Amended proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION amending Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 as regards measures to strengthen administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax
Date: 2017-11-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: European tax cooperation, VAT, administrative cooperation, exchange of information, fraud, intra-EU trade, tax authorities, tax harmonisation, tax law, tax offence

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 30.11.2017  COM(2017) 706 final 2017/0248 (CNS)  Towards a single EU VAT area - Time to act Amended proposal for a COUNCIL REGULATION amending Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 as regards measures to strengthen administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax {SWD(2017) 428 final} - {SWD(2017) 429 final}  
 
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

• 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

Reasons for and objectives of the proposal 

As a broad-based consumption tax, value added tax (VAT) is a major and growing source of 
tax  revenue  in  the  European  Union1.  In  recent  years,  however,  the  VAT  system  has  been 
unable to keep pace with the globalisation and digitalisation of the economy.  

In particular, the current system for the taxation of trade between Member States is still based 
on  ‘transitional  arrangements’.  In  1967,  the  commitment  was  made  to  establish  a  definitive 
VAT  system  operating  within  the  European  Community  at  that  time  in  the  same  way  as  it 
would  within  a  single  country2.  The  need  to  abolish  the  fiscal  frontiers  between  Member 
States by the end of 1992 made it necessary to reconsider the way in which trade in goods was 
taxed in the European Community. The goal was that goods would be taxed in the country of 
origin,  so  that  the  same  conditions  that  apply  to  domestic  trade  would  also  apply  to  intra-
Community trade, perfectly reflecting the idea of a genuine internal market. 

Since the political and technical conditions were not ripe for such a system, transitional VAT 
arrangements  were  adopted3.  Those  arrangements,  as  far  as  Business-to-Business  (B2B) 
transactions  on  goods  are  concerned,  split  the  cross-border  movement  of  goods  into  two 
different transactions: an exempt supply in the Member State of departure of the goods and an 
intra-Community acquisition taxed in the Member State of destination.  

These rules were regarded as temporary and are not without drawbacks since allowing goods 
to be bought free of VAT increases the opportunity for fraud, while the inherent complexity 
of the system is not favourable to cross-border trade.  

It  is  estimated  that  in  total  about  EUR 152 billion  was  lost  in  2015  due  to  shortcomings  in 
VAT  collection,  including  fraud4.  Earlier  estimates  had  put  the  losses  due  to  cross-border 
fraud alone at EUR 50 billion5. Such fraudulent practices distort competition within the single 
market and prevent it from functioning properly. Moreover, they have serious consequences 
for Member State budgets and for the European Union (EU) budget, as part of the EU’s own 
resources is based on VAT.  
In its VAT Action Plan of 7 April 20166, the Commission outlined the need to put in place a 
single  European  VAT area that could  cope  with the challenges  of the 21st century. A set of 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 
6 

VAT raised slightly more than EUR 1 trillion in 2015. This figure equates to 7 % of EU GDP or 17.6 % 
of total national tax revenues (Eurostat). 
First  Council  Directive  67/227/EEC  of  11 April  1967  on  the  harmonisation  of  legislation  of  Member 
States  concerning  turnover  taxes;  Second  Council  Directive  67/228/EEC  of  11 April  1967  on  the 
harmonisation of legislation of Member States concerning turnover taxes — Structure and procedures 
for application of the common system of value added tax. 
Council  Directive  91/680/EEC  of  16 December  1991  supplementing  the  common  system  of  value 
added tax and amending Directive 77/388/EEC with a view to the abolition of fiscal frontiers (OJ L 376 
of 31.12.1991, p. 1). 
CASE  &  Institute  for  Advanced  Studies,  Study  and  Reports  on  the  VAT  Gap  in  the  EU-28  Member 
States: 2017 Final Report, 2017. 
Ernst and Young, Implementing the ‘destination principle’ to intra-EU B2B supplies of goods, 2015. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European 
Economic and Social Committee on an action plan on VAT – Towards a single EU VAT area – Time to 
decide (COM(2016) 148). 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
                                                 
key  measures  would  be  adopted  in  the  short  and  medium  term  to  modernise  the  EU  VAT 
system and make it simpler, more fraud-proof and business-friendly.  

The Commission announced its intention to propose a definitive VAT system for intra-Union 
cross-border trade based on the principle of taxation in the Member State of destination of the 
goods in order to create a robust single European VAT area. 

Among  the  short-term  measures,  the  Commission  announced  its  intention  to  improve  the 
exchange and analysis of information by tax administrations and with other law enforcement 
bodies, to strengthen Eurofisc7 and to introduce new tools such as joint audits.  

The aim was to prepare the implementation of the definitive VAT system and, pending its full 
implementation, to contain cross-border fraud. 

The  EU’s  common  system  for  administrative  cooperation  between  the  Member  States’  tax 
administrations has been in place for many years. Above all it helps Member States collect the 
VAT due on cross-border transactions and fight fraud within the single market. However, as 
the  European  Court  of  Auditors  has  pointed  out8,  the  instruments  for  administrative 
cooperation and combating VAT fraud in the EU must be put to greater and better use.  
In  its  conclusions  of  May  2016  on  fighting  VAT  fraud9  the  Council  acknowledged  that 
improving administrative cooperation between tax authorities was of significant importance. 
It took note of the Commission’s intention to table a legislative proposal in 2017 that would 
aim at improving the exchange, sharing and analysis of key information and envisaged joint 
audits. The Council called on the Commission to propose ways of addressing legal obstacles 
and  practical  limitations  in  the  EU  and  within  the  Member  States  that  are  holding  back  a 
qualitative  leap  in  information  exchange.  This  work  should  promote  cooperation  and  cover 
the  full  range  of  available  means  —  including,  inter  alia,  VIES10,  Eurofisc  and  feedback 
procedures  —  and  address  the  challenges  to  customs  and  tax  authorities.  It  also  underlined 
that automatic information exchange was one of the ways forward in the fight against fraud 
and  confirmed  that  risk  assessment  and  analysis  remained  a  major  area  for  further 
improvement in the EU. 
In November 2016, the European Parliament11 welcomed the VAT Action Plan and supported 
its measures to reduce the VAT gap and tackle VAT fraud. 

This initiative is part of the ‘fair taxation package for the creation of a single EU value added 
tax area’ set out in the roadmap for a more united, stronger and more democratic Union12. It 
aims at tackling cross-border VAT fraud by implementing the Council, European Parliament 
and European Court of Auditors recommendations and drastically and swiftly improving how 
tax administrations cooperate together and with other law enforcement bodies.  

Such  measures  would  prepare  the  ground  for  full  implementation  of  the  definitive  VAT 
regime.  On  4  October  2017,  the  Commission  presented  a  series  of  legislative  proposals  to 
implement the  first  step of the definitive VAT  system whereby the VAT treatment  of intra-

7 

8 

9 
10 

11 

12 

report  no  24/2015:  Tackling 

Eurofisc  is  a  network  of  national  tax  officials  for  quick  and  multilateral  exchanges  of  targeted 
information on VAT fraud.  
Special 
http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR15_24/SR_VAT_FRAUD_EN.pdf. 
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2016/05/25-conclusions-vat-action-plan/. 
The  VAT  Information  Exchange  System  (VIES)  allows  Member  States  to  exchange  information  on 
cross-border supplies and taxable persons identified for VAT purposes. 
European Parliament resolution of 24 November 2016 on towards a definitive VAT system and fighting 
VAT fraud (2016/2033(INI). 
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/state-union-2017-brochure_en.pdf. 

fraud:  More  action  needed, 

intra-Community  VAT 

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
                                                 
Union B2B supplies of goods would be settled13. Another set of proposals will be presented 
next year. 

The three main types of cross-border fraud are still the most widespread and most significant 
across  the  EU:  ‘carousel  fraud’  (or  missing  trader  intra-Community  fraud  —  MTIC  fraud); 
used car fraud; and fraud involving customs procedures 42 and 63.  

MTIC fraud occurs when a fraudster purchases goods or services from another Member State 
free  of  VAT  but  then  charges  VAT  when  he  resells  them;  he  pays  no  VAT  to  the  tax 
authorities (while the buyer can deduct it). The European Court of Auditors and Europol have 
estimated  that  MTIC  fraud  could  account  for  EUR 40  to  60 billion  of  annual  VAT  revenue 
losses and that 2 % of organised crime groups could be behind 80 % of the fraud.  

Due  to  the dual  VAT  regime  applicable  to  cars  (‘margin  scheme’  or  normal  arrangements), 
trading in cars is often subject to VAT fraud. The easiest way to commit fraud is to sell recent 
or new means of transport (for which the whole amount is taxable) as second-hand goods (for 
which only the margin is taxable).  

Lastly,  the  scheme  for  importing  goods  free  of  VAT  (customs  procedures  42  and  63), 
implemented to ease trade where the goods are immediately delivered to a business in another 
Member  State,  is  often  abused  and  the  goods  diverted  to  the  black  market  without  VAT 
having been paid. This type of fraud sometimes occurs with the fraudulent undervaluation of 
the  goods  to  avoid  customs  duties.  There  were  8.5  million  import  transactions  with  a  VAT 
exemption in 2015, with a total value of EUR 74 billion. 

This  initiative  would  add  measures  specifically  designed  to  tackle  these  fraud  schemes,  to 
Council  Regulation  (EU)  No  904/201014,  the  reference  legal  basis  for  administrative 
cooperation and the fight against VAT fraud. 

• 

Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area 

Regulation  (EU)  No  904/2010  lays  down  the  conditions  under  which  the  Member  States’ 
competent  authorities  cooperate  with  each  other  and  with  the  Commission  to  ensure 
compliance with VAT rules within the single market. The VAT Action Plan seeks to bolster 
VAT  administrative  cooperation  instruments,  in  particular  Eurofisc,  as  a  means  of 
strengthening trust between tax authorities before the definitive VAT regime comes into play. 
Pending that, such measures will also help contain cross-border fraud. 

