REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the application by the Member States of Directive 2000/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2000 on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the community Reporting Period 2011-2012
Date: 2014-09-12
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, commercial vehicle, disclosure of information, driving mechanism, intra-EU transport, pollution control, road traffic, roadworthiness tests, safety device, signalling device













EUR-Lex - 52014DC0569 - EN











|



52014DC0569

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL on the application by the Member States of Directive 2000/30/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 June 2000 on the technical roadside inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the community Reporting Period 2011-2012 /* COM/2014/0569 final */









TABLE
OF CONTENTS
1........... INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 3
2........... DIRECTIVE
2000/30/EC............................................................................................ 4
3........... DATA
COMMUNICATED BY MEMBER STATES............................................... 4
4........... CONTENT
OF THE INSPECTION........................................................................... 5
5........... STATISTICAL
DATA................................................................................................ 5
5.1........ Percentage
of vehicles inspected.................................................................................. 6
5.2........ Overall
number of vehicles checked and their origin................................................... 7
5.3........ Prohibited
vehicles........................................................................................................ 8
5.4........ Types
of deficiencies and data by Member State....................................................... 10
6........... TYPES
OF PENALTIES........................................................................................... 10
7........... SUMMARY
CONCLUSIONS................................................................................. 11
ANNEX I: DEFICIENCIES DETECTED PER
INSPECTION POINT
ANNEX II: VEHICLES CHECKED AND
PROHIBITION RATE BY MEMBER STATE
 
1.           INTRODUCTION
In the interest
of road safety, environmental protection and fair competition, European
legislation provides for a set of measures to ensure that commercial vehicles
on European roads are in good condition. These include:
·        
rules
on admission to the occupation, which require transport operators to have
sufficient financial capacity to ensure the proper maintenance of vehicles
(Regulation (EC) No 1072/2009[1]);
·        
periodic
roadworthiness tests of vehicles, to be carried out in Member States for
vehicles registered on their territory, with a minimum frequency laid down at
European level (Directive 2009/40/EC[2]);
·        
technical
roadside inspections — the subject of this report — ensuring that commercial
vehicles are only used if they are maintained such as to ensure a high level of
technical roadworthiness (Directive 2000/30/EC[3]).
Under Directive
2000/30/EC, commercial vehicles and their trailers and semi-trailers circulating
on the territories of the Member States are subject to technical roadside
inspections of their roadworthiness, in order to improve road safety and protect
the environment.
Article 6
of Directive 2000/30/EC provides that, every two years, Member States
should provide the Commission with data collected for the previous two years relating
to:

 the number of commercial vehicles
     checked, grouped into seven categories as per the Directive and further
     grouped by country of registration;
 the items checked; and
 the deficiencies discovered.

The Directive
lists nine different points (see section 4 below) that may be subject to a
technical roadside inspection. If any of the items checked do not comply with
the relevant road safety requirements, the vehicle could be banned from the
road. Any deficiencies in the vehicle inspected must be mentioned in the inspection
reports that must be given to the vehicle’s driver. The Directive requires the
Commission to submit a report to the Council and the European Parliament on how
the Directive has been applied, based on data received from the Member States,
together with a summary of the results obtained.
On 3
April 2014, the European Parliament and the Council revised the Directive on
technical roadside inspection through Directive 2014/47/EU.[4] The
revised version of the Directive introduces inter alia an EU-wide target
for the number of technical roadside inspections to be carried out. To allow
for the smooth implementation of this new requirement when it comes into force in
2018, this report provides information relating to the future EU-wide target of
5 % of registered heavy commercial vehicles to be checked.
2.           DIRECTIVE 2000/30/EC
Directive
2000/30/EC, as amended,[5] — which
is applicable until 19 May 2018 — sets out a number of conditions for technical
roadside checks on commercial vehicles circulating in the EU.
A technical
roadside inspection means an unannounced examination of a commercial vehicle
circulating within the territory of a Member State. The inspection is carried
out by the authorities, or another body acting under their supervision, and is usually
carried out on public highways.
All technical
roadside inspections must be carried out without discriminating on the grounds
of the driver’s nationality or the country in which the commercial vehicle was
registered or entered into service. They must also be undertaken so as to
minimise the costs and delay for drivers and operators.
A targeted
approach should be adopted in selecting commercial vehicles for technical
roadside inspection, placing particular importance on identifying vehicles that
seem most likely to be poorly maintained.
Roadside
inspections are carried out in a stepwise approach. An initial inspection
covers a visual assessment of the vehicle’s maintenance condition when
stationary. If the vehicle’s condition seems to represent a safety risk that justifies
further examination, the vehicle may be subjected to a more elaborate test at a
testing centre in the vicinity. The outcome of each roadside inspection must be
documented in a technical roadside inspection report that follows the model set
out in the Directive. This information provides the basis for the information
Member States are required to communicate to the European Commission.
If a commercial
vehicle with dangerous deficiencies presents a serious risk to road safety, its
use may be prohibited until these deficiencies have been rectified. Foreign
vehicles with serious deficiencies must be notified to the Member State of origin to allow for appropriate follow-up.
3.           DATA COMMUNICATED BY MEMBER STATES
This
is the fourth report on how Directive 2000/30/EC is applied in Member
States; it covers the period 2011-12. The data collected by Member States
relating to this period was supposed to be provided to the Commission by 31
March 2013 at the latest.
