COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States as regards the accessibility requirements for products and services
Date: 2015-12-02
Institutions: Directorate-General for Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion, European Commission
Subjects: UN convention, approximation of laws, disabled person, electronic commerce, goods and services, harmonisation of standards, provision of services, single market, technical specification

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 2.12.2015  
SWD(2015) 265 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying the document 

Proposal for a Directive 

of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, 
regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States as regards the 
accessibility requirements for products and services 

{COM(2015) 615 final} 
{SWD(2015) 264 final} 
{SWD(2015) 266 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying the document 

Proposal for a Directive 

of the European Parliament and of the Council on the approximation of the laws, 
regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States as regards the 
accessibility requirements for products and services 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
 
1. 

PROBLEM DEFINITION 

Current  national  accessibility  requirements  relating  to  specific  products  and  services  differ 
from Member State to Member State, and sometimes within a Member State (where there are 
accessibility requirements at regional/local level). This leads to a fragmentation of the single 
market,  increasing  the  burden  on  industry  for  making  accessible  products  and  services 
available  to  consumers.  National  accessibility  requirements  differ  in  terms  of  coverage  (to 
what and to whom they apply), on the level of detail and on the technical details themselves. 
This  difference  in  coverage  also  means  that  for  some  products  or  services,  some  Member 
States may have established detailed rules whereas in others there are no rules in place. 

The  current  divergence  in  national  legislation  is  likely  to  increase  in  the  future,  as 
Member States have committed to implementing the general provisions of the United Nations 
Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities,  to  which  the  EU  is  also  a  party. 
Member  States  implement  these  provisions  in  different  ways  at  national  level.  There  is 
currently no EU-wide coordination of national legislation regarding the accessibility of 
products and services. In particular, there is no common definition on how products and 
services  should  be  made  accessible.  Provisions  in  some  EU  laws  that  require  certain 
products  or  services  to  be  accessible  imply  that  Member  States  will  develop  accessibility 
requirements to meet these obligations, and in the absence of coordinated action there is a risk 
of varying approaches and requirements. 

Economic operators who would like to sell their products or services in other Member States 
may  face  additional  costs  related  to  understanding  the  various  rules  applicable  and,  more 
significantly,  to  adapting  their  product/service  to  meet  the  requirements  of  a  particular 
national or even regional market. This prevents them from making best use of economies of 
scale,  and  means  that  they  cannot  fully  benefit  from  the  size  of  the  single  market.  Products 
and services produced  for  a limited  number of  consumers are more expensive,  as  economic 
operators  cannot  benefit  from  larger  markets,  which  would  allow  them  to  absorb  the  fixed 
costs  of  accessibility  features.  Costs  of  adapting  products  or  services  to  differing  national 
requirements may be especially burdensome for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). 

The  largest  number  of  reported  issues  has  concerned  the  built  environment,  transport  and 
ICT, including the web. These areas are key components for the accessibility of services. On 
the  basis  of  a  screening  exercise,  reflecting  EU  competences,  and  following  a  methodology 
described  in  more  detail  in  the  impact  assessment,  a  priority  list  has  been  created.  It 
identifies the products and services for which accessibility features are most needed, in 
areas where there is most legislative divergence and greatest market fragmentation, or where 
there is a very strong likelihood that these will occur, with consequential risks to the working 
of the single market: 

telephony services and related terminal equipment; 

−  computers and operating systems; 
−  digital TV services and equipment; 
− 
−  eBooks; 
−  self-service terminals including ATMs, ticketing and check-in machines; 
−  eCommerce; 
−  banking services; 
−  passenger transport services, including air, rail, bus and maritime; 
−  hospitality services. 

3 

 
 
 
Lack  of  EU  coordination  on  how  to  implement  accessibility  obligations  in  areas  such  as 
public procurement or the European Structural and Investment funds is a further issue. 
The  current  situation  discourages  cross-border  participation  in  public  procurement.  Recent 
studies show that the current level of cross-border public procurement is very low and 
that  the  differences  in  national  legal  requirements  and  the  variety  of  practices  used  by 
contracting  authorities,  including  on  accessibility,  constitute  a  barrier  to  cross-border  public 
procurement.  This  situation  can  create  uncertainty  for  European  industry  around  what  is 
actually  required  by  the  contracting  authority  and  how  to  compete  with  other  industries 
offering similar products and services. 