• 

Consistency with other Union policies 

Fighting tax fraud and evasion to help secure national and EU revenues and prevent distortion 
of  competition  has  been  a  top  Commission  priority  in  recent  years.  This  Commission’s 
political  guidelines15  call  for  more  strenuous  efforts  to  combat  tax  evasion  and  tax  fraud, 
using  means  such  as  improved  administrative  cooperation  between  tax  authorities.  These 
priorities are directly reflected in the VAT Action Plan. 

This initiative goes hand in hand with other VAT initiatives and would play an important role 
in securing the success of the most ambitious proposal  — implementing the definitive VAT 
regime. Additionally, MTIC fraud is one of the ten crime areas that Europol and the Council 

13 
14 

15 

COM(2017) 567, 568 and 569, 4.10.2017. 
Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 of 7 October 2010 on administrative cooperation and combating 
fraud in the field of value added tax (recast). 
Political  Guidelines  for  the  next  European  Commission:  https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-
political/files/juncker-political-guidelines-speech_en_0.pdf.  

EN 

3 

  EN 

 
                                                 
have identified as top priorities for the European Union for the period 2018-202116. A similar 
approach has been taken for the 2014-2017 period. Also of relevance are: 

– 

– 

2. 

• 

the entry into force of Directive (EU) 2017/1371, which will cover serious EU-wide 
VAT fraud17; and 

(EU)  2017/1939 

implementing  enhanced  cooperation  on 

the 
Regulation 
establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’) 18, adopted on 
12 October 2017 by twenty Member States19. This independent and decentralised EU 
body  will  be  responsible  for  investigating  and  prosecuting  crimes  against  the  EU 
budget, such as fraud, corruption, or cross-border VAT fraud above EUR 10 million. 

LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY 

Legal basis 

The  legal  basis  for  this  initiative  is  Article  113  of  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the 
European  Union  (TFEU).  Here  the  Council,  acting  unanimously,  shall  adopt  provisions  for 
the  harmonisation  of  Member  States’  rules  on  indirect  taxation  to  the  extent  that  such 
harmonisation  is  necessary  to  ensure  the  establishment  and  the  functioning  of  the  single 
market and to avoid distortion of competition. 

• 

Subsidiarity  

Member  States  are  primarily  responsible  for  VAT  management,  collection  and  checks. 
However, VAT fraud is often linked to cross-border transactions within the single market or 
involves  traders  established  in  other  Member  States  than  the  one  where  the  tax  is  due.  It 
adversely affects how the single market functions and causes serious losses to the EU budget.  

Under Article 113 of the TFEU, the Council shall adopt provisions to harmonise legislation 
concerning  indirect  taxes  to  ensure  the  establishment  and  the  functioning  of  the  internal 
market and avoid distortion of competition. The result has been EU cooperation instruments 
designed  above  all  to  organise  the  exchange  of  information  between  tax  administrations,  as 
well as supporting common audit activities and the establishment of the Eurofisc network.  

The  VAT  Action  Plan  calls  for  more  effective  instruments,  in  particular  a  stronger  role  for 
Eurofisc,  and  new  ways  of  collaboration  and  cooperation  with  a  sound  legal  basis.  This 

16 

17 

18 

19 

and 

2018 

crime 

serious 

between 

international 

Council Conclusions of 18 May 2017on setting the EU's priorities for the fight against organised crime 
2021 
and 
(http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/jha/2017/05/18/).  The  Council  Conclusions  defined  also 
the following priority: "(6) To disrupt the capacity of OCGs and specialists involve in excise fraud and 
missing  Trader  Intra  Community  (MTIC)  fraud".  This  priority  will  be  implemented  through  two 
Operational  Action  Plans:  Excise  fraud  and  MTIC  fraud.  Experiences  gained  from  the  Excise/MTIC 
priority in the previous Policy Cycle should be duly taken into account. 
Directive  (EU)  2017/1371  of  the  European Parliament  and  of  the  Council of  5 July 2017  on  the  fight 
against fraud to the Union's financial interests by means of criminal law. 
Council  Regulation  (EU)  2017/1939  of  12  October  2017  implementing  enhanced  cooperation  on  the 
establishment of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (‘the EPPO’). 
The  Member  States  participating  in  enhanced  cooperation  are:  Austria,  Belgium,  Bulgaria,  Croatia, 
Cyprus,  Czech  Republic,  Estonia,  Finland,  France,  Germany,  Greece,  Italy,  Latvia,  Lithuania, 
Luxembourg, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Spain. To date, Hungary, Malta, Netherlands, 
Poland, and Sweden decided not to take part in this initiative, while Denmark, Ireland and the United 
Kingdom do not to participate on the basis of Protocols no. 21 and respectively 22. 

EN 

4 

  EN 

 
                                                 
cannot be done solely at Member State level or using non-legislative instruments. Acting at 
EU level would offer value over and above what can been achieved nationally. 

• 

Proportionality 

The proposal is largely based on the existing legal framework and adds to it only where the 
framework  needs  strengthening.  All  measures  proposed  are  targeted  according  to  Member 
States needs, and while having positive effects on the VAT fraud level would not entail any 
additional  costs  for  business  and  administrations  except  for  the  measures  under  which  IT 
developments would be necessary. Even in these instances, the associated development costs 
would remain limited. 

Therefore,  the  new  provisions  would  not  go  beyond  what  is  strictly  necessary  to  make 
administrative cooperation instruments more effective in combating cross-border VAT fraud.  

• 

Choice of the instrument 

A Council Regulation is needed to amend current Regulation (EU) No 904/2010. 

3. 

• 

RESULTS 
CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS 

EX-POST 

EVALUATIONS, 

OF 

STAKEHOLDER 

Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation 

In  drawing  up  the  current  proposal,  an  evaluation  of  the  use  of  the  EU  framework  for 
administrative  cooperation  and  combating  VAT  fraud  provided  for  in  Regulation  (EU)  No 
904/2010 was carried out20.  

Overall,  the  Member  States  take  a  positive  view  of  the  legal  and  practical  framework 
implemented  with  Regulation  (EU)  No  904/2010.  The  vast  majority  consider  that  it  has 
helped  improve  administrative  cooperation  between  them.  Exchanges  of  information  on 
request, automated access to information, Eurofisc and multilateral controls are viewed as the 
Regulation’s most effective instruments.  

However,  Member  States  continue  to  see  drawbacks,  in  particular  with  Eurofisc,  which  has 
not yet reached its full potential. There is an apparent need to develop new instruments or new 
ways  of  cooperating.  In  particular,  Member  States  support  options  such  as  Transaction 
Network  Analysis  (TNA)  software  to  jointly  process  and  exchange  VAT  data  within 
Eurofisc21.  There  is  also  room  to  further  develop  automated  exchange  of  information  or 
access to new sets of data. In this context, Member States are particularly interested in access 
to customs data or car registration information.  

Exchanging information with EU law enforcement authorities remains a sensitive area for the 
Member  States.  According  to  them,  participation  in  Eurofisc  working  field  meetings  or 
spontaneous  exchanges  of  intelligence  between  Eurofisc,  Europol  and  OLAF  seem  to  be 
better avenues for improving cooperation between authorities involved in fighting VAT fraud 
at EU level than granting Europol and OLAF automated access to VIES or Eurofisc data. 

Improving  administrative  cooperation  on  VAT  would  be  fully  consistent  with  other  EU 
policies  currently  under  development.  This  is  particularly  true  of  Directive  (EU) 2017/1371 

20 
21 

Commission Staff Working Document – Impact Assessment accompanying this proposal.  
Eurofisc officials will use TNA to exchange and jointly process VAT data. TNA will be able to detect 
and visualize at an early stage suspicious networks. 

EN 

5 

  EN 

 
                                                 
and Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 implementing enhanced cooperation on the establishment of 
the  EPPO.  All  this  demonstrates  that  several  common  initiatives  at  EU  level  have  similar 
objectives:  improving  cooperation  between  law  enforcement  and  judicial  authorities  and 
finding new ways of combating the most severe threats to tax revenues. 

• 

Stakeholder consultations 

In drawing up the current proposal and assessing the current arrangements, the Commission 
sought  the  opinion  of  the  tax  authorities  in  the  Member  States  and  of  the  public  —  in 
particular on possible ways of improving administrative cooperation to address cross-border 
fraud. 

Most  Member  States  would  support  joint  processing  of  data  in  Eurofisc  (TNA)  and  the 
introduction of measures to fight fraud involving customs procedures 42 and 63. Access to car 
registration data also received support from most Member States. 

Other  stakeholders  such  as  business  and citizens  support the  role  of  the  EU  to  assist  and to 
ensure  administrative  cooperation  amongst  Member  States.  Some  of  them  consider  that  the 
current  instruments  are  not  adapted  to  new  business  models  and  to  the  fight  against  cross-
border  or  organised  crime  fraud.  New  automated  exchanges  of  information  and  a  greater 
collaboration  between  the  tax  and  law  enforcement  authorities  should  be  envisaged.  They 
support a greater role for Eurofisc. They expressed an overall positive opinion on joint audits.  

• 

Collection and use of expertise 

Besides  consulting  all  stakeholders  and  in  particular  the  Member  States  tax  authorities,  no 
outside experts were needed to draw up the current proposal. 

• 

Impact assessment 

In drawing up the current proposal, the impact assessment looked at five main options with 
sub-options:  

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

jointly processing and analysing data in Eurofisc;  

improving  the  operational  framework  for  coordinated  checks  between  Member 
States;  

developing  the  exchange  of  information  and  intelligence  between  Member  States’ 
tax administrations in Eurofisc and law enforcement authorities at EU level;  

tackling fraud involving the dual VAT regime applicable to cars by improving access 
to vehicle registration data;  

sharing  information  on  customs  procedures  42  and  63  between  customs  and  tax 
authorities.  

Careful  analysis  concluded  that  several  options  should  be  retained  to  address  all  relevant 
issues properly. 

