of procedures is in general only ensured for a limited number of procedures.   

And finally, the linguistic availability of the Point of Single Contacts could be improved 
even  if  some  of  the  portals  offer  already  information  in  languages  of  other  Member 
States  (for  instance  the  Point  of  Single  Contact  of  Rhineland-Palatinate  offers 
information  in  French  and  English,  the  portal  of  Brandenburg  provides  information  in 
English and Polish).   

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

In general,  Germany made  considerable  efforts to ensure correct implementation  of the 
Services  Directive  and  has  made  a  substantial  number  of  important  legislative  and 
practical changes. In particular the screening of legislation was a complex exercise due to 
the federal structure and the involvement  of  multiple  actors at all levels of government 

51 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

131 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
(federal, regional, local, professional orders). Germany made a major coordination effort 
by using its own on-line tool.  

In contrast to the majority of Member States, Germany decided to not adopt a horizontal 
law  implementing  the  general  principles  of  the  Directive  but  opted  to  implement  those 
principles through modifications to existing sector specific legal acts. 

Around 220 national measures have been adopted at federal level, by the Länder as well 
as by professional associations in order to implement the Services Directive and as many 
of  them  were  so  called  “omnibus  acts”  (“Artikelgesetze”),  each  of  which  amending  a 
series of sector-specific laws, the actual number of legislative acts having been modified 
amounts to around 400 acts. 

Germany  has  also  adopted  new  general  procedural  instruments  in  the  Administrative 
Procedures  Act  (Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz)  in  particular  concerning  the  points  of 
single contact, the rules on administrative cooperation and tacit approval. 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Germany (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

In the professional services sector no prohibited requirements have been identified, but 
shareholding  and  legal  form  requirements  have  been  maintained  for  lawyers,  tax 
advisors,  patent  agents,  architects  and  engineers.  In  addition  there  are  also  fixed  tariffs 
for veterinarians, insolvency administrators, architects, engineers. 

In the crafts sector, the Trade and Crafts Code determines which occupations pertain to 
the  crafts  sector.  The  so  called  Annex  A  lists  the  occupations  for  which  in  general  a 
master craftsman’s examination (Meisterprüfung) is required for self-employment. Case 
law permits such requirement only for crafts (particularly) susceptible to dangers (public 
health). 

As far as the construction and certification services sector is concerned there is still a 
certain  involvement  of  competitors  in  the  decision  making  process  whether  or  not  to 
grant an authorisation, although rules have been rendered less stringent as those bodies 
now  only  have  to  confirm  to  the  competent  authority  that  the  applicant  fulfils  all  the 
necessary  application  requirements.  Moreover,  many  expert  services  in  relation  to  the 
construction  of  buildings  and  a  few  in  relation  to  other  expert  services  still  contain 
specific tariffs ("Sachverständigentarife"). 

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

There is no horizontal rule on nationwide validity of authorisations.  

Nationwide validity however can be found in sector specific legislation in different ways: 

Certain  legal  acts  explicitly  state  that  the  authorisation  granted  is  valid  for  the  whole 
national  territory  (e.g.  federal  law  concerning  inspection  bodies  for  wastewater 
discharge). Other texts clearly foresee that the recognition of an expert in another part of 
the  country  is  ensured  (e.g.  law  of  the  Land  Baden-Würtemberg  or  of  the  Land  Berlin 

132 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
concerning the authorisation of a testing engineer and testing expert in the construction 
sector). 

In other legislation nationwide validity is assured by registration of a professional in one 
professional Chamber which gives the right to exercise the activity in the entire national 
territory (e.g. the registration of a veterinarian in one regional chamber of veterinarians 
enables him to exercise activity anywhere in Germany). 

According to the information of the Commission a sort of "mutual recognition" applies 
within Germany, e.g. an applicant will be registered in the professional list without any 
further exams if he is already registered in a professional list of another Land which has 
comparable  conditions  (e.g.  requirements  for  the  registration  in  the  list  of  consulting 
engineering)  or  authorisations  of  another  Land  might  only  be  accepted  if  they  are 
"comparable"  (regulation  on  experts  in  the  building  sector).  Depending  on  how  this 
system of mutual recognition is applied in practice with regard to cross border situations, 
but  also  within  Germany,  three  scenarios  can  be  distinguished:  i)  recognition  of  an 
authorisation  without  further  examination,  ii)  recognition  of  an  authorisation  if  the 
authorisation  has  been  granted  under  similar/comparable  conditions  and  iii)  an 
authorisation  is  not  recognized  at  all  and  the  service  provider  has  to  apply  for  a  new 
authorisation.  Depending  on  how  authorities  examine  what  are  "similar/comparable" 
conditions, this might also be qualified as imposing a new authorisation which might also 
raise questions as to the application of the freedom to provide services clause. 

3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit  approval  as  a  general  rule  has  been  introduced  in  the  Federal  Administrative 
Procedures Act ("Verwaltungsverfahrensgesetz des Bundes"). This law provides first of 
all  for  a  general  deadline  of  3  months  for  the  administration  to  take  a  decision.  This 
general  deadline  applies  unless  a  specific  legislation  provides  for  a  different  deadline. 
Furthermore it foresees that "the authorisation applied for is deemed to be granted after 
the expiry of a deadline set for the decision (tacit approval) if this is provided by law and 
if the application is sufficiently precise."  52 The federal administrative procedures act is 
therefore  the  basic  provision  for  tacit  approvals.  Whereas  the  Länder  of  Berlin, 
Niedersachsen,  Rheinland-Pfalz  and  Sachsen  refer  to  the  Federal  Administrative 
Procedures Act , the other Länder have their own Administrative Procedures Act. 

Another important horizontal act, the federal trades and craft acts ("Gewerbeordnung und 
Handwerksordnung") also explicitly foresees the tacit approval of authorisations.  

Concerning  the  sector  specific  legislation  (at  Länder  level),  tacit  approval  of 
authorisations  can  be  found  in  all  the  sectors  examined  mostly  with  a  reference  to  the 
Federal Administrative Procedures Act.  

In certain legislation it is explicitly foreseen that tacit approval of authorisations does not 
apply  (e.g.  in  the  construction  sector  the  legislation  on  the  recognition  as  a  testing, 
inspection  or  certification  body).  It  further  seems  that  the  rules  differ  between  the 
Länder:  some  have  foreseen  a  tacit  approval  of  authorisations  in  areas  where  other 
Länder do not accept tacit approval. This raises some doubts in particular with regard to 

52 "Eine beantragte Genehmigung gilt nach Ablauf einer für die Entscheidung festgelegten Frist als erteilt 
(Genehmigungsfiktion),  wenn  dies  durch  Rechtsvorschrift  angeordnet  und  der  Antrag  hinreichend 
bestimmt ist." 

133 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
the  justifications  invoked  by  the  Länder  not  granting  a  tacit  approval  of  authorisations. 
Other examples where tacit approval does not apply have been found e.g. in the food and 
beverage  sector  for  the  opening  of  a  restaurant  or  the  recognition  of  universities  in  the 
education sector. 

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  still  exists  for  officially  appointed 
surveyors  ("öffentlich  bestellte  Vermessungsingenieure")  in  the  Land  of  Nordrhein-
Westfalen. It seems that the German authorities justify this restriction with reference to 
article 51 TFEU (exercise of public authority). 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Germany  has  no  horizontal  provision  implementing  the  freedom  to  provide  services 
clause as there is no horizontal law implementing the Services Directive. The Directive, 
including the freedom to provide services clause, has therefore been implemented by way 
of amendments to sector-specific legislation at all levels of government.  

As  a  main  implementation  measure,  federal  legislation  abolished  the  cross-cutting 
notification requirement and various authorisation requirements under the Federal Trade 
Act  (Gewerbeordnung)  so  that  for  cross-border  services  many  of  these  requirements 
were  removed  in  the  field  of  retail,  tourism,  food  and  beverages,  real  estate  and 
crafts.  

The  Länder  mainly  abolished,  modified  or  replaced  authorisation  schemes  that  were 
linked to catering services, expert services under the Federal Consumer Goods and Food 
Act  and,  in  the  construction  sector,  to  services  such  as  services  of  structural  inspection 
engineers,  services  to  present  building  documents,  services  to  verify  the  stability  of  a 
building  or  its  fire  safety,  expert  services  under  the  federal  soil  protection  act,  expert 
services  in  relation  to  water  management,  interpretation  and  translation  services  for 
courts and authorities and services by training facilities for harbour safety officers.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

When  regulating  cross-border  services,  the  federal  and  the  Länder  legislation  follow 
different  approaches  to  distinguish  between  established  providers  and  cross-border 
services.  

The  term  ‘establishment’  is  only  defined  under  the  Federal  Trade  Act,  as  ‘fixed  office 
(feste Einrichtung) on the basis of which businessmen actually exercise their commercial 
businesses on a self-employed basis and for an undefined time’. This definition does not 
explicitly  apply  to  services  not  regulated  under  the  Federal  Trade  Act.  However,  since 
the sector-specific legislation implementing the freedom to provide services clause refers 
to the term ‘establishment’ without separately defining it, it seems that the sector-specific 
legislation should be construed so that the definition of ‘establishment’ under the Federal 
Trade Act is analogously applicable to the sector-specific legislation. 

134 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In  general  sector  specific  laws  distinguish  the  exercise  of  an  activity  according  to  the 
case law  of  the European Court of Justice  and refer to the provision  of 'occasional and 
temporary services'. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

As  set  out  above  a  significant  number  of  requirements  concerning  incoming  service 
providers  have  either  been  abolished  or  modified  to  render  the  national  legislation 
compliant  with  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause.  However,  it  seems  that  many 
requirements have been maintained which might not comply with the core provisions of 
the Directive concerning cross-border trade. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

Most requirements that were maintained were identified in the crafts, construction and 
certification services sector.  

Many federal authorisation requirements for experts in the field of the environment and 
many  authorisation  schemes  under  the  Länder  legislation  were  abolished,  modified  or 
replaced  under  the  condition  that  service  providers  from  other  Member  States  already 
possess an equivalent authorisation granted by another Member State. For instance, rules 
have  been  changed  in  some  Länder  concerning  different  experts  active  in  the 
construction sector such as engineers verifying the stability of buildings or certifying fire 
safety, and their obligation to be registered in a list (i.e. of the Chambers of Engineers) 
has  been  rendered  less  stringent  in  the  way  that  providers  having  to  comply  with 
equivalent requirements in their country of establishment do not have to be registered on 
the  list  in  Germany.  Similar  rules  apply  to  environmental  experts  (i.e.  for  instance 
supervision of use of certain products, emission water and soil measuring and control): 
procedures  have  been  rendered  less  stringent  and  only  ask  for  an  authorisation  under 
certain  conditions  (i.e.  for  instance  if  equivalent  authorisation  was  granted  in  the  home 
Member State).  

In  this  context  there  are  often  differences  between  the  Länder.  Whereas  some  have 
rendered  authorisation  procedures  for  cross-border  services  providers  less  stringent, 
others have maintained the rules and apply authorisation procedures without taking into 
consideration  whether  comparable  authorisations  have  been  obtained  by  service 
providers in their Member States of establishment. In addition it is often not clear from 
the text of the legislation, whether and when (before or after the start of the service) the 
equivalence  of  the authorisations is checked. If the competent Länder authorities check 
the equivalence of the authorisations before the service provider is entitled to carry out 
his  service,  then,  de  facto,  this  could  have  the  effect  of  an  authorisation  procedure  and 
hence  would  have  to  be  justified  under  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  of  the 
Directive.  It  will  also  have  to  be  verified  how  the  requirement  of  equivalence  of 
authorisations will be applied in practice. 

for 

requirements 

Other  authorisation/registration  requirements  of  the  Bund  and  the  Länder,  for  instance 
registration 
to  present  building  documents 
service 
(Bauvorlageberechtigung)  under  the  Länder  legislation,  were  replaced  with  notification 
requirements.  Notification  requirements  are,  in  general,  less  restrictive  than  an 
authorisation requirement. However, service providers still need to notify their services 
to  the  competent  authorities  and  provide  the  requested  documents  before  they  can 
commence their services.  

the 

135 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Another example in the construction sector concerns the need for inspectors of specific 
buildings  to  have  a  specific  identity  card  that  is  handed  out  to  them  as  part  of  the 
authorisation  procedure  and  to  present  this  identity  card  on  request  to  the  competent 
authorities. 

In some Länder authorisation procedures  still include the verification of equipment. As 
those rules have not been changed they also apply to cross-border service providers (e.g. 
certain Länder laws regulating expert services carried out under the Federal Equipment 
and Product Safety Act). 

Concerning the retail sector, authorisation requirements have been identified concerning 
the sale of sensitive goods (germs, explosives), the collection of wild plants and for the 
sale of goods at cemeteries (as laid down in  municipality  cemetery  ordinances  with 
reference to public order). 

As  far  as  the  education  sector  is  concerned,  authorisations  are  required  for  driving 
schools  as  well  as  for  educational  training  for  psychologists,  psychotherapists,  training 
for  veterinarians  and  pharmacists,  specialist  and  advanced  training  for  architects  and 
engineers, training for nurses.  

136 

 
 
 
 
 
 
   GREECE   
_______________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The Greek Point of Single Contact (PSC) was built on an existing e-government website, 
namely  ERMIS  Infrastructure  hosts  the  official  Greek  portal  for  Public  Administration 
providing citizens and businesses alike a central information and e-services hub.  

As far as business start-up and activity in Greece are concerned, the Greek PSC mostly 
covers  the  licensing  procedures,  whereas  the  business  launching  and  registration 
procedures  are  covered  by  different  governmental  sites,  such  as  'Start  Up  Greece' 
(www.startupgreece.gov.gr)  that  shares  information  about  starting  a  business  in  Greece 
Registry 
and 
(www.businessportal.gr).  

the  General 

opportunities, 

Commercial 

funding 

and 

The Greek PSC is linked to a network of 54 physical PSCs, which have been selected to 
serve  the  Services  Directive  purposes–  KEP-  that  have  been  operating  in  Greece  for 
about a decade. The electronic PSC serves as a central hub, transferring information and 
applications  to  the  physical  PSCs,  according  to  their  geographic  area  of  responsibility. 
The Greek PSC has a Greek and an English version, although the English version is not 
fully developed.  

In terms of information provision, the portal is restricted in providing information only 
for the specific sector licensing procedures.  

One of the good features of the Greek portal is the interactive search tree that provides 
checklists by service sector as well as the navigation environment, which is accompanied 
by  graphics.  The  portal  has  a  well  operating  search  machine  (in  Greek  –  searching  in 
English depends on the degree of specific procedures translation).  

The  Greek  PSC  portal  has  incorporated  a  STORK  functionality,  which  allows  for  e-ID 
holders from a number of other Member-States to use them. 

The  quality  of  the  content  varies,  since  there  are  procedures  missing  and  procedures 
which  have  not  been  updated  according  to  the  latest  simplifications  of  the  regulative 
framework and to the latest circulars and Ministerial Decisions issued. Full case handling 
of  administrative  tasks  is  not  possible,  even  though  several  procedures  can  be  fully 
completed  online.  The  content  of  the  PSC  portal  regarding  licensing  procedures  for 
cross-border  service  providers  has  been  enhanced  during  the  period  of  the  PSC  initial 
operations.  However,  there  is  still  need  for  this  content  to  be  enriched,  including  more 
licensing procedures. Moreover, there is also need for the existing content to be updated, 
since  the  regulative  framework  implementing  the  Services  Directive  is  under  constant 
modification and simplification. 

Overall the Greek PSC portal offers a relatively satisfactory level of services online but 
there are still things to be done to improve its efficiency and to make it a real tool that 
will be used by service providers and public administration.  

137 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The Services Directive was mainly implemented into Greek law by law 3844/2010 (Gov. 
Gaz. A' 63, 3-5-2010).53 This is a general text, transcribing into Greek law the text of the 
Services  Directive.  Furthermore,  this  law  provides  the  competent  Ministers  with  the 
necessary  delegation  of  powers  for  the  adoption  of,  at  least,  sixteen  sets  of 
implementation  measures.  On  this  legal  basis,  several  ministerial  decisions  have  been 
adopted in retail sector, tourism sector and professional services; most of them are of a 
sector-specific/vertical  nature  and  are  intended  to  implement  Articles  14,  15  and/or  16 
with respect to specific service activities. 
A  number  of  laws,  ministerial  decisions  and  presidential  decrees  have  been  issued, 
together with circulars as guidance aim to implement the new provision in practice.   

In  March  2010,  however,  Greece  has  entered  into  the  Memorandum  of  Understanding 
with  the  European  Commission/European  Central  Bank/International  Monetary  Fund, 
which  is  being  updated  and  its  application  monitored  on  a  three-monthly  basis,  and 
which  imposes  quite  precise  and  demanding  obligations  of  trade  liberalisation, 
rationalisation and reduction of red tape.  

Several  obligations  undertaken  by  Greece  under  the  Memorandum  correspond  to 
requirements  that  according  to  the  Services  Directive  should  be  abolished  or,  at  least, 
evaluated.  The  sanction  for  failure  to  comply  with  the  Memorandum  undertakings  is 
much more drastic and immediate than any of the sanctions likely to be imposed under 
EU law, since breach  of the Memorandum may lead to a termination of the funding of 
Greece’s  sovereign  debt.  Therefore,  as  far  as  the  implementation  of  the  Services 
Directive is concerned, there is a clear synergy with the application of the Memorandum.  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Greece 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The evaluation of the implementation of the Services Directive has revealed, on the one 
hand, that a number of requirements prohibited by article 14 of the Directive can still be 
found  in  Greek  legislation,  in  the  retail  and  education  sectors.  On  the  other  hand,  as 
regards requirements where the Directive left a margin of appreciation to Member States 
to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers  and  which 
are  mainly  foreseen  in  article  15  of  the  Directive,  a  number  of  such  requirements  have 
been  maintained  and  they  concern  basically  the  same  sectors  where  prohibited 
requirements still exist. 

Regarding  professional  services,  some  requirements  which  have  been  maintained  in 
Greece  concern  shareholding  requirements  for  chartered  accountants  and  for  lawyers, 
where  only  lawyers  can  be  shareholders  of  a  law  firm.  Before  the  adoption  of  Law 
3919/2011 almost all professions had a system of fixed prices, and after its adoption all 

53   Given  delays  with  the  adoption  of  other  texts  necessary  for  the  implementation  of  the  Services 
Directive,  the Commission  decided  on 27 October  2011 to  refer  Greece  to  the  Court of  Justice  over 
incomplete transposition of the Directive (IP/11/1283). Following the adoption and the notification of 
the last implementing measures the Commission has decided on 31 May 2012 to close the case against 
Greece. 

138 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
the minimum and fixed tariffs were repealed. However, sector specific legislation is still 
needed. Pricelists are maintained but only to serve as ‘reference prices’ or as the basis for 
the calculation of pre-paid tax and/or social charges due by the professionals for lawyers 
and engineers.  
Furthermore, for accountants and architects/engineers experience is required in order to 
be promoted from a grade to another.  

In the construction and crafts sector, no particular prohibitions apply. 

In the real estate sector, no particular prohibitions apply and the real estate sector is set 
by the 'Business Friendly Greece law', adopted the 11th of April 2012, which abolished 
the restrictions in place. 

As far as the retail sector is concerned, the legal form requirement for ambulant trade in 
the  retail  sector  (only  for  natural  persons)  is  maintained  and  other  prohibited 
requirements have been found notably in the legislation concerning outdoor sales which 
were amended in order to comply with the Services Directive's requirements; however, a 
numerus  clausus  system  for  the  delivery  of  authorisations  upon  the  opinion  of  the 
committee has been maintained, itself connected to an economic test. The requirement of 
prior residence for two years has been abolished, but priority to obtain a licence is given 
to  specific  categories  of  persons  (Greek  Romas,  repatriated  Greeks  from  North  Epirus 
and  Pontus).  Furthermore,  the  system  of  delivery  of  authorisations  is  characterised  by 
both quantitative and territorial restrictions. 

In the tourism sector several amendments took place and fixed tariffs and a number of 
restrictions were abolished. Furthermore, the simplification of yacht brokering agencies 
is already provided in a Joint Ministerial Decision.   

In the education sector Greek nationality is required for founders of private schools and 
the majority shareholding should also belong to Greek nationals.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval, an important mean to cutting red tape, as it foresees that an authorisation 
will  be  deemed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  provider  in  case  an  application  has  not 
received any response within the set time period, is foreseen in article 14 (4) of the law 
3844/2010. Additionally, it is provided by law on administrative performances that if the 
administration  does  not  reply  to  an  application  within  50  days,  the  authorisation  is 
deemed to have been granted.  

In  February  2011  the  Greek  legislator  passed  Law  3919/2011  on  the  “principle  of 
professional  freedom,  elimination  of  unnecessary  restrictions  for  the  access  to  and 
exercise of professions”, which came into force on 2 July 2011. Its scope is to enforce 
some of the provisions of Directive 2006/123/EC. Article 3 of Law 3919/2011 foresees 
that the requirement for an administrative license is abolished and a person is considered 
to  legally  exercise  a  profession  if  three  months  have  passed  from  the  date  he/she  has 
submitted  the  notice  of  initiating  the  professional  activity  and  has  submitted  all  the 
necessary documents that certify that he/she satisfies all legal requirements connected to 
the professional activity in question.  

The  administration  would  have  three  months  from  the  date  the  notice  of  initiation  was 
submitted to issue a decision prohibiting the exercise of the profession. The professions 

139 

 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
excluded from the above provisions are those of the notary, lawyer, engineer, pharmacist 
and professions in the field of public transport (i.e. taxi drivers). The second paragraph of 
Article 3 of Law 3919/2011 foresaw, that until the 2 July 2011, on the initiative of each 
Minister,  presidential  decrees  should  have  been  issued,  when  necessary,  instituting 
derogations from the above rule. At the time Law 3919/2011 was published, the Ministry 
of  Economy  issued  a  list  of  136  professions  considered to be “liberalised” by virtue of 
the provisions of Article 3.  