This divergence of accessibility legislation and related single market issues in areas such 
as  public  procurement  and  European  Structural  and  Investment  funds  is  expected  to 
increase.  While  accessibility  requirements  have  become  obligatory  in  the  new  European 
frameworks, the relevant EU law does not define what accessibility means and what it entails, 
leaving this to be defined in national or sector-specific rules. It is important to note that EU 
funding  from  programmes  like  the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds  or  the 
Connecting Europe Facility are often spent through public procurement.1 

A lack of cross-border competition due to the existence and further introduction of differing 
accessibility standards for public procurement processes is expected to have a negative impact 
on public sector budgets, as prices are likely to increase. 

2. 

ANALYSIS OF SUBSIDIARITY 

On the basis of Article 114 of the TFEU, the European Union has a right to act to improve 
the  conditions  for  the  establishment  and  functioning  of  the  single  market  for  accessible 
products and services. This article allows accessibility requirements to be harmonised at EU 
level and also allows for barriers dissuading economic operators from taking full advantage of 
the  benefits  of  the  single  market  to  be  addressed.  The  current  differences  in  legislation  on 
accessibility  of  products  and  services  creates  legal  uncertainty  and  higher  transaction  costs, 
and  may  dissuade  business  from  investing  in  new  and  more  innovative  accessible  products 
and services. 

This  initiative  fully  respects  the  principle  of  subsidiarity  by  focusing  only  on  those 
products and services for which there is evidence of a problem with the single market, hence 
the  need  to  address  it  at  EU  level  -  either  because  different  national  requirements  create  an 
effective  obstacle  to  trade,  or  because  they  already  fall  under  the  remit  of  EU  law.  Since 
Member States cannot tackle this problem alone, there is a need to establish a coherent legal 
framework that will allow for the free flow of accessible products and services in the single 
market.  Member  States  would  continue  to  be  responsible  for  regulating  the  accessibility 
requirements for products and services for  which there is no evidence of an internal market 
issue. 

In addition, this action would respect the principle of proportionality  by giving Member 
States  flexibility  in  deciding  how  to  achieve  EU-wide  objectives  and  by  allowing  for  a 
gradual implementation. This principle would also be considered for economic operators by 
including certain safeguards on the proportionality of the obligations.  

1 

The related Regulations also require accessibility to be observed when spending the funds, a measure to 
support further accessibility. 

4 

 
 
 
                                                 
This  initiative  is  consistent  with  other  EU  and  international  policies  and  would  have  a 
positive impact on several of the rights set out in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of 
the European Union. 

3. 

OBJECTIVES OF THIS EU INITIATIVE 

In order to address current and potential single market fragmentation, the general objectives 
of this initiative are to improve the functioning of the single market for specific accessible 
products and services, while serving the needs of industry and consumers, and to contribute to 
implementing the Europe 2020 strategy, the European disability strategy 2010-2020 and the 
UN  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with  Disabilities.  The  specific  objectives  are  to 
reduce  barriers  to  cross-border  trade  and  increase  competition  for  selected  accessible 
products and services and in public procurement. The operational objectives would be to set 
out EU-wide accessibility requirements for selected products and services, that would also be 
used when implementing general accessibility obligations set in EU law – such as EU public 
procurement rules - and to improve enforcement of accessibility requirements. 

4. 

POLICY OPTIONS 

Five  policy  options  were  discarded  at  an  early  stage  of  the  impact  assessment  process,  as 
being either unrealistic, unable to meet the objectives or disproportionate. These were:  

•  a horizontal framework applying to all relevant products and services;  

•  setting accessibility requirements for all private sector websites;  

•  self-regulation by industry;  

•  voluntary European standardisation alone; and  

•  a Regulation setting common accessibility requirements in all Member States. 