Due  to  the  lack  of  relevant  data,  it  was  not  possible  to  precisely  assess  and  quantify  the 
benefits of the main preferred options. However, the impact on the various stakeholders was 
summarised as follows: 

– 

Member States: the main options covered by this initiative could help make fighting 
cross-border  VAT  fraud  quicker  and  more  efficient,  and  should  therefore  increase 
VAT  revenues.  Joint  processing  of  data  within  Eurofisc  would  not  trigger  any 

EN 

6 

  EN 

 
– 

additional  costs,  as  they  are  already  borne  by  the  Fiscalis  programme22.  A  new 
exchange of information between tax and customs authorities and automated access 
to  car  registration  data  could  trigger  implementation  and  running  costs,  but  these 
could be limited, as existing systems could be used. 

Business, including SMEs and micro-enterprises: better targeting of fraudsters could 
reduce  the  compliance  costs  and  administrative  burden  for  businesses  involved  in 
intra-Union  trade,  as  the  envisaged  options  would  better  use  and  analyse  available 
information and therefore reduce the need for administrative enquiries and reporting 
obligations  from  compliant  traders.  Business  should  also  benefit  from  a  more  level 
playing field and better functioning single market.  

The  impact  assessment  accompanying  this  proposal  was  considered  by  the  Regulatory 
Scrutiny  Board  on  13  September  2017.  The  Board  gave  a  positive  opinion  with  some 
recommendations, in particular, on the need to better describe the interaction of this initiative 
with  other  elements  of  the  VAT  Action  Plan  and  the  need  for  clearer  motivations  for  the 
design of the options. Such recommendations were taken on board. The opinion of the Board 
and  the  recommendations  are  mentioned  in  the  Staff  Working  Document  for  the  impact 
assessment. 

• 

Regulatory fitness and simplification 

This initiative does not fall within the remit of the Regulatory Fitness Programme. 

• 

Fundamental rights 

targeted  and  circumscribed 

It is expected that this proposal would trigger new exchange and joint processing of existing 
VAT  information,  which  could  include  personal  data.  However,  data  collection  would  be 
strictly 
in  fraudulent 
transactions.  The  data  would  be  kept  only  for  the  time  necessary  for  analysis  and 
investigations by national tax authorities empowered to enforce VAT obligations. They would 
be used solely to identify potential fraudsters at an early stage and to put an end to fraudulent 
networks whose purpose is to abuse the VAT system by perpetrating VAT fraud. They would 
be accessed and used by authorised personnel alone. 

to  operators  supposedly 

involved 

Nevertheless,  these  measures  would  ultimately  be  subject  to  Article  8  of  the  Charter  of 
Fundamental Rights and, once introduced into Regulation (EU) No 904/2010, to Article 55(5) 
of that Regulation, which refers to the General Data Protection Regulation23. 

4. 

BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS 

The proposal will have no negative implications for the Union budget. 

5. 

• 

OTHER ELEMENTS 

Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements 

Pursuant  to  Article  59  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  904/2010,  the  Regulation’s  application  is 
reviewed every five years. In addition, under Article 49, to evaluate how well administrative 

22 

23 

Regulation  (EU)  1286/2013  of  11 December 2013  establishing  an  action  programme  to  improve  the 
operation of taxation systems States in the European Union for the period 2014-2020 (Fiscalis 2020). 
Regulation  (EU)  2016/679  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  27 April 2016  on  the 
protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of 
such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC 

EN 

7 

  EN 

 
                                                 
cooperation is combating tax evasion and avoidance, Member States must communicate to the 
Commission any available information relevant to the application of the Regulation and, inter 
alia,  annual  statistics  about  the  use  of  the  cooperation  instruments.  The  impact  assessment 
accompanying  this  proposal  lists  the  indicators  for  monitoring  and  evaluation  (see 
Chapter 8.1). 

• 

Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal 

The main objectives of the proposal are: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

jointly processing and analysing all relevant data within Eurofisc; 

improving  the  operational  framework  for  coordinated  checks  between  Member 
States; 

developing  the  exchange  of  data  between  Member  States’  tax  administrations  and 
law enforcement authorities at EU level; 

tackling fraud involving the dual VAT regime applicable to cars by improving access 
to vehicle registration data; 

fighting fraud involving customs procedures 42 and 63. 

On 4 October 2017 the Commission proposed amending Regulation (EU) No 904/2010, and 
in  particular  Articles  17  and  31  thereof24,  to  apply  from  1 January 2019  to  certified  taxable 
persons. This legislative proposal therefore constitutes an amended proposal including these 
provisions.  

Measures applicable as from the day of entry into force of this Regulation 

Exchanges of information without prior request 

Modifying  Article  13  would  enable  the  competent  authorities  to  exchange  information 
through other means than standard forms when they consider it necessary.  

Joint audits 

Carrying out an administrative enquiry is often necessary to combat VAT fraud in particular 
when the taxable person is not established in the Member States where the tax is due. Chapter 
VII  provides  for  the  presence  of  officials  in  administrative  offices  and  in  the  premises  of 
taxable persons during administrative enquiries in other Member States. To boost the capacity 
of tax administrations to check cross-border supplies, a new cooperation instrument would be 
included  in  the  Regulation.  Joint  audits  would  allow  officials  from  two  or  more  tax 
administrations to form a single audit team if they so wished and to participate actively in an 
administrative  enquiry.  That  team  would  examine  the  cross-border  transactions  of  one  or 
more  related  taxable  persons  (both  legal  entities  and  individuals)  carrying  out  cross-border 
activities, 
involving  related  affiliated  companies 
established in the participating countries.  

including  cross-border 

transactions 

In addition, to avoid that the choice by taxable persons of their place of establishment in the 
Union  hampers  the  proper  enforcement  of  VAT  and  to  avoid  duplication  of  work  and 
administrative  burden  for  tax  authorities  and  business,  when  at  least  two  Member  States 
consider  that  an  administrative  enquiry  into  the  amounts  declared  by  a  taxable  person  non-
established  on  their  territory  but  taxable  therein,  is  necessary,  the  Member  State  where  the 
taxable person is established should undertake the enquiry and the requiring Member States 

24 

COM(2017) 567, 4.10.2017. 

EN 

8 

  EN 

 
                                                 
should  assist  the  Member  State  of  establishment  by  taking  part  actively  in  the  audit.  This 
measure would be particularly relevant to combat fraud in e-commerce activity. 

Eurofisc  

Chapter  X  has  established  Eurofisc  for  the  swift  exchange  of  targeted  information  between 
Member  States,  in  order  to  tackle  large-scale  or  new  VAT  fraud  patterns.  To  speed  up  the 
joint processing and analysis of data within Eurofisc, the Commission is currently developing 
TNA software for voluntary use by the Member States as of 2018.  

In order to maximise TNA’s potential to identify fraudulent networks across the whole EU, 
Regulation  (EU)  No  904/2010  would  make  clearer  provision  for  the  joint  processing  and 
analysis  of  data  within  Eurofisc.  Involvement  in  such  processing  and  analysis  will  remain 
voluntary.  However,  all  Member  States  should  grant  Eurofisc  officials access to  their  VIES 
data  on  intra-Union  transactions  through  TNA;  in  that  way  the  software  can  identify  all 
potential  fraud  networks,  including  those  involving  traders  established  in  non-participating 
Member States. 

The  amendments  also  provide  clearer  rules  on  how  Eurofisc  would  run  and  be  run.  They 
would enable Eurofisc to coordinate joint administrative enquiries launched on the basis of its 
risk  analyses.  Eurofisc  officials  are  often  the  first  to  be  warned  about  new  fraudulent 
networks, and they have strong expertise in serious VAT fraud. Therefore, they would be the 
best placed to coordinate the corresponding administrative enquiries.  

This  would  make  for  a  swifter  and  more  effective  reaction  to  the  TNA  results  and  the 
information from such enquiries could be immediately processed by TNA. In practice, such 
coordination would be carried out in the Eurofisc working field with the relevant expertise by 
one  or  several  Eurofisc  officials  from  the  Member  States  involved  in  the  enquiries.  More 
coordinated checks between Member States should improve their capacity to react quickly to 
ever-changing fraudulent activities. 

The  proposal  also  opens  up  the  possibility  for  Eurofisc  officials  to  forward  information  on 
VAT  fraud  trends,  risks  and  serious  cases  to  Europol  and  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office 
(OLAF)  and  to  disclose  such  cases  to  the  EPPO.  This  would  cover,  in  particular,  the  most 
damaging VAT fraud, such as MTIC schemes and abuses of customs procedure 42 frequently 
involving  criminal  organisations.  These  organisations  take  advantage  of  their  international 
networks  to  create  advanced  MTIC  schemes  with  the  aim  of  extorting  money  from  the 
national  budgets.  They  hide  behind  straw  men,  which  gives  administrative  measures  less 
clout.  

Cooperation with law enforcement authorities at EU level would allow for the cross-checking 
of Eurofisc information with criminal records, databases and other information held by OLAF 
and Europol and would help identify the real perpetrators of fraud and their networks. OLAF 
obtains in particular relevant information in the context of its investigations on customs fraud, 
which is intrinsically linked to VAT fraud such as customs procedure 42 fraud. OLAF may 
also  facilitate  and  coordinate  VAT  fraud  investigations,  making  use  of  its  inter-disciplinary 
approach. 

Most Member States have already put in place such cooperation at national level and involve 
Europol  in  their  fight  against  MTIC  fraud.  However,  often  these  cooperation  actions  are 
complex and create the risk that the value of the information will be lost before it reaches the 
right  authorities.  A  direct  link  between  Eurofisc,  Europol  and  OLAF  as  well  as  with  the 
EPPO, for the most serious VAT fraud cases, would shorten this latency of data and maximise 
their value in the fight against criminal organisations.  