The very general and on occasion vague formulation of Article 3 of Law 3919/2011 has 
raised  serious  legal  concerns  as  to  its  interpretation  but  mostly  as  to  the  way  it  can 
practically be enforced. A number of sector-specific circulars have been issued in order 
to interpret the implementation of Article 3.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

Article  25  of  law  3844/2010  almost  literally  transposed  the  provisions  of  Article  24  of 
the Services Directive. However,  total prohibitions  of commercial  communications still 
exist for lawyers after the latest adoption of law 4038/2012 in the TV, the radio and the 
billboards.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Greece has adopted a horizontal transposition law (law 3844/2010) which may serve only 
as a reference document because it gives multiple delegations to the competent ministers, 
for  them  to  adopt  the  necessary  implementation  measures.  So  far,  however,  the 
implementation measures adopted are scarce and concern very few economic activities.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

After  the  latest  legislative  amendments  and  the  adopted  circulars  distinction  take  place 
between  a  service  provider  that  wants  to  establish  a  business  in  Greece  and  a  service 
provider wishing to provide temporary cross border services with retail sector, ambulant 
trade,  education  sector  and  tourism  sector  (sector  specific  amendments  through  the 
adoption of ministerial decisions, laws and circulars). The Point of Single Contact gives 
an indication about the rules that apply for an establishment in Greece and the rules for 
temporary service provision but the lack of update lead to uncertainty.   

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In  the  professional  services  sector,  most  of  these  are  likely  to  come  under  the 
deregulatory effect of law 3919/2011, which abolished most of the restrictions. A number 
of  circulars  for  the  implementation  of  this  law  have  been  issued  but  cross-border 
provision  of  services  is  not  specifically  dealt  with.  An  issue  which  may  need  some 
clarification  is  the  way  that  experience  acquired  in  other  Member  States  is  to  be  taken 
into account in order for the various classifications to be applied to foreign professionals 
such as for tax advisers.  

140 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
Construction,  crafts  and  certification  services  sectors  are  not  subject  to  any  of  the 
requirements foreseen in Article 16(2) of the Services Directive, and the same applies for 
cross-border service providers. 

In the real estate services there was a registration requirement, which was abolished by 
the  by  the  'Business  Friendly  Greece  law',  adopted  the  11th  of  April  2012,  where  it  is 
specified that cross-border providers of real estate services do not need to register with 
the  General  Commercial  Registry  as  the  Greek  counterparts  should  do,  as  long  as  they 
fulfil the requirements for the profession in their country of establishment.  

The most important development in relation to Article 16 of the Services Directive has 
been  done  in  the  tourism  sector.  The  authorisation  and  registration  requirements 
imposed on established service providers do not apply to cross-border service providers 
and a mere declaration requirement has been put in place.   
Moreover, it has been clearly set that cross-border service providers from other Member 
States are not subject to certain requirements, and the requirement that tourist guides had 
to be in a fixed employment relationship with the tour operators they were working with, 
is abolished.  

Finally,  most  requirements  which  have  been  maintained  concern  the  education  sector, 
where no cross-border services are foreseen without establishment.  Also, natural persons 
need to have the Greek nationality, while legal persons need to fulfil the double condition 
of  being  established  in  Greece  and  having  Greek  majority  shareholding.  Therefore, 
service provision, in the sense of Article 16 of the Services Directive, does not seem to 
be possible at the level of educational institutions. A Joint Ministerial Decision foresees 
the free cross-border provision of some educational services, such as teachers in training 
schools, private tutoring at home, and teaching foreign languages.  

141 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   HUNGARY   
_______________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  PSC  portal  was  built  on  an  existing  eGovernment  portal,  launched  in  September 
2003,  the  scope  of  which  is  much  broader  than  the  Services  Directive, addressing both 
businesses  and  citizens  and  covering  also  procedures  related  to  tax  and  social  security 
formalities. There are two portals linked to the PSCs in Hungary. 

1.  www.magyarorszag.hu is for all users. It is mostly providing information or 

downloadable documents to users and does not require identification. 

2.  www.ugyfelkapu.magyarorszag.hu, the so-called Client Gate, is a sub-site to 

magyarorszag.hu. The site provides a platform for diverse electronic services (e.g. 
tax-return, notifications). Users have to sign up to complete processes, for which 
users first have to pay a visit in person to one of the Hungarian Registration 
Offices or a Hungarian embassy. Alternatively e-signature issued in Hungary can 
be used for the services available online.  

The information provided on the PSC is comprehensive and thorough. The quality of the 
search  facility  is  generally  good,  however,  that  facility,  FAQs  and  several  other  user 
support elements are only available in Hungarian and their use require an already good 
knowledge of the legal background.  There is little information targeted specifically on 
cross-border service providers.  

Overall  the  Hungarian  PSC  still  has  a  long  way  to  go  to  be  fully  functioning  for  both 
Hungarian and foreign users. Although the scope of procedures covered by the portal is 
quite  comprehensive,  the  level  of  maturity  of  eGovernment  is  still  relatively  low  for 
many  procedures  since  several  competent  authorities  do  not  use  the  technical 
infrastructure to provide electronic completion of procedures through the PSC. Therefore 
users  are  still  often  required  to  send  supporting  documents  by  post  or  to  present 
themselves in person in order to use the electronic portal.  

The barriers for foreigners are extremely high, for linguistic reasons and because of the 
obligation to obtain Hungarian electronic signatures or to register. The same holds true 
for other components related to the completion of procedures, notably the use of online 
payment tools, tracking methods and the submission/ storing of supportive documents. 
In its study54, Deloitte  rated the  Hungarian  portal  lower than the average of all portals. 
The biggest weakness is its limited usability for foreign businesses, much improvement 
is needed on this front. 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The  Services  Directive  was  implemented  by  the  Hungarian  Services  Act55,  which  lays 
down the general rules applicable to all service sectors and establishes provisions on the 

54 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

55  Act LXXVI of 2009 on general rules on the taking up and pursuit of service activities 

142 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
exercise  of  the  freedom  of  establishment  and  the  free  movement  of  services.  This 
framework law of general application entered into force on 1 October 2009.  

In addition to the horizontal law, an "omnibus" act modified about 100 existing sectoral 
laws  and  an  "omnibus"  decree  amended  more  than  100  pieces  of  sector-specific 
secondary  legislation.  Moreover  an  additional  100  pieces  of  sector-specific  secondary 
legislation was modified individually. Notably more than 50 authorisation schemes have 
been replaced by declarations. 

Hungary was among the first Member States to implement the Directive. The Hungarian 
transposing legislation covers the same scope as the Directive. The legislative technique 
and the large number of amendments of sector-specific laws indicate that the Hungarian 
legislator aimed to implement the Directive thoroughly. However, since the second half 
of  2011,  Hungary  has  significantly  restricted  access  to  markets  which  were  previously 
open  and  where  many  foreign  providers  were  present  (big  retail,  sale  of  tobacco,  meal 
vouchers, waste management).  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Hungary (Articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The  legislator  seems  to  have  removed  all  requirements  prohibited  by  Article  14. 
However, according to a recently adopted measure  the activity of issuing hot meal and 
holiday  vouchers  ("SZÉP  Card")  cannot  be  pursued  by  a  branch  office  of  a  foreign 
company.  Moreover,  one  of  the  conditions  regarding  the  issuance  of  the  SZÉP  Card 
consists in the entity having exercised an activity falling under the same category in the 
Hungarian Income Tax Law for at least two years. These measures are incompatible with 
Article 14 and must be corrected as a matter of priority. 

On  the  other  hand,  as  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of 
appreciation  to  Member  States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the 
establishment of providers and which are mainly dealt with in Article 15 of the Directive, 
a  few  of  such  requirements  have  been  maintained  which  raise  doubts  as  to  their 
compatibility with the Directive.  

Most of such cases were identified in the retail sector. An issue of particular importance 
concerns  the  so-called  "Plaza  stop  law",  which  bans  generally  and  everywhere  the 
construction of commercial buildings over the size of 300 m2, unless special exemption is 
given.  The  territory  where  small-scale  producers  of  agricultural  products  can  sell  their 
produce is also restricted, and small-scale producers must be natural persons. Legal form 
requirements were also identified with regard to the sale of natural gas, which can only 
be  performed  by  legal  persons.  Through  legal  form  and  strict  territorial  restrictions,  a 
recent law on tobacco sale limits access to the market, and  the conditions for  getting a 
license  based  on  social  policy  considerations  might  discriminate  indirectly  against 
foreign operators. 

Regarding professional services, a recent law has imposed conditions to issue meal and 
holiday  vouchers  that  are  too  restrictive  and  unjustified,  since  they  require  an 
infrastructure  that  only  big  nation-wide  existing  banks  possess.  A  new  shareholding 
requirement  for  companies  (at  least  50%  of  the  shares  must  be  owned  by  the  State) 

143 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
foreclose private operators (including foreign ones) previously present on the market of 
waste management without justification.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (Article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval applies by virtue of a horizontal provision and sectorial provisions. Based 
on the Services Act, tacit approval must be used for all services falling under the scope of 
the Service Directive, unless it is expressly excluded by a sectorial legislation. 

Thus, tacit approval seems to have been successfully implemented in Hungary. The only 
identified  exception  is  the  case  of  the  accountants,  where  tacit  approval  is  explicitly 
excluded.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (Article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Hungary has transposed Article 16 of the Directive also through the horizontal Services 
Act and by modifying sector-specific legislation. The Act states that only the following 
requirements  can  be  applied 
to  cross-border  service  providers:  authorisation 
requirements,  notification  requirements  and  the  obligation  to  possess  an  identity 
document specific to the exercise of a service activity. Moreover, these requirements can 
only be applied to cross-border services if the specific rules are justified for reasons of 
public  policy,  public  security,  national  security  and  defence,  public  health  and  the 
protection of environment, and if the relevant sector-specific legislation explicitly states 
that the requirement is applicable to cross-border services. This seems to create sufficient 
certainty to foreign service providers as to when a requirement applies to them. 

2. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

With  respect  to  the  Article  16  requirements,  apart  from  the  cross-border  aspects  of  the 
cases  concerning  Articles  14  and  15  mentioned  above,  only  some  questionable 
notification requirements can be found in some sectors.  

In  the  field  of  construction,  foreign  building  contractors  must  notify  their  activities  in 
Hungary. In the notification of this measure by Hungary, it was claimed that the system 
is justified by public policy. 

Similar concerns may be raised against notification obligations concerning cross-border 
adult education services. 

144 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   IRELAND   
_________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  Irish  Point  of  Single  Contact  is  a  relatively  basic  website  that  relies  largely  on 
offering  links  to  the  relevant  websites  where  detailed  information  on  each  of  the 
procedures  can  be  found.  For  instance,  in  testing,  only  10%  of  the  information  on  the 
required procedures was to be found on the PSC portal itself, while 90% was covered by 
the  websites  of  the  competent  authorities  linked  to  by  the  portal.  Although  users  can 
ultimately find the information that they need, there is no single registration or login to 
the  PSC,  therefore  users  have  to  register  to  each  agency  to  which  they  are  re-directed, 
and there is no basic search function to locate relevant information on the site.  

As regards the electronic completion of procedures, a positive aspect for the Irish PSC is 
that it does not present any technical obstacles to the completion of procedures for users 
coming from another Member States. However, this is in the context of a portal through 
which  very  few  transactions  can  be  carried  out  by  electronic  means.  A  particular  issue 
concerns  the  fact  that  documents  and  forms  cannot  be  submitted  electronically,  e-
payment tools are not used and there is no way to track a procedure electronically. Even 
on the linked websites,  there  are  only a few instances concerning company registration 
where  two-way  interaction  is  possible.  Otherwise,  forms  are  simply  downloaded  and 
need to be submitted separately. Article 8(1) of the Services Directive states that it should 
be  possible  to  complete  all  necessary  procedures  and  formalities  at  a  distance  and  by 
electronic  means  through  the  PSC  and  the  relevant  competent  authorities.  In  Ireland, 
although electronic procedures are utilised in terms of certain registrations, applications 
etc.  there  is,  in  fact,  no  statutory  obligation  on  competent  authorities  to  necessarily 
adhere  to  electronic  procedures.  Therefore,  imposing  these  obligations  on  competent 
authorities continues to be challenging. 

In terms of usability, the Irish PSC does not score very highly56. While the presentation 
of  information  on  the  site  has  been  found  to  be  clear  and  useful  and  the  site  easy  to 
navigate,  much  remains  to  be  done  in  order  for  the  Irish  PSC  to  act  as  a  truly  useful 
source  of  information  for  entrepreneurs  within  and  outside  of  Ireland,  particularly 
through better integration of the PSC with the other government or agency sites to which 
it redirects users.  

The Irish PSC is not easy to find if one doesn't know its exact web address, and efforts 
need to be made to improve this, as well as in promoting the existence of the PSC with 
bodies that provide support to businesses in Ireland. Information on the site should also 
be  extended  to  procedures  to  be  followed  in  the  life  of  a  business  after  establishment. 
Assistance  to  users  is  very  limited,  and  information  is  available  only  in  English. 
Continued efforts will be needed to enhance the user experience when accessing the site 
and to improve the wider e-Government capability of the portal.  

56 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

145 

 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

Ireland  implemented  the  Services  Directive  through  a  horizontal  framework  law 
("ministerial  regulation")  which  was  adopted  some  11  months  after  the  transposition 
deadline57.  There  is  no  evidence  that  Ireland  has  amended  sector-specific  legislation  to 
bring  it  into  line  with  the  provisions  of  the  Services  Directive.  If  sector-specific 
legislation  is  domestic  in  origin  (i.e.  not  implementing  EU  rules),  then  the  horizontal 
legislation implementing provisions of the Services Directive, for instance article 16 on 
the freedom to provide  services, will  prevail over  sector-specific legislation in cases  of 
conflict.  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Ireland 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers  and 
which are mainly foreseen in article 15 of the Directive, a few of such requirements have 
been maintained. They concern the tourism and the retail sector.  

In  the  travel  sector,  there  is  a  requirement  for  travel  agents  and  tour  operators  to  set 
minimum  capital  investment  in  their  business.  They  are  especially  required  to  take  out 
particular bond that such businesses are required to take out to protect their customers. In 
putting another financial burden on businesses, it may act as an obstacle to growth in the 
travel  agency  and  tour  operator  sector.  The  guideline  as  to  the  minimum  capital 
investment  in  the  business  is  a  practical  approach  directed  towards  protecting  the 
customer. 

Caps on the size of retail outlets can act as an impediment on new entrants wishing to 
enter the market, such as operators of large hypermarkets that are more common in some 
EU  Member  States.  In  this  regard  the  draft  Retail  Planning  Guidelines,  taking  into 
account  recommendations  of  a recent  study58,  will  revise  the  floor  space  caps  with 
different limits for different retail activities and depending on location of the outlet. 

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval, an important tool for the cutting of cutting red tape, as it foresees that an 
authorisation will be deemed to have been granted to the provider in case an application 
has not received any response within the set time period, is foreseen in the horizontal 
law implementing the Services Directive in Ireland. 

Following  the  wording  of  the  Services  Directive,  the  Irish  horizontal  law  has  left  open 
the  possibility  for  competent  authorities  to  put  different  arrangements  in  place.  Sector-
specific  legislation  has  not  been  amended  to  specify  such  different  arrangements.  The 
horizontal  legislation,  and  the  possibility  for  tacit  approval,  exists  for  patent  and  trade 

European Union (Provision of Services) Regulations 2010 (S.I. No. 533 of 2010) give effect to the 

57  
Services Directive in Ireland, with the exception of Article 42 of the Directive, which was transposed 
separately by the European Communities (Court Orders for the Protection of Consumer Interests) 
Regulations 2010 (S.I. No. 555 of 2010). 
58   Forfás Study Review of the Economic Impact of the Retail Cap (April 2011)  

146 

 
                                                 
mark  agents  and  copyright  licensing  bodies,  casual  trading  near  a  harbour,  the 
registration of hotels, guest houses and other tourist accommodation, the use of premises 
for an activity involving the contained used of genetically modified organisms and surf 
training.  

Competent  authorities  may  decide  to  check  the  professional  qualifications  of  service 
providers  in  the  health,  social  care  and  veterinary  professions  who  are  not  eligible  for 
automatic  recognition  under  Articles  21  to  49  of  the  Professional  Qualifications 
Directive. In such cases, in the absence of a reaction from the competent authority within 
the deadlines set, the service may be provided. 

Sector-specific  legislation  containing  the  procedures  for  authorisation  of  tour  operators 
and  travel  agents,  vocational  education  and  training  providers,  those  involved  in  the 
health and safety of workers in the construction and other related industries, and driving 
instructors describe such approval processes without reflecting any arrangements for tacit 
approval. In the absence of the different arrangements provided for in the horizontal law, 
the  possibility  for  tacit  approval  can  be  deemed  to  apply,  but  this  may  not  be 
implemented in practice.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. However, there 
are  currently  strict  limitations  placed  on  the  possibility  of  barristers  to  advertise  their 
services.  However  this  issue  is  to  be  revisited  with  the  establishment  of  a  new  Legal 
Services Regulatory Authority as set out in the Legal Services Regulation Bill 2011. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The core chapter of the Directive on the freedom to provide services was introduced in 
the horizontal law which was adopted to implement the Services Directive. Article 16(1) 
and 16(2) are transposed into Irish law by means of Regulation 6 of the 2010 Regulations 
which are largely compliant with the letter and spirit of the Services Directive. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The  2010  Regulations  acknowledge  the  freedom  of  cross-border  service  providers  to 
operate within Ireland, subject to constraints whereby competent authorities can impose 
requirements  on  cross-border  service  providers  where  justified  under  the  four  core 
criteria of public policy, public security, public health, or protection of the environment. 
These provisions are therefore in conformity with the principle of the freedom to provide 
services. 

However,  with  the  exception  of  some  of  the  professional  services  sector  (particularly 
lawyers and auditors that are  subject to a  specific  EU  legal  framework), the distinction 
made between the requirements applicable to foreign entrants wishing to enter the Irish 
market through freedom of establishment and those wishing to offer their services on a 
temporary  cross-border  basis  may  not  always  be  clear.  Business  users  involved  in  the 
testing of Ireland’s Point of Single Contacts highlighted this point as being confusing to 
those wishing to assess their obligations.   

147 

 
3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

In principle, cross-border service providers have the right to provide services in Ireland if 
they  comply  with  the  conditions  set  in  their  Member  State  of  establishment.  However 
given  that  sector-specific  legislation  co-exists  with  the  horizontal  legislation,  service 
providers  would  need  to  verify  if  additional  requirements  apply  in  the  sector-specific 
laws (which may only be permitted for reasons of public policy, public security, public 
health or environmental protection).  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

With  regard  to  the  construction  and  crafts  sectors,  electricians  and  gas  installers  in 
Ireland  generally  register  with  the  relevant  designated  body  (RECI  or  ECCSA  for 
electricians and RGII for gas installers), which in turn ensure that their members comply 
with  quality  and  safety  standards.  It  is  not  compulsory  for  all  electricians  and  gas 
installers  to  register  with  these  bodies,  but  it  may  be  very  difficult  for  them  to  secure 
work unless they do so. Cross-border gas installers who wish to carry out work on with 
liquid petroleum gas may be subject to criminal sanctions unless they are registered with 
RGII.  

As  mentioned  above,  in  the  travel  sector,  tour  operators  and  travel  agents  operating  in 
Ireland,  and  involved  in  the  provision  of  tourism  and  travel  services  to  destinations 
outside  of  Ireland  are  obliged  to  hold  licenses  issued  by  the  Commission  for  Aviation 
Regulation.  This  requirement  does  not  allow  travel  agents  or  tour  operators  active  in 
other EU Member States to provide services on the basis of the authorisations obtained in 
their Member State of establishment. Furthermore they are obliged to meet certain capital 
thresholds and to take out a bond to cover them in the event that the business was unable 
to meet contractual or financial obligations. These requirements are supposed to protect 
the consumer. 

As  regards  the  education  sector,  vocational  education  providers  such  as  occupational 
first  aid  training  providers,  manual  handling  instructors  and  lifeguard  trainers  are 
required to register with the relevant statutory bodies.  

148 

 
 
   ITALY   
______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

Given  the  large  amount  of  legislative  instruments  stemming  from  the different national 
and local authorities, and the absence of a centralised system of publication of laws or an 
online  database  of  the  legislation  in  force,  points  of  single  contact  are  essential  to  help 
cross-border or established service providers in Italy.  

Points of single contact have been set up by local authorities in every city hall in Italy, or 
within the premises of the competent Chamber of Commerce. These local physical points 
can be traced using the central website, through a specific search. 

Generally speaking, the degree of information offered on the website is quite good and 
comprehensive.  Support  tools  for  users  are  provided,  which  also  provide  assistance  in 
English. However, the portal is not well known, so more communication and promotion 
activities will be necessary. 

The  website  enables  users  to  carry  out  procedures  through  one  single  communication 
which  allows  them  to  handle  several  administrative  requirements  altogether.  However, 
this is not always possible across all business sectors. In some cases, users are allowed to 
complete the requirements through the web site, in other cases they will only be able to 
acquire  information  without  the  possibility  to  submit  an  online  application.  Electronic 
identification and electronic signatures are required to gain access to the private area and 
to submit the filled forms. Online completion of procedures is easy, and the number of 
forms required has been reduced.  