However, data was
not always communicated in a timely manner. Fifteen Member States (Belgium,
Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Italy, Latvia, Malta,
the Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Sweden) met the
deadline and provided data on the number of vehicles checked, grouped by
category and country of registration, as well as data on items checked and
defects noted. After the Commission had entered bilateral dialogues with the remaining
12 Member States, they provided the required data. Finally, the last data from Member
States was received on 6 May 2014.
In order to
facilitate communication of information as required by Article 6 of Directive
2000/30/EC, the Commission and Member State experts have developed a
standardised format for reporting. Use of this standardised format greatly
facilitates data collection; however, this is not obligatory. The majority of
reports from Member States followed the recommended format, even when printed
tables were submitted. The Czech Republic, Germany, Spain, France, Poland, Slove nia and Finland did not use the standardised format.
The various
Member States provided the data at varying levels of completeness. Only a few
Member States — the Czech Republic, Greece, Latvia, Austria, Poland and Slovenia — submitted data on vehicles registered outside the EU. Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, France, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Slovakia and Slovenia provided statistics for 2011 and 2012 separately. Some Member States (Denmark, Spain, France, Poland and Slovenia) did not report key data on all vehicle categories,
inspection points or the origin of vehicles checked. Spain and Finland were the only Member States which did not provide information on prohibited
vehicles at all. Also, some Member States provided multiple data sets, for
instance data reported by their Ministry of Transport and their national police
department. In general, those Member States using the standardised format for
collecting information provided a more complete set of data to the Commission.
4.           CONTENT OF THE INSPECTION
The points
likely to be checked and to be included in the data sent by Member States are,
at a minimum, those referred to in point 10 of the specimen report set out in
Annex I to Directive 2000/30/EC, as amended. These are:
·        
identification;
·        
braking
equipment;
·        
steering;
·        
visibility;
·        
lighting
equipment and electric system;
·        
axles,
wheels, tyres, suspension;
·        
chassis
and chassis attachments;
·        
other
equipment, including tachograph and speed limitation devices;
·        
nuisances,
including emissions and spillage of fuel and/or oil.
5.           STATISTICAL DATA
In order to get
comparable information on the vehicles checked by Member States, it was
necessary to break down the numbers for road trains and articulated vehicles
into lorries and trailers, and lorries and semi-trailers, respectively. Figures
resulting from this split are shown in italics throughout this report.
5.1.        Percentage
of vehicles inspected
The total number
of vehicles checked was 8 145 984 vehicles
for
2011-12. During this period, the number of registered commercial vehicles in
the EU was 8 830 451 vehicles. The ratio of vehicles checked
in 2011-12 to the overall fleet is 92.25 %, which corresponds to 46.12 %
of the overall fleet being subject to roadside checks each year.
Among the Member
States, the ratio of the average number of vehicles inspected each year to the
number of registered commercial vehicles differs significantly, covering a
range from 0.3 % up to more than 100 %. These differences may be partly
explained by the various reporting methods used: for example, some Member
States (such as Germany, France and Poland) reported data including initial
inspections, while others reported only the more elaborate checks they carried
out. The variations could also be explained by the different systems of checks used
by Member States, ranging from basic inspections without any equipment to
highly sophisticated, elaborate tests using mobile inspection units or test
centres in close vicinity.
Table
1: Percentage of vehicles inspected
 Member State || Vehicles checked  (2011–12) || Registered vehicles category N2, N3, M2, M3, O3 and O4 || Ratio total per annum* 
 Belgium || 18 799 || 253 440 || 3.71 % 
 Bulgaria || 595 905 || 293 930** || 101.37 % 
 Czech Republic || 160 285 || 211 794** || 37.84 % 
 Denmark || 27 781 || 92 911 || 14.95 % 
 Germany || 2 881 859 || 963 763** || 149.51 % 
 Estonia || 1 791 || 44 596** || 2.01 % 
 Ireland || 11 988 || 107 610** || 5.57 % 
 Greece || 28 276 || 472 955** || 2.99 % 
 Spain || 388 505 || 869 934** || 22.33 % 
 France || 1 431 117 || 758 788** || 94.30 % 
 Italy || 65 053 || 1 070 184** || 3.04 % 
 Cyprus || 1 133 || 27 178 || 2.08 % 
 Latvia || 5 822 || 47 272** || 6.16 % 
 Lithuania || 83 342 || 109 019** || 38.22 % 
 Luxembourg || 901 || 18 615** || 2.42 % 
 Hungary || 328 202 || 160 112** || 102.49 % 
 Malta || 3 852 || 10 994** || 17.52 % 
 Netherlands || 11 471 || 310 833 || 1.85 % 
 Austria || 32 227 || 98 897 || 16.29 % 
 Poland || 1 710 675 || 914 776** || 93.50 % 
 Portugal || 709 || 116 455** || 0.30 % 
 Romania || 22 260 || 346 418** || 3.21 % 
 Slovenia || 4 534 || 45 673** || 4.96 % 
 Slovakia || 18 074 || 271 770** || 3.33 % 
 Finland || 23 609 || 189 447 || 6.23 % 
 Sweden || 39 597 || 148 528 || 13.33 % 
 United Kingdom || 248 217 || 874 564** || 14.19 % 
 Total || 8 145 984 || 8 830 451 || 46.12 % 
* Ratio total
per annum equals the average number of individual Member State checks each year
divided by the total number of vehicles registered in this Member State.
** Numbers
are derived from data provided by Eurostat.
