COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Follow-up of recommendations to the Commission report on the protection of the EU’s financial interests – fight against fraud, 2013 Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Protection of the European Union's financial interests - Fight against Fraud Annual Report 2014
Date: 2015-07-31
Institutions: European Anti-Fraud Office, European Commission
Subjects: EU expenditure, European Anti-fraud Office, fight against crime, financial control, fraud against the EU, sectoral planning

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 31.7.2015  SWD(2015) 152 final   COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Follow-up of recommendations to the Commission report on the protection of the  EU’s financial interests – fight against fraud, 2013 Accompanying the document REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL Protection of the European Union's financial interests - Fight against Fraud Annual Report 2014 {COM(2015) 386 final} {SWD(2015) 151 final} {SWD(2015) 153 final} {SWD(2015) 154 final} {SWD(2015) 155 final} {SWD(2015) 156 final}  
 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

COMMISSION  STAFF  WORKING  DOCUMENT  FOLLOW-UP  OF 
RECOMMENDATIONS  TO  THE  COMMISSION  REPORT  ON  THE 
PROTECTION OF THE  EU’S FINANCIAL INTERESTS – FIGHT AGAINST 
FRAUD, 2013 

1. 

2. 

SUMMARY .................................................................................................................. 3 

Conclusions and recommendations .............................................................................. 3 

2.1. 

An unprecedented set of anti-fraud measures ............................................................... 3 

2.1.1.  The beginning of the road: CAFS ............................................................................. 3 

2.1.2.  The reform of the European Anti-Fraud Office ...................................................... 3 

2.1.3.  Measures to fight fraud and corruption in public procurement ............................ 4 

2.1.4.  Sectoral measures: revenue ....................................................................................... 5 

2.1.5.  Sectoral mesures: expenditure ................................................................................... 5 

2.1.6.  What lies ahead ........................................................................................................... 6 

2.2. 

Operational results: a different pace ............................................................................. 7 

2.2.1.  Revenue: Quality of information and control strategies ......................................... 8 

2.2.2.  Expenditure: a developing landscape ....................................................................... 9 

3. 

3.1. 

Replies of member states ............................................................................................ 11 

An unprecedented set of anti-fraud measures ............................................................. 11 

3.1.1.  The reform of the European Anti-Fraud Office .................................................... 11 

3.1.2.  Measures to fight fraud and corruption in public procurement .......................... 21 

3.1.3.  Sectoral mesures: expenditure ................................................................................. 47 

3.1.4.  What lies ahead ......................................................................................................... 71 

3.2. 

Operational results: a different pace ........................................................................... 83 

3.2.1.  Revenue: Quality of information and control strategies ....................................... 83 

3.2.2.  Expenditure: a developing landscape ................................................................... 101 

2 

 
 
 
1. 

SUMMARY 

In  the  2013  Report  on  the  protection  of  the  European  Union's  financial  interests,  the 
Commission  made  certain  recommendations  to  the  Member  States.  The  Commission  has 
followed up on the implementation of these recommendations by the Member States as part of 
the 2014 reporting exercise.  

2. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

As  the  mandate  of  the  2010-2014  Commission  has  now  come  to  an  end,  it  is  worth  taking 
retrospective  look  at  the  most  significant  initiatives  undertaken  and  the  results  achieved  in 
2014, and the four years previous, regarding the protection of the EU’s financial interests and 
the fight against fraud. 

2.1. 

An unprecedented set of anti-fraud measures 

Unprecedented legal and administrative measures were taken and unparalleled proposals were 
made,  which  profoundly  impacted  upon  how  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States 
approach protecting the EU’s financial interests from fraud and other illegal activities. 

2.1.1.  The beginning of the road: CAFS 

In  2011,  the  Commission  adopted  its  multiannual  Anti-Fraud  Strategy  (CAFS).  Initially 
addressed to the Commission services, the Strategy was pivotal in raising fraud awareness and 
bringing the issues of fraud detection and prevention into the spotlight. 

The  Strategy  led  to  Commission  services  and  EU  agencies  adopting  sectoral  anti-fraud 
strategies.  The  addition  of  anti-fraud  provisions  to  the  new  legal  framework  for  spending 
programmes in 2014-2020 was also a significant achievement. 

The actions implemented in the framework of the Strategy have increased the Commission’s 
and national authorities’ awareness and capabilities. 

2.1.2.  The reform of the European Anti-Fraud Office 

In  2012,  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  carried  out  an  extensive  reorganisation  to  step  up 
efficiency in its investigative process and streamline governance and policy actions.  

The adoption of Regulation (EU) No 883/2013 provided an improved legal framework which 
strengthens the rights of the persons concerned by an OLAF investigation, and also enhances 
the necessary cooperation with Member States through the appointment of the AFCOS. 

Recommendation 1: 

The four Member States who have not yet designated AFCOS are invited to do so by the 
end of 2014. 
While  seventeen  Member  States1  reported  no  new  information  since  the  report  of  2013, 
Ireland, Denmark, Greece, Finland, Spain, Sweden, Luxembourg and the UK designated their 
countries' AFCOS in 2014. The four Member States explicitly invited by the Commission to 
designate their AFCOS in 2014 did so. All but one Member State AFCOS were established 
with coordinative, rather than investigative powers. The UK AFCOS has both administrative 

1  

Belgium, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Italy, Cyprus, Lithuania,  
Hungary, Malta, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Slovakia 

3 

 
 
                                                 
and  investigative  powers.  Spain  highlighted  its  intention  to  establish  an  Advisory  Council, 
which  will  bring  together  all  Spanish  authorities  involved  in  managing  EU  funds  and  will 
assist the AFCOS in its functions. 

While many Member States had already established an AFCOS before 2014, some provided 
updated information on the main tasks and responsibilities of their designated AFCOS in this 
reporting period. In this regard; 

  France  informed  OLAF  of  the  improved  online  communication  strategy  of  their 

AFCOS.  

  Croatia  reported  that  in  March  2013,  in  an  effort  to  strengthen  the  administrative 
capacities of the AFCOS (SCIF), SCIF employees visited the Bulgarian AFCOS with 
the aim of familiarising its employees with the functioning of an AFCOS in another 
Member State.  

  Latvia  introduced  a  regulation  to  strengthen  the  AFCOS,  which  now  includes  a 

representative of the State Audit Office.  

  Romania stated that there are bilateral talks taking place at present with OLAF on the 

renewal of the Cooperation Agreement between the two institutions. 

2.1.3.  Measures to fight fraud and corruption in public procurement 

Public procurement is a 'hot spot' for fraud and corruption. In 2012, the Commission started 
to modernise the existing rules to strengthen transparency and their anti-corruption purpose. 
In February 2014, three directives were adopted. 

In 2013, OLAF presented a study on the ‘Costs of corruption in public procurement’, and in 
February  2014  the  first  EU  anti-corruption  report  was  adopted.  Both  reports  contain 
recommendations and highlight best practices. 

In  addition,  Member  States  reported  a  significant  number  of  legislative  and  administrative 
measures aimed at strengthening work in this area. 

Recommendation 2: 

Member  States  are  invited  to  take  into  account  the  recommendations  included  in  the 
anti-corruption reports and the best practices highlighted there. 

Regarding this recommendation, the Member States' replies mainly focussed upon the 
transposition of the public procurement directive into national legislation. It would appear that 
in 2014, the vast majority of measures taken at Member State level regarding public 
procurement involved preparations for the transposition of the directive. 

Most Member States2 have commenced preparations for the transposition of the package of 
public procurement directives into national law, with most undertaking significant national 
measures in the last year in order to allow for such transposition. In this regard, 15 Member 

2  

Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Germany, Estonia, Ireland, Greece, Spain, France, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, 
Lithuania, Luxembourg,  Hungary, Malta, Slovenia, Finland, Sweden.  

4 

 
 
                                                 
States3 have either drafted the necessary national legislation that will transpose the package, 
or are in the process of doing so. While the deadline for the transposition of the directives is 
April 2016, three Member States4 foresee the adoption of the aforementioned acts into 
national law before the end of 2015.  

During the transposition process five Member States5 launched consultations; Cyprus, Ireland 
and Sweden carried out public consultations, while Slovakia launched an interdepartmental 
consultation and Slovenia consulted with the relevant contracting authorities.   

Three6 Member States established working groups to enable the transposition of the 
directives, while Romania and Denmark established committees to do so. Bulgaria adopted a 
'special' strategy for the development of the public procurement sector for the period 2014-
2020. 

E-Procurement is already in place in both Portugal and Slovenia.   

2.1.4. 

Sectoral measures: revenue 

In order to step up the fight against VAT fraud, a directive was adopted in 2013 to implement 
the  Quick  Reaction  Mechanism  to  deal  with  massive  and  sudden  VAT  fraud.  Established  in 
20107,  the  Eurofisc  network  started  operational  work  in  2011  with  the  progressive 
establishment of four working fields and specific risk-analysis projects. 

The  fight  against  illicit  tobacco  products  gained  momentum.  In  2010,  the  two  latest 
cooperation  agreements  with  tobacco  manufacturers  were  concluded.  In  2011,  the 
Commission prepared an action plan to fight cigarette and alcohol smuggling along the EU’s 
eastern  border.  In  June  2013,  a  comprehensive  EU  strategy  and  an  action  plan  to  fight 
smuggling  and  other  forms  of  illicit  trade  in  tobacco  products  were  adopted.  At  the  end  of 
2013,  the  Protocol  to  eliminate  the  illicit  trade  in  tobacco  products  appended  to  the  World 
Health  Organisation’s  (WHO’s)  Framework  Convention  on  Tobacco  Control  (FCTC)  was 
finalised and signed by the EU. 

2.1.5. 

Sectoral measures: expenditure 

In 2013, the main regulatory provisions for the 2014-20 spending programmes were adopted. 
For  the  first  time,  they  contain  a  specific  requirement  for  national  authorities  to  set  up 
effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures taking into account the risks identified. 

National  audit  authorities  and  the  Commission  will  monitor  the  correct  implementation  of 
such  requirements.  In  addition,  guidelines  on  fraud  risk  assessments  and  effective  and 
proportionate ant-fraud measures were prepared together with the national authorities8.  

3  

4  
5  
6  
7  
8  

Belgium,  Denmark,  Estonia,  Greece,  France,  Italy,  Cyprus,  Latvia,  Lithuania,  Hungary,  Malta, 
Slovenia, Slovakia, Sweden.  
Belgium, Denmark, Finland, Sweden.  
Ireland, Cyprus, Malta, Slovakia, Sweden. 
Latvia, Lithuania, Finland. 
Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 
In 2013 and 2014 

5 

 
 
                                                 
Member  States  will  need  to  respect  these  to  ensure  that  the  EU’s  financial  interests  are 
protected against fraud. 

Recommendation 3: 

The  Commission  recommends  that  Member  States  implement  the  legal  requirements 
according to the adopted guidelines. 

In 2014, Greece, Malta and Croatia adopted National Anti-Fraud Strategies (NAFS) in 
relation to the cohesion policy funds, while Bulgaria and Slovakia adopted NAFS covering 
both the revenue and expenditure areas. Romania, Italy and Slovenia began the process of 
developing NAFS in 2014. Lithuania put a National Anti-Corruption Programme for 2015-
2025 in place. Denmark developed an Anti-Fraud Action Plan in 2014 and Latvia expressed 
that each managing authority will develop an anti-fraud action plan in the future. Finland also 
commenced work towards developing a national anti-fraud action plan in 2014. 

2.1.6.  What lies ahead 

Three main legislative proposals have been submitted to the co-legislators in previous years 
and are awaiting approval: 

(a) 

(b) 

a directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law; 

a regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s Office; 

the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual administrative assistance in 

(c) 
the customs area. 

The  adoption  of  these  proposals  would  complement  and  strengthen  the  legal  framework 
shaped  in  2009-13.  It  would  strengthen  the  fight  against  fraud  and  would  ensure  stronger 
coordination with and between Member States. 

Recommendation 4: 

The Commission invites the co-legislators to swiftly complete the legislative work started 
and to adopt the pending proposals. 

In light of the fact that the three legislative acts have not yet been finalised, and negotiations 
are still on-going, many Member States have not yet taken a final position on the acts, and in 
many cases no preparations have begun regarding their implementation. Many of the Member 
States  where  preparations  have  not  yet  begun  highlighted  that  work  will  commence  on  the 
adoption of the regulations and the directive when the final texts are agreed. 

Several  Member  States  provided  information  on  the  actions  they  have  taken  in  respect  of 
these proposals: 

a) The directive on the fight against fraud: 

  Belgium has set up a working party to co-ordinate the Belgian position on the 

proposal.  

6 

 
 
  Germany adopted a bill in 2015 broadening the criminal liability for corruption by, 

and in respect of, EU officials.  

  Finland set up a project toward the implementation of the directive in the Ministry of 

Justice. 

  Bulgaria voiced its support for the proposal.  

b) The regulation on the European Public Prosecutor's Office: 

  Belgium has set up a working party to co-ordinate the Belgian position on the 

proposal.  

  The Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office of the Czech Republic has been assessing the 

proposed regulation. 

  Bulgaria supported the Commission proposal for a regulation for the establishment of 

an EPPO. 

  Finland has set up a project toward the establishment of the EPPO in the Ministry of 

Justice. 

  Germany is examining the possible impact of this on national law.  
  France recommends that the scope of the European Public Prosecutor's powers be 

amended to better limit it to the most serious and significant cases, rather than dealing 
with most commonly committed offences, as France's opinion is such that this could 
have a negative impact on procedures for identifying and reviewing customs 
infringement cases affecting the Union's financial interests. 

c) The amendment of Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual administrative assistance in the 
customs area: 

  Hungary noted that the application of this regulation in the national legal system did 

not cause any difficulty.  

Some Member States also cited participation in the negotiations in the Council and in the 
activities of the working groups for drafting the proposals. 

2.2. 

Operational results: a different pace 

Although  the  legislative  landscape  has  changed  considerably  over  the  last  few  years,  the 
analysis described in section 2.2 of this report shows that the impact of these measures is not 
as evident as one might have expected.   

The overall trend in detecting and reporting potentially fraudulent irregularities in the last five 
years shows a slow decrease (although this reversed since 2012). On the other hand, however, 
the  number  of  irregularities  not  reported  as  fraudulent  has  progressively  increased.  The 
decreasing trend is even more evident on the revenue side than it is on the expenditure side. 

7 

 
 
 
 
 
2.2.1.  Revenue: Quality of information and control strategies 

On  the  revenue  side,  it  is  not  clear  whether  the  trend  is  due  to  a  shift  towards  detecting 
irregular cases or to the way in which Member States classify cases. Other possible reasons 
could include: the new fraud prevention measures implemented in Member States to identify 
vulnerabilities;  the  possibility  of  Member  States  pursuing  financial  interests  without  further 
investigation  of  the  potential  criminal  offence;  the  possibility  that  Member  States’  controls 
strategies  may  need  to  include  more  dynamic  factors  to  better  adapt  to  the  changing 
environment.  

Recommendation 5: 

In view of the decreasing number of fraud cases reported, the Commission recommends 
that  Member  States  review  their  control  strategies  to  ensure  that  well-targeted,  risk-
based  customs  controls  are  in  place  to  make  it  possible to  effectively  detect  fraudulent 
import operations. 

Regarding Member States' customs control strategies, nine Member States9 improved, or are 
in the process of updating, the information systems used in the customs domain, in order to 
combat the occurrence of irregularities or fraud in this area.  

Furthermore, four Member States 10developed and implemented a strategic control plan in the 
last year in the customs field, while Denmark and Germany are in the process of developing 
such strategies. Finland's Analysis and Intelligence/Fiscal Risk Management is reviewing its 
strategy, which will include OWNRES reporting. 

Recommendation 6: 

Member States should step up work to ensure timely reporting on and updating of fraud 
and 
irregularity  cases.  To  ensure  effective  monitoring  and  follow-up,  reliable 
information on fraud and irregularity cases should be entered in OWNRES. 

In this regard, several11 Member States reported that they believe their quality and timeliness 
of reporting in OWNRES is sufficient and no new measures are necessary.  
However, six Member States12 introduced, or are in the process of introducing, new specific 
guidelines, instructions or training on the reporting in OWNRES for those staff members who 
use the system.  
Furthermore, eight Member States13 developed, or are in the process of developing improved 
internal rules and processes which will help to ensure that the data in OWNRES is accurate, 
reliable and up-to-date.   

9  
10  
11  
12  
13  

Belgium, Bulgaria, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Cyprus, Latvia, Lithuania, Sweden 
Croatia, Romania, Slovenia, UK 
Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Lithuania, Poland 
Denmark, Estonia, Greece, France, Cyprus, Latvia 
Belgium, Czech Republic, Cyprus, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Slovakia, Sweden  

8 

 
 
 
                                                 
2.2.2.  Expenditure: a developing landscape 

On the expenditure side, the changes in the number of fraudulent irregularities reported in the 
last five years are more difficult to interpret (decreasing over 2009-2011, and then increasing 
in the following two years). However, it appears to be linked to the fact that most spending 
programmes  are  multi-annual  (structural  and  rural  development  funds  and  pre-accession 
assistance).  

An unexpected change was observed in 2013 in the agriculture sector, with significantly more 
cases  of  potential  fraud  detected  and  reported.  However,  this  could  be  the  result  of  ad  hoc 
investigations, and might not be continued in years to come. 

The role of managing authorities in fraud detection has grown, in particular since 2012. Their 
role  should  grow  further  in  the  coming  years,  thanks  to  the  recently  developed  anti-fraud 
strategies that will be implemented fully throughout 2014-2020. 

Recommendation 7: 

The  Commission  recommends  that  Member  States  correctly  implement  the  EU’s  anti-
fraud  rules,  based  on  carefully  prepared  and  up-to-date  fraud  risk  assessments,  and 
supported by adequate IT tools that will help to better target checks. 
Structured coordination (exchange of data and information) between anti-fraud bodies 
and managing authorities has proved to be a best practice and should be implemented in 
all Member States. 

Regarding structured co-ordination, several Member States described the interaction between 
the relevant managing authorities and anti-fraud bodies in detail. In this regard; nine Member 
States14 noted the collaboration that takes place between relevant the managing authority and 
anti-fraud bodies within the framework of their national AFCOS.  
Regarding  the  IT  tools  currently  in  use  in  the  Member  States,  seven  Member  States15 
described  the  I.T  tools  that  they  are  currently  in  the  process  of  developing,  while  other 
Member States noted16 that they are exploring the possibility of introducing the ARANCHE 
risk  management  tool.  The  Italian  AFCOS  is  developing  a  specific  IT  tool,  the  Anti-Fraud 
Information  System  (SIAF)  in  order  to  help  to  prevent  fraud  against  the  EU's  financial 
interests. The development is co-funded by OLAF under the Hercule II program. 

Belgium requested that the Belgian AFCOS be given access to IMS. 

Fraud detection practices vary greatly between Member States, and the Commission remains 
concerned  with  the  low  number  of  potentially  fraudulent  irregularities  reported  by  some 
countries.  The  Commission  will  continue  its  work  to  raise  fraud-awareness  and  to  provide 
guidelines  to  improve  the  convergence  of  national  systems,  in  order  to  protect  the  EU’s 
financial interests against fraud more efficiently. 

Recommendation 8 

As  some  Member  States  report  very  low  numbers  of  fraudulent  irregularities,  the 
Commission recommends strengthening their work on detecting and/or reporting fraud: 

14  
15  
16  

Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Latvia, Malta, Slovakia 
Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Hungary, Slovakia, Finland 
Bulgaria, Spain, Croatia, Cyprus, Netherlands, Slovenia 

9 

 
 
 
                                                 
- 
the Netherlands; 
- 

in  the  area  of  cohesion  policy:  France,  Spain,  Ireland,  Hungary,  Denmark  and 

in the area of agriculture: Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal and Finland. 

Denmark, Ireland, Luxembourg and the Netherlands noted that the low level of fraudulent 
activities reflects the low level of fraud that actually takes place. Denmark also stated that the 
low level of fraud reflects the preventive measures taken nationally against fraudulent 
activity. 

Regarding the remaining  Member States  explicitly mentioned in  the recommendation  in  the 
area of cohesion policy: 

  France set up a 'preventing and combating fraud' working group as part of the European 
programme, bringing together coordinating ministries, managing authorities, inspection 
bodies and the Association of French Regions.  

  Hungary passed the new Government Decree No 272; this legal instrument will enhance 
the legal basis for the detection of fraud affecting the budgets of Hungary and the EU. 

As regards the remaining Member States explicitly mentioned in the recommendation in the 
area of agriculture:  

  Lithuania organised seminars, training and traineeships related to fraud prevention 
measures, the assessment of fraud risk and the investigation, identification and the 
elimination of infringements. 

  The Portuguese Agriculture and Fisheries Financing Institute decided to review, 

amend and broaden the anti-fraud procedures in place. Portugal also drafted legislation 
regarding risk analysis, and the existing provisions on the procedure applicable in 
cases of complaints or suspicions of intentional non-compliance were reviewed and 
amended. Action was also taken to raise awareness via seminars.  

  Finland evaluated the reporting process and guidelines to ensure the detection and 

reporting of fraud. 

10 

 
 
  
 
3. 

REPLIES OF MEMBER STATES 

3.1. 

An unprecedented set of anti-fraud measures 

3.1.1.  The reform of the European Anti-Fraud Office 

In  2012,  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  carried  out  an  extensive  reorganisation  to  step  up  efficiency  in  its  investigative  process  and  streamline 
governance and policy actions.  

The  adoption  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  883/2013  provided  an  improved  legal  framework  which  strengthens  the  rights  of  the  persons  concerned  by  an 
OLAF investigation, and also enhances the necessary cooperation with Member States through the appointment of the AFCOS. 

RECOMMENDATION 1: 

The four Member States who have not yet designated AFCOS are invited to do so by the end of 2014. 

BE  No information provided 

BG  No information provided  

CZ  No information provided  

DK 

1.1  
Den danske Koordineringstjeneste for Bekæmpelse af Svig [Danish anti-fraud coordination service] 

1.2. 
Danish anti-fraud coordination service  
The  decision  to  designate  the  Danish  AFCOS  was  taken  by  the  Government  at  a  ministerial  meeting  on  21  May  2014.  At  the  same  time,  a 
decision was made to create a "Fraud fighting network" with the participation of the Public Prosecutor for Economic and International Crime, 
the Danish AgriFish Agency, the Danish Business Agency and SKAT. 

11 

 
 
 
 
 
1.3.3 
This is a very new set-up, so it is difficult to assess its efficiency. The cooperation in the AFCOS network has been positive however, in terms 
of exchanges of experience and other factors. 

1.3.4 
A unit at the Ministry, which heads the "fraud fighting network", which consists of a number of other authorities. 

1.4.3 
Coordinating role, no involvement 

DE  There have been no changes as regards Germany compared to the information contained in the 2013 questionnaire. 

EE  AFCOS Estonia has been active in the Ministry of Finance in the Financial Control Department since 2003 together with the Auditing Authority 
for the Cohesion Policy, Norway and Swiss contributions. The only legal act that stipulates AFCOS’s function in Estonia is the Statutes of the 
Ministry of Finance and there is established that the Financial Control Department is responsible for “performance of the functions of an official 
cooperation partner of the European Anti-Fraud Office”. 

Estonian AFCOS main tasks are grouped into:  

1)  Preventive  activities  related  to  the  protection  of  the  EU  financial  interests  –  coordination  with  national  legislative  and  administrative 
measures; fraud risk assessment; taking the lead in formulating, disseminating, co-ordinating and implementing the national anti-fraud strategy.  

2) Exchange of information – access to all project information is given to main partners (the Police, the Prosecutor’s Office, Tax and Customs 
Board,  AGRI  and  Cohesion  Policy  1st  and  2nd  level  implementers,  other  institutions);  information  on  new  irregularity  cases  reaches  the 
partners within two weeks from the moment the detection and notification by the 2nd level Intermediate Body has occurred; regular and ad-hoc 
meetings with partners; contacts in law enforcement institutions who we send all doubtful information to in order to consult with them if there 
are  any  signs  of  crime,  and  how  to  move  on;  IMS  liaison  officers’  function.  Irregularity  reporting  is  moved  from  AFCOS  to  the  Managing 
Authority since 2014 January.  

12 

 
 
 
 
 
 
3) Training – we organise different seminars for all partners. 

4) Assisting OLAF in their visits to Estonia. 

For all these tasks we have one full-time official – the AFCOS adviser who is sometimes supported by the department manger. 

IE 

The  EU  Budget  Unit  in  the  Department  of  Finance  was  designated  as  Ireland’s  Anti  –  Fraud  Coordination  Service  (AFCOS).  OLAF  was 
informed of this decision in December of 2014. 

EL  AUTHORITY - The National Anti-corruption Coordinator 

Article  69  of  Law  4316/2014  (Government  Gazette,  Series  I,  No  270)  ‘Establishing  an  observatory  for  dementia,  improving  perinatal  care, 
regulating  issues  falling  within  the  competence  of  the  Ministry  of  Health  and  other  provisions’,  amended  paragraph  (M)  of  Law  4152/2013 
‘Emergency  measures  for  the  implementation  of  Laws  4046,  4093/2012  and  4127/2013’  and  assigned  to  the  National  Anti-corruption 
Coordinator the competences of Anti-fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS), according to Article 3(4) of Regulation (EU) No 833/2013 of the 
European Parliament and of the Council.  

In particular, according to subparagraph M.1 of paragraph M, Law 4152/2013 (Government Gazette, Series I, No. 107), as in force,  

‘The National Coordinator has the following mission: 

(a)  to  draw  up  a  National  Strategy  in  order  to:  (aa)  combat  corruption  at  all  levels  of  public  life  (political,  governmental,  judicial, 
administrative); and (bb) to counter fraud affecting the financial interests of the Greek State and the European Union (hereinafter ‘fraud’);  

(b) monitoring and evaluating the implementation of the strategy in question; and  

(c) coordination among all bodies involved in the implementation of the aforementioned national strategy’. 

In addition, according to subparagraph M.2 of paragraph M, Law 4152/2013 (Government Gazette, Series I, No 107), as in force, the National 
Coordinator, inter alia, ‘coordinates all services and authorities involved in implementing the national strategy to combat corruption and fraud. 
For this purpose, the National Coordinator shall take the necessary initiatives and actions in order to ensure the coherence and efficiency of the 
national strategy, with the exception of the coordination between audit bodies, whereas the National Coordinator shall be the competent Anti-
fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS), according to Article 325 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and within the meaning 

13 

 
 
ES 

of Article 4(3) of Regulation (EU, EURATOM) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 September 2013’. 

Promote training on preventing and combating fraud. 

Develop  and  implement  national  strategies  and  promote  the  necessary  legislative  and  administrative  changes  to  protect  the  European 

Identify possible weaknesses in Spain's systems for managing European Union funding. 
Establish channels for coordinating and sharing information on irregularities and suspected fraud between the various national bodies 

Royal Decree 802/2014 of 19 September 2014 (published in the Official State Gazette on 26 September 2014) established Spain's Anti-Fraud 
Coordination Service (AFCOS). AFCOS is part of the General State Audit Body (Intervención General de la Administración del Estado), an 
Undersecretariat that is itself part of the Ministry of Finance and Public Administration.  
The role of AFCOS is to:  
a) 
Union's financial interests.  
b) 
c) 
and OLAF. 
d) 
As such, these tasks are administrative in nature, primarily focusing on coordination and organisational aspects. AFCOS is the Central Contact 
Point for OLAF to communicate with the national authorities. AFCOS does not have investigative powers, although it does cooperate with the 
relevant authorities and can also take part in missions led by national bodies and OLAF.  
A further legislative change is planned with a view to establishing an Advisory Council. The Council will bring together all the authorities that 
are  involved  in  managing  EU  funding  or  resources,  along  with  those  that  should  be  involved  in  protecting  the  European  Union's  financial 
interests.  
In the proposal that has been drawn up, the Advisory Council's role will be to advise and support AFCOS to help it successfully carry out its 
duties. It is expected that the Council will be headed by the Auditor General (Interventor General de la Administración del Estado), with the 
AFCOS Director as First Vice-President, and that it will comprise the following members:  
- 
- 
Fiscal y Financiera). 
- 

A representative of each of the following Ministries: Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, Interior and Justice. 
Two representatives of the  Autonomous Communities designated  by the Council for Fiscal and Financial Policy (Consejo de Política 

One  Local  Authority  representative  appointed  to  the  National  Commission  for  Local  Administration  (Comisión  Nacional  de 

14 

 
 
One representative of the State Prosecutor's Office (Fiscalía General del Estado). 
One representative of the Tax Administration Agency (Agencia Estatal de la Administración Tributaria). 
Three representatives of the designated Authorities.  

Administración Local). 
- 
- 
- 
As we are still in the preparatory phase, it is too soon to evaluate its performance.  
The scope of these tasks will be defined in greater detail when setting up the Advisory Council, without prejudice to what may be decided in 
agreement with OLAF at a later date.  
This  legislation,  and  the  scope  of  any  agreement  that  may  be  signed  with  OLAF,  will  determine  the  relationship  with  OLAF  and  any 
investigative powers it might exercise; in any case, it is expected that OLAF will act as an observer.  
Other  issues  that  will  be  addressed  include  the  scope  of  cooperation  between  AFCOS  and  the  judicial  authorities,  and  arrangements  for 
initiating regulatory proposals and recommendations, guidelines, exchange of good practice, etc. 

FR 

In May 2013, by a decision of the Ministry of Finance, the French authorities designated the National Anti-Fraud Unit (Délégation nationale à la 
lutte contre la fraude - DNLF) as the national contact point for OLAF. Since then, the DNLF has thus been operating as an AFCOS in order to 
enhance the protection of the EU's financial interests. No changes were made to the DNLF's mandate in 2014. Nevertheless, in 2014 the DNLF 
used part of its website to improve communication on anti-fraud measures concerning European Union interests. In the international section of 
the website there is an area devoted to European activities. This section contains information summarising the DNLF's role as AFCOS, action 
undertaken by relevant national administrations, a presentation of OLAF that has been approved by its communication service, an interactive 
map of Europe showing all European AFCOS that are DNLF partners (with a description and contact details) and, since December 2014, all of 
OLAF's press releases have been included on the site. 

HR 

1.  Introduction 

As it was stated in last year’s report the obligation set in Article 3 (4) of the Regulation 883/2013 which stipulates that “Member States shall, for 
the purposes of this Regulation, designate a service (‘the anti-fraud coordination service’) to facilitate effective cooperation and exchange of 
information,  including  information  of  an  operational  nature,  with  the  Office”,  is  fulfilled  by  the  Republic  of  Croatia,  hence  the  Republic  of 
Croatia as a Member State has an ACFOS in place. AFCOS is established and functions as a system and is comprised of 3 main elements: 

15 

 
 
 
 
  Network of accredited bodies managing and using EU funds (Irregularity Reporting System)17;  
  Network of bodies dealing with combating fraud, corruption or some other form of illegal activities (AFCOS network)18; 
  Ministry of Finance - Service for Combating Irregularities and Fraud (SCIF), carrying out a coordinative role within the system and 

representing the European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF) contact point. 

Legal basis:  

  Budget Act (OG 87/2008, 136/2012) - Article 114 (a) provides for the obligation of the Republic of Croatia to set up system for 

combating irregularities and fraud in order to protect the EU financial interests. 

  Regulation  on  the  institutional  framework  of  the  system  of  combating  irregularities  and  fraud  (OG  144/2013)  -  lays  down 

rules for the functioning of the AFCOS system. 

  Decision on the establishment of AFCOS Network (OG 151/2013) - lays down rules on the functioning and role of the AFCOS 

Network in the AFCOS system. AFCOS Network is established in order to achieve full operability of the AFCOS system. 

  Government  Decree  on  internal  organization  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  (OG  32/12,  67/12,  124/12,  78/13,  102/13,  24/14, 

134/14, 154/14). 

2.  Service for Combating Irregularities and Fraud (anti-fraud coordination service) 

The  Service  for  Combating  Irregularities  and  Fraud  (SCIF)  is  established  within  the  Ministry  of  Finance.  Government  Decree  on  internal 
organization of the Ministry of Finance (OG 32/12, 67/12, 124/12, 78/13, 102/13, 24/14, 134/14, 154/14) sets up the organizational framework 
as well as tasks and responsibilities of SCIF. 
Government  Regulation  on  the  institutional  framework  of  the  system  of  combating  irregularities  and  fraud  (OG  144/13)  describes  the 
position/role of SCIF within the AFCOS system. Namely, the Regulation explicitly points out that SCIF has a coordinative role between the 
bodies of the Irregularity Reporting System and the bodies of the AFCOS Network. It is also a main contact point for OLAF in the Republic of 
Croatia  and  ensures  the  performance  of  inspections  by  OLAF  in  the  territory  of  the  Republic  of  Croatia.  SCIF  also  receives  checks  and 
consolidates  the  reports  on  irregularities  for  the  purpose  of  submitting  them  to  OLAF.  SCIF  also  independently  produces  Guidelines  for 
Managing Irregularities approved by the Minister of Finance which are binding for all the bodies of the Irregularity Reporting System.  

17  
18  

Quarterly reporting on irregularities which occurred within EU pre-accession funds (CARDS, PHARE, ISPA, SAPARD and IPA) and ESI Funds. 
The  AFCOS  Network  is  established  in  order  to  achieve  full  operability  of  the  AFCOS  system.  The  main  role  of  the  AFCOS  Network  is  to  provide  advises  and 
recommendations to all the bodies within the AFCOS system. 

16 

 
 
 
                                                 
SCIF  is  made  up  of  3  departments  (Department  for  Data  Collection  and  Analysis,  and  Irregularities  Reporting,  Department  for  Monitoring 
Notified  Irregularities  Procedures  and  Co-ordination  with  Competent  Bodies,  Department  for  Training  and  Risk  Management)  and  has  6 
employees. 

3.  The National Anti-Fraud Strategy in the Field of Protection of EU Financial Interests for the period 2014-2016 

The  Republic  of  Croatia  is  continuously  working  on  strengthening  and  improving  the  system  of  protection  of  the  EU  financial  interests. 
Accordingly, the National Anti-Fraud Strategy in the Field of Protection of EU Financial Interests for the period 2014-2016 was adopted by the 
Government on 23 January 2014. 
The purpose of the Strategy is to ensure effective and efficient protection of the EU financial interests by strengthening the AFCOS system in 
the Republic of Croatia, by carrying out predefined measures and achievement of the set objectives 
While describing each chapter of the Strategy special attention was paid what was done in particular area during implementation of the National 
Anti-fraud Strategy for the Protection of the European Union Financial Interest for the period 2010 – 2012 and what should be done in order to 
strengthen the AFCOS system and enhance protection of EU financial interests by implementing measures set in the Action Plan. 
Important  measures  for  improving  the  protection  of  the  EU  financial  interests  set  in  accompanying  Action  plan  for  the  period  2014-  2016 
include: 
Drafting of the Communication Strategy;  
Drafting of the Irregularity and Fraud Risk Management Methodology; 
Drafting of a Training Strategy; 
Drafting the Guidelines for Managing Irregularities; 
Maintaining regular communication with the AFCOS system bodies; 
Signing cooperation and information exchange protocols with the State Attorney’s Office, the Ministry of Interior and OLAF; 
Further strengthening of administrative capacities of the AFCOS system bodies. 

4.  Administrative capacity building  

In order to strengthen administrative capacities of SCIF, in March 2013, SCIF employees visited AFCOS Department Bulgaria with the aim of 
familiarizing  with  the  functioning  of  AFCOS  department  in  Member  states.  The  visit  was  financed  by  Institution  Building  Unit  of  DG 
Enlargement of the European Commission (TAIEX). 
Moreover,  representatives  of  SCIF  were  conducting  trainings  under  Module  11  “Irregularities  and  Fraud”,  within  the  frame  of  the  project 
“Establishing  a  training  system  for  Financial  Management  and  Control  (FMC)”  for  which  organization  Central  Finance  and  Contracting 
Agency was responsible. In the year 2013 education seminar was conducted on 22nd and 23rd April (24 participants). 

17 

 
 
Additional  educational  trainings  for  bodies  constituting  AFCOS  system  were  also  foreseen  and  conducted  within  the  TWL  Project  “Further 
enhancing the functioning of the Croatian AFCOS system with the aim of  efficient protection of the EU financial interests”. In the period of 
August  and  September  2013,  within  the  premises  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  and  around  162  employees  of  the  AFCOS  system  bodies  were 
trained. 
Also, under the TAIEX programme, in October 2013, SCIF employees visited Romanian the Fight Against Fraud Department (DLAF) with the 
aim of further strengthening Croatian AFCOS system. 
Moreover, in cooperation with the Police Academy, the representative of SCIF was speaker during the special course for the police inspector on 
the Academy. The presentation about the functioning of the AFCOS system took place on 7 November 2013. Furthermore, in the period 28 – 29 
November 2013, SCIF in cooperation with the Judicial Academy and with the Central Financing and Contracting Agency conducted a two day 
workshop  on  the  topic  “Irregularities  and  fraud  in  the  context  of  the  EU  funds”  for  the  participants  of  the  Judicial  Academy.  Also,  in 
cooperation  with  the  Police  Academy,  a  representative  of  SCIF  participated  as  a  lecturer  at  the  "Specialized  course  to  work  on  issues  of 
combating  economic  crime  and  corruption"  for  police  inspectors  on  the  subject  of  the  functioning  of  the  AFCOS  system  in  the  Republic  of 
Croatia. The aforementioned lecture was held on March 20th 2014. 
In  March  2014,  SCIF  employees,  in  order  to  further  strengthen  administrative  capacities  of  SCIF,  visited  Internal  Audit  and  Investigation 
Department  Malta  with  the  aim  of  familiarizing  with  the  functioning  of  AFCOS  department  in  Member  states.  The  visit  was  financed  by 
Institution Building Unit of DG Enlargement of the European Commission (TAIEX).  
Following the same aim, but with an experience of a different Member States, expert mission was organized in the period of September 2014 in 
cooperation  with  colleagues  from  Bulgarian  AFCOS.  In  the  premises  of  the  Ministry  of  Finance  of  the  Republic  of  Croatia,  Bulgarian 
colleagues held education for around 60 people from Irregularity Reporting System and AFCOS Network bodies, in the field of protection of 
the EU financial interests. The representatives of Bulgaria AFCOS also visited Customs Administration, Tax Administration and Ministry of 
Interior. 
Moreover,  in  September  2014,  SCIF  was  the  host  institution  for  colleagues  from  AFCOS  Montenegro  and  in  December  2014  from  Serbian 
AFCOS. The study visits were organized under the TAIEX programme, in order to share experience and knowledge regarding establishment of 
AFCOS System in the Republic of Croatia and protection of EU financial interests.   

IT 

No information provided 

CY  Cyprus confirmed the information provided in the 2013 report.  

18 

 
 
 
LV 

In order to strengthen the Latvian Anti-Fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS) function, to bring it closer to the model set by the European Anti-
Fraud  Office (OLAF)  and taking  into  account  the adoption of  Regulation (EU) No 883/2013,  in  2014 the Cabinet of Ministers adopted new 
regulation of the Coordination Council for the Protection of the European Union's financial interests (Council). 
The  Council  was  expanded  with  a  representative  of  the  State  Audit  Office  (SAO)  of  the  Republic  of  Latvia.  The  expert  from  the  SAO  has 
extensive knowledge and experience in the field of fraud prevention and protection of EU financial interests and holds an executive position as 
SAO council member and director of audit department. 
Amendments  to  the  Council  regulation  provides  additional  task  -  at  the  request  of  OLAF  the  Council  according  to  their  competence  shall 
provide the staff of OLAF with the assistance needed in order to carry out their tasks. 

LT  N/A 

LU  Luxembourg confirmed the information provided in the 2013 report. 

HU  Hungary is not affected by this recommendation. 

MT  Malta confirmed the information provided in the 2013 report. 

NL 

In  September  2013  the  Netherlands  notified  the  DG  of  OLAF,  through  a  letter  from  the  DG  of  the  Tax  Administration,  that  the  Customs 
Information Centre (Douane Informatiecentrum – DIC) provides the Netherlands' AFCOS. The answers to the AFCOS questionnaire submitted 
in 2014 remain valid. 

AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL  Not applicable. This recommendation was not directed at Poland. 