One  of  the  main  problems  lies  in  cross-border  procedures.  In  fact,  the  website  lacks 
information  regarding  cross-border  provision  of  services  as  well  as  online  forms  in 
English. Electronic logins and signatures can also constitute an obstacle for cross-border 
providers.59 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The subject matter of the Services Directive partly falls within the legislative competence 
shared by the State and its Regions. This means that the central State has the power of 
setting the legislative principles the regions will need to comply with when laying down 
more  detailed  provisions.  Regional  norms  passed  before  the  implementation  law  and 
conflicting with the national law should therefore be considered abrogated and Regions 
have a constitutional duty to finalise the implementation of the Directive. However, this 
hierarchical  relationship  is  only  implicit  and  this  undermines  legal  certainty.  In  fact,  in 
this situation, Italian courts would be the only authorities entitled to set aside conflicting 
regional rules, becoming the only guarantee for the correct application of the principles 
set out in the Directive. However, the implementation law has introduced a mechanism 
that aims to prevent future inconsistencies by requiring local and national authorities to 

59 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

149 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
notify  any  bill  containing  new  requirements.  Failure  to  do  so  will  result  in  the 
requirement being considered nil and void. 

It must be emphasised that with the entry into force of the national law implementing the 
Services  Directive,  Italy  has  dropped  its  previous  system  of  authorisation  schemes  in 
favour  of  a  lighter  system  of  notifications  and  declarations.  The  Italian  legislator  has 
introduced  the  SCIA  (Certified  notification  on  the  commencement  of  activity). 
According to the new rules, each act of authorisation, licence, concession, permission, is 
replaced by a notification made by the provider.  The notification can be made by mail or 
online and the activity can be commenced on the same day in which the notification is 
made. 

The  provisions  on  liberalisations  and  administrative  simplification  contained  in  a  law 
recently adopted (January 2012) introduce some relevant changes in this respect. In fact, 
this law empowers the government to propose new legislation with the aim of repealing 
unjustified  restrictions  and  authorisations  on  economic  activities,  removing  any 
discrimination or obstacle to new economic actors and promoting fair competition in the 
market.  Furthermore,  the  text  of  the  law  expressly  refers  to  EU  principles.  The  exact 
content  of  these  forthcoming  reforms  should  be  disclosed  gradually  up  until  the  end  of 
2012.  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in  Italy 
(Articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The Italian legislator has transposed in the horizontal implementation law all provisions 
contained in Article 14. It has also removed all provisions imposing on service providers 
the burden to prove the existence of economic need or demand or to assess the economic 
impact of the activity on the market through economic tests. However, a sector-specific 
analysis  of  the  regional  laws  identified  a  number  of  requirements  which  are  prohibited 
under  Article  14,  notably  in  the  retail  and  tourism  sectors.  Regarding  art.  15 
requirements, and in particular fixed tariffs, it is worth stressing that art. 9 of the recent 
d.l.  1/2012  abrogates  all  legislation  imposing  fixed  tariffs  in  the  field  of  regulated 
professions. However sector specific legislation may still be needed. 

Quantitative  or  territorial  restrictions  were  also  noted  in  the  retail  and  tourism  sectors. 
Requirements reserving access to particular providers were identified in the tourism, and 
education  service  sectors.  Legal  form  and  shareholding  requirements  have  been 
maintained in the education sector for the professional services and for the crafts sector. 

As  for  professional  services,  shareholding  and  legal  form  requirements  are  always 
connected in the Italian system, and they are applicable to all professions. Recent reforms 
have  opened  the  possibility  for  professionals  to  choose  from  a  wider  variety  of  legal 
forms,  notably  limited  liability  companies  with  non-professional  members.  A  few 
limitations have been maintained, some of which, interestingly, are linked to the age of 
the members (who must be no older than 35) and the amount of shares which can be held 
by non-professionals (no more than 1/3). 

In  the  retail  sector,  authorisations  to  open  a  newsagent's  shop  are  subject  to  specific 
assessments carried out by the competent local authority and approval of trade unions. A 
number of national and regional laws set quantitative and territorial restrictions for retail 

150 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
activities,  particularly  those  linked  to  large  retail  facilities  or  those  which  take  place  in 
public  spaces.  They  are  often  justified  by  the  need  to  promote  the  sustainable 
development  of  local  economies.  Reforms  abrogating  legal  form  requirements  for 
itinerant  retailers,  which  started  in  1998,  have  now  been  completed  through  the 
implementation  law,  which  states  that  all  types  of  legal  person  can  obtain  an 
authorisation for itinerant retail activities. 

The tourism sector falls within the scope of regional competences, therefore the national 
implementing  law  has  little  impact  on  this  sector.  A  number  of  regional  instruments 
containing  prohibited  requirements  were  identified.  Residency  within  the  region  where 
the service is provided is required for ski instructors, and travel agencies need to prove 
that  their  activity  is  insured  and  that  they  have  obtained  financial  guarantees  for 
reimbursing consumers, although they are not forced to obtain these guarantees in Italy. 
As  for  requirements  to  be  evaluated,  territorial  or  quantitative  restrictions  and  fixed 
tariffs difficult to justify can be found. For example, obtaining an authorisation to open a 
ski school can sometimes depend on the number of ski schools existing in the region, or 
the  amount  of  tourists  coming  in  the  region.  Fixed  tariffs  in  the  field  of  ski  instructors 
and  mountain  guides  and  restrictions  connected  to  the  distribution  of  ski  schools  and 
resorts  are  especially  common  (Veneto,  Trento,  Emilia  Romagna,  Lazio).  However, 
requirements limiting the  choice  of  the ski instructors between principal  and secondary 
establishment have been removed. 

The  national  implementing  law  of  the  Services  Directive  does  not  make  any  change  to 
the  education  sector.  National  laws  on  education  and  vocational  training  do  not  pose 
significant problems, but it should be stressed that they require legal persons established 
for educational purposes to be non-profit oriented without giving any justification.  

As for the crafts and construction sector, restrictions on legal form and shareholding of 
companies were identified in relation to craftsmen: the majority of shares must be held 
by  members  who  can  be  qualified  as  craftsmen.  Chimney  sweeps  in  the  province  of 
Bolzano have to comply with tariffs imposed by the local authorities. 

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (Article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

The Italian implementation law transposes the wording of Article 10(4) almost literally, 
therefore  ensuring  validity  of  authorisations  throughout  the  whole  country.  However, 
given  the  specificities  of  the  Italian  legal  system,  it  is  up  to  the  regional  and  local 
authorities  to  grant  authorisations  for  several  activities  (e.g.  carpenter,  social  operator, 
gardener, amongst others).  

All  the  qualifications  regulated  by  the  Regions  have  a  nationwide  validity.  A  few 
exceptions have been mostly identified in services related to tourism: in a few regions 
(Puglia, Friuli, Lazio, Lombardia, Marche) specific authorisations are required to transfer 
a  branch  or  the  headquarters  of  travel  agencies.  Furthermore,  the  qualification  for  the 
profession  of  tourist  guide  is  only  valid  in  the  Region  which  issued  the  qualification, 
because a qualification of "national tourist guide" does not exist yet. 

3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (Article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The  principle  of  tacit  approval  of  authorisations  has  been  correctly  transposed  in  the 
Italian  implementation  law  as  a  horizontal  rule  applicable  in  all  cases  where  a  licence, 
approval or other authorisation is needed for the provision of services. It should be noted 

151 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
that  this  principle  already  existed  in  the  Italian  administrative  legal  system  since  it  had 
been introduced by the 1990 law on administrative procedures and is widely applied in a 
way which fully complies with the Services Directive.  

Most activities can now be started following the aforementioned SCIA notification, and 
where an authorisation is still required, the principle of tacit approval applies as a general 
rule. However, there are several cases, both in the national and regional laws, where the 
principle is not mentioned: when this occurs, the principle does not apply. In some cases, 
the  absence  of  tacit  approval  is  duly  justified  by  overriding  reasons  of  public  interest, 
which is particularly the case in the construction and the  food  sector. For example, the 
national  law  requires  an  explicit  authorisations  from  public  authorities  to  build  gas 
pipelines  and  cableway  structures  due  to  public  safety  and  environmental  protection. 
Under the implementation law, most activities involving the sale of food and beverages 
must receive an explicit authorisation by public authorities, which is justified by health 
reasons.  Relocation  and  transfer  of  ownership  of  the  activity,  instead,  are  subject  to  a 
regime of tacit approval. 

However there are still numerous cases where no justification compliant with art.13(4) of 
the Services Directive can be found and where Italy must make sure that the instances in 
which tacit approval is not applied are limited to duly justified matters.  

Furthermore,  the  problem  of  legal  certainty  in  Italy,  described  above,  comes  into  play 
once again: the provisions contained in the Italian implementation law set principles for 
the  regional  law  to  abide.  As  such,  it  prevails  over  any  contrary  regional  provisions. 
However only a judge can set aside regional laws which do not comply with principles 
established at national level. 

In  the  tourism  sector,  several  regional  laws  require  an  explicit  authorisation  to  open 
travel  agencies  (Lazio,  Puglia),  various  type  of  touristic  accommodations  such  as  hotel 
and  guest  houses  (Liguria,  Veneto,  Abruzzo,  Sardinia)  and  agriturismo  (Piemonte, 
Trento,  Abruzzo).  Ski  schools  (Bolzano,  Piemonte,  Liguria),  ski  instructors  (Valle 
d'Aosta,  Toscana,  Lombardia,  Bolzano,  Trento,  Umbria,  Marche,  Veneto,  Liguria, 
Campania, Molise, Basilicata, Calabria) and alpine guides (Lombardia, Bolzano) are very 
often  subject  to  an  explicit  authorisation  regime.  In  the  business  sector,  the  issue  of  a 
lack  of  tacit  approval  is  mostly  linked  with  the  activity  of  beautician  (Piemonte, 
Lombardia, Liguria, Lazio, Basilicata, Sicily) and with social services (Tuscany, Veneto, 
Friuli). As for the retail sector, the issue is often connected with the set-up, the relocation 
and the enlargement of large retail facilities (Liguria, Sardinia, Lombardia, Friuli, Trento, 
Veneto, Abruzzo, Sicilia, Basilicata), a domain where even national laws do not foresee 
the  principle  of  tacit  approval.    While  eliminating  the  residence  requirement,  the 
implementation  law  has  also  maintained  an  explicit  authorisation  regime  for  trade  in 
public areas, which is regulated in detail by the regions. 

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (Article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. 

152 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The Italian implementing law does not contain at first sight a specific provision on cross-
border services. However, a systematic reading of its provisions provides a satisfactory 
definition  of  cross-border  service  provider,  making  sure  the  principle  is  implemented. 
Furthermore,  a  number  of  provisions  stress  the  fact  that  a  service  provider  is  someone 
exercising  a  profession  or  an  economic  activity  in  Italy  on  a  temporary  and  occasional 
basis. 

The horizontal nature of the Italian implementing law on the one side, and the hierarchic 
superiority  of  the  Italian  implementing  law  over  conflicting  norms  should  ensure,  in 
principle,  a  sound  implementation  of  the  free  movement  of  services.  However,  this 
technique  does  not  exclude  the  possibility  of  the  erroneous  application  of  conflicting 
norms that have not been expressly abrogated. Moreover, the fact that regional laws are 
not  published  in  the  national  official  journal  could  create  considerable  and  serious 
uncertainty for analysts and operators in the market. 

As  for  the  grounds  of  public  order,  public  safety,  public  health  or  protection  of  the 
environment, it is still unclear how they will be identified. Since they are not defined by 
the implementation law, their assessment can only take place a posteriori by looking at 
the  rules  implementing  the  Directive  in  the  different  sectors  and  activities.  It  is  also 
difficult  to  tell  which  authority  will  have  the  power  to  determine  if  one  of  the  four 
grounds should apply. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

As previously stated, the implementation law provides for an indirect definition of cross-
border  services,  and  a  definition  of  establishment,  therefore  clarifying  the  distinction 
between the two. Service providers established in another Member State do not need to 
comply with the requirements usually applicable to service providers established in Italy. 
But, again, the national law does not specify when and which authorities are in charge of 
deciding whether one of the four grounds justifying administrative requirements should 
apply. This uncertainty is aggravated by the absence of any specific provision for cross-
border  services  in  the  different  laws  regulating  the  access  to  professions  and  other 
economic activities. 

It's  worth  stressing  that  following  the  entry  into  force  of  the  Services  Directive,  many 
regions amended their legislation on retail activities to ensure compliance with the free 
provision of services clause. The obligation to have an establishment where the service is 
provided has been repealed in all regions. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The main problems here are again linked with the complexity of the Italian legal system 
and the existence of regional provisions conflicting with the Services Directive and the 
implementation law. 

153 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

Concerning  professional  services,  the  national  implementing  law  allows  requirements 
applicable to professionals established in Italy to be imposed on service  providers only 
for  reasons  related  to  public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  protection  of  the 
environment.  Neither  the  implementing  law,  nor  other  sector-specific  instruments 
however  explain  which  requirements  and  which  authority  can  decide  to  make  those 
requirements applicable to service providers that are not established in Italy. 

A similar situation can be observed in the tourism sector where most activities are also 
subject, to a certain extent, to authorisation schemes. It should be noted however that the 
pre-existing requirements have been translated to a mere declaration of commencement 
of  the  activities  ('Dichiarazione  Inizio  Attivita’),  which  serves  as  both  registration  and 
authorisation.  It's  worth  mentioning  the  peculiar  case  of  agriturismi.  Here  the 
authorisation  is  linked  to  a  quality  of  the  person  seeking  to  provide  the  agriturismo 
service: i.e. the status of imprenditore agricolo (agricultural entrepreneur). This condition 
basically requires establishment in Italy to own an agriturismo. Furthermore, special ID 
cards are compulsory for tourist guides and ski instructors in Veneto.  

154 

 
 
 
 
   LATVIA   
______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact 

The Latvian PSC was set up in 2009 and was built on the existing government e-services 
portal  www.latvija.lv,  with 
PSC 
specific 
(https://www.latvija.lv/EN/WebLinks/Portal/services.htm).  The  portal  goes  beyond  the 
requirements of the Service Directive.  

implementing 

part 

the 

a 

The  Point  of  Single  Contact  in  Latvia  provides  in  general  a  good  level  of  information. 
Information  is  lacking  however  for  cross-border  service  provision  and  may  vary 
depending on the geographical location or municipality. Information can be accessed or 
searched in a number of different ways (by service sectors, thematic index of procedures, 
licenses;  company  registration;  etc.).  Key  information  and  general  information  is 
available  in  foreign  languages  (English  and  Russian)  but  practically  no  forms  exist  in 
other languages.  

The state portal offers the possibility to complete a relatively high number of procedures 
electronically (downloading,  filling in and sending forms, mainly by e-mail). There are 
still  procedures  that  are  not  yet  available  online.  E-ID  is  mainly  required  for  fully 
interactive  online  services  and  e-signatures  are  required  to  complete  the  procedures 
online. eDocuments can be signed through an online application and sent by e-mail to the 
competent  authorities,  or  in  some  cases  uploaded  directly.  Even  if  legally  accepted,  e-
signatures  and  e-identification  from  other  Member  States  are  not  yet  supported 
technically but developments are underway.  

The portal provides a variety of online and offline support and a number of advice tools: 
guidelines,  help  documents  –  user  assistance;  frequently-asked-questions,  demos  or 
video.  Information  on  general  procedures  and  step  by  step  instructions  are  available  in 
English. In addition, an e-service Helpdesk is available, which can be contacted by phone 
or email.  
According  to  the  Deloitte  study60,  which  carried  out  some  user  testing  of  PSCs,  the 
overall use and usability of the Latvian PSC was perceived to be average. 
Further improvements are necessary to put in place missing electronic procedures as well 
as  technical  solutions  to  allow  for  cross-border  use  of  e-identification  and  e-signatures. 
From  the  users'  perspective,  online  content  and  information  availability  in  foreign 
languages should be enhanced. 

60 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

155 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

1. 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Latvia 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

No prohibited requirements or requirements where Member States have some margin of 
appraisal were identified in the Latvian legislation. 

2.  

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The principle of tacit approval was missing in the horizontal law as adopted in 2010 but 
has  been  introduced  in  the  horizontal  law  via  the  amendments  adopted  in  March  2012. 
Some work is still on-going on sectorial legislation to have it included there as well and 
to identify if different arrangements need to be put in place, if justified.   

3.  

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

The removal of total prohibition of commercial communications was not transposed by 
Latvia  in  the  original  version  of  the  horizontal  law  but  is  now  transposed  via  the 
amendments  adopted  in  March  2012.  However,  no  total  prohibitions  of  commercial 
communications have been identified in Latvian sectorial legislation.  

B. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

1.     National implementation 

Article 16 has been implemented by way of a clause in horizontal law (the Law on the 
Free Provision of Services). Some principles of Article 16 have not been fully compliant 
with  the  Services  Directive,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  principles  of  necessity  and 
proportionality  which  have  however  been  corrected  via  the  amendments  adopted  in 
March  2012.    The  same  applies  to  some  provisions  of  Article  16(2)  of  the  Directive, 
which  were  initially  transposed  in  a  deficient  manner,  but  have  been  corrected  via  the 
amendments of March 2012.  
Section  15  of  the  Law  on  the  Free  Provision  of  Services  foresees  that  the  criteria  for 
temporary  cross-border  services  and  applicable  requirements  are  to  be  provided  by  the 
Regulations of the Cabinet of Ministers (RCM).61 However, the need for the Regulations 
is  under  revision  and  alternatively  necessary  amendments  could  be  made  in  sectoral 
legislation, and guidelines drawn up for administrative use. 

2.  

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

No  distinction  is  made  in  sectorial  legislation  between  establishment  and  cross-border 
service provision. The Regulations on the cross-border provision of services, as foreseen 
under  Section  15(3)  of  the  Law  on  the  Free  Provision  of  Services  have  not  yet  been 
adopted but it can be seen from the wording of Section 15 (3) that a declaration will be 
foreseen  with  an  indicative  list  of  service  to  which  it  would  apply.  Depending  on  the 

61 Article 15(3) of LFPS. 

156 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
exact nature and required documentation as well as the services that will be covered, this 
requirement  may  raise  concerns  with  regard  to  its  compatibility  with  Article  16  of  the 
Services Directive.  

Currently  the  absence  of  these  Regulations  creates  some  legal  uncertainty  as  to 
applicable requirements to cross-border service provision. The Law on the Free Provision 
of Services should in principle take precedence over sector specific requirements because 
most of the sector specific requirements are laid down in Regulations that have a lower 
hierarchical status in the Latvian legal system than laws. When it comes to laws that have 
the same status as the Law on the Free Provision of Services, the latter is considered to 
be  lex  specialis  but  this  is  still  subject  to  the  interpretation  by  the  court  where  some 
additional insecurity may rise from the wording of Section 3(2) of the Law on the Free 
Provision of Services which could interpreted as giving precedence to sectorial laws over 
the Law on the Free Provision of Services.  

3.  

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The main problem is the above mentioned lack of clarity as to applicable provisions due 
to the missing Regulations, still to be adopted.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In  case  of  professional  services,  real-estate  evaluators  and  geodetic  work  performers 
must be certified that seems to amount to an authorisation in essence. This requirement is 
currently under revision to provide for a mutual recognition principle. 

In the construction sector, a service provider employing at least one person who has the 
right  to  run  an  independent  practice  (builder’s  practice  or  architect’s  practice)  must  be 
registered in the Construction Merchants' Register. 

In  the  retail  sector  an  authorisation  is  required  for  sales  in  markets  and  street  selling 
(authorisation from local-governments). 

In tourism, tourism agents and operators need to be registered in the specific database of 
tourist agents and tourist operators. 

157 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   LITHUANIA   
__________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

There is one Point of Single Contact in Lithuania, i.e. www.verslovartai.lt for users based 
in  Lithuania  and  for  users  from  outside  Lithuania.  The  portal  is  linked  to  a  physical 
infrastructure  of  the  PSC.  The  Lithuanian  PSC  thus  goes  beyond  the  minimum 
requirements  set  by  the  Services  Directive  (the  thematic  areas  covered  by  the  portal 
include  starting  up  a  business  -  encompassing  both  advice  on  grants,  loans,  funding, 
intellectual  property,  and  advice  on  legal  structures,  company  registrations,  permits, 
insurance -, employment, taxes and social security issues).  

The  portal  home  page  is  in  Lithuanian  with  a  button  linking  directly  to  the  English 
version. However the portal in English is less detailed than the one in Lithuanian.  

The Point of Single Contact in Lithuania does not yet cover all the necessary information. 
The PSC is good at information for company registration, permits, tax and social security 
formalities,  but  lacks  information  on  requirements  related  to  premises/location  of  the 
service  provider  and  cross-border  procedures.  For  cross-border  service  provision,  the 
availability of information varies by business sector, especially when it comes to detailed 
information (guidance on what forms and supportive documents have to be submitted as 
part of an application, whether originals or simple copies are accepted, etc.).  

A good practice is the use of interactive questionnaires that provide checklists for starting 
a  business  or  applying  for  a  license.  Questionnaires  are  developed  by  certain  field  of 
activity,  when  starting  a  business  or  verification  questionnaires,  helping  business  to 
check, whether there activity is exercised in according with the requirements as well as 
helping get ready for the visits of the controlling authorities. 

The  Lithuanian  portal  provides  information  in  English  language  however,  all  forms 
which are required to be filled in are in Lithuanian only. 

The  portal  does  not  provide  a  clear  distinction  for  foreign  businesses  considering 
permanent (i.e. an establishment) and cross-border service provision.  

Overall,  the  electronic  procedures  provided  by  the  Lithuanian  portal  are  the  same  for 
permanent  establishment  of  a  business  and  for  temporary  provision  of  services,  if  any 
requirements  are  applied  for  the  latter.  A  good  part  of  the  covered  procedures  can  be 
completed online, except for some licences and registrations. Online availability is lower 
(if not absent) for procedures relating to the premises of the providers and the place the 
service is carried out (downloadable forms).  

For completion of procedures, eID and e-signatures are required. Only national tools are 
supported, and no cross-border identification is currently available.  

Payments  can  be  conducted  via  online  e-bank  transfers;  credit  and  debit  cards  are  not 
supported. Proof of payment is to be provided by scanning the transfer confirmation.   

No  tracking  services  exist  which  would  enable  users  to  monitor  the  progress  of  their 
procedures.  Information by competent authorities is provided to service providers via e-
mail or phone call. 