5.2.        Overall number of vehicles checked and
their origin
Article 3 of
Directive 2000/30/EC sets out the non-discriminatory spirit of inspections to
be performed. Several Member States, especially Belgium, Luxembourg and Austria,
reported higher proportions of foreign vehicles having been subject to roadside
inspection, while other Member States with significant transit traffic reported
a more balanced distribution of inspections of resident and non-resident
vehicles. While this may be due to other factors, unrelated to the nature of
the inspection, the findings for Belgium and Luxembourg were similar in the
previous report on implementation of the Directive.[6]
Table
2: Origin of vehicles checked
 Reporting Member State (MS ) || Registered in the MS || Registered in another MS || Registered outside the EU || Total || Vehicles of the MS (%) 
 Belgium || 6 887 || 11 430 || 482 || 18 799 || 36.6 % 
 Bulgaria || 520 477 || 75 428 ||   || 595 905 || 87.3 % 
 Czech Republic || 103 641 || 53 401 || 3 243 || 160 285 || 64.7 % 
 Denmark* ||   ||   ||   || 27 781 ||   
 Germany || 1 833 789 || 921 213 || 126 857 || 2 881 859 || 63.6 % 
 Estonia || 1 732 || 53 || 6 || 1 791 || 96.7 % 
 Ireland || 11 988 ||   ||   || 11 988 || 100.0 % 
 Greece || 22 569 || 4 779 || 928 || 28 276 || 79.8 % 
 Spain || 366 205 || 22 300 ||   || 388 505 || 94.3 % 
 France || 721 796 || 694 157 || 15 164 || 1 431 117 || 50.4 % 
 Italy || 46 958 || 14 846 || 3 249 || 65 053 || 72.2 % 
 Cyprus || 1 133 ||   ||   || 1 133 || 100.0 % 
 Latvia || 4 781 || 1 041 ||   || 5 822 || 82.1 % 
 Lithuania || 55 201 || 28 141 ||   || 83 342 || 66.2 % 
 Luxembourg || 112 || 789 ||   || 901 || 12.4 % 
 Hungary || 252 209 || 75 993 ||   || 328 202 || 76.8 % 
 Malta || 3 820 || 32 ||   || 3 852 || 99.2 % 
 Netherlands || 6 999 || 4 472 ||   || 11 471 || 61.0 % 
 Austria || 14 019 || 16 650 || 1 558 || 32 227 || 43.5 % 
 Poland || 1 574 898 || 64 572 || 71 205 || 1 710 675 || 92.1 % 
 Portugal || 657 || 52 ||   || 709 || 92.7 % 
 Romania || 21 987 || 273 ||   || 22 260 || 98.8 % 
 Slovenia || 3 298 || 1 236 ||   || 4 534 || 72.7 % 
 Slovakia || 14 825 || 3 249 ||   || 18 074 || 82.0 % 
 Finland || 13 156 || 2 102 || 8 351 || 23 609 || 55.7 % 
 Sweden || 32 656 || 6 941 ||   || 39 597 || 82.5 % 
 United Kingdom || 126 502 || 121 715 ||   || 248 217 || 51.0 % 
 Total || 5 762 295 || 2 124 865 || 231 043 || 8 145 984 || 70.7 % 
* Denmark did not provide information on
origin for the majority of vehicles checked.
5.3.        Prohibited
vehicles
Vehicles with
dangerous deficiencies that present a serious risk to its occupants or other
road users may be prohibited from further use until those deficiencies have
been rectified. According to the information sent by Member States, the
proportion of vehicles prohibited in relation to all vehicles checked varies
considerably from one Member State to another, from a high of 87.6 % in
Estonia to just 0.6 % in Poland.
The figures seem
to indicate that targeting technical roadside inspections on poorly maintained
vehicles, as currently done in Luxembourg, Austria and the United Kingdom, increases
operational effectiveness and decreases administrative burden. Member States
adopting this approach seem to have a higher capture rate of faulty vehicles
with fewer checks than other Member States that conduct a higher number of
inspections. This is the case for Estonia, Luxembourg and Malta, which have the highest prohibition rate, while Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and Poland show the lowest
rates for the prohibition of vehicles registered in the EU.
Member States reporting particularly high numbers of checks tend to show low
rates of prohibitions or defects detected.
