COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Completing the Better Regulation Agenda: Better solutions for better results
Date: 2017-10-24
Institutions: European Commission, Secretariat-General
Subjects: EU act, EU programme, application of EU law, approximation of laws, drafting of EU law, institutional cooperation, interinstitutional agreement, transparency in decision-making

EN 

   EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 24.10.2017  COM(2017) 651 final   COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Completing the Better Regulation Agenda: Better solutions for better results {SWD(2017) 675 final}  
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION: BETTER REGULATION IN THE COMMISSION 

This Commission is half-way through its mandate. It remains focused on delivering the 
priority  initiatives  to  support  its  10  political  priorities1  for  the  benefit  of  the  Union's 
citizens; to support growth and jobs, to  make the internal market work better, to tackle 
security threats, to protect consumers and workers and to improve public health and the 
environment.  The  Work  Programme  for  20182  again  demonstrates  the  Commission’s 
focus on the big issues where European solutions are necessary. It includes measures to 
put  in  place  the  Digital  Single  Market  and  Energy  Union,  ensure  fair  taxation  of 
companies  and  social  fairness,  complete  the  Capital  Markets  Union,  strengthen  the 
Economic  and  Monetary  Union  and  banking  union,  further  combat  terrorism  and 
establishing the blueprint for the Union’s next multi-annual financial framework.  

Better  regulation  underpins  all  the  Commission's  work  to  ensure  the  EU  does  what  is 
needed  and  does  it  well.  To  this  end,  in  20153,  this  Commission  identified  a  set  of 
balanced principles and measures revolving around three key pillars:  

–  Impact  assessment:  new  proposals  are  accompanied  by  impact  assessments 
which  explore  how  policy  goals  can  be  achieved  in  the  most  efficient  way 
without imposing unnecessary burdens.  

–  "Evaluate first": all revisions of existing legislation would assess opportunities to 
simplify and reduce unnecessary costs based on analyses and stakeholder inputs.  

–  Stakeholder  engagement:  better  regulation  is  underpinned  by  the  active 
engagement of civil society, which invites inputs from stakeholders at all points 
in the policy cycle using a range of feedback tools and consultation activities. 

This approach to better regulation has received wide support from stakeholders including 
the  European  Parliament4  and  the  Council5.  Already  in  2015,  the  OECD  ranked  the 
Commission's  impact  assessment  and  evaluation  systems  third  and  fifth  respectively 
among  OECD  members6.  Since  this  ranking  was  made,  the  Commission  introduced 
further  improvements  in  May  2015,  and  in  2016  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council 
and the Commission agreed on an Interinstitutional Agreement on Better Law-Making7. 
In addition, in December 2016, the Commission presented a more strategic approach to 

1   https://ec.europa.eu/commission/index_en  
2   COM(2017) xxx [to be completed when known] 
3   COM(2015) 215 of 19 May 2015; Better regulation for better results – An EU agenda. 
4   European Parliament resolution of 12 April 2016 on Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme 

(REFIT): State of Play and Outlook; 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0104  

5   Better 

regulation 

to 

strengthen  competitiveness:  Council  conclusions  26  May  2016; 

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/05/26-conclusions-better-regulation/  

6   OECD 

(2015),  OECD  Regulatory  Policy  Outlook  2015,  OECD  Publishing,  Paris; 

http://www.oecd.org/publications/oecd-regulatory-policy-outlook-2015-9789264238770-en.htm  

7  

Interinstitutional Agreement between the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union and 
the  European  Commission  on  Better  Law-Making.  OJ  L  123,  12  May  2016,  p.1.  http://eur-
lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2016:123:TOC    

2 

 
                                                 
enforcement  of  EU  legislation8.  In  the  course  of  2017,  there  have  been  three  further 
significant developments in how the Commission approaches better regulation. 

–  First,  the  Commission  has  pushed  further  with  its  efforts  to  increase  the 
transparency,  legitimacy  and  accountability  of  its  work,  in  particular  as  regards 
the consultation process and the possibilities for stakeholders to provide feedback 
on its proposals (section 2.2 below). By the end of 2017, it will have rolled out 
the  "contribute  to  law-making"  website  which  will  allow  stakeholders  to 
participate fully in the Commission's work throughout the policy cycle9. 

–  Second, in 2017, the Commission completed a major update of the guidelines and 
the tools for better regulation across the entire policy cycle10. While their primary 
function  is  to  explain  and  exploit  the  linkages  between  the  various  steps  of 
policymaking  inside  the  Commission  and  to  support  its  services  in  their  better 
regulation  work,  they  are  also  made  available  to  the  European  Parliament,  the 
Council, the Member States and all stakeholders. The aim is to facilitate further 
engagement of all these actors in the Union's policymaking process.  

–  Third,  at  the  beginning  of  2017,  the  Regulatory  Scrutiny  Board  completed  the 
recruitment  of  its  staff,  and  now  includes  the  three  members  from  outside  the 
European  institutions.  This  independent  Board11  checks  the  quality  of  impact 
assessments and selected evaluations of existing legislation and makes public all 
its opinions. Each impact assessment will in principle need a positive opinion for 
the  initiative  to  proceed.  Should  the  Commission  decide  to  take  action  in  the 
absence  of  such  an  opinion,  it  publicly  explains  why  it  decided  to  proceed.  In 
addition, the Board is providing practical methodological advice to Commission 
departments.  The  Board  now  also  examines  selected  evaluations  and 
systematically  asks  whether  –  in  line  with  the  'evaluate  first  principle'  -  an 
evaluation  has  been  done  to  support  the  impact  assessment  report  where 
legislation is amended.   