Solutions for supporting cross-border eIDs and e-signatures are under development.  

158 

 
 
 
The portal provides interactive tools to obtain information (downloadable guides, videos 
and demos or case studies). These are generally good, easy to use and comprehensive.  

If no answer can be found in the provided tools, a help message in the portal can be used.  
A user can choose a topic from a drop-down list and write a question to the PSC.  
Overall the usability of the Lithuanian PSC62 by end-users was deemed to be very good 
with  some  wishes  for  improvements    to  extend  the  coverage  of  interactive  tools  to  all 
sectors  and  also  make  it  overall  available  in  EN,  improve  the  structure  of  information 
including  by  making  a  clear  distinction  between  requirements  and  procedures  for 
permanent establishment and cross-border provision of services, implementation of web 
forms, allow service providers from other MS to use their eID and e-signs and translate 
forms. 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Lithuania (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The new version of the Law on Control of Weapons and Ammunition entered into force 
on 1 March 2011 and abolished the requirement based on nationality and residency.  On 
the  contrary,  the  latest  amendment  to  the  Law  on  Vocational  Education,  which  entered 
into force on 10 June 2010, foresees that in order to provide formal vocational training a 
natural  person  from  another  Member  States  must  have  its  residence  in  Lithuania. 
According  to  Article  14,  requirements  that  discriminate  on  the  bases  of  residence  are 
prohibited and need to be abolished. 

The requirement that service providers have to take a specific legal form was abolished 
in significant number of sectorial laws. . Nevertheless, the latest amendments to the Law 
on  Tourism  introduced  a  specific  legal  form  requirement  for  the  tourism  information 
service  providers  which  can  only  be  operated  by  a  legal  person.  Moreover,  the 
requirement fixing a minimum number of employees still remains for some areas, namely 
–  company  restructuring  administration  and  company  bankruptcy  administration.  The 
shareholding requirement has been identified in the Law on the Bar for the professional 
members    whereby  lawyers  have  to  own  100  %  of  the  capital  of  professional 
partnerships. 

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The principle of tacit approval has been implemented via the horizontal law transposing 
the  Services  Directive,  namely  Article  7(3)  of  the  Law  on  Services.  In  addition  tacit 
approval has been included explicitly in majority of sectoral laws. The horizontal Law on 
Services also foresees that derogations for tacit approval could be introduced, but only in 
laws  and  if  justified  by  overriding  reasons  relating  to  the  public  interest,  including 
legitimate  interest  of  the  third  parties.  For  example,  such  derogations  have  been 
introduced  in  the  Laws  on  Control  of  Circulation  of  Civil  Pyrotechnic  Means,  on 
Vocational Education, on Maintenance of Potentially Dangerous Equipment. 

62 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

159 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

Article  15  of  Law  on  Services  literally  transposes  the  provisions  of  Article  24  of  the 
Directive. One total prohibition has been identified for lawyers in Article 42 of the Law 
on the Bar which contains a total prohibition on commercial communications. The type 
of  information  that  can  be  communicated  can  merely  be  informative  and  is  therefore 
narrower than a commercial communication as defined by the Directive. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation 

Article 16 has been implemented by way of horizontal legislation with additional sector-
specific laws. The Law on Services seems to transpose most of the requirements covered 
by  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  correctly  and  completely.  The  transposing 
legislation  does  not  contain  provisions  expressly  transposing  Article  16(2)  of  the 
Services  Directive;  however,  the  Law  on  Services  does  not  allow  any  restrictions  on 
freedom to provide services in Lithuania, except cases foreseen in the Law on Services or 
other  laws.  Such  laws  must  follow  the  principles  of  non-discrimination,  necessity  and 
proportionality  referred  to  in  Article  16(1)  of  the  Services  Directive.  The  four  reasons 
justifying  the  imposition  of  Lithuanian  requirements  on  cross-border  service  providers 
established in other Member States namely, public policy, public security, public health 
and protection of the environment are laid down by Article 9, section 3, paragraph 2, of 
the Law on Services.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The  Law  on  Services  enables  service  providers  established  in  other  Member  States  to 
provide  services  in  Lithuania  without  having  to  comply  with  additional  requirements, 
unless  specific  requirements  are  established  by  laws.  This  means  that  only  laws,  not 
secondary  legislation,  may  impose  additional  requirements  on  service  providers  from 
other  Member  States.  Such  laws,  in  so  doing,  must  meet  the  principles  of  non-
discrimination, necessity and proportionality.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In  the  professional  services  sector  there  remain  a  number  of  requirements,  applied  to 
incoming  service  providers.  The  Law  on  Company  restructuring  and  the  Law  on 
Company bankruptcy foresee an establishment requirement for the legal persons and an 
obligation  on  the  all  service  providers  to  obtain  an  authorisation  from  the  competent 
authority. 

In  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services  sector,  the  Law  on  Construction 
foresees an examination of legal knowledge under the programmes approved by the body 
authorised by the Lithuanian Government for engineers intending to exercise temporary 
service activity in Lithuania.  

160 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In the real estate sector property assessment services have to be carried out by entities 
that  are  registered  in  Lithuania.  For  the  registration  of  an  entity  in  Lithuania  the  same 
package  of  documents  must  be  submitted  for  cross-border  service  provision  as  for 
establishment. 

In the retail sector the Law on Alcohol Control as well as the Law on Tobacco Control 
still contains establishment requirement. 

161 

 
 
 
 
   LUXEMBOURG   
___________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

Luxembourg has set up one virtual point of single contact, http://www.guichet.public.lu, 
which is aimed at citizens and businesses users based in or outside Luxembourg. Physical 
PSCs  are  run  by  the  Chamber  of  Commerce  and  the  Chamber  of  Trades,  the  so  called 
"Espace Entreprises" and "Contact Entreprises".  

The degree of information offered on the PSC of Luxembourg is generally very good. A 
simple and advanced search function is offered to help users find the relevant information 
easier  and  faster.  This  seems  particularly  important  for  service  providers  from  other 
Member States which are generally less familiar with the legal or administrative system 
in Luxembourg.  

The  establishment  of  the  PSC  has  also  led  to  the  development  of  an  interactive  form, 
available in French, German and English, where the provision of occasional services in 
Luxemburg can be notified to the relevant authority by simple mail.  

On-line completion of procedures is in general good but can however still be improved 
by the Luxembourg PSC in order to avoid documents to be send by post.  

Several support tools are being offered to users such as online help through FAQs, search 
function  and  email  to  the  physical  PSCs.  For  technical  questions  and  business  permits 
helpdesks are being offered.  

The  linguistic  availability  of  the  information  offered  on  the  PSC  in  Luxembourg  is 
considered  well  as  it  offers  for  instance  most  electronic  forms,  the  search  facility,  the 
FAQs and several other user support elements in English and French.  
The overall use and usability of the Luxembourg PSC is above average.63 However, some 
areas of improvement could be made such as the set-up of an improved search function to 
assist users in finding the relevant information. Another improvement that would benefit 
service  providers  is  the  provision  of  more  online  services  and  the  use  of  marketing 
activities to increase awareness about the point of single contact website.   

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

In May 2011, Luxembourg adopted the law related to services in the internal market. It is 
a framework law of horizontal application transposing almost literally the provisions of 
the Services Directive. Relevant sectorial laws were checked as well and adapted to be 
aligned with the requirements of the horizontal law. The number of sector-specific laws 
to be amended was relatively small because most economic activities are covered by the 
new law regulating access to the professions of craftsmen, traders, retailers, industrialists 
and other liberal professions. The legislative process is on-going for the law on alcohol 
serving establishments.  

63 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

162 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Luxemburg (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

Concerning  professional  services,  several  restrictions  still  exist  with  regard  to  the 
profession  of  lawyers  such  as  the  shareholding  in  law  firms.  The  establishment  of  a 
branch  in  Luxembourg  of  a  law  firm  established  in  an  EU  Member  State  that  includes 
non-lawyers  is  prohibited.  A  lawyer  can  open  only  one  office  in  Luxembourg. 
Concerning legal form, the law of 16 December 2011 concerning the exercise of the legal 
profession as a legal entity has broadened the possibilities for the legal profession making 
it possible for European law firms to provide services in Luxemburg without having to 
modify their original legal form. 

No  forbidden  requirements  in  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services  as 
Luxembourg  abolished  the  obligation  to  have  the  opinion  of  a  committee,  including 
persons from the same profession, on the application for authorisation of a profession in 
this  sector.  Other  requirements  were  abolished  in  the  course  of  the  transposition  of  the 
Services  Directive  such  as  a  shareholding  requirement  obliging  the  qualified  person  to 
have  a  majority  share  and  a  ban  on  having  more  than  one  establishment  in  the 
crafts/construction sector.  

No  forbidden  requirements  in  real  estate  sector.  To  be  noted  that  in  the  case  of  real 
estate  agents  Luxembourg  abolished  a  procedure  including  competitors  in  the  decision 
making process. Before, when deciding on an application for authorisation the authorities 
received  the  opinion  of  a  committee  that  included  among  others  competing  real  estate 
agents.  This  forbidden  requirement  was  removed  by  the  new  Law  regulating  certain 
professions.  

Under the former law regulating certain professions a market study had to be provided in 
the application for authorisation of retail spaces of more than 2000 square metres. This 
requirement  was  abolished  by  the  new  2011  Law  regulating  certain  professions. 
Authorisations  for  these  retail  spaces  however  are  still  subjected  to  specific  criteria 
regarding the quality of urban planning and consumer protection such as the equilibrium 
between activities in city centres and urban zones.  

In  the  other  sectors  examined,  i.e.  the  tourism  and  education  sector  no  such 
requirements have been identified.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval applies as a general rule and was introduced in the horizontal law. A list 
of  exceptions  however  was  included  where  tacit  approval  does  not  apply  to  aspects  of 
public interest and public security such as weapons trade and protection of environment. 
Consequently,  the  laws  that  are  not  mentioned  in  the  list  should  be  understood  as 
providing for a tacit approval scheme.  

In practice, it seems that Luxemburg has set a term of three months for administrations to 
reply on the submission of a complete request. If they do not respond within this deadline 
the authorisation should considered to be given.  

163 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   
3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

Luxemburg  has  abolished  all  total  prohibitions  on  commercial  communications  by 
regulated professions in his horizontal law implementing the Services Directive. 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Luxembourg implemented the freedom to provide services clause foreseen by article 16 
of  the  Services  Directive  by  way  of  a  horizontal  law  as  well  as  by  sector-specific 
legislation.  The  horizontal  law  related  to  the  services  in  the  internal  market  literally 
reproduced  Article  16(1)  and  Article  16(2)  of  the  Services  Directive.  With  regard  to 
article  16(3),  no  mention  is  made  of  overriding  reasons  of  general  interest  other  than 
public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  the  protection  of  the  environment.  The 
exemption for labour conditions was also included in the general law on services in the 
internal market. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

Even  before  the  adoption  of  the  law  related  to  services  in  the  internal  market,  the 
Government started to align its legislation to the freedom to provide services clause. The 
authorisation  for  electricians,  for  established  as  well  as  foreign  entrants,  to  work  in 
installations of the electricity distribution grid was abolished as this was considered to be 
a restriction to the freedom to provide services. Other requirements such as accreditation 
for  auditors,  horizontal  authorisation  for  the  establishment  of  economic  activities  were 
brought in line with the letter and spirit of the Services Directive.   

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

However, cross-border service providers will still need to apply for an authorisation for 
child welfare and assistance to persons in need, technical studies and verifications in the 
field of environment and accreditation for institutes of higher education. In addition, the 
selling of alcoholic drinks outside the premises can only be carried out in the territory of 
a municipality by the persons established there, excluding incoming service providers.   

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

Regarding  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services,  individuals  or  private  or 
public entities other than the State which carry out technical studies and verifications in 
the  field  of  the  environment  must  apply  for  an  authorisation.  Cross-border  service 
providers  undertaking  these  activities  in  Luxembourg  are  not  exempted  from  this 
authorisation.  No  explicit  justification  is  provided  by  the  legislator,  though  this 
authorisation  may  however  have  been  maintained  following  screening  on  grounds  of 
environmental protection.  

In the retail sector several requirements have been abolished. Before the entry into force 
of the new law on regulated professions, there was no derogation from the requirement 

164 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
for an authorisation for cross-border service providers hawking certain goods (e.g. bread, 
milk,  sugar)  temporarily  and  occasionally  in  Luxembourg.  Furthermore,  there  was  a 
notification obligation for all kinds of (trade) services, including construction. Now, the 
new  law  on  regulated  professions  exempts  incoming  service  providers  from  any 
administrative authorisation such as registration with the trade register.  

In  the  other  sectors  examined,  i.e.  the  professional  services,  real  estate,  tourism  and 
education sector no such requirements have been identified.  

165 

 
 
 
 
   MALTA   
_______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The first portal that was set up in order to implement the Services Directive contained the 
relevant information in English and Maltese language, but was lacking a search facility 
as  well  as  a  distinction  between  permanent  establishment  and  cross  border  activity 
scenarios.  The  possibility to  complete procedures on-line was only available for a very 
limited number of procedures.  

However  in  January  2012,  a  new  portal,  “Business  first”,  was  launched  and 
significantly improves the performance of the Maltese PSC. It is still too early for a 
more detailed analysis of this new site, as the new portal has not been tested in the same 
way as was tested the old version and the PSCs from other Member States. 

As  far  as  it  can  be  evaluated  so  far,  the  new  portal  provides  generally  very  good  and 
complete  information  and  the  information  offered  goes  well  beyond  the  scope  of  the 
Services  Directive  and  covers  also  procedures  like  VAT  registration,  social  security 
contributions,  residence  permits,  employment licences.  All  applications are available in 
English and some in Maltese too.  

Improvements could still be made concerning the on-line availability of procedures and 
the distinction between establishment and cross-border scenarios.64  

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

Malta  adopted  a  mix  of  horizontal  and  sector  specific  implementing  measures.  The 
horizontal  law  which  was  enacted  as  an  omnibus  act  included  amendments  to  sixteen 
pieces  of  primary  sector  specific  legislation,  mainly  in  the  general  trade,  tourism, 
regulated professions and education sector. 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Malta 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

Article  14  of  the  Services  Directive  has  been  almost  literally  transposed  in  the  general 
horizontal  implementation  act.  It  provides  that  competent  authorities  are  expressly 
prohibited from making access to or the exercise of a service activity in Malta subject to 
compliance with any of the requirements listed in the Directive as being prohibited. This 
implies that in principle the prohibited requirements can never be imposed in any service 
sector. However, such requirements have been identified in sector specific legislation and 
even  if  the  horizontal  law  should  prevail,  there  is  some  legal  insecurity  for  service 
providers whether or not to they have to fulfil those requirements.  

64 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

166 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
Concerning  professional  services,  legal  form  and  shareholding  requirements  for 
architects and civil engineers and auditors as well as for lawyers have been maintained. 

As far as the retail sector is concerned, it seems that for selling of alcoholic beverages 
there is an economic needs test which has been maintained. 

Furthermore  quantitative  and  territorial  restrictions  concerning  timeshare  and  timeshare 
like  products  promotion  have  been  maintained  as  the  number  of  licences  issued  by  the 
authority  is  limited  to  any  one  marketer  to  a  maximum  of  eight  operators.  Timeshare 
representatives  also  have  to  display  prominently  the  identity  document  issued  by  the 
authority.  In  addition  a  whole  series  of  other  requirements  still  apply,  like  special 
qualification training from recognised training institution or at least two years' experience 
in  the  management  of  a  similar  business  activity  as  a  condition  to  obtain  a  licence  for 
tourist  accommodation,  catering  establishments,  incoming  tourism  agencies,  organised 
excursion  operator  and  travel  agencies.  And  finally,  for  special  designated  locations 
(such  as  prehistoric  sites  and  UNESCO  Heritage  sites)  tourist  guides  have  to  possess 
specific knowledge of the designated location which is recognised by the authority. 

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval, an important mean to cutting red tape, as it foresees that an authorisation 
will  be  deemed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  provider  in  case  an  application  has  not 
received any response within the set time period, has been implemented by the horizontal 
law implementing the Services Directive.  

The horizontal law also foresees that different arrangements may be made if justified by 
overriding  reasons  relating  to  the  public  interest.  In  this  respect  a  quite  considerable 
number  of  those  exceptions  have  been  identified.  For  instance  the  Trading  License 
Regulation, the Building (Price Control) Act, the Malta Travel and Tourism Act for the 
operation  of  a  tourist  accommodation  or  a  catering  establishment,  the  Timeshare 
Regulations,  the  Travel  Operators  Regulations,  the  Recreational  Diving  Services 
Regulations do not foresee tacit approval of certain authorisations where it is deemed that 
there are overriding reasons relating to the public interest.  

Tacit  approval  has  been  specifically  foreseen  in  sector  specific  legislation  for  instance 
concerning the licensing of tourist guides, the authorisation for car rental services or the 
authorisation for the temporary provision of services as a civil and structural engineer in 
Malta. 

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Malta implemented the freedom to provide services clause in the horizontal Services Act.   

167 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
The  Services  Act  uses  very  similar  wording  to  the  Directive  and  states  that  incoming 
service  providers  cannot  be  prevented  from  providing  services  by  the  imposition  of 
requirements which are discriminatory, unnecessary or disproportionate. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

In general there is no systematic distinction between freedom of establishment and free 
provision of services.  

However,  Malta  has  introduced  specific  provisions  for  cross-border  providers  in  some 
sector  specific  legislation  (e.g.  accountancy  profession,  architects  and  veterinarians). 
Where no such distinction is made, the competent authority will have to decide on a case 
by case basis whether or not a requirement imposed on a service provider complies with 
the free provision of services principles as laid down in article 16 of the Directive.  

For example, the Trade Licensing Act, which covers those commercial activities that are 
not otherwise governed by any other sector specific law, provides for the possibility of 
the  regulatory  authority  to  impose  requirements  with  regard  to  the  provision  of  a 
particular service activity, where these are justified for reasons relating to public policy, 
public security, public health or the protection of the environment. In order to establish 
whether  a  service  provider  is  established  or  exercising  his  freedom  to  provide  services 
the competent authority "shall assess and decide each case on its individual merits and in 
conformity with EU law and Court of Justice case-law".  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

In  general  Malta  has  removed  establishment  requirements  and  replaced  authorisation 
schemes for cross-border service providers such as tourist guides, employment agencies 
and sellers of time-shares by less restrictive notification requirements. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In  the  professional  services  sector,  no  requirements  applying  to  incoming  service 
providers have been identified.  

Concerning  the  retail  sector,  a  certain  number  of  authorisation  schemes  have  been 
replaced  by  notification  or  information  obligations  and  a  prohibition  on  regulatory 
authority from imposing discriminatory, unnecessary or disproportionate requirements on 
incoming providers except where these are justified for the four reasons mentioned in the 
Directive. 

In  the  tourism  sector,  prior  notification  is  still  required  for  time  share  promotion 
services and for tour operators and recreational diving services. 

However  for  certain  activities  requiring  a  licence  the  legislation  does  not  distinguish 
between  establishment  and  cross  border  provision  of  services.  It  is  not  clear  how  this 
legislation interacts with the Services Act and how it is applied in practice to incoming 
service providers. 

168 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   NETHERLANDS   
_____________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The Netherlands has one portal which leads to all the information and transactions that 
entrepreneurs need when starting up or running a business in the Netherlands. It was built 
on  the  existing  portal  Answers  for  Business.  This  portal  aims  to  integrate  the  public 
authorities on all levels including Ministries, municipal authorities, provincial authorities 
and water boards. Because of the decentralized governmental system in the Netherlands, 
the website contains basic information and links towards specific information, forms and 
transactions  which  are  made  available  on  the  websites  of  more  than  600  Competent 
Authorities.  

The level of information available is considered very good as a clear guiding facility is 
being  offered.  Direct  assistance  and  advice  via  a  chat  function  is  also  seen  as  best 
practice as it significantly improves the usability of the Point of Single Contact.  

Improvements can be made in general on the presentation of different business situations, 
i.e.  in  particular  the  distinction  between  establishment  and  cross  border  provision  of 
services, which is helpful for users of the portal from other Member States who are less 
familiar with the Dutch legal and administrative system.  

The development of the PSC has led to the offer of a relatively high number of electronic 
procedures. Most of them can be submitted by means of two-way interaction using the 
Message  Box  while  the  documents  can  only  be  obtained  through  the  websites  of  the 
competent authorities.  

Consequently, on-line completion of procedures can still be improved by offering more 
full electronic case handling.  

The Dutch PSC portal provides for a number of highly praised interactive tools to assist 
PSC  users  to  obtain  information.  Online  help  and  guidance  is  provided  by  email,  chat, 
Twitter and an easy search facility. A telephone number is also at the disposal of users.  

The  linguistic  availability  of  the  PSC  however  could  be  improved  as  user  support 
elements  on  the  linked  sites  of  competent  authorities  were  frequently  only  offered  in 
Dutch and therefore provide insufficient support for foreign visitors.  
The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  Dutch  PSC  is  above  average65.  However, 
improvements could be made concerning the clarity of information (distinction between 
establishment and cross border provision of services scenarios), the linguistic availability 
and the availability of full on-line procedures.  

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

In  general,  the  Netherlands  made  considerable  efforts  to  ensure  correct  implementation 
of the Services Directive and has made a substantial number of important legislative and 
practical changes. In particular the screening of legislation was a complex exercise due to 

65 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

169 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
the existence of more than 600 competent authorities including local authorities such as 
municipalities and provinces.   

In  contrast  to  the  majority  of  Member  States,  the  Netherlands  decided  not  to  transpose 
specific  provisions  of  the  Services  Directive  through  horizontal  rules,  and  instead 
amended non-binding instructions on legislation on the one hand and relied on adapting 
those pieces of sector-specific legislation that conflicted with the Directive on the other 
hand.  Around  20  national  measures  have  been  adopted  in  order  to  implement  the 
Services Directive.   