Table
3: Proportion of prohibited vehicles in relation to all vehicles checked
 Reporting Member State || Vehicles registered in the reporting Member State || Vehicles registered in the EU (including reporting Member State) 
 Number of vehicles checked || Number of prohibitions || Ratio of prohibitions (%) || Number of vehicles checked || Number of prohibitions || Ratio of prohibitions (%) 
 Belgium || 6 887 || 589 || 8.6 % || 18 317 || 1 140 || 6.2 % 
 Bulgaria || 520 477 || 10 043 || 1.9 % || 595 905 || 12 584 || 2.1 % 
 Czech Republic || 103 641 || 2 595 || 2.5 % || 157 042 || 3 340 || 2.1 % 
 Denmark ||   ||   ||   || 27 781 || 211 || 0.8 % 
 Germany || 1 833 789 || 13 772 || 0.8 % || 2 755 002 || 31 817 || 1.2 % 
 Estonia || 1 732 || 1 517 || 87.6 % || 1 785 || 1 544 || 86.5 % 
 Ireland || 11 988 || 5 200 || 43.4 % || 11 988 || 5 200 || 43.4 % 
 Greece || 22 569 || 1 266 || 5.6 % || 27 348 || 1 378 || 5.0 % 
 Spain || 366 205 ||   ||   || 388 505 ||   ||   
 France || 721 796 || 76 448 || 10.6 % || 1 415 953 || 191 896 || 13.6 % 
 Italy || 46 958 || 6 710 || 14.3 % || 61 804 || 7 960 || 12.9 % 
 Cyprus* || 1 133 || 1 684 || 148.6 % || 1 133 || 1 684 || 148.6 % 
 Latvia || 4 781 || 317 || 6.6 % || 5 822 || 403 || 6.9 % 
 Lithuania || 55 201 || 827 || 1.5 % || 83 342 || 1 142 || 1.4 % 
 Luxembourg || 112 || 82 || 73.2 % || 901 || 531 || 58.9 % 
 Hungary || 252 209 || 4 314 || 1.7 % || 328 202 || 6 239 || 1.9 % 
 Malta || 3 820 || 1 895 || 49.6 % || 3 852 || 1 900 || 49.3 % 
 Netherlands || 6 999 || 166 || 2.4 % || 11 471 || 134 || 1.2 % 
 Austria || 14 019 || 5 851 || 41.7 % || 30 669 || 14 477 || 47.2 % 
 Poland || 1 574 898 || 9 228 || 0.6 % || 1 639 470 || 9 228 || 0.6 % 
 Portugal || 657 || 15 || 2.3 % || 709 || 16 || 2.3 % 
 Romania || 21 987 || 8 815 || 40.1 % || 22 260 || 8 875 || 39.9 % 
 Slovenia || 3 298 || 52 || 1.6 % || 4 534 || 83 || 1.8 % 
 Slovakia || 14 825 || 3 515 || 23.7 % || 18 074 || 4 093 || 22.6 % 
 Finland || 13 156 ||   ||   || 15 258 ||   ||   
 Sweden || 32 656 || 3 812 || 11.7 % || 39 597 || 7 043 || 17.8 % 
 United Kingdom || 126 502 || 40 022 || 31.6 % || 248 217 || 87 563 || 35.3 % 
 Total || 5 762 295 || 198 735 || 3.4 % || 7 914 941 || 400 481 || 5.1 % 
* Cyprus
reported the number of failures instead of number of prohibitions.
5.4.      Types
of deficiencies and data by Member State
The most
frequent deficiencies detected during inspections concern the roadworthiness
condition of:
-           lighting
equipment and electric system (47.0 %);
-           axles,
wheels, tyres, suspension (24.6 %); and
-           chassis
and chassis attachments (11.8 %).
As shown in
Annex I, these figures highlight the importance of roadside inspections for road
safety. Comparing data with the previous reporting period shows that similar
problematic areas were also identified then.
For deficiencies
relating to emissions and leakages — which, in addition to being a road
safety hazard, can also have an impact on the environment — there has been a
decrease of three percentage points (from 4.1 % to 1.0 %) in the
ratio of spillage of fuel and/or oil since the previous reporting period.
Even within the
different items to be tested — such as braking equipment for example —
considerable differences in deficiency rates were reported, ranging from 1.9 %
in Estonia to 47.3 % in the United Kingdom. This may
be due to the different testing methods applied by Member States. When it becomes
applicable, Directive 2014/47/EU will introduce greater harmonisation in testing
methods, assessment of deficiencies and use of test equipment for more detailed
technical roadside inspections.
Data submitted
by Member States on the number of inspections made on vehicles registered in
non-EU countries is still not sufficient to draw significant conclusions on
their roadworthiness condition.
Annex II to this
report provides an overview of the number of vehicles checked in Member States
by country of registration and the ratio of prohibitions issued.
6.           TYPES OF PENALTIES
The Directive
does not set out a system of penalties for any infringements discovered.
Penalties are to be set by Member States, without discrimination on the grounds
of the driver’s nationality or of the country in which the vehicle was
registered or entered service.
If it becomes
evident that a commercial vehicle presents a serious risk to its occupants or
other road users, the authority or inspector carrying out the inspection is
empowered under Directive 2000/30/EC to prohibit the use of a vehicle
until the dangerous deficiencies discovered have been rectified.
Serious
deficiencies found in a commercial vehicle belonging to a non‑resident,
in particular those that lead to its use being prohibited, must be notified to
the competent authorities of the Member State where it is registered.
The competent
authorities of the Member State that found the serious deficiency may ask the
competent authorities of the Member State where the vehicle is registered to
take appropriate measures, such as subjecting the vehicle to a further
roadworthiness inspection. However, no reporting is required on such cases.
7.           SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS
Compliance with
reporting obligations has improved, although reports from Member States still lack
some key statistical data, notably on vehicle categories, inspection points,
origin of vehicles checked and number of prohibitions imposed. Member States
did not always meet the deadline set in legislation for providing data; in some
cases, these were only provided when the Commission had launched bilateral
inquiries with the relevant Member State authorities. Some Member States continue
not to use the standardised electronic format that the Commission has
recommended for submitting data. The Commission continues to recommend that the
standardised electronic format be used, as this will support the submission of
more complete data.
Several
conclusions can be drawn from this report on roadside inspections of commercial
vehicles circulating within the EU.
The annual total
number of vehicles checked in the EU represents more than 40 % of
the commercial vehicle fleet for the EU as a whole, ranging from less than 1 %
in Portugal to more than 100 % in Germany, Hungary and Bulgaria. The future EU target of 5 % — stipulated in the new roadside inspection
Directive 2014/47/EU — should therefore be easily reachable for all Member
States. However, 11 Member States remain substantially below the EU target and
should therefore increase their technical roadside inspection activity.
