COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE The Goods Package: Reinforcing trust in the single market
Date: 2017-12-19
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, environmental protection, free movement of goods, goods and services, market approval, market supervision, mutual recognition principle, product safety, single market

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 19.12.2017  COM(2017) 787 final  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE The Goods Package: Reinforcing trust in the single market  
 
 
1.  STRENGTHENING THE SINGLE MARKET FOR GOODS 

The single market for goods is one of the greatest achievements of the European Union. We 
will  celebrate  its  25th  anniversary  in  2018.  Its  foundation  is  trust,  between  consumers, 
businesses and authorities. Consumers have to trust that the products they buy and use are safe. 
Businesses need to be able to trust that there is a level playing field where rules apply to all 
and protect everyone equally. In particular small and medium-sized businesses (SMEs) should 
be  freed  from  red  tape,  to  promote  entrepreneurship  and  job  creation.  Trust  has  enabled 
unprecedented  integration  of  markets  within  the  EU,  has  been  and  continues  to  be  a 
cornerstone of economic growth. Industry added value alone has grown by 25% in EU27 (23% 
in  EU28)  in  real  terms  since  2009.  Its  share  as  a  proportion  of  the  economy  has  therefore 
significantly  increased  since  2009  from  15.5%  (14.7%  in  EU28)  to  17.1%  (16.1%  in  EU28) 
today.1 

As the Single Market Strategy2 underlines,  the EU and the Single Market  need to  adapt to a 
changing  environment.  Obstacles  in  product  and  services  markets  hamper  efficiency, 
productivity  and  the  competitiveness  of  the  European  economy.  Businesses  often feel  stifled 
by  outdated  and  excessively  burdensome  regulations  and  unable  to  find  the  information  that 
they need. Also, a disregard for EU product rules hampers the creation of a truly level playing 
field.  

Both the European Parliament and the European Council have endorsed the aims of the Single 
Market  Strategy  and  have  called  on  the  Commission  to  remove  remaining  obstacles  and  to 
facilitate  solutions.3  It  follows  from  the  Leader’s  Agenda  that  the  European  Council  will 
review  progress  made  towards  the  2018  deadlines  of  the  Single  Market  Strategies  in  March 
2018.4 

For the single market for goods there are especially two remaining structural weaknesses that 
have to be rapidly addressed to reap its full potential and to justify trust. The potential is there, 
consumers,  businesses  and  authorities  are  ready;  we  just  have  to  provide  the  necessary 
environment to make it work.  

The first structural weakness of the single market for goods relates to the enforcement of EU 
harmonised  product  safety  rules.  Despite  far-reaching  safety  rules,  there  are  still  too  many 
unsafe  and  illicit  products  on  the  market.  These  products  cause  major  risks  for  consumers. 
They  do  not  get  value  for  their  money  and  may  be  exposed  to  health  risks.  A  lack  of 
enforcement  of  EU  product  rules  should  not  result  in  an  unfair  advantage  for  those  who 
deliberately  try  to  circumvent  essential  safety  rules.  The  Commission  has  recently  adopted 
measures to improve enforcement action against breaches of intellectual property rights5. But it 

1   Source  Eurostat  (2016  figures  are  provisional).  These  figures  include  manufacturing,  extractive  industries  and 
utilities  industries.  They  exclude  business  services  and  construction,  which  are  however  closely  linked  to  EU 
industry, not least against the backdrop of the growing role of value chains and of servitisation. 

2   COM (2015) 550 final, Upgrading the Single Market: more opportunities for people and business”, 28.10.2015. 
3   European  Parliament,  Resolution  on  the  Single  Market  Strategy,  26  May  2016,  P8_TA(2016)0237;  European 

Council, Conclusions, 15 December 2015.  

4   European  Council,  Leaders’  Agenda,  http://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/21594/leaders-agenda.pdf,  October 

2017. 

5   See the Intellectual Property package adopted by the Commission on 29. 11. 2017 which includes several measures 
and  notably  a  Communication  on  a  balanced  IP  enforcement  system  responding  to  today's  societal  challenges 
(SWD(2017) 430 final). 