The general framework included in the Services Act contains important parts on the Point 
of  Single  Contact  such  as  rules  on  information,  (electronic)  assistance,  and  legal 
remedies for service providers, business customers and consumers. Also, guidelines are 
being  given  to  competent  authorities  on  how  to  proceed  with  authorisations  and  to 
provide mutual assistance to guarantee a good administrative cooperation. Several Acts 
have  been  amended  by  the  Services  Act  for  instance  the  general  Act  on  administrative 
law,  the  Civil  Code,  the  Act  on  enforcement  of  consumer  protection  and  the  Code  on 
Civil procedures.   

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in  the 
Netherlands (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

No forbidden requirements were identified in the professional services sector; however, 
some requirements subject to the evaluation of Member States have been identified like 
requirements relating to the shareholding of companies for lawyers and accountants. For 
lawyers  all  shares  of  the  legal  practice  must  be  owned  by  lawyers  who  practice  in  the 
partnership in question except for holding companies, foundations and persons employed 
in  the  legal  partnership  as  non-lawyers  and  holding  no  more  than  1/10  of  the  capital. 
Concerning accountants the majority of shares of an accountant office has to be held by 
registered accountants.   

The requirement that inspection of certain heating machines has to be performed only by 
companies  established  in  the  Netherlands  has  been  abolished  in  the  crafts  and 
certification sector.  

In  retail  sector,  persons  that  want  a  licence  for  a  market  stand  should  have  their  legal 
residency  in  the  Netherlands.  The  system  of  spatial  planning  still  allows  for  zoning 
schemes in which rules regulating the establishment of certain retail outlets (such as large 
stores, stores selling do-it-yourself commodities etc.) take economic considerations into 
account for the granting of the relevant licence, despite a clear prohibition in the spatial 
planning decree (BRO).  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit  approval  of  authorisations  which  contributes  to  cut  red  tape  is  foreseen  in  the 
general  Act  on  administrative  law.  In  addition  the  Services  Act  includes  provisions  on 
good  administration  and  assistance  to  service  providers,  for  instance  information  and 
assistance  should  be  given by competent authorities as quickly as possible in an up-to-

170 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
date, clear and transparent manner. The law provides that the decision shall take effect on 
the third day after the time period for the administration to take a decision has ended.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Dutch  legislation  generally  does  not  make  a  distinction  between,  on  the  one  hand,  a 
situation where a service provider is established in the Netherlands or will establish itself 
in the Netherlands and, on the other, a situation involving the temporary provision of a 
cross-border  service  by  a  service  provider  from  another  Member  State.  Thus  the 
Netherlands  decided  not  to  transpose  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  in  general 
through horizontal rules, and instead assessed much of their legislation against the strict 
requirements  of  Article  16  and  relied  on  adapting  those  pieces  of  sector-specific 
legislation  that  conflicted  with  these  rules.  In  addition.  The  Netherlands  amended  non-
binding  instructions  for  the  legislator.  According  to  the  Dutch  legal  order  the  national 
government  is  empowered  to  require  regional  or  local  authorities  to  correct  their 
regulation in case of non-compliance with EU legislation.  

The most important legislation applying to cross border services is contained in the Trade 
Registry Decree and in an Act of Parliament modifying the General Administrative Law 
Act,  the  Services  Act  and  several  other  Acts  where  the  principle  of  tacit  approval  is 
included.    

Other amendments of provisions applying to cross border services are for instance rules 
on exclusion of arbiters based on nationality in arbitration cases, provisions in the retail 
sector, the abolition of the permit for assessors dealing with damage from disasters/major 
accidents and a requirement regarding construction waste. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The  use  of  sector-specific  amendments  on  the  one  hand  and  the  Instructions  for 
legislation on the other hand sets the distinction between a service provider that wants to 
establish  a  business  in  the  Netherlands  and  a  service  provider  wishing  to  provide 
temporary cross border services. This means that a vast majority of the legislation should 
be in conformity with the free provision of services clause as it must be either included in 
the  legislation  or  covered  by  the  Instructions.  The  Netherlands  decided  to  screen  and 
asses its legislation against the strict requirements of article 16 for cross-border as well as 
for domestic providers. The maintained requirements will therefore usually apply to both 
these scenarios. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The  specific  way  in  which  the  Netherlands  has  implemented  the  free  provision  of 
services  clause  seems  to  provide  a  sufficient  transposition  of  the  obligations  of  the 
Services  Directive.  However,  the  Instructions  on  legislation  do  not  form  binding 

171 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
legislation  and  give  competent  authorities  the  right  to  deviate  from  the  instructions  if 
careful explanations are being given for that. In addition, those Instructions do not apply 
to  local  authorities  but  in  order  to  ensure  that  municipalities  would  comply  with  the 
Services  Directive,  model  decrees  have  been  issued  by  the  Association  of  Netherlands 
Municipalities. Internal remedies can be imposed in case local authorities do not comply 
with those instructions.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In  the  Crafts  and  certification  sector  several  requirements  can  be  identified  such  as 
certification organisations and testing laboratories performing certain tasks need to have 
an  establishment  in  the  Netherlands.  Inspectors  of  heating  machines  must  be  appointed 
by  the  Minister  of  Infrastructure  and  Environment.  Noise  emission  inspectors  for 
materials  used  outdoors  need  to  obtain  an  accreditation.  Certification  organisations  and 
testing laboratories where tasks regarding construction guidelines are concerned have to 
be  appointed  by  the  Minister  (but  service  providers  from  other  Member  States  are  also 
eligible for appointment and accreditation). 

In  the  retail  sector,  the  Doorstep  Selling  Act  (Colportagewet)  used  to  impose  on 
salespersons  not  residing  in  the  Netherlands  an  obligation  to  date  stamp  contracts  in 
Rotterdam  while  salespersons  residing  in  the  Netherlands  could  do  this  in  the 
municipality where they sold the goods. The date stamp duty has been deleted altogether. 
Also,  the  certification  of  personal  equipment  and  machines  sold  in  supermarkets  was 
abolished.  The  obligation  to  have  an  authorisation  or  registration  for  incoming  service 
providers still exists for street selling in The Hague, to trade in live animals, to organise a 
flea market.    

The obligation to have an authorisation or registration for incoming service providers still 
exists in the tourism sector such as for tours with motor vehicles and Foreshore walking.  

172 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   POLAND   
_______________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The Polish Point of Single Contact consists of an online portal (eu-go.gov.pl) created as a 
common  initiative  of  the  Ministry  of  Economy  (coordinator),  the  Polish  Chamber  of 
Commerce and the Institute of Logistics and Warehousing.  The PSC portal is developed 
within  an  e-government  project  called  UEPA,  which  aims  to  simplify  administrative 
procedures  and  make  them  electronically  available  till  the  end  of  2013.  The  PSC  is 
integrated to the ePUAP platform (electronic platform for public services).  Whereas the 
PSC page provides the relevant information on requirements and procedures, the actual 
completion of procedures is carried out through the ePUAP portal.  

In  terms  of  information  provision,  the  Polish  PSC  goes  beyond  the  minimum 
requirements of the Services Directive. Information provision is in general good but not 
fully  satisfactory  as  some  information  is  still  missing,  is  not  sufficiently  detailed  (e.g. 
deadlines,  means  of  redress,  supportive  documents  to  be  submitted)  or  too  detailed. 
Information  can  be  access  or  searched  in  number  of  different  ways:  by  type  of  users, 
service sectors, thematic index of procedures. 

The scope of procedures available online varies and online completion in most cases is 
not possible yet, but the process of implementing online procedures is still on-going. E-
signatures  or  national  solution  (so  called  trusted  profile)  are  required  to  complete  most 
procedures  online,  ePUAP  platform  does  not  support  the  foreign  e-signatures.  The 
tracking of the procedures and online payment are not possible on PSC portal.  

The number of assistance services is available to PSC's users (e.g.FAQ, Helpdesk). These 
are generally good and easy to use.  

The  focus  groups  taking  part  in  the  Deloitte's  assessment  of  the  PSC  expressed  a 
relatively  low  level  of  satisfaction  with  the  content  on  the  portal  mostly  due  to  the 
problems  with  the  completion  of  procedures.  Therefore  the  extension  of  the  scope  of 
available  procedures  and  the  possibilities  for  their  full  electronic  completion  is  highly 
recommended.  

Improvements should be made also for cross-border provision of services. Although the 
PSC  provides  a  separate  section  for  temporary  provision  of  services,  it  is  difficult  to 
understand different requirements applicable to foreign service providers. 

The  test  users  expressed  more  positive  outlook  about  the  portal's  accessibility  and  in 
general  they  found  it  is  easy  to  use66.  The  Polish  PSC  is  easily  accessible  and  its 
positioning is very good in search engines. Nevertheless the awareness about the portal is 
low and needs to be improved in order to increase its uptake by business.  

Polish PSC is not translated into other languages, but provides an electronic translation 
facility.  This  does  not  seem  to  be  problematic  for  the  access  to  information  but 
completion of procedures for foreign user is difficult as they are only available in Polish.  

66 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

173 

 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Poland 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

Implementation  of  the  Article  14  and  15  of  the  Services  Directive  was  done  through 
sector specific legislation. The evaluation of the implementation of the Services Directive 
has revealed that most of the requirements prohibited by Article 14 of the Directive have 
been removed by changes in the sector specific laws. The requirement still maintained in 
the  Polish  legislation  concerns  the  education  sector:  a  driving  school  can  only  be 
operated  by  the  entrepreneur  having  a  seat  or  place  of  residence  in  Poland,  which 
constitutes a requirement contrary to article 14 (1) of the Services Directive.  

Some requirements where the Directive left a margin of appreciation to Member States to 
streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  establishment  of  providers  and  which  are 
foreseen in article 15 of the Directive have been identified. The obligation for the legal 
professionals and tax advisors to be exercised by natural persons or partnerships has been 
made less stringent by allowing additional option of a joint-stock limited partnership. For 
patent agents and tax advisors additional legal forms of joint stock and limited liability 
companies are available (those are coupled with the shareholding requirements: majority 
of votes and shares must belong to the members of the relevant profession, the majority 
of the members of the management board need to be the members of the profession, the 
sale  of  the  shares  requires  the  approval  of  the  management  board).  For  patent  agents, 
solicitors and advocates minimum tariffs have been identified.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Poland  introduced  a  tacit  approval  of  authorisations  through  Article  46  (7)  of  the 
horizontal  law,  which  amends  the  Act  of  2  July  2004  on  the  Freedom  of  Economic 
Activity (FEA).  FEA is the main act governing the performance of economic activity on 
the territory of Poland. According to this change tacit approval constitutes a general rule 
unless  the  law  stipulates  otherwise.    If  the  authority  fails  to  decide  on  the  application 
within  the  indicated  time  limit  set,  it  is  deemed  that  the  authority  has  decided  as 
requested  by  the  entrepreneur,  unless  the  provisions  of  specific  acts  provide  otherwise 
due to overriding reason relating to the public interest. The Polish code on administrative 
conduct  stipulates  the  general  rule  that  the  bodies  of  public  administration  should  deal 
with the matters without unnecessary delay. This is not however a fixed and clear period. 

The  Act  of  4  March  2010  foresees  also  exceptions  to  the  rule  on  tacit  approval  for 
specific activities. The exception to the rule on tacit approval concerns: training services 
for  the  aviation  personnel,  provision  of  aviation  services  other  than  air  transport, 
wholesale  sale  of  alcoholic  beverages  above and  below  18%,  sale  of  alcohol  for  inside 
and  outside  consumption,  authorisation  for  the  sale  of  alcohol  for  the  reception 
organizers.  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

Article  8  of  the  Act  of  4  March  2010  conforms  to  the  provisions  of  article  24  of  the 
Directive,  which  does  not  contain  any  prohibitions  on  the  commercial  communications 

174 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
by  the  regulated  professions.  In  Poland  rules  on  commercial  communication  are  often 
stipulated in the rules issued by the professional association.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Poland  implemented  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  in  Article  4  of  the  PSA 
(horizontal legislation). The article introduces a general rule that service providers from 
other Member States may temporarily provide services in the territory of Poland, without 
having to be entered in any business register. The same Article specifies that temporary 
provision of services may be subject to the requirement to obtain a certificate (certyfikat), 
concession  (koncesja),  licence  (licencja),  authorisation  (zezwolenie),  approval  (zgoda), 
entry in the register of regulated activity (wpis do rejestru działalności regulowanej) or 
to other appropriate register if the provision of the specific law imposes such obligation 
on  the  grounds  on  public  policy,  public  security,  and  protection  of  public  health  or  the 
environment. 

Only one of the principles listed in article 16(1) of the Services Directive, the principle of 
necessity  is  mentioned  in  the  PSA.  The  horizontal  legislation  does  not  mention  the 
principle  of  proportionality  and  non-discrimination.  No  examples  of  provisions  that 
would directly or indirectly discriminate against service providers from another Member 
States were found in Polish legislation. As regards the principle of proportionality, there 
are still provisions in the Polish legislation which contradict it. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The  legislation  does  not  provide  for  a  clear  distinction  between  a  service  provider  that 
wants  to  establish  a  business  in  Poland  and  a  service  provider  wishing  to  provide 
temporary  
cross-  border  services.  Poland  has  introduced  provisions  for  temporary  provision  of 
services in some sector specific legislation (e.g. Act on Detective Services, Postal Law, 
Act on Plant Protection). However in most cases this distinction is missing.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

The implementation of the Article 16 raises certain doubts regarding the interpretation of 
the implementing provision especially in reference to the provision stating that temporary 
provision  of  services  may  be  subject  to  the  requirement  to  obtain  a  certificate, 
concession, licence, authorisation, approval, entry in the register of regulated activity or 
to other appropriate register if the provision of the specific law imposes such obligation 
on  the  grounds  on  public  policy,  public  security,  and  protection  of  public  health  or  the 
environment. Two possible interpretations emerge. First interpretation is straightforward 
and  requires  an  explicit  statement  in  the  specific  law  that  a  rule  also  applies  to  cross-
border  services.  The  second  possible  interpretation  stresses  that  certain  rules  can  be 
applied  to  cross–border  services,  irrespective  of  whether  relevant  law  states  explicitly 
that  the  rule  also  applies  to  such  services.  It  has  been  noted  that  this  may  lead  to 
confusion and also different interpretation and arbitrarily application by the authorities to 
cross–border service providers. Taking into account that most of sectoral legislation does 
not make a distinction between the establishment and temporary provision of services, it 

175 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
is probable that competent authorities will apply the same rules to national and cross – 
border service providers. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

Most requirements which have been maintained concern the education, the tourism and 
the  crafts, construction and certification services sectors. 

In the crafts, construction and certification services, the authorisation is required for 
the provision of the services of repairing or modernisation of technical devices as well as 
manufacturing of materials and elements used in the modernization or repair by service 
providers  from  other  Member  States.  This  requirement  was  added  by  the  horizontal 
legislation implementing the Services Directive (PSA).  

As  for  the  tourism  sector,  requirements  regarding  registration  and  possession  of  a 
special  identity  document  could  be  identified.  Travel  operators  and  travel  agencies  are 
required  to  enter  into  register  of  regulated  activity  maintained  by  voivodship  marshal. 
The entry into register (register of organizer of trainings for candidates for tourist guide 
and  tour  guide)  is  also  required  for  providers  of  training  to  travel  guides  and  tour 
guides.67  Obligation  to  possess  special  card  ("legitymacja")  and  ID  ("identyfikator")  is 
foreseen for tourist guides and tour guide. These documents should be displayed by the 
tourist  guide  and  tour  guide  when  performing  their  duties  as  a  confirmation  of  their 
competences.  

In  the  education  sector  driving  schools  operators  have  an  obligation  to  have 
establishment  and  enter  into  register  of  regulated  activity  maintained  by  starosta.  A 
number of requirements have been identified in particular for the provision of vocational 
training  leading  to  professional  qualifications.  The  requirement  to  enter  in  the  relevant 
register  have  been  identified  for  service  providers  :  conducting  additional  training  for 
drivers  licence,  conducting  training  for  the  purpose  of  road  transport  and  providing 
training on plant protection.  Service providers wanting to provide training to recreational 
managers  and  camp  counsellors  must  obtain  approval  from  the  regional  educational 
authority  ("kuratorium  oświaty").  Providers  of  special  courses  for  the  trainers  (first 
degree, second degree and master degree trainer) are required to obtain the approval of 
the Minister of Physical Education.68 Additionally service providers providing training to 
drivers  for  the  purpose  of  road  traffic,  service  providers  conducting  additional  training 
for driving licence holders, service providers providing training for drivers transporting 
hazardous  goods,  services  providers  providing  training  for  the  railway  carriers 
transporting hazardous goods, and service provides conducting trainings for operators of 
machines  and  other  technical  instruments  for  soil  moving,  construction  and  road  –
building works are obliged to have facilities and teaching equipment, which seems to be 
contradictory  to  the  rule  of  proportionality  provided  in  Article  16  (1)  of  the  Services 
Directive. 

67 The proposal for the Act on the changes to the acts regulating the exercise of some professions contains 

the deletion of this requirement, except for mountain tourist guides. 

68 The proposal for the Act on the changes to the acts regulating the exercise of some professions contains 

the deletion of this requirement. 

176 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
   PORTUGAL   
__________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  setting  up  of  the  Portuguese  point  of  single  contact  (www.portaldampresa.pt)  is 
progressing  well.  Work  for  the  setting-up  of  the  Point  of  Single  Contact  is  currently 
being undertaken in the context of the follow-up of the “Memorandum of Understanding 
for Portugal on specific economic policy conditionality” (MoU) dated 3 May 2011.  

Portugal  had  well-established  business  portal  for  the  creation  and  registration  of 
companies (Portal de Empresa). This portal provides well-functioning handling services 
related  to  company  registration,  As  regards  information  and  completion  of  other 
procedures  granting  access  to  a  service,  it  appears  that  at  the  time  of  the  assessment 
commissioned externally and which has been integrated in this report the point of single 
contact  was  undergoing  some  restructuration  and  the  procedures  under  the  Service 
Directive  could  not  be  assessed  properly.  As  of  the  end  of  October  2011  however, 
information  on  procedures  governing  access  to  services  have  been  available  for 
many sectors. The lay-out of the information presentation has been recently modified to 
give  a  more  clear  view  of  requirements  applicable  to  established  and  to  cross-border 
service providers. Updates on the legal framework applicable shall be updated as soon as 
all the pending sector-specific amendments are adopted in the months to come. For the 
moment, information is presented in Portuguese and automatic translation tools into other 
languages are offered to users. Work is to be undertaken to improve the quality of these 
translations. 

Online procedures are available for a number of services but work to extend them 
further  should  be  continued  and  enhanced.  This  work  needs  to  await  for  sector-
specific  amendments  that  are  to  be  adopted  in  the  next  months.  Work  should  be 
continued  to  facilitate  cross-border  completion  of  procedures  and  to  ensure  that 
procedures to start a business or to provide services have a sufficient degree of detail and 
of electronic availability in all locations, types of activity and competent authority. 

The  PSC  authorities  cooperate  with  competent  authorities  (at  national  and  at  local 
level)  to  ensure  that  the  workflows  of  the  procedures  are  correctly  transposed  into  the 
PSC,  in  particular  in  the  context  of  the  Zero  Licensing  Project  for  retail  and  food  and 
beverages. For this purpose authorities are also receiving training on the application that 
supports  the  back-office,  to  empower  the  different  authorities  with  the  necessary 
knowledge  to  make  small  changes  in  the  workflow,  when  required  due  to  changes  in 
legislation. This collaboration needs to be stepped up as a matter or urgent to allow for 
the faster integration of procedures in the PSC.69 

69 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

177 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  in  Portugal  required  a  very  significant 
amount  of  legislative  work,  which  is  currently  still  on-going  within  the  context  of  the 
financial aid monitoring under close scrutiny from the Commission services.  Due to the 
on-going state of the reforms, the picture below may not be updated. 

The  main  act  transposing  the  Services  Directive  into  Portugal  is  a  horizontal  law, 
Decreto-Lei 92/2010, whose provisions prevail over sector specific laws, either national, 
regional or local, regulating specific services  

The  Portuguese  authorities  are  still  in  the  process  of  completing  a  very  significant 
number  of  sector-specific  amendments  to  ensure  that  requirements  in  sector-specific 
legislation are adapted to the Services Directive. These sector-specific amendments were 
partly  contained  in  the  horizontal  law  but  are  mostly  being  carried  out  through 
amendments of specific acts.  

•  Firstly, the Portuguese horizontal law expressly amends legislation in the 

following sectors: thermal management (DL 142/2004); activity of dolphin and 
whale watching in the waters of Portuguese mainland (DL 9/2006); quality of 
drinking water (DL 306/2007); municipal services of public water supply, 
wastewater disposal and urban waste management (DL 194/2009); multi-
municipal services of public water supply and urban waste management (DL 
379/93); and incineration or co-incineration of waste (DL 85/2005).  

• 

In addition, a significant number of sector-specific amendments has been adopted 
by specific acts which have amended the Corporation Code (DL 49/2010) with a 
view to removing an establishment requirement which applied in a cross-cutting 
manner, the industrial property agents (Law 17/2010) to allow for the provision 
of services in Portugal to providers established in other Member States, leisure 
activities (DL 32/2011), holiday products (DL 37/2011); the “Zero Licence” (DL 
48/2011), travel and tourism agencies (DL 61/2011), construction and real estate 
agents (DL 69/2011), waste landfills, cartographic production and abstraction of 
groundwater (DL 84/2011) and funeral services (DL 109/2010),   DL 77/2011 
on marketability of natural gas in free market, amending DL 30/2006, DL 
78/2011 on marketability of electricity in free market, amending DL 29/2006,  
DL 99/2011 amending DL 64/2007 on Social Support Institutions, nature tourism 
establishments (Portaria 47/2012, water parks (DL 86/2012) and EMAS Auditors 
(DL 95/2012). 