The proportion of
domestic vehicles out of the total number of vehicles checked also varies
substantially. In Belgium, Luxembourg and Austria, where the proportion of
checks on domestic vehicles is below 50 %, efforts should be made to
ensure a more balanced rate of checks, more in line with those in other Member
States with significant transit traffic.
The proportion of vehicles prohibited in
relation to all vehicles checked shows sizeable variations, from less than 1 %
in Poland to more than 80 % in Estonia. The figures reported suggest that
the efficiency of technical roadside inspections can be increased by better
targeting the checks that are carried out. The administrative burden for both
enforcement authorities and transport operators could also be reduced through better
targeting. The new roadside inspection Directive 2014/47/EU requires Member
States to change their inspection systems, moving from carrying out purely
random checking to a more targeted approach.
The most
frequent deficiencies detected during inspections concern the roadworthiness
condition of lighting equipment, wheels, tyres and chassis. However,
significant variations in these deficiency rates can be seen across Member
States. The European Commission encourages Member States to pay particular
attention to the categories of deficiencies that continue to be most
problematic and to adjust the inspection methods they use accordingly.
[1]               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 (recast), OJ L
300, 14.11.2009, p. 72.
[2]               Directive 2009/40/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 6 May 2009 on roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and
their trailers (Recast), OJ L 141, 6.6.2009, p. 12.
[3]               Directive 2000/30/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 6 June 2000 on the technical roadside
inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the
Community, OJ L 203, 10.8.2000, p. 1.
[4]               Directive 2014/47/EU of the European Parliament and
of the Council of 3 April 2014 on the technical roadside inspection of the
roadworthiness of commercial vehicles circulating in the Union, OJ L 127,
29.4.2014, p. 134.
[5]               Commission Directive 2010/47/EU of 5 July 2010
adapting to technical progress Directive 2000/30/EC, OJ L 173, 8.7.2010,
p. 33.
[6]COM(2013) 303.
ANNEX
I: DEFICIENCIES DETECTED PER INSPECTION POINT

ANNEX II: VEHICLES CHECKED AND PROHIBITION RATE BY MEMBER STATE
NOTE:
The figures reported below do not take into account the splitting up of road
trains and articulated vehicles.
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 AT ||   || BE ||   || BG ||   || CY ||   || CZ ||   || DE ||   || DK ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 AD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AL || 3 || 66.7 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AT || 14 019 || 41.7 % || 121 || 1.7 % || 1 174 || 1.4 % ||   ||   || 701 || 2.3 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 AZ || 1 || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BA || 169 || 59.2 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 66 || 3.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BE || 61 || 47.5 % || 6 887 || 8.6 % || 155 || 5.2 % ||   ||   || 54 || 3.7 % ||   ||   || 3 || 33.3 % 
 BG || 761 || 60.4 % || 244 || 8.2 % || 404 750 || 2.5 % ||   ||   || 816 || 3.2 % ||   ||   || 6 || 33.3 % 
 BL ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BR || 1 || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BY || 66 || 42.4 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 255 || 2.4 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CH || 103 || 44.7 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 13 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CS || 338 || 62.4 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CY || 21 || 52.4 % || 8 || 0.0 % || 1 438 || 0.0 % || 1 054 || 159.8 % || 9 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 CZ || 2 212 || 44.3 % || 534 || 5.1 % || 2 437 || 1.9 % ||   ||   || 73 191 || 3.5 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 DE || 1 903 || 35.3 % || 1 608 || 2.6 % || 1 363 || 1.6 % ||   ||   || 2 917 || 1.6 % || 1 266 270 || 1.1 % || 11 || 18.2 % 
 DK || 31 || 41.9 % || 56 || 5.4 % || 113 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 20 ||   ||   ||   || 404 || 33.9 % 
 EE || 27 || 59.3 % || 43 || 4.7 % || 252 || 1.6 % ||   ||   || 165 || 1.2 % ||   ||   || 2 ||   
 EI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 EL || 104 || 59.6 % || 19 || 15.8 % || 8 087 || 4.7 % ||   ||   || 81 || 1.2 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 ES || 104 || 51.9 % || 689 || 6.5 % || 305 || 4.3 % ||   ||   || 299 || 1.0 % ||   ||   || 2 ||   
 FI || 15 || 33.3 % || 18 || 5.6 % || 39 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 14 ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 AT ||   || BE ||   || BG ||   || CY ||   || CZ ||   || DE ||   || DK ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 FR || 34 || 44.1 % || 1 278 || 5.0 % || 289 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 38 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 GE || 8 || 75.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HR || 288 || 50.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 136 || 3.7 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HU || 3 590 || 59.1 % || 313 || 2.9 % || 4 962 || 3.8 % ||   ||   || 2 912 || 2.1 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 IE || 35 || 48.6 % || 60 || 6.7 % || 20 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 22 ||   ||   ||   || 2 || 50.0 % 
 IR || 6 || 50.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IT || 814 || 36.2 % || 409 || 5.4 % || 878 || 4.6 % ||   ||   || 234 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 KG ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 KZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LI || 19 || 36.8 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LT || 243 || 56.0 % || 392 || 3.3 % || 614 || 1.6 % ||   ||   || 1 082 || 0.8 % ||   ||   || 6 ||   
 LU || 8 || 25.0 % || 470 || 1.7 % || 2 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 25 ||   ||   ||   || 3 ||   
 LV || 91 || 52.7 % || 70 || 5.7 % || 456 || 0.2 % ||   ||   || 254 || 0.4 % ||   ||   || 5 || 60.0 % 
 MC ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MD || 51 || 68.6 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 15 || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ME || 13 || 84.6 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MK || 75 || 56.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 134 || 3.0 % ||   ||   || 1 ||   
 MT || 6 || 50.0 % || 3 || 0.0 % || 1 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 NL || 284 || 34.9 % || 2 069 || 5.1 % || 976 || 1.1 % ||   ||   || 237 || 1.3 % ||   ||   || 16 ||   