PT 

In the reply to the questionnaire in the 2013 Report on the fight against fraud and the protection of the EU’s financial interests we indicated that 
the Inspectorate General of Finance (IGF) had been appointed as the Anti-Fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS) in Portugal by Order No 
07/14/MEF of 10 January 2014 of the Minister of State and Finance. The tasks attributed to it were also specified.  
In view of the content of the above reply, we have no major changes or developments to report at this stage. 

19 

 
 
RO  Fight against Fraud Department - DLAF is established as AFCOS since 2002 and ensures, supports and coordinates, as the case may be, the 
fulfilment of Romania’s obligations with regard to the protection of European Union financial interests, as per Article 325 of the Treaty on the 
Functioning  of  the  European  Union.  Over  time,  the  institution  was  strengthening  its  capacity,  so  as,  from  2011,  it  fulfils  all  the  tasks  of 
Guidance notes on main tasks and responsibilities of Anti-Fraud Coordination Service (AFCOS).  
It  is  worth  mentioning  that,  at  this  time,  there  are  bilateral  talks  to  OLAF  for  renewal  of  the  Cooperation  Agreement  (Administrative 
Cooperation Arrangement (АСА)) between the two institutions.  
In terms of national duties, in 2014 DLAF continued to carry out the control activities, ensured irregularity reporting and technical assistance to 
OLAF and reinforced prevention activities. 
The Department has started: 
- 
- 
and Proportionate Anti-Fraud Measures - Programming Period 2014-2020, 
- 

developing National Anti-Fraud Strategy by conducting an internal assessment (SWOT) of the existing situation, 
coordination and support Managing Authorities in implementation of DG Regio Guidance Note on Fraud Risk Assessment and Effective 

strengthening the professional training capacity through employing new staff and developing new training programs. 

Sl 

AFCOS was formed in 2002 and is actively working for the protection of EU financial interests.  

SK  No information provided 

FI 

SE 

Finnish  AFCOS  was  officially  appointed  under  the  Government  Financial  Controller’s  Function  in  the Ministry  of  Finance  on  16  December 
2014 based on State Budget Act (423/1988) Section 24 f (1216/2003). 

Sweden designated the Swedish Economic Crime  Authority as  AFCOS on 16th of October, with the AFCOS coming  into  force on the 1st of 
January 2015. The AFCOS' tasks are coordinative rather than investigative.  

UK  The City  of London Police was designated as AFCOS on the 28th  of April 2014; it was established with both  coordinative and investigative 

powers.  

20 

 
 
3.1.2. 

 Measures to fight fraud and corruption in public procurement 

Public procurement is a “hot spot” for fraud and corruption. In 2012, the Commission started to modernise the existing rules to strengthen transparency 
and their anti-corruption purpose. In February 2014, three directives were adopted. 

In  2013,  OLAF  presented  a  study  on  the  ‘Costs  of  corruption  in  public  procurement’,  and  in  February  2014  the  first  EU  anti-corruption  report  was 
adopted. Both reports contain recommendations and highlight best practices. 

In addition, Member States reported a significant number of legislative and administrative measures aimed at strengthening work in this area. 

RECOMMENDATION 2 

Member States are invited to take into account the recommendations included in the anti-corruption reports and the best practices highlighted 
there. 

BE  CHANCELLERY OF THE PRIME MINISTER: 

Belgium  is  currently  transposing  the  three  EU  directives  on  public  procurement  and  concessions  (Directives  2014/23/EU,  2014/24/EU  and 
2014/25/EU)  into  Belgian  law.  Belgium  hopes  that  the  Belgian  Parliament  will  adopt  the  draft  transposing  legislation  in  2015  and  that  its 
implementing  decrees  will  be  published  before  18 April  2016,  by  which  date  the  EU  Member  States  are  expected  to  have  transposed  these 
directives. 

Against this background, Belgium is particularly mindful of the arrangements designed to combat corruption and fraud in public procurement. 
Nevertheless, since the relevant acts are still being drafted, the measures referred to below may yet be modified during the legislative process. 
More specifically, these acts comprise: 

1. General rules designed to compel contracting authorities to take the necessary measures to effectively prevent, identify and remedy conflicts 
of interest arising in the award and implementation of contracts so as to avoid any distortion of competition and to ensure equal treatment of all 
economic operators.  

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Against  this  background,  Belgium  is  mindful  of  the  'revolving  door'  mechanism,  which  is  designed  to  prevent  any  natural  person  who  has 
worked  in-house  at  a  contracting  authority,  in  a  hierarchical  relationship  or  otherwise,  from  subsequently  playing  any  part  in  a  public 
procurement  contract  awarded  by  this  contracting  authority,  where  a  direct  link  exists  between  the  activities  previously  performed  by  this 
person for the contracting authority and their activities under the contract; 

2. Measures designed to exclude candidates or tenderers from participating in a contract because of specific conduct or acts at any stage of the 
procedure.  

As  already  stipulated  in  the  law  of  15 June  2006  on  public  procurement,  a  mandatory  exclusion  will  be  applied  to  candidates  or  tenderers 
convicted of corruption or fraud by a judicial decision having final and binding effect. 

This exclusion will, however, be optional and left at the discretion of the contracting authority: 

-  when candidates or tenderers have committed grave professional misconduct laying their integrity open to question; 

-  when they have committed acts, entered into agreements or implemented restrictive practices with the aim of distorting competition; 

-  when a conflict of interest cannot be effectively remedied by other less intrusive measures; 

-  where a distortion of competition from the prior involvement of the economic operators in the preparation of the procurement procedure 

cannot be remedied by other, less intrusive measures; 

-  Where they have sought to unduly influence the decision-making process of the contracting authority, to obtain confidential information 
likely  to  give  them  an  undue  advantage  in  the  procurement  procedure  or  have  negligently  provided  misleading  information  likely  to 
have a material influence on decisions concerning exclusion, selection or award. 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Directives  2014/24/EU  and  2014/25/EU  leave  the  Member  States  the  option  of  obliging  contracting  authorities  to  exclude  candidates  or 
tenderers on the above optional grounds (and on the other optional grounds referred to in these directives), but Belgium has chosen not to do so; 
3. Governance and monitoring measures, in particular an obligation for Belgium to submit an audit report every three years to the European 
Commission  focussing  on  the  prevention,  detection  and  reporting  of  cases  of  fraud,  corruption,  conflicts  of  interest  and  other  serious 
irregularities in the field of public procurement. 

BG  The following measures have been taken to ensure harmonisation of the rules governing the award of public procurement contracts: 

A National Strategy for the development of the public procurement sector for the period 2014–2020 was adopted by Decision No 498 of the 
Council of Ministers of 9 July 2014. It sets out measures in five impact areas to be implemented through a number of activities against fixed 
deadlines.  The  impact  areas  in  question  are  adopting  legislation,  law  enforcement,  publicity  and  transparency  of  public  procurement, 
strengthening of the administrative capacity, and professionalism in the public procurement sector and control systems. 

The principal measures include the adoption of a new legislative framework, notably a new framework Public Procurement Act (ZOP) and the 
necessary  secondary  laws  to  ensure  its  implementation.  The  new  law  will  transpose  the  requirements  of  the  new  EU  Directives  on  public 
procurement (Directives 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council). 

The aim of the measures relating to control systems is to set up mechanisms that ensure more efficient cooperation and interaction between the 
competent  authorities,  and  streamline  the  administrative  sanctions  levied  and  their  appeal  procedures.  The  scope  of  the  ex-ante  controls 
performed  by  the  Public  Procurement  Agency  (AOP)  will  be  expanded  in  three  areas:  technical  specifications  for  the  award  of  public 
procurement  contracts;  contracts  awarded  at  lower  thresholds  (by  means  of  performing  random  controls)  and  monitoring  of  some  of  the 
exceptions not covered by the ZOP. 

With a view to preventing and combating certain poor practices relating to the application of the ZOP currently in force, a number of actions 
aimed  at  overcoming  the  most  common  practical  challenges  have  been  planned.  The  implementation  of  the  measure  will  rely  mainly  on 
methodological  assistance  from  the  AOP.  Guidelines  on  certain  matters  will  continue  to  be  developed,  updated  and  published  on  the  public 
procurement web portal to provide the necessary assistance to contracting authorities to enable them to put an end to poor practices. Tender 
dossiers,  methodologies,  technical  specifications  and  sample  documents  from  completed  public  procurement  calls  that  have  stood  up  to  all 
necessary checks and audit verifications will also be published on the web portal. 

23 

 
 
 
In order to improve the award of public procurement contracts in certain areas, the Managing Authorities responsible for the various operational 
programmes  will  draw  up  sets  of  uniform  or  other  model  documents.  They  will  be  a  useful  instrument  to  assist  efforts  to  overcome  the 
challenges stemming from the low skills base of contracting authorities, particularly at local level. 

The ongoing monitoring of public procurement by the AOP, the managing authorities of operational programmes and the bodies responsible for 
ex-post  controls  should  allow  for  the  detection  of  errors  and  infringements,  and  analyses  of  the  underlying  reasons.  Summaries  of  the 
information thus obtained should be compiled and used as a basis for updating published manuals and methodological guidelines in a timely 
manner. 

The Strategy sets out measures that have been coordinated with the European Commission and progress on their implementation is therefore to 
be  reported  to  the  relevant  Commission  services  in  a  timely  manner.  Implementation  of  the  Strategy  will  improve  the  legislative  and 
institutional  framework  of  public  procurement,  and  ensure  greater  transparency  and  publicity  in  the  award  of  public  procurement  contracts 
through the introduction of e-procurement by 2016. 

The new Directives on public procurement are to be transposed into national law by April 2016 at the latest. According to the National Strategy 
for the development of the public procurement sector for the period 2014–2020 and the plan for the implementation of the measures envisaged 
therein, the new Directives are to be transposed by the end of January 2016. Work is currently in progress to finalise the new framework Public 
Procurement  Act  and  public  consultations  with  all  relevant  stakeholders  will  be  launched  after  the  draft  is  published  on  the  dedicated  web 
portal. 

Efforts  are  currently  focused  on  the  development  of  a  new  National  anti-corruption  strategy,  which  sets  out  new  prevention  and  control 
measures for the public procurement sector. The Council of Ministers is expected to approve the strategy in March 2015. 

The following anti-corruption measures have been taken by Bulgaria’s law enforcement bodies: 

I. General organisational measures taken by the Bulgarian Prosecutor’s Office (PRB) 

1. A functional analysis of the structure and work of the Prosecutor’s Office was conducted in 2013. 

2. On the basis of the findings set out therein, structural changes were undertaken with the aim of enhancing specialisation and efficiency of the 
efforts to combat serious crime, including fraud with implications for the financial interests of the EU. A specialist department has been set up 
at the Supreme Cassation Prosecutor's Office (VKP). 

24 

 
 
3. An analysis of the prosecution of corruption crimes in the period 2007–2013 has also been conducted. On the basis of the findings set out in 
the report a package of measures has been developed, which includes the following: 

A  Single  Catalogue  of  corruption  crimes,  which  has  outlined  the  scope  of  corruption  crimes  in  line  with  international  treaties  and 
European case-law; a uniform reporting mechanism has also been introduced that enables monthly reporting and conducting analyses of this 
type of crime; 

Special supervision arrangements for high-profile cases monitored by the European Commission have been introduced, which require: 

the submission of monthly reports by the administrative managers of prosecution services to the Prosecutor-General; 

the submission of monthly reports to the VKP on proceedings instituted and the progress in cases subject to special supervision within 

each appellate district, based on a standardised electronic template; 

compiling monthly summaries of the cases on the record of the PRB and an analysis intended for the Supreme Judicial Council (VSS) 

and the Ministry of Justice for the purposes of the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM). 

Guidelines on the judicial review and ex officio checks conducted by higher ranking prosecution services with the aim of improving the 

standard of justice administration. 

Guidelines on the improvement of prosecutorial and court supervision arrangements have been drawn up. They seek to achieve better 
overall efficiency of prosecutorial work (during the pre-trial phase in order to reduce the number of cases remanded to the prosecution services 
by courts and—during the trial phase—in order to reduce the number of acquittals through analysis and action needed to overcome frequently 
encountered, recurrent deficiencies). 

With  a  view  to  ensuring  a  better  standard  of  investigations  and  tapping  the  full  potential  of  the  investigators  from  the  National 
Investigation Service, including the departments under the jurisdiction of provincial prosecution services, an extended mechanism (taking into 
account  the  instruments  available  under  the  current  Criminal  Procedure  Code)  has  been  set  up  for  the  allocation  of  cases  of  high  legal  and 
factual complexity, including arrangements enabling the follow-up and monitoring of their progress; 

A Specialist Judicial Anti-Corruption Unit has been set up by an order of the Prosecutor General and pursuant to an agreement between 

the PRB and the State Agency for National Security (DANS); 

Guidelines on cooperation between the Prosecutor’s Office and the DANS have been approved; 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
A cooperation agreement has been concluded between the PRB, the National Institute of Law (NIP), the Ministry of the Interior (MVR) 
and the DANS. One of the priority tasks set out therein is the introduction and use of modern, practical methods in the professional training of 
magistrates  and  employees  working  in  the  respective  institutions,  and  the  exchange  of  results  of  the  analyses,  research  and  methodologies 
developed by each institution; 

Other  cooperation  and  interaction  agreements  have  been  concluded  between  the  PRB  and  institutions  concerned  in  combating 
corruption crimes, inter alia, the National Audit Office, the National Financial Inspection Service, the Commission for Confiscation of Illegal 
Assets, etc. 

The  Specialist  Administrative  Directorate  for  Financial  Intelligence  of  the  DANS  (SAD  FR  DANS)  obtains,  keeps,  analyses  and  detects 
information about suspicious dealings, transactions and clients received from the persons referred to in Article 3(2) and 3(3) of the Anti-Money 
Laundering  Act  (ZMIP).  Some  of  the  preventive  measures  include  extended  checks  and  monitoring  of  current  or  former  politically  exposed 
persons (PEPs) and reporting cases of suspected money laundering relating to potential corrupt practices. The reports on suspicious operations 
connected with  PEPs  are a priority in the work of the SAD FR DANS. In  2014, the department handled 14 cases connected with PEPs and 
referred information about 8 cases to the competent directorates of the DANS. Reports on the remaining cases will be finalised within a short 
period of time. During the same period the SAD FR DANS, acting on requests from the competent authorities, conducted checks in four cases 
relating to potential corrupt practices. 

Measures taken by the authorities responsible for the administration of EU funds in the capacity as Managing Authorities/Executive Agencies 

The bodies responsible for the administration of EU funds carry out ex ante, ongoing and ex post controls on the award of public procurement 
contracts, including checks to verify compliance with Council of Ministers Decree No 118/2014 laying down the rules and procedures for the 
award of public contracts by beneficiaries of the grant assistance under the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, 
the Cohesion Fund, the European Fisheries Fund, and the Financial Mechanism of the European Economic Area and the Norwegian Fund (EEA 
and Norway Grants), which are not covered by the Public Procurement Act. 

The controls include conducting checks on planned calls on the basis of a schedule of forthcoming tenders to ensure expenditure planning and 
the award of contracts by means of single procedures. Ex ante controls will be conducted on tender documentation prior to being published and 
on the checklists detailing the outcome of conducted checks. Ex post controls will be performed by way of monitoring the implementation of 
recommendations  and  conducting  analyses  of  detected  deficiencies  with  a  view  to  precluding  the  verification  of  expenditure  where 
infringements have been detected. 

26 

 
 
 
 
In line with established practice, upon the launch of new operations the Managing Authorities will organise training events for the beneficiaries 
that  cover  all  aspects  of  contract  performance,  including  the  award  of  public  procurement  contracts,  and  familiarising  participants  with  the 
definitions of irregularity and fraud with a view to preventing them. 

The State Fund Agriculture (DFZ), in the capacity as a body with special competence for the disbursement of funds from the EU agricultural 
funds, has taken the following measures: 

Regulations Nos 24 of 29 August 2014 and 25 of 25 July 2014 have been amended laying down the rules for transfer to the DFZ of 
accumulated interest on advance payments, reimbursement, within a period of 10 days from the signature of a final annex in tenders conducted 
under the ZOP, advance payments that exceed 50 % of the amount of approved grants, and deduction from the amount of paid funds of the 
compensation agreed in concluded grant agreements in respect of breach of contract. 

In 2014, a survey aiming to gauge the level of corruption risk at DFZ units was conducted. A report setting out the survey results and 
corresponding  proposals  has  been  drawn  up.  The  rules  of  procedure  of  the  DFZ  Inspection  Service  have  been  amended  and  additional  anti-
corruption rules have been drawn up with the aim of improving the whistleblowing mechanism, enhancing the protection of whistle blowers, 
ensuring  objectivity  and  a  high  standard  of  conducted  checks,  and  improving  interinstitutional  cooperation  and  the  rules  on  detecting, 
documenting and levying sanctions for corruption. 

Measures undertaken by the competent control bodies: the Public Financial Inspection Agency (ADFI) is part of the public internal financial 
control  system  in  Bulgaria.  The  bodies  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Agency  perform  ex-post  controls  to  verify  the  legality  of  the  budget, 
economic  or  accounting  activities  of  the  organisations  and  entities  specified  in  Article  4  of  the  Public  Financial  Inspection  Act  (ZDFI), 
including  those  relating  to  the  award  of  public  procurement  contracts  and  their  subsequent  performance.  They  are  further  tasked  with 
identifying  irregularities,  and  detecting  fraud  and  any  resulting  damage  or  loss  sustained,  levying  financial  and  administrative  penalties,  and 
detecting fraud and irregularities with implications for the financial interests of the European Union. In 2014, during the course of conducted 
financial  inspections  the  bodies  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  ADFI  identified  and  reported  infringements  and  fraud  indicators  in  the 
disbursement  of  EU  funds  in  19  cases.  All  detected  infringements  had  implications  for  the  award  of  public  procurement  contracts  and  their 
subsequent performance (breach of the rules laid down in the Public Procurement Act, the implementing regulation thereto and the Regulation 
on the award of small public procurement contracts). A total of 51 injunctions in respect of infringements have been drawn up and served on the 
responsible officials. Follow-up measures were taken in line with the ZDFI; copies of 5 reports detailing the outcome of the conducted financial 
inspections have been sent to the Prosecutor’s Office on the grounds of competence; and the outcome of the 19 financial inspections in which 

27 

 
 
 
 
irregularities were detected have been notified to the financing bodies. 

Measures taken by the competent audit authorities: in June 2014, the Audit of EU Funds Executive Agency (IAOSES) updated the EU Funds 
Audit Manual. The sections setting out the rules on systems and operations audits and the standard of audit work were modified significantly. 
Several new model documents have been incorporated into the manual, including an audit sample and sub-sample memorandum and checklists 
to  be  completed  for  the  audits  conducted  on  operations  and  to  verify  the  legality  of  the  public  procurement.  For  the  purposes  of  the  audits 
conducted  in  2014,  the  financial  implications  of  the  infringements  of  public  procurement  rules  identified  by  the  Audit  Authority  were 
established in accordance with the Guidelines for determining financial corrections to be made by the Commission to expenditure financed by 
the  Union  under  shared  management,  for  non-compliance  with  the  rules  on  public  procurement,  approved  by  Commission  Decision  of  19 
December 2013. To ensure compliance with a recommendation received from the Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, audits 
include detailed checks to verify compliance with the timeframes for obtaining tender documentation and submitting proposals. At the end of 
2014  the  register  of  public  procurement  calls  on  which  checks  were  conducted  during  the  audits  on  operations  financed  from  operational 
programmes  during  the  period  2010–2014  was  updated.  As  a  matter  of  good  practice,  the  IAOSES,  following  the  completion  of  audits  on 
operations,  has  continued  to  compile  annual  summary  analyses  of  frequently  encountered  irregularities  with  implications  for  the  award  of 
public procurement contracts under operational programmes, where detected errors have financial implications for which the Audit Authority 
has  proposed  that  corresponding  financial  corrections  be  imposed  by  the  responsible  Managing  Authority.  These  analyses,  along  with  the 
register of audited public procurement calls, are used for the purposes of risk assessment in the context of further audits due to be conducted 
under the respective programme. The annual analyses are published on the webpage of the IAOSES. 

CZ  No information provided  

DK  Pursuant to the Procurement Directive 2014/24, purchasers are obliged to exclude economic operators from participation in a procurement 

procedure if the operator has been convicted in a final judgment of certain specific violations of the law, including corruption.  
In the Danish proposal for the transposition of the Procurement Directive, a sentence for corruption will entail that an economic operator will be 
excluded from participation in procurements for four years from the date of final judgment. A condition for a purchaser's being able to enter 
into a contract with an economic operator is that the operator must prove that it has not been convicted of corruption in the past four years. An 
economic operator cannot be excluded, however, if it can prove that it has taken appropriate action which demonstrates its reliability.  
It is expected that the Procurement Act transposing the Procurement Directive will be tabled on 25 February 2015. It is expected to enter into 
force on 1 October 2015. The Act is, among other things, an outcome of the work of the Procurement Act Committee, which was completed in 

28 

 
 
November of last year. 

DE  Work to implement the package of directives into national law has already begun. On 7 January 2015 the Federal Cabinet adopted the key 

points for the reform of procurement law that will provide the basis for implementation in Germany. 

EE 

In 2014 the Ministry of Finance engaged stake-holders (including contracting authorities and unions of economic operators) to collaborate with 
us in order to agree upon a preliminary intent of the draft of the new public procurement law transposing the new procurement directives 
package. The collaboration was conducted in the form of written consultations and several thematic round-tables, as well as workshops in 
specific areas (i.e. social services). By the end of the summer the preliminary intent was completed and agreed upon between the stake-holders. 
During the rest of the year the Ministry of Finance has focused on writing the draft of the new act, which is foreseen to be agreed upon by the 
goverment in spring 2015. 

The detection and prosecution of corruption cases with identifying the proceeds of corruption and to ensure its rapid seizure and subsequent 
confiscation will be the priority of the law enforcement institution in the coming years. The changes to the Penal Code came into force in 2015 
and case-law drafting or practice is required now.  

For example we improved § 300 Violation of requirements for public procurement and § 3001 Violation of procedural restrictions.  

https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/eli/522012015002/consolide  

IE 

Transposition of the new procurement Directives, 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU, 2014/25/EU, into national law by Member States is required by 
April 2016.  In 2014, Ireland carried out a public consultation process as part of its programme of transposition of these Directives.    

Updates on the status of the transposition process in Ireland will be available on www.procurement.ie 

EL  AUTHORITY - Ministry of Economy, Infrastructure, Shipping and Tourism 

Ι.  In  the  context  of  the  reform  of  the  national  regulatory  and  institutional  framework  for  public  procurement,  in  implementation  of  specific 
actions laid down in the Memorandum of Understanding, the Single Independent Public Procurement Authority (SIPPA), within the scope of its 
competences arising from Law 4013/2011, as the institutionally specialised authority of the Hellenic Republic on the matter,  coordinated the 
preparation of the legislative initiative for the creation of a cohesive and uniform legal framework for public procurement, leading to a vote and 
adoption by Parliament of Law 4281/2014 ‘Measures for the support and development of Greek economy, organisational issues of the Ministry 

29 

 
 
of Finance, and other provisions’. This Law, which will become fully effective as of 1 March 2015, will modernise, simplify and systematise in 
a single, uniform manner national legislation on public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts, in full compliance 
with  both  EU legislation and case-law of  the Court of Justice. This  Law codified the existing institutional framework  and created a  modern 
legislative framework for public procurement, and paved the way for the transposition of the new directives, which is expected to be completed 
within the timeframe indicated in the new directives (April 2016).  

In  particular,  regarding  the  fight  against  corruption,  the  law  introduces  strict  and  detailed  transparency  guarantees  and,  in  particular,  the 
obligation of the contracting authority to take the necessary measures for the effective prevention, detection and remedy of conflicts of interest 
which  may  arise  during  tenders  (Article  45  of  the  Law).  In  addition,  certain  provisions  set  out  the  contractor’s  obligation  to  comply  with  a 
clause of integrity, which sets out that the contract shall be obligatorily terminated if it is found that the contractor’s behaviour has been illegal 
before or during the award procedure, as well as at the stage of the contract’s implementation (Article 46 of the Law). The provisions of the 
Law regulating the environment of Electronic Public Procurement in Greece are also of utmost importance (Articles 134-138).  

ΙΙ. As is well known, the new Directives 2014/23/ΕU (L94), 2014/24/EU (L94) and 2014/25/EU (L94) must be transposed into Greek national 
legislation  by  16  April  2016.  The  Hellenic  Republic,  in  the  context  of  the  working  parties  coordinated  by  the  Single  Independent  Public 
Procurement Authority (SIPPA), with the participation of representatives from the competent Ministries and other authorities, as notified to the 
competent authorities of the European Commission, has drawn up and is currently implementing the National Integration Plan (NIP). The NIP 
sets out a number of actions and an indicative timetable for their implementation, as well as the organisational structure, to be adopted for the 
successful implementation of the integration project. 

ES  Other measures related to spending and resources:  

Procurement-related measures 
In 2014, the necessary measures were implemented to apply Law 19/2013 of 9 December 2013 on Transparency, Access to Public Information 
and Good Governance (Ley 19/2013 de Transparencia, acceso a la información pública y buen gobierno). For example, 2014 saw the launch of 
the Transparency Portal, giving access to the most frequently requested central government information. Also, Royal Decree 919/2014 of 31 
October 2014 approving the Bylaws of the Transparency and Good Governance Council (Consejo de Transparencia y Buen Gobierno) was 
adopted.  
The aim of the Transparency Portal is to improve access to information on various issues, including those outlined below.  
a) 

All contracts, with details of the subject, the duration, the amount of the tender and award, the procurement procedure used, the 

30 

 
 
Decisions authorising or recognising compatibility that affect public servants, along with decisions authorising high-ranking central 

Description of the agreements signed, indicating the signatories, subject matter, duration, amendments, obligation to provide services, 

Subsidies and public aid granted, indicating the amount, the purpose/aim and the beneficiaries.  
The audited accounts that must be presented and the auditor's reports produced by auditing bodies. 
Annual remuneration received by high-ranking officers and the senior management of the bodies in question. If necessary, details will 

instruments used to publicise the tender where applicable, the number of tenderers taking part in the tendering procedure, the identity of the 
successful tenderer and any amendments to the contract. The decisions concerning withdrawal from and rejection of contracts will also be 
published. Information pertaining to contracts of lesser value will be published quarterly.  
b) 
and, if necessary, any financial obligations agreed. Signed management agreements will also be published, indicating the subject, budget, 
duration, financial obligations and, if any subcontracting has taken place, details will be provided of the successful tenderers, procedure and 
contract amount.  
c) 
d) 
f) 
also be published of any compensation payments received by people leaving their post.  
g) 
government officials or similar who leave their posts to take up employment in the private sector, in accordance with the regulations in force at 
local or Autonomous Community level.  
Local representatives' annual declarations of assets and activities.  
h) 
Statistical information required to evaluate the level of compliance and quality of public services falling within their remit.   
i) 
Autonomous Communities and Local Authorities have up to two years to adapt to the requirements of the Transparency Law. Nevertheless, 
various legislative measures have already been taken to implement the Law, including Law 4/2014 of 22 December 2014 of the Autonomous 
Community of Madrid; Decree 215/2014 of 16 December 2014 of the Autonomous Community of Aragon; Law 12/2014 of 16 December 2014 
of the Region of Murcia; the Agreement of 3 September 2014 of Castile-La Mancha; Law 1/2014 of 24 June 2014 on Public Transparency of 
Andalusia (Ley 1/2014 de Transparencia Pública de Andalucía); and Law 19/2014 of 29 December 2014 on Transparency, Access to 
Information and Good Governance of the Regional Government of Catalonia (Ley 19/2014 de transparencia, acceso a la información y buen 
gobierno de la Generalitat de Catalunya), which creates a register of interest groups, for example.  
Further laws have been adopted: Law 14/2013 of 26 December 2013 on Rationalisation of the Public Sector in the Autonomous Community of 
Galicia (Ley 14/2013 de racionalización del sector público autonómico de Galicia) and the Institutional Code of Ethics of the Regional 
Government of Galicia (Código ético institucional de la Xunta de Galicia) were adopted via the Resolution of 8 September 2014. Law 4/2011 

31 

 
 
Inclusion of political parties, foundations with links to political parties, trade union organisations and business associations in the 

of 31 March 2011 on Good Administration and Governance of the Balearic Islands (Ley 4/2011 de buena administración y gobierno de las Islas 
Baleares); and Law 1/2014 of 18 February 2014 regulating the Status of Public Officials of the Government and Administration of the 
Autonomous Community of Extremadura (Ley 1/2014 de regulación del Estatuto de los Cargos Públicos del Gobierno y la Administración de 
la Comunidad Autónoma de Extremadura).  
Preparations are under way to amend the Law on Public Sector Contracts as soon as possible with a view to introducing various anti-corruption 
measures. Some of the most significant changes are listed below. 
• 
subjective scope of application of the Law on Contracts. 
• 
New rules concerning the profile of the contracting body. The contract law will implement a number of publicity-related measures, 
including a measure affecting all signed contracts, regardless of the contract type or size, and contracts that may be drawn up in the future.  
• 
Introduction of an article obliging contracting bodies to take the necessary measures to combat fraud, favouritism and corruption, and to 
prevent, detect and effectively address any conflicts of interest that may arise in a public contract. The ultimate aim is to guarantee transparency 
in the procedure and equal treatment for all potential contractors.  
New rules concerning the contractor selection procedure. The negotiated procedure without publicity based on the criterion of contract 
• 
size will cease to exist and a new procedure, the 'simplified open procedure', will be introduced; this process is also fast and flexible but offers 
benefits in terms of publicity and transparency. Any business can take part in this selection procedure; the tenders submitted are announced at a 
public event, attended by the legal adviser and the financial controller, and the contract award decision is based on automatic selection criteria 
(not subject to value judgements by the contracting body and thus easier to monitor). 
• 
- persons who have been convicted in a criminal court of corruption involving private individuals; 
- relatives of senior management, not restricted to the spouse or partner and their descendants, as was the case until now, but also including 
relatives in the ascending line and relatives up to the second degree of consanguinity or affinity. This will apply not only to central government 
officials but also to other administrations at local or Autonomous Community level.  
• 
Measures will be adopted at local level, where a greater number of corruption cases have been reported. A series of changes will be 
introduced in the revised text of the Law on Public Sector Contracts (Ley de Contratos del Sector Público) and this will have a particular impact 
on two issues: the organisation and composition of the bodies responsible for public procurement issues at local level; and the introduction of 

The number of prohibitions on taking part in a public tender procedure will be increased, including: 

32 

 
 
Evaluation panels and awarding bodies must have staff who are specialists in the field of public procurement. Specifically, they will 

In municipalities with fewer than 5 000 inhabitants and for contracts of lesser value, a restriction will be imposed on the procurement 

Interim staff will not be allowed to be members of evaluation panels.  
The rules of jurisdiction for Mayors and Presidents of Local Authorities will change, giving greater power to Municipal and Provincial 

measures designed to prevent fraudulent and corrupt activities at local level.  
Several specific measures will be implemented. 
a) 
procedure whereby at least three viable bids will have to be received. 
b) 
need to be 'technical legal specialists'. This is in line with the European Commission's EU-wide requirements relating to public procurement, as 
is the requirement relating to the professionalisation of staff working in public procurement.  
c) 
d) 
Councils as contracting bodies; this will ensure more stringent guarantees of objectivity in public procurement procedures (also because 
Councils include representatives of the opposition). As such, the Mayor or President of the Local Authority will be the contracting body for 
contracts that represent less than 10 % of the authority's resources and with a value of less than EUR 6 million.  
Furthermore, in the area of Local Administration, Law 27/2013 on Rationalisation and Sustainability (Ley 27/2013 de racionalización y 
sostenibilidad) has been adopted and measures have been taken to tighten rules governing control procedures, implementation methodology, 
criteria for action, and rights and responsibilities in the development of public functions across local government. This fills a legal vacuum, 
enabling techniques such as auditing in all its various forms to be widely used for Local Authorities, bringing them into line with other areas of 
the public sector. The General State Audit Body will be involved in this process.  
In addition, with a view to strengthening the independence of civil servants providing secretarial, audit or inspection-related services for Local 
Authorities, the State will be responsible for selecting, training and vetting staff and will have disciplinary powers in the most serious cases.  
At the same time, Royal Decree-Law 5/2014 of 4 April 2014 approved the creation of up to 210 civil servant posts at Local Administration 
level in order to comply with the provisions outlined above.  
Revenue-related measures 
As regards revenue-related measures, on 23 December 2014, Spain deposited its instrument of accession to the Protocol to Eliminate the Illicit 
Trade in Tobacco Products, which was adopted in Seoul on 12 November 2012, thereby becoming the sixth party to ratify the Protocol, and the 
second EU Member State to do so after Austria. 

33 

 
 
FR 

1/ Taking into account the public procurement recommendations included in the anti-corruption reports, on 3 March 2014 the Interministerial 
Committee  for  the  Coordination  of  Inspections  (Commission  interministérielle  de  coordination  des  contrôles  -  CICC),  France's  auditing 
authority for structural funds, issued a revised version of the public procurement checklist that had been presented at the Operations Controllers 
Seminar in January 2014. The aim of this revised version was to incorporate the changes introduced by Commission Decision C(2013) 9527 of 
19 December 2013 on financial corrections in public procurement procedures.  
Furthermore, the transposition of the new public procurement directives will build on the procedures currently in place, in particular: 
- by specifying that the final conviction on corruption charges of a member of an administrative, management or supervisory body of a legal 
person  or  of  a  natural  person  who  has  powers  of  representation,  decision-making  or  control  therein  shall  lead  to  the  exclusion  from  public 
procurement procedures of that legal person, as long as the natural person is performing these functions; 
- by enhancing transparency through the obligation to disclose any amendments that are made. 
2/ As regards measures taken in 2014 with a view to preparing the transposition of the 2014 public procurement directives, Law No 2014-1545 
of  20  December  2014  on  the  Simplification  of  business  practices  and  containing  various  provisions  simplifying  and  clarifying  the  law  and 
administrative procedures empowers the French Government to take the necessary legal measures to enable the transposition of the new public 
procurement directives by Government Order. 
The  draft  order  drawn  up  following  the  adoption  of  the  above-mentioned  Law  simplifying  business  practices  was  submitted  for  public 
consultation 
juridiques): 
http://www.economie.gouv.fr/daj/marches-publics.  This  public  consultation,  which  ended  on  3  February  2015,  made  it  possible  to  gather 
opinions from all interested parties, ministries, purchasing departments, associations of local representatives, professional federations, economic 
operators and citizens. Anyone interested could take part in the consultation. The results of the consultation are currently being analysed; the 
text  will,  if  necessary,  be  adapted  based  on  these  results  and  will  then  need  to  receive  interministerial  approval.  Once  the  order  has  been 
adopted, the implementing decrees will need to be issued. 
It was not possible to anticipate the content of the anti-corruption measures contained in the public procurement directives prior to their final 
adoption. 
However,  anti-corruption  measures  were  already  part  of  public  procurement  procedures,  in  accordance  with  Directives  2004/17/EC  and 
2004/18/EC  of  31  March  2004.  The  issue  of  corruption  and  the  fight  against  it  is  essentially  tackled  through  tendering  bans,  namely  by 
excluding from the procedure those persons: 

for  Legal  Affairs 

the  Department 

the  website 

(Direction 

by  way 

affaires 

des 

of 

of 

34 

 
 
- who have been convicted by final judgment on corruption charges; 
- who have attempted to influence the decision of a public purchaser; 
- or who have caused distortion of competition. 
In  cases  where  the  law  so  provides  and  which  relate  to  convictions  for  involvement  in  a  criminal  organisation,  corruption,  fraud  or  money 
laundering,  but  also  in  cases  of  professional  misconduct  or  false  declarations,  the  judge  may  impose  a  ban  on  taking  part  in  public  tenders. 
Persons who may be subject to a ban are those 'who have, in the last five years, received a final conviction for one of the offences provided for 
(...) in Article 433-1 [active corruption practices and trading in influence], (...) in Article 435-2 [active corruption of EU officials and officials 
of  Member  States],  (...)  of  the  Criminal  Code'.  This  rule  stems  from  the  public  procurement  directives  themselves,  which  require  a  'final 
judgment'. This replicates the requirement contained in the Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) concluded within the framework of 
the WTO. 
The  fight  against  corruption  and  fraud  in  public  procurement  is  also  underpinned  by  factors  that  are  not  specific  to  rules  governing  public 
procurement, such as:  
-  fast  and  effective  redress  mechanisms  open  to  any  person  who  may  wish  to  contest  a  public  contract  award  decision,  along  with  greater 
judicial powers; 
- monitoring and prosecution services that focus solely on corruption cases; 
- protection procedures for people reporting corruption; 
- the fact that a person convicted of corruption will be banned from running for office (many public purchasers have decision-making bodies 
that include elected representatives), forbidden from bidding for public contracts, excluded from public service, etc. 
As  such,  the  public  procurement  good  practice  guide,  released  following  the  circular  dated  29  December  2009,  contains  specific 
recommendations relating to combating corruption. The guide reminds readers that a corruption conviction will result in a ban on taking part in 
tendering  procedures  and  also  recommends  that  public  purchasers  adopt  a  Code  of  Practice  governing  the  conduct  of  their  purchasing 
departments  and  that  of  final  decision-makers.  For  example,  it  contains  rules  relating  to  bans  on  accepting  gifts  or  invitations,  the  need  to 
disclose  connections  of  any  kind  between  a  public  servant  and  a  given  supplier,  the  requirement  for  purchasing  managers  to  take  sufficient 
leave, and rules relating to accessing, securing and storing all documents that record communications with suppliers. The guide refers readers to 
the  internal  inspection  guide  included  in  the  reports  produced  by  the  Central  Service  for  the  Prevention  of  Corruption  (Service  central  de 

35 

 
 
prévention de la corruption - SCPC). 

HR  Within the Plan of normative activities of the Ministry of Economy of the Republic of Croatia, it is planned to draft a new normative legal act 

with the aim of transposing new EU directives in the field of public procurement. 
Namely,  directives  on  public  procurement  i.e.  Directive  2014/24/EU  and  Directive  2014/25/EU  entered  into  force  on  17  April  2014,  and 
therefore the Republic of Croatia is obliged to transpose those directives till 18 April 2016 at the latest, with the possibility to postpone some 
provisions.  During the drafting of the Act, special emphasis will be placed on prescribing measures to prevent conflicts of interest in the field of 
public procurement. 
Furthermore, it has to be stressed that the Government of the Republic of Croatia adopted the draft proposal of Anti-Corruption Strategy 2015- 
2020  on  15th  January  2015.  The  accompanying  Action  Plan  includes  further  elaboration  of  measures  and  activities  aimed  at  creating  a 
comprehensive strategic approach to the prevention and reduction of corruption risks in public procurement both at national and local level. 
Measures include:  

  Strengthening the legal framework as regards public procurement - systematization and harmonization of  laws, procedures and manuals 

in the field of public procurement; 

 

Improving  the  system  of  legal  protection  in  the  field  of  public  procurement  and  supervision  of  the  implementation  of  public 
procurement contracts; 

  Monitoring  the  implementation  of  the  rules  on  transparency,  access  to  information  and  avoiding  conflicts  of  interest,  systematic  risk 

assessment and prioritization in the supervision of public procurement; 

  Strengthening and improvement of anti-corruption and ethical education.  

Main activities to achieve the abovementioned measures include: 

  Adoption of new law on public procurement; 

  Adoption of implementing regulations regarding the law on public procurement; 

  Adoption of manuals in the field of public procurement; 

  Continuous education for stakeholders in the field of public procurement in cooperation with the Croatian Chamber of Commerce and 

36 

 
 
the National School of Public Administration. 

IT 

Law No 190 of 16 November 2012 on ‘prevention and punishment of corruption and unlawful conduct in the public administration’ was 

The Government is working on the draft of an enabling decree transposing the Public Procurement and Concessions Directives on the 
1. 
basis of the principles and criteria in the enabling law transposing the Directives, by drafting a new Contracts and Concessions Code that will 
supersede and repeal the current Public Contracts Code (Legislative Decree No 163/2006) and provide for appropriate transitional 
arrangements. The draft enabling law is currently before the Senate.  
2. 
adopted to combat corruption and introduce a prevention system centred on the adoption of a national anti-corruption plan  and triennial 
prevention plans at the level of each public authority. 
For example, the plan adopted by the Ministry of Education, Universities and Research (MIUR) in Ministerial Decree No 62 specified the rules 
and procedures for ensuring  stringent application at the Ministry of the provisions on combating corruption and unlawful conduct in the public 
administration, with a view to: 
• 
• 
• 

reducing the opportunities for corruption; 
increasing the MIUR's capacity to detect corruption; 
creating an environment that discourages corruption. 