Finally,  it  is  worth  noting  that  under  the  above-mentioned  MoU  of  3  May  2011,  the 
Portuguese authorities agreed to adopt the remaining necessary amendments at the time 
with a view to modifying the sector-specific legislation to fully implement the Services 
Directive. Portugal committed to adopt new legislation in the first semester of 2012. It is 
of  utmost  importance  that  all  the  pending  reforms  which  have  accumulated 
significant delays are completed as soon as possible. 

178 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Portugal (Articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The implementation of the Services Directive is resulting in general in a very significant 
reduction  of  administrative  burden  in  Portugal.  A  very  significant  number  of 
authorisations have been transformed into prior declarations and a considerable number 
of requirements applicable to the access and exercise of an activity have disappeared. 

As regards Article 14 requirements, Article 11 of Decreto Lei 92/2010 which prevails 
over  sector-specific  legislation  reproduces  the  prohibition  contained  in  the  Directive. 
Further  to  the  on-going  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive,  it  would  appear  that 
this  type  of  requirements  can  no  longer  be  identified  in  sector-specific  legislation.  In 
particular,  it  appears  that  numerous  requirements  that  did  not  recognize  insurance 
acquired  in  other  Member  States  have  been  removed  from  sector-specific  legislation 
(construction, real estate, tourism). 

As  regards  Article  15  requirements,  which  need  to  be  subject  to  a  necessity  and 
proportionality  criterion,  many  examples  of  them  can  still  be  found  in  sector-specific 
legislation.  

The  obligation  to  take  a  specific  legal  form  in  Portugal  is  applicable  to  sectors  like 
tourism  (car  rental),  pending  elimination,  and  private  higher  education.  A  legal  form 
requirement formerly applied to real estate agents was eliminated. 

Requirements on capital shareholding have been identified for certain highly regulated 
professions (regulated professions, in particular lawyers and accountants).  

In  Portugal,  a  minimum  number  of  employees  is  required  for  construction,  technical 
services  (inspection  and  maintenance  of  lifts,  skip  hoists,  escalators  and  moving 
walkways), installation of gas networks, placement agencies (all in the process of being 
amended) and also for diving services, holidays camps and whale watching. 

Maximum  tariffs  exist  for  the  servicing  of  lifts,  escalators  and  moving  walkways  and 
for the inspection of gas distribution networks and premises in buildings. 

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (Article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

For the authorisations that remain in the Portuguese legal order, simplification has been 
ensured  by  the  horizontal  law  transposing  the  Services  Directive.  For  example,  the 
national  validity  of  authorisations  has  become  a  general  rule  through  Article  17, 
paragraph  1  of  Decreto-Lei  92/2010.  The  regime  for  tourist  guides  in  the  autonomous 
regions  has  however  not  been  adapted  to  this  requirement  so  the  application  of  the 
principle will need to be ensured through the horizontal law. 

The  Portuguese  authorities  are  planning  to  go  beyond  the  rule  foreseen  in  the  Services 
Directive  and  to  extend  national  validity  to  other  procedures  such  as  the  notifications 
foreseen  in  the  Professional  Qualifications  Directive  in  the  context  of  reforms  of  Lei 
9/2009  on  the  recognition  of  qualifications  which  is  being  monitored  under  the  MOU. 
Also  the  notification  shall  be  valid  indefinitely  in  time,  except  for  those  professions 
belonging to the security sector. 

179 

 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (Article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit  approval  has  become  the  general  rule  under  Article  9,  2  (b)  of  the  Decreto-Lei 
92/2010 unless an overriding reason of general interest justifies the contrary. Article 9(2) 
of  DL  92/2010  cross-refers  to  the  tacit  approval  regulated  in  the  Portuguese 
Administrative Procedure Code. Examples of non-tacit approval remain in sector-specific 
legislation,  in  particular  in  the  area  of  private  higher  education,  aerial  services  and 
weapon sales. 

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (Article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

The  prohibition  of  total  bans  on  commercial  communications  has  been  laid  down  in 
Article  14,  paragraph  1  of  Decreto-Lei  92/2010.  Article  14(1)  of  DL  92/2010  bans  the 
conditions  which  impose  an  absolute  prohibition  of  commercial  communication  with 
regard to the regulated professions. There may be still be some cases of total prohibition 
of  commercial  communications  laid  down  in  the  statutes  of  professional  orders  (for 
example,  that  of  veterinaries).  These  remaining  restrictions  should  be  addressed  in  the 
context of the on-going reform for professions whose regulation involves a professional 
body which is currently under preparation in the context of the MOU.  

B. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

As a starting point, it should be indicated that Portuguese legislation made no difference 
at all between requirements that can be applied to established service providers and those 
that  can  be  applied  to  cross-border  service  providers  before  the  implementation  of  the 
Services  Directive  (with  a  notable  exception  in  law  governing  tourism  services).  This 
resulted in a high administrative burden which rendered the provision of services in the 
Portuguese territory very difficult. Several examples of this were challenged successfully 
before the European Court of Justice. 

1. 

National implementation  

Once  the  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  will  be  completed  in  Portugal,  the 
structure of Portuguese legislation shall adequately reflect the two freedoms foreseen in 
the  Treaty.  Sector-specific  legislation  in  the  area  of  services  shall  clearly  distinguish 
between  requirements  applicable  to  established  service  providers  and  to  cross-border 
ones. This novelty should be welcome as a very significant progress in the alignment of 
Portuguese legislation with the internal market principles. 

As  regards  the  implementation  of  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  in  Portugal,  it  is 
being  ensured  both  through  the  horizontal  law  transposing  the  Services  Directive  and 
through exhaustive sector-specific amendments. Certain doubts were raised at some point 
as to whether the implementation of Article 16, paragraph 1 is clear enough in the text of 
the  horizontal  law.  While  the  implementation  of  the  general  principle  and  of  its 
application  to  requirements  listed  in  Article  16,  paragraph  2  of  the  Directive  leaves  no 
doubt as to its correction, questions may therefore arise as to whether the implementation 
of  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive  also  extends  to  any  other  conditions  on  the 
exercise  of  the  activity,  such  as  insurance  obligations,  tariffs,  and  restrictions  on  the 
provision  of  multidisciplinary  services  or  legal  form  requirements,  for  example,  when 

180 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
these  are  not  checked  through  a  prior  authorisation  or  declaration70.  The  theoretical 
question of whether such requirements can be applied to cross-border service providers 
and,  if  yes,  under  what  conditions  remains.  However,  to  the  extent  that  sector-specific 
legislation is being exhaustively amended in Portugal this margin of doubt should have a 
very limited impact or none. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The horizontal law implementing the Services Directive in Portugal contains definitions 
which  correspond  to  those  of  the  Services  Directive  and  which  should  largely  ensure  a 
correct  distinction  of  the  situation  of  established  and  cross-border  service  providers. 
Furthermore,  most  sector-specific  legal  frameworks  currently  differentiate  between 
provisions  applicable  to  established  service  providers  and  to  cross-border  service 
providers,  which  should  help  guarantee  a  correct  understanding  of  the  distinction  by 
competent authorities called to implement requirements laid down in those regimes. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

As  indicated  above,  sector-specific  amendments  currently  on-going  are  bringing 
significant changes to the Portuguese legal framework applicable to cross-border service 
providers. 

An important amendment that has an impact in all sectors has been the elimination in the 
Código  das  Sociedades  Comerciais  (Corporate  Code)  of  the  obligation  that  previously 
applied to companies that were not established in Portugal but want to provide services 
there for more than one year to open up a representation (a branch or agency) in Portugal. 
This is no longer the case for cross-border services. An establishment requirement in the 
tourism sector (car rental) is in the process of being abolished. 

Authorisations  were  applied  for  cross-border  provision  amongst  others  in  following 
sectors  construction,  real  estate,  aerial  photography,  ticket  sales,  market 
salespersons,  car  rental  without  a  driver,  placement  services  and  driving  schools. 
Insurance requirements have also been reported as being applicable to both established 
and  cross-border  service  providers  alike  in  respect  of  several  service  activities,  such  as 
accountants  and  statutory  auditing,  construction,  real  estate  agencies,  servicing  of  lifts, 
escalators and moving walkways, travel agencies.  

Further to the implementation of the Services Directive, authorisations for travel agencies 
have  been  lifted.  Authorisation  for  cross-border  service  providers  in  the  areas  of 
construction, real estate and placement services are in the process of being replaced by 
prior  declarations.  Authorisations  for  ticket  sales,  market  salespersons  and  car  rental 
without  a  driver  are  to  be  eliminated  altogether.  Some  authorisations  for  cross-border 
services  shall,  however,  be  maintained  in  very  sensitive  areas  such  as  weapon  sales, 

70   Different interpretations can be held in this regard. Articles 4(1) and 4(3) of DL 92/2010 need to be 
read together with its Articles 8(1) and 8(2)(a) and (b) which clarify the meaning of “administrative 
authorisation”  and  “prior  communications”.  The  administrative  authorisations  can  be,  namely, 
licences,  authorisations,  validations,  authentications,  certifications,  acts 
issued  after  a  prior 
communication.  This  definition  contains  only  examples  of  what  is  included.  The  expression 
“authorisation”  mentioned  in  Article  4(3)  of  DL  92/2010  could  refer  to  all  possible  kinds  of 
requirements. However, one could also take the view (in light of the cross-reference to the definitions 
in Article 8) that it only relates to requirements on access to the activity such as authorisation schemes 
or equivalent. 

181 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
whale watching, aerial services and private higher education. Insurance requirements in 
the  area  of  construction  and  travel  agencies  are  also  being  or  have  been  significantly 
simplified with the purpose of rendering cross-border service provisions easier. In other 
instances they are being removed entirely (real estate). 

182 

 
 
 
 
   ROMANIA   
________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The  Romanian  Point  of  Single  Contact  even  if  technically  operational  cannot  be 
considered as fully functioning at the moment: the e-identification requirements are such 
that it is only accessible to Romanian entities or individuals. Furthermore, the content is 
rather basic. Currently there are 45 procedures available online.  

For  the  time  being,  only  the  use  of  the  Romanian  language  has  been  envisaged,  with 
assurances from the authorities that translation in other languages will be provided and 
gradually added. The user's guide in English is available on the PSC but it is difficult to 
locate as it needs to access through links in Romanian.   

In  addition,  the  Romanian  authorities  are  not  in  compliance  with  the  relevant 
Commission Decisions with regard to the establishment, maintenance and publication of 
trusted lists of certification service providers supervised/accredited by Member States.71 

The  major  obstacle  to  the  completion  of  the  Romanian  Point  of  Single  Contact  has 
been  the  lack  of  designation  of  a  coordinating  entity  and  the  lack  of  buy-in  to  the 
process from the relevant competent authorities. However, such ownership is crucial 
if the staff  in  the  related  competent  authorities are to be trained and instructed to input 
and update the relevant information on the Point of Single Contact site. So far this issue 
seems not to be resolved in a satisfactory manner, which is delaying the development of 
the PSC. 

The portal was not available at the time of the testing done by the Deloitte therefore its 
usability has not been assessed.72 

These  issues  have  been  raised  repeatedly  with  the  relevant  Romanian  authorities  and 
have  been  included  in  the  Memorandum  of  Understanding  but  to  date  without  much 
success.  

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

Romania  has  adopted  a  horizontal  law  (Government  Emergency  Ordinance  49/2009 
approved  by  Law  68/2010)  as  well  as  sector-specific  laws.  A  total  of  62  national 
measures have been adopted, mainly in the following sectors: construction, services for 
installations and equipment's, tourism and some regulated professions.  

71 Decision 2009/767/EC, as amended by Decision 2010/425/EU. 
72 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

183 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Romania (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

Concerning  prohibited  requirement,  two  were  identified  in  the  retail  area:  an  economic 
needs  test  and  the  involvement  of  competitors  in  the  authorisation  procedure  for  the 
opening  of  large  surface  retail  stores.  This  issue  has  been  raised  with  the  Romanian 
authorities who have communicated draft legislation addressing this failure. The required 
legislative amendments have not been adopted yet. The elimination of these requirements 
has  also  been  included  as  a  condition  in  the  MoU.  In  the  area  of  education,  a  provider 
established in another Member State can only choose to set up a branch in Romania and 
is not able to set up another form of establishment.  

As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States to streamline the regulatory environment for the establishment of providers only a 
few  of  such  requirements  remain  in  the  Romanian  legislation  except  for  the  legal  form 
requirement, which seems to be applied both in cases of professional services that rely 
on the personal involvement of the professional (such as services provided by lawyers or 
tax advisors) and where they are doubled by shareholding requirements. 

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Romania  had  adopted  a  generally  applicable  law  introducing  the  principle  of  tacit 
authorisation  in  respect  of  administrative  authorisations  prior  to  the  implementation  of 
the  Services  Directive  by  a  horizontal  act  in  order  to  cut  red  tape  and  to  facilitate  the 
operation of businesses in Romania. 

However, this legal act states that each administrative authority should publish at its main 
office and also on the website the specific cases of authorisation where the tacit approval 
procedure is applicable. Taking into account this provision, it may be considered that the 
tacit  approval  procedure  is  not  enforced  automatically,  but  that  each  relevant  authority 
should decide and communicate upon how it envisages applying the said procedure. 

Sector specific legislation was amended in order to specify where tacit approval applies 
(for example in the case of works in the field of fight against fire). Moreover, a reference 
to the authorisation procedure provisions of the horizontal law implementing the Services 
Directive was explicitly introduced for external services for the prevention and protection 
of labour health and safety and legal metrology, which would presumably mean that tacit 
authorisation  applies.  In  addition,  some  sector  specific  acts  (especially  in  the  tourism 
sector) make a special reference to the application of the general rules of the horizontal 
law  implementing  the  Services  Directive,  which  would  complete  the  sector  specific 
legislation. In this case, it can be assumed that the tacit authorisation would also apply.  

Nevertheless, for most services sectors no specific provisions on tacit authorisations were 
adopted and serious doubts remain as  it is not clear how  the general tacit  authorisation 
principle mentioned in the horizontal act would be applicable in practice. 

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified.  

184 

 
 
 
 
 
 
B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Romania reproduced in its horizontal legislation the text of Article 16(1) and (3), which 
seems  to  imply  that,  if  sector  specific  legislation  does  not  make  a  distinction  between 
established  and  cross-border  providers,  a  case-by-case  analysis  (implying  justification 
and proportionality) is needed. 

However,  according  to  the  information  available  to  Commission  services,  concerns 
remain  as  to  the  practical  implementation  of  this  provision.  Actually,  in  Romania,  a 
general principle of legal interpretation says that sector-specific legislation would prevail 
over the free movement clause introduced by the horizontal law (lex specialis prevails). It 
would  seem  that  in  case  the  specific  law  is  silent  over  certain  aspects,  the  general  law 
could  be  used  to  complement  the  specific  regulation  but  could  not  reverse  conflicting 
provisions.  However,  general  laws  are  also  other  laws  than  the  one  transposing  the 
Services Directive such as the law on the trade register, which requires an establishment. 
No information has been provided as to the relationship between the different laws and 
how  the  competent  authorities  implement  in  practice  the  freedom  to  provide  services 
principle. Nevertheless, it should be pointed out that the Romanian legislation recognises 
in  Article  148  of  its  Constitution  the  primacy  of  EU  law.  Thus,  an  horizontal  law 
implementing  a  European  directive  would  take  precedence  over  conflicting  provisions 
contained in national legislation.  

No  information  is  currently  available  on  which  of  these  interpretations  would  be 
followed in practice by competent authorities or Romanian courts. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The Romanian legislation does not provide for a text making a clear distinction between 
services  provided  through  an  establishment  or  cross-border  on  temporary  basis  so  the 
principles set by the European Court of Justice would apply.  

Specific legislation sometimes includes separate provisions for the cross-border providers 
but  without  indicating  specific  means  of  identifying  them.  Nevertheless,  no  problems 
seem to be arising in practice due to this distinction. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Concerning cross-border trade, serious concerns are raised by the fact that it seems that 
for  any  services  in  all  sectors  where  the  sector  specific  legislation  does  not  expressly 
provide for cross-border service provision, the specific rules will be complemented with 
the  rules  set  out  in  the  general  transposition  rules  which  could  lead  to  requiring  an 
establishment and registration with the Romanian trade register. 

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the professional services sector, a special identity card is required for fiscal advisers. 
An  establishment  requirement  and  an  authorisation  are  requested  for  legal  advisers, 
architects, tax advisors and patent lawyers. Separate rules exist when these services are 
provided by professionals organised as a company.  

185 

 
 
 
 
 
 
In  the  crafts,  construction  and  certification  services  sector,  there  establishment, 
authorisation  and  legal  form  requirements  have  been  maintained,  coupled  with  a 
restriction  for  the  self-employed,  for  services  that  involve  boilers,  pressure  vessels  and 
hoisting  equipment  as  well  as  for  providers  that  design,  execute,  audit  and  exploit  the 
electrical  installations  from  the  electro-energetic  system.  Moreover,  for  individuals 
performing the actual works in some technical professions that involve boilers, pressure 
vessels and hoisting equipment, the person has to have previous experience in Romania. 
A special identity card  is required for authorised electricians, operators responsible for 
the  technical  supervision  and  verification  for  the  use  of  the  installations  or  equipment, 
specialised  technical  staff,  energy  auditors  and  technical  auditors  in  the  field  of  the 
protection of historical monuments.  

No specific law exists for the real estate sector and thus service providers (national and 
cross-border) have to comply with the general provisions imposing, amongst others, an 
obligation  on  services  providers  to  have  an  establishment  in  Romania  in  order  to  be 
registered in the Romanian trade register.  

Concerning the retail sector, Romania requires that legal persons involved in retail are 
established in Romania. 

In  the  tourism  sector,  an  establishment  is  required  for  travel  agencies  and  a  special 
identity document for tourist guides. In Romania, authorised tourist guides must wear a 
special  and  customized  badge.  However,  this  requirement  does  not  apply  to  foreign 
tourist guides accompanying groups of foreign tourists. 

As far as the education sector is concerned establishment and authorisation in Romania 
are  required  for  education  in  general,  as  well  as  for  professional  training  for  adults 
(authorisation  required  only  for  those  wishing  to  issue  certificates  with  national 
recognition)  and  driving  schools  (in  addition  to  requirements  affecting  the  use  of 
equipment). 

Use of exceptions article 17 

In respect of the scope of application of Article 16,  Romania excluded the services of 
architects and veterinarians from the application of Article 16, in contradiction with 
the limited exceptions provided in Article 17 of the directive. 

186 

 
 
 
 
 
   SLOVAKIA   
___________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

Although Slovakia has had physical PSCs in place since 2007 its online Point of Single 
Contact  (PSC)  has  only  been  available  to  the  public  since  January  2012,  therefore  any 
assessment of the availability and quality of information and procedures on the site can 
only be a preliminary one.  

The  Slovak  PSC  offers  a  wide  range  of  information  on  the  majority  of  procedures  that 
businesses  would  need  to  complete.  With  regard  to  language  support,  only  general 
information is available in English. While the online forms are very helpfully provided in 
a  bilingual  form,  business  users  may  find  it  difficult  to  identify  the  appropriate 
procedures and find the relevant forms as most of the detailed information is available in 
Slovak only.  

In terms of electronic completion of formalities, the Slovak PSC makes use of integrated 
online forms which are used to centralise the information collected and to forward it on 
to the relevant competent authorities for further processing. This system is perceived as 
very  user-friendly.  Procedures  that  cannot  be  dealt  with  through  this  system  and  for 
which there is no electronic support concern mainly those dealt with by local authorities. 
Where  necessary,  scanned  documents  can  also  be  attached  to  the  relevant  forms.  E-
signatures  are  required  for  the  submission  of  forms  and  the  completion  of  procedures, 
and currently Slovak and Czech e-signatures can be accepted. Electronic payment is not 
supported, but instructions for credit transfers are given.  

However while it largely fulfils the requirements under the Services Directive it does not 
entirely meet businesses' needs in that it does not include information on social security 
and  also  on  procedures  that  fall  under  the  responsibility  of  local  authorities,  which  are 
particularly important in the restaurant and catering sector. User testing of a pilot version 
of the PSC73 indicated that there is no clear distinction made between foreign businesses 
considering  permanent  establishment  and  those  considering  temporary  cross-border 
service provision, but improvements have been made to the site in recent developments.  

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

Slovakia transposed the freedom to provide services provision of the Services Directive 
through  both  horizontal  and  sector-specific  legislation.  The  horizontal  law  contains 
general provisions regulating the performance of the specific activities, the procedure for 
submitting applications for authorisation, the procedure for the granting of authorisation, 
and  the  performance  of  supervision.  This  law  applies  to  all  circumstances  unless 
otherwise provided by sector-specific legislation.  

Slovak legislation provides that a cross-border service provider may provide services in 
the territory of the Slovak Republic if he/she complies with the conditions set under the 
laws of the Member State of establishment, unless the relevant Act provides otherwise, 

73 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

187 

 
 
 
                                                 
and that a service provider shall be obliged to ensure that the same conditions of access 
to services apply to all recipients of such services regardless of their nationality, place of 
permanent  residence  or  registered  office.  In  line  with  the  Services  Directive,  it  further 
sets out that the imposition of requirements for the provision of services by cross-border 
services  providers  may  only  be  justified  for  reasons  of  public  policy,  public  security, 
public health or environmental protection.  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Slovakia (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The evaluation of the implementation of the Services Directive has revealed that there do 
not seem to be any prohibited requirements in Slovakia.  

As  regards  requirements  where  the  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to  Member 
States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of  providers  and 
which are mainly foreseen in article 15 of the Directive, a few of such requirements have 
been  maintained  with  regard  to  legal  form  and  shareholding,  particularly  in  the 
professional services and education sectors.  