 NO || 2 || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Non EU ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 623 308 || 2.9 % ||   ||   
 Other Non-EU MS ||   ||   || 482 || 5.6 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 87 859 || 2.6 % ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 AT ||   || BE ||   || BG ||   || CY ||   || CZ ||   || DE ||   || DK ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 PL || 1 392 || 54.5 % || 1 413 || 5.2 % || 7 981 || 2.8 % ||   ||   || 12 112 || 2.4 % ||   ||   || 20 || 30.0 % 
 PT || 68 || 58.8 % || 342 || 9.4 % || 494 || 1.2 % ||   ||   || 177 || 0.6 % ||   ||   || 2 || 50.0 % 
 RO || 2 072 || 63.9 % || 485 || 7.4 % || 17 149 || 7.6 % ||   ||   || 2 844 || 2.6 % ||   ||   || 6 || 33.3 % 
 RS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 585 || 1.7 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 RU || 47 || 55.3 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 249 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SE || 22 || 22.7 % || 28 || 3.6 % || 93 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 48 ||   ||   ||   || 2 || 50.0 % 
 SI || 1 054 || 52.2 % || 165 || 3.0 % || 1 138 || 11.3 % ||   ||   || 271 || 2.2 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % 
 SK || 1 656 || 53.5 % || 404 || 3.2 % || 2 074 || 6.4 % ||   ||   || 8 403 || 2.5 % ||   ||   || 6 ||   
 SM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SV || 1 || 100.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TJ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TN || 2 || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TR || 262 || 40.8 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 257 || 0.4 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UA || 96 || 63.5 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 373 || 2.4 % ||   ||   || 2 || 50.0 % 
 UK || 42 || 59.5 % || 189 || 8.5 % || 103 || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 18 ||   ||   ||   || 5 ||   
 US || 1 || 100.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 VA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XK || 5 || 60.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ZM || 1 || 100.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 EE ||   || EL ||   || ES ||   || FI ||   || FR ||   || HU ||   || IE ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 AD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AL ||   ||   || 247 || 5.3 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AT ||   ||   || 137 || 4.4 % ||   || 0.0 % || 4 ||   || 2 207 || 17.9 % || 3 008 || 0.6 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 AZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BA ||   ||   || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BE ||   ||   || 25 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 20 ||   || 57 393 || 18.0 % || 39 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 BG ||   ||   || 2 325 || 2.5 % ||   || 0.0 % || 50 ||   || 17 094 || 15.7 % || 3 144 || 3.9 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 BL ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BY ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 47 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CH ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CY ||   ||   || 6 ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 71 || 28.2 % || 0 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 CZ ||   ||   || 14 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 52 ||   || 19 722 || 12.5 % || 3 729 || 1.6 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 DE || 1 || 100.0 % || 44 || 2.3 % ||   || 0.0 % || 98 ||   || 59 102 || 18.1 % || 1 239 || 2.3 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 DK ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 59 ||   || 1 745 || 22.0 % || 38 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 EE || 1 647 || 92.1 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 600 ||   || 1 487 || 15.7 % || 151 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 EI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 EL ||   ||   || 18 726 || 6.8 % ||   || 0.0 % || 2 ||   || 2 893 || 32.6 % || 67 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 ES ||   ||   || 4 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 2 ||   || 171 093 || 18.0 % || 202 || 6.4 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 FI || 1 || 100.0 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 10 284 ||   || 421 || 14.7 % || 18 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 EE ||   || EL ||   || ES ||   || FI ||   || FR ||   || HU ||   || IE ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 FR ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 9 ||   || 721 796 || 10.6 % || 84 || 13.1 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 GE ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HR ||   ||   || 3 ||   ||   ||   || 5 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HU || 1 || 100.0 % || 18 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 12 ||   || 13 622 || 12.5 % || 252 209 || 1.7 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 IE ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 2 406 || 14.9 % || 69 || 11.6 % || 11 988 || 43.4 % 
 IR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IT ||   ||   || 36 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 3 ||   || 66 779 || 19.1 % || 1 012 || 1.4 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 KG ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 KZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LT || 7 || 57.1 % ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 96 ||   || 12 650 || 14.7 % || 1 404 || 2.8 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 LU ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 11 246 || 19.3 % || 3 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 LV || 12 || 75.0 % || 2 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 105 ||   || 7 660 || 12.7 % || 400 || 2.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 MC ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MD ||   ||   || 19 || 5.3 % ||   ||   || 9 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ME ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MK ||   ||   || 126 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MT ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 58 || 8.6 % || 0 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 NL ||   ||   || 6 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 78 ||   || 41 669 || 19.1 % || 494 || 3.8 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 NO ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 4 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Non-EU || 6 || 100.