CY  Cyprus has drafted three bills, for the transposition of the three new Procurement Directives respectively, which were set under public 

consultation, concluded in 2014. Presently, the three bills are under legal-linguistic process provided by the Attorney General Office, according 
to the national law-making practice. 

LV 

Following the adoption of amendments in the Criminal Law scope of public officials has been extended stipulating that representatives of state 
authority shall be considered public officials, as well as any person permanently or temporarily executing duties in state or local government 
service, including state or local government company, having authority to take decisions binding for other persons or having authority to 
perform supervision, control, investigation or sanctioning functions or to act with assets or finances of an institution or its company. 
Adopted amendments in the Criminal Procedure Law in 2014 provides the opportunity to divide criminal proceedings against a legal person 
and a natural person if it is in the interests of criminal justice. The liability of legal persons is therefore not restricted to cases where the natural 

37 

 
 
 
person is held liable. The Law also provides for entering into agreement in criminal case with a legal person. 
Starting from 2014 new provision in the Criminal Procedure Law stipulates that adjudication of a case if charges are brought against a public 
official holding responsible position shall be of a higher priority in comparison with other cases in order to ensure reasonable terms.  
Amendments in the Law on Prevention of Conflict of Interest in Activities of Public Officials abolished the exception with regards to members 
of the Parliament to enter into contracts with state authorities if granted in open tender procedure. 
In order to elaborate regulation for whistle-blowers protection in 2014 inter-institutional working group was established under the guidance of 
the State Chancellery and consisting of representatives from the Corruption Prevention and Combating Bureau, Prosecutor’s General Office, 
Supreme Court, Ministry of Welfare, Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Interior, Latvian chapter of Transparency International „Delna”, Free 
Trade Union Confederation of Latvia. 
Starting from January 2014 administrative sanctions are enacted for violation in the area of public procurement and public-private partnership. 
Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Latvia has established a working group for transposing the Directive 2014/24/EC, Directive 
2014/25/EC, Directive 2014/23/EC where experts from Procurement Monitoring Bureau, NGO’s and other ministries are involved.  The 
Ministry of Finance plan to develop first draft of the new Public Procurement Law, Public Service Providers Procurement Law, amendments of 
Public and Private Partnership Law until June 2015. Mentioned laws and amendments shall enter into the force on 18 April 2016. 

In order to reduce the risk of corruption in the area of public procurement in Lithuania, emphasis is being placed on developing electronic and 
centralised public procurement, preventing and monitoring infringements of the public procurement rules and improving regulation in the area 
of  public  procurement.  The  value  of  electronic  public  procurement  operations  published  in  2014  (where  the  procurement  procedure  was 
published,  the  procurement  documents  provided  and  tenders  received  electronically)  exceeded  95%  of  the  value  of  all  public  procurement 
operations published. It is planned, by means of the e-invoicing information system set up in 2015, to modernise the central public procurement 
information system and the VšĮ CPO LT online catalogue for centralised public procurement.  
The  value  of  centralised  public  procurement  increased  following  the  entry  into  force  on  1  January  2014  of  the  obligation  to  acquire  goods, 
services and works from or via the central contracting authority in the event that the goods, services or works proposed in the CPO catalogue 
meet the contracting authority's requirements and the latter is not able to have them performed more efficiently through a rational use of the 
funds  allocated,  and  after  the  VšĮ  CPO  LT  online  catalogue.  In  2014,  the  CPO  LT  online  catalogue  was  used  to  procure  goods,  works  and 
services of a value of almost EUR 389 million, i.e. three times more than in 2013.  
Contrary to what is written about Lithuania in the Annex to the European Commission’s EU Anti-Corruption Report (COM (2014) 38 final), 
the consent of the Lithuanian Public Procurement Office to carrying out a negotiated procedure without publication of a contract notice was not 

LT 

38 

 
 
withheld.  Under  the  current  public  procurement  rules,  the  contracting  authority  must  obtain  consent  if  it  wishes  to  suspend  procurement 
operations, amend the terms of the procurement contract, carry out a negotiated procedure without publication of a contract notice or conclude 
an in-house transaction. It is not required to obtain the consent of the Public Procurement Office in procurement cases of lesser importance, but 
this does not mean that the contracting authority is not required to comply with the provisions of the Public Procurement Act (as indicated in 
the  Commission's  report).  It  should  also  be  noted  that  now  that  the  threshold  for  low-value  procurement  has  been  increased,  contracting 
authorities  are  obliged  to  publish  information  on  their  website  on  low-value  procurement  operations  that  have  been  launched,  the  winning 
bidder and the contract which it is intended to conclude or which has been concluded. It can therefore be said that the fact of the administrative 
burden on contracting authorities having been reduced ensures that the principal of transparency is not infringed. 
In implementation of measures under the National Anti-Corruption Programme, with effect from 1 January 2015 the Public Procurement Act 
requires contracting authorities to publish the proposed winning bidder, the contract concluded and any amendments to it in the central public 
procurement information system. 
Further  to  the  comment  in  the  Commission's  report  to  the  effect  that,  in  order  to  ensure  that  the  Public  Procurement  Office  performs  its 
functions properly, the Office's workforce should be increased, in 2014 the Office was allocated 10 new posts. The Public Procurement Office 
also  established  a  risk  management  information  system  in  order  to  enhance  its  ability  to  prevent  and  monitor  infringements  of  the  public 
procurement  rules.  This  system  enables  information  stored  in  the  information  systems  operated  by  the  Public  Procurement  Office  to  be 
integrated and allows risky procurement operations and contracts to be identified for assessment and contracting authorities to be selected for 
inspection. 
Legislation is also being drawn up to implement the new EU Public Procurement Directives (2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU). In order to fully 
assess the issues linked to the implementation of the provisions of those Directives and transpose those directives into national law in the best 
possible  manner,  Order  of  the  Minister  for the  Economy  No  4-234  of  18  April  2014  sets  up  a working  group  comprising  representatives  of 
business, professional associations, public organisations and other interested bodies. The draft legislation drawn up is currently being discussed 
within the said working party. 
Significant national measures taken in transposing the package of public procurement directives directive into national legislation in 2014. 

LU 

HU  During the transposition of the new public procurement directives adopted in February 2014, it was essential to review the Hungarian public 
procurement regulation system, since the new directives had implemented a significant reform of EU public procurement law. Consequently, in 
order for the provisions of the directives to be appropriately transposed, it has become necessary to pass a new Public Procurement Act. 

The  concept  of  the  new  Public  Procurement  Act  aimed  at  the  transposition  of  the  new  public  procurement  directives  had  already  been 

39 

 
 
completed, and it was adopted by the Government on 5 November 2014. The concept outlines the most important elements of the new public 
procurement regulation to be developed. In drafting the new bill, the Prime Minister’s Office regularly consults the European Commission in 
order  to  be  able  to  adopt  a  Public  Procurement  Act  in  Hungary  that  best  matches  the  EU  rules.  Accordingly,  the  delegation  of  the  Prime 
Minister’s Office held consultations with the Directorate General for Internal Market and Services (DG MARKT) on the concept of the act in 
Brussels in November and in Budapest on 12 December. The remarks made during the talks will be taken into account and the discussion of the 
individual subjects and more specific regulatory ideas will continue in January 2015. 

Codification work is continuously underway in order to transpose the rules of the new directives into Hungarian law. As part of the cooperation 
between the Ministry of Justice and the Prime Minister’s Office, a Public Procurement Codification Work Committee has been set up, which 
assists the legislative work with its activities. 

Particular  attention  is  being  paid  in  the  new  transposing  act  to  the  simplification  of  procedures,  the  reduction  of  administrative  burdens, 
ensuring the widest possible competition (e.g. in connection with reasons for disqualification and selection criteria), the provision of assistance 
to small and medium-sized enterprises and transparency. 

According to the concept of the new act, while promoting the widest possible competition and during public procurements, in order to ensure 
non-discrimination, the freedom of the parties inviting tenders will be significantly limited in the area of setting suitability  requirements. The 
measures taken in this connection (in particular, the restriction of sales revenues and the extent of references that may be required) are designed 
to greatly open up the competition in the area of public procurements and, through the introduction of several sub-rules, uniform practice and 
higher transparency can be achieved. We expect greater competition to have a favourable effect also on bid prices. 

Another measure of note taken in 2014 is an action plan that Hungary had to devise for the appropriate operation of public procurements during 
the  use  of  EU  funds  on  the  basis  of  the  Partnership  Agreement.  This  includes  22  measures  in  total,  which  are  aimed  at  transforming  the 
Hungarian  public  procurement  system,  such  as  issuing  a  communication  on  more  stringent  setting  of  suitability  conditions,  cooperation 
between the Prime Minister’s Office and the Hungarian Competition Authority on taking more efficient action against restrictive practices by 
bidders  and  a  conference  on  the  subject  of  anti-corruption  actions.  In  December  2014,  the  Prime  Minister’s  Office  organised  a  two-day 
conference, which focused on emphasising the importance and role of anti-corruption means. With regard to the significant effect of corruption 
on  society  as  a  whole,  in  addition  to  Government  stakeholders,  the  representatives  of  civil  society  also  had  the  opportunity  to  speak  at  the 
conference. 

40 

 
 
 
MT 

In  2014,  Malta  was  still  in  the  process  of  transposing  the  EU  Directives  on  public  procurement  into  Maltese  Laws.  In  carrying  out  this 
transposition  exercise  Malta  has  carried  out  a  consultation  exercise  with  the  largest  contracting  authorities  to  get  their  feedback.  The 
Department of Contracts also organised in collaboration with the office of the commission and the office of the EU parliament an information 
session for economic operators. The first draft of the classical directive i.e.2014/24/EU is scheduled   to be forwarded to the AG’s office for end 
of March. The other two directives will follow after. 

NL  Not applicable to the Netherlands. 

AT  Austrian answer: "As points 1-8 either refer to specific other MS or do not specifically mention Austria, please do not expect any further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL 

Poland recognises the risks associated with corruption in public procurement and fully supports the demand for taking coordinated action to 
prevent and eliminate the risk of corruption at all stages of the procedure for granting public contracts. Anti-corruption policy in the field of 
public procurement in Poland is administered by the Public Procurement Office (PPO), which is  responsible for ensuring that the process of 
granting  public  contracts  is  transparent  and  competitive,  as  well  as  entities  involved  with  detecting  and  prosecuting  crimes  associated  with 
corruption.  Anti-corruption  measures  primarily  focus  on  ensuring  appropriate  public  procurement  procedures  and  overseeing  that  they  are 
applied correctly as well as detecting and combating corruption in the public procurement field.  
In actions to prevent corruption, it is worth noting the specific role played by instruments that ensure transparency in proceedings for granting 
public  contracts,  including  publishing  public  procurement  announcements  in  the  Public  Procurement  Bulletin  or  in  the  Supplement  to  the 
Official  Journal  of  the  EU,  depending  on  their  value.  The  PPO,  as  the  institution  responsible  for  the  functioning  of  the  public  procurement 
system, cooperates with bodies responsible for detecting and prosecuting corruption cases with the main goal of increasing the knowledge of 
these  institutions  and  contracting  authorities  about  correct  application  of  public  procurement  procedures  and  the  violations  that  occur  most 
frequently  in  these  procedures,  but  also  increasing  awareness  of  contracting  authorities  and  economic  operators  about  threats  resulting  from 
corruption in public procurement. Joint actions take such forms as organising training and conferences and issuing publications.  
In  terms  of  detecting  corruption  in  public  procurement,  appropriate  control  mechanisms  are  in  operation  at  the  stages  before  and  after 
conclusion of a public  procurement contract.  Checks performed by the  president  of the PPO  mainly aim to  study whether the procedure  for 
awarding public procurement contracts is carried out correctly in accordance with current regulations and if circumstances arise during a check 
which could point to corruption or other illegal practices, the PPO president sends information about it to the prosecuting authorities.  

41 

 
 
 
In 2014, there were changes in Polish legal regulations which, in accordance with the opinion expressed by the Commission in the EU Anti-
Corruption  Report  [COM(2014)38],  are  linked  with  anticorruption  policy  in  practice,  and  if  applied  incorrectly  could  lead  to  incidents  of 
corruption  in  public  procurement.  These  changes  concern  regulations  relating  to  the  basis  for  exclusion  from  public  procurement  contracts, 
making the assessment of offers more efficient in terms of identifying glaringly low prices and reducing the excessive dependence on lowest 
price as the most important criterion at the expense of criteria concerning quality. 
It should be noted that in 2012 (i.e. even before publication of the abovementioned Commission report) the Public Procurement Act was applied 
properly in terms of the need for verifying connections within capital groups at the stage of qualitative selection of contractors. An obligation 
was introduced  to exclude contractors who belong to  the  same  capital  group,  submit separate offers or  make  applications to take part in  the 
same procedure unless they demonstrate that the links between them would not lead to violation of fair competition between contractors in the 
procedure to award the contract. The introduction of this provision aimed, among other things, to exclude price collusion and manipulation of 
the  procedures  as  well  as  phenomena  which  could  consequently  bring  about  public  losses  through  price  inflation  and decreasing  the  quality 
obtained within the public procurement. 

PT 

The new public procurement Directives (Directives 2014/23/EU, 2014/24/EU and 2014/25/EU of 26 February 2014) have not been transposed 
into national legislation as the period for their transposition does not end until 18 April 2016. 
We should also point out that from 18 October 2018 the new Directives will make it compulsory to use electronic means for public procurement 
throughout the European Union, as is currently the case in Portugal. Under Portuguese law it is already compulsory to use electronic means for 
procurement  procedures,  including  the  publication  of  notices,  making  available  of  procedural  documents,  submission  of  proposals  and 
notification of the award decision.  
This measure makes processes more transparent and helps to simplify the conduct of the procedure considerably, reduce waste (e.g. volume of 
paper) and obtain better results by encouraging competition in the single market (e.g. better prices and quality). 

RO  All institutions and stakeholders are aware of the two studies (Fighting Corruption in the EU and Identifying and Reducing Corruption in Public 

Procurement in the EU) and use them us guidelines for future actions. 

For  example:  Fight  against  Fraud  Department  -  DLAF,  as  AFCOS,  following  Commission’s  recommendations  for  RO  from  EU  Anti-
Corruption Report completed: 

42 

 
 
- 

maintaining the legal provisions which ensure the decisional independence of DLAF, 

developing  the  Conduct  Code  of  the  personnel  with  control  attributions  in  the  field  of  the  protection  of    EU  financial  interests  and 

- 
Registry for misconducts of officials, civil servants and contractual employees with responsibilities in the protection of EU financial interests, 

- 

strengthening DLAF’s controls in this area.  

Regarding transposition of the new Public Procurement Directives into the national legislation, by decision of Prime Minister was established 
an Interministerial  Committee to  reform legislative and institutional framework for public procurement. The purpose of the Committee is  to 
coordinate the legislative and institutional framework reform in public procurement. 

Finalizing  the  National  Strategy  for  Public  Procurement  along  with  the  European  Commission  is  a  priority.  In  this  regard,  the  Technical 
Working Group established five pillars / directions of action which will be found in the content of the National Strategy: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

Quality of the legislative framework, including an assessment of options to implement the new public procurement directives; 

Global coherence and effectiveness of the institutional system; 

Regularity and quality of public procurement (controls in the field); 

Strengthening the administrative capacity of contracting authorities, focusing on professional issues and integrity; 

Strengthening the capacity of the public procurement system in order to stimulate effective competition (monitoring and statistics). 

To implement the 5 actions a timetable was set for December 2014 to June 2015. 

SI 

Slovenia began with activities at the end of 2014, Ministry of Public Administration contacted other member states and held discussions with 
all ministries and Court of Audit of the Republic of Slovenia, Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Slovenia, Commission for the Prevention 
of Corruption, National Review Commission etc. till the end of January 2015 we were receiving written suggestions about implementation of 

43 

 
 
new directives. At the moment we are preparing first draft of new law, which will implement both Public Procurement Directives 2014/24/EU 
and 2014/25/EU. We intend to bring the final version of new law in to the Governmental procedure till this summer in autumn we plan the 
legislation procedure in the Parliament. We intent to adopt the new law till the end of this year and with vacation legis of 3 months we will 
implement new directives on time.  

Slovenia will along with the implementation of both directives change her review system. In February there will be a meeting with minister of 
justice considering this topic where we will discuss some issues. Regardless of the final decision whether the review system will cover all areas 
of PP (also concessions). 

E- procurement: 

Slovenia started this project 2 years ago and it contains 5 modules. One of them E-auctions is obligatory to use since 1st February this year and 
will lower the costs of PP. The whole system will be fully functional till the end of this year.  

Government Office for Development and European cohesion policy in the role of managing authority for the implementation of cohesion policy 
continues  to  organize  training  and  workshops  in  the  field  of  public  procurement,  as  this  area  was  the  2007-2013  programming  period  is 
recognized  as  one  of  the  areas  that  had  to  a  great  extent  the  impact  on  the  poor  absorption  of  cohesion  funds  (in  2014  we  organized  five 
workshops  entitled  Legal  regulations  on  public  procurement  with  examples  from  practice.  The  aforementioned  workshops  were  attended  by 
160 employees at  the  managing  authority and intermediate bodies. At the end of 2014, we organized a training  Procurement for subscribers 
with presentation of innovations in the field of public procurement. This training was attended by 40 people from the managing authority). Also 
for this reason, analysis of the situation in the field of public procurement in relation to ensuring the effectiveness of the utilization of European 
cohesion funds was prepared. A Task Force on public procurement was appointed, which will be responsible for the identification of the key 
problems  in  public  procurement  procedures  for  projects  financed  by  means  of  European  cohesion  policy.  Based  on  the  above  mentioned 
analysis and on the views of the Task Force, further guidelines for the effective operation of the new programming period will be given. Action 
in this area is also a declaration/announcement of financial status of persons working in the field of public procurement and involved in the 
implementation of public procurement above value € 40,000.  

The  Commission  for  the  prevention  of  Corruption  reports  on  the  measures  implemented  and  activities  planned  for  better  implementation  of 
control and prevention of the formation of circumstances for the corruption. The case concerns a "SUPERVISOR". 

The  supervisor  is  an  online  service  of  the  Commission  for  Prevention  of  Corruption  for  the  general  public,  media,  industry  and  public 

44 

 
 
authorities, which provides insight into the expenditure of public institutions, relating to goods and services. 

Web application of The Commission for the prevention of Corruption named  Supervisor has been upgraded: 

From March 2014 onwards Supervisor contains also information about the purpose of the financial transactions of direct budget users. "From 
The Supervisor it is evident not only how much and to whom has a budget user indicated resources, but also for what purpose was each and 
every financial transaction executed." 

From January 2015, the Supervisor also contains aggregate wages and salaries, the aggregated amounts of pensions and various other amounts. 
Before the update, the Supervisor had a base of approximately 50 million transactions after the update, approximately 120 million. 

In 2015 the Commission for the prevention of Corruption is planning to implement further update applications, with information on transactions 
of a 100-percent state-owned companies. 

SK  On  28  March  2014,  the  new  directives  on  public  procurement  and  concessions  were  published  in  the  Official  Journal  of  the  EU  (Directive 
2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and the Council on public procurement; Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the 
Council on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors; Directive 2014/23/EU of the European 
Parliament and of the Council  on the award of concession contracts).  
The Public Procurement Office has started to work on a new Act to transpose the Directives in question into national legislation immediately 
after their publication in order to benefit from the Directives as quickly and efficiently as possible. In the period from 22 January 2015 to 11 
February 2015, interdepartmental consultation on the draft Act is being held. 
Act No 292/2014 on the contribution received from the European Structural and Investment Funds and amending certain acts entered into force 
on  1  November  2014.  Section  46  of  this  Act  defines  in  detail  the  conflict  of  interests  in  the  field  of  ESI  Funds  and  ways  of  tackling  it. 
Regarding conflicts of interests, the CCB's methodical interpretation on this issue was prepared in cooperation between the relevant authorities 
(CCA — Central Coordination Authority, AFCOS, the Public Procurement Office, Audit Authority, Certifying Authority). 
Other planned measures of an administrative nature in the control of public procurement under ESIF projects for the 2014-2020 programming 
period, which arise under the ESIF management system and which have a direct impact on the efficiency of the fight against corruption include: 
— the introduction of new control mechanisms and rules for their efficient use, which focus on preventive elimination of shortcomings in the 
public procurement phase before implementation and before the contract is signed. These are 'ex-ante controls'. 

45 

 
 
— Structural adjustment of the rules of public procurement control, which foresees an increased involvement of other operators in the field of 
public procurement, in particular the Public Procurement Office and the Antimonopoly Office of the Slovak Republic. 
—  the  introduction  of  instruments  which  make  it  possible  to  identify  the  increased  risk  of  a  particular  contract  audited  and  the  consequent 
follow-up by the inspection body. This mainly concerns the use of risk analysis and taking into account the so-called 'red flag' indicators.  
For 2014, we consider as important a measure by the Supreme Audit Office (SAO), which in 2014 established new procedures, which were 
reflected in the Guidelines for the control of compliance as well as financial control. In view of the above, the SAO SR takes account of the 
results of the risk analysis when selecting the operators to be inspected. This measure is of a horizontal nature and does not concern only public 
procurement. 
In  2014,  the  Slovak  Audit  Authority,  in  line  with  the  rewriting  of  Act  No  25/2006  on  public  procurement  and  with  the  deficiencies  in  the 
EC/ECA  audit  missions,  updated  the  checklist  for  verification  of  public  procurement  rules  and  procedures  in  the  Procedures  for  the 
Government Audit of Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund and the European Fisheries Fund, adding issues such as: 
— the exclusion of tenderers who did not meet the personal status requirements (e.g. in arrears on social insurance);  
— exclusion from participation in procurement procedures on the  basis of a decision of the competent court or of the Slovak Antimonopoly 
Office and the Public Procurement Office;  
— more detailed regulation of the introduction of amendments to the contracts resulting from the tendering procedure; 
— stricter checks on the facts arising from the sworn statements by candidates for public procurement;  
— a stricter verification of compliance with the deadlines set by the Act on public procurement, e.g. in the case of shorter deadlines to request 
the tender documents. 
In  2014,  several  bodies  (Managing  Authorities,  the  Agricultural  Paying  Agency,  Slovak  Tax  Administration)  carried  out  various  sectoral 
measures, or measures directed towards the individual operational programmes, with a view to streamlining public procurement processes, e.g.: 
Extending  the  principle  of  'green  public  procurement'  (GPP)  and  improving  or  extending  the  training  activities  in  the  area  of  public 
procurement, streamlining of control activity, stepping up ad hoc communication with relevant stakeholders (the Antimonopoly Office of the 
Slovak Republic, Public Procurement Office, law enforcement bodies). 

FI   Reform of national legislation on public procurement has started under the Ministry of Employment and the Economy. The reform is based on 
the revision of the public procurement Directives announced in April 2014. The initiative is prepared by two working groups of the Ministry of 

46 

 
 
Employment and the Economy. The government programme for structural change states that the act on public contracts will be reformed on 
basis of the Directives. The new act on public procurement shall be entering into force in spring 2016. 

SE  A committee of inquiry appointed by the Government has submitted a proposal for new legislation on the implementation of the directives on 
public procurement. The proposal has been referred for public consideration. The Ministry of Finance is currently preparing a government bill 
on the proposed new legislation with the intention to presenting it to the Swedish Parliament in the second half of 2015. 

UK 

 Responsibility for transposing the Public Procurement Directives into UK Law rests with Parliament. 

3.1.3. 

Sectoral mesures: expenditure 

In 2013, the main regulatory provisions for the 2014-20 spending programmes were adopted. For the first time, they contain a specific requirement for 
national authorities to set up effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures taking into account the risks identified. 

National  audit  authorities  and  the  Commission  will  monitor  the  correct  implementation  of  such  requirements.  In  addition,  guidelines  on  fraud  risk 
assessments and effective and proportionate ant-fraud measures were prepared together with the national authorities19.  

Member States will need to respect these to ensure that the EU’s financial interests are protected against fraud. 

RECOMMENDATION 3 

The Commission recommends that Member States implement the legal requirements according to the adopted guidelines. 

BE  A specific measure has been enforced and can be qualified as soft law. 

It embeds  a  general initiative with  the  Belgian Privacy Commission  in  order  to  formalize the exchange  of data and information between the 
General  Administrations  of  the  FPS Finances  and  particularly  between  Customs  &Excise  and  the  General  Administration  of  Fight  Against 
Fraud (ISI).  

The specific initiative  has  been taken to  limit the financial  impact of  misuse  of the custom regime 42 by identified  « missing traders ». The 

19 

In 2013 and 2014. 

47 

 
 
 
                                                 
General Administration Fight Against Fraud communicates on regular basis an updated list of such persons (natural or legal persons). Customs 
has also limited the impact of the misuse of this regime by imposing severe checks and financial warranties. 

ESF VLAANDEREN: 

ESF  and  AMIF  Vlaanderen  will  use  the  'ARACHNE'  IT  tool  being  provided  by  the  EC.  An  anti-fraud  policy  procedure  is  currently  being 
studied with an eye to achieving uniformity between ESIF funds in Flanders. 

FEDER WALLONIE (ERDF WALLONIA): 

In 2014, the Structural Funds in Wallonia were subject to the following measures: 

- public procurement ex ante conditionality implemented and approved by the Commission; 

- scheduling in 2015 of an information/training session for the administrations/beneficiaries concerned; 

- testing of the 'ARACHNE' (risk analysis) IT tool  

BG 

In connection with a letter received in April 2014 from the Directorate for Protection of the Financial Interests of the European Union (Anti-
Fraud Coordination Service, AFCOS) at the MVR and the documents annexed thereto, which Member States and the Commission are to use as 
administrative  instruments,  manuals  or  methodologies  to  improve  anti-fraud  measures,  including  the  practical  guide  Identifying  conflicts  of 
interest  in  public  procurement  procedures  for  structural  actions  received  from  The  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  (OLAF),  the  Ministry  of 
Finance, in a letter sent to the Heads of the Managing Authorities of all operational programmes, issued the following recommendations: 

equirement be introduced for the staff of the Managing Authorities/Intermediate Bodies involved in the preparation, implementation 
and management of operational programmes and of EU-funded project management units/teams to sign declarations of absence of conflict of 
interest within the meaning of Article 57(2) of Regulation (EU, Euratom)  No 966/2012. A model declaration has been sent to the Managing 

48 

 
 
 
 
Authorities setting out the minimum requirements for the information to be disclosed in the declarations in line with OLAF’s Practical Guide 
for managers. It has been recommended that signing declarations of absence of conflict of interest required by all staff members be included in 
the procedure manuals for the programming period 2014–2020 and that declarations be signed by all staff of all MA/IB and EU-funded project 
management  units/teams  involved  in  the  preparation,  implementation  and  management  of  operational  programmes  during  the  programming 
period 2007–2013; 

that checks to detect common and frequently encountered corruption schemes be included in the checklists used by the Managing Authorities 
for the programming periods 2007–2013 and 2014–2020 by incorporating appropriate indicators (red flags) with a view to ensuring compliance 
with the recommendations set out in the Information Note COCOF 09/0003/00 BG on fraud indicators for ERDF, ESF and CF. This will ensure 
the  possibility  of  verifying  objectively  the  presence  of  indicators  of  fraud  and  conflict  of  interest  in  the  checks  performed  by  Managing 
Authorities. 

In  June  2014,  the  checklists  used  by  the  Certifying  Authority  (CA)  to  verify  the  legality  and  regularity  of  the  award  of  public  procurement 
contracts by beneficiaries under OPs were modified by incorporating appropriate fraud indicators (red flags). 

The  Commission  guidelines  and  annexes  thereto,  including  the  risk  assessment  instrument,  are  an  integral  element  of  the  management  and 
control systems of the Managing Authorities of all operational programmes implemented in Bulgaria. In addition, a written procedure for the 
detection and reporting of irregularities has been adopted in accordance with the requirements laid down in Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. The 
chapter  on  irregularities  in  the  manuals  on  the  implementation  and  management  of  operational  programmes  sets  out  detailed  rules  and 
procedures  for  the  detection,  reporting  and  follow-up  on  irregularities/fraud  and  the  internal  procedures  for  preventing  and  combating 
irregularities and fraud in the performance of contracts for grant assistance cofinanced by the respective operational programme. 

The procedures for the administration and management of irregularities are fully in line with the requirements of applicable  Community and 
national law, notably the Regulation laying down the procedures for the administration of irregularities with implications for funds, instruments 
and  programmes  cofinanced  by  the  EU,  adopted  by  Decree  No  285  of  the  Council  of  Ministers  of  30  November  2009  (published  in  State 
Gazette (SG) No 97 of 8 December 2009; amended in SG No 6 of 20 January 2012). The procedures include detailed rules for cooperation and 
interaction between the Managing Authority of the respective operational programme with the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF), the MVR 
Anti-Fraud  Coordination  Service  (AFCOS)  and  the  managing  authorities  of  the  operational  programmes  in  the  administration  of  reported 
irregularities and fraud and their mandatory reporting. In line with the Regulation the Managing Authorities keep registers of notified cases of 
fraud  and  other  irregularities  under  the  operational  programmes  and  of  detected  irregularities.  Information  about  alleged  and  identified 
irregularities is updated in the ‘Suspected Irregularities’ and ‘Irregularities’ modules of the EU Funds Management and Monitoring Information 

49 

 
 
System (MMIS) on a regular basis. Excerpts from registers are sent to the MVR Anti-Fraud Coordination Service on a quarterly basis, along 
with information about recently notified irregularities and any changes in registered irregularities. In line with the internal rules of procedure of 
Managing Authorities all detected irregularities, including suspected fraud, are entered into the Irregularities module of the MMIS, regardless of 
their financial implications. 

The Managing Authorities submit quarterly reports on irregularities to the European Commission via the New Irregularity Management System 
online  platform.  The  Managing  Authorities  report  all  registered  irregularities  and  cases  of  suspected  fraud  to  the  Commission.  All  cases  of 
detected and registered irregularities in which fraud is suspected have been notified to the Bulgarian Prosecutor’s Office for further investigation 
on the grounds of competence. 

In line with the applicable internal rules of procedure, upon the signature of grant agreements and public procurement contracts all beneficiaries 
and  selected  contractors  sign  statements  confirming  that  they  are  familiar  with  the  various  definitions  of  irregularity  and  fraud.  The  model 
statements are annexed to the manual. Prior to the signature  of grant agreements and authorising the final payment for the works carried out 
under concluded grant agreements, the Managing Authorities conduct verification checks with the aim of preventing the double  financing of 
activities, services and supplies. 

In accordance with Commission Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1302/2008 on the central exclusion database (CED), and in view of Article 108 
of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable 
to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the 
general  budget  of the European Communities,  the  Managing Authorities,  prior  to  concluding  grant  agreements with  applicants  and tenderers 
under  all  priority  axes  of  the  respective  operational  programme  and  making  payments,  conduct  checks  in  the  Central  Exclusion  Database 
referred to in Commission Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1302/2008 through authorised officials of the AFCOS Directorate. The outcome of 
conducted checks is documented in dedicated checklists. 

In line with the currently applicable Guidelines for determining financial corrections to be made by the Commission to expenditure financed by 
the  Union  under  shared  management,  for  non-compliance  with  the  rules  on  public  procurement  approved  by  Commission  Decision  of  19 
December 2013 and the updated Methodology for determining the financial corrections for infringements in the award of public  procurement 
contracts for the implementation of projects cofinanced from the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund, the European Rural Development Fund, 
the  European  Fisheries  Fund  and  the  Framework  Programme  on  solidarity  and  the  management  of  migration  flows,  adopted  by  Decree  No 
134/2010 of the Council of Ministers, the manuals and management and control systems of the Managing Authorities have been updated and 

50 

 
 
contain a description of the functions and rules for the new programming period 2014–2020. 

In  2014,  an  agreement  on  the  delegation  of  functions  relating  to  the  implementation  of  the  Operational  Programme  on  Development  of  the 
Fisheries  Sector  for  the  period  2007–2013  was  concluded  between  the  Fisheries  and  Aquacultures  Executive  Agency  (IARA)  and  the  State 
Fund  Agriculture  Paying  Agency  (DFZ  RA)  in  the  capacity  of  Intermediate  Body  of  the  Operational  Programme  on  Rural  Development 
(OPRSR).  The  goal  of  the  agreement  is  to  address  deficiencies  in  the  administration  of  irregularities.  In  connection  with  this,  point  9 
Administration  and  reporting  of  irregularities  of  Section  A  General  provisions  of  the  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the  European  Fisheries  Fund 
Directorate  (version  5)  was  supplemented  and  now  includes  preventive  measures  and  action  to  be  taken  in  cases  of  alleged  or  actual 
irregularities and suspected fraud. The system for the prevention and detection of conflicts of interest covers the full range of actions relating to 
the processing of project documentation, including ex ante controls and ongoing control and monitoring. The sequence of the steps ensures full 
traceability  of  the  process  of  registering  and  reporting  irregularities,  including  the  collection  and  recovery  of  funds.  The  actions  taken  are 
coordinated  with  and  rely  on  the  exchange  of  information  between  the  Managing  Authority  and  the  Intermediate  Body.  The  Managing 
Authority  has  made  arrangements  for  the  investigation  of  alleged  irregularities  by  gathering  available  information,  conducting  documentary 
checks and, where necessary, on-the-spot checks, conducting analyses and compiling summaries of the facts of each case prior to reporting the 
alert  and  adopting  a  decision  of  whether  or  not  an  irregularity  has  occurred.  The  MA  and  IB  take  joint  action  to  register  and  collect 
unrecoverable  debt  or,  where  fraud  is  suspected,  the  respective  case  file  is  forwarded  to  the  competent  authorities.  Where  other  competent 
bodies are notified of irregularities within the remit of competence of the European Fisheries Fund Directorate, the Managing Authority assists 
the bodies concerned by providing all necessary information that is available to it. The Managing Authority keeps a register of received alerts in 
respect  of  irregularities  and  fraud  with  implications  for  the  European  Fisheries  Fund  and  a  register  of  irregularities  under  the  EFF.  Excerpts 
from the registers are submitted to the AFCOS on a quarterly basis, along with a report drawn up jointly by the MA and IB. The Managing 
Authority  reports  the  irregularities  subject  to  a  requirement  for  notification  to  OLAF  on  a  quarterly  basis  via  the  Irregularity  Management 
System. 

CZ  No information provided  

DK  Danish  Business  Authority:  The  managing  authority  for  the  Structural  Funds  has  put  in  place  an  anti-fraud  action  plan  in  compliance  with 

Article 125(4)(c) of Regulation No 1303/2013, and is now beginning to implement the elements of the plan. 

DE  Needless to say, the legal requirements stemming from the legislative package have been met. Germany wishes to reiterate that guidelines are 

51 

 
 
only binding on the Commission and in no way legally binding on the MS. 

EE  Regarding  the  2014-2020  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  (ESIF)  Estonia  has  adopted  fraud  risk  assessment  tools  outlined  in  the 
Commission guidelines and launched risk assessment in 2014. As a result of the assessment, risky measures that require additional analysis or 
control measures will be identified, Intermediate Bodies’ procedure rules will be updated, if necessary, and needed actions will be conducted. 
Fraud awareness is being raised in by conducting regular practical seminars, case studies and regular exchange of information with the police 
and AFCOS. In addition, starting from 2014 the police are analysing projects and related expenditure financed from structural assistance, and 
will bring out fraud risks identified. 

IE 

Sectoral measures: revenue 

VAT anti-fraud measures introduced in Finance Act 2014 

1. Revenue power requiring the issue of a document (Section 108B of VAT Consolidation Act 2010) 

Revenue Commissioners may require a trader, for a specified period (no more than 2 months), to issue a VAT invoice-like document in respect 
of  all  supplies  for  which  a  VAT  invoice  is  not  issued.  The  measure  will  act  as  a  deterrent  to  traders  who  disregard  invoicing  obligations  in 
respect of supplies to trade customers thereby facilitating shadow economy activity and suppression of sales by those customers. This measure 
can  be  used  in  a  targeted  manner  to  improve  compliance  in  certain sectors  without imposing  any  significant  additional burden  on  compliant 
trade 

2. Joint and several liability (Section 108C of VAT Consolidation Act 2010) 

This new anti-fraud mechanism will allow the Revenue Commissioners to hold a person jointly and severally liable for VAT that has not been 
remitted  to  them  by  another,  where  that  person  knowingly  or  recklessly  participates  in  transactions  connected  to  the  fraudulent  evasion  of 
VAT.   It  applies  to  taxable  supplies  of  goods  or  services  and  also  to  intra-Community  acquisitions  of  goods.   A  person  who  is  jointly  and 
severally liable will be liable for the net amount of VAT due.   

Regarding Cigarette Smuggling, 

Adoption of the ‘Protocol to eliminate the illicit trade in tobacco products appended to the World Health Organisation’s (WHO’s) Framework 
Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC)’ – Following Government approval, Ireland’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations signed 
the Protocol to Eliminate Illicit Trade in Tobacco Products, adopted by the Parties to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control 

52 

 
 
(WHO  FCTC),  in  New  York  on  20  December  2013.  The  new  international  treaty  is  aimed  at  combating  illegal  trade  in  tobacco  products 
through  control  of  the  supply  chain  and  international  cooperation.  As  a  key  measure,  Parties  commit  to  establishing  a  global  tracking  and 
tracing system to reduce and eventually eradicate illicit trade. 

Sectoral measures: expenditure 

The  Irish  Authorities  are  aware  of  the  Guidance  on  Fraud  Risk  Assessment  and  Effective  and  Proportionate  Anti-Fraud  Measures,  which 
provides assistance and recommendations to Managing Authorities. 

Effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures, taking into account the risks identified, are being put in place by the Managing Authorities of 
the  relevant  ESI  funded  operational  programmes  for  2014-2020  in  accordance  with  Article  125  (4)  (c)  and  Annex  XIII  of  the  Common 
Provision Regulation.  

EL  AUTHORITY - Ministry of Economy, Infrastructure, Shipping and Tourism 

The new General Regulation for the 2014-2020 Programming Period explicitly raises the issue of prevention and fight against fraud, in Articles 
72 and 125 thereof. At the same time, the Support Programme for Greece includes a specific objective (Objective No 10) for the creation and 
implementation of a National Anti-Fraud Strategy within the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund. 

In  this  context,  in  2014,  the  General  Secretariat  for  Public  Investments-NSRF  has  developed  and  submitted  to  the  European  Commission, 
through  the  Special  Institutional  Support  Authority,  a  National  Anti-Fraud  Strategy  for  Structural  Actions  (sectoral).  This  Strategy  sets  the 
framework and objectives for preventing fraud and includes a multi-annual Action Plan. The Action Plan resulted from the cooperation between 
the General Secretariat for Public Investments-NSRF and the competent authorities (Financial Audit Committee, Financial and Economic Crime 
Unit,  National  Anti-Corruption  Coordinator,  General  Inspector  of  Public  Administration),  with  the  assistance  of  the  Τask  Force  for  Greece 
(TFGR) and OLAF. Both the Strategy and the Action Plan were welcomed by OLAF.  

The National Strategy and the Action Plan are based on a prevention and continuous improvement system, which:  

- 

is consistent with the Commission's guidelines for Member States to adopt a proactive, structured and targeted approach in managing 
fraud risks (guidance note 0021/ June 2014), which can act in support of the regulatory framework; 

53 

 
 
 
-  permits the use of the related IT tools proposed by the Commission (such as the Fraud Risk Assessment Tool); 

- 

sets the framework for a coherent set of procedures, responsibilities and actions to prevent and combat fraud, which is able to govern all 
the functions of the Management and Control System (MCS) for the 2014-2020 Programming Period, to be implemented by Managing 
Authorities. 