Figure  1  provides  an  overview  of  key  activities  of  better  regulation  and  shows  the 
substantial  work  completed  in  the  last  twelve  months.  The  rest  of  this  Communication 
provides  more  detail  on  these  developments,  on  the  on-going  work  with  the  REFIT 
platform  to  collect,  analyse  and  take  forward  stakeholders'  views  on  how  to  simplify 
existing  legislation.  It  also  responds  to  the  commitments  the  Commission  made  in  the 
Interinstitutional  Agreement  on  Better  Law-Making  (in  particular  paragraph  48)  and  to 
the  conclusions  of  the  Council12  and  it  outlines  further  actions  to  deliver  on  the 

“Contribute to law-making”: https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/contribute-law-making_en  

8   C(2016) 8600 of 21 December 2016; EU law: Better results through better application. 
9  
10   https://ec.europa.eu/info/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox_en  
11   https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/regulatory-scrutiny-board_en  
12   Council  conclusions of December 2014 (Doc  16000/14): "…call  on  the  Commission  to develop  and 
put  in  place  -  on  the  basis  of  input  from  Member  States  and  stakeholders  -  reduction  targets  in 
particularly burdensome areas, especially for SMEs, within the REFIT Programme, which would not 
require  baseline  measurement  and  should  consider  at  the  same  time  the  costs  and  benefits  of 
regulation.";  and  Council  conclusions  of  26  May  2016  on  better  regulation  to  strengthen 
competitiveness which " urge the Commission to rapidly proceed on [.]. the introduction of reduction 
targets in 2017, whilst always taking into account a high level of protection of consumers, health, the 
environment and employees and the importance of a fully functioning Single Market." 

3 

 
                                                 
Commission's ambitious Better Regulation Agenda. The staff working document linked 
to this Communication provides additional information on simplification efforts.  

Figure1. Overview of better regulation activities since their launch in the Commission 

As at 31 August 2016 

As at 31 August 2017 

Evaluations 

Impact assessments 

Public consultations 

REFIT Platform opinions 

688 

975 

704 

17 

798 

1028 

814 

58 

2.  APPLICATION OF BETTER REGULATION:  KEY RESULTS 

2.1.  Being big on the big things: respecting subsidiarity and proportionality 

The  Juncker  Commission  focuses  on  a  core  set  of  ten  political  priorities,  and  remains 
committed  to  acting  only  where  necessary  at  EU  level  and  to  propose  only  what  is 
essential to deliver the results we want. Based on evidence gathered through the various 
better regulation instruments, it acts where it needs to and where it adds value. Figure 2 
illustrates this Commission's focus which also facilitates the mainstreaming of horizontal 
objectives, like sustainability, across all policy fields. Finally, where sectoral approaches 
have been pursued in a number of areas, such as energy and climate, transport, the digital 
single market and the internal market, better regulation instruments have been applied to 
ensure coherence and avoid unnecessary and overlapping costs within these sectors. 

Impact  assessments  have  been  prepared  for  the  vast  majority  of  these  initiatives. 
However,  the  input  and  evidence  needed  for  an  impact  assessment  cannot  always  be 
obtained  for  actions  where  an  immediate  policy  response  is  needed.  This  has  been  the 
case over the last year in the fields of migration and security, for example. In these cases, 
the Commission has nonetheless provided evidence to the extent possible to support what 
it proposes, and in the few cases where this has not been possible, it has explained why.  

Figure  2.  The  number  of  priority  initiatives  in  the  Juncker  Commission  2015  –  2018 
compared to the last year of its predecessor  

Priority initiatives 2014-2018 

100

50

0

2014

2015

2016

2017

2018

In  addition  to  focusing  on  key  priorities,  the  Commission  also  continues  its  efforts  to 
ensure  that  the  actions  it  takes  are  proportionate.  The  Commission  reports  annually  on 
the  substantial  work  it  undertakes  in  the  field  of  subsidiarity  and  proportionality.  An 
important tool is the independent scrutiny of policy options by the Regulatory Scrutiny 
Board  before  the  Commission  adopts  its  proposals.  The  Board  checks  the  options 

4 

 
 
 
explored to simplify legislation and all relevant impacts (such as those on SMEs) which 
can lead to more effective, efficient or proportionate approaches that avoid unnecessary 
costs. Box 1 provides examples.  

Box 1. Examples where better regulation led to more proportionate approaches 

  Proposal  on  the  free  flow  of  data  in  the  digital  single  market  (COM(2017)  495).  The 
Regulatory  Scrutiny  Board  raised  concerns  about  the  necessity  and  proportionality  of  the 
option of intervening into business-to-business contracts to make the transfer ("portability") 
of data between providers of cloud services more efficient. The Commission therefore chose 
to  rather  encourage  self-regulation  by  codes  of  conduct  on  information  to  be  provided  to 
users  of  data  storage  or  other  processing  services.  It  also  decided  that  the  modalities  of 
switching and porting should be addressed through self-regulation to define best practices. 

  Proposal  for  a  Directive  on  the  promotion  of  renewable  energy  (COM(2016)  767).  As 
explained in the proposal's explanatory memorandum, less intrusive measures were proposed 
following  concerns  expressed  by  the  Regulatory  Scrutiny  Board  about  the  proportionality 
(and conformity with the subsidiarity principle) of measures to promote renewable energy in 
the heating and cooling sectors. 