1 

 
                                                 
is  time  to  do  more  to  ensure  compliance.  On  a  market  the  size  of  the  Single  Market, 
enforcement  authorities  in  Member  States  have  to  cooperate  well  with  each  other  to  remove 
unsafe products from the market in an effective and swift way.  

The  second  structural  weakness  relates  to  products  that  do  not  fall  under  harmonised  EU 
product safety rules, or only fall partially under such rules, for example in the area of furniture, 
tableware or certain construction products. Such products may be considered safe and in line 
with  the  public  interest  in  one  Member  State,  but  may  face  market  access  difficulties  in 
another  Member  State.    There  may  be  legitimate  differences  due  to  national  specificities. 
.However,  any  refusal  should  be  duly  justified  and  explained  on  the  basis  of  public  policy 
concerns. Assistance to better understand and eventually overcome market access obstacles for 
these  products  should  be  offered.  Business  opportunities,  and  this  is  especially  relevant  for 
SMEs, need to be improved. 

Therefore,  the  Commission  is  today  proposing  a  "goods  package"  that  will  comprehensively 
address  these  weaknesses  for  a  better  functioning  single  market  for  goods.  It  contains  two 
ambitious  legislative  proposals.  The  first  aims  to  strengthen  compliance  and  enforcement  of 
EU product rules6. The second intends to revamp and facilitate the use of mutual recognition in 
the  Single  market7.  The  "goods  package"  is  completed  by  a  Report  on  the  operation  of 
Directive  (EU)  2015/1535  laying  down  a  procedure  for  the  provision  of  information  in  the 
field of technical regulations and of rules on Information Society services from 2014 to 20158, 
a  Report  on  the  implementation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No.  765/20089,  as  well  as  soft  law 
measures spelt out in this Communication which aim to build trust in the Single Market. 

2.  TRUST IN THE ENFORCEMENT OF EU PRODUCT RULES 

Consumer  safety  and  environmental  protection  are  the  cornerstones  of  the  single  market  for 
goods. Across the EU, we have agreed on common safety and environmental rules to protect 
us  against  safety  hazards,  pollution  and  environmental  damage.  Still,  many  consumers  were 
knowingly  and  deliberately  mislead  when  they  bought  a  diesel  car.  Unfortunately,  cars  were 
not  the  only  goods  where  there  has  been  unfair  competition  by  circumvention  of  the  rules. 
Large  numbers  of  unsafe  products  are  being  sold  in  Europe  every  day.  This  ranges  from 
mislabelled  products  to  products  posing  severe  risks  to  health  or  the  environment.  Between 

6   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). 

7   Regulation  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  on  mutual  recognition  of  goods  lawfully  marketed  in 

another Member State (COM(2017)796). 

8   Report  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European  Economic  and  Social 

Committee on the operation of Directive (EU) 2015/1535 from 2014 to 2015 (COM(2017)788). 

9      Report  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 765/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council 
of 9 July 2008 setting out the requirements for accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of 
products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 339/93 (COM(2017)789). 

2 

 
                                                 
2011 and 2017, there were about 2,500 incidents where illegal products had to be withdrawn 
from the market10. And this is probably the tip of the ice-berg. 

EU product rules cover a large share of manufactured products in the EU. These have a value 
of EUR 2 400 billion and are produced or distributed by some 5 million businesses. EU rules 
allow  products  to  circulate  freely  across  the  Union  while  ensuring  a  high  level  of 
environmental,  health  and  safety  protection.  For  many  sectors,  such  as  toys  and  electric 
equipment, the EU has lean un-bureaucratic ways of allowing market access. A level playing 
field for businesses, with clear rules and a high level of consumer protection is needed for the 
single market to work. Trust and a level playing field are already achieved in other sectors such 
as foodstuffs, plant health or animal health, on the basis of stringent rules agreed at EU level. 

We are also living in a world increasingly affected by societal changes such as globalisation 
and digitalisation. Products and distribution chains across the EU are increasingly interlinked. 
On the other hand, national market surveillance authorities lack resources and are confined to 
their  national  territory.  We  need  a  European  perspective  to  enforcement.  Too  often, 
investigations  launched  in  one  Member  State  end  at  the  national  border.  To  overcome  this 
discrepancy,  market  surveillance  must  be  consistent  no  matter  whether  the  product  is  made 
outside or inside the EU, or whether it is bought online or offline. 