At  present,  the  General  Secretariat  for  Public  Investments-NSRF  and  all  relevant  authorities  are  implementing  the  actions  included  in  the 
Strategy  and  the  Plan,  in  line  with  the  envisaged  timetable.  The  General  Secretariat  for  Public  Investments-NSRF  and  its  Departments  have 
implemented the following actions in 2014: 

-  The official anti-fraud Policy Statement in Structural Actions of the General Secretariat for Public Investments-NSRF, along with the 
relevant  electronic  brochure  have  been  drawn  up  and  posted  on  the  web  page  of  the  NSRF  and  on  the  web  pages  of  the  Operational 
Programmes  (OPs),  in  order  to  raise  awareness  among  staff-members  involved  in  Structural  Actions  and  the  general  public.  The 
guides/instructions of OLAF and the EU have also been posted. 

-  Actions included in the Action Plan, such as the obligation to submit an assets statement and a declaration of no conflict of interest, have 

been incorporated in the recently adopted and published Law on the NSRF 2014-2020 (Law 4314/2014).  

-  Article 52 of Law 4314/2014 on the NSRF 2014-2020 provides for the establishment of a team in all Managing Authorities, with the 
purpose of assessing fraud risks on the basis of the assessment tool proposed by the European Commission in its relevant guidance note, 
as  well  as  making  recommendations  with  regard  to  corrective  measures  and  reporting  results  to  an  Internal  Cooperation  Network, 
coordinated by the Special Institutional Support Authority (SISA). 

-  A  pilot  implementation  of  the  fraud  risk  assessment  tool  was  carried  out  under  the  OP  ‘Competitiveness  and  Entrepreneurship  2007-

2013’. 

-  The updating of IT tools used for structural actions is currently underway. 

AUTHORITY  -  Ministry  of  Finance  –  General  Accounting  Office  of  the  State  –  Fiscal  Control  Committee  (FCC)-  Directorate:  52-
Planning and Evaluation of Audits 

Regarding the Commission’s remark on the implementation of legal requirements by Member States, in accordance with the adopted guidelines, 
the Financial Audit Committee, acting as Audit Authority of the OPs under Objectives 1, 2 and 3 of the NSRF, as well as of the OP Fisheries 

54 

 
 
2007-2013, has made the following observations:  

According to the Commission’s Working Document, this recommendation relates to the implementation of Article 125(4)(c), which stipulates 
that ‘the managing authority puts in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures, taking into account any risks identified’, inviting 
Member States to outline any anti-fraud measures taken in 2014, ideally embedded in national anti-fraud strategies.  

It should be reminded that, in the context of the reply of the Greek Authorities to the Follow-up Recommendations to the Commission report on 
the  protection  of  the  EU’s  financial  interests  -  fight  against  fraud  (OLAF),  2012,  the  Ministry  of  Development  and  Competitiveness  and,  in 
particular, the Special Institutional Support Authority of the NSRF Secretariat-General, acting as coordinating body of the managing authorities, 
in view of a similar recommendation by the Commission, mentioned the creation of a ‘National Anti-Fraud Strategy within the Structural Funds 
and the Cohesion Fund’, making specific reference to the basic strategic objectives thereof.  

The aforementioned National Strategy, which has been forwarded to the Commission’s Services, sets out, inter alia, the actions to be taken by 
the Financial Audit Committee, as Audit Authority under Article 62 of the General Regulation for the Programmes of the NSRF 2007-2013 and 
Article 123(4) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 for the Programmes of the NSRF 2014-2020.  

In particular:  

(A) in the context of the objective ‘Promoting and establishing ethical rules against fraud’, the members of the Financial Audit Committee 
(including  Experts),  the  members  of  audit  teams  (auditors,  experts)  and  the  employees  of  the  Directorates  acting  in  support  of  the  Financial 
Audit Committee, are required to fill-in Declarations of Conflict of Interest, by which they must state that they do not participate in activities 
related to the preparation, organisation, management or implementation of programmes co-financed by the EU and that, if they have any future 
direct or indirect implication in such activities, they will immediately make the relevant declaration to the Financial Audit Committee (EDEL). 
These Declarations are archived at the Secretariat of the Financial Audit Committee.  

(B) in the context of the objective ‘Effective cooperation among the competent National Authorities’, the Financial Audit Committee, acting 
as  competent  authority  for  sending  the  final  notifications  on  cases  of  irregularities/fraud  to  OLAF,  is  required  to  re-determine  the 
services/bodies  responsible  for  notifying  cases  of  irregularities/fraud  to  the  Financial  Audit  Committee,  in  order  to  extend  the  access  of 
stakeholders to the IMS and, possibly, re-examine their roles. Note that this process is currently underway.  

(C)  in  the  context  of  the  objective  ‘Effective  cooperation  with  relevant  external  bodies’,  the  Financial  Audit  Committee,  as  already 
mentioned  in  the  replies  of  our  Department  to  the  Follow-up  Recommendations  of  previous  years,  has  concluded  a  Memorandum  of 

55 

 
 
Cooperation since August 2012 with the Inspectors/Controllers Body for Public Administration (SEEDD), which sets out the rules governing 
the  cooperation  between  the  two  audit  authorities,  based  on  information  exchange  and  the  two-way  notification  of  their  audit  results. 
Furthermore, since April 2014, the Financial Audit Committee has included the Single Public Procurement Independent Authority among the 
recipients of final audit reports in relation to public procurement issues.  

(D) in the context of the objective ‘Enhancement of Transparency’, the Financial Audit Committee posts all updated versions of the Audit 
Strategy on its web site, in order to provide information on the design of audits on actions and systems to be carried out, so that every interested 
person may obtain information on the projects and bodies to be audited. Furthermore, in the context of transparency enhancement, a Register of 
Budgetary Auditors and Auditors of the Financial Audit Committee has been set up, whereas the creation of a Register of Experts is currently 
underway.  

(E)  in  the  context  of  the  objective  ‘Customisation  and/or  introduction  of  Instruments  and  Processes  in  the  Management  and  Control 
System  for  PP  2014-2020’,  the  creation  of  a  Register  of  Budgetary  Auditors  and  Auditors  of  the  Financial  Audit  Committee,  as  well  as  a 
Register  of  Experts,  are  some  of  the  actions  for  achieving  this  objective.  Complementary  actions  to  this  direction  include  the  training  of 
members of the aforementioned Registers, which will be carried out by the National Centre for Public Administration and Local Government 
(EKDDA). 

F) in the context of the objective ‘Response to Fraud’, as already incorporated in the national Anti-Fraud Strategy as also stipulated in Article 
15 of Law 4314/2014 for the new 2014-2020 Programming Period, the Special Institutional Support Authority of the NSRF Secretariat-General 
is responsible, inter alia, for ‘Establishing the strategy for preventing and countering fraud in Structural Actions and ensuring the creation and 
operation of an effective mechanism for handling complaints’. However, the actions taken by the National Anti-corruption Coordinator in the 
context  of  the  competences  assigned  thereto  as  AFCOS,  i.e.  anti-fraud  coordination  service,  will  be  crucial  for  complaint  handling  by  all 
authorities. 

AUTHORITY  -  Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production,  Environment  and  Energy  (Former  Ministry  of  Rural  Development  and 
Food) - Directorate of Legislative Initiative and Infringement Management 

The  competent  directorate  of  the  ministry  has  observed  that,  as  noted  by  the  Payment  and  Control  Agency  for  Guidance  and  Guarantee 
Community Aid (OPEKEPE), Article 125 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013, on which this recommendation is based, refers to the duties of 
Managing Authorities only in relation to the EU Funds ERFD, ESF, CF and EMFF. The EAFRD is included in the provisions of Article 72 of 
the  same  Regulation,  which  sets  out  the  general  principles  for  all  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  but  is  not  included  in  the 

56 

 
 
requirement under Article 125, regarding the obligation of Member States to design an anti-fraud system. With regard to this Fund, the relevant 
obligation arises from the aforementioned Article 58 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013. 

AUTHORITY - Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE) 

With  regard  to  the  Audit  Strategies  of  EU  Member  States,  the  Financial  and  Economic  Crime  Unit  (SDOE)  has  contributed,  among  other 
Departments of the Greek State, to the creation of the sectoral Greek Anti-Fraud Strategy for EU Structural Funds and Investment Capital. The 
implementation  of  the  annual  audit  actions  of  the  Financial  and  Economic  Crime  Unit  (SDOE)  takes  into  account  national  priorities  in 
accordance with the Recommendations of the Commission for Combating Fraud and protecting national and EU financial interests. It involves 
dynamic factors/parameters, allowing for implementation in a rapidly changing environment. In view of the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 
517/1997 and according to the standards of International Mutual Administrative Assistance, the Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE) 
submitted a recommendation to the OLAF for the creation of an appropriate legal framework for EU Structural Funds and, at the same time, it 
supported the initiative of the Italian Presidency regarding the extension of the proposal in question to the European Fisheries Fund and to the 
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development. 

ES 

FR 

The approval process for the operational programmes is ongoing and, as a result, effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures are still being 
put in place.  

In terms of measures that will be applied, please refer to the details given in the previous section. 

For the 2014-2020 programming period, the management of structural funds in France will largely fall within the remit of the Regional 
Councils. These regional authorities already have institutional experience in this area as they received global grants under the 2007-2013 
programme. Furthermore, the overwhelming majority of central government staff in charge of management and inspection for the 2007-2013 
programme will be transferred to the Regional Councils, thereby ensuring that their skills are retained. The role of certifying authority will 
remain within the remit of the Directorate-General of Public Finances (Direction Générale des Finances Publiques - DGFiP). As the 
independent auditing authority for the designation procedure, the CICC has impressed upon the future Managing Authorities (MAs) and 
Certifying Authorities (CAs) the need to set out a fraud prevention programme. The CICC translated and circulated to the MAs and CAs the 
checklist contained in Annex 3 of the guidance note on designation, and this has now become a reference tool for all interested parties. 
Furthermore, on 3 March 2014 the CICC issued a revised version of the public procurement checklist that had been presented at the Operations 
Controllers Seminar in January 2014. The aim of this revised version was to incorporate the changes introduced by Commission Decision 

57 

 
 
C(2013) 9527 of 19 December 2013 on financial corrections in public procurement procedures. 
The CICC has launched a number of initiatives to ensure widespread distribution of the guidance note relating to the evaluation of fraud risk 
and effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures. Together with the Office of the Commissioner General for Territorial Equality 
(Commissariat Général à l’Egalité des Territoires - CGET), the CICC has also regularly featured these issues on the agenda of the monthly 
training seminars for Europe correspondents. Furthermore, during the training seminars, the Commission gave two presentations to MA 
representatives on the ARACHNE fraud risk assessment tool. 
Finally, the CGET has set up an anti-fraud working group, of which the CICC is a member, bringing together representatives of the future 
regional MAs and CAs to identify best practices and draw up common standards. 
Fraud prevention and detection was one of the major themes of the annual training seminar for operations controllers that was held on 5 and 6 
February 2015; the CICC invited OLAF representatives to run a session on the role of audit authorities in preventing and detecting fraud. 

HR  During 2014, the Republic of Croatia launched a number of preparatory activities for the implementation of the legal requirements according to 

the adopted guidelines. 

The legal framework for the implementation of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), Cohesion Fund (CF) and European Social 
Fund (ESF) in the programming period 2014-2020 was established by the following legal acts: 

  Act on the Establishment of Institutional Framework for the Implementation of European Structural and Investment Funds in 

the Republic of Croatia in the Financial Period 2014-2020 (Official Gazette, No. 92/2014) – in force since 5 August 2014. 

  Decree  on  the  Bodies  of  the  Management  and  Control  Systems  of  the  European  Social  Fund,  the  European  Regional 
Development  Fund  and  the  Cohesion  Fund,  regarding  Investment  for  Growth  and  Jobs  Goal  (Official  Gazette,  No.  107/2014, 
hereinafter: the Decree) – in force since 13 September 2014. 

Provisions of Article 3 (3) (3) of the Decree relate to the irregularity management and anti-fraud activities, stipulating that the coordinating role 
for  these  issues  is  assigned  to  the  Ministry  of  Finance.  Furthermore,  Article  5  (3)  (46)  provides  that  the  Managing  Authority  carries  out 
activities of prevention, detection and correction of irregularities, and taking into account the risks identified, corrective measures and recoveries 
of unduly paid amounts with interest, and put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures. 

As  the  Croatian  institutional  framework  envisages  two  levels  of  Intermediate  Bodies,  by  the  relevant  provision  of  the  Decree  they  are  also 

58 

 
 
obliged to carry out anti-fraud measures and detect and correct irregularities.  

In order to raise the awareness and enhance the capacities of the management and control systems’ bodies for the management of irregularities 
and fight against fraud, a seminar on anti-fraud and anti-corruption measures in ESI Funds was organized by the European Commission (DG 
REGIO  and  OLAF)  in  May  2014.  The  seminar  was  attended  by  approximately  80  participants  employed  in  the  Managing  Authorities, 
Certifying Authority, Audit Authority, Intermediate Bodies and other relevant institutions.  

The  Commission  also  supported  the  Republic  of  Croatia  in  strengthening  its  anti-fraud  capacities  by  providing  a  risk  management  tool 
ARACHNE. Three Managing Authorities for the programmes managed in the programming period 2007-2013 (Transport, Human Resources 
Development, Regional Competitiveness OPs) introduced ARACHNE during 2014 and used it in a test phase. The introductory presentations of 
ARACHNE  were  organized  by  the  Commission  in  May  2014,  during  the  anti-fraud  seminar  and  as  a  separate  event.  Also,  the  Commission 
organized training for ARACHNE users in the Managing Authorities in October 2014 in Zagreb. 

Further  strengthening  of  administrative  capacities  for  implementation  of  anti-fraud  measures  was  ensured  by  the  Government  Decision  on 
employment  in  the  central  state  administration  bodies,  offices  of  Croatian  Government,  legal  entities  vested  with  public  authorities  and 
foundations  involved  in  the  management  and  control  systems  for  the  use  of  the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  in  Croatia  was 
adopted in November 2014. 

The Decision enables employment in management and control systems’ bodies, in order to strengthen their capacities for implementation of ESI 
funds.  Capacities  of  the  Managing  Authorities were  enhanced  during 2014  by,  inter  alia,  participation  of  their  staff  in  a  number  of  trainings 
related  to  public  procurement.  A  large  portion  of  irregularities  and  fraud  relates  to  public  procurement,  therefore  Managing  Authorities  and 
Intermediate  Bodies  level  2,  which  in  the  Croatian  institutional  set-up  for  ESI  funds  perform  ex-ante  and  ex-post  verifications  of  public 
procurement, ensured that a sufficient  number of staff obtained certificates in  public procurement. Furthermore,  during the year 2014, in  the 
process  of  fulfilling  the  ex-ante  conditionalities  for  the  implementation  of  the  2014-2020  Operational  Programmes,  the  Republic  of  Croatia 
prepared the action plans in which it is envisaged to: i) develop training plans for the fields of public procurement and state aid by June 2015, 
and ii) set-up a network of coordinators for the fields of public procurement and state aid by February 2015. These measures, aimed at staff 
working  in  the  management  and  control  systems’  bodies,  are  envisaged  to  support  the  Member  State’s  efforts  for  reducing  the  risk  of 
irregularities and fraud. 

In  December  2014  the  Ministry  of  Regional  Development  and  EU  Funds  received  for  comments  a  Draft  strategy  for  combating  corruption, 
which in the paragraph 5.2.2. Economy, for achieving objective “Enhancing transparency and efficiency of anti-corruption mechanisms in the 

59 

 
 
field  of  economy”  envisages  the  measure  “Strengthening control  and  coordination in  tendering  and  contracting  procedures related to  the  EU 
financial resources”. Upon adoption by the Croatian Parliament, this national strategy shall provide a framework and streamline a development 
of  a  more  specific,  but  a  complementary  Anti-fraud  strategy  for  ESI  funds,  which  is  envisaged  to  be  prepared  in  the  first  half  of  2015. 
Furthermore, Anti-fraud risk analyses and procedures are envisaged to be defined in the Common National Rules and internal manuals for the 
financial perspective 2014-2020 in the first or second quarter of 2015. 

IT 

the Commission's technical fora (Committee on the Coordination of the Fight Against Fraud and associated working parties), where it 

In  recent  years  action  to  combat  fraud  in  Italy  has  been  stepped  up,  thanks  above  all  to  the  activity  of  the  National  Anti-Fraud  Committee 
(COLAF), the Italian AFCOS, which is based at the Prime Minister's Office, Department for European Policies, and is responsible for:  
pro-active participation in: 
1. 
the  relevant  European  legislative  fora,  primarily  the  Council's  Working  Party  on  Combating  Fraud,  at  which  it  made  a  decisive 
• 
contribution  to  the  new  OLAF  Regulation  (EU)  No  883/2013,  which  contains  many  provisions  proposed  by  Italy  (establishment  of  national 
AFCOS,  the  possibility  of  promoting  joint  operational  actions  based  on  the  best  EU  investigation  practices,  etc.).  In  particular,  during  the 
Presidency, a discussion was launched on the advisability of a Regulation on mutual administrative assistance for a crucial, and (paradoxically) 
‘exposed’ sector, namely that of the Structural Funds; 
• 
presented and proposed Italian best practices for combating fraud; 
developing  many  partnerships  with  other  Member  States  interested  in  studying  Italian  anti-fraud  know-how.  In  particular,  during  the 
2. 
Presidency, it organised a dedicated anti-fraud conference in Rome in October, attended by representatives of all the Member States and of the 
main European institutions involved in combating fraud); 
3. 
• 
• 
• 
management tools. 

effectively and efficiently coordinating all the national authorities for the purposes of : 
enhancing monitoring of EU financing and the recovery of amounts unduly paid; 
publishing all the beneficiaries of EU funds on a single website (‘transparency initiative’); 
preventing  illegal  activities  by analysing  and  disseminating  information  on  the  main  fraud  scenarios, as  well  as  studying  new  IT  risk 

60 

 
 
 
CY  Agricultural  sector:  The  legal  requirements  according  to  the  adopted  guidelines  are  implemented  at  the  Cyprus  Agricultural  Payments 
Organisation  (CAPO).  Specifically,  the  audit  procedures  and  the  audit  questionnaires  used  at  CAPO  are  revised  to  accommodate  additional 
controls/procedures based on the audit findings of previous years’. 
Structural Funds Sector: The Managing Authority will incorporate anti-fraud measures in its verifications guidelines, within the framework of 
the anti-fraud strategy.   

LV   AFCOS has taken the initiative in formulating a National Anti-Fraud strategy, aimed at reinforcing the protection of EU’s financial interests. 

On  AFCOS  Council’s  meeting  at  the  end  of  2014  it  was  decided  to  extend  the  national  Guidelines  for  the  Prevention  and  Combating  of 
Corruption  2014-2020  (elaborated  by  the  Corruption  Prevention  and  Combating  Bureau  in  close  cooperation  with  national  competent 
authorities)  and  to  set  targets  for  the  prevention  and  combating  fraud  and  corruption  in  the  implementation  and  use  of  EU  funds  and  other 
foreign financial assistance instruments, thus providing a unified complex approach to the prevention of corruption in the country. It is planned 
to adopt the guidelines as soon as possible. 
In this regard each managing authority (MA) shall draw up its action plan of effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures taking into account 
the substantial risks identified. 
The  MA  for  EU  Structural  Funds  and  Cohesion  Fund  has  designed  the  management  and  control  system  for  the  2014-2020  planning  period 
providing  preventive  measures  to  detect  red  flags,  including  fraud  risks  and  risk  of  conflict  of  interest  in  all  levels  of  EU  funds  project 
implementation. For example, necessity of adequate separation of planning and implementing functions is set out in the management law of EU 
structural and Cohesion fund for the 2014-2020 programming period. 
Regarding  to  the  decision  of  the  AFCOS  Council  mentioned  the  MA  for  EU  Structural  Funds  and  Cohesion  Fund  has  prepared  a  fraud  risk 
assessment  guide  and  on  November,  2014  has  sent  to  intermediate  bodies  to  fill  in  the  self-assessment  tool.  It  is  based  on  the  Commission 
guidance  note  0021  –June  2014.  At  this  moment  results  of  self-assessment  are  evaluated  by  the  MA  in  order  to  put  in  place  effective  and 
proportionate anti-fraud measures for 2014-2020. 
Rural  Support  Service  (Paying  Agency  EAFRD/EFF/EMFF)  has  carried  out  restructuring,  establishing  an  Internal  Control  Division,  directly 
subordinated to the Director. The task of this Division will be to reveal possible fraud risk factors. Currently, the procedures and methodology 
are  being  improved  in  order  to  determine  risk  factors  at  the  level  of  measures,  projects  and  clients.  The  IT  system  is  being  improved  to 
practically implement the aforementioned. 

61 

 
 
LT 

As  regards  the  Latvia–Lithuania  Cross  Border  Cooperation  Programme  (hereinafter-  the  LV-LT  Programme)  under  European  Territorial 
Cooperation Objective, similar to LV-LT Programme 2007–2013, also for the new LV-LT Programme 2014-2020 and in the Fund for European 
Aid  to  the  Most  Deprived  (hereinafter  –  FEAD)  the  risks,  including  those  of  fraud,  will  be  monitored  in  the  process  of  Programme  risk 
management. In the new programming period 2014-2020 the MA as part of the Management and Control Systems will put in place effective 
and proportionate anti-fraud measures taking into account the risks identified as stipulated respectively in the paragraph 4c of Article 125 of the 
Common Provisions Regulation (CPR -cohesion policy) No 1303/2013 and the paragraph 32.4.c of Regulation (EU) No 223/2014, and taking 
into  consideration  guidance  note  0021  –June  2014  and  the  specifics  of  the  LV-LT  Programme  and  FEAD.  The  Management  and  Control 
Systems will be established during 2015. 

In  the  light  of  Article  125(4)(c)  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1303/2013,  provisions  have  been  inserted  into  national  legislation  appointing  the 
administrative  authorities  for  2014-2020  EU  Structural  Funds  and  defining  their  responsibilities  and  functions.  Moreover,  the  managing 
authority and the intermediate body that performs the functions vested in it under the responsibility of the managing authority are required to 
establish and apply anti-fraud measures as stipulated by Article 125(4)(c) of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013. The legislation also provides that 
the  managing  authority,  in  accordance  with  Regulation  (EU)  No  1303/2013  and  taking  account  of  the  recommendations  issued  by  the 
Commission  on  fraud  risk  assessment  and  effective  and  proportionate  anti-fraud  measures,  and  acting  in  cooperation  with  the  intermediate 
bodies and the Financial Crime Investigation Service (FCIS) under the Ministry of the Interior, must carry out an annual assessment of the risk 
of  fraud,  taking  account  of  the  risks  of  fraud  identified  during  the  assessment  and  establish  anti-fraud  measures  and  coordinate  their 
implementation.  It  is  also  laid  down  that  the  managing  authority  and  intermediate  body  are  responsible,  within  their  respective  areas  of 
competence, for the planning and implementation of anti-fraud measures. 
Anti-corruption and anti-fraud measures and activities relating to the use of EU funds are also to be applied under the Lithuanian National Anti-
Corruption Programme for 2015-2025, the draft of which was submitted to the Parliament (Seimas) of the Republic of Lithuania by Lithuanian 
Government Resolution No 1370 of 8 December 2014 on the submission to the Seimas of the draft Seimas Resolution approving the Lithuanian 
National Anti-Corruption Programme for 2015-2025. It is planned that responsibility for the implementation of the said measures will lie with 
the  Ministry  of  Finance,  the  Ministry  of  Agriculture,  the  Ministry  of  Social  Security  and  Labour,  the  Ministry  of  the  Interior,  the  Special 
Investigation Service, the FCIS and the Prosecutor General’s Office, each acting within their own areas of competence, i.e. the authorities that 
are responsible within their respective areas of competence for the implementation of the relevant EU funds and programmes in Lithuania, and 
the authorities that have the powers and experience in preventing, investigating and detecting fraud and corruption. 

62 

 
 
LU  Any anti-fraud measures, ideally embedded in national anti-fraud strategies, either general or sectoral, adopted in 2014. 

HU 

In the programming period of 2014 to 2020, the Prime Minister’s Office, as the Ministry led by the Minister responsible for the use of European 
Union funds, places special emphasis on the fight against intentional abuses, such as fraud and corruption, in the area of the protection of the 
financial  interests  of  the  European  Union  and  Hungary,  in  cooperation  with  the  stakeholders  of  the  institutional  system  for  support  policy 
concerned. To this end, Hungary: 

expressed its commitment to the prevention, detection and efficient management of fraud and corruption in the Partnership Agreement 

1. 
concluded with the Commission, furthermore, it declared that it had zero tolerance towards intentional abuses during the use of EU funds. 

it  expressed  its  commitment  to  follow  the  recommendations  of  the  Commission  made  for  Member  States  for  anti-fraud  and  anti-

2. 
corruption measures, for which it agreed to perform the obligations listed below: 

devising  implementation  rules,  uniform  procedures  and  methodologies  for  introducing  and  taking  anti-fraud  and  anti-corruption 

○ 
measures in the period of 2014 to 2020; 

devising an Anti-fraud Strategy with respect to the European Structural and Investment Funds applicable to the programming period of 

○ 
2014 to 2020; 

○ 

performing fraud risk analyses and fraud risk management for the period of 2014 to 2020; 

o 

introducing  the  ARACHNE  electronic  risk  analysis  system  developed  by  the  Commission  to  efficiently  identify  high  risks  and  risky 
projects and beneficiaries; 

o  maintaining  and  improving  efficient  and  successful  cooperation  between  the  institutional  stakeholders  concerned  with  respect  to  the 

prevention, detection, sanctioning and deterrence of fraud and corruption; 

o  organising mandatory trainings for beneficiaries and staff working in the area of development policy in order to increase anti-fraud and 

anti-corruption awareness; 

o  facilitating the integrity of the institutional system and strengthening its personal and organisational integrity. 

3. 

In the programming period of 2014 to 2020, it agreed to carry out the following in order to prevent corruption, to take anti-corruption 

63 

 
 
action and to increase the efficiency of integrity: 

o  devising and efficiently operating an integrity management system; 

o  establishing  efficient  cooperation  between  the  stakeholders  of  the  institutional  system  ensuring  the  use  of  aid  provided  by  certain 

European Union funds and the investigating authorities, 

o  assessing the corruption and integrity risks relating to the operation of the institutional system for aid management, devising an action 

plan for their management and preparing an integrity report on its implementation; 

o  devising general procedures for receiving and investigating reports on abuses, irregularities and integrity and corruption risks relating to 
the operation of the Prime Minister’s Office and the institutional  system for aid  management;  developing an internal whistle-blowing 
system and establishing a regulatory background for the protection of whistle-blowers; 

o  organising trainings on the subjects of integrity, occupational ethics and anti-corruption activities. 

Measures taken in 2014: 

I. 

Legal framework: 

In  the  programming  period  of  2014  to  2020,  Government  Decree  No 272 of  5 November 2014  on  procedures  for  using  aid  from  certain 
European Union funds (‘Government Decree No 272 of 5 November 2014’) established the regulatory background required for the introduction 
and application of anti-fraud measures, specifying the tasks of the stakeholders of the individual institutions for aid policy, as follows: 

The head of the management authority is responsible for the implementation of the anti-fraud policy specified by the Minister responsible for 
the use of European Union funds, thus it participates in the prevention, identification and reporting of fraud, the enforcement of the repayment 
and sanctioning of amounts paid without authorisation and possible default interest. As part of this, it: 

  proceeds in accordance with the procedures and methodologies specified by the Ministry led by the Minister responsible for the use 

of European Union funds within the framework of the anti-fraud policy; 

  cooperates  in  devising  methodologies  for  fraud  risk  analysis,  carries  out  fraud  risk  assessments  according  to  the  methodology 
specified by the Minister responsible for the use of European Union funds, and uses the IT system developed for supporting fraud 
risk analyses; 

64 

 
 
  simultaneously with filing criminal reports and criminal notices relating to European Union aid, informs the Minister responsible for 

the use of European Union funds and the audit authority; 

  participates in anti-fraud and anti-corruption trainings organised by the Minister responsible for the use of European Union funds. 

In addition to the foregoing, in order to prevent corruption, pursuant to the new provision of Government Decree No 272 of 5 November 2014, 
an anti-corruption clause  is added in the case of all contractual relations involving aid, according to which the contracting partner may not 
carry out or permit an act or may not authorise any third party to perform an act that results in the infringement of legislation applicable to the 
virtue of public life and anti-corruption legislation. The contracting partner may not accept and may not offer or give presents or cash or non-
cash benefits to any proceeding third-party. 

II. 

Capacity development of organisations: 

Identification  of  those  responsible:  The  fight  against  fraud  has  to  be  implemented  at  all  levels  of  the  institutional  system  for  aid  policy, 
therefore, pursuant to Government Decree No 272 of 5 November 2014, the Ministry led by the Minister responsible for the use of European 
Union  funds  and  the  Prime  Minister’s  Office  act  as  coordination  organisations  in  order  to  introduce  anti-fraud  measures  and  to  devise  their 
applicability, furthermore, on their initiative, staff with special expertise have been appointed at the organisations of the institutional system for 
aid policy, who are engaged in anti-fraud activities and who are responsible for liaising with the coordination organisation. 

IT system: In 2014, the Prime Minister’s Office indicated its intent to introduce the ARACHNE electronic risk assessment system developed 
by the Commission, on which consultations have already been started with the competent Directorate–General. 

Fraud risk analysis: In 2014, a fraud risk analysis was started in respect of the European Structural and Investment Funds for the programming 
period of 2014 to 2020, as part of which a self-assessment fraud risk analysis working group was set up. 

MT 

In accordance with the principle of having ‘the right tone from the top’ the top management of the Managing Authority is committed to zero 
tolerance to fraud.  

During  2014,  the  Managing  Authority  embarked  on  the  preparatory  phase  of  adopting  ARACHNE,  a  risk-based  analytical  tool.  Project 
ARACHNE on an EU level, aims at establishing a comprehensive and complete database of projects implemented under the Structural Funds in 

65 

 
 
 
Europe and to enrich the data with publicly available information in order to identify, based on a set of risk indicators the most risky projects.  

The Managing Authority circulated the two practical working documents issued by OLAF in 2013. These are ‘Identifying conflicts of interest in 
public procurement procedures for structural actions’ and ‘Detection of forged documents in the field of structural actions’. In addition, in the 
Managing  Authority’s  reply  to  the  Commission  to  the  pre-interruption  letter  dated  1  April  2014,  the  principles  contained  within  the  same 
document were kept in mind.  

The Managing Authority updates its verification checklists on a regular basis especially when it encounters cases where improvements can be 
attained in the implementation process of projects; this is also done to continue to prevent possible irregularities. Furthermore, the Manual of 
Procedures prepared by the Managing Authority, now includes a specific section on Fraud, both preventive and detection actions. 

To  conclude,  during  training  organized  by  the  Managing  Authority  for  internal  staff  and  relevant  stakeholders,  reference  is  made  to  lessons 
learnt from previous verifications and audits to mitigate against similar shortcomings in the future. Such training is repeated on an annual basis 
to all officers. 

NL  The Netherlands supports the recommendation and is already taking the relevant action. The guidelines are incorporated and processed in the 
descriptions  produced  in  accordance  with  Article  72  of  Regulation  1303/2013.  There  is  also  an  anti-fraud  policy  for  the  ESF  aimed  at 
preventing the misuse or improper use of ESF subsidies. A comparison with your 'adopted guidelines' will be conducted later this year. This will 
also help prepare the designation audit in which the audit authority investigates whether the anti-fraud policy meets EU requirements. 

AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL 

In  order  to  meet  the  requirements  of  Article  125(4)(c)  of  Regulation  No  1303/2013,  in  2014  the  managing  authorities  (MA)  took  note  of 
Commission  guidelines  entitled  Fraud  risk  assessment...  On  the  basis  of  this  document  the  MA  analysed  the  mechanisms  to  prevent  the 
occurrence of fraud in its operational programme (OP). As a result, during consultation on the  Minister for Infrastructure and Development's 
guidelines on monitoring implementation of operational programmes for 2014-2020, an outline of the document was drawn up describing the 
means for combating fraud which will be appropriately specified for each operational programme (OP). The document will cover: 

a) 

detection of fraud by the OP implementing institutions; 

66 

 
 
b) 

c) 

d) 

e) 

the anti-corruption procedures used in these institutions that guarantee the transparency of their activities; 

description of the rules for handling information on possible fraud, obtained from external sources; 

description of the mechanisms implemented in the OP to prevent corruption in public procurement; 

description of the information measures for preventing fraud and corruption at all levels of implementation of the OP. 

On the basis of the results of audits obtained from individual managing authorities, which were carried out by  the Commission and the ECA 
under the 2007-2013 financial perspective, once the data had been anonymised, the Commission and ECA audit database was created and sent 
to  the  managing  authorities,  the  certifying  authority,  representatives  of  the  auditing  authority  and  the  Supreme  Audit  Office  (SAO).  This 
database  is  a  source  of  knowledge  that  can  help  in  determining  the  risk  of  fraud  and  irregularities  in  cohesion  policy.  This  database  will  be 
updated cyclically. 

In the context of the Common Agricultural Policy, the Commission's recommendation could refer to Art. 58(1)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) 
No 1306/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council, according to which Member States are, inter alia, obliged to adopt all legislative, 
regulatory  and  administrative  provisions  within  the  framework  of  the  CAP,  and  to  take  any  other  measures  necessary  to  ensure  effective 
protection of EU financial interests. Preventing fraud was, and still is, taken into account at every level of work in drawing up, implementing 
and executing rural development programmes, including creating appropriate national legislation.  

These  provisions  particularly  apply  to  ways  of  monitoring  actions  to  prevent  fraud  and  irregularities  and  to  detect  and  eliminate  them,  and 
outline the rules for eliminating or minimising risk of financial damage. Account is taken of the results of audits and controls, both in-house and 
from  external  institutions  (e.g.  ECA,  the  Commission,  the  SAO),  and  information  obtained  from  other  sources  that  could  identify  new, 
previously unknown areas of risk. 

PT  Decree-Law No 137/2014 of 12 September 2014 establishes the governance model for the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF), 
including the ERDF, ESF, CF, EARDF, EMFF and the respective operational and rural development programmes for the 2014-20 programming 
period. It also establishes the organisational structure for performing the tasks of support, monitoring, management, supervision and assessment, 
certification, audit and control under the terms of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013 of 17 December 2013. The Decree Law stipulates that the 
Inspectorate-General of Finance (IGF) is the sole audit authority for the programmes cofinanced by the ESIF. 

Consequently, in  2014, as  part  of the preparation of the  methodological framework for the programming period  2014-20, the audit authority 

67 

 
 
(IGF)  contributed  to  the  guidelines  for  formulating  the  Anti-Fraud  Strategy  in  the  context  of  the  cohesion  policy  funds.  The  objective  is  to 
ensure that the managing authority appointed for each operational programme is capable of putting in place effective and proportionate anti-
fraud measures, taking into account the risks identified, in accordance with Article 125(4)(c) of Regulation No 1303/2013. 

RO  All  Managing  Authorities  are  aware  of  the  provisions  of  Article  125  of  the    Common  Provisions  Regulation  (CPR  -cohesion  policy)  No 
1303/2013 and of the Guidance Note on Fraud Risk Assessment and Effective and Proportionate Anti-Fraud Measures - Programming period 
2014-2020 and they are in different phases of achieving/execution of fraud risk assessment. 

Plans  for  anti-fraud  measures  will  be  adopted  in  the  Managing  Authorities  after  their  accreditation  by  COM  to  manage  future  Operational 
Programs. All Managing Authorities are using ARACHNE tool.  

AFCOS coordinates and assists them in implementing anti-fraud measures. 

AFCOS has made its own assessment of the current situation of anti-fraud system and started developing the Antifraud Strategy in accordance 
with OLAF Guidelines (Guidelines for national anti-fraud strategies for European Structural Funds and Investment (ESIF)). 

Regarding other sectoral anti-fraud measures, adopted in 2014, we can mention: 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Anti-Fraud communication actions with beneficiaries and other stakeholders,  

trainings, workshops etc., 

strengthening internal procedures, 

checking fraud indicators, according to the COCOF Guide on financial corrections for public procurement, 

organizing missions to verify the capacity to implement delegated functions, 

implementing measures to facilitate whistleblowing, 

prudent management of payment applications with fraud indicators  

focus on conflict of interests, 

sample based controls. 

68 

 
 
SI 

SK 

Government Office  for Development  and European  cohesion policy in the role of the  managing authority is involved in the preparation of a 
national strategy to combat fraud. All activities in this regard will be held this year, i.e. in 2015. The Managing Authority for this purpose also 
appointed its representative within CoCoLaf  FP ESIF working group meeting on the "National Anti-Fraud Strategy and Practice - preparatory 
phase". Discussions on the strategy are supposed to be held on the level of Member State during 2015. 

In view of the obligation laid down in Article 125(4)(c) of the CCB General Regulation, the CCB has drawn up Methodological Guideline No 3 
on procedure for appointing the MA and CA. One of the essential components is also the incorporation of measures to combat fraud within the 
settings of management and control systems. Annex 4 to this CCB Methodological Guideline is the Commission guidance note on 'fraud risk 
assessment  and  effective  and  proportionate  anti-fraud  measures'.  This  document  is  a  guide  to  the  MA  for  the  development  of  effective 
mechanisms for combating fraud at the level of the relevant stakeholders. In addition, well-planned use must be made of ARACHNE in this 
regard, which will increase the effectiveness of mechanisms to combat fraud. 

This recommendation is also affected by measures set out in response to Commission recommendations No 2 and No 7. Measures were also 
adopted in 2014 to combat fraud within the framework of each operational programme. They include the measure of the Ministry of Labour, 
Social Affairs and the Family of the Slovak Republic as the Managing Authority for the Employment and Social Inclusion OP. This measure 
gradually introduces electronic time sheets for the beneficiaries to prevent fraud in reporting work under projects co-financed by the ESF. 

FI  Work toward implementation of national anti-fraud action plans meeting the requirements of the 2014–2020 spending programmes has begun. 
Anti-fraud  measures  are  to  be  taken  into  action  during  the  year  2015.  The  Managing  Authority  of  Finland’s  structural  funds  programme  is 
developing  a  risk  assessment  strategy,  which  includes  a  fraud  risk  assessment  component.  It  is  based  when  applicable  on  the  Commission’s 
Guidance  Note  on  fraud  risk  assessment  for  the  programming  period  2014–2020  and  national  legislation  and  guidance  concerning  risk 
management  and  anti-fraud.  According  to  risk  analysis  based  on  experience  from  the  previous  programme  periods  the  risk  of  fraud  is  not  a 
significant risk in the structural fund programs in Finland. Thus the effective and reasonable measures of fighting fraud are implemented as a 
part of the national risk management proceedings.  

As a part of the preparation of the description of the management and control system required by the implementing regulation the governing 
body ensures that the intermediate bodies fullfill the designation requirements that also covers the required prcocedure for the risk management 
and  anti-fraud  procedure.    The  description  of  the  management  and  control  system  reguired  from  the  intermediate  bodies  includes  also  the 

69 

 
 
 
questions  about  the  risk  management  and  anti-fraud  that  are  prepared  by  taking  the  advantage  of  the  following  Comission  guidelines: 
Designation Procedure – Guidance EGESIF 14-0013,    ja Guidance on a common methodology for the assessment of management and control 
systems in the Member States; EGESIF    14-0010 chek lists.  

The  managing  authority  has  delivered  anti-fraud  guidelines  published  by  OLAF  to  the  intermediat  bodies  (e.g.  OLAF  Practical  Guide  on 
Conflict of Interest.pdf, OLAF_Practical Guide on forged_Documents.pdf, Compendium of Anonymised Cases. Structural Actions (2011) 

When developing the IT-systems for the program period 2014-2020 the requirements for the risk management and anti-fraud procedure have 
been taken to further consideration than before. 

State authorities are obliged to report any abuse of funds under its management (Act on the National Audit Office (676/2000). Also citizens can 
report  suspected  frauds  related  to  public  financial  management  to  the  National  Audit  Office.  Sate  officers’  are  working  under  penal 
responsibility and thus intentional and gross negligence acts against public funds are criminalized. 

Anti-fraud knowledge sharing and cooperation between state authorities will be developed together with the national anti-fraud action plans to 
establish good practices and develop effective and proportionate measures detect, report and prosecute suspected frauds.  

Finland joined the IACA (International Anti-Corruption Academy) in 26 August 2014. The IACA will strengthen cooperation and knowledge 
sharing on a field of corruption research. 