  EU standardisation policy. Stakeholders rely on EU harmonised technical standards for their 
operations. The timely publication of references to these standards in the Official Journal of 
the  EU  has  been  problematic.  Based  on  the  recommendations  of  the  REFIT  Platform,  the 
Commission  and  the  European  Standardisation  Organisations  have  agreed  upon  an  action 
plan to resolve the issue. 

2.2.  Transparency, legitimacy and accountability 

In  the  course  of  2016  and  2017,  the  Commission  has  put  particular  emphasis  on 
increasing the legitimacy of what it does. The Commission is committed to the highest 
standards of transparency and accountability in the interests of democratic legitimacy, in 
line with Priority 10 of its Political Guidelines ("A Union of Democratic Change"). The 
public  and  stakeholders  rightly  expect  to  be  able  to  influence  decision-making 
themselves,  to  examine  the  evidence,  and  to  know  who  else  is  seeking  to  influence 
decision-making.  The  Commission  has  led  by  example  on  transparency  on  interaction 
with interest representatives by applying the principle that Commissioners, Members of 
their  Cabinets  and  Directors-General  will  only  meet  lobbyists  who  are  on  the 
Transparency  Register,  and  who  publish  information  about  these  meetings  on  their 
websites. In addition, registration in the Transparency Register is now also a requirement 
for stakeholder organisations and individual experts representing a common interest to be 
appointed  as  members  of  expert  groups  advising  the  Commission.  In  September  2016, 
the  Commission  put  forward  a  proposal  for  a  legally-binding  Interinstitutional 
Agreement for a mandatory Transparency Register which would cover the Commission, 
the European Parliament and, for the first time, the Council. This would be a major step 
forward towards stronger lobbying transparency.  

The  Commission  is  strongly  committed  to  engaging  with  stakeholders  and  citizens 
throughout the policy cycle13 and has invested significantly in a range of tools to engage 
better about its activities. Despite the availability of these tools, it is clear that the level of 
participation has not reached its full potential and some stakeholders are still unwilling or 
able to engage. The Commission has taken additional measures to tackle this problem. In 
particular:  

13   OECD  pilot  database  on  stakeholder  engagement  practices:  http://www.oecd.org/gov/regulatory-

policy/EC-Stakeholder-Engagement.pdf  

5 

 
                                                 
  To respond to concerns from stakeholders, including the REFIT Platform14, that 
it  is  often  not  clear  what  use  the  Commission  makes  of  their  input,  the 
Commission  will  provide  better  feedback  on  stakeholders'  views  in  its  impact 
assessments, evaluations and consultation reports to show how their inputs have 
been used.  

  To ensure that the right stakeholders are targeted in the most-effective manner to 
gather  their  views  and  important  data,  the  Commission  has  strengthened  its 
guidance  to  Commission  services  on  preparing  a  clear  consultation  strategy  for 
each  initiative  which  will  be  presented  in  roadmaps  and  inception  impact 
assessments.   

  To  reach  the  widest  possible  audience  and  to  facilitate  feedback,  the  public 
consultation  for  important  initiatives  will  now  be  available  in  all  official  EU 
languages while others will appear in at least English, French and German. This 
responds  to  concerns  expressed  by  the  European  Parliament,  the  European 
Ombudsman, stakeholders and citizens.  

  On 1 July 2016, the Commission launched a website that is a central entry point 
for  citizens  and  stakeholders  to  find  information  about  policy-making  and  to 
participate in the process15. This makes it easier for them to express their views. 
It  makes  policymaking  more  transparent  as  contributions  are  published 
automatically.  This  fulfils  an  important  commitment  of  the  2015  Better 
Regulation Agenda.  

  Feedback can now be given on a single website on the Commission’s early ideas 
for  new  initiatives  (roadmaps  and  inception  impact  assessments),  adopted 
proposals,  and  on  draft  tertiary  legislation  (delegated  acts  and  implementing 
acts). The latter is a significant improvement in transparency and consultation in 
what traditionally has been a complex and opaque process involving only experts 
and representatives of the Member States. Figure 3 provides an overview of the 
state of play.  

Figure 3. “Contribute to law-making” website: Overview from its launch on 1 July 2016 

Acts posted to the Europa website for stakeholder feedback 

As at 31 August 2017 

Draft delegated acts 

Draft implementing acts 

Roadmaps and inception impact assessments 

Legislative proposals adopted by the Commission 

98 

126 

225 

194 

especially 

The  Commission  will  also  continue  to  encourage  even  greater  participation  by 
stakeholders, 
social  media 
(#EUHaveYourSay). This has contributed to a steady increase in the number of visitors 
to  the  Contribute  to  law-making  website,  reaching  more  than  47,000  in  August  2017 
(Figure 4). Contributions received have for instance led to changes in the Commission's 

proposals, 

through 

priority 

for 

14   https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/xxii4ab_on_stakeholder_consultation_mechanisms.pdf  
15   https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/contribute-law-making_en  

6 

 
                                                 
proposal  on  rules  about  fair  use  of  roaming  of  mobile  telecommunications16  or  have 
informed  the  legislator,  as  in  the  case  of  the  public’s  response  on  the  Commission’s 
firearms proposal17. 

The  Commission  will  make  further  improvements  to  the  website  by  the  end  of  2017. 
These will include a 'timeline view' which will provide earlier and more information on 
each  upcoming  initiative,  and  incorporate  access  to  all  on-line  public  consultations 
launched each year. 

