COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REFIT EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down rules and procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on products and amending Regulations (EU) No 305/2011, (EU) No 528/2012, (EU) 2016/424, (EU) 2016/425, (EU) 2016/426 and (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Directives 2004/42/EC, 2009/48/EC, 2010/35/EU, 2013/29/EU, 2013/53/EU, 2014/28/EU, 2014/29/EU, 2014/30/EU, 2014/31/EU, 2014/32/EU, 2014/33/EU, 2014/34/EU, 2014/35/EU, 2014/53/EU, 2014/68/EU and 2014/90/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council
Date: 2017-12-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: approximation of laws, import (EU), market approval, market supervision, marketing standard, product quality, product safety, quality standard, single market, surveillance concerning imports

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 19.12.2017  SWD(2017) 470 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REFIT EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council  laying down rules and procedures for compliance with and enforcement of Union harmonisation legislation on products and amending Regulations (EU) No 305/2011, (EU) No 528/2012, (EU) 2016/424, (EU) 2016/425, (EU) 2016/426 and (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and of the Council, and Directives 2004/42/EC, 2009/48/EC, 2010/35/EU, 2013/29/EU, 2013/53/EU, 2014/28/EU, 2014/29/EU, 2014/30/EU, 2014/31/EU, 2014/32/EU, 2014/33/EU, 2014/34/EU, 2014/35/EU, 2014/53/EU, 2014/68/EU and 2014/90/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council {COM(2017) 795 final} - {SWD(2017) 466 final} - {SWD(2017) 467 final} - {SWD(2017) 468 final} - {SWD(2017) 469 final}  
 
 
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Regulation (EC) No 765/2008, applicable from 1 January 2010, provides a framework for market 
surveillance of products aiming to protect the public interests through the reduction of the number 
of  non-compliant  products  on  the  EU  Internal  Market  and  to  ensure  a  level  playing  field  among 
economic operators. The evaluation's conclusions are:    

Effectiveness 

The Regulation has been only partly effective.  

  Although  coordination  and  cooperation  developed  significantly,  they  have  not  reached  a 
satisfactory  level.  Member  States  do  not  sufficiently  use  the  available  tools  for  cross-border 
cooperation.  Market  surveillance  authorities  and  customs  make  limited  use  of  each  others' 
findings.  Although  the  value  of  administrative  cooperation  is  essential,  there  is  no  active 
participation in several Administrative Cooperation groups. 

  Uniformity  and  rigorousness  of  market  surveillance  have  not  yet  been  achieved  due  to 
significant differences across Member States as to their organisation, availability of resources, 
powers of inspections/sanctions and systems of monitoring/reporting. 

  The  border  controls  on  imported  products  seem  insufficient  due  mainly  to  a  lack  of 

jurisdiction of authorities outside their territories.  

Efficiency 

Most of the provisions' costs are borne by Member States' authorities. Costs vary considerably 
due  possibly  to  national  organisational  models  requiring  different  resources.  Average  annual 
budgets allocated do not correlate with the market size. However, the analysis has been limited by 
the poor quality of data included in the reports. 

Regarding  the  costs  for  economic  operators,  information  costs  are  perceived  as  insignificant. 
Businesses address the negative impact that across-the-board inconsistencies in the approach taken 
by different Member States have on them. They also stress that the enforcement mechanism cannot 
create a level playing field for businesses that are selling products in the Internal Market. In terms 
of  benefits,  the  Regulation  did  not  achieve  the  expected  improved  safety  for  consumers/users 
and level playing field for businesses in light of the mentioned persistence/increase in the number 
of non-compliant products. 

Relevance  

The  Regulation’s  definitions  are  generally  clear  and  appropriate,  however  they  are  not  complete 
and up-to-date, especially regarding new/emerging dynamics (e.g. online sales).  

Coherence  

The  Regulation's  internal  coherence  was  not  questioned.  As  for  the  external  coherence  some 
issues  have  been  identified  relating  to  the  General  Product  Safety  Directive,  in  terms  of  clear 
boundaries and  alignment  of  defintions.  These  issues  were  tackled  in  the  proposal  put  forward  in 
2013. The coherence of the Regulation with sectoral directives is sufficiently safeguarded by the lex 
specialis provision. While not hindering the implementation of the Regulation, some discrepancies 
and  gaps  in  definitions  and  terminology  could  diminish  the  overall  clarity  of  the  framework  for 
market surveillance.  

1 

 
 
EU added value 

The  benefits  of  a  single  piece  of  European  legislation  instead  of  several  different  pieces  of 
national  legislation  are  widely  recognised.  In  particular  the  common  information  systems  would 
favour  administrative  cooperation.  Overall,  the  potential  for  the  Regulation  to  achieve  a  full  EU 
added value is still hindered by the sub-optimal level of cross-border exchange of information and 
cooperation, and by the lack of a uniform implementation of the market surveillance framework.  

2