SE 

The  Swedish  Council  for  the  protection  of  the  European  Union’s  financial  interests,  also  known  as  the  SEFI  Council,  is  responsible  for 
coordinating measures in Sweden to combat fraud and other improper use of EU-related funds. The SEFI Council consists of: 

The Swedish Economic Crime Authority  

The National Financial Management Authority  

The Swedish Board of Agriculture  

The Västerbotten County Administrative Board.  

The Migration Board  

The Swedish Police Authority 

70 

 
 
The Swedish ESF Council 

The Swedish Agency for Economic and Regional Growth  

Swedish Customs  

The Swedish Economic Crime Authority is responsible for the Council’s secretariat functions.  

Through the SEFI Council, chaired by the Swedish Economic Crime Authority, three meetings have taken place during 2014. 

On 16 October 2014, the SEFI Council arranged a “SEFI Council Day” with seminars open to all the authorities managing EU-funds. The aim 
of the seminar was to increase the knowledge about anti-fraud rules among the agencies and how to work with reporting crimes to prosecutors. 
For  more  details  about  the  seminar,  please  follow  the  link:  http://www.ekobrottsmyndigheten.se/vart-arbete/samverkan/SEFI-radet/sefi-
radsdagen-2014/ 

In May 2013, the SEFI Council set up an ad hoc working group for exchanging experiences on measures to prevent, discover and control fraud 
and other improper use of EU-related funds. The work of the group resulted in a guidance document on handling suspicious fraud in connection 
with  management  of  EU  funds.    The  guidance  document  was  adopted  by  the  SEFI  Council  in  October  2014  and  has  been  distributed  to  all 
agencies concerned. The guidance document is used to guide the administrators in how to detect frauds and errors and in which case they are 
supposed to report a crime to the Swedish Economic Crime Authority. 

In September 2014 the Swedish Board of Agriculture hosted a seminar held by the Anti fraud Expert Mr Peter Baader from DG Agris.   

UK  European  Structural  and  Investment  Fund  authorities  are  developing  their  implementation  procedures  following  adoption  of  most  of  the  UK 

programmes. 

3.1.4.  What lies ahead 

Three main legislative proposals have been submitted to the co-legislators in previous years and are awaiting approval: 

(1) 

a directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law; 

71 

 
 
 
 
(2) 

a regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s Office; 

(3) 

the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual administrative assistance in the customs area. 

The adoption of these proposals would complement and strengthen the legal framework shaped in 2009-13. It would strengthen the fight against fraud 
and would ensure stronger coordination with and between Member States. 

RECOMMENDATION 4 

The Commission invites the co-legislators to swiftly complete the legislative work started and to adopt the pending proposals. 

BE 

FPS JUSTICE: 

Belgium is closely monitoring negotiations on the proposal for a directive on the fight against fraud to the EU's financial interests by means of 
criminal law and the proposal for a regulation to set up a European Public Prosecutor's Office. A working party has been set up to coordinate the 
Belgian position on the two legislative proposals; it comprises representatives from the various authorities concerned. In its role as Belgium's 
designated  AFCOS,  the  Inter-ministerial  Economic  Committee  (IEC)  receives  regular  briefings  on  the  state  of  play  with  regard  to  these 
legislative proposals. 

BG  Bulgaria concurs with the need for Community-wide joint action to combat fraud and other illegal activities with implications for the financial 

interests of European Union. 
Bulgaria has voiced its support for the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the fight against fraud to the 
Union's financial interests by means of criminal law and for the Commission proposal for a Regulation on the establishment of the European 
Public Prosecutor's Office. 
Bulgaria provided comprehensive information in this regard a year ago in the context of the actions to be taken to address Recommendation 2 of 
the Commission relating to the 2012 Anti-Fraud Report. 
Bulgaria was an active participant in the debates and supported the amendment of Council Regulation (EC) No 515/97 of 13 March 1997 on 

72 

 
 
 
 
 
CZ 

DK 

mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure 
the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters. 

Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office: one of the legislative proposals being drafted is the regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s 
Office. As the central body protecting the EU’s financial interests in terms of criminal law, the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office has been 
actively  cooperating  with  the  Czech  Ministry  of  Justice  on  assessing  the  proposed  Regulation.    In  the  course  of  2014  the  Supreme  Public 
Prosecutor’s  Office  produced  a  number  of  opinions  on  the  proposal  and  also  presented  observations  on  behalf  of  the  Czech  Republic  at 
discussions on the final version of the Regulation. As part of its work the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office has also assessed the impact of 
the proposed Regulation on the existing national legal arrangements, identifying potential problems in setting up the Office. 

 Directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law: 
The proposed directive on the fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law was originally put in place on the 
basis of Article 325 of the Treaty chapter on combatting fraud, which is not part of the Danish opt-out. The Council and the Parliament agree, 
however, that the correct legal basis of the proposal is Article 83(2) of the Treaty, in the chapter on legal cooperation on criminal matters. 
This means that the proposed directive will fall under the Danish opt-out and that Denmark will not be taking part in its adoption. Similarly, a 
directive will not be binding upon, or applicable in, Denmark. 
Regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor's Office: 
The proposed regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor's Office has been put in place on the basis of Article 86 TFEU. The proposal 
will therefore fall under the Danish opt-out and Denmark will not be taking part in its adoption. Similarly, a regulation will not be binding upon, 
or applicable in, Denmark. 
Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual administrative assistance in the customs area: 
Denmark has not yet initiated any preparations at national level concerning the proposed amendment to Regulation 515/97. 

DE  The Federal Government is closely monitoring the negotiations on the proposals in Brussels. In doing so, it takes into account, inter alia, the 

need and scope for subsequent implementation into national law and enforcement of the legal instruments. 

Germany  supports  the  Latvian  Presidency's  aim  of  bringing  the  proposal  for  a  Directive  on  protecting  the  EU's  financial  interests  to  a  swift 
conclusion.  In  order  to  ensure  better  protection  of  the  EU's  financial  interests,  the  Federal  Government  adopted  a  bill  on  21  January  2015 

73 

 
 
(Gesetz zur Bekämpfung der Korruption) which specifically provides for a broadening of criminal liability for corruption by and in respect of 
EU officials. 

The  Federal  Government  has  welcomed  the  proposal  for  a  Directive  submitted  by  the  Commission  on  establishing  the  European  Public 
Prosecutor's Office and is actively and constructively involved in the negotiations at the Council. It assumes that the Member States will need to 
take further legislative action in due course. Parallel to the negotiations in Brussels, the Federal Government, in coordination with the judicial 
authorities in Germany's federal states, is therefore also examining the possible impact on national law and whether any further rules may be 
required in German legislation. 

EE 

The  Estonian  Tax  and  Customs  Board  was  involved  in  the  process  of  updating    regulation  EC  No  515/97  on  mutual  assistance  between  the 
administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the 
law in customs and agricultural matters. 
Estonian implementing entities and ministries, even partners, are involved in the preparation and amendment of the 2014-2020 programming 
period legislative and practical framework. The experience from the previous periods is being used. We harmonize legal acts, work processes, 
concepts, rules etc. 

IE  With regard to a directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law and a regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutors Office, 

IE has no preparatory actions to report. 

With  regard  to  the  amendment  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  515/97  on  mutual  administrative  assistance  in  the  customs  area,  Ireland  supports 
continuation of the work on regulation 515/97 and its completion during 2016 if possible. 

EL  AUTHORITY - Ministry of Finance - General Directorate of Customs and Excise Duties; Directorate: 33 Customs Audit 

The competent directorate of the customs administration has made the following observations: 

Regarding the third legislative proposal, namely the amendment to Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual assistance between the administrative 
authorities within the customs zone, Greece participated in a pilot container traffic monitoring project (Contraffic Project) as of December 2014, 
under Regulation (EC) No 515/97 (Container Status Messages). At present we are awaiting the final version of the Regulation. 

AUTHORITY - Ministry of Justice, Transparency and Human Rights - Directorate for Legislative Work, International Relations and 

74 

 
 
International Judicial Cooperation 

The competent directorate of the Ministry of Justice, Transparency and Human rights observed that the recommendation in question does not 
concern  the  Member  States  but  is  an  invitation  to  co-legislators  (Council  and  European  Parliament)  to  immediately  complete  the  legislative 
work that has already started and to adopt pending proposals. 

ES 

No information provided 

FR 

The French authorities intend to continue to support the three legislative proposals mentioned in the recommendation [a directive on the fight 
against fraud by means of criminal law, a regulation to set up a European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the amendment of Regulation (EC) No 
515/97 on mutual administrative assistance in the customs area] with a view to the swift adoption of these proposals. 
They would, however, like to emphasise that, were the European Public Prosecutor to handle cases relating to the most commonly committed 
offences, this could have a negative impact on procedures for identifying and reviewing customs infringement cases affecting the Union's 
financial interests. Therefore, they recommend that the text be amended to better limit the scope of the European Public Prosecutor's powers to 
the most serious and significant cases, as this will allow Member States to retain their ability to deal rapidly with cases that, although not of 
major importance in their criminal dimensions, are nonetheless important from an economic point of view. 
Indeed, customs infringement cases most often result in the detention of goods; this can be very detrimental if goods are not released quickly 
enough. The bargaining capacity of customs authorities should therefore be maintained in cases that, although formally criminal cases, need to 
be handled quickly and only very occasionally justify common law criminal proceedings. 
As regards the amendment to Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual administrative assistance in the customs area, the French authorities 
worked to achieve a compromise text with a view to protecting the ambitious objectives it contains, namely:  
- the admissibility as evidence of documents obtained through international mutual administrative assistance (IMAA); 
- the creation of a Containers Status Messages (CSM) register; 
- the creation of an Import/Export/Transit register.  
Furthermore, the French authorities supported, and obtained, an amendment to the text whereby, as a minimum requirement, export data for 
products subject to excise duty will be included in both registers; this provision includes a review clause whereby, two years after the text has 

75 

 
 
 
entered into force, it will be possible to include all export data in both registers and to extend the CSM database to include air and road freight 
carriers’ data. 
Implementing the Regulation on mutual administrative assistance in customs and agricultural matters and transferring data from customs 
databases to the European Commission's databases (OLAF) will necessitate changes to declarations made to the French Data Protection 
Authority (Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés - CNIL), to the relevant data processing regulations along with IT and 
organisational changes. The wording of the draft text obliging economic operators to transfer data to the customs authorities in order to build up 
the CSM database will, if necessary, form the basis of a transposition measure at national level. 

HR  As regards the Directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law and Regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s Office, 
it has to be stressed that representatives of the Ministry of Justice of the Republic of Croatia participate in activities of the Working group for 
drafting  Proposals  of  the  Directive  on  the  fight  against  fraud  by  means  of  criminal  law  and  Regulation  to  set  up  the  European  Public 
Prosecutor’s Office. Furthermore, in coordination with other relevant bodies, representatives of the Ministry of Justice create official positions 
regarding the documents concerned which are presented at the meetings of the Working Group for the Criminal Law (E 15).  

Moreover, the Criminal Code of the Republic of Croatia (Official Gazette 125/11, 144/12) is aligned with the European legislation through the 
introduction of Article 258 paragraph 5 of the Criminal Code.   

Namely,  the  Criminal  Code  (OJ  125/11,  144/12)  defines  the  criminal  offence  of  SUBSIDY  FRAUD  in  Article  258  and  sets  sanctions. 
Therefore, Article 258 lays down:  

(1)  Whoever,  with  the  aim  that  he/she  or  another  person  receive  a  state  subsidy,  provides  a  state  subsidy  provider  with  false  or  incomplete 
information concerning the facts on which the decision on the granting of a state subsidy depends, or fails to inform a state subsidy provider of 
changes important for making the decision on the granting of a state subsidy shall be punished by imprisonment from six months to five years.  

(2) The same punishment as referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article shall be inflicted on whoever uses the granted state subsidy funds in a 
manner contrary to their intended use.  

(3) If, in the case referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article, the perpetrator acts with the aim of receiving a significant amount of state subsidies 
or  if,  in  the  case  referred  to  in  paragraph  2  of  this  Article,  he/she  uses  a  significant  amount  of  state  subsidies,  shall  be  punished  by 
imprisonment from one to ten years.  

(4) Whoever in cases referred to in paragraph 1 of this Article voluntarily prevents making of the decision on the granting of a state subsidy, 

76 

 
 
may have his/her punishment remitted. 

(5) State subsidies within the meaning of this Article shall be equated with subsidies and aid granted from European Union funds. 

As regards the amendment of the Regulation (EC) No 515/97, Croatian Customs Administration was actively involved thru its representatives 
within Customs Union Group (CUG) in the drafting of new Regulation  of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation 
(EC) No 515/97 of 13 March 1997 on mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and cooperation between 
the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters.   

It is strongly believed that new legislative act will bring more possibilities for stronger fraud prevention and detection of irregularities while 
having strong effect on revenue. 

IT 

The European Commission presented the proposal for amendments to Regulation (EC) No 515/97 at the meeting of the Council's Working Party 
on Customs Union of 16 December 2013, which I attended.  
At this time, the Agency provided the Italian Parliament, via the Assessment Unit, with relevant information on the proposal, in accordance with 
Article 6(4) of Law No 234 of 24 December 2012. 
During  the  first  half  of  2014,  the  Greek  Presidency  dedicated  many  meetings  to  discussion  of  this  proposal.  However,  it  failed  to  obtain  a 
sufficient consensus on the compromise text, principally because of strong opposition from Germany, the UK and the Netherlands. The main 
objections concerned the additional costs that would be involved in creating the new computerised registers, the lack of adequate protection of 
sensitive commercial data and the additional reporting requirements for economic operators.  
At the time the Italian delegation essentially supported the Commission's proposal, since it approved of its objectives.  
The proposal for amendments to Regulation (EC) No 515/1997 thus became part of the legislative programme for the Italian Presidency of the 
EU Council starting on 1 July 2014.  
One  of  the  tasks  of  the  Italian  Presidency  was  therefore  to  draft  a  compromise  text  that  could  achieve  a  broader  consensus  among  the 
delegations  to  the  Council  Working  Party.  During  its  Presidency  (1  July  to  31  December  2014),  Italy  worked  intensively  on  this  new  text; 
following  the  final  discussion  of  the  proposed  provisions  at  the  Working  Party's  meeting  of  18  July  2014,  and  thanks  to  OLAF's  technical 
assistance,  it  was  possible  to  release  the  final  text  to  the  Working  Party  on  Customs  Union  and  to  request  a  mandate  from  COREPER  for 

77 

 
 
 
discussion with the Parliament and the Commission (trilogue).  
On 24 September 2014, Sandro Gozi, under-secretary for European policies and affairs at the Presidency, reported to the European Parliament, 
IMCO Committee, about the customs aspects of the text and the positive achievement regarding the amendments to Regulation (EC) No 515/97. 
After  that,  following  technical  meetings,  trilogues  were  held  between  the  Presidency,  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Commission  on  26 
November and 1 December 2014. On 19 December 2014, COREPER 1 confirmed political agreement on the negotiating package in the form 
resulting from the third and last trilogue of 18 December, with only Austria and Germany voting against the package (Spain abstained and the 
UK entered a parliamentary reservation).  
The approval by COREPER was a significant achievement for the Italian Presidency, given that the agreement on amendments resulted from an 
awareness of the importance of the measures to combat infringements of customs law in order to protect the financial interests of the European 
Union, which involves developing customs cooperation to combat such infringements.  
The result was also achieved in a relatively short time, given the complexity of the legislative file.  
The new Regulation will now proceed through the legislative process, with adoption after a quick  second reading. 
In  the  light  of  the  foregoing,  Italy  confirms  its  commitment  to  working  for  rapid  adoption  and  application  of  the  Regulation  amending 
Regulation (EC) No 515/1997. 

CY  No actions have as yet taken place, given that the proposals are still awaiting approval. 

LV   Latvia fully understands the need to swiftly complete the legislative work on the three main legislative proposals that will  form the basis for 
strong  and  efficient  protection  of  the  financial  interests  of  the  European  Union.  At  the  same  time  we  also  understand  that  these  are  very 
important issues and they ask for very serious deliberations in the Council and that takes time. 
The Cabinet of Ministers of Republic of Latvia adopted national position to support Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council 
amending Regulation (EC) No 515/97 of 13 March 1997 on mutual assistance between the administrative authorities of the Member States and 
cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of the law on customs and agricultural matters. 
The work on adoption of Regulations and the directive will start when the final text is agreed. 

LT 

(1) Intensive work is in progress in the Council working bodies concerning a proposal for a European Parliament and Council Directive on the 
fight against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law. The Commission submitted this proposal on 12 July 2012, and 

78 

 
 
the Council adopted a general approach on its text on 6 June 2013.  The European Parliament voted on the amendments to this text on 16 April 
2014,  allowing  trilogue  negotiations  to  be  launched  from  the  autumn  of  2014  (two  trilogue  meetings  have  already  taken  place).  During 
preparations for these meetings, meetings of Council working groups took place, the issues of most concern were discussed by the Council's 
CATS Committee, and the written procedure was also used. A third trilogue meeting with the EP was scheduled for February 2015. 
(2) The European Commission proposal for a Council Regulation on the establishment of the European Prosecutor’s Office was adopted on 17 
July 2013, and intensive negotiations have been taking place within the Council preparatory bodies (at expert and political level) since then. 
This is a priority initiative for each Presidency, but in view of the complexity of the proposal, its scope and the special legislative procedure 
being applied, time is needed for the Member States to reconcile their positions and complete negotiations on this proposal.  Moreover, during 
negotiations the Member States must take into account the views expressed by national parliaments on the compliance of the proposal with the 
principle of subsidiarity.  Four days of Council working party meetings on this proposal were planned for February 2015. 
(3) Trilogue negotiations were completed in December 2014 concerning the proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the 
Council amending Council Regulation (EC) No 515/97 of 13 March 1997 on mutual assistance between the  administrative authorities of the 
Member States and cooperation between the latter and the Commission to ensure the correct application of Community customs and agricultural 
legislation,  after  a  compromise  text  of  the  Regulation  had  been  discussed  and  agreed  upon.  Following  the  adoption  of  the  Regulation,  it  is 
planned to draw up the required plan for the implementation of measures and introduce amendments into national legislation. 
It should be noted that Representatives of the Republic of Lithuania also actively participated in discussions concerning the above-mentioned 
legal acts within the Council working bodies. 

LU  Any preparatory actions taken in 2014 in respect of these proposals. 

HU 

  The Prosecutor General’s Office regularly plays the role of reviewing and commenting on various draft directives and draft decrees at 
the request of the Ministry of Justice. The establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office may bring significant changes also 
for the Hungarian public prosecution organisation. The discussion of the relevant draft decree is underway, during which the Prosecutor 
General’s Office maintains a regular working relationship with the Ministry of Justice. The Prosecutor General’s Office made a proposal 
to the Ministry of Justice for supporting the development of a network-type EPPO concept. 

  Taking  into  account  the  fact  that  neither  the  Directive  on  the  fight  against  fraud  carried  out  with  means  of  criminal  law  nor  the 
Regulation  aimed  at  the  establishment  of  the  European  Prosecutor’s  Office  have  been  adopted,  no  preparatory  work  relating  to 
transposition is underway yet at the Ministry of Justice. 

79 

 
 
  Taking action against the infringement of customs legislation forms an integral part of the protection of the EU’s financial interests and 
the  development  of  customs  cooperation.  The  amendment  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  515/97  would  significantly  improve  the  detection, 
investigation and prevention of customs fraud by increasing the exchange of information and the available evidence and would improve 
the operation of the established system, thereby increasing the efficiency and success of the measures. 

  The  need  for  legislation  in  Member  States  is  to  be  examined  depending  on  the  new  EU regulation.  Taking  into  account  the  fact  that 
Regulation (EC) No 515/97 currently in force is also directly applicable, it did not require national legislation, and its application in the 
national legal system did not cause any difficulty. 

MT 

NL 

(1) Re: Directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law: the General Approach is the preferred approach. Meanwhile, the European 
Parliament has conducted a series of negotiations. Another trilogue is going to take place whereby the Presidency is of the understanding that 
the European Parliament wishes to move towards a global agreement on the text of the proposed directive.  

(2) Re: Regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s Office: discussions and negotiations are being carried out between Member States 
with regard to the proposed text of the said regulation.  

(3) Re: Amendment of Regulation (EC) No 515/97: no preparatory action was taken by Malta in 2014. 

Pending the European Commission's and the Member States' final decisions, no preparatory measures have been taken as yet to implement these 
instruments. The informal trilogue on the PIF Directive, for example, continues and negotiations on the EPPO are also still ongoing. In the latter 
case, the Netherlands has yet to adopt a position on possible participation. The same applies to the amendment of Regulation 515/97. Although 
the negotiations are at an advanced stage, a vote on the final proposal is still required. 

AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL 

The competent national authorities so far have not taken any preparatory legislative action in relation to the Commission's proposals, i.e. the 

80 

 
 
 
 
draft PIF directive and the draft regulation on establishing a European Public Prosecutor's Office, acknowledging that such actions would be 
decidedly  premature  given  the  state  of  work  on  these  drafts.  Concerning  legislative  work  towards  amending  regulation  515/97,  the  Customs 
Authority, as the competent national structure, actively participates in work on the subject in the relevant committee of the Commission. 

PT  Nothing of significance to report. 

RO  Regarding  the  three  legislative  proposals,  RO  participated  actively  and  constructively  in  the  negotiation  of  the  instruments  mentioned  in  the 

request and offers a full political support to the legislative proposals. 
Developing/drawing mandates in order to negotiate those instruments are methods of identifying solutions to implement them and preparing the 
future compatibility with domestic legislation. 
Moreover, since February 2014, new definitions of offenses and sanctions of criminal offenses in protection of EU financial interests, entered 
into force. 

SI 

SK 

Financial Administration of the Republic of Slovenia actively participated in the process of amending of Council regulation (EC) No. 515/97. 
On the national level there are no additional special measures foreseen. The regulation will be implemented directly. 

(1)  Proposal  for  a  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  fight  against  fraud  affecting  the  financial  interests  of  the 
European Union by the means of criminal law defines the conduct to be considered as criminal offences in EU Member States, thus achieving 
the  necessary  unity  of  laws  of  EU  Member  States  and  avoiding  speculative  behaviour  by  the  perpetrators  of  these  crimes  in  order  to  avoid 
criminal  prosecution  through  the  use  of  differences  in  legal  protection  between  the  Member  States  of  the  European  Union.  In  2014,  the 
comments of the European Parliament on the general approach reached in the Council were discussed in the trilogue: so far, no consensus has 
been reached between the Council, COM and EP. 
(2) The Proposal for a Regulation establishing the European Public Prosecutor’s Office is currently the most important proposal in the field of 
criminal law. In general, the Slovak Republic supports the objectives of the proposal on the establishment of a European Public Prosecutor’s 
Office, in particular regarding more efficient and effective investigation and prosecution of criminal offences affecting the financial interests of 
the EU. Since the beginning of the negotiations in December 2013, the draft Regulation has undergone significant development, with reference 
to changing the structure of powers, competences and the definition of the competences and tasks of the European Public Prosecutor's Office. 
The decentralised structure of the EPPO, based on the original Commission proposal, was replaced by a collegial model agreed by Ministers at 

81 

 
 
the March Council of Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs. The Greek presidency then submitted the text of the draft Regulation containing 
provisions of Articles 1-19 resulting from the discussions at technical level and incorporating the conclusions of the last Council of Ministers of 
Justice  and  Home  Affairs.    The  Italian  presidency  continued  this  work,  expanding  it  up  to  Article  33.  The  document  was  presented  at  the 
December  Council  of  Ministers  of  Justice  and  Home  Affairs,  and  was  welcomed  as  a  basis  for  further  discussion.  Certain  provisions  are  a 
matter of concern for the Slovak Republic, in particular ancillary competence, determination of jurisdiction, procedural guarantees and judicial 
review.     
(3)  The  Slovak  Republic  fully  supports  the  adoption  of  a  proposal  to  amend  Regulation  (EC)  No  515/97  on  mutual  assistance  between  the 
administrative authorities in  customs  matters, which  after approval will become  binding in  its entirety  and directly applicable in all  Member 
States. 

1. Directive on the fight against fraud by means of criminal law COM(2012) 363 final: The general agreement has been implemented nationally 
and a project toward implementation of the directive has been set in the Ministry of Justice.  

2.  Regulation  to  set  up  the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  COM(2013)  534  final:  a  project  has  been  set  in  the  Ministry  of  Justice  to 
prepare establishing the EPPO. 

(1)Sweden takes active part in the negotiations of the PIF Directive and is ready to start the process of implementation once the Directive has 
been adopted. The Swedish Parliament has been informed.  

(2)  Sweden  shares  the  Commission’s  view  that  we  need  to  be  able  to  effectively  investigate  and  prosecute  crimes  against  EU´s  financial 
interests. We are taking active part in the negotiations regarding the regulation to set up the European Public Prosecutor’s Office. At the same 
time we are analysing how such a regulation would impact the Swedish judicial system and what kind of adjustments might be needed on our 
part, if and when such an Office is set up within the EU. Sweden has, naturally, not yet taken a final position on the proposal since negotiations 
are ongoing and a number of important issues are still being discussed. 

(3) The Swedish Parliament has been informed regarding the proposal of amendment of Regulation (EC) No 515/97 on mutual administrative 
assistance in the customs area and the still ongoing negotiations. Any further steps regarding implementation have not yet been undertaken. 

FI 

SE 

UK  Mutual Assistance (MA) requests are received by two office in HMRC i.e. 

a) International Relations Customs - International Relations  

82 

 
 
b) International Mutual Assistance Team (IMAT). 
Both offices have direct access to AM communications recorded on AFISng (Anti-Fraud Information System new generation). 
MA requests are executed by IMAT which is also responsible for the collation of the material and for the onward transmission to the requesting 
authority for MAs. 
MA communications are processed according to OLAF’s timescales, contained within the MA message. There is regular liaison with OLAF 
throughout  the  process.  Where  necessary,  audits  at  UK  importers  are  made  and  the  results  of  these,  including  any  financial  recoveries  are 
transmitted back to OLAF. 
Our Finance Team are sent details of recoveries made on MA messages so that OWNRES database can be updated.  

3.2. 

Operational results: a different pace 

Although  the  legislative  landscape  has  changed  considerably  in  the  last  few  years,  the  analysis  described  in  section  2.2  of  this  report  shows  that  the 
impact of these measures is not as evident as one could have expected.   

On the one hand, the overall trend in detecting and reporting potential fraudulent irregularities in the last five years shows a slow decrease, although this 
seems to have reversed since 2012. On the other hand, the number of irregularities not reported as fraudulent has progressively increased. The decreasing 
trend is more evident on the revenue side than it is on the expenditure side. 

3.2.1.  Revenue: Quality of information and control strategies 

On the revenue side, it is not clear whether the trend is due to a shift towards detecting irregular cases or to the way in which Member States classify 
cases. Other possible reasons could include: the new fraud prevention measures implemented in Member States to identify vulnerabilities; the possibility 
of Member States pursuing financial interests without further investigation of the potential criminal offence; the possibility that Member States’ controls 
strategies may need to include more dynamic factors to better adapt to the changing environment.  

RECOMMENDATION 5 

In view of the decreasing number of fraud cases reported, the Commission recommends that Member States review their control strategies to 
ensure that well-targeted, risk-based customs controls are in place to make it possible to effectively detect fraudulent import operations. 

83 

 
 
 
 
BE 

FPS FINANCE: 

Belgian Customs has already in place robust Risk Management strategy to cover possible forthcoming financial risks but has also implemented 
post clearance checks. 

This  strategy  has  been  confirmed  by  the  new  organizational  structure  of  our  General  Administration  of  Customs  &  Excise  ,  that  will  be 
operational in 2015. 

A better communication of feedbacks on identified risks shall be implemented to enhance the efficiency of those approaches. 

FEDER WALLONIE (ERDF WALLONIA): 

Firstly,  the  overall  drop  in  the  number  of  reported  fraud  cases  is  a  cause  for  satisfaction.  Information/training  efforts  involving  the 
beneficiaries/administrations concerned are bearing fruit and likely to deter 'would-be fraudsters'. 

Prevention in this field must be improved still further. Against this background, Wallonia is currently testing the ARACHNE IT tool. 

BG  The  Bulgarian  customs  authorities  have  made  appropriate  arrangements  for  the  reporting  of  fraud/irregularities  concerning  Traditional  Own 
Resources (TOR) in OWNRES within the time periods stipulated in Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000. The cases in question 
are reported by the head office of the Customs Agency, following verification of the information received from the local departments of the 
Customs Agency. 

With a view to preventing irregularities relating to the evasion of anti-dumping duties, 84 risk profiles were jointly developed with the Tariff 
Policy Department and integrated into the automated analysis module. 

The analysis module contains up-to-date lists of persons and countries of origin and destination identified as presenting a risk for the financial 
interests of the EU and its Member States. 

CZ 

In  order  to  detect  the  most  serious  crime  predominantly  involving  tax  and  customs  duties,  a  permanent  joint  team  has  been  set  up  brining 
together the Corruption and Financial Crime Detection Section, the Directorate-General for Finance and the Directorate-General for Customs. 
The team, made up of representatives from the police and the customs authorities, targets tax evasion and tax crime, especially involving VAT 

84 

 
 
 
and  excise  duties.  The purpose  of  setting  up  the  team  was  to  ensure  effective  and  speedy  exchange  of  information  and  coordination  in  joint 
police and customs operations, so that tax evasion is promptly identified, investigated and brought to book. The joint team’s main function is to 
ensure that taxes are properly collected, that amounts unlawfully received are paid back to the state budget and that offenders are prosecuted. 
As  regards  risk  management,  control  activities  are  supported  by  analytical  tools  developed  and  actively  used  by  the  Czech  customs 
administration. The national analytical tools target risks in connection with goods import and transit operations. The main analytical tool is the 
ERIAN electronic risk analysis system, which checks online all customs declarations received against the risk profile databases. The profiles are 
set in term of the various columns on the customs declaration, such as country code, tariff classification, entity etc.  While the declaration is 
being processed, automatic risk analysis is carried out  in the background, which may result in an inspection being ordered (“red table”) or just 
the customs official being notified that there is a potential risk. Both national risk profiles and international joint risk  criteria are added to the 
risk profile database on an ongoing basis. The risk profiles are created on the basis of various sources (inhouse, external and international). An 
important source of international information for risk analyses is the Community Risk Management System (CRMS), which contains two types 
of information. One is the Risk Information Form (RIF)  reports, which are principally designed to quickly exchange information between all 
EU  Member  States  regarding  potential  risks,  whether  detected,  imminent  or  theoretical,  in  connection  with  the  transportation  of  goods  to  or 
from the EU. The other part of the system is the Priority Control Area (PCA) module, which is used for communication during joint control 
operations and in critical situations. The Czech customs administration has set up and operates a national register of all RIF reports issued in the 
system. Each newly received RIF report is analysed and the result of the analysis is processed (a risk profile is created). The information from 
the RIF reports is also used by the Automatic Risk Assessment (ARA) application, which yields and assesses generalised risks in the import 
regime. It is currently based on the preferential and non-preferential origin of the goods. Established infringements involving changes to tariff 
classification, antidumping etc. are entered in the application from the recorded RIF reports. 

DK  SKAT's  action  strategy is  a  general  one  from  2013  onwards,  since  SKAT  is  now  working  to  develop  multiannual  segment  strategies  for the 

entire tax base.  
A segment strategy is defined as a strategy to manage a tax gap – in the field of customs, a customs gap – in one segment. The strategy contains 
an analysis of the segment and an action plan for future activities regarding the segment's target group, and, along with a thorough analysis of 
the  risks,  tax  gap,  taxpayer  behaviour  and  structural  framework,  is  to  ensure  that  the  action  taken  is  firmly  knowledge  based.  Each  segment 
strategy, therefore, is to contain an analysis of possible access to the segment, an action plan for future action in the area and a plan for follow-
up of the action.  
"Duties of a fiscal nature" is one of SKAT's segments. The work of developing a multiannual segment strategy in this field, however, poses 

85 

 
 
major challenges for SKAT regarding the demands/expectations of the Commission in terms of dealing with the tasks in the field. This must be 
seen  in  the  light  of  the  fact  that  SKAT's  point  of  departure  in  the  work  is  based  on  the  segment  strategy  and  the  customs  gap,  and  in  an 
intelligent and intelligence-based adaptation.   
The  common  market  organisation  of  agricultural  products,  such  as  sugar,  cereals,  fruit  and  vegetables,  etc.)  is  different,  because  it  has  an 
established regulation-based control requirement with which SKAT complies. 

DE  Nevertheless, customs risk management in Germany is subject to constant review. A working party within the Customs Criminal Investigation 
Office (Zollkriminalamt – ZKA) is currently examining how to improve customs risk management and adapt control strategies. Germany is also 
involved  in  implementing  the  strategy  and  action  plan  to  improve  the  customs  risk  management  of  the  European  Commission  and  Member 
States, and will ensure that the related roadmap and the resulting measures are promptly implemented. 

EE  Updates and additions for AM and RIF notices and alerts were introduced into the management instruction in the Tax and Customs Board to 

ensure even more effective risk management and feedback. 
The Tax and Custom Board still uses well-functioning national systems as car number detection, the ship’s passenger information system, etc. 
The State Border Act was amended, which granted the legal framework for treating transatlantic air passenger’s information. We use Europe-
wide risk information for the selection of customs declarations using the Select programmes.  
For better assessment of financial fraud risks an additional tax declaration system called KMD INF was created that provides an overview of the 
company’s purchase and sales partners. All transactions exceeding €1000 per partner have to be declared there.  
The amendments of the Penal Code came into force in 2015 – punishment for illegal handling of alcohol and tobacco was made stricter (3-5 
years  in  prison).  Also  the  extended  confiscation  of  the  proceeds  of  crime  was  added.  That  means  that  now  you  can  confiscate  all  illegally 
obtained income, not only the income that the investigation covers. 
All customs procedures related to importation are covered in Estonia with an electronic risk analysis (selection criteria) and different automatic 
controls (to control completion of customs formalities pursuant to law), both carried out on the moment of placing of goods under the customs 
procedure. Such a process is already in use since 2006 when a new system for the customs data complex together with its support systems was 
implemented. In addition, entry and / or transit formalities prior to importation are covered by the electronic risk analysis. The selection by the 
principle of random choice is applied so well. 
All units exercising supervision within the Estonian Tax and Customs Board participate in risk criteria introduction / creation. Risk criteria can 

86 

 
 
be  either  on  individual-,  operation-  or  goods-based.  The  officials  of  Intelligence  Department  are  dealing  with  data  analysis  software  SAS 
Enterprise Guide and various departmental, national and international databases. 

IE 

In Ireland electronic systems are used on an ongoing basis to target risk at pre-clearance, clearance and post clearance.  All consignments are 
subjected  to  electronic  risk  analysis.    This  risk  analysis  targets  all  forms  of  risk  including  safety  &  security,  financial,  prohibitions  & 
restrictions, IPR, fraud etc..  Where a consignment is selected for intervention it will be controlled either on arrival, at clearance or in a post 
clearance setting.  We review our procedures on an on-going basis. 

EL  AUTHORITY - Ministry of Finance - General Directorate of Customs and Excise Duties; Directorate: 33 Customs Audit 

The competent directorate of the customs administration indicated that in December 2013 the national IT system ICISnet was put into operation 
for implementing automatic audit profiles based on risk criteria, using the DSS subsystem. 

ES 

FR 

In  Spain,  levels  of  control  have  remained  the  same  in  the  years  referred  to  in  the  report.  However,  major  improvements  have  been  made  to 
operation management systems; this means that, as improvements are being made to the way declarations are processed and validated in the 
system, it is becoming less likely  that errors will occur and any attempt to make a false declaration can be detected when the information is 
entered in the system, thereby eliminating the need to remedy the situation at a later date.  
It is also important to note that Spain has a centralised and completely electronic risk analysis system, making it possible to act upon any type of 
customs declaration and all the data included in the declarations. Planning of ex-post checks is geared to checking the operations that pose the 
greatest risk. Information is fed back into the risk analysis system based on the results of checks and the system is constantly being adapted to 
the possible types of fraud. Nevertheless, the Spanish government has taken on board the Commission's recommendation to carry out checks 
using a risk analysis process. 

In response to recommendation 7 put forward by the European Commission in the 2012 Annual Report, the French authorities explained in 
great detail the inspections policy of the Directorate-General of Customs and Indirect Taxes (Direction générale des douanes et des droits 
indirects- DGDDI) and the system that had been put in place as a result. The structure of the organisation that was presented, and which is based 
on a targeted approach to inspections and preliminary risk assessment, did not undergo any major changes in 2014. On the revenue side, since 
2013 the DGDDI has nevertheless observed an increase in the number of fraud cases compared with irregularity cases. This trend reversal is the 
result of improved classification of reported cases. Wilful intent has not always been determined when the initial notification document is drawn 
up and it is this document that is used to decide whether a case should be reported via OWNRES and the information updated. The services in 

87 

 
 
charge of entering fraud and irregularity reports in OWNRES are paying particular attention to this issue. 

In 2013, Customs Administration developed Strategic Plan for Control 2013-2015 (hereinafter: Strategic Plan) which was based on the proposal 
of  the  EC  representatives.  Strategic  Plan  determines  legal  framework  for  the  implementation  of  controls,  fields  of  control,  prevention  of 
smuggling,  investigations,  cooperation  and  education.  According  to  the  Strategic  Plan,  Customs  Administration,  independently  or  in 
cooperation  with  other  competent  authorities,  drafts  Annual  Monitoring  Plan  and  conducts  targeted  continuous  activities.  In  terms  of 
implementation of the Strategic Plan, Customs Administration has defined risk indicators that are used in the selection of subjects or areas of 
supervision.  All  types  of  control  in  Customs  Administration  should  be  based  on  risk  analysis  and  assessment.  Moreover,  risk  indicators  for 
company, goods, transport and customs subjects are defined. 

It is expected that Customs Administration revise Strategic plan and therefore start with the activities to draft and develop new Strategic Plan for 
Control. 

HR 

IT 

The Customs and Monopolies Agency, at which a Risk Analysis Office was set up, has been conducting appropriate monitoring since 1999, and 
consequently has one of the best control systems of all the Member States, according to both the Court of Auditors 2010 report on controls on 
simplified customs procedures and the DG Budget subject-specific reports on control and risk analysis systems.  
The risk analysis carried out ensures an adequate level of controls throughout all Italian territory. 

CY 

In 2013, the import systems of the Department of Customs and Excise of the Republic of Cyprus, as well as the related risk-analysis system 
have been upgraded. The new risk-analysis system includes new tools such as the implementation of compliant list, and the data loading tool for 
the creation of tables introduced in to the system to support profiles. No further changes/upgrades have been taken place in 2014.   

LV   National  Customs  Board  of  Latvia  has  established  a  risk  based  post  clearance  control  system.  The  risk  information  is  communicated  to  the 
responsible division to conduct customs audits and to the division that is  responsible for post clearance controls of the declarations. The risk 
information received from OLAF is analysed and taken into account for selecting the declarations for post clearance controls. In the internal 
instructions it is said that 5% of the declarations released for free circulation in the previous month should be selected for post clearance checks 
with the specific criterion (origin, classification (including meursing), duties or value).  
In the moment of the release of the goods for free circulation if the customs officer has doubts about the declaration or the risk profile has been 

88 

 
 
 
activated the security is collected to secure the duty amount in case of the customs debt.  
Additionally the newest version of the State Revenue Service’ internal rules that let down the procedure for preparation of the reports on fraud 
and irregularities, recovery and for registration of the information in OWNRES system is approved on 19.12.2013. In order to meet the deadline 
set by Article 6.5 of Council Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000 implementing Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom on 
the system of the European Communities own resources the above mentioned procedure sets the time limit of four weeks (after the date when 
calculation of customs debt or  possible customs debt is approved) for submitting the information to the responsible Unit with a view of  its’ 
registration in OWNRES. The reminders of the time limits are sent on the regular basis. 

LT 

In 2014 an enhanced risk assessment and control system was introduced in a partial version involving personal checks which makes it possible 
to  assess  persons  and/or  customs  declarations  made  on  their  behalf  for  the  purposes  of  post-clearance  checks  and  to  verify  the  progress  of 
checks carried out and record their results. 

LU  Any new developments that have taken place since 2013. 