In  line  with  other  EU  initiatives  such  as  the  Industrial  Policy  Strategy11,  the  Digital  Single 
Market Strategy12 and its  mid-term review,13 and  the action  plan for customs  management14, 
the Commission therefore proposes to step up the enforcement of common EU safety rules. 
Consumers  need  to  regain  trust  that  the  goods  they  purchase  online  or  offline  are  safe.  If 
problems arise, we need to have the right framework for addressing the risks and restoring a 
level playing field. 

is  about  creating  economic  opportunities,  boosting 
The  single  market  for  goods 
competitiveness  and  making  the  EU  fit  to  tackle  the challenges  of  a  global  economy.  At  the 
same  time,  as  the  Commission’s  reflection  paper  on  harnessing  globalisation  has  underlined, 
the EU needs to act and to restore a level playing field with strong enforcement of EU rules15. 
In  an  open  single  market,  rules  are  there  to  protect  EU  citizens’  safety.  It  can  only  function 
well if a high level of trust in this protection can be guaranteed. Strong enforcement is vital to 
ensure  that  competition  occurs  among  compliant  goods,  not  between  compliant  and  non-
compliant goods. 

a) 

Smart enforcement in a borderless single market  

Market surveillance is handled by the Member States, and rightly so. They are best placed to 
monitor  their  markets  and  impose  penalties  if  need  be,  because  they  are  closest  to  any 
incidents, the first to react and the most familiar with their national economy. 

10   Source: RAPEX. This number covers only products that are subject to EU harmonisation legislation. 
11   COM(2017) 479 final, Investing in a smart, innovative and sustainable Industry: A renewed EU Industrial Policy 

Strategy. 

12   COM(2015) 192 final, A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe. 
13   https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/digital-single-market-mid-term-review. 
14   COM(2014) 527 final, EU Strategy and Action Plan for customs risk management: Tackling risks, strengthening 

supply chain security and facilitating trade. 

15    European Commission, Reflection paper on harnessing globalisation, 10 May 2017. 

3 

 
                                                 
However,  purely  national  enforcement  is  insufficient.  There  are  over  500  distinct  market 
surveillance authorities (from 1 to over 200 per Member State) policing one Single Market for 
specific  products.  Businesses  are  more  often  than  not  based  in  a  different  place  from  the 
market  surveillance  authority  that  detects  a  problem.  This  leads  to  difficulties  as  regards  the 
determination of the applicable law and jurisdiction, access to justice and the enforcement of 
decisions.  Rogue  suppliers  currently  abuse  this  market  fragmentation,  to  the  detriment  of 
consumer and product safety. 

Despite  a  willingness  to  act  at  national  level,  enforcement  in  the  single  market  for  goods  is 
often  hampered  by  a  lack  of  resources  (staff,  budget,  laboratory  capacity),  coordination  and 
exchange. Rogue traders may make money from placing unsafe products on the market but it 
is  the  authorities  that  have  to  pick  up  the  bill,  e.g.  paying  to  destroy  unsafe  products.  In  an 
integrated single market for goods, the work of national authorities to control unsafe products 
therefore needs to be better coordinated, so rogue traders cannot hide behind borders and the 
response to non-compliance with EU rules is consistent across the Union. 

Therefore,  this  package  is  a  big  step  towards  smarter  enforcement,  complementing  and 
strengthening, where necessary, existing and future Union harmonisation legislation16:  

Enforcement authorities will work more closely together through single liaison offices. Use of 
another Member State’s evidence, test reports and decisions will be made easier. There will be 
a presumption that if a product is found not to comply with EU product rules in one Member 
State, the evidence and decisions can be transferred to another, to facilitate enforcement across 
the EU. 

Actions  against  incompliant  products  can  only  be  effective  when  authorities  share  more 
information about investigations and illegal  products. The Commission  will engage  more 
intensively  in  ensuring  common  knowledge  gathering  among  enforcement  authorities  and 
convergence  of  different  IT  tools,  such  as  the  Rapid  Alert  System  for  dangerous  non-food 
products  (RAPEX)  and  the  Information  and  Communication  System  on  Market  Surveillance 
(ICSMS), to facilitate the enforcement work of authorities. 