A  preliminary  screening  showed  that  this  EU  initiative  should  only  cover  selected  priority 
areas,  where  obstacles  to  the  functioning  of  the  single  market  were  visible  and  likely  to 
increase and where action at European level would add more value. Regulatory intervention 
allowing Member States flexibility in implementation appears to be the most efficient form of 
EU intervention for tackling current and expected problems with the functioning of the single 
market.  A  Directive  in  particular  would  be  in  line  with  the  approach  taken  in  previous 
Commission Communications and instruments, and would ensure the unobstructed movement 
of accessible products and services without going beyond that which is necessary. 

The following four options were retained for further impact analysis: 

Option 1: No further action at EU level (baseline scenario). 

Option  2:  EU  Recommendation  defining  common  accessibility  requirements  for  the 
selected products and services, as well as in the area of public procurement. This option 
addresses the problem in the baseline scenario by including accessibility requirements which 
may be applied to a defined list of products and services and to public procurement processes. 

5 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Option  3:  EU  Directive  defining  common  accessibility  requirements  for  the  selected 
products  and  services  as  well  as  in  the  area  of  public  procurement  -  applicable  to  the 
Member States when they regulate on accessibility. Under this option, Member States will 
not  be  required  to  legislate  on  accessibility  requirements  by  a  given  date,  but  if  they  do  or 
have already done so, they will have to follow EU rules in order to ensure consistency across 
the  single  market.  All  Member  States  will  have  to  ensure  the  free  circulation  of  accessible 
products  and  services,  even  if  they  do  not  regulate  on  accessibility,  and  to  use  common 
accessibility requirements in public procurement processes. 

Option  4:  EU  Directive  defining  common  accessibility  requirements  for  the  selected 
products  and  services,  as  well  as  in  the  area  of  public  procurement  –  immediately 
applicable  to  all  Member  States.  This  option  requires  all  Member  States,  including  those 
which have not yet legislated on accessibility, to introduce new legislation on accessibility in 
accordance  with  the  EU  rules  proposed.  It  fully  harmonises  accessibility  rules  across  all 
Member States. 

5. 

ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT 

Separate assessments have been made of the impact on each product and service, and different 
policy options could be used for each of them. 

Each  of  the  four  policy  options  has  been  assessed  in  terms  of  its  social,  economic  and 
environmental impacts and the extent to which it meets the policy objectives and broader EU 
objectives. The assessment criteria for ‘effectiveness’ and ‘efficiency’ take into account how 
the  option  would  improve  cross-border  trade  in  the  selected  products  and  services  and  in 
public  procurement  and  how  the  option  would  increase  competition  among  industry  for  the 
selected products and services and in public procurement. 

Economic  impact  was  assessed  in  terms  of  the  costs  to  businesses  of  meeting  different 
national accessibility requirements for the products and services in the baseline scenario, and 
of the potential savings, from those costs, under each of the policy options resulting from the 
harmonisation of EU-level requirements. When considering the possible impact on different 
social  groups,  particular  consideration  was  given  to  the  impact  on  older  consumers  and 
consumers with disabilities. Consideration of the impact of each option on fundamental rights 
was  an  integral  part  of  the  exercise  and  these  potential  impacts  are  therefore  evaluated 
throughout the assessment. 

In addition, a specific assessment of the impacts on SMEs and micro-enterprises (the ‘SME 
test’) has been carried out, including by consulting an SME panel. Because of their size and 
limited  resources,  differences  in  national  accessibility  requirements  cause  disproportionate 
problems  for  SMEs.  SMEs  would  therefore  be  expected  to  benefit  in  particular  from  the 
elimination of divergence in accessibility requirements. The impact assessment has not shown 
any need for specific measures for SMEs. 

5.1.  Assessment of option 1 

If  no  further  action  is  taken,  the  problems  identified  would  be  expected  to  increase,  as  a 
growing number of Member States put in place non-harmonised accessibility requirements to 
meet  their  obligations  under  the  United  Nations  Convention  on  the  Rights  of  Persons  with 
Disabilities. Based on a set of underlying assumptions, including market volume, proportion 
of  cross-border  trade  and  proportion  of  development  costs,  an  assessment  of  the  expected 

6 

 
 
 
 
market situation in 2020 has been calculated in monetary terms. The total overall annual cost 
of the baseline scenario is estimated to be around EUR 20 billion in 2020. 

