COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the import of cultural goods
Date: 2017-07-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: EU customs procedure, art trade, cultural object, fight against crime, illicit trade, import (EU), import licence, surveillance concerning imports, terrorism, third country

EUROPEAN 
COMMISSION 

Brussels, 13.7.2017  
SWD(2017) 263 final 

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

Accompanying the document 

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the import 
of cultural goods 

{COM(2017) 375 final} 
{SWD(2017) 262 final} 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
Impact assessment on a proposal for customs measures on the import of cultural goods 

Executive Summary Sheet 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? Maximum 11 lines 
In  the  framework  of  the  2015  European  Agenda on  Security1  and  of  the 2016 Action  Plan  to  step  up  the  fight 
against  the  financing  of  terrorism2  the  Commission  announced  that  it  would  prepare  a  legislative  proposal 
against illicit trade in cultural goods by the end of second quarter 2017.  
The proposal addresses the problem of cultural goods from third countries illegally taken from their historical and 
archaeological context being brought in to the EU, thereby fostering organised crime, terrorism financing, money 
laundering and tax evasion as well loss of cultural identity and heritage to source countries. It follows up on EU 
legislation prohibiting trade in cultural goods from Iraq and Syria (Regulations 1210/2003 and 36/2012).  

What is this initiative expected to achieve? Maximum 8 lines 
The  initiative  aims  to  prevent  the  import  and  storage  in  the  EU  of  cultural  goods  illicitly  exported  from  a  third 
country;  thereby  reducing  trafficking  in  cultural  goods,  combatting  terrorism  financing  and  protecting  cultural 
heritage,  especially  archaeological  objects  in  source  countries  affected  by  armed  conflict.  For  this  purpose  it 
proposes  to:  establish  a  common  definition  for  cultural  goods  at  import;  ensure  importers  exercise  diligence 
when  buying  cultural  goods  from  third  countries;  determine  standardised  information  to  certify  the  goods  are 
legal;  provide  for  effective  deterrents  to  trafficking;  and  promote  the  active  involvement  of  stakeholders  in 
protecting cultural heritage. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level? Maximum 7 lines  
Control  and  scrutiny  measures  undertaken  by  one  Member  State  do  not  prevent  illicit  cultural  goods  entering 
that Member State from a different Member State that has not established such controls. The uneven treatment 
of economic operators in different Member States results in discrimination. A common approach is necessary to 
ensure effectiveness and homogenous treatment of imports throughout the EU.  

B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? Maximum 14 lines  
Policy options were considered in groupings:  
Firstly,  soft-law  options  to  foster  stakeholder  goodwill  and  self-discipline  and  improve  capacities  of  competent 
authorities (GROUPING A).  
Secondly, regulatory options addressing two important elements:  
- the appropriate definition of the scope of the cultural goods to be covered by the initiative (GROUPING B);  
- the documentary requirements needed to certify the licit nature of the goods (GROUPING C) 
More specifically, Grouping C comprises the following certification options: 
(a) Export certificate issued by the source country and administrative cooperation with the country in question; 
(b) Importer statement (affidavit) together with an Object ID form providing basic information on the goods; 
(c) Import licence issued by EU cultural authorities for all cultural goods 
(d) Import licence for cultural goods at high risk from pillage (archaeological objects) and importer statement and 
Object ID for all other cultural goods (combining elements of b + c). 

Who supports which option? Maximum 7 lines  
Enterprises  and  interest  representatives  favour  non-regulatory  options  and  would  rather  have  no  specific  EU 
documentary requirements at import.  Among these, they would seem to object less to the importer statement. 
Member States public authorities, NGOs and civil society favour stronger measures, such as export certification 
or import licencing; they are unsure about the effectiveness of importer statements, as self-certification has not 
been tried in this domain.  

1 COM (2015) 185 final  
2 Commission Communication the European Parliament and the Council on an Action Plan for strengthening the 
fight against terrorist financing [COM(2016) 50 final] 

2 

 
 
 
 
                                                            
C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines 
The  preferred  option  is  a  combination  of  soft-law  options  and  regulatory  measures  with  a  large  typology  of 
goods,  limited  by  a  250  years  minimum  age  limit.  Documentation  requirements  are  foreseen  also,  in  order  to 
prove licit provenance. In this way, through more effective controls, it is expected to reduce trafficking in cultural 
goods, combat terrorism financing and protect cultural heritage, especially in source countries affected by armed 
conflict.   

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines 
Economic  operators  who  import  cultural  goods  considered  endangered  heritage  (a  very  small  part  of  the  art 
market) will have to obtain import licences for them before they can import them in the EU. This will involve some 
costs  for  importers  to  gather  the  documentation  and  submit  it  to  the  authorities,  as  well  as  some  expense  for 
cultural  authorities  to  ensure  they  have  the  appropriate  expertise  to  examine  applications.  For  other  goods, 
importers will need to fill in the importer statement & Object ID and present them to customs for examination and 
registration.  

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? Maximum 8 lines 
The  quasi-totality  of  art  market  enterprises  are  micro-  or  small  businesses.  For  this  reason,  the  proposed 
measures were considered as if all operators were SMEs, i.e. an effort was made to select solutions requiring 
limited operational resources and lowest possible compliance costs. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? Maximum 4 lines 
Except in the case of import licencing for archaeological objects and elements of monuments for which Member 
States will have to ensure they have the specialised expertise to process applications, the rest of the measures 
do not imply significant needs in human resources or operational costs. 

Will there be other significant impacts? Max 6 lines  
Customs controls and other deterrents to trafficking (penalties) will have a negative impact on organised crime 
and terrorist financing operating in the EU and abroad. The EU measures may have a positive impact on third 
countries whose cultural heritage is at risk.  

Proportionality  
The measure does not impose unreasonable costs on traders and administrations. 

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed? Maximum 4 lines  
The Commission will report every five years on the implementation of the Regulation. 

3