Furthermore,  reliable  market  surveillance  indicators  should  make  sure  that  there  is  a 
common understanding of the challenges facing market surveillance. 

National enforcement authorities will get more support for the coordination and performance 
of  their  tasks.  A  Union  product  compliance  network  will  be  set  up.  This  network  will 
provide  administrative  support  for  the  joint  investigations  needed  to  coordinate  the 
enforcement  actions  of  over  500  national  authorities.  The  network  will  allow  authorities  to 
pool knowledge, organise exchanges of officials, develop a common intelligence picture, and 
devise  efficient  methods  for  more  targeted  and  risk-based  controls.  It  will  also  provide 
standard training for inspectors and assist with joint procurement of product testing capacity. 
The  network  will  infuse  market  surveillance  with  the  common  European  perspective  that  is 
necessary  in  a  common  European  market.  However,  subsidiarity  will  be  fully  respected. 
National market surveillance authorities alone will enforce concrete decisions on traders.  

16   In accordance with the principle of lex specialis, the enforcement Regulation proposal should apply only in so far 
as there are no specific provisions with the same objective, nature or effect in other existing or future rules of Union 
harmonisation  legislation.  This  is  particularly  relevant  for  Union  legislation  covering  drug  precursors,  medical 
devices, in vitro diagnostic medical devices; etc. 

4 

 
                                                 
Closer cooperation between businesses and enforcement authorities is also essential. Both 
parties need to trust each other. The following strands of closer cooperation are envisaged: 

  Compliance  information:  Manufacturers  consider  that  they  should  be  the  first  to  be 
contacted if there is a suspicion their products fall short of the rules. This way, they can 
immediately  intervene,  dispel  misunderstandings  or  take  corrective  measures,  if 
necessary. They will also know if the product in question is being sold elsewhere. Most 
manufacturers who sell in  the Union already have a  representative  who can  be easily 
contacted. This good practice will become mandatory17. 

 

'Compliance Partnership Agreements' with their local authorities will allow businesses 
to get advice on compliance issues.  

  Businesses  and  authorities  can  conclude  'memoranda  of  understanding'  about  joint 

projects to identify incompliant products18. 

  As prevention and enforcement go hand in hand, businesses in the EU and around the 

globe can seek regulatory advice from national 'Product Contact Points'19.  

For a safe and functioning single market, businesses and consumers must be aware of the rules 
and have information they need to react and adapt. Market surveillance authorities will have 
to publish their findings, especially when they restrict the marketing of certain products. 

b) 

Enforcement at external borders 

Consumers  should  expect  the  same  level  of  protection  for  goods  manufactured  inside  or 
outside the EU. In a globalised world, it remains a challenge to ensure that imported products 
also  meet  EU  requirements  and  do  not  compete  unfairly  by  breaking  EU  rules.  In  principle, 
imported products should be checked on entry into the single market. Yet the sheer volume of 
imports  makes  it  impossible  to  check  all  consignments.  Over  30 %  of  all  goods  on  the  EU 
markets were imports in 2015. They had an estimated value of almost EUR 750 billion20. 

17   A  product  can  only  be  made  available  on  the  market  if  a  person  responsible  for  compliance  information  is 
established in the Union and can be a direct interlocutor for market surveillance authorities. This person could be 
the manufacturer, the importer or any other economic operator mandated by the manufacturer   and shall keep the 
required  relevant  technical  documentation  including  the  EU  declaration  of  conformity,  when  applicable,  of  the 
product and shared it with the market surveillance authorities upon request. 

18   In  the  context  of  intellectual  property  rights  infringements,  Memoranda  of  Understanding  are  used  between 
industry partners, see the Commission Communication of Communication on   a balanced IP enforcement system 
responding to today's societal challenges (SWD(2017) 430 final), p. 8-9.  

19   https://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/goods/free-movement-sectors/mutual-recognition/contacts-list_fr. 
20   SWD(2017)466 — Commission services staff working document, Impact Assessment 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) 2016/424, (EU) 2016/425, (EU) 2016/426 and (EU) 2017/1369 of the European Parliament and 
of  the  Council,  and  Directives  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. 