Figure 4. Evolution in the numbers of visitors to the Contribute to EU law-making site 

47 428 

50000

40000

30000

20000

10000

0

6
1
-
n
u

i

j

6
1
-
.
l
i

u

j

6
1
-
t
û
o
a

6
1
-
.
t
p
e
s

6
1
-
.
t
c
o

6
1
-
.
v
o
n

6
1
-
.
c
é
d

7
1
-
.
v
n
a
j

7
1
-
.
r
v
é
f

7
1
-
s
r
a
m

7
1
-
.
r
v
a

7
1
-
i
a
m

7
1
-
n
u

i

j

7
1
-
.
l
i

u

j

7
1
-
t
û
o
a

2.3. 

Simplifying legislation and tackling unnecessary costs 

From  the  beginning  of  its  mandate  this  Commission  has  emphasised  that  actively 
managing  existing  EU  legislation  is  as  important  as  preparing  new  initiatives.  It  is 
essential to ensure that legislation remains fit for purpose and delivers the results that EU 
law-makers  intended.  At  the  heart  of  its  efforts  to  deliver  simpler  legislation,  the 
Commission  focuses  on  tackling  unnecessary  costs  and  eliminating  administrative 
burdens  without  compromising  policy  objectives.  Making  legislation  simpler  and  less 
burdensome  also  improves  implementation  and  enforcement,  and  ultimately  delivers 
better results. 

The Commission is convinced that the reduction of unnecessary costs is most effectively 
done  on  a  case  by  case basis  so that  the  intended  objectives  of  the  legislation  are  fully 
maintained. The Commission has been consistent in its view that better regulation is not 
deregulation. Where there is a clear need to regulate to achieve important societal goals – 
whether,  for  example,  in  the  field  of  labour  markets,  health  and  safety  at  work, 
environmental protection, or to deal with the impact of new technologies on privacy – it 
will do so with the appropriate ambition. Some costs will always be incurred to ensure 
that legislation is effective and these have to be seen in the context of the overall benefits 
the  legislation  will  bring.  To  ensure  democratic  accountability  and  transparency,  it  is 
essential  that  a  political  decision  on  which  costs  are  legitimate  to  achieve  the  policy 
objectives  is  based  on  evidence  from  a  case-by-case  assessment  which  responds  to  the 
concerns of stakeholders and citizens. 

16   https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/roaming-implementing-regulation  
17   COM(2015) 0750. Proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending 

Council Directive 91/477/EEC on control of the acquisition and possession of weapons. 

7 

 
 
                                                 
The  Commission's  approach,  unlike  that  in  many  Member  States,  is  based  on  the 
"evaluate  first  principle".  Before  revising  legislation  or  introducing  new  legislation  the 
Commission  has  made  a  commitment  to  evaluate  what  already  exists  to  identify  the 
potential  for  simplification  and  cost  reduction.  These  evaluations  can  be  of  individual 
pieces  of  legislation  or  of  several  pieces  of  legislation  together  covering  a  particular 
sector ("fitness checks") and they identify areas of possible cost savings for the specific 
legislation  in  question.  This  analysis  is  then  carried  forward  in  the  impact  assessment 
process  which  identifies  how  these  changes  can  best  be  implemented,  and  quantifies 
wherever  possible.  These  exercises  are  carried  out  on  the  basis  of  evidence,  which  is 
gathered  through  stakeholder  consultations,  the work  of  the  REFIT  platform,  and  input 
which can be submitted to the "Lighten Your Load" website18. This process is essential to 
ensure the overall legitimacy of the exercise and to ensure that policy objectives are not 
adversely  affected  by  efforts  to  reduce  costs.  In  2016,  evaluations  were  carried  out  for 
just under a half of the impact assessments and in 2017 this has risen to almost 70%. This 
is a significant achievement since the concept was introduced. 

Box 2.  Important evaluations and fitness checks 2016-2017 

  Fitness check on monitoring and reporting obligations in EU environment policy. 

  Evaluation of the External Borders Fund 2011-2013. 

  Evaluation of the Horizon 2020 programme. 

  Evaluation of the Regulation on the mutual recognition of goods. 

  Evaluation of the market surveillance provisions of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008. 

  Fitness check on consumer law. 

  Sectoral fitness check of the construction sector. 

  Call for evidence on the functioning of the EU regulatory framework for financial services.  

A key challenge is to quantify sufficiently accurately the costs and benefits of proposed 
changes. This quantification is challenging not least because the data which are available 
– including data which Member States might collect on the performance of legislation –
are often limited. This makes it difficult to produce rigorous estimates of impacts across 
28  Member  States.  In  spite  of  the  challenges,  the  Commission  nevertheless  presents 
quantified information in about half of its impact assessments and in almost all of those 
included  in  the  REFIT  programme.  Overall  the  Commission's  practice  in  terms  of 
quantification is very much in line with approaches elsewhere, and is well advanced in 
relation to estimating the benefits of policies.  