EN 

9 

  EN 

 
This  proposal would lift  some restrictions on the right of Eurofisc  officials to consult VIES 
data  on  intra-Union  supplies  when  the  supplier  or  the  customer  is  registered  in  another 
Member State (Article 21(2)). Currently, access is restricted to Eurofisc liaison officials, who 
should  hold  personal  user  identification  for  the  electronic  systems  to  gain  access  to  this 
information. In addition, access must occur in connection with an investigation into suspected 
fraud  and  only  during  general  working  hours.  This  proposal  would  remove  the  latter 
condition, as limiting the timespan for fighting serious VAT fraud is difficult to justify. It is 
also  proposed  that  the  practical  details  around  the  identification  of  authorised  officials  be 
defined in an implementing act to address the concerns of certain Member States. 

Procedures to refund VAT to taxable persons not established in the Member State of refund  

Chapter XII covers the forwarding of requests for VAT refunds in other Member States and 
the  exchange  of  information  on  such  requests.  It  would  be  amended  to  improve  coherence 
with the collection of VAT debts in the Member State of establishment and to avoid the use of 
– and the administrative burden and costs linked to – a recovery assistance request from the 
Member State of establishment to seize the VAT refund amount in the refund Member State.  

Under  the  existing  rules  on  recovery  assistance,  the  authorities  of  the  Member  State  of 
establishment may send a request for recovery or precautionary measures to the Member State 
of refund, for the VAT refund amounts to be seized. This requires the applicant authority to 
draw  up  a  specific  request  for  recovery  assistance;  the  VAT  refund  and  tax  recovery 
authorities  in  the  requested  Member  State  must  engage  in  special  coordination  to  carry  out 
this  request;  and  the  taxable  person  concerned  who  wants  to  contest  the  recovery  or 
precautionary measures taken by the requested authorities, has to undertake this action in the 
requested Member State, in accordance with Articles 14(2) and 17 of Directive 2010/24/EU.  

The taxable person concerned may consent to have a direct transfer of the VAT refund to the 
Member State of establishment, in order to discharge his outstanding VAT liabilities in that 
Member State, or in order to have this refund amount retained as a precautionary measure in 
case  of  disputed  VAT  debts  in  that  Member  State.  In  the  latter  case,  a  contestation  of  that 
retention could be brought before the competent judicial authorities in his own Member State 
of establishment, in all stages of the proceedings concerning the disputed VAT debt. 

The current proposal would avoid the need for recovery assistance requests, insofar as the tax 
debtor would agree to the direct transfer. In this way, it would also reduce the administrative 
burden for the applicant Member State and avoid all administrative burden and costs for the 
requested Member State. 

When  applying  the  transfer  and  retention  arrangements  in  view  of  securing  the  payment  of 
disputed  VAT  liabilities  in  the  Member  State  of  establishment,  that  Member  State  must 
clearly respect the tax debtor’s rights. In this regard, the proposal envisages judicial oversight 
of  the  retention  of  the  VAT  refund  amount  in  the  Member  State  of  establishment.  This  is 
designed to  help  tax  debtors  wishing  to  contest  the  measure,  as  they  will  no  longer have  to 
contest precautionary measures in the other Member State.  

Disclosure of serious VAT fraud cases involving at least two Member States to OLAF and 
the EPPO 

Chapter  XIII,  which  covers  relations  with  the  Commission,  would  be  amended  to  better 
protect  the  European  Union’s  financial  interests.  The  Member  States  participating  in  the 
EPPO should communicate to it, information on the most serious VAT offences as referred to 
in Article 2(2) of Directive (EU) 2017/1371. These would be cases involving activity in two 
or more Member States and total damage of at least EUR 10 million.  

EN 

10 

  EN 

 
The  EPPO  will  be  an  independent  and  decentralised  EU  body.  It  will  be  responsible  for 
investigating and prosecuting crimes against the EU budget such as cross-border VAT fraud 
above  EUR 10  million. It  will  operate  as  a single  office  across  participating  Member  States 
and will combine European and national law enforcement efforts in a unified, seamless and 
efficient approach. 

OLAF  will  remain  responsible  for  administrative  investigations  into  non-fraudulent  and 
fraudulent  irregularities  affecting  the  EU’s  financial  interests.  Its  mandate  and  competence 
with regard to VAT fraud therefore go beyond those cases identified as most serious in Article 
2(2)  of  Directive  (EU)  2017/1371.  In  addition,  as  not  all  Member  States  will  be  part  of  the 
EPPO,  OLAF  will  continue  with  its  administrative  investigations  in  relation  to  non-
participating  Member  States  in  the  same  way  as  it  does  today.  In  the  participating  Member 
States,  in  areas  under  the  EPPO’s  remit,  the  EPPO  and  OLAF  will  establish  and  maintain 
close  cooperation  aimed  at  ensuring  the  complementarity  of  their  mandates,  and  avoiding 
duplication.  In  this  context,  OLAF  may  bring  support  to  the  EPPO  investigations  on  VAT 
fraud cases.  

OLAF  may  also  facilitate  and  coordinate  VAT  fraud  investigations  making  use  of  its  inter-
disciplinary approach, as well as provide analysis and intelligence. To this end, the Member 
States  should  communicate  to  OLAF  information  about  VAT  offences  where  they  deem  it 
appropriate for the exercise of its mandate. 

Update  of  the  conditions  governing  the  exchange  of  information  and  the  Commission’s 
exercise of implementing powers 

Chapter  XV,  which  lays  down  the  conditions  for  the  exchange  of  information,  would  be 
amended  to  reflect  the  new  legal  basis  for  personal  data  protection:  Regulation  (EU) 
2016/679. 

Chapter XVI, with the general and final provisions, must be updated with the new legal basis 
for  Member  State  checks  on  how  the  Commission  exercises  its  implementing  powers: 
Regulation (EU) 182/2011. 

Measures applicable from 1 January 2020 

Sharing customs procedures 42/63 and vehicle registration data with tax authorities 

Chapter  V  deals  with  the  storage  and  exchange  of  information  on  taxable  persons  and 
transactions.  Amending  this  chapter  would  allow  for  exchanges  of  data  on  customs  imports 
with VAT exemptions and on vehicle registrations.  

The  first  new  set  of  data  would  be  exchanged  to  tackle  the  abuse  of  the  VAT  scheme  for 
importing goods free of VAT (customs procedures 42 and 63) where they were supposed to 
be delivered to another Member State but were diverted to the black market. One weakness of 
these procedures is that the entire process can take a long time to check, despite the risk of 
fraud  occurring  quickly.  Before  they  can  carry  out  such  checks  the  tax  authorities  in  the 
Member  States  of  import  and  of  destination  have  to  wait  for  the  importer’s  recapitulative 
statement, which often fails to materialise.  

With  this  proposal,  the  relevant  information  in  relation  to  customs  procedures  42  and  63 
submitted  electronically  with  the  customs  declaration  (e.g.  VAT  numbers,  value  of  the 
imported goods,  type of commodities etc.) would  be shared by the Member  State of import 
with  the  tax  authorities  in  the  Member  State  of  destination.  The  tax  authorities  in  both 
countries  would  therefore  be  able  to  cross-check  this  information  with  the  information 
reported by the importer in his recapitulative statement and VAT return, and by the recipient 
in  his  VAT  return.  In  addition,  if  the  Member  State  of  destination  detected  that  the  VAT 

EN 

11 

  EN 

 
number of the customer, albeit valid, had been hijacked by the importer, it could immediately 
inform the Member State of import, so that it could check the importer. In addition, by cross-
checking the customs information with the VAT recapitulative statements, the tax authorities 
would be able to detect cases of undervaluation at the moment of import, designed to avoid 
customs duties. Extended access to the data could be granted to Eurofisc officials, as for intra-
Union supplies. 

Amending Article 21 would also clarify that customs authorities responsible for checking the 
conditions  for  the  VAT  exemption  in  customs  procedures  42  and  63  should  be  granted 
automated access to the VAT Information Exchange System (VIES) so that they could check 
the  validity  of  VAT  identification  numbers.  This  is  one  of  the  conditions  for  granting  the 
VAT  exemption  at  the  moment  of  import  and  an  automatic  check  at  the  border  would  be  a 
considerable deterrent against this type of fraud.  

The  second  new  set  of  data  to  be  exchanged  would  be  used  by  Eurofisc  officials  to  tackle 
cross-border fraud involving the sale of second-hand cars. In particular it would allow them to 
identify  swiftly  who  has  committed  the  fraudulent  transactions  and  where.  In  practice,  this 
access  would  be  granted  through  the  EUCARIS  platform25,  where  automated  information 
exchanges on vehicle registrations already take place. 

Measures applicable as from 1 July 2021 

When taxable persons established in one Member State supply goods or services to customers 
established  on  the  territory  of  another  Member  State,  they  are  increasingly  subject  to 
obligations in that other Member State. This is often driven by technological developments. In 
order  to  facilitate  the  correct  application  of  VAT  on  such  cross-border  transactions,  the 
mechanism  provided  for  in  Article  32  by  which  information  is  made  readily  available  for 
taxable  persons  should  be  extended  to  encompass  other  information,  notably  on  rates  and 
measures targeting small enterprises. 

25  EUCARIS  started  in  1994  to  enable  national  registration  authorities  to  cooperate  in  the  fight  against 
international  vehicle  crime  and  driving  licence  tourism  by  exchanging  vehicle  registration  and  driving 
licence  information.  All  EU  Member  States  now  make  use  of  the  system  developed  and  operated  by  the 
EUCARIS co-operation. 

EN 

12 

  EN 

 
                                                 
2017/0248 (CNS) 

Amended proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 as regards measures to strengthen 
administrative cooperation in the field of value added tax 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 113 thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

After transmission of the draft legislative act to the national parliaments, 
Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament1,  
Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee2,  

Acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1 
2 
3 

4 

5 

In  its  VAT  Action  Plan3,  the  Commission  announced  its  intention  to  put  forward  a 
proposal  setting  out  the  principles  for  a  definitive  value  added  tax  (VAT)  system  in 
relation  to  cross-border  business-to-business  trade  between  Member  States.  The 
Council,  in  its  conclusions  of  8  November  20164,  invited  the  Commission  to  make 
certain  improvements  in  the  meantime  to  the  Union  VAT  rules  in  relation  to  cross-
border transactions. 