5 

 
 
 
                                                 
Trade in harmonised products: sold production and trade with non-EU countries (2008-
2015, EU-28), € billions 

s
n
o
i
l
l
i

B

 2.750

 1.750

 750

 (250)

 (1.250)

 2.810  

 2.201  

 2.536  

 2.777  

 2.747  

 2.770  

 2.752  

 735  

 609  

 746  

 807  

 817  

 765  

 813  

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

 (692) 

 (824) 
Production

 (849) 

 (980) 

Imports (Extra EU)

 (1.040) 
 (1.085) 
Exports (Extra EU)

 (1.062) 

Source: Prodcom — statistics by product, EUROSTAT (2016) 

The rules on the enforcement at the external borders need to be adapted to the new realities of 
the 21st century, including the increasing number of online sales, and the new Union Customs 
Code. 

The new proposal adapts the current legal setting to the new customs rules. It provides for 
more clarity for controls on products entering the EU, and for coordination of and cooperation 
between customs and market surveillance authorities. 

It also simplifies the paperwork for importers. Trusted businesses will benefit from lighter 
controls and, as a result, authorities will be able to concentrate their efforts where  the risk to 
product safety is greatest.  

Also,  when  enforcement  authorities  have  doubts  about  the  legality  of  a  product,  they  will 
suspend release for free circulation in the EU until they receive appropriate evidence that the 
product is fit to be sold in the EU. 

c) 

Accreditation and CE-marking 

While  the  current  market  surveillance  rules  are  in  need  of  improvement,  the  EU  rules  for 
accreditation and the CE marking have shown to work reasonably well. This communication is 
accompanied by a report that highlights the importance of a well-run and reliable accreditation 
and  conformity  assessment  system  that  underpins  EU  policy  and  reinforces  trust  in  product 
safety. 

3.  UNITED IN DIVERSITY IN THE SINGLE MARKET FOR GOODS: MUTUAL RECOGNITION 

Where there are no common EU product rules, for example in the area of childcare articles or 
cash registers, the principle of mutual recognition should ensure that a product that is lawfully 
marketed in one Member State can also be sold in any other Member State — as long as it is 
safe  and  respects  the  public  interest.21  However,  too  often  businesses  today  cannot  rely  on 
mutual  recognition  to  access  markets  across  the  EU.  Especially  small  and  medium-sized 
enterprises  report  serious  difficulties  when  attempting  to  rely  on  mutual  recognition  to  sell 

21   These interests include for instance: public morality, public policy or public security; the protection of health and 
life of humans, animals or plants; the protection of national treasures possessing artistic, historic or archaeological 
value; or the protection of industrial and commercial property. 

6 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
their products in another Member State. Member States introduce additional requirements and 
duplication  of  testing,  thus  unnecessarily  increasing  red  tape  and  costs.  This  deprives 
economic operators from the efficiencies of scale of the single market, increases the prices for 
consumers and decreases trade to the detriment of all.22 

National authorities often lack trust in the judgment of authorities from other Member States, 
which  results  in  additional  requirements  and  duplication  of  testing,  thus  unnecessarily 
increasing red tape and costs. In addition, challenges via court decisions which deny or restrict 
market  access  are  lengthy  and  costly  for  operators.  Consequently,  businesses  are  facing 
unwarranted  costs  because  they  must  adapt  their  products  to  the  requirements  of  several 
national  markets  and  they  encounter  market  entry  delays  and  lost  opportunities.  This  hits 
small and medium-sized enterprises in particular.23  

This  must  change.  The  current  system  can  and  needs  to  be  improved.  The  Commission 
therefore  proposes  to  boost  and  clarify  the  existing  opportunities  and  to  facilitate  market 
access. 