This  approach  is  delivering  results.  Within  its  regulatory  fitness  programme,  the 
Commission  has  launched  137  initiatives  for  simplification  since  2015.  The  REFIT 
Platform  has  played  an  important  role  in  focusing  the  Commission's  work  on  what 
matters  most  for  stakeholders.  Since  early  2016,  the  REFIT  Platform  has  adopted  58 
opinions  and  provided  input  notably  to  the  simplification  of  the  Common  Agricultural 
Policy, the European Structural and Investment Funds, VAT rules and in the area of the 
single  market.  Box  3  provides  a  number  of  examples  where  the  Commission  has 
identified  potential  cost  savings  for  businesses  as  well  as  citizens  and  national 
administrations,  with  the  help  of  the  REFIT  platform.  Further  details  on  these  and  all 
other REFIT proposals are provided in the Staff Working Document published with this 

18   http://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/lighten-load_en  

8 

 
                                                 
Communication.  The  Work  Programme  for  2018  lists  the  major  proposals  to  reduce 
unnecessary costs the Commission intends to make before the end of its mandate. 

Box 3. Examples of regulatory simplification of existing legislation19 

  Proposal  to  modernising  VAT  for  cross-border  B2C  e-commerce  (COM(2016)  757).  The 
proposal  is  designed  to  simplify  complex  VAT  obligations  relating  to  cross-border  e-
commerce and to create a level playing field for EU and third country businesses which often 
make  non-compliant  VAT-free  sales.  The  proposal  is  expected  to  reduce  VAT  compliance 
costs for businesses by EUR 2.3 billion a year from 2021 while at the same time increasing 
VAT revenues for Member States by EUR 7 billion. 

  Proposal  for  a  Regulation  establishing  a  single  digital  gateway  to  provide  information, 
procedures,  assistance  and  problem-solving  services  (COM(2017)256).  Significant 
obstacles  exist  for  both  citizens  and  businesses  interested  in  moving  to,  selling  products  or 
providing  services  in  another  EU  country.  Finding  relevant,  accurate  and  understandable 
information  online  as  well  as  being  able  to  access  and  carry  out  administrative  procedures 
online  is  crucial  for  those  willing  to  use  the  advantages  of  the  Single  Market,  but  often 
remains complicated, time-consuming and expensive, if possible at all. As far as information 
is  concerned,  businesses  could  save  between  EUR  11  and  55  billion  annually  for 
researching  just  nine  business  topics.  The  preferred  option  would  reduce  by  60%  the  1.5 
million  hours  that  citizens  currently  spend  on  researching  online  seven  essential  topics 
before going abroad. 

  Proposal for a Regulation on European business statistics (COM(2017) 114). The current 
system  for  producing  European  business  statistics  is  fragmented  across  domain-specific 
regulations.  This  leads  to  inconsistencies  in  the  collected  data  and  inefficiencies  in  their 
production.  The  new  proposal  will  repeal  10  existing  acts  and  provide  a  common  legal 
framework for the production and compilation of business statistics. The proposal is expected 
to deliver better quality statistics and lead to a rationalisation of national statistical production 
processes and a reduction of the statistical burden on respondents who provide data. The new 
proposal is expected to generate an administrative burden reduction for businesses of at 
least 13.5% annually due in significant part to savings in the production of intra-EU trade 
statistics. 

  Revision  of  European  Market  Infrastructure  Regulation  (Rules  on  over  the  counter 
derivatives,  central  counterparties  and  trade  repositories)  (COM(2017)208).  The  proposal 
sets  out  a  number  of  targeted  modifications  of  the  existing  regulation,  in  particular  to 
simplify  the  rules  and  eliminate  disproportionate  costs  and  burdens  for  small  companies  in 
the  financial  sector  without  jeopardising  financial  stability.  The  combined  effect  of  all 
preferred options, calculated solely for the purpose of the impact assessment, amount to cost 
reductions ranging from EUR 2.3 billion to EUR 6.9 billion in fixed (one-off) costs and 
from EUR 1.1 billion to EUR 2.66 billion in operational costs. 

  Proposal for a Regulation on the governance of the Energy Union (COM(2016) 759). The 
proposal will result in significant reduction of administrative burden for the Member States, 
the Commission and other EU Institutions by rationalising the current planning and reporting 
requirements  in  the  energy  and  climate  fields  which  are  spread  over  many  different  legal 
instruments  with  different  reporting  cycles.  The  proposal  integrates,  streamlines  or  repeals 
more  than  50  existing  individual  planning,  reporting  and  monitoring  obligations.  It  is 
expected to deliver in excess of EUR 3.4 million savings in administrative costs. 

  Proposal  for  on  the  interoperability  of  electronic  road  toll  systems  and  facilitating  cross-
border exchange of information on the failure to pay road fees in the Union (COM(2017) 
280).  The  proposal  tackles  poor  interoperability  of  European  road  tolling  systems  and 
infrastructure  by  making  it  easier  for  new  service  providers  to  enter  the  market  and  by 

19   Examples  selected  from  the  REFIT  scoreboard.  More  information  can  be  found  in  the  linked  staff 

working document. 

9 

 
                                                 
allowing  less  technically  complex  on-board  units  to  be  supplied  to  vehicle  owners  (non-
GPS). Poor interoperability is estimated to incur unnecessary costs of EUR 334 million per 
annum. 

  Proposal  to  amend  restrictions  on  the  use  of  hazardous  substances  in  electrical  and 
electronic equipment (COM(2017) 38). The proposed measures would restore the secondary 
market  and  increase  spare  part  availability  for  certain  equipment.  There  would  be  reduced 
costs  and  administrative  burden  for  business  and  public  authorities,  additional  market 
opportunities for repair industries and secondary selling, positive social impact, including for 
EU hospitals, which would save about EUR 170 million after 2019, from maintaining the 
possibility  to  resell  and  buy  used  medical  devices.  The  exclusion  of  pipe  organs  from  the 
Directive’s scope would also help avoid the loss of up to 90% of jobs in the sector and the 
annual loss of up to EUR 65 million by 2025.  