The certified taxable person is one of the essential components of that new definitive 
VAT  system  for  intra-Union  trade  and  will,  in  addition,  be  used  for  certain 
simplification measures within the current VAT system. The concept  of the certified 
taxable  person  should  allow  for  proving  that  a  specific  taxable  person  can  be 
considered as a reliable taxpayer within the Union. 
Certain rules laid down by Directive 2006/112/EC5 for transactions that are considered 
fraud-sensitive  shall  apply  only  where  certified  taxable  persons  are  involved.  It  is 
therefore  essential  that  the  certified  taxable  person  status  of  a  taxable  person  can  be 
verified by electronic means in order to guarantee that those rules may apply. 

OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
OJ C […], […], p. […]. 
Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European 
Economic and Social Committee on an action plan on VAT - Towards a single EU VAT area - Time to 
decide (COM(2016)148 final of 7.4.2016). 
Council  conclusions  of  8  November  2016  on  Improvements  to  the  current  EU  VAT  rules  for  cross-
border transactions (No. 14257/16 FISC 190 ECOFIN 1023 of 9 November 2016).  
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (OJ L 
347, 11.12.2006, p. 1). 

EN 

13 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(1) 

(2) 

6 

7 

3 

In the first step towards a definitive VAT system as proposed by the VAT Action Plan, 
in the case of intra-Union supplies of goods the reverse charge procedure should apply 
where  the  person  acquiring  the  goods  is  a  certified  taxable  person.  It  is  therefore 
essential,  for  a  taxable  person  making  an  intra-Union  supply  of  goods,  to  know 
whether or not his customer has been granted the certified taxable person status. Given 
the  practical  similarity  with  the  current  exemption  for  intra-Community  supplies  of 
goods and in order to avoid  unnecessary costs or  burden, use  should be made  of the 
current  VAT  Information  Exchange  System  (VIES)  in  which  information  on  the 
certified taxable person status should be integrated. 

In  order  to  provide  information  on  the  certified  taxable  person  status  of  taxable 
persons  in  Member  States,  Member  States  should  record  and  store  in  an  electronic 
system the up to date certified taxable person status of taxable persons. Tax authorities 
of  a  Member  State  should  thereafter  grant  tax  authorities  of  other  Member  States 
automatic  access  to  this  information  and  should  be  able,  upon  demand  from  persons 
referred to in Article 31(1) of Council Regulation (EU) No 904/20106, to confirm by 
electronic means the certified taxable person status of any taxable  person where  that 
status is relevant for the purpose of the transactions referred to in that Article. 

Taking  into  account  that  the  provisions  included  in  this  Regulation  result  from  the 
amendments  introduced  by  Council  Directive  […]  15  /EU7,  this  Regulation  should 
apply from the date of the application of those amendments. 

The current system for the taxation of trade between Member States is based on 
transitional  arrangements  introduced  in  1993  which  have  become  outdated  and 
prone to fraud in the context of a highly complex value added tax (VAT) system. 
The  Commission  put  forward  a  proposal3  setting  out  the  principles  for  a 
definitive  VAT  system  for  cross-border  business-to-business  trade  between 
Member  States  that  would  be  based  on  the  taxation  of  cross-border  supplies  in 
the  Member  State  of  destination. Given  the  fact  that it could  take  several  years 
for  the  definitive  VAT  system  for  intra-Union  trade  to  be  fully  implemented, 
short  term  measures  are  needed  to  combat  cross-border  VAT  fraud  more 
effectively  and  in  a  more  timely  manner.  Improving  and  simplifying  the 
administrative  cooperation  instruments,  in  particular  Eurofisc,  is  also  of 
significant  importance  in  the  fight  against  VAT  fraud  in  general  and  to 
strengthen  trust  between  tax  authorities  before  the  definitive  VAT  regime  is 
introduced. 

Carrying out an administrative enquiry is often necessary to combat VAT fraud 
in  particular  when  the  taxable  person  is  not  established  in  the  Member  States 
where  the  tax  is  due.  To  ensure  the  proper  enforcement  of  VAT  and  to  avoid 
duplication  of  work  and  administrative  burden  of  tax  authorities  and  business, 
where  at  least  two  Member  States  consider  that  an  administrative  enquiry  into 
the amounts declared by a taxable person non-established on their territory but 
taxable  therein,  is  necessary,  the  Member  State  where  the  taxable  person  is 
established  should  undertake  the  enquiry  and  the  requiring  Member  States 

Council Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 of 7 October 2010 on administrative cooperation and combating 
fraud in the field of value added tax (OJ L 268, 12.10.2010, p.1). 
Council  Directive  […]/EU  of  […]  amending  Directive  2006/112/EC  as  regards  harmonising  and 
simplifying  certain  rules  in  the  value  added  tax  system  and  introducing  the  definitive  system  for  the 
taxation of trade between Member States (OJ L […]) 
COM(2017) 569 final of 4 October 2017. 

EN 

14 

  EN 

 
                                                 
should  assist  the  Member  State  of  establishment  by  taking  part  actively  in  the 
enquiry. 

Forwarding information without a prior request to the competent authorities of 
other Member States in accordance with Council Regulation (EU) No 904/20104 
should  be  as  simple  and  effective  as  possible.  It  is  therefore  necessary  to  allow 
competent authorities to forward information by means other than the standard 
forms when they deem it necessary.  

The concept of certified taxable person is one of the essential components of the 
proposal  on  the  definitive  VAT  system  and  will  also  be  used  for  certain 
simplification  measures  within  the  current  VAT  system.  The  concept  of  the 
certified  taxable  person  should  make  it  possible  to  prove  that  a  specific  taxable 
person can be considered as a reliable taxpayer within the Union. 
Certain  rules  laid  down  by  Directive  2006/112/EC5  for  transactions  that  are 
considered  fraud-sensitive are  to  apply only  where certified taxable persons  are 
involved. It is therefore essential that status of a certified taxable person can be 
verified by electronic means in order to guarantee that those rules may apply. 

As a first step towards a definitive VAT system as proposed in in Communication 
from the Commission on an action plan on VAT - Towards a single EU VAT area 
-  Time  to  decide6,  the  reverse  charge  procedure  is  to  apply  to  intra-Union 
supplies  of  goods  where  the  person  acquiring  the  goods  is  a  certified  taxable 
person.  It  is  therefore  essential  for  taxable  persons  supplying  goods  within  the 
Union  to  know  whether  or  not  their  customers  have  been  granted  certified 
taxable person status. Given the practical similarity with the current exemption 
for  intra-Community  supplies  of  goods,  and  to  avoid  unnecessary  costs  or 
burden, information on the certified taxable person status should be provided by 
the VAT Information Exchange System (VIES). 

In order to provide information on the certified taxable person status of taxable 
persons in Member States, Member States should record and store the up to date 
status  of  taxable  persons  who  have  been  granted  certified  taxable  person  status 
by a competent authority in that Member State, in an electronic system. The tax 
authorities  in  a  Member  State  should  then  grant  the  tax  authorities  in  other 
Member  States  automated  access  to  this  information.  In  addition,  they  should 
also be able, at the request of certain persons provided for in Regulation (EU) No 
904/2010,  to  confirm  by  electronic  means  the  certified  taxable  person  status  of 
any taxable person where that status is relevant for those transactions. 

The  VAT  exemption  for  the  imports  of  goods  provided  for  in  Article  143(2)  of 
Directive  2006/112/EC  (‘customs  procedure  42’)  is  often  abused  and  goods  are 
diverted  to  the  black  market  without  VAT  having  been  paid.  It  is  therefore 
essential  that  customs  officials  when  checking  whether  the  requirements  for 
granting the exemption are met, have access to the registry of VAT identification 
numbers.  Furthermore,  the  information  collated  by  the  customs  authorities,  as 
part of this procedure, should also be made available to the competent authorities 

Council  Regulation  (EU)  No  904/2010  of  7  October  2010  on  administrative  cooperation  and 
combating fraud in the field of value added tax (OJ L 268, 12.10.2010, p. 1). 
Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax 
(OJ L 347, 11.12.2006, p. 1). 
COM(2016)148 final of 7 April 2016. 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

4 

5 

6 

EN 

15 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(9) 

of  the  Member  State  where  the  subsequent  intra-Community  acquisition  must 
take place.  

In  order  to  tackle  fraud  arising  from  the  dual  VAT  regime  applicable  to  cars, 
Eurofisc  liaison  officials  should  be  able  to  access  vehicle  registration  data  in  an 
automated  way.  It  would  allow  them  to  identify  swiftly  who  has  committed  the 
fraudulent transactions and where. Such access should be made available via the 
European Vehicle and Driving Licence Information System (EUCARIS) software 
application, whose use is mandatory for Member States under Council Decision 
2008/615/JHA7  and  Council  Decision  2008/616/JHA8,  as  regards  vehicle 
registration data. 

(10) 

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the provisions on 
automated  access  to  information  collated  by  the  customs  authorities  and  to 
vehicle  registration  data,  implementing  powers  should  be  conferred  on  the 
Commission.  Those  powers  should  be  exercised  in  accordance  with  Regulation 
(EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council9. 

(11)  For  the  purpose  of  ensuring  the  effective  and  efficient  monitoring  of  VAT  on 
cross-border  transactions,  Regulation  (EU)  No  904/2010  provides  for  the 
presence of officials in administrative offices and during administrative enquiries 
in other Member States. In order to strengthen the capacity of tax authorities to 
check cross-border  supplies, there should be joint audits enabling officials from 
two or more Member States to form a single audit team and actively take part in 
a joint administrative enquiry.  