A targeted and cooperative approach will also be followed with regard to the implementation 
of  the  Single  Market  Transparency  Directive  (EU)  No  2015/1535.  This  Directive  is  an 
important  tool  for  the  prevention  of  barriers  for  products  which  are  not  or  only  partially 
harmonised.  Member  States  are  obliged  to  notify  any  draft  legislation  concerning  these 
products so that barriers can be prevented ex-ante. In line with the results of the report on the 
implementation of the Directive, also published today, the Commission and the Member States 
need  to  solve  difficulties  at  an  earlier  stage,  focus  on  the  most  widespread  concerns  and  the 
most economically significant areas in Member States. 

a) 

Making it work 

The principle of mutual recognition for goods is derived from the Treaty on the Functioning of 
the European Union (TFEU)24. It has been repeatedly upheld and strengthened by the Court of 
Justice of the European Union. However, the current framework has not proven sufficient to 
ensure  consistent  and  effective  application.  Therefore,  it  is  proposed  to  replace  the  Mutual 
Recognition Regulation25 with a new Regulation that clarifies and simplifies the procedures 
to be followed by businesses and public administrations. 

Market access based on mutual recognition should only be denied if there is a legitimate and 
proportionate  public  interest  at  stake.  Today,  if  the  denial  is  illegitimate  or  disproportionate, 
the  only  way  to  challenge  the  decision  is  via  national  courts.  Such  processes  are  long  and 
costly,  and  do  not  meet  the  specific  needs  of  mutual  recognition.  Challenging  a  decision 
denying  market  access  can  cost  between  EUR 10 000  and  EUR 100 000  per  product  and  per 
market.  Businesses  state  that  this  is  the  biggest  obstacle  to  the  smooth  functioning  of  the 
mutual recognition system. In  many cases, rather than facing uncertain outcomes,  businesses 

22    See  also:  "The  Cost  of  Non-  Europe  in  the  Single  Market,  'Cecchini  Revisited',  An  overview  of  the  potential 
Market," 

economic 
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2014/510981 /EPRS STU(2014)510981 REVl_EN.pdf.   

completion 

European 

further 

Single 

gains 

from 

the 

of 

23    Idem. 
24    Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty. 
25   Regulation  (EC)  No  764/2008  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  9  July  2008  laying  down 
procedures relating to the application of certain national technical rules to products lawfully marketed in another 
Member State and repealing Decision No 3052/95/EC, OJ L 218, 13.8.2008, p. 21. 

7 

 
                                                 
end up adapting their products at extra cost — with a corresponding cost to consumers and loss 
to the efficiency of the European economy.  

The  new  mutual  recognition  proposal  introduces  a  problem  solving  procedure  to  provide 
effective  remedies  and  re-establish  trust  in  mutual  recognition.  First,  amicable  and  hands-on 
solutions  will  be  sought  by  making  use  of  the  existing  SOLVIT  mechanisms.  If  dialogue 
fails,  the  Commission  may  intervene  on  the  matter  by  issuing  an  Opinion,  and  where 
appropriate,  making  recommendations  to  assist  the  parties  in  solving  the  case.  In  this  way, 
businesses  and  exporting  Member  States,  instead  of  waiting  for  years  to  have  their  products 
and laws recognised by other Member States, will know what to expect in a matter of weeks or 
months.  In  addition,  the  Commission  will  be  able  to  strategically  implement  its  enforcement 
powers under Article 258 TFEU where systemic problems in specific sectors are identified.  

At present, businesses need to prove that their product is already on sale elsewhere in the EU if 
they  want  to  obtain  mutual  recognition.  The  range  of  evidence  required  by  the  authorities 
varies  from  a  simple  invoice  to  a  Member  State’s  declaration  that  the  product  has  been 
lawfully  marketed.  To  help  businesses  demonstrate  that  their  product  already  meets  the 
requirements  of  another  Member  State,  to  reassure  the  authorities  and  facilitate  cross-border 
cooperation  we  propose  a  new  simple  voluntary  ‘mutual  recognition  declaration’  to  be 
completed  by economic operators, which  will reduce administrative burden. 