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other Non-EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 15 164 || 16.6 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 EE ||   || EL ||   || ES ||   || FI ||   || FR ||   || HU ||   || IE ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 PL || 12 || 58.3 % || 91 || 1.1 % ||   || 0.0 % || 264 ||   || 64 920 || 12.9 % || 16 794 || 1.4 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 PT ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 65 603 || 13.8 % || 32 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 RO ||   ||   || 1 416 || 3.2 % ||   || 0.0 % || 23 ||   || 35 842 || 15.7 % || 24 107 || 4.3 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 RS ||   ||   || 91 || 2.2 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 RU ||   ||   || 11 ||   ||   ||   || 5 359 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SE || 3 || 100.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 89 ||   || 269 || 16.7 % || 155 || 3.9 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 SI ||   ||   || 16 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 9 ||   || 5 023 || 15.2 % || 4 030 || 2.0 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 SK ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 11 ||   || 21 614 || 14.9 % || 15 728 || 1.3 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 SM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SV ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TJ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TN ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TR ||   ||   || 129 || 0.8 % ||   ||   || 18 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UA ||   ||   || 14 ||   ||   ||   || 223 ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UK || 1 || 100.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 12 ||   || 11 568 || 12.9 % || 46 || 34.8 % ||   || 0.0 % 
 US ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 VA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XK ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ZM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 IT ||   || LT ||   || LU ||   || LV ||   || MT ||   || NL ||   || PL ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 AD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AL ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 ||   
 AR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 7 ||   
 AT || 30 || 6.7 % ||   || 0.0 % || 6 || 116.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 18 || 0.0 % || 286 ||   
 AZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 74 ||   
 BA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 442 ||   
 BE || 40 || 20.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 77 || 57.1 % || 2 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 252 || 2.0 % || 97 ||   
 BG || 57 || 29.8 % || 127 || 6.3 % || 25 || 120.0 % || 14 || 14.3 % ||   ||   || 51 || 0.0 % || 2 547 ||   
 BL ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BY ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 12 295 ||   
 CA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CH ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 36 ||   
 CS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1 ||   
 CY || 1 || 100.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 2 || 100.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 8 || 0.0 % || 5 ||   
 CZ || 60 || 13.3 % || 345 || 0.3 % || 13 || 53.8 % || 8 || 12.5 % ||   || 0.0 % || 82 || 1.2 % || 9 082 ||   
 DE || 106 || 10.4 % || 254 ||   || 161 || 67.7 % || 10 ||   || 7 || 0.0 % || 297 || 2.4 % || 3 126 ||   
 DK || 8 ||   || 30 ||   || 5 || 0.0 % || 9 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 32 || 0.0 % || 133 ||   
 EE || 6 || 16.7 % || 1 438 || 1.3 % || 1 || 100.0 % || 106 || 6.6 % ||   || 0.0 % || 12 || 0.0 % || 3 345 ||   
 EI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 EL || 13 || 15.4 % ||   || 0.0 % || 4 || 75.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 12 || 0.0 % || 53 ||   
 ES || 37 || 51.4 % || 1 ||   || 60 || 71.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 104 || 1.9 % || 597 ||   
 FI || 5 ||   || 4 || 50.0 % || 8 || 87.5 % || 10 || 10.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 23 || 4.3 % || 112 ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 IT ||   || LT ||   || LU ||   || LV ||   || MT ||   || NL ||   || PL ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 FR || 254 || 29.1 % || 2 ||   || 56 || 76.8 % || 1 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 42 || 0.0 % || 83 ||   
 GE ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 103 ||   
 HR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0.0 % ||   ||   || 813 ||   
 HU || 75 || 13.3 % || 81 || 2.5 % || 20 || 40.0 % || 2 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 37 || 2.7 % || 2 912 ||   
 IE || 5 || 40.0 % || 2 ||   || 6 || 16.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 15 || 0.0 % || 88 ||   
 IR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 18 ||   
 IT || 8 118 || 62.2 % ||   || 0.0 % || 16 || 37.5 % ||   || 0.0 % || 13 || 38.5 % || 52 || 3.8 % || 633 ||   
 KG ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 62 ||   
 KZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 230 ||   
 LI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 240 ||   
 LT || 42 || 2.4 % || 46 220 || 1.8 % || 23 || 43.5 % || 497 || 11.9 % ||   || 0.0 % || 162 || 1.2 % || 22 710 ||   
 LU || 29 || 13.8 % ||   || 0.0 % || 106 || 77.4 % ||   || 0.0 % || 2 || 0.0 % || 4 || 0.0 % || 49 ||   
 LV || 7 ||   || 4 693 || 0.5 % || 8 || 37.5 % || 3 974 || 8.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 15 || 0.0 % || 7 430 ||   
 MC ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1 ||   
 MD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 820 ||   
 ME ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 10 ||   
 MK ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 608 ||   
 MT || 3 || 66.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 3 513 || 53.9 % || 2 || 0.0 % || 51 ||   
 NL || 35 || 20.0 % || 6 ||   || 41 || 24.4 % || 14 ||   || 2 || 0.0 % || 2 724 || 1.3 % || 770 ||   
 NO ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 14 342 ||   
 Non EU || 24 || 4.2 % ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other Non-EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 IT ||   || LT ||   || LU ||   || LV ||   || MT ||   || NL ||   || PL ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 PL || 156 || 12.2 % || 16 513 || 1.5 % || 56 || 71.4 % || 202 || 7.9 % ||   || 0.0 % || 392 || 2.0 % || 1 033 995 || 0.9 % 