As the status quo would not require specific changes in investment or administrative burden, 
these costs are estimated to be zero in this option. 

5.2.  Assessment of option 2 

Due  to  its  non-binding  nature,  this  option  is  expected  to  be  implemented  in  only  a  limited 
number of Member States, depending on the products and services considered. On the basis of 
calculations made for each relevant market and illustrating that sometimes added accessibility 
costs will constitute a fraction of these initial costs, this option is expected to have an overall 
annual  cost  of  EUR  16  billion  representing  a  cost  savings  of  20 %  in  comparison  with  the 
baseline scenario. 

The  administrative  burden  introduced  by  requiring  firms  to  provide  information  on  the 
accessibility of their products would amount to around EUR 20 million. 

5.3.  Assessment of option 3 

Option 3 would achieve the policy objectives. It removes existing fragmentation and prevents 
future fragmentation as it would be applicable when Member States legislate on accessibility. 
This option is expected to have an overall annual cost of EUR 10 billion and would achieve 
the highest cost savings of the considered options with cost savings of 50 % in comparison 
with the baseline scenario.  

The total annual administrative burden related to this option (for the companies reporting on 
accessibility) would be around EUR 107 million. 

5.4.  Assessment of option 4 

Like  the  previous  option,  option  4  would  achieve  the  objectives  of  the  initiative.  It  would 
eliminate the fragmentation caused by different national accessibility requirements, as a result 
of the simultaneous introduction of uniform accessibility requirements in all Member States 
for each of the selected products and services across the entire single market. It would give 
rise  to  some  additional  costs  to  businesses  and  would  yield  fewer  savings  than  option  3. 
Nevertheless,  this  cost  reduction  is  estimated  at  45 %  of  the  baseline  scenario.  Its  overall 
cost would be of EUR 11 billion.  

The  administrative  burden  on  companies  would  be  around  EUR  126  million,  as  option  4 
would extend requirements to provide information to all companies supplying the EU market. 

6. 

COMPARISON OF POLICY OPTIONS 

Option  2  would  insufficiently  address  the  objectives;  in  particular,  it  would  not  eliminate 
fragmentation in the single market. 

Options  3  and  4  are  the  policy  options  that  would  best  address  the  problem  identified  and 
consequently would most improve the functioning of the single market for accessible products 
and  services.  A  comparison  of  the  impacts  of  those  two  policy  options  shows  differences 
mainly in their effectiveness, costs savings and proportionality. 

7 

 
 
 
While both options 3 and 4 would result in a positive impact on fundamental rights, the most 
beneficial  effects  on  harmonising  the  single  market,  leading  to  the  biggest  social  positive 
impacts, would result from option 4.  

However, option 3 seems to be less costly for companies and more subsidiarity-friendly and 
proportional  as  it  does  not  impose  a  strict  timeframe  for  Member  States  to  regulate  on 
accessibility.  The  administrative  burden  is  expected  to  be  higher  for  option  4,  as  it  covers 
immediately all Member States and therefore introduces more obligations for industry. 

In  conclusion,  option  3  is  initially  more  beneficial  from  an  economic  perspective,  but  less 
effective to remove and prevent the emergence of new barriers to the smooth functioning of 
the  single  market.  Option  4  can  be  more  beneficial  in  terms  of  effectiveness  and    social 
benefits,  as  it  creates  immediately  a  bigger  market,  that  could  compensate  its  bigger 
immediate costs. 

7. 

MONITORING AND EVALUATION ARRANGEMENTS 

The Commission is the guardian of the Treaty and will need to regularly check how Member 
States  have  implemented  and  ensured  the  compliance  of  the  relevant  products  and  services 
with the accessibility requirements. 

The impact of this proposal will be monitored through indicators such as the number of court 
cases relating to accessibility problems with relevant products and services or the number of 
public  calls  for  tender  that  refer  to  accessibility  and  EU-level  accessibility  requirements.  A 
range of existing information sources will be used to provide the necessary data. Five years 
after the entry into application of this initiative, the Commission will evaluate its impact. This 
will  include  an  assessment  of  its  actual  effects,  the  collection  of  lessons  to  be  learned  and 
considerations for potential improvements, including regarding the scope of the proposal. 

8