HU  Pursuant  to  a  provision  of  Act  CXXVI  of  2003  on  the  implementation  of  community  customs  law  (‘National  Customs  Act’),  which  was 
prepared and adopted by Parliament in 2014 and has been in force as of 1 January 2015, the customs authority performs its customs inspection 
activities on the basis of considerations set out in Community and national legislation and information on inspections published by the head of 
the State tax and customs authority every year by 20 February. The customs inspection model has to be designed in such a way that being aware 
of possible inspections at any time encourages clients to voluntarily comply with the law. The information on inspections published by the head 
of the State tax and customs authority specifies how the inspection capacity of the customs authority is to be used taking into account current 
economic processes, customs policy objectives, changes in legislation, the forms of practice most harmful to customs and tax revenue interests 
and the risks detected. 

A  current  internal  order  of  the  National  Tax  and  Customs  Administration  (‘NAV’  relating  to  ex-post  inspections  states  that  an  essential 
precondition  of  efficient  and  successful  customs  clearance  achieving  inspection  goals  is  the  accurate  identification  of  subjects  and  business 
organisations proven to pose a risk. It is a requirement when selecting clients for inspection that economic operators must be treated equally, 
and thus  it is essential that selection is  carried out  on the basis  of specific and  documented risk criteria. The risk analysis has  to ensure that 
economic  operators  and  transactions  representing  the  highest  risk  are  selected  for  inspections,  also  including  a  reasonable  proportion  of 
operators and objects representing a medium and low risk as well as randomly selected business organisations. In view of the foregoing and the 
fact that selection is by central (or, in some cases, regional and local) risk analysis, the possibility of conducting targeted, risk-based customs 

89 

 
 
inspections is ensured. 

MT  No  new  developments  to  report  since  the  Customs  control  strategy  is  of  a  dynamic  nature  in  order  to  provide  a  well-targeted,  risk-based 
customs  control  emanating  from  trends  identified  locally  and  by  other  Customs  administrations  from  other  Member  States  as  well  as  by 
other relevant agencies. Thus it allows for a pro-active approach to identify possible new fraudulent import trends. Some quality issues have 
nonetheless been identified when the reported information was analysed. When comparing the number of fraud and irregularity cases for 2009-
13 with the figures from previous reports, it appears that there is a time gap between when the cases are detected and when they are reported via 
the OWNRES application. Although Member States’ work to regularly update the information on cases of fraud and irregularities can only be 
welcomed, the timely reporting of fraud and irregularity cases should nevertheless be respected. 

NL  The Dutch customs authorities take a risk-based approach, the success of which is apparent from the increase in the number of detected fraud 
cases. For instance, the launch of one of OLAF's biggest customs investigations in recent years, involving unlawful imports of solar panels, was 
based on information supplied by the Dutch customs authorities. The customs authorities conclude that there is no need for them to adapt their 
working methods. 

AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL  Based on statistical data from OWNRES, conclusions should not be drawn for Poland about a decrease in the number of fraud cases, which 
according to the system are as follows: 2012 (24), 2013 (17), 2014 (35). However, significant discrepancies in the number of cases of fraud 
reported in 2013 among Member States where the scale of freight traffic in foreign trade is likely to be similar may indicate that there is a risk of 
certain  states  taking  a  non-uniform  approach  to  reporting  cases  classified  as  fraud.  In  the  case  of  Poland,  fraud  cases  reported  in  OWNRES 
concern actions relating to measures to stop cigarette smuggling. 

PT  We  wish  to  highlight  the  use  of  the  SSA,  which  is  an  automatic  selection  system  associated  with  the  various  customs  declaration  systems 
(import, export and others). It acts on the information contained in customs declarations and automatically selects targets and directs controls 
according to risk, thereby guaranteeing equivalent levels of risk analysis irrespective of the place of acceptance of the declaration. This results in 
more  effective  and  efficient  controls.  Suspicions,  evidence  and  actual  fraud  are  processed  via  the  SIIAF  –  an  integrated  anti-fraud  customs 
information system – designed to merge the whole process of collating, processing and disseminating information and also the results of anti-

90 

 
 
fraud operational activity. 

strengthening customs control, 
preventing fiscal evasion, 
fighting tax evasion, 
customs’ fight against fraud. 

RO  According to General Directorate of Customs within the National Agency for Fiscal Administration, through the Working Rules/Regulation of 
organising and functioning of the General Directorate of Customs, powers and responsibilities on the risk assessment were given to all services 
within  the  specialized  fields  in  Supervision  and  Control  Customs.  This  measure  allows  organizational  control  strategy  focused  on  risk 
management, on continuous improvement and development function of risk analysis, on monitoring and control customs. 
Through  Strategic  Plan  of  Action  and  Control  of  the  National  Agency  for  Fiscal  Administration  drafted  and  approved  for  2015,  General 
Customs Directorate must implement a number of strategic objectives regarding: 
- 
- 
- 
- 
To  implement  these  strategic  objectives,  the  strategic  plan  of  action  and  control comprises  a  series  of  lines  of  action,  indicators,  responsible 
structure and deadlines for implementing specific activities, activities that cover both measures of operational character and also measures to 
strengthen risk analysis function and subsequently control activity, such as: 
- 
risks  
- 
- 
- 
- 

updating procedures/instructions specific to risk management activities 
controlling and guiding territorial structures to ensure efficient monitoring and control actions 
increasing quality in the subsequent control/investigations/verification of customs declarations 
ulterior verifications regarding anti-dumping duties on goods released for free circulation, etc. 

implementation  of  risk  profiles  in  national  electronic  system  of  risk  management  (RMF-RO)  for  treating  potential/  proven  identified 

SI 

 In Slovenia, the number of reported irregularities for the period 2007-2013 is increasing, which is a guarantee that the system of detection and 
reporting is actively working. At the same time the financial period is coming to an end, what results in an increase in the number of reported 
irregularities.  With  the  increasing  reporting,  the  suspected  fraud  is  increasing.  Some  cases  are  reported  as  a  case  of  fraud.  Based  on  the 

91 

 
 
foregoing, we believe that the reporting system is operational and works in Slovenia. 

Financial Administration of the Republic of Slovenia describes measures implemented in 2013: 

At the level of the Republic of Slovenia the strategy against economic crime in the Republic of Slovenia for the period from 2012 to 2016 was 
adopted,  which  provided  comprehensive  measures  in  various  fields.  Financial  Administration  of  the  Republic  of  Slovenia  is  committed  to 
improve the cooperation between the competent authorities, to changes in legislation, education, etc.  

With the aim of improving the efficiency for fraud detection by the import the Customs Administration (from 01.08.2014 onwards Financial 
Administration of the Republic of Slovenia) adopted a strategy in 2013.  This strategy among others aims as well at improving the method of 
carrying out customs controls based on risk analysis and develop and manage methods of risk analysis and selectivity in the detection of illicit 
trafficking and crime. 

In  2014,  the  Commission  informed  the  Tax  Administration  of  the  Slovak  Republic  of  34  cases  of  fraud  or  irregularity  via  the  European 
Commission's  OWNRES  application.  Compared  to  2013,  when  only  8  cases  were  reported,  this  is  a  significant  increase.  This  is  the  highest 
number of reported cases of fraud/irregularities per calendar year since 2005. 
The Slovak Tax Administration ensures, through the national automated risk profiling, targeted determination of the checks to be carried out at 
the time of customs clearance in order to avoid and eliminate the risk at importation into the EC. A separate system module has been used since 
2006.   
All input from the internal and external environment, as well as the analytical activity of the Tax Administration itself, are incorporated into the 
risk profiling. Existing risk profiles are continually assessed and, where necessary, supplemented or modified. On the basis of the risk profiling 
and its results, the customs procedure at the time of the release of the goods involves document checks, partial or complete physical checks or 
taking samples. 

The customs has not informed further developments for this report compared to last year’s report. 

Swedish  Customs  has  a  comprehensive  control  strategy.  The  strategy will  contribute  to  better  controlling results  and methods,  making  more 
conscious priorities and using resources more efficiently. The strategy should ensure inter linkage and synergies between control, service and 
information in order to enable the operators to do things right from the start.  

The controls carried out by Customs should be based on well targeted analysis and focus on errors that are deliberate and formidable. During 

SK 

FI 

SE 

92 

 
 
2015 a new framework of intelligence will be implemented. The framework describes how intelligence on an overall basis will be performed. In 
addition to the new framework, the officers will be trained in e.g. business systems and logistics, to strengthen their analytical ability.   

Furthermore, Swedish Customs is currently developing a new risk management system. The new system will enable selection and analysis of all 
information  that  is  submitted  to  Customs  in  every  stage  of  the  flow  of  goods.  The  system  is  expected  to  be  implemented  in  October  2016. 
Integration with present systems and the future systems will be made as soon as possible after October 2016. 

UK  HMRC has drafted and implemented an updated control strategy in June 2014 that outlines the procedures and structure of: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

The UK Customs authority  

The stages of customs release procedures  

UK approach to managing risk 

The end to end risk map of the customs business, 

The segmentation framework and behaviour model for customs businesses and the Intervention strategy for controlling and facilitating 

• 
customs businesses 

Some quality issues have nonetheless been identified when the reported information was analysed. When comparing the number of fraud and irregularity 
cases  for  2009-13  with  the  figures  from  previous  reports,  it  appears  that  there  is  a  time  gap  between  when  the  cases  are  detected  and  when  they  are 
reported via the OWNRES application. Although Member States’ work to regularly update the information on cases of fraud and irregularities can only 
be welcomed, the timely reporting of fraud and irregularity cases should nevertheless be respected. 

RECOMMENDATION 6 

Member States should step up work to ensure timely reporting on and updating of fraud and irregularity cases. To ensure effective monitoring 
and follow-up, reliable information on fraud and irregularity cases should be entered in OWNRES. 

BE 

FPS FINANCE: 

93 

 
 
 
Same comment than the one formulated on recommendation 5: especially our last phrase that will complete the eventual remark of O&O_E&R. 
This new administration within BE Customs & Excise is responsible of the reporting in OWNRES. 

FEDER WALLONIE (ERDF WALLONIA): 

The  irregularities  found  in  Wallonia  within  programmes  co-funded  by  the  ERDF  are  regularly  entered  in  the  IMS  notification  system  for 
irregularities 

BG  As regards the reporting and validation of cases in OWNRES, Bulgaria has updated the details (names and contact details) of the staff of local 

customs departments responsible for sending information to the head office of the Customs Agency. 

In  addition,  the  local  departments  of  the  Customs  Agency  have  been  instructed  to  update  the  information  submitted  to  the  head  office  on  a 
regular basis. 

CZ  There is a long-standing requirement on all departments in the prosecution service to keep the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office notified of 
any criminal cases affecting the financial interests of the EU. As the AFCOS contact point on criminal matters, the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s 
Office therefore has comprehensive information on criminal irregularities for the whole of the Czech Republic and it then uses this information 
to produce the regular quarterly reports on the status of all these criminal proceedings. These reports are sent to OLAF on a regular basis. To 
ensure  effective  exchange  of  information  with  OLAF,  on  the  basis  of  the  government-adopted  National  Strategy  for  the  Protection  of  EU 
Financial Interests  close cooperation has  been  set  up between the Supreme  Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Czech Police (Corruption and 
Financial Crime Detection Section investigating criminal activities affecting the financial interests of the EU), so that information on ongoing 
investigations and other police activities is promptly shared. 
The  customs  authorities  meet  the  notification  requirement  regarding  cases  of  fraud  and  irregularities  using  the  OWNRES  database  in 
accordance with Article 6(5) of Council Regulation 1150/2000. Under that Article each Member State is required to send the Commission a 
description of cases of fraud and irregularities detected within two months following the end of the quarter in which they were detected. In the 
case of the Czech  Republic the OWNRES entries  are in  most cases  made well within  the time limit. Last year the Commission checked  the 
OWNRES entries and, according to the information available, did not have any major observations to make on them. During the control visit to 
the  Czech  Republic  the  Commission  representatives  stressed  that  the  Commission  created  the  OWNRES  application  primarily  for  its  own 
purposes regarding the public revenue aspect of the cases recorded and only secondarily for OLAF ’s monitoring of irregularities and fraud. 

DK  To ensure compliance with OWNRES reporting deadlines, the officials involved receive a deadline alert. There is good cooperation between 

94 

 
 
DE 

customs officials and those in Accounts. OWNRES cases are drawn up and reported according to the current rules and a link between the B 
account and the OWNRES reports is ensured. 
Internal guidelines have been created to ensure that SKAT settles EU own resources correctly. These guidelines are an overall description of the 
rules and procedures for all settlement of EU OWNRES (customs duties). These guidelines also describe the rules for OWNRES reporting.   

Official meetings held at varying intervals exclusively examine the reporting of cases of fraud and irregularities pursuant to Article 6(5) 

In addition to the user manual, instructions are available to services in the form of official guidelines. 
OWNRES reports are validated by officials in the legal and expert supervision departments of the Federal Finance Directorates, through 

In reply to finding 3.4 in inspection report 14-2-1, the following points were made: 
Germany has introduced a number of measures designed to ensure that OWNRES contains accurate, reliable and up-to-date information: 
• 
• 
their main customs offices. 
• 
Since  2008,  Germany  has  carried  out  annual  database  matching  between  the  OWNRES  and  NIZZA  databases  (the  German  customs 
authority's cash management system).  National checks are performed  in respect of 'potential cases', 'outstanding cases' and 'discharged cases' 
and rectified as necessary. 
• 
of Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000. The next such official meeting is scheduled for April 2015. 
• 
Since  2012,  German  customs  authority  officials  have  been  able  to  attend  a  four-day  course  dealing  specifically  with  traditional  own 
resources. One of this course's main modules looks at how to report cases of fraud and irregularities pursuant to Article 6(5) of Regulation (EC, 
Euratom) No 1150/2000.  
Overall, these measures are regarded as sufficient in terms of establishing the minimum requirements for high-quality data. 
According to 'Document ACOR/2014-12/agenda-04-en', presented to the Member States at ACOR's 162nd meeting of 4 December 2014, the 
Commission is satisfied with the position and will declare the report item closed. No further action is required from Germany. 
However,  we  would  suggest  once  again  that  the  Commission  should  adapt  the  OWNRES  database,  for  which  it  assumes  responsibility,  to 
requirements. First, the database is not sufficiently user-friendly; second, the Commission requires that false information be knowingly entered. 
For instance, the database allows just a single valid administrative/financial stage. If tranches are handled differently (e.g. a tranche becomes 
irrecoverable and the Member State should assume financial liability for a further lost tranche), this cannot be displayed using the current matrix 
on stages in recovery. 

95 

 
 
EE  Updates and additions to AM and RIF notices and alerts were introduced into the management instruction in the Tax and Customs Board to 

ensure even more effective risk management and feedback. 
The OLAF FIDE system is used for the handling of fraud. 

IE 

IE  strives  to  ensure  that  our  work  in  relation  to  OWNRES  is  addressed  in  line  with  requirements.    Procedures  are  in  place  to  ensure  timely 
reporting and updating of fraud and irregularity cases and that the information entered is accurate to the extent reasonably possible, result from 
reliable systems and verifiable data and are in compliance with the relevant EU regulations, rules and guidance. 

EL  AUTHORITY - Ministry of Finance - General Directorate of Customs and Excise Duties; Directorate: 33 Customs Audit 

The competent directorate of the customs administration has made the following observations: 

1) With regard to notifications on fraud affecting the EU’s own resources under Regulation (EU) No 1150/00, the competent Directorate of the 
Ministry of Finance (D33) provides oral and written instructions for compliance with the requirements of Community legislation, to all customs 
authorities.  Circular  order  No  D33Α  5029264  EX2014  9/12/2014  (copy  attached  hereto)  was  issued  for  this  purpose.  It  highlights  the 
importance of correct notification and updating of data on cases of fraud and irregularities, making reference to the following specific points: 

(a) Notification obligation under the OWNRES system;  

(b) Reconciliation of Accounting B with information sheets on fraud and irregularities;  

(c) Reconciliation of OWNRES and WOMIS; 

(d) Reconciliation of OWNRES and information sheets – Reg. No [Regulation (EC) No 515/97]  

(e) Reconciliation of OWNRES and data on cigarette smuggling. 

2)  The  two  Customs  Audit  Authorities  (CAAs)  of  Attica  and  Thessaloniki,  that  are  carrying  out  inspections  at  the  judicial  departments  of 
customs  offices  with  regard  to  the  proper  implementation  of  procedures,  ensure  that  new  information  sheets  on  fraud  and  irregularities  are 
filled-in properly and that older sheets are properly updated. Reference to their role is also made in the aforementioned order. 

3) Training on proper notification and updating of data on cases of fraud and irregularities was provided, inter alia, in the context of the 2014 
training programme for customs authorities on the new ICISnet information system and, in particular, the subsystem of information and special 

96 

 
 
cases. 

ES  As a result of DG Budget's inspection in Spain, which included checks on the content of the OWNRES forms, work is under way to adopt the 
necessary measures to encourage reporting using the forms, ensure that the forms are kept up to date and that the information they contain is 
complete. 

FR 

HR 

In 2014, the DGDDI launched a large-scale audit of the OWNRES system to improve the detection and reporting of fraud and irregularities 
related to traditional own resources uncovered by its services. Reasons were identified for possible delays between case detection and 
notification via OWNRES. Resulting primarily from differing interpretations of the concepts of 'booking' (in the budgetary sense) and of 'fraud 
or irregularity cases' (a legal concept implying that notification of the offence has been given), these delays, notwithstanding some long-running 
individual cases relating to the right to be heard, did not have a significant impact on the notification procedure beyond an extra three months. 
New instructions are currently being drafted based on the conclusions of this audit and these will be circulated during the first half of 2015, 
which will lead to a new framework for implementation and improved reliability of information reported. 

In  the  period  01.07.2013.  -  31.12.  2013.,  the  Republic  of  Croatia  has  entered  eight  cases  of  fraud  and  irregularities  (5  fraud  cases  and  3 
irregularity cases). All cases were approved on time and obtained the number of quarter in which they were discovered. Additionally, European 
Commission document "Follow-up recommendations to the Commission report on the protection of the EU's financial interests fight against 
fraud, in 2013" along with the Recommendations 5 and 6 was forwarded to the relevant operators in the regional customs offices, which reveal 
and enter cases to OWNRES (i.e. customs officers that are appointed to enter cases in OWNRES application) as well as they were also informed 
about the importance of this recommendation. 

IT  When it comes to reporting under the OWNRES system, Italy is particularly attentive both to the time limits for transmission, which have never 

been missed, and to ensuring that all information provided is complete and correct. 

Every quarter a meticulous cross-control is carried out between the OWNRES and the separate account results in terms of the entries, discharges 
(where amounts have been recovered, declared irrecoverable or made available) and corrections at every operational office. 

A consistency check between the various items entered in the system is also carried out each quarter in respect of new cases. 

CY  As  regards  the  Department  of  Customs  and  Excise  of  the  Republic  of  Cyprus,  an  internal  process  was  established  in  order  to  ensure  timely 

97 

 
 
 
reporting  on  and  updating  of  fraud  and  irregularity  cases,  effecting  monitoring,  reliable  information  on  fraud  and  irregularity  cases  in 
OWNRES. 

LV   The  newest  version  of  the  State  Revenue  Service’s  internal  rules  that  let  down  the  procedure  for  preparation  of  the  reports  on  fraud  and 
irregularities, recovery and for registration of the information in OWNRES system is approved on 19.12.2013. In order to meet the deadline set 
by Article 6.5 of Council Regulation (EC, EURATOM) No 1150/2000 of 22 May 2000 implementing Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom on the 
system  of  the  European  Communities  own  resources  the  above  mentioned  procedure  sets  the  time  limit  of  four  weeks  (after  the  date  when 
calculation  of  customs  debt  or  possible  customs  debt  is  approved)  for  submitting  the  information  to  the  responsible  Unit  with  a  view  of  its’ 
registration in OWNRES.  
The State Revenue Service’ National Customs Board Unit that is responsible for the management of the “B” account, is also responsible for 
gathering and entering of information in OWNRES. In order to reveal the gaps and mismatches this Unit cross-check the data entered in the “B” 
account and reported via OWNRES, also reminds regularly on the importance of timely, complete and reliable reporting. 

LT 

In order to ensure that information concerning infringements and fraud is entered into the European Commission’s OWNRES properly and on 
time, in 2004 the Lithuanian customs authorities adopted rules on entering information concerning infringements and fraud linked to European 
Union traditional own resources falling within their competence into the European Commission's OWNRES system.  These have been updated 
several times and continue to remain in force. Checks on the correctness and timely submission of data entered into the OWNRES system are 
made in several ways. 
Persons  have  been  appointed  (processors)  to  enter  information  into  the  OWNRES  system,  as  have  information  validators.  Processors  must 
ensure that data entered into the OWNRES system are consistent with the data entered into the tax accounting and control system. Validators 
check whether the form and content of the information entered into OWNRES by processors meets the requirements laid down. In addition, the 
competent local customs officials are obliged to inform the processor of any changes (appeal cases, amounts recovered, etc.) concerning cases 
previously registered in OWNRES. 
The  correctness  of  OWNRES  data  is  also  ensured  by  the  rules  on  checking  the  correctness  of  data  contained  in  reports  relating  to  the 
Communities' own resources. Under these rules, local customs officers are required to check the correctness of data submitted for the purposes 
of drawing up reports on EU own resources at least once every quarter. During these checks, it is also ensured that OWNRES and the B account 
data  tally.  The  correctness  of  OWNRES  data  must  also  be  periodically  verified  by  officials  of  the  Customs  Department  under  the  Tax 
Administration Division of the Ministry of Finance. Errors relating to OWNRES data are rarely detected during these checks. We consider the 

98 

 
 
existing control measures to be sufficient. 

LU  Measures taken to ensure timely reporting on, and updating of, fraud and irregularity cases, effective monitoring, reliable information on fraud 

and irregularity cases in OWNRES. 

HU  The  relevant  internal  order  of  NAV  regarding  procedures  relating  to  irregularity  reports  and  issued  by  the  President  of  NAV  prescribes  that 
irregularities  detected  and  subject  to  a  reporting  obligation  are  entered  by  the  body  or  organisational  unit  detecting  them  in  the  OWNRES 
system  within  eight  working  days  following  the  availability  of  the  information  serving  as  a  basis  for  the  report,  which  is  approved  on  the 
following working day. Thus, the timely reporting of fraud cases and irregularities is ensured. The regulation referred to above requires with 
respect to the updating of information that the officer entering it should continuously update the measures introduced in connection with the 
irregularities previously detected and entered in the OWNRES system and their results in the OWNRES system. 

The Commission’s Directorate–General for the Budget carried out an inspection in Hungary with regard to its traditional own funds between 13 
and  18  September  2013,  during  which  it  was  established  that  certain  customs  bodies  reported  the  establishment  of  customs  debts  exceeding 
EUR 10,000, arising as a result of subsequent procedures conducted on the proposal of clients, in the OWNRES system, while the reasons for 
the modifications did not imply either fraud or irregularities. On the basis of the contents of the report submitted to the Commission, it is not 
warranted to make OWNRES reports in the case of the establishment of customs debts arising as a result of subsequent procedures conducted 
on the proposal of clients  if no sign  implying fraud or  irregularity  is  found, while  the amount  of the customs debt  established exceeds EUR 
10,000. The bodies concerned have been informed about this. 

MT  The  reporting  process  has  been  reviewed  so  that  the  time  lag  between  the  detection  of  irregularities  and  the  submission  of  the  report  on 
OWNRES will be reduced to a minimum. The reporting mechanism has been modified so that the relevant sections of the Department complete 
the  form  (information  sheet  for  reporting  an  OWNRES  case  of  fraud  and  irregularity  of  duties  exceeding  €10,000)  and  include  it  in  the 
respective  file  for  every  specific  fraud  case.  Thus  the  Customs  Debt  Unit  is  in  a  position  to  minimise  the  time  lag  between  the  detection  of 
irregularities by the responsible section and the submission of the report in OWNRES. 

NL  All irregularities relating to breaches of customs regulations involving more than 10 000 euro in duty are entered in OWNRES, in compliance 

with EU legislation. This recommendation endorses the current procedure. 

99 

 
 
 
AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL 

Issues surrounding the OWNRES system in Poland are regulated by a decree from the Minister of Finance on reporting cases of detected fraud 
and irregularities concerning traditional EU own resources exceeding EUR 10 000 in OWNRES. This decree specifically regulates, inter alia, 
the timely reporting of cases of fraud and irregularities, according to which data is input and updated on a monthly basis by the 15th day of the 
following month. Within supervision provided by the competent institution, proper flow of information within the system is verified and the 
transferred data is validated and verified. Cases are confirmed by the deadline outlined in regulation 1150/2000, i.e. within two months of the 
end  of  each  quarter  in  which  irregularities  or  fraud  are  detected.  The  audit  performed  by  the  Supreme  Audit  Office  in  2014  for  detected 
irregularities and fraud reported in 2013 in OWNRES showed that the cases reported to the Commission were taken into the system correctly. 

PT  Nothing of any significance to report. 

RO  According to the National Agency for Fiscal Administration, fraud/irregularities detected in the period 2009-2013, were reported online through 

OWNRES system in due time, in accordance with the legal provisions in force. 
Regarding cases of cigarette smuggling, there is a gap between committing the offense and imposing the customs debt established by the courts 
in criminal sentence (which is the documentary evidence for the result communicated through OWNRES) due to criminal proceedings. 

SI 

The Managing Authority notes that the biggest problem in the context of reporting of irregularities lies in the period between detection of an 
irregularity  and  the  actual  reporting.  Therefore,  the  Managing  Authority  monitors  all  incoming  audit  reports  of  national  and  European 
supervisory authorities and the inspection reports on the spot in order to ensure the adequacy and accuracy checks. In addition, the Managing 
Authority also asks the respondents - intermediate bodies, in the case of open irregularities, to close/complete them as soon as possible (Art.5). 

Customs  Administration  of  the  Republic  of  Slovenia  (from  01.08.2014  onwards  Financial  Administration  of  the  Republic  of  Slovenia)  is 
ensuring effective control on the level of the General Customs Office by internal professional supervision of  customs offices work.  Several 
times a year the timeliness and correctness of entry in the OWNRES application is verified. 

Certifying  Authority  (CA)  regularly  monitors  all  audit  reports,  reports  on  the  controls  carried  out  on  the  spot  and  quarterly  reports  on 
irregularities.  In  the  case  of  irregularities  which  have  financial  implications,  CA  issues  a  request  for  the  reimbursement  to  the  Managing 
authority  or  an  intermediate  body  that  have  to  take  care  of  the  funds  return  within  their  authorization.  CA  also  carries  out  checks  for  the 

100 

 
 
SK 

FI 

SE 

purposes of certification of the managing authority or intermediate bodies and reviews the adequacy of procedures and controls that they carry 
out. Based on their findings may propose to the managing authority or intermediate body to carry out checks on the spot. 

In order to improve activities in the area of traditional own resources and the management of the OWNRES database, the agenda mentioned was 
placed within the organisational structure of the Slovak Finance Administration as of 1 July 2014, in the Tax and Customs Section. A team was 
set up, which cooperates closely with staff at regional level who are responsible for recording cases in the OWNRES application. To allow more 
rapid collection of information and subsequent entry of this information in OWNRES, staff at regional level are guaranteed access rights to the 
national ACIS application. In the coming days, training for the employees referred to above will be carried out.      
In  2014  notifications  of  fraud  or  irregularities  registered  by  the  Slovak  Tax  Administration  in  OWNRES  were  recorded  in  accordance  with 
Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1150/2000 implementing Decision 2007/436/EC, Euratom on the system of the European 
Communities' own resources. 

No information received from the customs. 

In accordance with Council Regulation 1150/2000, Swedish Customs reports irregularities and fraud on a quarterly basis. Swedish Customs is 
currently updating its procedures regarding the reporting on irregularities and fraud in OWNRES, in order to ensure a more efficient and correct 
reporting. 

UK  As regards frauds & irregularities involving traditional  own resource revenue, HMRC conducts regular checks (i.e. twice weekly) to identify 
post clearance demands involving €10k+ to be keyed to OWNRES. Monitoring of older cases is ongoing to ensure timely updates and closure 
where necessary. The task represents a large percentage of the administrative staff's overall work. Where information classed by OWNRES as 
mandatory has not been provided follow up inquiries are made to ensure full details are received from the case officer.   

3.2.2.  Expenditure: a developing landscape 

On the expenditure side, the changes in the number of fraudulent irregularities reported in the last five years are more difficult to interpret (decreasing in 
2009-11, and then increasing in the following two years). However, it seems to be more linked to the fact that most of spending programmes are multi-
annual (structural and rural development funds and Pre-accession assistance).  

101 

 
 
 
 
An unexpected change was observed in 2013 in the agricultural sector (with significantly more cases of potential fraud detected and reported); this could 
be the result of ad hoc investigations and might not be confirmed in future years. 

However, the role of the managing authorities in detecting fraud has been growing, in particular since 2012. Their role should grow further in the coming 
years, thanks to the recently developed anti-fraud strategies that will be fully implemented in 2014-20. 

RECOMMENDATION 7 

The Commission recommends that Member States correctly implement the EU’s anti-fraud rules, based on carefully prepared and up-to-date 
fraud risk assessments, and supported by adequate IT tools that will help to better target checks. 
Structured  coordination  (exchange  of  data  and  information)  between  anti-fraud  bodies  and  managing  authorities  has  proved  to  be  a  best 
practice and should be implemented in all Member States. 

BE 

The Belgian AFCOS has been designated in 2013, however the day-to-day functioning of AFCOS is still in a process of optimizing.  

FEDER WALLONIE (ERDF WALLONIA): 

AFCOS, in the same way as Belgium's FPS Foreign Affairs, should be granted IMS access for consultation purposes. 

ESF VLAANDEREN: 

The  form  this  cooperation  will  take  is  still  being  studied,  but  Flanders  believes  that  it  should  make  allowances  for  Belgium's  institutional 
structures. 

BG  By Decision No 53 of 17 December 2014 of the Council of Ministers, a National strategy for preventing and combating irregularities and 

fraud with implications for the financial interests of the European Union for the period 2014–2020 was adopted. 

The National Strategy is in line with the new initiatives for protection of the financial interests of the Union at Community level and takes into 

102 

 
 
 
 
 
account  the  Commission’s  recommendations.  On  the  basis  of  an  analysis  of  the  mechanism  for  protection  of  the  financial  interests  of  the 
European Union, it outlines the irregularities reported during the period 2007–2013, the problem areas identified, and the strategic goals and 
actions  to  be  taken  by  the  bodies  involved  in  the  management  and  control  of  the  disbursement  of  EU  funds  and  by  the  revenue  and  law 
enforcement agencies responsible for combating irregularities and fraud with implications for revenue and spending at Community level. 

The main goal of the National Strategy is to ensure a higher level of protection of the financial interests of the EU through the achievement of 
four strategic goals. The first goal is step up prevention through better legislation, strengthening of the administrative capacity, transparency and 
public access to information, maintaining integrated databases and systems that enable reporting and the exchange of information. The second 
strategic goal — more efficient detection and combating of irregularities and fraud — will be achieved through strengthening of the cooperation 
and interaction between revenue authorities, conducting robust internal controls, and interaction between government bodies, the private sector, 
non-governmental organisations and civil society and improvement of the system for the exchange of information about irregularities and fraud, 
and reliance on advanced information technologies and electronic management in the administration of irregularities. The third strategic goal is 
to strengthen cooperation with OLAF and the competent bodies of the EU and other Member States and the fourth one is to raise the efficiency 
of  investigations,  recovery  action  and  the  levying  of  penalties.  The  national  rules  on  imposing  penalties  will  be  streamlined,  clear  and 
expeditious recovery procedures will be put in place and the efficiency of administrative and penal proceedings will be improved. 

In  connection  with  the  exchange  of  information  between  the  managing  authorities  and  anti-fraud bodies,  the  Managing  Authorities  of 
operational  programmes  keep  separate  registers  of  notified  and  identified  irregularities,  and  report  the  information  contained  therein  to  the 
AFCOS Directorate of the MVR on a quarterly basis. 

The Managing Authorities of operational programmes have an obligation to report irregularities and fraud via two electronic systems: 

 

the Information System for Management and Monitoring of EU Funds (MMIS), which contains a dedicated Irregularities module and 
enables 
irregularities  covered  by  Articles 28(2)  and 36(1)  of  Commission 
Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 (this category of irregularities are not reported to OLAF but must be reported to the AFCOS Directorate 
at national level); 

the  reporting  of  all  detected  and  registered 

 

the  Irregularity  Management  System  (IMS),  which  is  used  to  report  irregularities  and  fraud  covered  by  Article  28(1)  of  Commission 
Regulation (EC) No 1828/2006 (irregularities reported to OLAF). 

Management and monitoring information system for the period 2014–2020 (MMIS 2020) 

103 

 
 
A single Information System (MMIS 2020) will be used during the programming period 2014–2020 for the management and monitoring of the 
following operational programmes cofinanced by the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF): Transport and Transport Infrastructure; 
Environment,  Regions  in  Growth;  Innovation  and  Competitiveness;  Good  Governance;  Human  Resources  Development;  Science  and  Smart 
Growth; Rural Development Programme 2014–2020; and Development of the Fisheries Sector 2014–2020. In accordance with Contract MS-96 
of 29 July 2014 concluded with a view to enabling the functioning of the MMIS 2020, the functionalities of the information system used during 
the programming period 2007–2013 will be further developed. The MMIS 2020 will have a significantly higher capacity for the storage and 
processing of structured information about projects, applicants, beneficiaries, partners, contractors, payments made, types of expenditure, etc. In 
addition,  the  system  will  be  equipped  with  functionalities  enabling  the  exchange  of  information  with  the  National  Statistical  Institute,  the 
Company Register, the BULSTAT Register, the De minimis and State Aid registers, etc. This will improve the analytical capability of MMIS 
2020, including the possibilities to generate reports to be used to prevent and combat fraud, including by means of conducting checks to verify 
the absence of double financing, monitoring and conducting analyses and assessments. The expanded functionalities are a further guarantee for 
the detection and prevention of fraud and irregularities with implications for the operational programmes. 

Arachne Bulgaria plans to introduce and use the Arachne system developed by the European Commission as a risk assessment instrument for 
the operational programmes. Thus, a software tool will be available for daily use that enables identification of the projects that carry the highest 
risk and ensures a possibility for the systematic monitoring and review of information about projects, beneficiaries, contracts and contractors 
from  internal  and  external  sources  over  extended  periods  of  time.  Following  extensive  communication  with  the  Commission,  data  from  the 
Management and Monitoring Information System (MMIS) about all operational programmes has been submitted for processing to enable the 
final software configuration. In addition, the use of Arachne as a risk assessment tool will be included in the description of the management and 
control systems of the Managing Authorities. 

The  information  alleging  irregularities  is  administered  in  accordance  with  the  procedures  and  within  the  time  periods  stipulated  in  the 
Regulation  laying  down  the  procedures  for  the  administration  of  irregularities  with  implications  for  funds,  instruments  and  programmes 
cofinanced by the European Union. The information concerning alerts and irregularities is entered into the MMIS and IMS in a timely manner 
by  the  officers  responsible  for  irregularities  and  it  is  used  by  the  Certifying Authority  (CA)  for  the  purposes  of  certifying  expenditure  and 
drawing up declarations in respect of the amounts written off and recovered, those to be recovered and non-recoverable amounts.  

When reviewing documents or upon the receipt of letters (by post or via the electronic reporting system of the Ministry of Finance), complaints 
and  information  about  irregularities  on  the  part  of  natural  or  legal  persons  within  the  competence  of  bodies  other  than  the  CA,  which  are 
covered by the definitions of irregularity and fraud, may be detected. In this case, the CA registers the alleged irregularity under the respective 

104 

 
 
operational programme in the dedicated register and notifies the unit or body concerned. When the information received contains indications of 
fraud, the competent law enforcement bodies (Prosecutor’s Office) and the AFCOS Directorate are notified. The operating procedures manuals 
of  the  Certifying  Authority  for  the  programming  periods  2007–2013  and  2014–2020,  respectively,  contain  detailed  procedures  for  reporting 
irregularities/suspected  fraud  to  be  followed  by  the  staff  of  the  CA  in  accordance  with  the  Regulation  laying  down  the  procedures  for  the 
administration of irregularities with implications for funds, instruments and programmes cofinanced by the European Union. All employees of 
the  Certifying  Authority  have  access  to  the  Irregularities  register  in  which  the  alerts  within  the  competence  of  bodies  other  than  the  CA  are 
entered in connection with the certification of expenditure incurred under the operational programmes. 

As  regards  information  alleging  irregularities,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  Managing  Authorities  have  stepped  up  their  efforts  to  verify  the 
reliability of information and conduct checks on sources through feedback and collecting verification information via different channels. The 
Managing  Authorities  conduct  detailed  checks  to  verify  the  information  contained  in  each  report  that  may  subsequently  be  qualified  as 
‘suspected  fraud’.  Feedback  is  sent  to  the  party  that  reported  the  alleged  irregularity  in  each  case  with  a  view  to  collecting,  obtaining  and 
compiling a summary of the information received. Unannounced on-the-spot checks are conducted as necessary to establish the facts, obtain 
documentary  evidence to  be  sent  to  the  competent  law  enforcement  bodies,  and  identify  the  presence  or  absence  of  intentional  behaviour  or 
deception. 

Since  the  beginning  of  2014,  information  has  been  entered  into  the  information  systems  of  the  Managing  Authorities  where  the  alleged 
infringement is corroborated by written evidence, which is frequently not only cited but also sent via the systems as attachments and appears in 
the  file  of  the  irregularity  concerned.  Information  is  updated  on  a  regular  basis  by  modifying  the  details  of  the  irregularity  in  the  electronic 
systems.  Detailed  checks  are  conducted  when  information  about  suspected  fraud  or  conflicts  of  interest  is  received.  In  connection  with  this, 
information  from  a  broad  range  of  public  sources  and  available  grant  agreement/public  procurement  documentation  is  collected  with  the 
assistance  of  all  interested  administrative  services  or  competent  bodies.  The  competent  law  enforcement  and  control  bodies  (Police, 
Investigation  Service,  Prosecutor’s  Office  and  courts)  are  notified  with  a  request  to  take  action,  depending  on  the  competence  of  the  body 
concerned. On-the-spot checks are conducted without prior notification to the grant beneficiary. The respective fraud indicator is reported to the 
AFCOS Directorate of the MVR in line with the Regulation adopted by Decree No 285/2009 of the Council of Ministers and the rules laid down 
in  Section  Irregularities  of  the  Procedures  Manual  of  the  Managing  Authority  of  the  operational  programme.  Where  the  suspected  fraud  is 
verified  (by  modifying  the  information  about  the  irregularity  in  which  fraud  is  suspected)  a  100 %  financial  correction  is  imposed  on  the 
respective project component (concluded contract, activity and/or budget heading). The information about registered irregularities and fraud is 
updated  and  reported  on  a  regular  basis  with  a  view  to  ensuring  adequate  traceability  of  the  progress  of  verifications  and/or  administrative 

105 

 
 
proceedings. 

On  1 February 2014,  an  Administrative  Investigations  Unit  within  the  AFCOS  Directorate  of  the  MVR  was  established.  Its  tasks  include 
conducting administrative checks with a view to detecting irregularities with implications for the financial interests of the EU (administrative 
investigations). As of 31 December 2014, the Administrative Investigations Unit had instituted proceedings in 50 cases following the receipt of 
information on alleged irregularities. Seven administrative investigations have been completed. No recommendations for follow-up action were 
given in the three cases in which infringements were not identified. In four cases irregularities at project level were detected during the course of 
the administrative investigation under the operational programmes Environment, Regional Development, Rural Development and Development 
of the Fisheries Sector. Recommendations for the recovery of the amount of BGN 11 921 826 were given and the cases have been referred to 
the Bulgarian Prosecutor’s Office. 

A Permanent Working Group on Irregularities (PRGN) was established. It operates under the supervision of the AFCOS Directorate and 
comprises  34  members,  including  officials  from  the  AFCOS  Directorate  and  the  relevant  institutions:  Managing  Authorities,  Certifying 
Authorities and Audit Authorities. The PRGN is responsible for identifying and reviewing specific problem cases that are very complex or cases 
that are ambiguous, and for exchanging experiences, good practices and information about new fraudulent practices. 