(12)  When taxable persons established in one Member State supply goods or services 
to customers established in another Member State, they are increasingly subject 
to  obligations  in  that  other  Member  State.  This  is  often  driven  by  technological 
developments. To facilitate the correct application of VAT on such cross-border 
transactions, the mechanism by which information is made readily available for 
taxable  persons  should  be  extended  to  encompass  other  information,  notably 
rates and measures for small businesses. 

(13) 

In order to combat the most serious cross-border fraud schemes, it is necessary to 
clarify  and  strengthen  the  governance,  tasks  and  functioning  of  Eurofisc. 
Eurofisc liaison officials should be able to access, exchange, process and analyse 
all necessary information swiftly and coordinate any follow-up actions. It is also 
necessary  to  strengthen  the  cooperation  with  other  authorities  involved  in  the 
fight  against  VAT  fraud  at  Union  level,  in  particular  through  the  exchange  of 
targeted  information  with  Europol  and  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office. 
Therefore, Eurofisc liaison officials should be able to share, spontaneously or on 
foot  of  a  request,  information  and  intelligence  with  Europol  and  the  European 
Anti-Fraud Office. This would enable Eurofisc liaison officials to receive data and 
intelligence  held  by  Europol  and  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  in  order  to 
identify the real perpetrators of the VAT fraud activities.  

7  

8 

9 

Council Decision 2008/615/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the stepping up of cross-border cooperation, 
particularly in combating terrorism and cross-border crime (OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 1). 
Council Decision 2008/616/JHA of 23 June 2008 on the implementation of Decision 2008/615/JHA 
(OJ L 210, 6.8.2008, p. 12). 
Regulation  (EU)  No  182/2011  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  laying  down  the 
rules  and  general  principles  concerning  mechanisms  for  control  by  Member  States  of  the 
Commission’s exercise of implementing powers (OJ L 55, 28.2.2011, p.13). 

EN 

16 

  EN 

 
                                                 
(14) 

In order to ensure uniform conditions for the implementation of the provisions on 
Eurofisc,  implementing  powers  should  be  conferred  on  the  Commission.  Those 
powers should be exercised in accordance with Regulation (EU) No 182/2011. 

(15)  Organising the forwarding of requests for VAT refunds — pursuant to Article 5 
of  Council  Directive  2008/9/EC10  offers  an  opportunity  to  reduce  the 
administrative  burden  for  the  competent  authorities  to  recover  unpaid  VAT 
debts in the Member State of establishment. 

(16)  To protect the financial interests of the Union against serious cross-border VAT 
fraud,  the  Member  States  participating  in  the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s 
Office should communicate to that office, including via Eurofisc liaisons officials, 
information  on  the  most  serious  VAT  offences  as  referred  to  in  Article  2(2)  of 
Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council11.  

(17)  Member  States  should  also  communicate  to  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office 
information about offences against the common VAT system where they consider 
it  appropriate.  This  would  enable  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  to  fulfil  its 
mandate  to  carry  out  administrative  investigations  into  fraud,  corruption  and 
other illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union, and to provide 
assistance to the Member States in order to coordinate their action to protect the 
financial interests of the Union against fraud. 

(18)  The Commission may have access to the information communicated or collected 
pursuant to Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 only in so far as it is necessary for care, 
maintenance  and  development  of  the  electronic  systems  hosted  by  the 
Commission and used by the Member States for the purpose of this Regulation. 

(19)  For  the  purposes  of  this  Regulation,  it  is  appropriate  to  consider  limitations  on 
certain  rights  and  obligations  laid  down  by  Regulation  (EU)  2016/679  of  the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council12  in  order  to  safeguard  the  interests 
referred to in Article 23(1)(e) of that  Regulation. Such limitations are necessary 
and proportionate in view of the potential loss of revenue for Member States and 
the  crucial  importance  of  making  information  available  in  order  to  combating 
fraud effectively. 

(20)  Directive 2006/112/EC will lay down rules for transactions that are to apply only 
where certified taxable persons are involved and new rules on rates and for small 
businesses.  It  is  therefore  necessary  to  defer  the  application  of  the  measures  of 
this Regulation relating to the status of certified taxable person and in respect of 
information to be made available to taxable persons about rates and special rules 
for  small  businesses  until  those  rules  are  applied.  As  the  implementation  of  the 
provisions  on  the  automated  access  to  the  information  collated  by  the  customs 
authorities  and  to  vehicle  registration  data  will  require  new  technological 

10 

11 

12 

Council  Directive  2008/9/EC  of  12  February  2008  laying  down  detailed  rules  for  the  refund  of 
value added tax, provided for in Directive 2006/112/EC, to taxable persons not established in the 
Member State of refund but established in another Member State (OJ L 44, 20.2.2008, p. 23). 
Directive  (EU)  2017/1371  of  the  European Parliament  and  of  the  Council of  5  July  2017  on  the 
fight  against  fraud  to  the  Union's  financial  interests  by  means  of  criminal  law  (OJ  L  198, 
28.7.2017, p. 29). 
Regulation  (EU)  2016/679  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  the  protection  of 
natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such 
data (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 

EN 

17 

  EN 

 
                                                 
developments,  it  is  necessary  to  defer  their  application  to  allow  the  Member 
States and the Commission to carry out those developments. 

(21)  Since  the  objectives  of this Regulation  –  improving the  cooperation instruments 
between Member States and combating cross-border fraud in  the  field of  VAT- 
cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better 
achieved at Union level, the  Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the 
principle  of  subsidiarity  as  set  out  in  Article  5  of  the  Treaty  on  the  European 
Union.  In  accordance  with  the  principle  of  proportionality,  as  set  out  in  that 
Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve 
those objectives. 

(22) 

(7) 

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 should therefore be amended accordingly, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

Amendments to Regulation (EU) No 904/2010  

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 is amended as follows: 

(1) 

Article 7 is amended as follows: 

(a)  paragraph 3 is deleted; 

(b)  paragraph 4 is replaced by the following: 

‘4. The request referred to in paragraph 1 may contain a reasoned request 
for  a  specific  administrative  enquiry.  The  requested  authority  shall 
undertake the administrative enquiry in coordination with the requesting 
authority. The tools and procedures referred to in Articles 28 to 30 of this 
Regulation may be used. If the requested authority takes the view that no 
administrative  enquiry  is  necessary,  it  shall  immediately  inform  the 
requesting authority of the reasons thereof. 

Notwithstanding  the  first  subparagraph,  an  enquiry  into  the  amounts 
declared  by  a  taxable  person  established  in  the  Member  State  of  the 
requested  authority  and  which  are  taxable  in  the  Member  State  of  the 
requesting  authority,  may  be  refused  solely  on  any  of  the  following 
grounds: 

(a) on the grounds provided for in Article 54(1), assessed by the requested 
authority in conformity with a statement of best practices concerning the 
interaction  of  this  paragraph  and  Article  54(1),  to  be  adopted  in 
accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 58(2); 

 (b) on the grounds provided for in paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of Article 54;  

 (c) on the grounds that the requested authority had already supplied the 
requesting  authority  with  information  on  the  same  taxable  person  as  a 
result of an administrative enquiry held less than two years previously. 

Where the requested authority refuses an administrative enquiry referred 
to in the second subparagraph on the grounds set out in points (a) or (b), it 
shall nevertheless provide to the requesting authority the dates and values 
of any relevant supplies made by the taxable person in the Member State 
of the requesting authority over the previous two years. 

EN 

18 

  EN 

 
Where  the  competent  authorities  of  at  least  two  Member  States  consider 
that  an  administrative  enquiry  is  required,  the  requested  authority  shall 
not  refuse  to  undertake  that  enquiry.  Member  States  shall  ensure  that 
arrangements  are  put  in  place  between  those  requesting  authorities  and 
the  requested  authority  whereby  officials  authorised  by  the  requesting 
authorities shall take part in the administrative enquiry carried out in the 
territory  of  the  requested  authority  with  a  view  to  collecting  the 
information referred to in the second subparagraph. Such administrative 
enquiry  shall  be  carried  out  jointly  by  the  officials  of  the  requesting  and 
requested  authorities.  The  officials  of  the  requesting  authorities  shall 
exercise  the  same  powers  of  inspection  as  those  conferred  on  officials  of 
the  requested  authority.  The  officials  of  the  requesting  authorities  shall 
have  access  to  the  same  premises  and  documents  as  the  officials  of  the 
requested authority for the sole purpose of carrying out the administrative 
enquiry.’; 

(2) 

in Article 13, paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 

‘3. The information shall be forwarded by means of standard forms or by other 
means  which  the  respective  competent  authorities  deem  appropriate.  The 
Commission  shall  adopt  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the  standard  forms. 
Those  implementing  acts  shall  be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the  examination 
procedure referred to in Article 58(2)’; 

(1) 

Article 17 is replaced by the following: 

'Article 17 

1.        Each  Member  State  shall  store  in  an  electronic  system  the  following 
information: 

(a)        information  which  it  collects  pursuant  to  Chapter  6  of  Title  XI  of  Directive 
2006/112/EC; 

(b)    data on the identity, activity, legal form and address of persons to whom it has 
issued  a  VAT  identification  number,  collected  pursuant  to  Article  213  of  Directive 
2006/112/EC, as well as the date on which that number was issued; 

(c)    data on VAT identification numbers it has issued which have become invalid, 
and the dates on which those numbers became invalid; 

(d)        information  which  it  collects  pursuant  to  Articles  360,  361,  364  and  365  of 
Directive  2006/112/EC  as  well  as,  as  from  1  January  2015,  information  which  it 
collects pursuant to Articles 369c, 369f and 369g of that Directive; 

(e)        information  as  regards  the  status  of  a  certified  taxable  person  pursuant  to 
Article 13a of Directive 2006/112/EC, as well as the date on which that status was 
granted, refused and withdrawn. 