 PT || 29 || 10.3 % || 2 ||   || 11 || 9.1 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 49 || 2.0 % || 428 ||   
 RO || 152 || 27.6 % || 44 || 4.5 % || 54 || 90.7 % || 2 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 60 || 0.0 % || 3 399 ||   
 RS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1 056 ||   
 RU ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 17 543 ||   
 SE || 3 ||   || 3 ||   || 5 ||   || 3 ||   ||   || 0.0 % || 15 || 0.0 % || 147 ||   
 SI || 52 || 11.5 % || 12 ||   || 10 || 60.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 21 || 0.0 % || 934 ||   
 SK || 100 || 13.0 % || 97 || 4.1 % || 24 || 41.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 56 || 0.0 % || 5 462 ||   
 SM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 126 ||   
 SV ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TJ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 0 || 0.0 % 
 TM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 1 774 ||   
 TN ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 2 935 ||   
 UA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 15 649 ||   
 UK || 19 || 5.3 % ||   || 0.0 % || 13 || 69.2 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 35 || 0.0 % || 93 ||   
 US ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9 ||   
 VA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   || 9 ||   
 XK ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ZM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 PT ||   || RO ||   || SE ||   || SI ||   || SK ||   || UK ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 AD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AL ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 AT ||   || 0.0 % || 2 || 0.0 % || 26 || 53.8 % || 19 || 0.0 % || 115 || 7.8 % || 242 || 61.6 % 
 AZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BE ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 42 || 54.8 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 1 245 || 65.5 % 
 BG ||   || 0.0 % || 66 || 7.6 % || 525 || 54.9 % || 117 || 2.6 % || 65 || 36.9 % || 3 731 || 84.0 % 
 BL ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 BY ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CH ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 CY ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 74 || 108.1 % 
 CZ ||   || 0.0 % || 6 || 16.7 % || 222 || 56.3 % || 16 || 0.0 % || 374 || 29.7 % || 3 155 || 65.4 % 
 DE || 1 ||   || 4 || 25.0 % || 392 || 28.6 % || 5 || 20.0 % || 58 || 13.8 % || 3 350 || 50.7 % 
 DK ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 930 || 40.5 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 118 || 66.1 % 
 EE ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 405 || 36.0 % || 2 || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 238 || 52.9 % 
 EI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 EL ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 2 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 239 || 92.5 % 
 ES || 26 ||   || 0 || 0.0 % || 45 || 57.8 % || 7 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 6 826 || 82.8 % 
 FI ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 989 || 26.3 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 6 || 83.3 % 
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 PT ||   || RO ||   || SE ||   || SI ||   || SK ||   || UK ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 FR || 2 ||   || 2 || 50.0 % || 18 || 44.4 % || 2 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 1 596 || 57.7 % 
 GE ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 HU ||   || 0.0 % || 51 || 49.0 % || 93 || 53.8 % || 165 || 2.4 % || 387 || 41.1 % || 3 354 || 66.8 % 
 IE ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 22 || 50.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 1 || 0.0 % || 6 666 || 75.3 % 
 IR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 IT ||   || 0.0 % || 4 || 0.0 % || 10 || 80.0 % || 34 || 8.8 % || 3 || 33.3 % || 2 511 || 76.1 % 
 KG ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 KZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LI ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 LT ||   || 0.0 % || 1 || 0.0 % || 391 || 62.9 % || 24 || 8.3 % || 25 || 20.0 % || 3 256 || 70.9 % 
 LU || 1 ||   || 0 || 0.0 % || 3 || 33.3 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 127 || 57.5 % 
 LV ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 250 || 46.0 % || 15 || 6.7 % || 17 || 17.6 % || 359 || 72.7 % 
 MC ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MD ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ME ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MK ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 MT ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 2 || 100.0 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 83 || 104.8 % 
 NL ||   || 0.0 % || 7 || 14.3 % || 382 || 31.9 % || 1 || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 3 871 || 55.0 % 
 NO ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Non EU ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Other Non-EU MS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 Country of origin || Checking countries (number of checks carried out; prohibition %) 
 PT ||   || RO ||   || SE ||   || SI ||   || SK ||   || UK ||   
 Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % || Checks || % 
 PL || 2 || 50.0 % || 61 || 41.0 % || 1 905 || 58.4 % || 145 || 2.1 % || 605 || 30.6 % || 11 679 || 73.0 % 
 PT || 463 || 3.2 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 21 || 66.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 2 900 || 84.7 % 
 RO || 1 ||   || 19 319 || 45.6 % || 143 || 64.3 % || 189 || 6.3 % || 216 || 31.5 % || 5 567 || 86.6 % 
 RS ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 RU ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SE ||   || 0.0 % || 1 || 0.0 % || 32 656 || 11.7 % ||   || 0.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 55 || 63.6 % 
 SI ||   || 0.0 % || 3 || 0.0 % || 33 || 45.5 % || 2 805 || 1.9 % || 9 || 33.3 % || 1 068 || 73.7 % 
 SK ||   || 0.0 % || 3 || 33.3 % || 67 || 70.1 % || 90 || 2.2 % || 11 215 || 31.3 % || 2 743 || 70.9 % 
 SM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 SV ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TJ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TN ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 TR ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UK ||   || 0.0 % || 0 || 0.0 % || 25 || 64.0 % ||   || 0.0 % || 1 || 200.0 % || 97 536 || 41.0 % 
 US ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 UZ ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 VA ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 XK ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   
 ZM ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||   ||