All Managing Authorities maintain open lines of communication with the AFCOS Directorate of the MVR on issues such as methodological 
guidance  on  the  administration  and  reporting  of  irregularities  but,  equally,  for  the  purposes  of  conducting  on-the-spot  checks  when  special 
assistance from investigating bodies is required. 

With regard to the information systems put in place in several Managing Authorities of operational programmes, it should be noted that 
the  Directorate-General  for  the  Management  of  Territorial  Cooperation  of  the  Ministry  of  Regional  Development  and  Public  Works  has 
developed an integrated management information system (for the programmes for which it is responsible as designated Managing Authority) 
with different levels of access and protection, which enables project documentation to be entered, stored and monitored in a separate section. It 
is  further  equipped  with  a  functionality  enabling  information  to  be  entered  about  each  irregularity/suspected  fraud  detected.  The  relevant 
information about irregularities is accessible from the different modules, which enables full traceability of the administration of irregularities 
from the date on which they occurred until the case is closed/a financial correction is imposed. The information is used by the working groups 
set  up  within  the  administrative  service  for  risk  assessment  at  project  and  programme  level  in  order  to  identify  potential  deficiencies  in  the 
management and control system and for overall fraud risk assessment. During the programming period 2014–2020 full access to the electronic 
system  will  be  granted  to  the  AFCOS  Directorate  of  the  MVR  and  the  Managing  Authority  of  the  Operational Programme  on  Regional 
Development (OPRD) will develop a dedicated information system for the needs of the MA of the OPRD, equipped with a functionality for 

106 

 
 
cross-referencing all information about irregularities or fraud received by or generated within the Managing Authority to the risk  assessment 
system set up under the operational programme. It will provide input for fraud risk assessment both at the level of each structural unit of the MA 
and each individual beneficiary to be conducted by use of the IT tool described. 

The  management  and  control  systems  of  the  Operational  Programme  on  Human  Resources  Development  (OPHRD)  referred  to  in  the 
Manual  on  the  management  and  implementation  of  the  operational  programme  during  the  period  2014–2020  are  fully  in  line  with  the 
Commission’s  Guidelines  and  the  annexes  thereto.  The  manual  contains  a  procedure  for  detecting  and  reporting  irregularities  that  has  been 
modified  to  ensure  compliance  with  the  provisions  laid  down  in  Regulation  (EU)  No 1303/2013.  A  detailed  description  of  the  rules  and 
procedure for the detecting, reporting and follow-up on irregularities/fraud is set out in Chapter 12 Irregularities of the Manual. The system is 
similar to the one currently used. The requirement for risk assessment in the context of the anti-fraud effort during the period 2014–2020 has 
been  taken into  account and is  an integral  component of the management  and control systems  of the OPHRD 2014–2020, including the risk 
assessment system for the operational programme. The description of the systems and the manual were approved on 26 and 14 January 2015, 
respectively, and their accreditation by the Audit of EU Funds Executive Agency is forthcoming. 

The  Managing  Authority  of  the  Operational  Programme  on  the  Environment  (OPE)  is  currently  developing  a  comprehensive  risk 
assessment  strategy,  which  includes  a  fraud  risk  assessment  component.  It  is  based  on  the  Commission’s  Guidance  Note  on  fraud  risk 
assessment for the programming period 2014–2020 and Guidelines for national anti-fraud strategies for the European Structural and Investment 
Funds. The specific steps to be taken by the Managing Authority against fraud will be set out in detail in the MA procedures manual. 

For  a  second  year  after  introducing  the  principle  of  effectively  structured  coordination,  in  2014  the  State  Fund  for  Agriculture  (DFZ) 
continued to follow the model to ensure coordination between the Anti-Fraud Department and the Directorates responsible for direct payments. 
Three  checks  were  conducted  in  accordance  with  Article  28(1)  of  the  Rules  of  Procedure  of  the  DFZ.  Risk  analysis  is  conducted  by  use  of 
IACS, a specialist software product that allows for analyses on the basis of different risk criteria, and generation of project samples, grant 
applications  and  payment  requests  for  the  purposes  of  the  ex  post  controls  conducted  by  the  Anti-Fraud  Directorate.  As  a  result  of  a 
meticulously conducted risk analysis with input from the Anti-Fraud Department, the Direct Payments Department and the Technical Inspection 
Service  Directorate,  a  number  of  high-risk  beneficiaries  have  been  identified.  The  outcome  of  the  checks  conducted  to  date,  on  the  basis  of 
thorough and up-to-date fraud risk assessments using appropriate IT instruments, demonstrate conclusively that the checks being carried out are 
much better targeted. The considerable number of beneficiaries having submitted applications that involve suspected fraud is a reliable indicator 
that the principle of structured coordination (data and information exchange) between the bodies concerned in the fight against fraud and the 
managing authorities and paying agencies is a good practice and should continue to be applied in the future. 

107 

 
 
The  Axter  Popeye  information  system  is  designed  to  enable  the  management  of  projects  cofinanced  by  EU  funds  by  the  Fisheries  and 
Aquacultures Executive Agency (IARA) in its capacity as designated Managing Authority. It is used for the registration of grant applications by 
the  local  departments  of  the  IARA,  subsequent  processing  of  project  information  by  officials  at  the  Agency’s  head  office,  the  entry  of 
information into standard registers and generating different reports on applications and projects by the competent officials. The software product 
used for the processing of project information and collecting data to be transmitted via the Axter Popeye system of the European Commission 
ensured  a  fully  automated  process  of  acceptance,  registration  and  evaluation  of  project  applications  under  the  Operational  Programme  on 
Development of the Fisheries Sector (OPDFS) for the period 2007–2013 and provided a sound basis for the management and monitoring of the 
programme. The Axter Popeye information system is equipped with an interface to the management and monitoring system for the Structural 
Funds and the Cohesion Fund of the European Union in Bulgaria (MMIS) with a view to making appropriate administrative arrangements for 
cooperation  ad  control  of  the  entry,  update  and  electronic  exchange  of  information  between  the  two  systems.  Designated  officials  from  the 
European  Fisheries  Fund  Directorate  have  access  to  both  the  MMIS  and  the  Integrated  Administration  and  Control  System  (IACS)  for  the 
purposes of the administrative checks conducted on payments requests under projects implemented under the Operational Programme on Rural 
Development (OPRD). 

The  Specialist  Directorate  for  Financial  Intelligence  of  the  State  Agency  for  National  Security  (DANS)  is  a  beneficiary  under  a  project 
implemented  under  the  Operational  Programme  on  Administrative  Capacity  (OPAC)  for  the  development  of  an  information  and 
communication  system  and  a  secure  web  portal  for  the  provision  of  electronic  services  to  the  public  administration,  businesses  and 
citizens  in  relation  to  the  implementation  of  measures  to  combat  money  laundering  and  terrorist  financing.  The  project,  with  a  scheduled 
completion deadline in the second half of 2015, will enable the persons referred to in Article 3(2) and 3(3) of the ZMIP to transfer electronically 
information  on  the  performance  of  their  obligations  for  the  reporting  of  suspicious  operations  and  the  development  of  internal  rules  on  the 
control and prevention of money laundering and terrorist financing, thereby accelerating and enhancing the efficiency of communication and the 
subsequent processing of information by the Specialist Administrative Directorate Financial Intelligence of the DANS. 

The Bulgarian Prosecutor’s Office has put in place and is now using a Single Information System (SIS), which enables the entry, storage and 
traceability of uniform case and other information from the institution of proceedings up to the issuance of an injunction in the case. A separate 
functionality ensures that all court decisions are available (as electronic attachments) in case folders. Depending on access authorisations, the 
SIS may be used by: 

  each prosecutor (and investigating magistrate) at first-instance level for the purposes of the cases and proceedings allocated to them; 

108 

 
 
  more senior prosecutors for the purposes of conducting ex officio checks and case reviews; 

 

the heads of the respective prosecution offices for the purposes of administrative control, including the checks envisaged in the Judiciary 
Act (ZSV) to ensure compliance with the time periods for conducting investigations and adopting decisions. 

The following electronic registers have been developed (on the basis of the information entered into the SIS): 

  Register of persons subject to pending criminal proceedings; 

  Register to monitor compliance with the time periods laid down in procedural law; 

  Register of persons remanded in custody; 

  Register of the time periods laid down in the Criminal Procedure Code; 

  Register of pending cases; 

  Register of acquittals. 

Funds  are  available  to  ensure  that  each  prosecutor  and  investigating  magistrate  has  access  to  the  national  information  systems  database, 
including identity documents, the company register, etc. The SIS comprises a communication module equipped with an interface to the Single 
Crime Prevention Information System. 

In connection with cooperation and data exchange, the PRB is considering updating the joint guidelines on the exchange of information with the 
AFCOS  Directorate  of  the  MVR.  The  statistical  information  that  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  provides  about  crimes  with  implications  for  the 
financial interests of the EU includes details such as the date of instituting criminal proceedings, and their progress and outcome, throughout the 
trial phase and up to the entry into force of the decisions handed down by the courts. As regards the information about the different types of 
programmes  (which  cannot  be  generated  automatically),  the  IT  Directorate  is  examining  the  data  export  software  functionalities  of  the  SIS 
version currently used. 

The  Prosecutor’s  Office  conducts  monthly  analyses  of  high-profile  cases  involving  corruption  or  crimes  with  implications  for  the  financial 
interests of the EU. The analyses cover the previous month and outline the progress made in relation to the previous five months and the same 
period in the previous year. Along with other information about the package of measures, trends are identified to enable senior officials in the 
Prosecutor’s Office to determine the need for follow-up action. 

109 

 
 
In 2013, proceedings were instituted in 179 new cases in respect of financial fraud with implications for the financial interests of the EU. Of 
these, 103 cases have been brought to court and 96 convictions have been obtained. This information has been obtained from the Report of the 
Prosecutor-General on law enforcement and the activity of prosecution and investigation services in 2013 and the Analysis of the work of the 
Prosecutor’s Office during the first three quarters of 2014. 

During  the  latter  period  the  Prosecutor’s  Office  supervised  proceedings  in  349  pre-trial  proceedings  concerning  abuse  of  EU  funds  and 
proceedings were instituted in 117 new cases. Proceedings have been concluded in 154 cases in which 98 injunctions were issued against 113 
accused parties. A total of 64 sentences and 2 acquittals have entered into force. 

CZ 

In  connection  with  information  exchange  on  suspected  criminal  acts  involving  financial  resources  received  from  EU  funds,  last  year  the 
Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office stepped up cooperation with the central bodies that audit subsidies co-financed from European funds and 
public procurement. Specifically, a formal agreement was concluded on cooperation between the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office and the 
Supreme Audit Office, on the basis of which joint training is conducted and information exchanged, including information reporting suspected 
criminal acts, which the Supreme Public Prosecutor’s Office then takes the necessary action  to investigate. The Supreme Public Prosecutor’s 
Office has entered into similar cooperation with the Office for the Protection of Competition, including exchanging information and experience 
within the Office’s remit on scrutinising the conduct of public procurement procedures. 
The  Czech  Republic  has  a  long-standing  tradition  of  focusing  on  eliminating  risks  potentially  threatening  EU  traditional  own  resources.  In 
connection it is essential for there to be communication between the centre processing the risk information and the body actually carrying out 
the  checks.  Post-clearance  checks  on  goods  are  one  of  the  mechanisms  used  for  this  purpose.  Selecting  which  traders  need  to  be  checked 
because they present a risk is one of the key factors affecting the effectiveness of the checks then carried out.  The Automatic Risk Assessment 
(ARA) application referred to above was created for this purpose. This application can collate the risk factors entered and automatically process 
them  in  relation  to  traders  to  be  checked.  Search  queries  identify  specific  traders  and  the  customs  declarations  at  risk.  Rules  have  also  been 
introduced on communication between the central level (Directorate-General for Customs) and the operational departments (customs offices). 
Risk analyses are carried out at central level regarding potential infringements of the law. Where a risk is identified as real, it is reported to the 
customs office concerned proposing specific action or a thematic area to be looked at and the customs office then reports back on whether the 
identified risk was substantiated or not. This system is highly effective. The effectiveness of post clearance checks on goods currently stands at 
86.8%. 

110 

 
 
 
DK  Cooperation  concerning  EU  anti-fraud  rules  in  Denmark  takes  place  between  authorities  in  the  AFCOS  network.  Anti-fraud  legislation  is 
implemented in the field of agriculture by the Danish AgriFish Agency, for the structural funds by the Danish Business Agency and for customs 
by  SKAT.  The  Public  Prosecutor  for  Economic  and  International  Crime  (SØIK)  is  the  competent  authority  for  the  investigation  of  crimes 
involving EU funds, while the AFCOS (Ministry of Finance) undertakes overall coordination of cases with horizontal relevance.  
Regular  meetings  are  held  in  the  AFCOS  network,  at  which  there  is  a  general  exchange  of  experiences  and  information.  Besides  this,  the 
individual authorities in the network cooperate directly with each other.  
Cooperation between the AgriFish Agency and SKAT has been formalised in the form of a cooperation agreement which lays down that "SKAT 
and  the  AgriFish  Agency  will  on  a  mutual  and  ongoing  basis  inform  each  other  of  relevant  events  and  information,  including  suspicions  of 
unlawful imports/exports/transits, falsified documents and suchlike" (cooperation agreement of June 2014). 
Concerning the structural funds, an initial test of the usefulness of Arachne in the management of structural funds has begun. The initial test, 
and any further use of Arachne, however, needs to be further clarified in terms of Danish data protection legislation. 
Cooperation between the managing authorities and the Public Prosecutor for Serious Economic and International Crime is coordinated inter alia 
via  AFCOS.  If  there  is  a  case  of  suspected  fraud  involving  EU  funds  which  confers  financial  gain  on  the  beneficiary  and  for  which  no 
administrative sanctions are available, the case is to be reported to the police. SØIK is responsible for registering such notifications. 
Actual cases and any transfers are discussed directly between the managing authority and SØIK. A communication on the notification of cases 
of fraud is currently being audited by the National Auditor, and the NA will issue guidelines for the police's handling of notifications of cases of 
fraud involving EU funds. 

DE 

Implementing measures for the EU's anti-fraud provisions in the agriculture and fisheries sector are well advanced. 
In agriculture, a working party has developed guidance which paying agencies are expected to use as their basis when implementing the anti-
fraud measures. The first anti-fraud manuals have already been produced and are being used in order to ensure that, inter alia, more targeted 
inspections can also be carried out. In fisheries, bilateral talks have been held with the European Commission. As a result, the administrative 
authorities have been offered help with implementing the fraud risk assessment and strategy for proportionate anti-fraud measures, and advised 
on their correct application. These anti-fraud measures also stipulate how suspected cases should be forwarded to the competent investigative 
authorities. 
Germany  takes  a  ‘zero-tolerance’  approach  to  fraud,  as  stipulated  by  the  Commission.  The  Structural  Funds  do  not  appear  to  contain  any 

111 

 
 
legislative provision for the mandatory use of IT tools in the fight against fraud. Germany therefore invites the Commission to confine itself to 
requesting proportionate measures. 

EE  An  access  to  the  project  databases  (Management  Information  System)  is  given  to  main  partners  as  the  Police  and  Tax  and  Customs  Board. 
Information  on  new  irregularity  cases  reaches  to  them  within  two  weeks  from  the  moment  the  detection  and  notification  by  the  2nd  level 
Intermediate Body has occurred. Our implementing entities have regular and ad-hoc meetings with the Police officials and joint training courses 
or seminars. We have contacts in law enforcement institutions, who we send all doubtful information to in order to consult with them if there are 
any signs of crime. 
Regarding  the  2014-2020  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  (ESIF)  Estonia  has  adopted  fraud  risk  assessment  tools  outlined  in  the 
Commission  guidelines  and  launched  risk  assessment  in  2014.  In  the  Management  Information  System  double  financing  is  checked  at  the 
expenditure level and necessary cross-checks have been developed. 

IE 

Effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures, taking into account the risks identified are being put in place by the Managing Authorities of 
the  relevant  ESI  funded  operational  programmes  for  2014-2020  in  accordance  with  Article  125  (4)  (c)  and  Annex  XIII  of  the  Common 
Provision Regulation. 

EL  AUTHORITY Ministry of Economy, Infrastructure, Shipping and Tourism 

As mentioned earlier (answer to recommendation 3), the Management and Control System (MCS) of the 2014-2020 Programming Period, to be 
implemented  by  Managing  Authorities  (MAs),  will  include  specific  procedures  for  preventing  and  combating  fraud.  Article  52  of  Law 
4313/2014  on  the  NSRF  2014  2020  sets  out  the  creation  of  an  Internal  Cooperation  Network  between  all  Departments  involved  in  the 
management of structural actions, coordinated by the Special Institutional Support Authority (SISA). A team will be established within each 
Managing Authority, which will be responsible for assessing fraud risks, making recommendations on corrective measures and reporting results 
to the Internal Network in question. The Network will examine the reports of Managing Authorities (MAs) on the assessment of fraud risks and 
the anti-fraud measures adopted. The results of reports may lead to further guidelines or clarifications. Therefore, the contribution of Managing 
Authorities (MAs) to preventing and combating fraud is expected to be further improved in the years to come. 

Regarding cooperation at  the national level, in addition to the  individual cooperation initiatives launched in previous years, the creation of a 
Cooperation  Network  for  the  National  Anti-Fraud  Strategy  in  Structural  Actions  was  proposed  in  January  2014,  at  the  initiative  of  the 
Secretariat-General of Public Investments (SGPI-NSRF), between the following departments: Secretariat-General of Public Investments NSRF, 

112 

 
 
Financial  Audit  Committee,  Financial  and  Economic  Crime  Unit,  National  Anti-Corruption  Coordinator  and  the  General  Inspector  of  Public 
Administration.  Fruitful  meetings  were  held  in  this  context.  The  appointment  of  the  National  Anti  Corruption  Coordinator  as  AFCOS  is 
expected to further improve the coordination of anti-fraud actions and the exchange of country-level information.  

Regarding IT systems for data collection and processing, we would like to inform you that the upgrading of the Integrated Information System 
(ITS) is currently underway, aiming to the gradual automatisation of all necessary procedures, the integration of operational flows and document 
handling, electronic document support, etc.  

Furthermore,  important  tools  were  developed  in  previous  years  and  are  currently  being  upgraded,  such  as  the  Information  System  for  the 
Management of State Aid (ISMSA) and the SACS system for monitoring the Accumulation of State Aid.  

The Information System for the Management of State Aid (ISMSA) ensures compliance with transparency and anti-fraud requirements and it 
also covers the requirement for documenting all steps, from Submission by the Investor up to  compliance with Long-Term Obligations, in its 
entirety, including the recording of relevant supporting documents (audit trail). Article 57 of Law 4314/2014 provides for the mandatory use of 
the  Information  System  for  the  Management  of  State  Aid  (ISMSA)  by  all  authorities  implementing  measures  that  promote  and  support 
entrepreneurship. 

The  SACS  system  is  an  information  system  for  recording  all  State  aids,  which  will  ensure  that:  (a)  the  rules,  as  defined  in  EU  institutional 
documents, and (b) the maximum amounts of State aid which may be granted in each case, are complied with. This audit prevents the granting 
of State aid that exceeds the maximum ceilings and, therefore, it may act as a deterrent for fraud. 

AUTHORITY  -  Ministry  of  Finance–  General  Accounting  Office  of  the  State  –Fiscal  Control  Committee  (FCC)-  Directorate:  52nd 
Planning and Evaluation of Audits 

Regarding the Commission’s remark on the coordination between the competent anti-fraud authorities and the implementation of EU rules by 
such authorities using appropriate IT tools, the Financial Audit Committee, acting as Audit Authority of the OPs under Objectives 1, 2 and 3 of 
the NSRF, as well as of the OP Fisheries 2007-2013, has made the following observations:  

In addition to the actions taken so far by the Financial Audit Committee for preventing and combating fraud, which are being presented in detail 
in  the  Audit  Manual  of  the  Financial  Audit  Committee,  as  mentioned  in  the  replies  of  our  Department  in  the  context  of  the  Follow-up 
Recommendations of previous years, the Financial Audit Committee, as mentioned in Observation No 8 of our reply for the year 2012, does not 
use a specific IT tool to analyse fraud risks during the design of its audits.  

113 

 
 
Regarding the cooperation of our Department with other authorities in order to combat fraud, as mentioned in Observation No 3, the Financial 
Audit Committee cooperates both with the Inspectors - Controllers Body for Public Administration (SEEDD) and with the Single Independent 
Public Procurement Authority, through the exchange of information and data on their audit results.  

Furthermore, the Financial Audit Committee submits, on a half-yearly basis, information on its audits to the National Anti-Fraud Coordinator, 
who  has  also  been  designated  as  AFCOS  for  Greece,  whereas  it  also  submits,  on  an  annual  basis,  the  results  of  its  audits  to  the  General 
Inspector of Public Administration. 

Finally, the Financial Audit Committee, acting as Audit Authority under Article 62 of the General Regulation on NSRF 2007-2013 Programmes 
and Article 61 of the Regulation on the OP Fisheries 2007-2013, is in close cooperation with all authorities involved in the Management and 
Control System of the above Programmes, namely the managing authorities, the Certification Authority and the national coordination bodies. 

AUTHORITY  -  Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production,  Environment  and  Energy  (Former  Ministry  of  Rural  Development  and 
Food) - Special Management Service of the Rural Development Programme (EYD PAA) 

In the field of data and information exchange, the Special Management Service of the Rural Development Programme (EYD PAA) works with 
the National Anti-Corruption Coordinator (AFCOS), established under Law 4152/2103 (Government Gazette, Series I, No 107), as in force, as 
well  as  with  the  Directorate  of  Legislative  Initiative  and  Infringement  Management  of  the  Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production, 
Environment and Energy. 

Furthermore, the Special Management Service for the Programme ‘Rural Development’ cooperates, as appropriate, with audit bodies, such as 
the  Financial  and  Economic  Crime  Unit  (SDOE).  In  particular,  in  the  cases  where  the  on-the-spot  audits  of  the  Audit  Units  of  the  Special 
Management Service for the Programme ‘Rural Development’ and the Special Implementation Services or the Programme ‘Rural Development’ 
show some indication of suspected fraud, the report of the audit results is notified and administrative assistance is requested from the competent 
Financial and Economic Crime Unit department for further investigation and actions to be taken in accordance with its competences under law. 
In addition, if the above audits indicate possible crimes related to the protection of the EU’s financial interests, a copy of the audit report is also 
sent to the competent prosecuting authority which takes legal action, as appropriate.  

Regarding the use of IT tools, the following must be noted: the audit system takes into account cases of non-eligibility of expenditure/error, as 
well as irregularities with indications of fraud, in the identification of risk factors for the sampling of audits based on risk analysis. Note that the 
specifications for the design of the new IT System for the Programme ‘Rural Development’ in respect of the 2014-2020 period, as drawn up by 
the competent working party, provide for the interconnection of the system with the IT Systems of other Funds/ITS (to assess, inter alia, the 

114 

 
 
possibility  of  duplicated  financing  of  projects)  and  establish  the  possibility  of  interconnection  with  reference  cost  statements  in  respect  of 
investment measures/projects, aiming to verify that costs are reasonable and, therefore, to reduce the error rate of the Programme. 

AUTHORITY  -  Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production,  Environment  and  Energy  (Former  Ministry  of  Rural  Development  and 
Food) - Directorate of Audits and Inspections 

In the field of data and information exchange, the Directorate of Audits and Inspections of the Ministry of Reconstruction of Production, which 
is responsible for carrying out ex post, on-the-spot audits on beneficiaries or debtors related directly or indirectly to the financing system under 
the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF), has developed a structured cooperation with other authorities.  

Specifically, Article 83 of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 provides for mutual assistance among Member States in cases where a company or a 
third party is established in a Member State other than that where: i) the related amount was collected or should have been collected and/or was 
paid or should have been paid, and ii) the documents and information necessary for the audit are located.  

In  implementation  of  the  above  Article,  Member  States  must  send  to  the  Commission  a  list  of  businesses  established  in  a  third  country,  for 
which the amount in question has or should have been paid or collected in the said Member State.  

In addition, under Regulation (EC) No 1276/2008, this Directorate of the Ministry of Reconstruction of Production: 

(a) has concluded a Memorandum of Cooperation dated 12 July 2010 with the Ministry of Finance-General Directorate of Customs and Excise 
Duties  and  the  Payment  and  Control  Agency  for  Guidance  and  Guarantee  Community  Aid  (O.P.E.K.E.P.E),  for  their  cooperation  and 
coordination in the field of exports, with regard to all agricultural products eligible for refunds.  

(b)  furthermore,  it  cooperates  with  Member  States,  where  appropriate,  in  accordance  with  Article  83  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1306/2013  on 
mutual assistance, which stipulates that if additional information is required in another Member State as part of the scrutiny of an undertaking 
and, in particular, cross-checks, specific scrutiny requests may be made indicating the reasons for the request. 

(c) cooperates with other Services, as the case may be. In particular, the Directorate acquires information and data, as appropriate, if requested 
by any competent national authority, such as the Financial and Economic Crime Unit and other competent economic and/or tax authorities. 

(d) Finally, representatives of the Directorate in question participated in a meeting held by the National Anti-corruption Coordinator in Greece 
in the context of (a) taking up the new duties of AFCOS (anti fraud coordination service) by the National Coordinator; and (b) relevant actions 
under  the  Memorandum  of  Cooperation,  whereas  they  participated  in  an  event  held  by  the  National  Coordinator  on  ‘Modern  Means  of 

115 

 
 
Communication and Information in the management of Corruption’. 

Regarding  the  use  of  IT  tools,  in  implementation  of  Article  80  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1306/2013,  this  Directorate  of  the  Ministry  of 
Reconstruction of Production uses an IT system which has been presented to the auditing services of the European Commission and has been 
designed  on  the  basis  of  risk  analysis  for  the  computerised  elaboration  of  audit  programmes,  in  order  to  grade  and  visualise  as  many  risk 
parameters as possible leading to a better preparation of audit programmes of the Directorate by reducing the likelihood of errors in the process 
of selecting the beneficiaries to be audited and in the monitoring of audit programmes. 

In particular, the selection of the businesses to be audited is based on previously determined risk criteria for which severity factors on a scale 
from  0  (zero  risk)  to  3  (highest  risk)  are  implemented.  The  Risk  Analysis  methodology  consists  of  calculating  the  Risk  Amount  for  each 
business as the product of the criteria grade multiplied by the amount of the financial aid. The companies with the highest Risk Amount are 
those  selected  first.  The  proposals  for  the  use  of  risk  analysis  are  presented  each  November  to  the  competent  Service  of  the  European 
Commission  and  include  the  assessment  of  the  risk  analysis  of  the  previous  financial  year,  the  balance  of  risk  factors  and  all  relevant 
information regarding the approach to be followed, the techniques, the criteria and the method of implementation, under Regulation (EU) No 
1306/2013 and the implementing acts thereof. 

Finally,  this  Directorate  of  the  Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production  selects  the  transactions  to  be  audited  by  applying  a  risk  analysis 
methodology in respect of undertakings. 

AUTHORITY - Ministry of Reconstruction of Production, Environment and Energy - Directorate for Spatial Planning, Environment 
and Climate Change 

The Directorate of Spatial Planning, Environment and Climate Change of the Ministry of Reconstruction of Production has been designated as 
implementing  authority  of  certain  actions  under  Measure  2.1.4  ‘Agri-environment  Aid’  of  the  Rural  Development  Programme  (RDP)  2007-
2013,  as  approved  in  the  context  of  the  Rural  Development  Programme  (RDP)  2007-2013  by  means  of  Decision  No  Ε(2007)  6015/29 
November 2007 of the European Commission, as amended and in force. According to Joint Ministerial Decision No 079833/25 October 2011 
(Government Gazette, Series II, No 2366), as amended and in force, in order to comply with the recommendations of the European Commission 
on  the  reduction  of  irregularities  and  combating  fraud  aiming  to  protect  its  financial  interests,  the  Directorate  has  developed  a  computerised 
application which covers, for each action, all stages from the submission of aid applications by the interested parties and the performance of the 
required administrative audits and cross-checks, to the inclusion and payment to beneficiaries. 

In  particular,  the  terms  and  conditions  for  inclusion,  compliance  with  commitments,  the  administrative  inspections,  on-the-spot  checks  and 

116 

 
 
laboratory  tests  carried  out,  as  well  as  compliance  with  the  requirements  for  granting  the  aid  under  the  aforementioned  Joint  Ministerial 
Decision No 079833/25 October 2011, are being recorded in a computer application (using IT tools), in order to ensure compliance with the 
conditions for granting the aid, both at the approval stage and at the payment stage. As a result, the work of the auditors of the implementation 
bodies, the application body, the payment body and the bodies responsible for laboratory tests with regard to specific agricultural/environmental 
actions, as the case may be, is being assisted and safeguarded. All processes and audits that the competent bodies are required to implement so 
that  the  beneficiaries  of  the  co-financed  projects  may  receive  the  approved  aid  throughout  the  duration  of  their  contractual  obligations  are 
entered in the computerised application. 

The  computerised  environment  facilitates  the  cross-checks  required  under  Article  18  of  the  above  Joint  Ministerial  Decision  between  the 
information  declared  and  the  information  of  the  beneficiary  registered  both  in  other  database  systems,  such  as  the  Single  Aid  Application 
(A.E.E.) database, the geospatial data database (LPIS), the M.A.E.E. database (Register of Farmers and Agricultural Exploitation), the database 
of  Veterinary  records,  and  in  other  electronic  data  files  from  various  public  or  private  entities  such  as:  bank  accounts/early  retirement 
beneficiaries/early  retirement  successors  with  ten-year  foreclosure/findings  from  A.E.E.  audits  etc.  In  particular,  the  Single  Aid  information, 
which provides the final ‘image’ of each producer’s agricultural holding, constitutes the basis for the initial request and the subsequent audits 
provided for.  

Therefore, many of the procedures established for the auditing and inspection of the systems supported by these databases, are also incorporated 
indirectly as safeguards in the programmes of agri environmental actions. In this way, the stages which involve the human factor are reduced, 
eligibility  for  aid  to  producers  and  the  declared  areas  and/or  animals  is  ensured,  double  funding  of  parcels  or  producers  is  avoided  and,  in 
general, opportunities for fraud which would negatively affect the financial interests of the EU, are reduced. 

AUTHORITY  -  Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production,  Environment  and  Energy  (Former  Ministry  of  Rural  Development  and 
Food) - Directorate for Programming and Applications 

In order to ensure the effectiveness of: (a) regular inspections of the approved investment schemes, as laid down in the Community and national 
institutional framework, which are carried out during the certification process of expenditures for aid payment, as well as during the long-term 
obligations of authorities; and (b) unscheduled inspections carried out following complaints (e.g. Hellenic Food Authority (EFET), Financial 
and  Economic  Crime  Unit  (SDOE)  and  other  authorities  and/or  private  persons),  the  Directorate  for  Programming  and  Applications  of  the 
Ministry  of  Reconstruction  of  Production  held  a  training  seminar  in  2013  in  each  Region/Regional  Unit,  addressed  to  the  members  of  the 
competent  Monitoring  Committees  of  Investment  Schemes,  in  order  to  inform  them  on  the  audit  procedure,  so  as  to  safeguard  national  and 

117 

 
 
Community financial interests. 

Note that the regular inspections carried out by Monitoring Committees during the long-term obligations of bodies, are annual and are carried 
out on all subsidised units for: 

(a) five years for machinery and ten years for subsidised buildings, under investment plans included and implemented in the context of Measure 
2.1 of the Operational Programme Rural Development – Rural Restructuring (EPAA & AY 2000-2006); and 

(b) five years both for subsidised machinery and subsidised buildings under investment plans which have been included in Measure 123Α of the 
Rural Development Programme (PAA) 2007-2013. 

The inspections carried out on all inspected establishments receiving aid under Measure 2.1 of the Operational Programme Rural Development 
– Rural Restructuring (EPAA &  AY 2000-2006)  from the competent Monitoring Committees,  in  relation to  compliance  with the contractual 
obligations  of  operators  after  the  implementation  of  investment  plans  and  the  entry  of  establishments  into  operation,  have  led  to  findings  in 
certain cases, such as discontinuation of operation of the establishments before the end of the five-year period for completion of the works, lease 
of  premises,  operating  for  a  purpose  other  than  the  one  subsidised,  etc.  With  regard  to  these  projects,  the  Directorate  in  question  has 
implemented a recovery process of the public expenditure paid, in accordance with applicable legislation. 

In  particular,  in  the  context  of  data  and  information  exchange,  issues  related  to  the  institutional  framework  of  Measures  2.1  and  123Α,  the 
procedure for the exercise of the Directorate’s competences, the departments with which the Directorate works in order to counter fraud, the 
method  for  handling  complaints  and  the  problems  faced  by  the  Directorate  as  Implementing  Body  of  the  aforementioned  measures,  were 
discussed during a meeting held in October 2014 with members of the Coordinating Body for combating fraud. 

In  the  context  of  its  competences,  the  Directorate  in  question  cooperates  with  other  audit  services  under  Presidential  Decree  107/2014 
(Government Gazette, Series I, No 174), as well as with the Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE), examining the audit reports submitted 
thereto by these services and implementing procedures for the recovery of national or EU funds, when deemed necessary. 

AUTHORITY - Hellenic Police  

1. Combating economic crime is a key priority of the Hellenic Police, as set out both in the  New Strategic Operational Programme of the 
Hellenic Police for the period 2015-2049 and in the Economic Policy of the Hellenic Police Headquarters, which was drawn up in March 
2013.  In  particular,  the  Strategic  Operational  Programme  sets  out  individual  general  actions  for  the  effective  combating  of  economic  crime, 

118 

 
 
including, inter alia, countering international crimes and fraud, as well as countering illegal aid under national and EU resources.  

In  addition,  the  Economic  Policy  of  the  Hellenic  Police  Headquarters  establishes  combating  fraud  against  the  Greek  State  and  against  the 
interests  of  the  European  Union  as  one  of  the  key  objectives  with  regard  to  fraud,  setting  specific  targeted  actions  in  order  to  achieve  the 
objective pursued.  

2. Regarding the specific issues raised by the recommendations, the Hellenic Police notes the following: 

This recommendation focuses, inter alia, in increasing coordination between competent authorities. In this context, taking account of the fact 
that cigarette smuggling is a criminal activity detrimental to the economic interests of the European Union, please note that: 

An Inter-ministerial Steering Committee, comprising the General Secretariat of Public Revenue, the Hellenic Police Chief, the Chief of the 
Hellenic Coast Guard and the Director-General of Customs and Excise Duties, was established in 2014 for the surveillance and monitoring of 
the preparation and implementation of a comprehensive strategy and a coordinated action plan in order to counter cigarette smuggling. Note that 
the  Committee  in  question  was  established  following  a  proposal  included  in  a  Report  of  the  European  Commission  and  the  International 
Monetary Fund in cooperation with the Greek Customs Administration, in order to counter cigarette smuggling. 

At  the  same  time,  a  ‘Multidisciplinary  Task  Force’  was  established  in  order  to  facilitate  the  work  of  the  Committee  in  question,  with  the 
participation  of  two  (2)  representatives  from  each  Authority  involved,  who  are  responsible  for  administrative  and  operational  matters, 
respectively.  

The implementation of this initiative brought the following results:  
(a) An Action Plan was signed during the 2nd meeting of the Inter-ministerial Committee on 27 August 2014, drawn-up under responsibility 
of the Multidisciplinary Task Force, which had received an order to prepare it. The Action Plan established a National Strategy for combating 
the  illegal  production  and  marketing  of  tobacco  products  and  set  individual  targets  to  this  end.  At  the  same  time,  it  stressed  the  need  for 
developing  interdisciplinary  cooperation,  which  is  necessary  for  effectively  addressing  the  matter  at  hand,  through  the  establishment  and 
organisation of a coordination centre, the design of joint operations and the ability to make ‘controlled deliveries’. 

(b) In the light of the above, the Multidisciplinary Task Force worked on these issues and, on 3 November 2014, it submitted for approval by the 
members  of  the  Inter-ministerial  Steering  Committee  a  series  of  proposals  for  addressing  these  issues,  including  the  establishment  and 
operation of a Coordination Centre against the Smuggling of Tobacco Products.  

119 

 
 
AUTHORITY - Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE) 

The  Financial  and  Economic  Crime  Unit  (SDOE)  is  carrying  out  targeted  inspections  after  developing  risk  analysis  systems  on  the  basis  of 
updated Risk Indicators, in  accordance  with  the Recommendations of the Commission  for protecting the national  and EU financial interests. 
Following  the  submission  of  relevant  requests  by  Authorities  of  the  Greek  State,  the  Financial  and  Economic  Crime  Unit  (SDOE)  provides 
substantial assistance by carrying out on-the-spot checks throughout Greek territory in the context of investment projects co financed by the EU 
in all sectors of the economy. The Financial and Economic Crime Unit (SDOE) refers, in a systematic manner, cases of identified irregularities 
to  the Authorities of the Greek  State which are responsible for recovering unduly and unlawfully paid  sums, with  regard to the national and 
Community part of financing.  

ES  As stated above, the operational programmes and the resulting anti-fraud measures that are being prepared are still awaiting approval. As such, 
it  is  not  possible  to  give  any  information  on  these  aspects  at  this  point  in  time.  Among  other  measures,  managing  authorities  plan  to  use 
ARACHNE or other similar tools. 

FR 

The French authorities have taken note of the recommendation. The European regulatory framework evolved in 2014 following the reform of 
the  Common  Agricultural  Policy  (CAP),  which  introduced  general  anti-fraud  provisions  in  the  horizontal  CAP  regulation.  The  European 
accreditation criteria for paying agencies were supplemented accordingly so that the paying agencies can strengthen procedures for preventing 
and detecting fraud and irregularities. When supervising paying agencies, the competent authority for the accreditation of paying agencies – 
the Ministry of Agriculture, Agrifood and Forestry and the Directorate for Budget (Ministère de l’agriculture, de  l’agroalimentaire et de la 
forêt et direction du budget) – ensures that they address anti-fraud issues systematically and satisfactorily.  

In 2014, paying agencies began to think about the new type of set-up to put in place. They can use DG Agri's guidance note of February 2014 
to  help  them in  this process; the note encourages  paying agencies to take a  more  systematic approach to handling fraud risk, but  does not 
make it obligatory for the agencies to carry out new inspections. There are several ways in which paying agencies will deal with fraud risk as 
part of their activities: 

- in terms of human resources, staff training will include a fraud awareness component; 

-  checks  carried  out  by  paying  agencies  will  include  fraud  prevention  and  detection  as  a  specific  objective,  whilst  taking  into  account  the 
risks; 

- in terms of internal inspections, follow-up procedures need to be put in place to prevent and detect fraud and irregularities, particularly in 

120 

 
 
relation to areas of CAP expenditure that fall within the remit of the paying agency, where there is a high level of exposure to the risk of fraud 
or other serious irregularities. 

The management declaration signed every year by the head of the paying agency will need to confirm whether effective and proportionate 
anti-fraud measures have been put in place and whether these measures take into account any identified risks. 

HR  Regarding the cooperation between managing authorities and Service for Combating Irregularities and Fraud, it has to be pointed out that the 
cooperation between AFCOS bodies is prescribed by the Government Regulation on the institutional  framework of the system for combating 
irregularities  and  fraud  (OJ  144/2013).  Namely,  Article  7  of  the  Regulation  establishes  the  cooperation  between  the  bodies  of  the  AFCOS 
system, hence all bodies of the AFCOS system are obliged to mutually cooperate and exchange data and information. 

Furthermore,  three  Managing  Authorities  for  the  SCF  programmes  managed  in  the  programming  period  2007-2013  (Transport,  Human 
Resources  Development,  Regional  Competitiveness  OPs)  introduced  ARACHNE  during  2014  and  used  it  in  a  test  phase.  For  this  purpose, 
relevant data was extracted from the Management Information System (SCF MIS) and delivered to ARACHNE. Regular updates of SCF MIS 
data are delivered to the Commission for the purpose of getting as reliable as possible results of ARACHNE risk analyses. 

Additionally,  SCF  MIS  is  carried  out  by  the  Ministry  of  Finance  and  the  Ministry  of  Regional  Development  and  EU  Funds  which  are 
responsible for its sound management. Within the SCF MIS, Service for Combating Irregularities and Fraud (SCIF) as an AFCOS coordinative 
body has observer role (read only rights).  