2.4.  Assessment  of  alternative  approaches  for  simplification  and  reducing 

costs 

Reducing  unnecessary  regulatory  burdens  is  a  political  priority  of  this  Commission 
which  is  being  delivered  thanks  to  an  approach  which  addresses  actual  stakeholders 
concerns,  ensures  proper  democratic  accountability  and  fosters  accurate  quantification 
without depending on it. In line with the commitment in the Interinstitutional Agreement 
the  Commission  has  nevertheless  assessed  alternative 
on  Better  Law-Making, 
approaches,  including  that  of  fixing  burden  reduction  objectives  in  specific  sectors.  Its 
conclusions are summarised in Box 4 and presented in more detail in the accompanying 
Staff Working Document.  

Box 4. Alternative approaches to regulatory simplification 

  One approach to reducing regulatory costs is by fixing ex ante burden reduction targets either 
for the economy as a whole or for sectors. To be credible and effective such targets need to be 
based on a methodology to establish the overall level of costs and an assessment of what can 
realistically be reduced (the 'baseline'). Gathering this evidence is expensive, takes significant 
time to complete, and does not necessarily produce an accurate representation because data is 
often limited. This uncertainty makes it very difficult to calibrate the ambition of any ex-ante 
objective, whether for the economy as a whole or for a specific sector. This is even more so at 
European  level  as  demonstrated  by  the  Commission's  own  experience  with  reducing 
administrative burdens in the period 2007-201320.  

  Some  stakeholders  have  suggested  that  targets  should  be  set  'politically',  rather  than  on  the 
basis of a methodology, with no clear justification for how they would be calculated or why 
they  should  be  applied  only  in  specific  sectors.  The  Commission  is  concerned  that  such  an 
approach would create deregulatory pressures and impair its political responsibility to deliver 
what needs to be done when it needs to be done (consider for instance the past need to respond 
to  the  financial  crisis  and  more  recent  efforts  to  address  security  issues,  the  challenge  of 
migration, or to privacy issues raised by new technologies). It is also not convinced that such 
an approach would be broadly acceptable to stakeholders. The diversity of views on this issue 
of ex ante targets is well illustrated by the results of the consultation of the REFIT platform21. 

  The  same  considerations  apply  to  the  system  of  "one-in-one  out"  where  a  new  act  or  the 
additional  costs  introduced  by  a  new  piece  of  legislation  have  to  be  accompanied  by  an 
equivalent reduction through the revision of an existing piece of legislation or its withdrawal. 
Regulatory  costs  should  be  reduced  on  the  basis  of  evidence,  not  simple  numerical  targets. 

20   https://publications.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/257ede84-dd11-4873-be36-

77aaca2faeab (ABRplus programme)  

21   https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/overview-law-making-process/evaluating-and-improving-
existing-laws/reducing-burdens-and-simplifying-law/refit-platform/refit-platform-recommendations_en      

10 

 
                                                 
While  the  Commission  makes  a  proposal  to  withdraw  a  piece  of  legislation,  the  Legislator 
may not agree; and the withdrawal itself could result in 28 different, and potentially divergent, 
national approaches. 

The Commission's own experience, and the evidence it has seen from other systems, does 
not  suggest  that  an  approach  based  on  ex  ante  reduction  objectives  will  produce  better 
results  in  terms  of  tackling  unnecessary  costs  and  providing  tangible  benefits  for 
stakeholders  than  its  current  approach.  This  approach  is  based  on  a  case  by  case 
evaluation of existing pieces of legislation to identify concretely what can be simplified, 
streamlined or eliminated. The Commission's approach is evidence-based, and legitimacy 
is  provided  by  the  fact  that  it actively  involves  stakeholders.  It  ensures that  there  is  no 
risk of undue deregulation or having a negative impact on key policy objectives.  

The  Commission  will  therefore  focus  its  efforts  on  improving  this  approach.  In 
particular, building on its evaluations of legislation, the Commission commits to ensuring 
that  each  impact  assessment  supporting  a  legislative  revision  presents  clearly  what  the 
potential  cost  savings  are,  quantified  as  far  as  possible,  thereby  setting  a  clear  burden 
reduction  objective  for  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  to  take  account  of  in 
their  work22.  Where  they  change  the  Commission’s  proposals  and  reduce  or  add 
simplification  elements,  the  Commission  will  urge  both  institutions  to  explain 
transparently why this is necessary and to assess the impact of their amendments in line 
with  the  Interinstitutional  Agreement  on  Better  Law-Making.  This  burden  reduction 
objective  would  also  guide  the  Member  States  when  transposing  and  implementing 
Union legislation. 

In  addition,  the  Commission  has  revamped  its  better  regulation  toolbox  with  detailed 
guidance  to  Commission  services  on  quantification  and  has  stepped  up  the  internal 
training  available.  The  Commission  also  intends  to  consult  stakeholders  more 
systematically  about  the  need  or  potential  to  simplify  legislation  as  part  of  its 
consultation activities accompanying evaluations and impact assessments. 

The  Commission  will  also  work  with  the  two  institutions  to  give  greater  effect  to 
paragraphs 22 and 23 of the Interinstitutional Agreement to establish a more systematic 
approach to monitoring and evaluating the performance of existing legislation to ensure 
that  the  data  necessary  for  good  evaluations  and  solid  quantification  is  available.  The 
Commission will include appropriate provisions in its proposals.  