2.        The  technical  details  concerning  the  automated  enquiry  of  the  information 
referred  to  in  points  (b),  (c),  (d)  and  (e)  of  paragraph  1  of  this  Article  shall  be 
adopted in accordance with the procedure provided for in Article 58(2).' 

(3) 

Article 17 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

in paragraph 1, the following point (e) is added: 

EN 

19 

  EN 

 
‘(e)  information  as  regards  the  status  of  a  certified  taxable  person 
pursuant  to  Article  13a  of  Directive  2006/112/EC,  as  well  as  the  date  on 
which that status was granted, refused and withdrawn.’; 

(b) 

in paragraph 1, the following point (f) is added: 

‘(f) information which it collects pursuant to points (a) and (b) of Article 
143(2)  of  Directive  2006/112/EC,  as  well  as  the  country  of  origin,  the 
country  of  destination,  the  commodity  code,  the  currency,  the  total 
amount,  the  exchange rate, the  prices  of the  individual items and the  net 
weight.’; 

(c)  paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

‘2.  The  Commission  shall  adopt  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the 
technical  details  concerning  the  automated  enquiry  of  the  information 
referred  to  in  points  (b)  to  (e)  of  paragraph  1  of  this  Article.  Those 
implementing  acts  shall  be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the  examination 
procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’; 

(d)  paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

‘2.  The  Commission  shall  adopt  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the 
technical  details  concerning  the  automated  enquiry  of  the  information 
referred  to  in  points  (b)  to  (f)  of  paragraph  1  of  this  Article.  Those 
implementing  acts  shall  be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the  examination 
procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’; 

(e) 

the following paragraph 3 is added: 

‘3.  The  Commission  shall  determine  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the 
exact  categories  of  information  referred  to  in  point  (f)  of  paragraph  1  of 
this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with 
the examination procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’; 

(4) 

Article 21 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

the following paragraph 1a is inserted: 

‘1a.  Every  Member  State  shall  grant  its  officials  who  check  the 
requirements  provided  for  in  Article  143(2)  of  Directive  2006/112/EC 
access to the information referred to in points (b) and (c) of Article(17)(1) 
of  this  Regulation  for  which  automated  access  is  granted  by  the  other 
Member States.’; 

(b) 

in paragraph 2, point (e) is amended as follows: 

(i) 

points (i) and (ii) are replaced by the following: 

‘(i) access is in connection with an investigation into suspected fraud 
or is to detect or identify perpetrators of fraud;  

(ii)  access  is  through  a  Eurofisc  liaison  official,  as  referred  to  in 
Article  36(1),  who  holds  a  personal  user  identification  for  the 
electronic systems allowing access to this information.’; 

(ii)  point (iii) is deleted; 

(c) 

the following paragraph 2a is inserted: 

EN 

20 

  EN 

 
‘2a. With respect to the information referred to in Article 17(1)(f), at least 
the following details shall be accessible: 

the  VAT  identification  numbers  issued  by  the  Member  State 

(a)  
receiving the information; 

the  VAT  identification  numbers  of  the  importer  or  of  his  tax 
(b)  
representative  who  supplies  the  goods  to  persons  holding  a  VAT 
identification number referred to in point (a); 

the  country  of  origin,  the  country  of  destination,  the  commodity 
(c)  
code, the  currency,  the  total  amount,  the  exchange rate, the  prices of  the 
individual items and the net weight of the imported goods followed by an 
intra-Community  supply  of  goods  from  each  person  referred  to  in  point 
(b)  to  each  person  holding  a  VAT  identification  number  referred  to  in 
point (a); 

(d)  
the  country  of  origin,  the  country  of  destination,  the  commodity 
code, the  currency,  the  total  amount,  the  exchange rate, the  prices of  the 
individual items and the net weight of the imported goods followed by an 
intra-Community  supply  of  goods  from  each  person  referred  to  in  point 
(b) to each person holding a VAT identification number issued by another 
Member State under the following conditions: 

(i) access is in connection with an investigation into suspected fraud or is 
to detect or identify perpetrators of fraud; 

(ii) access  is  through  a  Eurofisc  liaison  official,  as  referred  to  in  Article 
36(1),  who  holds  a  personal  user  identification  for  the  electronic  systems 
allowing access to this information. 

The  values  referred  to  in  points  (c)  and  (d)  shall  be  expressed  in  the 
currency of the Member State providing the information and shall relate 
to each single administrative document submitted.’; 

(d) 

the following paragraph 3 is added: 

‘3.  The  Commission  shall  determine  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the 
practical arrangements as regards the conditions provided for in point (e) 
of paragraph 2 of this Article. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in 
accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’; 

(e)  paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 

‘3.  The  Commission  shall  determine  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the 
practical arrangements as regards the conditions provided for in point (e) 
of  paragraph  2  and  in  point  (d)  of  paragraph  2a  of  this  Article.  Those 
implementing  acts  shall  be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the  examination 
procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’; 

(5) 

the following Article 21a is inserted: 

‘Article 21a 

1.  Every  Member  State  shall  grant  the  competent  authority  of  any  other 
Member  State  automated  access  to  the  following  information  in  relation  to 
national vehicle registrations: 

(a) data relating to vehicles; 

EN 

21 

  EN 

 
(b) data relating to the owners and the holders of the vehicle in whose name the 
vehicle is registered, as defined in the law of the Member State of registration.  

2. Access to the information referred to in paragraph 1, shall be granted under 
the following conditions: 

(i) access  is  in  connection  with  an  investigation  into  suspected  fraud  or  is  to 
detect or identify perpetrators of fraud; 

(ii) access  is  through  a  Eurofisc  liaison  official,  as  referred  to  in  Article  36(1), 
who  holds  a  personal  user  identification  for  the  electronic  systems  allowing 
access to this information. 

3.  The  Commission  shall  determine  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the  exact 
categories  of  information  and  the  technical  details  concerning  the  automated 
enquiry  of  the  information  referred  to  in  paragraph  1  of  this  Article  and  the 
practical arrangements as regards the conditions provided for in paragraph 2 of 
this  Article.  Those  implementing  acts  shall  be  adopted  in  accordance  with  the 
examination procedure referred to in Article 58(2).’; 

(6) 

in Article 24, the second paragraph is replaced by the following: 

‘Member  States  shall  be  responsible  for  all  necessary  developments  to  their 
systems to permit the exchange of that information using the CCN/CSI network 
or any other similar network used for the same purpose.’; 

(7) 

the title of CHAPTER VII is replaced by the following: 

‘PRESENCE IN ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES AND DURING 
ADMINISTRATIVE ENQUIRIES AND JOINT AUDITS’; 

(8) 

Article 28 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

the following paragraph 2a is inserted: 

‘2a.  By  agreement  between  the  requesting  authority  and  the  requested 
authority,  and  in  accordance  with  the  arrangements  laid  down  by  the 
latter, officials authorised by the requesting authority may, with a view to 
collecting  and  exchanging  the  information  referred  to  in  Article  1,  take 
part  in  the  administrative  enquiries  carried  out  in  the  territory  of  the 
requested  Member  State.  Such  administrative  enquiries  shall  be  carried 
out jointly by the officials of the requesting and requested authorities. The 
officials  of  the  requesting  authority  shall  exercise  the  same  powers  of 
inspection  as  those  conferred  on  officials  of  the  requested  authority.  The 
officials  of  the  requesting  authorities  shall  have  access  to  the  same 
premises and documents as the officials of the requested authority for the 
sole  purpose  of  carrying  out  the  administrative  enquiry.  By  agreement 
between  the  requesting  authority  and  the  requested  authority,  and  in 
accordance with the  arrangements laid down by the  requested authority, 
both authorities may draft a common audit report.’; 

(b)  paragraph 3 is replaced by the following: 

‘3.  The  officials  of  the  requesting  authority  present  in  another  Member 
State in accordance with paragraphs 1, 2 and 2a must at all times be able 
to  produce  written  authority  stating  their  identity  and  their  official 
capacity.’; 

EN 

22 

  EN 

 
(9) 

(2)  Paragraph 1 of in Article 31, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

‘1.  The  competent  authorities  of  each  Member  State  shall  ensure  that  persons 
involved in the intra-Community supply of goods or of services and non-established 
taxable  persons  supplying  telecommunication  services,  broadcasting  services  and 
electronically  supplied  services,  in  particular  those  referred  to  in  Annex  II  to 
Directive 2006/112/EC, are allowed to obtain, for the purposes of such transactions, 
confirmation by electronic means of the validity of the VAT identification number of 
any  specified  person  as  well  as  the  associated  name  and  address.  The  competent 
authorities  of  each  Member  State  shall  also  ensure  that  it  can  be  verified  by 
electronic means whether any specified person is a certified taxable person pursuant 
to  Article  13a  of  Directive  2006/112/EC  where  such  tax  status  is  relevant  for  the 
purposes of that Article. This information shall correspond to the data referred to in 
Article 17 of this Regulation.’; 

(10) 

in Article 32, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

‘1.  The  Commission  shall,  on  the  basis  of  the  information  provided  by  the 
Member States, publish on its website the details of the provisions approved by 
each  Member  State  which  transpose  Chapter  2  of  Title  VIII,  Article  167a, 
Chapter 3 of Title XI and Chapter 1 of Title XII of Directive 2006/112/EC.’; 

(11) 

Article 33 is amended as follows: 

(a)  paragraph 1 is replaced by the following: 

‘1. In order to promote and facilitate multilateral cooperation in the fight 
against  VAT  fraud,  this  Chapter  establishes  a  network  for  the  swift 
exchange,  processing  and  analysis  of  targeted  information  between 
Member  States  and  for  the  coordination  of  any  follow-up  actions 
(‘Eurofisc’).’; 

(b)  paragraph 2 is amended as follows: 

(i) 

point (b) and (c) are replaced by the following: 

‘(b) carry out and coordinate the swift multilateral exchange and the 
joint  processing  and  analysis  of  targeted  information  in  the  subject 
areas in which Eurofisc operates (‘Eurofisc working fields’); 

(c) coordinate the work of the Eurofisc liaison officials as referred to 
in  Article  36(1)  of  the  participating  Member  States  in  acting  on 
warnings and intelligence received;’; 

(ii) 

the following point (d) is added: 

‘(d)  coordinate  participating  Member  States’  administrative 
enquiries  into  the  suspects  and  perpetrators  of  fraud  identified  by 
the Eurofisc liaison officials as referred to in Article 36(1).’; 

(12) 

in Article 34, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

‘2. Member States having chosen to take part in a Eurofisc working field shall 
actively  participate  in  the  multilateral  exchange  and  the  joint  processing  and 
analysis of targeted information between all participating Member States and in 
the coordination of any follow-up actions.’; 

(13) 

Article 35 is replaced by the following: 

EN 

‘Article 35 

23 

  EN 

 
The  Commission  shall  provide  Eurofisc  with  technical  and  logistical  support. 
The Commission shall not have access to the information referred to in Article 
1, which may be exchanged over Eurofisc, except in the circumstances provided 
for in Article 55(2).’; 

(14) 

Article 36 is amended as follows: 

(a) 

the following paragraph 1a is inserted: 

‘1a.  The  liaison  officials  of  the  Member  States  shall  designate  a  Eurofisc 
chairperson  among  the  Eurofisc  liaison  officials,  for  a  limited  period  of 
time. 