Those  involved  in  mutual  recognition  do  not  communicate  sufficiently  well  with  each  other. 
This is often because powers and responsibilities for specific regulations are scattered, which 
complicates navigation around these — often very technical — matters. Therefore, we aim to 
reinforce product contact points as the communication channel for mutual recognition26. 
To  make  these  contact  points  easily  distinguishable,  a  common  visual  identity  could  be 
developed.  Cross-border  cooperation  between  contact  points  will  be  enhanced.  An  online 
platform will allow the authorities to connect with each other. 

b)  More cooperation and deeper trust 

Cooperation and trust are needed for mutual recognition to work well. They will help to build 
mutual understanding of the different national approaches and concerns. This will be fostered 
by  exchanges  of  officials  working  in  particularly  problematic  sectors  such  as  construction 
products. Equally important, the Commission will work more closely with specific countries 
and sectors to make mutual recognition work.  

The Commission will further assess the possible benefits for businesses and public authorities 
of further developing the existing product list for mutual recognition27. 

To  increase  national  authorities’  reliance  on  and  trust  of  the  mutual  recognition,  the 
Commission will also try to raise awareness of national authorities on how mutual recognition 
works via dedicated training efforts. This will be aimed mainly at national administrations (e.g. 
at  product  contact  points,  departments  responsible  for  problematic  product  areas,  national 
courts,  market  surveillance  authorities  and  SOLVIT  staff)  and  businesses.  A  targeted  ‘train 
the  trainer’  package  on  mutual  recognition  for  authorities  and  businesses  and  a  ‘mutual 

26  

‘Product  contact  points’  are  the  interface  between  business  and  national  administrations  and  the  place  to  find 
information on all applicable national rules.  

27  http://ec.europa.eu/growth/single-market/goods/free-movement-sectors/mutual-recognition/products-list_en.  

8 

 
                                                 
recognition  rule  book’  will  give  comprehensive  guidance  on  how  to  apply  mutual 
recognition. 

Finally,  Member  States  should  continue  to  explicitly  provide  for  mutual  recognition  in  their 
national technical rules, but they should do so in a comprehensible manner. The Commission 
therefore  encourages  Member  States  to  insert  a  clear  and  unambiguous  ‘single  market 
clause’28 in national technical regulations, and will develop specific guidance for its use:  

‘Goods lawfully marketed in another Member State of the European 
Union or in Turkey, or originating and lawfully marketed in an EFTA 
State that is a contracting party to the EEA agreement are presumed to 
be  compatible  with  this  measure.  The  application  of  this  measure  is 
subject to Regulation [reference].’ 

4.  CONCLUSION 

The single market for  products is one of the EU’s best assets.  It gives  the EU a competitive 
advantage in meeting the challenges of globalised trade flows and value chains. To meet these 
challenges, we need to ensure that the Single market delivers successfully by offering market 
opportunities for businesses and a high level of protection for everyone. All those involved — 
the general public, workers, consumers, businesses and authorities — need to be assured that 
they can  act and acquire safe products  in  a transparent and fair  environment  where  the rules 
apply in an equal manner to all. They need to be able to trust that products are safe and comply 
with the law. 

This Package is about making sure that we establish such a transparent and fair single market 
of safe products for everyone. Authorities and businesses will gain trust in mutual recognition 
as a principle that protects the public interest for all and opens up the Single Market. Improved 
compliance and enforcement will reinforce consumers' trust in the safety of products placed in 
the Single Market. This is even more important in an ever faster changing and more integrated 
world. 

Alongside  the  legislative  proposals  of  this  Package,  we  will  work  closely  with  competent 
authorities and stakeholders, taking the necessary steps to build this trust. This will ensure that 
as of today already, real impact and benefits for all can make a difference in the Single market 
for goods of tomorrow. 

28   This does not apply to products originating from EFTA States and Turkey that have been excluded from the EEA 

agreement or from the customs union with Turkey (e.g. fish and fish products). 

9 

 
 
 
                                                 
 
Appendix: 

Proposed timeline for ‘soft law’ measures 

2018: 

  Single market clause 
  Ongoing: Optimising the convergence of market surveillance IT 
tools (such as RAPEX and ICSMS) in compliance with the 
applicable legal basis.   

  Application of market surveillance indicators 
  Prepare awareness-raising campaign on mutual recognition 
  Elaborate train-the-trainer programme for mutual recognition 
  Cooperative approach to specific sectors under the Single Market 

Transparency Directive 

2019: 

  Mutual recognition rulebook 
  Exchange of officials 
  Examine further development of existing product list for mutual 

recognition 

10