Moreover, Member States have considerable discretion on how to implement Union law 
at  national,  regional  and  local  levels.  Business  perceptions  of  regulatory  burdens  vary 
significantly  across  the  Union,  which  suggests  that  this  discretion  plays  an  important 
role.  The  Commission  will  continue  to  work  with  Member  States  on  this  issue,  for 
example by providing implementation plans to facilitate implementation. In line with the 
call  in  the  Interinstitutional  Agreement,  Member  States  should  make  clear  when 
transposing  Union  legislation  into  national  law  when  they  add  elements  that  are  not 
related to that legislation. 

2.5.  New approach to enforcement of Union law 

The  effective  application  of  EU  law  is  essential  to  deliver  its  intended  benefits.  It  is 
crucial that Member States live up to their responsibility to respect and enforce the rules 

22   See  Tool  #12  on  the  format  of  the  impact  assessment  report  in  the  better  regulation  toolbox; 

https://ec.europa.eu/info/better-regulation-guidelines-and-toolbox_en   

11 

 
                                                 
they  themselves  have  jointly  put  in  place.  The  Commission  will  continue  to  support 
Member States in their efforts to transpose, apply and implement EU law. At the same 
time,  as  guardian  of  the  Treaties,  the  Commission  will  increase  its  efforts  to  ensure 
compliance with EU law.  

In  line  with  the  priority  actions  announced  in  2016,  the  Commission  presented  its  new 
enforcement  policy  in  the  Communication  "EU  law:  Better  results  through  better 
application"23.  The  Communication  sets  out  a  more  strategic  approach  to  the 
Commission's infringement policy, focusing on systemic problems, where Commission's 
enforcement action can make a real difference. Priority will be to investigate cases where 
Member States incorrectly transpose EU law into national law or fail to do so at all. The 
importance the Commission attaches to the timely transposition of Union law is reflected 
in its strengthened approach to financial sanctions for such cases. The Commission will 
also rigorously pursue cases where Member States have failed to comply with a judgment 
of  the  Court  of  Justice,  or  where  they  have  caused  serious  damage  to  EU  financial 
interests, or violated EU exclusive powers. Such failures deny citizens and businesses the 
rights and the benefits they enjoy under European law. In line with this new policy, the 
Commission  will  close  cases  when  it  considers  this  appropriate  from  a  policy  point  of 
view.  A  recent  factsheet  accompanying  the  President's  State  of  the  Union  address 
illustrates the evolution in enforcement activity24. 

The  objective  of  the  Commission's  new  infringement  policy  is  to  ensure  swifter 
compliance  where  it  matters,  to  be  able  to  deliver  on  its  policy  priorities.  This  new 
infringement policy is not a stand-alone initiative, but is firmly embedded in a series of 
other actions that the Commission will take to support Member States in implementing 
EU  law  and  to  work  in  close  partnership  with  them  to  ensure  that  EU  law  is  applied 
timely,  correctly  and  effectively.  The  Commission  will  engage  in  a  more  systematic 
better law-making dialogue with the Member States on compliance with EU law and on 
broader  enforcement  issues  and  policy  considerations,  across  the  range  of  legislative 
areas.  

Poor  implementation  of  Union  legislation  means  that  the  full  intended  benefits  are  not 
realised  in  practice.  As an example, full implementation  of EU  environment legislation 
could save the EU economy EUR 50 billion every year in health costs and direct costs to 
the environment. The Environmental Implementation Review25  was launched as a new 
tool to improve implementation of European environmental policy and commonly agreed 
rules.  This  is  the  beginning  of  a  new  process  with  the  Member  States  to  identify  and 
address  the  causes  of  implementation  failures,  and  to  try  to  find  solutions  before 
problems become urgent. In February 2017, the Commission published the first set of 28 
country  reports  mapping  national  strengths,  opportunities  and  weaknesses  regarding 
implementation,  together  with  a  Communication  identifying  common  challenges  and 
suggested actions for improvement for all EU Member States26.  Ultimately, this concept 
could be applied more widely in other policy areas if it is successful. 

23   C(2016) 8600, OJ C 18, 19 January 2017.  
24   https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/better-regulation-factsheet_en.pdf  
25   Communication  "Delivering 

the  benefits  of  EU  environmental  policies 

through  a  regular 

Environmental Implementation Review"(COM(2016)316 final). 

26   Communication  "The  EU  Environmental  Implementation  Review:  Common  challenges  and  how  to 

combine efforts to deliver better results" (COM(2017)063 final). 

12 

 
                                                 
2.6.  Working with the other institutions 

The  Interinstitutional  Agreement  on  Better  Law-Making  recognises 
joint 
responsibility of all EU Institutions in  delivering high-quality Union legislation. For its 
part,  the  Commission  has  progressively  delivered  most  of  its  commitments  under  the 
Agreement  over  the  last  12  months  or  so.  The  Commission  looks  forward  to  the  first 
political  stocktaking  with  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  to  see  where 
additional efforts are required to improve better law-making processes and the fitness of 
EU legislation.  

the 

Box 5. Implementation of the Commission’s commitments in Interinstitutional Agreement on 
Better Law-Making (IIABL) 

  Together  with  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council,  a  joint  declaration  of  political 

priorities was agreed for 2017 and is now being implemented. 

  Proposals to update comitology rules in Union acts to the requirements of the Lisbon Treaty 

have been made. 