In the professional services sector, lawyers from other EU Member States operating in 
(but not established  in) Slovakia  cannot  be  members  of  associations,  partners  of  public 
commercial  companies  or  limited  partnership  companies,  and  cannot  be  partners  and 
representative  agents  of  limited  liability  companies.  Tax  advisors  in  the  form  of  legal 
persons can only be in the form of public commercial companies or joint-stock limited 
partnerships  where  registered  tax  advisors  have  at  least  75%  of  the  capital  or  voting 
rights.   Architects and engineers are subject to shareholding requirements, whereby they 
may  establish  companies  to  provide  their  services  only  if  they  hold  a  majority  of  the 
shares  of  the  company.  Insolvency  administrators  have  fixed  maximum  tariffs.  Only 
natural persons can act as mediators.  

In the real estate sector, only natural persons can provide the services of land surveyor 
and cartographer, where the result serves for public or municipal/local authorities.  

And  as  regards  education,  entities  providing  certain  training  services  in  the  area  of 
health and safety in the workplace must be established as legal persons.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The concept of tacit approval was introduced in the horizontal legislation implementing 
the  Services  Directive  in  Slovakia.  In  accordance  with  the  wording  of  the  Services 
Directive,  the  Slovak  horizontal  law  has  left  open  the  possibility  for  competent 
authorities to put different arrangements in place but sector-specific legislation does not 
appear to have been amended to specify such different arrangements.  

the  authorisation  of  architects, 

As  a  result,  areas  in  which  there  do  not  appear  to  be  any  possibility  for  tacit  approval 
include 
insolvency  practitioners,  patent  agents, 
interpreters  and  translators,  urban  planners  and  construction  engineers,  geological 
excavation  and  mining  practitioners,  geodesists,  cartographers  and  metrologists, 
education and further education providers and driving schools.  

188 

 
3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition on commercial communications has been identified. 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Article  8(1)  of  Slovakia's  horizontal  law  implementing  the  Services  Directive  (Act 
136/2010)  provides  that  a  cross-border  service  provider  may  provide  services  in  the 
Slovak  Republic  if  he  complies  with  the  conditions  set  in  his  Member  State  of 
establishment, unless the Act provides otherwise. It further sets out that the imposition of 
requirements for the provision of services by cross-border services providers may only be 
justified  for  reasons  of  public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  environmental 
protection.  However  although  cross-border  provision  is  dealt  with  in  sector-specific 
legislation,  there  are  a  number  of  authorisation  schemes  which  also  seem  to  apply  to 
cross-border  service  providers.  These  include:  tax  advice,  insolvency  administration, 
mediation,  interpretation  and  translation  services,  surveying/  cartography,  pollution 
prevention and control, environmental management and audit, and real estate activities.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

A  distinction  is  made  between  the  requirements  applicable  to  foreign  service  providers 
wishing to establish in Slovakia and those wishing to offer their services on a temporary 
cross-border  basis,  whereby  businesses  establishing  in  Slovakia  must  notify  the 
authorities,  and  unless  stated  differently  in  the  applicable  sector-specific  law,  can  start 
providing their services on the day of notification. This obligation does not, in principle, 
apply to cross-border service providers, unless provided for in sector-specific legislation, 
in which case cross-border providers can use using a specific notification form available 
on the website of the Ministry of the Interior.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

In principle, cross-border service providers have the right to provide services in Slovakia 
if they comply with the conditions set in their Member State of establishment. However 
given  that  sector-specific  legislation  co-exists  with  the  horizontal  legislation,  service 
providers  would  need  to  verify  if  additional  requirements  apply  in  the  sector-specific 
laws (which may only be permitted for reasons of public policy, public security, public 
health or environmental protection).  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

As  regards  the  professional  services  sector,  insolvency  administrators  are  obliged  to 
register  in  the  list  of  insolvency  administrators  in  order  to  act  in  bankruptcy  and 
rescheduling proceedings. Architects are required to register. Patent attorneys are subject 
to  a  notification  procedure  in  which  they  are  obliged  to  disclose  the  presumed  time 
during which they will provide their services.  

Most  construction-related  services  are  considered  to  be  regulated  professions  in 
Slovakia  and  rules  applicable  to  them  are  set  out  in  sector-specific  legislation. 
Constructions  safety  coordinators  must  pass  an  examination  for  construction  manager, 

189 

 
 
construction inspector or safety technician. It is not clear whether foreign entrants need to 
pass  such  examinations  or  if  they  can  benefit  from  recognition  of  their  qualifications. 
Prior authorisation  or registration is required for construction-related  services  including 
gas  installation  and  technical  certification  of  building  products.  The  restoration  of 
cultural monuments and works of art is also subject to prior registration.  

In  the  education  sector,  there  are  authorisation  requirements  in  the  area  of  vocational 
training  with  regard  to  mining  safety,  worker  safety,  fire  prevention,  environmental 
management  and  audit  and  industrial  accident  prevention.  Furthermore  driving  schools 
are obliged to register.  

190 

 
 
   SLOVENIA   
________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The Slovenian PSC cannot be considered as fully functioning at the moment: it is based 
on the e-Government portal available for online registration of businesses.  

The  current  Slovene  portal  provides  very  limited  information  and  services  to  complete 
the  relevant  types  of  administrative  requirements.  In  general  the  portal  offers  on-line 
registration of a company and it provides limited information necessary for the start-up of 
the business. 

The current Slovene PSC allows the full online completion of some administrative tasks, 
connected  to  registration  of  a  company  and  most  common  supporting  procedures. 
However, the required infrastructure to ensure compliance cross-border acceptance of e-
ID  and  e-Signatures  still  has  to  be  implemented.  Currently,  foreign  business  cannot 
submit  online  applications,  if  they  do  not  obtain  Slovenian  tax  number  and  a  digital 
certificate of the certification authority of Republic of Slovenia. The Ministry for Justice 
and Public Administration, responsible for horizontal measures and central key-enablers 
in  the  field  of  e-government,  is  developing  a  Central  authentication  system  to  support 
authentication of foreign users, taking into account also the solutions from the large scale 
pilot STORK. 

The current portal offers several email contacts based on different competent authorities. 
Areas  covered  are  registration,  business  license,  taxes  and  social  security,  crafts  and 
construction.  Online  help  is  available  by  email  and  phone.  In  order  to  take  into 
consideration the user needs, the portal collects regularly their feedbacks and experiences 
through different methods. 

The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  Slovenian  PSC  is  perceived  to  be  below  the 
average74.  The foreign users cannot use the portal while for domestic users it is simpler 
to  go  to  the  physical  contact  point.  Improvements  could  be  made  concerning  the 
availability and completeness of procedures and information, the structure, the clarity and 
accessibility of the information provided and user-friendliness, especially for the foreign 
users. However, the new PSC under development  is  planned  to  profoundly  modify  this 
situation and to provide full information for domestic and foreign users in Slovene and 
English. 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

After  a  promising  start  with  the  adoption  of  the  horizontal  implementing  law,  the 
implementation work got seriously delayed regarding the adoption of all amendments to 
sector-specific legislations.  

74 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

191 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
A. 

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

1. 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in 
Slovenia (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

No prohibited requirement has been identified in the Slovenian legislation for any of the 
assessed sectors.  

As  regards  requirements,  where  the  Services  Directive  left  a  margin  of  appreciation  to 
Member  States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of 
providers  and  which  are  mainly  dealt  with  in  Article  15  of  the  Directive,  a  number  of 
such requirements have been maintained. They concern professional services and the real 
estate sector.  

Concerning  professional  services,  requirements  relating  to  shareholding  of  companies 
can be found for lawyers: the ownership of lawyers’ offices is reserved only to lawyers. 
Collecting  societies  must  also  be  organised  as  non  profit  organisation.  In  addition, 
lawyers  are  subject  to  minimum  tariffs  while  insolvency  practitioners  must  respect 
minimum and maximum tariffs.  

In the real estate sector, the law prescribes maximum tariffs to be complied with by real 
estate agency services75. 

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval, an important mean to cutting red tape, as it foresees that an authorisation 
will  be  deemed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  provider  in  case  an  application  has  not 
received any response within the set time period, has been implemented via the Act on 
services in the Internal Market (horizontal implementing law of the Services Directive) 
and in certain areas  of  sectoral legislation (10acts), where it actually applies. However, 
where  sector  specific  laws  have  not  been  amended,  certain  doubts  remain  as  to  the 
practical  effects  of  the  tacit  approval  principle  provided  in  the  Act  on  services  in  the 
Internal Market  

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

The Slovenian horizontal implementing law has implemented this article of the Services 
Directive.  In  addition,  the  Act  on  Media  lays  down  a  general  presumption  that 
advertisement activities should be free for all professions unless limited by law. No total 
prohibition on commercial communications for regulated professions has been identified 
in sector-specific legislation.  

75 4 % of the price of the property which is being sold 

192 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation. 

The core chapter of the Directive on the freedom to provide services has been transposed 
into Slovenian law by the combination of a horizontal law (the Act on the Services in the 
Internal Market) and amendments to sector-specific legislation.  

The  Act  on  the  Services  in  the  Internal  Market  implements  generally  the  principles  set 
out  in  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive,  i.e.  that  requirements  can  be  imposed  on 
incoming  service  providers  only  if  such  requirements  are  non-discriminatory,  are 
justified for reasons of public policy, public security, public health, or the protection of 
the environment, and are proportionate to the objectives pursued. However, this Act does 
not amend directly sector-specific legislation.  

Only  15  legal  acts  seem  to  have  been  amended  to  implement  the  freedom  to  provide 
services  clause,  but  the  rest  of  the  Slovenian  sector-specific  legislation  has  not  been 
modified.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services  

The  implementation  approach  in  the  sector-specific  legislation  might  be  incomplete. 
Actually,  the  proper  implementation  of  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  requires 
the  conformity  of  sector-specific  legislation  with  the  Services  Directive  since  the 
horizontal law has no precedence over sector-specific legislation. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause 

Most sector-specific legislation does not seem to distinguish between establishment and 
cross-border  provision  of  services.  Thus  it  seems  that  the  requirements  in  force 
(authorisations  or  registrations)  could  apply  for  both  categories  of  service  providers.  In 
addition,  in  some  sectors  (chimney-sweepers,  operational  monitoring),  it  seems  that 
providers  from  other  Member  States  cannot  provide  cross-border  services.  They  are 
reserved to selected providers in Slovenia. 

According  to  the  results  of  the  study,  in  the  sector  of  crafts,  the  competent  authorities 
seem to abstain from requiring craft permits required in the sector-specific legislation in 
order to comply with the freedom to provide services clause.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the sector of crafts, construction and certification services, the law does not make 
any  distinction  between  established  and  cross-border  providers:  both  have  to  acquire  a 
craft  permit  to  provide  craft  services76.  However,  in  practice  it  seems  that  the  Small 
Crafts  Chamber  does  not  require  craft  permits  or  registration  in  case  of  cross-border 
provision  of  service.  Regarding  the  certification  services,  the  legal  acts  again  do  not 
provide  specific  provisions  for  the  cross-border  provision,  implying  that  the  same 
requirements are applicable as those for established providers. 

76   The law explicitly states that the qualifications and previous work experience which were acquired in 

other Member States are recognised in Slovenia. 

193 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
As far as real estate services are concerned, the legislation in the real estate sector was 
amended  to  implement  the  Services  Directive.  An  easier  access  for  cross-border 
providers  is  foreseen:  the  providers  of  real  estate  agency  services  do  not  have  to  be 
licensed,  whereas  for  the  cross-border  provision  of  land-surveying  services,  the 
registration is an automatic result of notification of service. However, every provider – 
even cross-border providers – must observe the prescribed tariffs foreseen for real estate 
activities. 

As  far  as  tourism  is  concerned,  authorisation  schemes  are  in  place  for  travel  agencies, 
tour operators, tourist guides (except for tourist guides which accompany tourist groups 
from  abroad)  and  for  providers  of  sport  activities  for  tourists.  For  tourist  guides, 
municipalities  can  provide  special  conditions  for  the  providers  providing  services  in 
designated tourist locations.  

194 

 
 
   SPAIN   
_____________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The Spanish point of single contact (www.eugo.es) is well established. Its setting up has 
involved  the  coordination  of  numerous  competent  authorities  at  different  levels  of 
government.  Most  of  the  regulatory  requirements  related  to  the  establishment  and 
provision of services involve national, regional and local authorities. In Spain, there are 
17 autonomous communities, 2 autonomous cities and more than 8,000 local entities. 

As  regards  the  presentation  of  applicable  requirements,  the  information  on  the  legal 
framework  with  which  service  providers  have  to  comply  has  been  standardised  and 
organised  on  three  starting  steps  (location,  activity  and  method  of  provision)  and  is 
perceived as generally good. 

The Spanish point of single contact acts mainly as a gateway to online procedures from 
other competent authorities, which are responsible of the electronic availability of  their 
own  procedures.  That  means  that  the  availability  of  electronic  procedures  depends 
mainly  on  the  development  of  e-government  within  each  public  administration  and  the 
level of e-government services differs from one territory or city to another. Work should 
be continued to ensure that procedures to start a business or to provide services have a 
sufficient degree of detail and of electronic availability in all locations, types of activity 
and competent authority. 

Services  provided  through  the  Spanish  point  of  single  contact,  except  for  accessing 
general  and  specific  information,  require  identification  tools  such  as  e-identification,  e-
signatures  or  user  login.  Those  tools  are  needed  especially  when  starting  an  online 
procedure  or  when  logging  in  the  personal  area  of  the  portal.  Regarding  cross-border 
users,  the  Spanish  point  of  single  contact  –EUGO.es  portal-  permits  access  to  the  
Personal Area to service providers who are in possession of European Digital Credentials 
that can be checked in its national supplier of identity through STORK network (Iceland, 
Austria,  Estonia,  Spain,  Italy,  Liechtenstein,  Lithuania,  Portugal,  Slovenia,  Finland  or 
Sweden). 

General information is generally available in Spanish, Catalan, Basque, Galician, English 
and  Portuguese.  However,  specific  documentation  for  the  completion  of  procedures 
under  the  responsibility  of  competent  authorities  are  often  only  found  in  Spanish,  and 
sometimes  even  only  in  one  of  other  Spanish  co-official  languages.  Efforts  should  be 
continued  to  enhance  availability  of  information  in  other  languages  with  a  view  to 
facilitating use of the PSC.77 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

Implementation of the Services Directive in Spain entailed a very significant amount of 
legislative work given its complex administrative structure.   

77 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

195 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
The  main  act  transposing  the  Services  Directive  into  Spanish  Law  is  a  horizontal  law 
adopted at national level, whose provisions prevail over regional laws regulating sector-
specific  services  (Ley  17/2009,  de  23  de  noviembre,  sobre  el  libre  acceso  a  las 
actividades de servicios y su ejercicio78).  The content of the horizontal law is ambitious 
in its approach. 

The  Spanish  authorities  also  undertook  a  very  significant  number  of  sector-specific 
amendments to ensure that requirements in sector-specific legislation are adapted to the 
Services Directive. An omnibus law (Ley 25/2009, de 22 de diciembre, de modificación 
de diversas leyes para su adaptación a la Ley sobre el libre acceso a las actividades de 
servicios y su ejercicoi79), adapts the State laws, most of them sectoral, to Law 17/2009 
and  it  also  extends  the  principles  of  good  regulation  to  sectors  not  affected  by  the 
Services Directive. Two other laws with sector-specific amendments were passed at the 
Central  Government  level:  one  for  retail80  and  one  for  environmental  impact 
assessment81. In addition to the amendments to national laws, adaptations were necessary 
at  the  level  of  State  regulations.    By  April  2010,  118  Royal  Decrees  (RD)  and  21 
Ministerial  Orders  had  been  amended  through  51  Royal  Decrees  and  one  Ministerial 
Order.  24  Royal  Decrees  had  been  fully  repealed.  At  the  Autonomous  Communities 
level,  the  adaptation  took  place  through  amendments  to  sector-specific  laws  introduced 
(either  by  regional  omnibus  laws  or  by  sector-specific  regional  legislation)  and 
amendments affected mostly retail and tourism service activities.  

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Spain 
(Articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The implementation of the Services Directive has resulted in a very significant reduction 
of administrative burden in Spain. Numerous authorisations have been transformed into 
prior  declarations  and  a  considerable  number  of  requirements  applicable  to  the  access 
and exercise of an activity have disappeared. 

As regards prohibited requirements for access to an activity, Article 10 of Ley 17/2009 
(the  horizontal  law  implementing  the  Services  Directive)  does  no  longer  allow  for  the 
application  of  requirements  listed  in  Article  14  of  the  Services  Directive.  A  significant 
amount  of  prohibited  requirements  has  been  eliminated  from  sector-specific  legislation 
(such as for example, economic tests required for the granting of authorisations for large-
scale commercial surfaces or the intervention of competitors in the granting of individual 
authorisations, which were requirements previously found in retail legislation) and from 
the  statutes  of  professional  associations.  It  can  thus  be  concluded  that  further  to  the 
implementation  of  the  Services  Directive,  no  relevant  examples  of  these  prohibited 
requirements are to be signalled in sector-specific legislation although it may well be that 

78   BOE num. 283, de 24.11.2009 - Law 17/2009, of 23 November,  on Free Access to Service Activities 

and its Exercise 

79   BOE núm. 308, de 23.12.2009 - Law 25/2009, of 22 December, amending diverse laws to adapt them 

to Law 17/2009- 

80   Ley 1/2010, Ley 1/2010, de 1 de marzo, de reforma de la Ley 7/1996, de 15 de enero, de Ordenación 
del  Comercio  Minorista  (BOE  num.  53  de  02.03.2010)  -  Law  1/2010,  of  1  March,  amending  Law 
7/1996, January 15, on Retail Trade. 

81   Ley 6/2010, de 24 de marzo, de modificación del texto refundido de la Ley de Evaluación de Impacto 
Ambiental de proyectos (BOE núm. 73, de 25.03.2010) - Law 6/2010, of 24 March, ammending the 
Consolidated Law on Environmental Impact Assessment 

196 

 
 
 
 
 
  
 
                                                 
there are cases of local regulations that still require a Spanish identification card for the 
completion of some procedures. In the tourism area, some restrictions could still remain 
in  some  autonomous  communities  related  to  the  freedom  of  the  provider  to  choose 
between  establishment  in  the  form  of  an  agency,  branch  or  subsidiary.  Most  of  the 
autonomous  communities  where  this  problem  appears,  allow  travel  agents  to  establish 
branches  leaving  no  other  options  although  the  horizontal  laws  would  prevail  over  this 
restriction. 

Sector-specific  amendments  in  the  Spanish  legal  order  have  also  considerably  reduced 
administrative  burden  by  eliminating  unjustified  and  disproportionate  requirements.  In 
accordance  with  Article  15  of  the  Services  Directive,  Article  11  of  Ley  17/2009  (the 
horizontal  law  implementing  the  Services  Directive)  only  allows  for  sector-specific 
legislation  to  impose  these  requirements  if  justified  by  an  overriding  reason  of  general 
interest  and  proportionate.  A  very  significant  review  of  sector-specific  legislation  has 
been carried out to ensure that Article 15 requirements were conformed to Article 11 of 
Ley 17/2009. Certain Article 15 requirements relating to the shareholding of companies 
have  been  maintained  in  legislation  in  a  mitigated  form,  such  as  shareholding 
requirements for professional associations82.  

There  are  still,  however,  cases  of  requirements  that  raise  doubts  of  compatibility  with 
Article 15 in certain pieces of sector-specific legislation. For example, the obligation for 
the service provider to take a specific legal form in the regulation of land and real estate 
agents and requirements to have a specific qualification in order to hold share capital can 
still be found in certain professional association rules would not appear to be justified. As 
a  result,  reforms  of  the  statutes  of  some  professional  associations  still  appear  to  be 
necessary  to  ensure  that  providers  have  legal  certainty.  However,  the  horizontal  law 
would prevail over those restrictions. 

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (Article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

As  indicated  above,  numerous  authorisations  have  been  transformed  into  prior 
declarations.  The remaining  authorisations have been generally simplified. In a country 
with  a  regional  structure  as  complex  as  the  Spanish  one,  the  implementation  of  Article 
10, paragraph 4 of the Services Directive was of particular relevance to reduce business 
barriers. The Spanish authorities opted for an ambitious implementation of the principle 
by means of a general rule laid down in Article 7 of Ley 17/2009. This provision only 
allows  for  reasons  of  public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  and  the  protection  of 
the environment to limit the geographical scope of authorisations which are not linked to 
a  specific  physical  establishment.  For  authorisations  linked  to  a  physical  establishment 
other overriding reasons of general interest can be invoked. The Spanish authorities are 
considering reinforcing mechanisms to guarantee the right application of this provision in 
practice such as internal administrative cooperation. 

82   Law 2/2007, of 15 March, on professional partnerships requires as a minimum that the majority of the 
share  and  voting  rights  or  the  majority  of  the  shareholders  equity  and  the  number  of  partners  in  the 
non-sharing companies belong to professional partners. 
197 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (Article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Before  the  implementation  of  the  Services  Directive  tacit  approval  was  already  a 
principle  of  general  application  in  administrative  procedures  in  Spain  in  light  of  Ley 
30/1992 on administrative procedures. In this regard, the implementation of the Services 
Directive has not introduced a significant change in the Spanish legal order. Nonetheless, 
the horizontal law (Ley 17/2009) modified Ley 30/1992 to reinforce the positive silence 
principle  (negative  silence  has  to  be  settled  in  laws  and  only  in  general  interest 
exceptional circumstances). 

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified.  

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Further to the implementation of the Services Directive, it can be generally said that the 
structure of Spanish legislation at national and regional level adequately reflects the two 
freedoms foreseen in the Treaty, without prejudice to possible remaining isolated cases of 
bad implementation. This novelty should be welcome as a very significant progress in the 
alignment of Spanish legislation with the internal market principles. 