Also, SCIF as a coordinative body is responsible for sound management of Irregularity Management System (AFIS-IMS) within the bodies in 
the AFCOS System. The reporting of irregularities in the Republic of Croatia (Managing Authority – SCIF – OLAF) is carried out within the 
IMS System in accordance with the prescribed procedures which are drafted by the SCIF. With the aim to strengthen administrative capacity of 
the IMS users, SCIF continuously organizes seminars and workshops. Furthermore, judicial authorities in the Republic of Croatia have observer 
role (read only rights) within the System so that they can act upon the case in accordance with their responsibilities.  

IT 

All the managing authorities are authorised to use the IMS system and also have their own databases and information exchange protocols with 
external audit bodies.  

The  Italian  AFCOS,  through  the  Guardia  di  Finanza  section  responsible  for  combating  fraud  against  the  EU,  has  devised  a  new  project  for 
protecting EU budget resources, entitled ‘National Anti-Fraud Database (DNA), IT tool for preventing fraud against the financial interests of the 

121 

 
 
 
European Union, with the cooperation of employees of the police forces and national and regional authorities’  

Specifically, the aim of the project is to: 

1. 

continue sharing best strategies for preventing and combating fraud with other Member States through the study of best practices; 

devise a dedicated IT tool for monitoring and auditing in order to create fraud-prevention models shared with the police and the national 

2. 
and regional authorities. 

The  main  objective  is  to  use  all  the  data  available  in  national  and  regional  databases  to  generate  specific  alerts,  destined  primarily  for  the 
managing authorities, for identifying and reducing the highest risks of irregularities and fraud relating to projects receiving EU co-financing. 

The  strong  Italian  commitment  to  this  project  is  supported  by  the  Guardia  di  Finanza,  which  has  provided  an  IT  application  -  soon  to  be 
launched in a test phase - for enhancing action to combat fraudulent acquisition of EU funds; the system is called the Sistema Informativo Anti 
Frode (S.I.A.F.) [computerised anti-fraud system]. 

The  application  is  made  up  of  an  integrated  technology  platform  which  will  link,  in  a  single  analysis  environment,  the  information  on  EU 
funding  granted  contained  in  the  data  bases  used,  in  most  cases,  at  the  bodies  designated  to  manage  the  funds,  with  a  view  to  targeted  and 
effective selection for inspection purposes of recipients of public funding judged to be ‘at risk’ on the basis of specific indicators. 

CY  The Managing Authority for the Structural Funds, through its participation in AFCOS, has collaboration with the national anti-fraud bodies and 
intends to consider the use of this forum in the framework of its fraud self-assessment and elaboration.  In addition, it is envisaging the use of 
the ARACHNE risk scoring tool on a pilot basis during the first half of 2015. 

LV   Latvian AFCOS mainly focuses on exchange of essential information and improvement of communication between different bodies as the good 

and effective communication within all parties involved is prerequisite for effective protection of the EU interests in Latvia. 
In this regard information flow schemes’ has been elaborated and a list of available State Information Systems which currently can be used on 
daily basis has been provided by AFCOS, as well as contact persons in the anti-fraud bodies and managing authorities (hereinafter – MA) has 
been appointed to ensure exchange of data and information among the involved national authorities as well as between these authorities and 
OLAF.  
The MA and anti-fraud bodies participates in national AFCOS Council’s meetings in which the questions related to fraud prevention and risk 

122 

 
 
detraction are discussed. 
All  MA’s  and  Rural  Support  Service’s  (RSS)  (Paying  Agency  EAFRD  /  EFF/  EMFF)  collaboration  with  law  enforcement  institutions  -  an 
exchange with information is done on regular basis, on request or using available Information Systems. 
In summer of 2014, representatives from the Division of Economic Crime Investigation of the State Police participated in the  conference on 
fraud prevention matters organized by RSS. Explanation was provided in person to the Prosecutor's office, regarding administration of payments 
from EU funds. In the first half of 2014, a lecture was delivered to judges of administrative courts on the administration of EU funds. 
All MA have established or plan to establish a Management Information System to store data on beneficiaries, project progress and any other 
information which is essential for the monitoring of EU funds, including Fraud and corruption risk analysis, as well as in order to reduce the 
administrative burden on citizens. In future it is also planned to improve the established systems by improving its functionality and usefulness 
for the administration of EU funds. 
The MA ensure the application of the Union’s sectorial legislation on the reporting irregularities, suspected fraud and fraud by sending regular 
reports  via  IMS  to  OLAF/EC.  The  managing  authority  of  the  LV-LT  informs  the  relevant  Programme  Member  states  National  Authorities 
(hereinafter – the NAs) on irregularity cases within their territory, including fraud, which have been detected by the authorities involved in the 
management  and  administration  of  the  Programme.  Afterwards,  the  NAs  inform  European  Commission  and  OLAF  as  well  as  the  anti-fraud 
bodies of the respective member state according to the national legal framework. 

LT 

In order to ensure that anti-fraud measures are properly instituted and implemented, national legislation requires that the managing authorities 
for the 2014-2020 EU Structural Funds should introduce and apply measures to combat fraud. The managing authority, acting in cooperation 
with the managing authorities for the 2014-2020 EU Structural Funds and the Financial Crime Investigation Service under the Ministry of the 
Interior (FCIS), establishes these measures in the light of the periodic fraud risk assessment and the Commission's recommendations on fraud 
risk assessment and effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures, and coordinates their implementation. 
National  legislation  also  provides  that  where  a  criminal  offence  is  suspected,  the  FCIS  must  immediately  be  informed  thereof  in  writing 
(accompanied  by  all  the  relevant  information  and  documentation),  it  being  empowered  by  law  to  carry  out  investigations  of  suspected  fraud 
cases. The FCIS informs the body supplying the information concerning the suspected case of fraud of whether or not it has decided to initiate 
an investigation into a suspected offence. 
In  order  to  strengthen  cooperation  between  the  managing  authorities  for  EU  Structural  Funds  and  those  authorities  that  are  empowered  and 
experienced  in  the  area  of  preventing,  investigating  and  detecting  fraud  and  corruption  and  their  administrative  capacity  as  regards  matters 

123 

 
 
relating to the prevention and detection of fraud and corruption in the administration of EU Structural Funds, the FCIS, the Public Procurement 
Office and the Lithuanian Competition Council are involved in the system of administering EU Structural Funds. The functions to be performed 
by those authorities in implementing the EU funds operational programme for 2014-2020 approved by Commission Decision No C(2014)6397 
of 8 September 2014 (hereinafter ‘the operational programme’) and the procedure for the exchange of information between them are set out in 
the relevant legislation. 
It is provided that, in addition to the above activities, the FCIS should also organise meetings with the managing authorities for EU Structural 
Funds in order to provide methodological and practical assistance regarding suspected offences and participate in the activities of the working 
groups  dealing  with  the  investigation,  detection,  elimination  and  prevention  of  infringements  under  projects  co-financed  funded  using  EU 
Structural Funds (hereinafter ‘projects’). 
The Public Procurement Office of the Republic of Lithuania, acting in accordance with the procedure laid down by the Public Procurement Act, 
checks  how  the  Act  and  its  implementing  legislation  are  being  complied  with  in  project  procurement,  seeks  to  prevent  infringements  of  the 
overall legislation, advises contracting authorities and suppliers involved in implementing the operational programme and authorities involved 
in managing the operational programme on public procurement matters, and creates opportunities for authorities involved in managing projects 
to check public procurement operations implemented by means of the central public procurement information system (‘CVP IS’), etc. 
At the same time, the Competition Council, in the context of its participation in implementing the operational programme, advises authorities 
and project promoters on matters relating to the application of competition policy and state aid, analyses state aid projects, compiles information 
concerning  the  state  aid  that  has  been  granted  in  implementing  the  operational  programme  and  submits  it  to  the  Commission  and  other 
interested authorities, seeks to prevents restrictive agreements from arising in the implementation of project procurement and investigates such 
restrictive agreements, etc. 
Legislation  and  draft  legislation  regulating  the  administration  of  EU  Structural  Funds  are  assessed  from  the  point  of  view  of  preventing 
corruption, as provided for in Article 8 of the Lithuanian Anti-Corruption Act. Such assessments are carried out by the authority responsible for 
the draft and the Lithuanian Special Investigation Service of the Republic of Lithuania. 
The joint working group of inspectors of EU Fund infringements for the funding periods 2007 2013 and 2014-2020 was set up by Order No 1K-
417  of  the  Lithuanian  Minister  for  Finance  of  3  December  2014  amending  Order  No  1K-115  of  the  Minister  for  Finance  establishing  the 
infringement  inspectors  working  group  in  respect  of  EU  structural  aid  for  the  period  2007-2013.  This  working  group  is  made  up  of 
representatives of the managing authority and project managing authorities.  Meetings of the working group are also attended by representatives 
of the audit authority, the certifying authority, the FCIS, the Public Procurement Office and Competition Council as observers. The first meeting 

124 

 
 
of this working group was held on 18 December 2014, the main topic of discussions being the prevention of public procurement infringements, 
including the possibility of project managing authorities using the central public procurement risk management information system set up by the 
Public Procurement Office in monitoring procurement by project promoters, assessing the level of risk involved and properly organising checks. 
In order to ensure that project management authorities are able to check project procurement effectively (especially in cases where procurement 
by the project promoter is relevant to projects of the same promoter managed by several different authorities) and to learn about infringements 
detected  by  other  authorities,  provision  is  made  for  project  procurement  information  to  be  registered  in  the  computerised  information 
management and monitoring system for EU structural aid (henceforth SFMIS 2014). This information as well as information on infringements 
will be accessible to all project management authorities. Provision is also made for the SFMIS 2014 to be linked to the CVP IS system managed 
by the Public Procurement Office and for project management authorities to be able to carry out public procurement checks using that system. 

LU  Outline of the collaboration between managing authorities and anti-fraud bodies and list the IT tools currently in use.   

HU 

In Hungary, the relationship between the authorities that are to investigate criminal offences committed in relation to national and EU budget 
support and the management bodies playing a role in the distribution of aid is established in national legislation. Section 71/B(1) of Act XIX of 
1998 on criminal proceedings (‘Criminal Proceedings Act’) deserves special attention, which provides a possibility for administrative bodies to 
become familiar with the details of the investigation for the time and to the extent required for performing their tasks, naturally, bearing in mind 
the enforcement of criminal investigation interests. In addition, the legal instrument of signalisation set forth in Section 63/A of the Criminal 
Proceedings  Act  is  also  important,  which  requires  the  authorities  proceeding  in  the  criminal  proceedings  to  notify  other  authorities  and 
administrative bodies if their proceedings appear to be necessary. 

From the point of view of cooperation, its channel (electronic or paper-based) is not relevant, thus no separate IT system has been established 
with respect to the contents of the recommendation. 

Within its scope of responsibilities, the Agricultural and Rural Development Office (‘MVH’) cooperates with the European Anti-fraud Office 
(OLAF) and NAV as anti-fraud bodies. 

1. Cooperation with OLAF: 

On behalf of MVH, cooperation is based on legislation in the following areas: 

• 

reporting irregularities committed by the clients of MVH and subject to a reporting obligation to OLAF (Regulation (EC) 1848/2006 and 

125 

 
 
Regulation (EC) 1828/2006); 

provision of information  and data by MVH for inspections  ordered by OLAF and facilitation of the on-site inspections conducted by 

• 
OLAF Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council. 

During cooperation, the following IT devices and tools are to be pointed out: 

• 

an electronic reporting system (IMS) used for entering irregularity reports to be sent to OLAF; and 

on  the  basis  of  the  requests  of  the  OLAF  Coordination  Office  of  the  Central  Office  of  NAV  (AFCOS),  information  and  data  on  the 

• 
investigations ordered by OLAF are provided by MVH electronically on an interface accessible on the internet on the basis of authorisation. 

2. Cooperation with NAV: 

2(a) Co-operation with one of its divisions, AFCOS: 

The cooperation serving to protect the EU’s financial interests covers the following areas on the basis of a written agreement (MVH doc. ID: 
DSZ/26-2011): 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

mutual provision of information on legislative and legislation-amending initiatives to each other; 

review by AFCOS of the irregularity reports of MVH from the point of view of quality assurance to be sent to OLAF; 

support provided by AFCOS to the use of the Irregularity Management System (IMS); 

based on requests by AFCOS, provision of information and data by MVH in connection with investigations ordered by OLAF; 

delivery of professional opinion at the request of MVH, drafting of recommendations and provision of experience by AFCOS; 

possibility that AFCOS becomes familiar with the findings of external inspection bodies affecting MVH and associated with the subject-

• 
matter of the agreement; 

provision of a possibility for the other party to participate in trainings, conferences and exchanges of experience serving to protect the 

• 
EU’s financial interests; 

126 

 
 
 
mutual provision of information about the meetings of the Commission relating to the protection of the EU’s financial interests, which 

• 
were attended by the representatives of the parties. 

2(b) Cooperation with the entire office (NAV): 

The cooperation, on the basis of a written agreement (MVH doc. ID.: DSZ/75-2013 and DSZ/75-2013/1), covers the following areas regarding 
the irregularities found among the clients of MVH: 

• 
Debts  owed  to  MVH  as  a  support  body  for  agricultural  and  rural  development  (aid  used  without  authorisation  and  other  payment 
obligations) are deemed public debts that may be collected as taxes, and they are collected by the taxation body of NAV on the basis of the data 
provided by MVH, with the exceptions defined in the relevant act. 

• 
In  connection  with  the  inspection  of  the  export  refund  system  of  agricultural  and  food  products  and  subsequent  inspections,  NAV 
conducts  inspections  and  informs  MVH  about  irregularities  found  during  such  inspections.  MVH  informs  NAV  about  its  measures  taken  in 
connection with the irregularities found. 

During cooperation, the following IT devices and tools are to be mentioned specifically: 

• 

Data is transferred between the parties electronically, according to the data structure laid down in the agreement. 

3. 

Maintaining and improving efficient and successful cooperation between the institutional stakeholders concerned with respect to the prevention, 
detection, sanctioning and deterrence of fraud and corruption enjoys high priority; to this end, the institutional system for support policy and the 
investigating authority began consultations in the programming period of 2014 to 2020 in order to enter into a formal cooperation agreement. 

The drafting of a Cooperation Agreement between the Prime Minister’s Office and AFCOS began already in 2014 in order to ensure that in 
connection with development projects implemented with the co-financing of the EU, the anti-fraud awareness has the highest possible level in 
the institutional system for development policy in order to successfully prevent and to facilitate the detection of fraud affecting the budgets of 
Hungary and the EU. 

The stakeholders in the institutional system for support policy use the electronic system developed by the Commission, the IMS, for reporting 

127 

 
 
 
irregularities. 

The IT system launched in 2014 and allowing access to EU tender funds in the period of 2014 to 2020, the Development Policy Database and 
Information System (FAIR), is an electronic administration interface for tenders, which helps bidders handle various tasks related to tenders and 
projects by means of a single customised interface. The greatest innovation of the system is that it is connected to a few authentic databases (of 
NAV,  the  Court  of  Registration  and  the  Land  Registry  Office),  thus  using  these  databases,  bidders  can  request  the  necessary  documents 
electronically and automatically. 

MT  Although  the  Managing  Authority  is  not  the  competent  body  at  law  to  establish  whether  cases  of  suspected  fraud  are  actually  cases  of 
established fraud, if during its management verifications it encounters ‘red flags’ or cases of irregularities which could  potentially be tainted 
with fraud, the Managing Authority reports such instances to AFCOS (Malta). Thus, in bringing to the attention of AFCOS (Malta) the relevant 
facts  which  could  potentially  encompass  suspected  fraud,  the  Managing  Authority  prompts  further  investigation  by  this  body.  To  make  the 
liaison  process  between  the  Managing  Authority  and/or  its  stakeholders  and  AFCOS  (Malta)  more  robust,  the  ‘Manual  of  Procedures’  was 
revised  to  formally  include  the  procedure  to  be  undertaken  in  the  event  of  suspicion  of  fraud;  the  procedure  highlights  the  authority  levels, 
responsibilities for action and reporting lines.  

In addition, all irregularities identified by the Managing Authority and/or its stakeholders are submitted to AFCOS (Malta). These irregularities 
are  uploaded  on  the  Structural  Funds  Database  administered  by  the  Managing  Authority.  Once  the  irregularities  are  submitted  to  AFCOS 
(Malta), the Managing Authority and AFCOS (Malta) liaise to clarify certain issues which merit further examination; this in particular when the 
type of the irregularities fall within the categories that are reportable to DG OLAF. Furthermore, the Managing Authority also collaborates fully 
with AFCOS (Malta) in particular when DG OLAF is scrutinizing specific cases of irregularities. 

NL  The reply earlier to recommendation No 3 pointed out that the Netherlands has incorporated the anti-fraud guidelines within its management 
and  control  systems.  The  risk  analyses  performed  by  the  managing  authorities  are  part  of  these.  The  possibilities  in  terms  of  deploying 
ARACHNE  are  currently  being  studied.  This  is  the  subject  of  intensive  contacts  in  the  case  of  the  ERDF  and  ESF  funds;  however,  the 
exchanges  of  information  between  the  anti-fraud  authorities  are  not  conducted  on  a  structural  basis.  The  EFF's  and  the  Agricultural  Funds' 
contact  persons  have  no  involvement  in  these  contacts  relating  to  ARACHNE,  because  the  relevant  EU  DGs  (AGRI  and  MARE)  are  still 
unwilling  to  use  ARACHNE.  The  ESF  and  the  Agricultural  Funds  each  have  their  own  investigation  and  inspection  services  which  the 
managing authorities call upon when fraud is suspected (and investigated). 

128 

 
 
 
AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." (Ares(2015)553829) 

PL 

In order to provide a framework for the exchange of data between the cohesion policy implementation institutions and investigative bodies, the 
Working  group  on  combating  fraud  in  cohesion  policy  funds  was  created,  working  at  the  interdepartmental  level.  The  group  was  created 
following  the  identification  of  legal,  administrative,  organisational  and  operational  obstacles  in  the  cooperation  between  cohesion  policy 
implementation institutions and institutions with investigative powers. Within the working group the entities that created it are planning such 
things as outlining the rules for efficient exchange of information between cohesion policy implementation institutions and investigative bodies 
on suspected fraud, drawing up rules for mutual cooperation in case of fraud and rules for consultation on fraud prevention mechanisms. In the 
long term, these actions will be part of potential strategies or policies to combat fraud in Poland. 

In the field of agriculture, the Commission approved the Rural Development Programme for 2014-2020 which includes some of the elements of 
the management and control system. Further work is currently in process to specify the rules of this system which also takes  into account the 
EU rules for protection of financial interests, e.g. by adopting appropriate solutions in the field of cooperation between managing institutions 
and  investigative  bodies.  Currently  these  bodies  already  cooperate  with paying  agencies,  with  ongoing  help  provided  in  the  proceedings  and 
cases concerning beneficiaries of administrative actions by both agencies. 

PT  With regard to the area of agriculture, the following was noted: 

As regards the first paragraph of the recommendation - Following the publication of Regulation (EU) No 1306/2013 of 17 December 2013, and 
with particular reference to Article 58 thereof, and Annex I to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 907/2014 of 11 March 2014 and also 
the  Guidance  Note  on Anti-fraud Measures  as  foreseen  in  the  context  of  Accreditation, IFAP  (Agriculture  and  Fisheries  Financing  Institute) 
decided to review, amend and broaden the current anti-fraud procedures. 

Accordingly,  legislation  was  drafted  on  the  process  of  identifying  risk  situations,  or  greater  risk  of  fraud,  and  the  existing  provisions  on  the 
procedure applicable in cases of complaints or suspicions of intentional non-compliance were reviewed or amended. 

In addition, the following steps were taken: 

a) Action was taken to raise awareness in this  field (for example, the Anti-fraud Seminar organized by IFAP in close collaboration with DG 

129 

 
 
AGRI and held in Lisbon on 18 November 2014); 

b) A proposal was made to extend deterrents against fraud in obtaining subsidies, for example by strengthening the penalty systems applicable 
to investment measures (as in the case of the publication of Implementing Order No 230/2014 of 11 November 2014 establishing the system for 
applying action 3.2 ‘Investment in agricultural holdings’ and action 3.3 ‘Investment in the processing and marketing of agricultural products’, 
both part of measure 3, ‘Development of agricultural products’ from the 2020 Rural Development Programme); 

c) The internal process in force for preparing the notification of irregularities was amended and is now undergoing legislative review; 

d) The existing processes for validating information provided by beneficiaries were stepped up, as was the conclusion of protocols with public 
or private bodies with a view to streamlining and broadening the process of validating this information. 

As regards the second paragraph of the recommendation, the following was noted: 

a)  the  existence  of  a  link  between  criminal  investigation  bodies  and  IFAP's  departments  -  in  IFAP's  case  the  link  involves  submitting 
complaints, providing information and giving statements, in its capacity as representative of the Institute or as a witness for the parties; 

b) the competent departments of IFAP follow judicial proceedings for offences associated with obtaining subsidies or grants awarded by that 
body, in its capacity as a joint party in criminal proceedings or as a civil party. 

In the area of cohesion policy, two workshops were organized in 2014 for all managing and certifying authorities, with the participation of the 
European Commission. One of the workshops focused on the closure of the 2007-13 programming period and the other on the 2014-20 period. 
In both cases the aim was to harmonise procedures aimed at the sound management of Community funds and the fight against fraud. 

As regards the period 2014-20, the importance of promoting an anti-fraud strategy was impressed upon the authorities and they were informed 
of the European Commission’s guidelines on this. 

A start was then made on preparing methodological instruments, both as regards the procedures to apply, in general, in the different areas of 
managing Community funds and, in particular, the preparation of anti-fraud strategies. 

In terms of IT tools, various steps were taken to publicise ARACHNE, which is already being used by the Audit Authority, despite its current 
limitations. 

The managing and certifying authorities have had other systems for quite some time, which enable them to reduce to a satisfactory degree the 

130 

 
 
risk of granting aid to bodies that have previously committed irregularities.   

RO  Cooperation  between  Managing  Authorities  and  AFCOS  has  consolidated  over  10  years,  materialized  through  cooperation  agreements  or 

informal collaborative practice (informal best practices / Agreements). 
Collaboration takes place on several levels: 
- 
preventive  measures  against  fraud:  drafting  legislation  /  guidelines,  regular  exchange  of  views  on 
legislation in force, training on anti-fraud measures, exchange in best practices or communication regarding antifraud measures for 2014-2020, 
including fraud risk assessments. 
- 
Managing Authorities investigation body  
- 
This structured regular coordination is to be evolving into the National Anti-Fraud Strategy. 

control:  exchange  of  data  and  information  in  order  to  complete  the  investigations,  or  coordinating 

reporting irregularities and exchange of information in order to assist OLAF Investigators. 

SI 

In the 2007-2013 programming period, all the authorities involved in the implementation of European cohesion policy are using a range of IT 
systems that are available to us. On every day basis ISARR is used. ISARR is the reference information system for monitoring and reporting on 
the implementation of operational programs. Besides Supervisor used, a web application of Commission for Prevention of Corruption (more on 
Supervisor  please  see  in  reply  on  Recommendation  2).  There  is  also  a  pay  base  GVIN,  which  currently  contains  only  information  from 
Slovenia.  In the programming  period  2014-2020 Slovenia will be prone  to  use  the tools of the European Commission  on Risk Assessment  - 
Arachne. 

In Slovenia we also have the inter-ministerial working group, for better cooperation between the other authorities, including law enforcement 
agencies. 

Certifying Authority is in the FP 2007-2013 using the information system IS-PA2007, where the system controls are implemented, verifying the 
completeness and correctness of data on individual operations. In the IS are noted also all of audit reports and reports on the controls carried out 
on the spot. An integral part of IS is also a "debtors book”, which are recorded claims for reimbursement. 

Slovenian Paying Agency continuously improves its control systems for the detection of financial irregularities/fraud; builds on risk assessment 
and consequently, adapting IT tools. 

Collection  and  reporting  of  data  on  new  cases  of  financial  irregularities  or  suspicion  of  fraud  under  the  Slovenian  paying  agency  is  set  by 
internal  working  instructions.  Gathering  of  information  on  new  cases  in  the  frame  of  the  paying  agency  is  carried  out  once  a  month  with  a 

131 

 
 
SK 

special e-mail addressed to all those employees who have at disposal this information. Subsequently, the department responsible for cooperation 
with the AFCOS,  performs the quality control of responses of the employees in the paying agency through checking data on debt, which is in 
the form of a table (IT tool accounting application that is created in Oracle Forms tool) prepares the service responsible for finance. By this way 
Slovenian  Paying  Agency  established  a  dual  capture  (gathering)  of  information  and  thus  substantially  reduces  the  possibility  that  any  of  the 
irregularities cases should not been communicated to the AFCOS. 

For the implementation of ERDF, CF and ESF, Slovakia uses the ITMS information system for the  collection, processing and monitoring of 
data  on  the  use  of  funding  from  the  EU  budget.  The  system  contains  a  function  to  prevent  double  funding,  which  consists  of  checking  the 
uniqueness of accounting documents and their use in individual projects. In the programming period 2014-2020, the information system ITMS 
2014+ will provide greater interoperability with other information systems. These information systems include in particular: The central portal 
of the public administration and its modules (e.g., IAM, e-desk, e-notify, Electronic Service Module, etc.), the code lists and registers (e.g. code 
list of legal forms, register of natural persons, register of legal persons, the register of addresses, etc.), e-procurement services, e-services for 
social insurance and health insurance, electronic mailbox, the irregularity management system (IMS) and the Electronic Contract System. 
Slovakia is also working on adjustments to the 2014-2020 programming period, so that the collection of data and its subsequent evaluation are 
compatible with the Commission - ARACHNE.  
Many MAs use also other IT tools, e.g. the commercially established Social Network of Firms in the Slovak Republic, the so called 'FOAF' 
which has proved to be an appropriate additional tool to identify conflicts of interest. Further measures are underway with regard to the specific 
needs of the individual operational programmes at the level of managing authorities. For example, the Managing Authority for the Employment 
and Social Inclusion OP also uses its own IT system FONDUE for identifying conflicts of interest. Some managing authorities have made it a 
priority  in  2014  to  address  collusive  behaviour  in  public  procurement  and  to  intensify  communication  with  the  Antimonopoly  Office  of  the 
Slovak Republic, as well as with law enforcement agencies. 
Coordination of control activities between the Audit Authority (Ministry of Finance of the Slovak Republic), the Supreme Audit Office of the 
Slovak Republic and AFCOS (Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic) takes place through the Working Group on cooperation in the 
field of the coordination of control activities within the Management Committee for protecting the financial interests of the EU in the Slovak 
Republic,  where  the  control  and  audit  plans  for  international  financial  resources  and  own  resources  of  the  Slovak  national  budget  are 
harmonised.  
The update of the Principles of coordination of controls and audits of the AFCOS network partners, version 4.0, which was approved by the 

132 

 
 
Management Committee on the protection of the financial interests of the EU in the Slovak Republic on 9 February 2014, was supplemented by 
a point concerning coordination between the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic and the Audit Authority concerning complaints 
received in the audit of EU funds. On the 1st and the 15th of each month, it shall send information on the submissions received, thus improving 
effectiveness and efficiency in handling complaints. 
In the field of agricultural policies, the APA uses SAS software as an IT tool for the modelling of applicants' risks. 
With regard to the revenue side of the EU budget, the Tax Administration of the Slovak Republic ensures, through the national automated risk 
profiling,  targeted  determination  of  the  checks  to  be  carried  out  at  the  time  of  customs  clearance  in  order  to  avoid  and  eliminate  the  risk  at 
importation into the EC. A separate system module has been used since 2006.  
All input from the internal and external environment, as well as the analytical activity of the Tax Administration itself, are incorporated into the 
risk profiling. Existing risk profiles are continually assessed and, where necessary, supplemented or modified. On the basis of the risk profiling 
and its results, the customs procedure at the time of the release of the goods involves document checks, partial or complete physical checks or 
taking samples. 
Customs controls on the basis of the national risk profiling are carried out in line with current Community and national legislation and depend 
on the personnel and material capacities of the individual customs office branches. 

FI 

The Managing Authority of Finland’s structural funds programme “Investment for Growth and Jobs” is developing a risk assessment strategy, 
which includes a fraud risk assessment component. It is based when applicable on the Commission’s Guidance Note on fraud risk assessment 
for the programming period 2014–2020 and national legislation and guidance concerning risk management and anti-fraud.  

For the program period 2014-2020 the implementing procedure for management and control system for structural funds are developed so that 
the  aim  is  that  the  control  system  prevents  and  minimizes  the  risks  of  irregularities  and  fraud  beforehand  during  the  different  stages  of  the 
implementing  in  accordance  with  requirements  set  in  regulation.  When  developing  the  IT-systems  for  the  program  period  2014–2020  the 
requirements for the risk management and anti-fraud procedure have been taken to further consideration than before 

The risk assessment is made to every operation and beneficiaries during the preparation of the finance decision before the project decision  is 
made. The information of the defined risk class based on the risk assessment is recorded to IT-system and the information is used during g the 
execution of the follow up of the operation, processing of the payment claim and on the spot audits. During the preparation of the project and 
finance decision the managing authority ensures that no double financing is received from other sources. The IT-system of the structural funds 
includes  the  operation  for  authority  to  find  out  the  beneficiary’s  tax  debt  information.  The  managing  authority  trains  and  instructs  the 

133 

 
 
intermediate  bodies  to  identify  red  flags  of  the  irregularities  and  fraud  and  to  start  appropriate  process  when  needed.  In  addition  to  that  the 
managing  authority  assesses  the  risks  of  fraud  and  operations  to  fight  against  fraud  as  part  of  the  planning  process  of  the  management 
authority’s control process. 

SE 

The  Swedish  Council  for  the  protection  of  the  European  Union’s  financial  interests  has  adopted  a  common  reporting  policy.  The  policy  is 
intended to function as an aid for the agencies in their work and states, among other things, that suspected EU fraud should be reported to the 
Swedish Economic Crime Authority.  

Although  not  being  part  of  its  formal  anti-fraud  mandate,  the  SEFI  Council  serves  as  an  informal  platform  for  exchanging  experiences  on 
managing EU funds in a broader scope, including on the challenges connected with the development of adequate IT tools. 

UK  Audit  Authorities  and  Managing  Authorities  must  be  functionally  separate  to  retain  independence.  They  can  coordinate  development  of  the 

Anti-Fraud Strategy in terms of identifying the risk modalities, but exchange of information can only be limited. 

Fraud  detection  practices  remain  very  different  between  Member  States  and  the  Commission  remains  concerned  with  the  low  number  of  potentially 
fraudulent  irregularities  reported  by  some  countries.  The  Commission  will  continue  its  work  to  raise  fraud  awareness  and  to  provide  guidelines  to 
improve the convergence of national systems to protect the EU’s financial interests against fraud more efficiently. 

RECOMMENDATION 8 

As  some  Member  States  report  very  low  numbers  of  fraudulent  irregularities,  the  Commission  recommends  strengthening  their  work  on 
detecting and/or reporting fraud: 

- 
- 

BE 

BG 

in the area of cohesion policy: France, Spain, Ireland, Hungary, Denmark and the Netherlands; 
in the area of agriculture: Lithuania, the Netherlands, Portugal and Finland. 

No information provided  

No information provided  

134 

 
 
 
CZ 

No information provided  

DK  All irregularities are reported to OLAF pursuant to the rules in force. An assessment takes place on a case-by-case basis of whether a simple 

irregularity is involved, or whether it is a case of suspected fraudulent circumstances.  

The  anti-fraud  action  plan  adopted  pursuant  to  Article  125(4)(c)  of  Regulation  No  1303/2013  sets  out  an  organisation  designed  to  ensure 
improved and uniform assessment of cases which are on the borderline between simple irregularities and cases of suspected fraud by forwarding 
these borderline cases to the same unit at the managing authority for assessment. 

Furthermore,  a  preventive  administrative  control  has  been  put  in  place  concerning  fraudulent  circumstances,  including  via  start-up  meetings 
with beneficiaries. Additionally, controls will be carried out during the implementation of project activities, so that it can be checked, during 
these controls, whether the activities in receipt of support are actually being carried out.  

In  the  light  of  this,  it  is  the  view  of  the  Danish  Business  Agency  that  there  is  a  very  low  degree  of  fraud  involving  the  Structural  Funds  in 
Denmark. 

DE  Germany not affected. 

EE  Number of irregularities (IRQ 2, IRQ 3) and established fraud (IRQ 5) reported by Estonia is at an average level compared to  other Member 

States.  
We  make  improvements  to  our  system  year  by  year:  1)  Cooperation  between  the  partners  is  getting  better  –  common  analyses,  exchange  of 
information and access to databases. 2) Common training courses or meetings as collective assessment of fraud risks or practical work in the 
partner’s organisation. 3) Better prevention work. 

IE 

The Irish Authorities are satisfied that the procedures in place for detecting irregularities including fraudulent irregularities in the 2007-2013 
cohesion policy programmes are adequate and appropriate.  There is no evidence to suggest that fraudulent irregularties went undetected. 

EL  No information provided 

ES 

FR 

The recently created AFCOS will continue to develop as it consolidates its operations. 

In order to strengthen fraud detection and reporting in the area of cohesion policy, the French authorities have carried out the following 

135 

 
 
measures: 
- As it does every year, the CICC has distributed a handbook for operations controllers, which acts as a road map and provides instructions 
enabling them to successfully carry out their tasks. The handbook regularly reiterates the need to report to OLAF; for example, in 2014, 
paragraph 9-3 of the document read as follows: 'it is also your duty to report any suspicions you may have of fraudulent activity. An irregularity 
will not qualify as potentially fraudulent if it is solely the result of negligence or of a lack of awareness of the rules; it must be of an intentional 
nature, meaning that it involves deliberate intent to circumvent current rules. In principle, when reporting this type of case, the infringement 
should also be referred to the judicial authorities in line with Article 40 of the Criminal Procedure Code. If it proves difficult to determine 
whether the irregularity is potentially fraudulent, you are advised to contact your CICC correspondent'. 
- Furthermore, in its capacity as coordinating authority for European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF), the CGET has launched a range 
of initiatives. 
a) It organised a meeting, together with the European Commission, on prevention and anti-fraud measures for the authorities managing the 
programmes (19 June 2014). During the meeting, the Commission presented the ARACHNE fraud risk detection tool to the French managing 
authorities. 
b) At regular meetings (the monthly meeting of Europe correspondents in the regions), the CGET and the CICC have raised managing 
authorities' awareness of these issues, and informed them about the existence of documents (e.g. risk maps) and the ARACHNE tool.  
c) It has set up a 'Preventing and combating fraud' working group as part of European programmes bringing together coordinating ministries, 
managing authorities, inspection bodies (CICC, DGFIP) and the Association of French Regions (Association des Régions de France). 
d) With the support of the Secretariat-General for European Affairs - Transport and Regional Policy Sector (Secrétariat général des affaires 
européennes - Secteur Transports et politique régionale) and of the working group, it has drawn up a list of questions to ask the European 
Commission concerning the content and use of the ARACHNE tool and its consequences.  
e) It has helped managing authorities that wanted to try out the European Commission's ARACHNE tool using project data from the 2007-2013 
programming period. 
In 2014, 205 reports were sent using the Irregularity Management System (144 for the European Structural Fund and 61 for the European 
Regional Development Fund). Of these, two recipients are now subject to legal proceedings. 

HR  Since the 1 of July 2013, the Republic of Croatia became the EU Member State and therefore, has the opportunity to use EU funds. In order to 

136 

 
 
use the EU Structural instruments, the Republic of Croatia set up the institutional framework for the management of EU funds.  

As regards reporting on fraudulent irregularities, the Republic of Croatia fulfils its obligation by having all necessary tools and mechanisms in 
place (legal basis /institutional set up, guidelines, procedures, regular meetings /round tables of the AFCOS Network, continuous maintaining of 
the AFIS-IMS). 

The Republic of Croatia continuously strengthens efforts to detect fraud by aligning all the documents/acts with EU legislation, exchange  of 
best practices with other MSs and strengthening administrative capacities (see position on Recommendation 1). 

No information provided 

IT 
CY  No information provided 

LV   N/A 

LT 

In the light of the European Commission's recommendation that the Member States’ work in identifying and/or reporting fraud be strengthened, 
EU funds are used to organise seminars, training and traineeships relating to fraud prevention measures, the assessment of fraud risk and the 
investigation, identification and elimination of infringements and similar issues. 

LU  Any measures taken to strengthen efforts to detect fraud. 

HU  Government  Decree  No  272  of  5  November  2014  established  the  legal  basis  for  the  application  of  criminal  notices,  which  allows  efficient 
cooperation  and  quick  information  exchange  between  the  stakeholders  of  the  institutional  system  for  support  policy  and  the  investigating 
authority, and with this legal instrument, it is possible to successfully detect fraud affecting the budgets of Hungary and the EU. 

In addition, in order to strengthen the reporting activity, the Prime Minister’s Office holds a number of trainings ensuring  an increase in anti-
fraud awareness and regarding occupational ethics and integrity for the staff of the institutional system for support policy. 

MT  No information provided 

NL  The Netherlands sees no direct link between low levels of fraud reporting and insufficient efforts to detect fraud. The management and control 

137 

 
 
 
systems are designed to detect irregularities and suspected fraud cases involving EU money. The Dutch systems have received an unqualified 
opinion from the Audit Authority (AA). Moreover, the AA procedure has received an unqualified opinion from the Commission. In 2013, the 
Commission  sent  a  ‘letter  of  confidence’  to  the  Netherlands  confirming  that  its  control  and  management  system  was  working  effectively, 
including in the area of fraud detection. Several suspected fraud cases have been reported recently, which confirms the system's effectiveness. 
Fraud prevention and detection is a major issue in the Netherlands and subject to constant scrutiny. 

AT  Austrian  answer:  "As  points  1-8  either  refer  to  specific  other  MS  or  do  not  specifically  mention  Austria,  please  do  not  expect  any  further 

comment on this document." 

PL  Not applicable. This recommendation was not directed at Poland. 

PT 

In the area of agriculture, it should be noted that: 

Following  the  publication  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  1306/2013  of  17  December  2013,  and  with  particular  reference  to  Article  58  thereof,  and 
Annex I to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 907/2014 of 11 March 2014 and also the Guidance Note on Anti-fraud Measures as 
foreseen in the context of Accreditation, IFAP (Agriculture and Fisheries Financing Institute) decided to review, amend and broaden the current 
anti-fraud procedures. 

Accordingly,  legislation  was  drafted  on  the  process  of  identifying  risk  situations,  or  greater  risk  of  fraud,  and  the  existing  provisions  on  the 
procedure applicable in cases of complaints or suspicions of intentional non-compliance were reviewed or amended. 

The related mechanisms: 

a) Action was taken to raise awareness in this field (for example, the Anti-fraud Seminar organized by IFAP in close collaboration with DG 
AGRI and held in Lisbon on 18 November 2014); 

b) A proposal was made to extend deterrents against fraud in obtaining subsidies, for example by strengthening the penalty systems applicable 
to investment measures (as in the case of the publication of Implementing Order No 230/2014 of 11 November 2014 establishing the system for 
applying action 3.2 ‘Investment in agricultural holdings’ and action 3.3 ‘Investment in the processing and marketing of agricultural products’, 
both part of measure 3, ‘Development of agricultural products’ from the 2020 Rural Development Programme); 

c) The internal process in force for preparing the notification of irregularities was amended and is now undergoing legislative review; 

138 

 
 
d) The existing processes for validating information provided by beneficiaries were stepped up, as was the conclusion of protocols with public 
or private bodies with a view to streamlining and broadening the process of validating this information. 

The above shows that measures have been taken to improve the process of identifying the risk of fraud and detecting and notifying fraud. 

RO  N/A 

SI 

In the light of all available resources, facts given and implementation of the three operational programs in the programming period 2007-2013, 
we estimate that the system of detection and reporting of irregularities in Slovenia works well.   

SK  No information provided 

FI 

Comparing the number of reported irregularities it is seeable that also the number of reported suspected frauds will stay small. 

According to the Agricultural funds, a reporting process and guidelines has been evaluated to ensure effectiveness of detect and report suspected 
frauds. Data is double-checked and reported cases are followed more closely to update reports in case there is reason to suspect a fraud. 

SE 

No information provided 

UK  N/A 

139