The liaison officials of the Member States shall: 

(a) agree on the establishment and termination of Eurofisc working fields; 

(b) examine any issues relating to the operational functioning of Eurofisc; 

(c) assess, at least on a yearly basis, the effectiveness and efficiency of the 
operation of Eurofisc activities; 

(d) approve the annual report, referred to in Article 37. 

The Eurofisc chairperson shall ensure that Eurofisc operates properly.’; 

(b)  paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

‘2. The liaison officials of the Member States participating in a particular 
Eurofisc  working  field  (‘participating  Eurofisc  liaison  officials’)  shall 
designate  a  Eurofisc  working  field  coordinator,  among  the  participating 
Eurofisc liaison officials, for a limited period of time. 

Eurofisc working field coordinators shall: 

(a) collate the information received from the participating Eurofisc liaison 
officials  as  agreed  by  the  working  field  participants  and  shall  make  all 
information  available  to  the  other  participating  Eurofisc  liaison  officials; 
this information shall be exchanged by electronic means; 

(b)  ensure  that  the  information  received  from  the  participating  Eurofisc 
liaison  officials  is  processed  and  analysed  together  with  the  relevant 
information  communicated  or  collected  pursuant  to  this 
targeted 
Regulation,  as  agreed  by  the  participants  in  the  working  field,  and  shall 
make the result available to all participating Eurofisc liaison officials; 

(c) provide feedback to all participating Eurofisc liaison officials; 

(d)  submit  an  annual  report  on  the  activities  of  the  working  field  to  the 
liaison officials of the Member States. 

(c) 

the following paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 are added: 

‘3.  Eurofisc  working  field  coordinators  may  forward,  on  their  own 
initiative or on request, some of the collated and processed information to 
Europol and the European Anti-Fraud Office (‘OLAF’), as agreed by the 
working field participants. 

4. Eurofisc working field coordinators shall make the information received 
from  Europol  and  OLAF  available  to  the  other  participating  Eurofisc 
liaison officials; this information shall be exchanged by electronic means. 

EN 

24 

  EN 

 
5.  Eurofisc  working  field  coordinators  shall  also  ensure  that  the 
information received from Europol and OLAF is processed and analysed 
together with the relevant targeted information communicated or collected 
pursuant  to  this  Regulation,  as  agreed  by  the  working  field  participants, 
and  shall  make  the  results  available  to  the  participating  Eurofisc  liaison 
officials.’; 

(15) 

Article 37 is replaced by the following: 

‘Article 37 

The Eurofisc chairperson shall submit an annual report on the activities of all of 
the working fields to the Committee referred to in Article 58(1). 

The  Commission  shall  adopt  by  means  of  implementing  acts  the  practical  and 
procedural arrangements in relation to Eurofisc. Those implementing acts shall 
be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 
58(2).’; 

(16) 

in paragraph 1 of Article 48, the following subparagraphs are added: 

‘Where  the  Member  State  of  establishment  becomes  aware  that  a  taxable 
person  making  a  request  for  refund  of  VAT,  in  accordance  with  Article  5  of 
Directive  2008/9/EC,  has  undisputed  VAT  liabilities  in  that  Member  State  of 
establishment, it may inform the Member State of refund of those liabilities so 
that the Member State of refund shall request the consent of the taxable person 
for  the  transfer  of  the  VAT  refund  directly  to  the  Member  State  of 
establishment in order to discharge the outstanding VAT liabilities. Where the 
taxable person consents to this transfer, the Member State of refund on behalf 
of  the  taxable  person  shall  transfer  this  amount  to  the  Member  State  of 
establishment, to the extent that it is required to discharge the outstanding VAT 
liability.  The  Member  State  of  establishment  shall  inform  the  taxable  person 
whether the amount transferred amounts to either a full or a partial discharge 
of  the  VAT  liability  within  15  days  of  the  receipt  of  the  transfer  from  the 
Member State of refund. 

Where the Member State of establishment becomes aware that a taxable person 
making a request for refund of VAT, in accordance with Article 5 of Directive 
2008/9/EC, has disputed VAT liabilities in that Member State of establishment, 
it  may  inform  the  Member  State  of  refund  of  those  liabilities,  so  that  the 
Member State of refund shall request the consent of the taxable person for the 
transfer  of  the  VAT  refund  directly  to  the  Member  State  of  establishment  in 
order that it be retained as a precautionary measure. Where the taxable person 
consents to this transfer and retention, the Member State of refund on behalf of 
the  taxable  person  shall  transfer  this  amount  to  the  Member  State  of 
establishment  to  the  extent  that  it  is  required  to  secure  the  payment  of  the 
disputed  VAT  liability.  The  Member  State  of  establishment  shall  inform  the 
taxable  person  of  the  transfer  and  of  the  retention  of  the  amount  transferred 
within 15 days of the receipt of the transfer from the Member State of refund. 
The transfer of the amount to the Member State of establishment shall only be 
permitted  where  the  Member  State  of  establishment  has  in  place  effective 
judicial control, which enables the courts to grant the release, at the request of 
the taxable person and in all stages of the proceedings, of the amount retained 
or of any part of it.’; 

EN 

25 

  EN 

 
(17) 

the title of CHAPTER XIII is replaced by the following: 

‘RELATIONS WITH THE COMMISSION AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS, 
BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES OF THE UNION’; 

(18) 

in Article 49, the following paragraph 2a is added: 

‘2a.  The  Member  States  participating  in  the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s 
Office shall communicate to that office, in accordance with Article 24 of Council 
Regulation (EU) 2017/1939(*), any available information about serious offences 
against the common VAT system as referred to in Article 2(2) of Directive (EU) 
2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council(**). 

The  Member  States  may  communicate  to  the  European  Anti-fraud  Office  any 
available information about offences against the common VAT system to enable 
it to consider appropriate action in accordance with its mandate.’; 

_________________________________________________________________ 

(*) Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939 of 12 October 2017 implementing enhanced cooperation 
on  the  establishment  of  the  European  Public  Prosecutor’s  Office  (‘the  EPPO’)  (OJ  L  283, 
31.10.2017, p. 1). 

(**) Directive (EU) 2017/1371 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2017 on 
the  fight  against  fraud  to  the  Union's  financial  interests  by  means  of  criminal  law  (OJ  L  198, 
28.7.2017, p. 29). 

(19) 

Article 55 is amended as follows: 

(a)  paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

‘2. Persons duly accredited by the Security Accreditation Authority of the 
Commission  may  have  access  to  this  information  only  in  so  far  as  it  is 
necessary for care, maintenance and development of the electronic systems 
hosted  by  the  Commission  and  used  by  the  Member  States  to  implement 
this Regulation.’; 

(b)  paragraph 5 is replaced by the following: 

‘5.  All  storage,  processing  or  exchange  of  information  referred  to  in  this 
Regulation is subject to the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council(*).  However,  Member  States 
shall, for the purpose of the correct application of this Regulation, restrict 
the scope of the obligations and rights provided for in Articles 12 to 22 and 
Articles  5  and  34  of  Regulation  (EU)  2016/679  to  the  extent  required  in 
order  to  safeguard  the  interests  referred  to  in  Article  23(1)(e)  of  that 
Regulation. The processing and storage of information referred to in this 
Regulation shall be carried out only for the purposes referred to in Article 
1(1) of this Regulation and the storage periods of this information shall be 
limited to the extent necessary to achieve those purposes.’; 

_____________________________________________________________ 

(*) Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 
2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data 
and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data 
Protection Regulation) (OJ L 119, 4.5.2016, p. 1). 

(20) 

in Article 58, paragraph 2 is replaced by the following: 

EN 

26 

  EN 

 
‘2. Where reference is made to this paragraph, Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No 
182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council(*) shall apply.’; 

_________________________________________________________________ 

(*) Regulation (EU) No 182/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 February 
2011  laying  down  the  rules  and  general  principles  concerning  mechanisms  for  control  by 
Member  States  of  the  Commission’s  exercise  of  implementing  powers  (OJ  L  55,  28.2.2011,  p. 
13). 

(21) 

Annex I is deleted. 

Article 2 

Entry into force and application 

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in 
the Official Journal of the European Union. 

It shall apply from 1 January 2019. 

Points (a) and (c) of point (3) of Article 1, and point (9) of Article 1 shall  apply from 1 
January 2019.  

Points (b), (d) and (e) of point (3) of Article 1, points (a), (c) and (e) of point (4) of Article 
1, and point (5) of Article 1 shall apply from 1 January 2020.  

Point (10) of Article 1 shall apply from 1 July 2021. 

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States. 

Done at Brussels, 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

27 

  EN