Article  12(3)  of  Ley  17/2009  implements  Article  16  of  the  Services  Directive.  Law 
17/2009  produced  an  automatic  derogation  from  provisions  of  equal  or  inferior 
hierarchical  level  that  conflict  with  its  provisions.  As  a  direct  consequence  of  the 
repealing  provision,  an  administrative  authority  may  decide  not  to  apply  provisions  of 
equal  or  inferior  hierarchical  level  conflicting  with  provisions  of  Law  17/2009.  In 
addition,  taking  into  consideration  that  this  Law  was  adopted  in  accordance  with  the 
exclusive  competences  of  the  State  to  develop  basic  legislation  in  the  fields  it  covers, 
regional legislation must respect its provisions83. As a result Article 12(3) of Ley 17/2009 
prevails over conflicting provisions of equal value at regional level.  

However, rules on the conflict of laws are not the only way with which the Spanish legal 
system relies upon to ensure compliance of sector-specific legislation with Article 16 of 
the  Services  Directive.  In  addition  to  the  prevailing  horizontal  law,  sector-specific 
legislation at national and regional level has been reviewed and when necessary amended 
to eliminate requirements that do not comply with Article 12(3) of the Spanish horizontal 
law. 

83   Nevertheless, in case a conflicting law was adopted an unconstitutionality appeal before the TC would 
be  promoted  to  declare  that  void  contrary  to  Ley  17/2009.  According  to  Organic  Law  2/1979,  of  3 
October, of the Constitutional Court, the unconstitutionality appeal can be submitted by the President 
of the Government, the Ombudsman, fifty members of the Spanish Parliament or fifty members of the 
Senate. These parties can exercise this action within three months from the official publication of the 
legal  act  containing  provisions  contrary  to  the  Constitution.    In  addition  to  the  unconstitutionality 
appeal,  any  judge  or  Court  can  submit  an  unconstitutionality  question  to  the  TC  when  a  Law 
applicable to the case it is analysing and on whose validity the judgment depends may be contrary to 
the CE.  

198 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

Law  17/2009  includes  definitions  which  should  ensure  a  correct  application  of  the 
concept  of  cross-border  service  provider/provision  in  line  with  the  Services  Directive. 
Furthermore,  most  sector-specific  legal  frameworks  currently  differentiate  between 
provisions  applicable  to  established  service  providers  and  to  cross-border  service 
providers,  which  should  help  guarantee  a  correct  understanding  of  the  distinction  by 
competent authorities called to implement requirements laid down in those regimes. 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Despite  the  implementation  of  Article  16  in  the  Spanish  legal  order  by  means  of  a 
horizontal  provision  and  by  means  of  sector-specific  amendments,  a  number  of 
requirements  applicable  to  cross-border  service  providers  have  remained  in  sector-
specific  legislation  despite  the  fact  that  their  justification  and  proportionality  could  be 
questioned.  It  has  to  be  added  that  many  of  these  would  be  no  longer  applicable  in 
principle in view of the tacit derogation operated by Ley 17/2009 but their existence in 
paper does not contribute to legal certainty for service providers. 

In  the  area  of  crafts,  sector-specific  legislation  has  been  amended  to  implement  the 
Services Directive. However, certain requirements such as certain registration obligations 
or  requirements  on  the  exercise  of  the  activity  remain  applicable  for  cross-border 
services.  

In the real estate sector, some restrictions still remain and require amendment to ensure 
conformity with the horizontal law transposing the Services Directive which prevails in 
any  event.  In  some  autonomous  communities,  for  example,  the  statutes  of  the 
professional  associations  would  still  require  that  the  provider  has  its  principal 
establishment within the territory of the association.  In this specific case, not only  the 
horizontal laws (Ley 17/2009 y Ley 25/2009) but also the professional associations law 
(Ley 2/1974) again prevail.  

199 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   SWEDEN   
________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

Sweden used an existing website (www.verksamt.se) and developed it further in order to 
implement the Services Directive. In general, Sweden takes a comprehensive view of the 
PSC  with  the  aim  to  provide  for  information and completion  of procedures beyond the 
scope  of  the  Services  Directive,  both  in  terms  of  procedures  and  in  terms  of  economic 
activities.  

The  degree  of  information  offered  on  the  Swedish  PSC  is  generally  very  good  and  is 
provided  in  simple  and  clear  language  and  well-structured.  The  content  of  information 
provided is comprehensive and goes beyond the minimal legal requirements as provided 
for in the Services Directive. For instance, information is also offered concerning tax and 
social security requirements. 

An important number of procedures can be completed online. However, many procedures 
require  the  use  of  Swedish  e-ID  or  e-signature  which  is  difficult  to  fulfil  for  foreign 
service providers. It would be important to enhance the ease of procedure completion for 
foreign users by developing means to accept foreign-issued e-Identification.  

Most of the information on the PSC is translated to English which is a big advantage for 
cross-border  service  providers.  An  improved  search  function  and  a  clear  distinction 
between  cases  of  establishment  and  cases  of  cross-border  provision  of  services  would 
even increase the usability of the PSC in particular for incoming service providers. 
The  overall  use  and  usability  of  the  Swedish  PSC  is  above  average84.  However, 
improvements could be made concerning the clarity of information by further developing 
the search function and by enhancing the ease of procedure completion for foreign users, 
in particular by developing means to accept foreign-issued e-Identification. 

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

Sweden  adopted  its  horizontal  law  and  a  considerable  number  of  sector  specific 
legislation  within  the  transposition  deadline.  Around  60  national  measures  have  been 
adopted in order to implement the Services Directive. In addition, Sweden has modified 
its  law  on  foreign  branches  in  2011.  By  removing  obstacles,  in  particular  an 
establishment  requirement,  Sweden  opened  up  the  market  and  made  access  easier  for 
service providers from other Member States.  

Before  Sweden  changed  the  law,  operators  legally  established  in  the  EU  wishing  to 
pursue an economic activity in Sweden were subject to formalities likely to dissuade or 
even  prevent  them  from  offering  their  services  to  Swedish  businesses  and  consumers. 
Even for temporary activities, operators had to be established and registered as a branch 
in the Swedish register of foreign branches before starting work. The alternative was to 
set  up  as  subsidiary,  involving  even  more  red  tape.  The  procedure  for  registering  the 
branch could take up to eight months. Finally, an operator established in another Member 

84 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

200 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
State  needed  both  an  agent  responsible  for  receiving  notifications  of  documents  and  a 
representative, both domiciled in Sweden. 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements applying to providers established or wishing to establish in Sweden 
(articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

The evaluation  of  the  implementation of the Services Directive has revealed that a few 
requirements  prohibited  by  article  14  of  the  Directive  can  still  be  found  in  Swedish 
legislation. Also, some requirements where the Directive left a margin of appreciation to 
Member  States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  for  the  establishment  of 
providers  and  which  are  mainly  dealt  with  in  article  15  of  the  Directive  have  been 
maintained.  

Concerning  professional  services,  it  seems  that  there  is  an  involvement  of  competing 
operators  in  the  granting  of  an  authorisation  for  establishment  for  lawyers  as  lawyers 
already established in Sweden shall confirm the good reputation of the candidate lawyer. 
In  addition,  only  a  Member  of  the  Swedish  Bar  Association  may  be  a  shareholder  or 
partner  of  a  legal  practice  conducted  in  the  form  of  a  limited  liability  company  or 
partnership. Similarly, only accountants may be shareholders or owners of an accounting 
undertaking  conducted  in  the  form  of  a  limited  liability  company  or  partnership. 
Moreover,  it  seems  that  a  patent  agent  has  to  be  domiciled  in  Sweden  in  order  to  be 
entitled to receive documents.  

Finally, in the real estate sector, fixed maximum tariffs on professional housing agency 
services (letting agents) have been maintained.  

In  the  tourism  sector,  a  residence  requirement  has  been  maintained  for  car  rental 
services as a responsible person domiciled in Sweden has to be appointed.  

2. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

Tacit approval does not apply as a general rule. Sector specific legislation was amended 
in  order  to  specify  where  tacit  approval  applies.    For  example,  it  has  been  explicitly 
introduced for the authorisation to operate as a car rental business. 

In particular, it seems that it was a deliberate decision that tacit approval should not apply 
to the construction sector in its entirety. Moreover tacit approval does not seem to apply 
to  environmentally  hazardous  activities,  to  debt  collecting  activities  and  to  company 
registration. 

Sweden  will  have  to  ensure  that  the  instances  in  which  article  13(4)  of  the  Services 
Directive is not applied are limited to duly justified matters. 

3. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

No total prohibition of commercial communications has been identified.  

201 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

Sweden implemented the freedom to provide services clause of Article 16 of the Services 
Directive  by  way  of  a  horizontal  law  provision  as  well  as  by  sector-specific  law.  This 
horizontal provision does not in itself guarantee a complete implementation of Article 16 
as it is not unconditional, nor does it mention that the freedom to provide services may 
only  be  restricted  for  reasons  of  public  policy,  public  security,  public  health  or  the 
protection of the environment. 

The  provision  in  the  horizontal  law  must  therefore  be  seen  in  the  light  of  the  other 
implementing  measures  carried  out  by  the  Swedish  Government  in  the  sector-specific 
legislation. The Swedish Government has carried out a careful screening of the national 
legislation  and  amended  a  number  of  Acts  in  order  to  ensure  conformity  with  the 
Services Directive. In addition, according to the Swedish legal order, the horizontal law, 
including  the  provision  implementing  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause,  must  be 
interpreted  in  the  light  of  the  preparatory  legislative  work  that  refers  clearly  to  the 
Directive and the principles deriving from it. 

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

It seems that this implementation implies, in case that sector specific legislation does not 
make  a  distinction  between  an  established  and  a  cross-border  service  provider,  that  the 
competent  authority  has  to  decide  on  a  case-by-case  basis  whether  a  requirement 
applicable to providers established in Sweden shall also be applied in the same manner to 
a  service  provider  established  in  another  Member  State  wanting  to  provide  temporary 
services in Sweden.  

In  view  of  this,  the  effectiveness  of  the  Swedish  implementation  of  the  freedom  to 
provide  services  clause  will  depend  to  a  large  extend  on  the  way  this  clause  is 
implemented in practice. However, no practical experience has been documented so far.  

The  Swedish  government  has  issued  brochures  for  the  attention  of  local  authorities 
explaining how the Services Directive, including the freedom to provide services clause, 
has to be applied in practice.85 

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Following their screening, the Swedish authorities had identified only few requirements 
which  should,  according  to  the  Directive,  not  be  applied  anymore  to  incoming  service 

85  "The  Services  Directive  -  general  guidelines  for  authorities  and  municipalities"  (non-official 

translation) published in Nov 2011: 
http://www.kommers.se/Documents/Dokumentarkiv/Publikationer%20i%20PDF/%c3%96vriga%20pu
blikationer/Publikation%20-%20Tj%c3%a4nstedirektivet%20-
%20s%c3%a5%20p%c3%a5verkas%20myndigheter%20och%20kommuner.pdf  

    "How the Services Directive applies on local authorities" (non-official translation) published in Dec 

2011:  
http://www.kommers.se/Documents/Dokumentarkiv/Publikationer%20i%20PDF/%c3%96vriga%20pu
blikationer/Publikation%20-
%20Kommunernas%20regel%c3%b6versyn%20utifr%c3%a5n%20tj%c3%a4nstedirektivet.pdf  

202 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
 
 
providers.  As  a  consequence,  only  a  limited  number  of  sector  specific  legislative  acts 
have been amended in order to ensure the implementation of this part of the Directive. 
However,  according  to  the  information  of  the  Commission,  problems  of  compatibility 
with  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  still  exist,  namely  as  regards  car  rental 
services and patent agents. 

In  addition,  it  seems  that  it  might  have  been  considered  that  authorisation  regimes 
applicable to service providers established in Sweden should apply to the same extent to 
service  providers  established  in  other  Member  States  providing  their  services  in  the 
Swedish territory on a cross-border basis (e.g. in the retail sector concerning health and 
safety requirements of products or premises). This causes some doubts and concerns as to 
the  justification  by  one  of  the  four  reasons  recognized  by  the  Directive.  In  this  respect 
special  attention  will  have  to  be  paid  to  the  very  broad  interpretation  of  the  notion  of 
“public policy” which includes also animal welfare.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the tourism sector, there is an obligation for providers of car rental services to appoint 
a  "responsible"  person  domiciled  in  Sweden.  In  addition  there  are  some  questions 
concerning insurance obligations in the sector. It seems that the requirement to provide a 
guarantee  with  the  competent  authority  in  Sweden  does  not  apply  to  cross-border 
provision of travel services  other  than package travel, but that the obligation applies to 
package  travel  activities  and  in  any  case  to  resellers  in  Sweden  acting  on  behalf  of  a 
provider established in another Member State. 

As far as the education sector is concerned, it seems that the authorisation scheme for 
driving school is also applicable to cross-border service providers. 

Use of exceptions article 17 

Sweden  has  interpreted  broadly  the  exception  of  the  freedom  to  provide  services 
clause  as  foreseen  in  Article  17(11)  of  the  Services  Directive  and  concerning 
intellectual  property  rights.  The  competent  authority  may  request  the  owner  of  an 
intellectual property right who is not domiciled in Sweden to have an agent residing in 
Sweden who is entitled to receive for him service of writs of summons, notifications and 
other documents in legal cases and matters concerning the patent. 

203 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
   UNITED KINGDOM   
_________________________________ 

I. 

Points of Single Contact  

The UK Point of Single Contact has two entry points depending on whether the user is 
(www.businesslink.gov.uk) 
the  UK 
based 
the  UK 
(www.UKwelocmesbusinesslink.gov.uk).  

outside 

or 

in 

Information  available  is  presented  in  simple  and  clear  language  which  is  of  particular 
advantage to cross-border service providers who are not familiar with the administrative 
system  of  the  UK.  The  content  of  the  information  provided  goes  well  beyond  the 
minimum  requirements  set  out  in  the  Services  Directive  and  covers  for  instance  also 
information on social security and tax issues.  

A relatively high number of procedures can be completed on-line, but the degree of on-
line sophistication seems to depend on whether it concerns an establishment or a cross-
border scenario.  

The  portal  can  accept  electronic  signatures,  also  from  other  Member  States,  but 
electronic signatures in general are not used for verification purposes but rather to lock 
down documents and forms completed by users so that others cannot tamper with them.  

The  PSC  offers  a  high  degree  of  readiness  for  domestic  and  cross-border  users.  The 
interactive  search  tree  that  provides  checklists  by  sector  or  company  type  has  been 
considered as one of the best examples of good practice and very user-friendly. 

The  homepage  for  users  from  outside  the  UK  provides  also  for  a  help  button  linking 
directly  to  versions  of  the  site  in  24  other  languages,  even  if  information  in  other 
languages only covers core and general information.  

The UK PSC is well established and the overall use and usability have been rated above 
average86.  However,  in  order  to  enhance  the  usability  of  the  PSC,  a  clear  distinction 
between  establishment  and  cross-border  situations  would  certainly  be  appreciated  in 
particular  by  cross-border  service  providers.  Improvements  concerning  the  on-line 
availability of procedures would certainly benefit all service providers.  

II. 

Implementation of and compliance with key provisions 

The  main  piece  of  implementation  is  the  "Provision  of  Services  Regulation  2009",  an 
omnibus law which implements the principles of the Services Directive in a cross-cutting 
way and amends some sector specific regulations. 

Another important element relevant to the implementation of the Services Directive was 
the  amendment  of  the  Companies  Act  which  abolished  a  general  obligation  for  anyone 
doing business in the UK to have an address in the UK. This requirement was indirectly 
discriminatory  against  persons  established  in  other  Member  States  who  did  not  have  a 
place of business in the UK.  

86 http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/services/services-dir/study_on_points_of_single_contact_en.htm 

204 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
in 

the  horizontal 

In  general,  few  sector  specific  amendments  were  made,  the  UK  claiming  to  have 
traditionally  a  light  touch  regulatory  regime.  Besides  a  few  sector  specific  changes 
contained 
licensing  of 
(street 
pubs/bars/restaurants  etc.)  which  concerned  mostly  amendments  regarding  aspects  of 
authorisation  schemes  and  availability  of  procedures  electronically,  changes  in  sector 
insolvency  practitioners  (authorisation  scheme  and 
specific 
insurance),  veterinarians,  bars  and  restaurants  and  certain  services  in  the  area  of  gas 
supply, distribution and storage.  

trading/peddlars  and 

legislation  concern 

law 

A. 

1.  

Streamlining the regulatory environment for services 

Requirements  applying  to  providers  established  or  wishing  to  establish  in  the 
United Kingdom (articles 14 and 15 of the Services Directive) 

No  requirements  prohibited  by  Article  14  have  been  maintained  in  the  UK.  The  few 
requirements which existed in UK legislation prior to the implementation of the Services 
Directive have all been removed.  

However, a number of requirements where the Directive left a margin of appreciation to 
Member  States  to  streamline  the  regulatory  environment  have  been  identified,  mainly 
concerning professional services where there is still a number of requirements, imposed 
by  Professional  rules,  relating  to  the  shareholding  of  companies  and/or  obligations  to 
take  a  specific  legal  form,  in  particular  with  regard  to  lawyers  and  auditors.  Some 
particularly  stringent  requirements  regarding  legal  form  and  shareholding  in  the  legal 
professions  where  advocates  in  Scotland  and  barristers  in  Northern  Ireland  can  only 
provide  services  as  single  practitioners  and  the  solicitors  are  subject  to  shareholding 
obligations  in  both  of  them,  raise  questions  as  regards  their  proportionality.  The 
shareholding requirements are in the process of being relaxed. 

2. 

Nationwide validity of authorisations (article 10(4) of the Services Directive) 

Authorisations which are not granted for the whole territory of a Member State but only 
for a specific part are likely to hinder the exercise of service activities.  

The United Kingdom implemented the principle of nationwide validity of authorisations 
in  the  horizontal  law  which  foresees  that  an  authorisation  granted  by  a  competent 
authority must enable the provider of the service to have access to the service activity or 
to  the  exercise  it  throughout  the  United  Kingdom.  However  the  law  also  contains  an 
exception for cases where the functions of the competent authority relate only to part of 
the  United  Kingdom.  For  those  cases,  the  authorisation  granted  is  only  valid  for  that 
particular  part  of  the  country  and  no  mechanism  to  ensure  nationwide  validity,  such  as 
recognition of authorisations issued by other devolved administrations, is provided for.  

3. 

Tacit approval of authorisations (article 13(4) of the Services Directive) 

The  principle  of  tacit  approval  is  an  important  means  of  cutting  red  tape  as  it  foresees 
that  an  authorisation  is  deemed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  provider  in  case  an 

205 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
application  has  not  received  any  response  within  the  set  time  period.  The  UK  has 
foreseen this principle in its horizontal law implementing the Services Directive.87 

In its Guide for Business on the Provision of Services Regulations88 the UK authorities 
explain that "failure to respond within the advertised time implies that your licence has 
been granted thus enabling you to start doing business." 

Nevertheless, there are quite a few exceptions to this principle. Those exceptions can be 
found in almost all sectors, but mainly in the construction and tourism sector. 

The United Kingdom will have to ensure that the instances in which article 13(4) of the 
Services Directive is not applied are limited to duly justified matters. 

4. 

Total  prohibition  of  commercial  communications  (article  24  of  the  Services 
Directive) 

The horizontal law rules out any prohibition of commercial communication for regulated 
professions.  

However it appears that the Law Society of Scotland practice Rules governing advertising 
and  promotion  of  solicitors  in  Scotland  contain  a  prohibition  on  direct  or  indirect 
approaches  to  members  of  the  public  but  only  where  the  solicitor  knows  or  ought  to 
know that the person in question is a client of another solicitor (or equivalent- including 
registered foreign lawyers and registered European lawyers). 

B. 

1. 

Boosting cross-border trade  

National implementation  

The  horizontal  law  giving  effect  to  the  main  provisions  of  the  Services  Directive  also 
implements  the  freedom  to  provide  services  clause  as  foreseen  in  Article  16  of  the 
Directive, which has been literally reproduced. The horizontal law being an omnibus law, 
it also amended certain sector specific legislation, e.g.  concerning pedlars, employment 
agencies. 

The UK carried out an in-depth screening process and identified around 280 pieces out of 
several  thousands  to  be  assessed  for  their  compliance  with  the  Directive.  24  of  those 
legislative acts were finally amended to comply with the Services Directive. However, it 
seems  that  only  one  piece  of  legislation,  namely  the  Companies  Act  was  modified  in 
order to ensure compliance with the freedom to provide services clause.  

2. 

Distinction between freedom of establishment and free provision of services 

The  horizontal  law  refers  to  the  general  principles  of  non-discrimination,  necessity  and 
proportionality  and  to  the  justified  reasons  for  imposing  requirements  to  incoming 

87   "In the event of failure to process the application within the period set or extended in accordance with 
the  preceding  provisions  of  this  regulation,  authorisation  is  deemed  to  have  been  granted  by  a 
competent authority, unless different arrangements are in place". 

88   http://www.bis.gov.uk/files/file53100.pdf 

206 

 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                 
service providers. The reasons mentioned are the four reasons recognized by the Services 
Directive.  

3. 

Issues with the free provision of services clause  

Requirements maintained and applied to incoming services providers seem to concentrate 
on the retail and construction sector.  

Examples of requirements that have been maintained 

In the construction sector, a number of specific Article 16 requirements with regard to 
obtaining consent  before carrying out  certain works or activities have been maintained, 
such  as  licence  for  specific  works  on  highways  or  concerning  waste  management. 
Curiously  enough  there  is  also  an  authorisation  requirement  for  window  cleaners  in 
Scotland.  

the  retail  sector,  most  requirements 

the  form  of 
Concerning 
authorisations.  The  majority  of  those  authorisations  are  concerned  with  licensing  the 
retail sale of alcohol. Licences are also required for other services, including second-hand 
dealer’s licences, metal dealers and street traders. 

identified 

took 

As far as the education sector is concerned, a number of registration requirements exist 
in relation to driving instruction. 

207