  New  rules  on  consultation  of  experts  from  the  Member  States  during  the  preparation  of 
delegated acts are now in force. Negotiations between the European Parliament, the Council 
and  the  Commission  on  establishing  delineation  criteria  for  delegated  acts  have  been 
launched. 

  The IT project to establish a new register for delegated acts is on track to be operating by the 

end of 2017 as envisaged. 

  The  three  institutions  have  developed  and  are  taking  forward  a  plan  for  a  new  joint 
interinstitutional web-based portal to improve the transparency of the legislative process. 

  Negotiations  between  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  Commission  on 
establishing  practical  arrangements  for  the  conduct  of  international  negotiations  have  been 
launched. 

  The Commission’s better regulation guidelines and toolbox have been revised and now cover 
all  issues  covered  by  the  IIA-BL  such  as  recast,  codification,  “cost  of  non-Europe”, 
monitoring and evaluation legal provisions, etc. 

  An  IT  capacity  has  been  created  to  accept  Member  State  reports  about  those  national 

transposing measures which go beyond the requirements of Union law. 

  This  Communication  refers  to  commitments  regarding  simplification  of  legislation  and 
assessing the feasibility of establishing objectives to reduce unnecessary costs in key sectors. 

3.  CONCLUSIONS AND NEXT STEPS TO COMPLETE THE BETTER REGULATION AGENDA 

Today, more than ever, there is a need to ensure that policy-making is rooted in facts and 
evidence. The world and the problems we face are too complex for solutions to be found 
without looking first at the evidence in a structured and comprehensive way.    

The  Commission's  approach  works  well  and  has  achieved  positive  results.  Better 
regulation  is  a  tool  that  has  provided  a  basis  for  timely  and  sound  policy  decisions 
delivering on the political priorities that drive the Commission's action to deal with the 
challenges that the EU faces today. Public consultations, evaluation, impact assessments 
and the REFIT programme have allowed the systematic appraisal of new proposals and 
existing  legislation  so  that  needed  results  can  be  delivered  and  unnecessary  regulatory 
costs  be  avoided.  This  approach  allows  the  merits  of  legislation  to  be  assessed  in  a 
comprehensive,  evidence-based  and  systematic  manner.  It  is  flexible  and  allows  the 

13 

 
Commission  to  focus  on  specific  acts  which  stakeholders  highlight  as  needing  to  be 
improved. 

This  ensures  that  better  regulation  informs  political  choices  and  provides  them  with 
greater legitimacy and accountability. It forces policy-makers as well as stakeholders to 
argue  on  the  basis  of  evidence  and  expected  impacts  and  finally  it  provides  a  range  of 
tools to engage meaningfully with all parts of society.    

Notwithstanding  this,  the  Commission  is  always  ready  to  improve  its  better  regulation 
policy. In particular, with regard to the REFIT programme, the Commission has decided 
to  step  up  its  efforts  to  quantify  the  impacts  of  its  proposals  and  to  ensure  that  all 
revisions  of  existing  legislation  look  systematically to  simplify  and  reduce  unnecessary 
costs. This is set out in the revised better regulation guidelines and toolbox which entered 
into force in July this year. From the 1 November, all impact assessments should, as far 
as  possible,  quantify  and  present,  in  a  consistent  way,  the  results  of  the  REFIT-related 
work and all information about the costs and benefits of the initiative.  

The Commission will provide an overall assessment of how its Better Regulation Agenda 
has been implemented throughout this Commission mandate.  

Box 6. Follow-up actions 

  For  revisions  of  existing  legislation,  each  impact  assessment  will  present  clearly  what  the 
potential  cost  savings  are,  quantified  as  far  as  possible,  thereby  setting  a  clear  burden 
reduction objective for the  European Parliament and the Council to take account of in the 
legislative process and Member States in respect of their transposition and implementation of 
the legislation.   

  In  addition,  there  will  be  key  proposals  in  2017  and  2018  with  a  significant  simplification 

dimension including: 

–  Taxation  &  VAT:  A  package  of  initiatives  on  the  definitive  VAT  system  and 
simplification  for  SMEs  which  will  reduce  the  administrative  burden  on  small 
enterprises, to contribute to the creation of an environment favourable to their growth 
and cross-border trade and to provide a level playing field. 

–  Reducing burdens on business: The Company Law package would simplify company 
law related procedures and reduce the related administrative burden for companies and 
public authorities (e.g. using digital procedures). 

–  Supporting  public  authorities:  Reporting  requirements  in  environmental  legislation 

would be rationalised based on the findings of the fitness check.  

–  Helping  consumers:  Simplification  of  existing  rules  in  the  body  of  consumer-related 
law  such  as  information  requirements  and  distance  communication  with  consumers. 
This would deliver some cost reductions and alleviate administrative burdens. 

  Continue  to evaluate  Union  legislation  periodically with  the  aim  to  keep  it  fit  for  purpose. 
Important evaluations currently underway include those on chemicals legislation, maritime-
related legislation and the general food law.  

  Ensure that stakeholders are asked systematically for their views about the need and potential 
to  simplify  legislation  (e.g.  in  public  consultations  accompanying  evaluations  and  impact 
assessments). 

  Together  with  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council,  step  up  efforts  to  implement  the 
include 

the  Interinstitutional  Agreement  on  Better  Law-Making 

provisions  of 
proportionate monitoring and evaluation arrangements in new legislation. 

to 

14