COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors
Date: 2018-04-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, European Commission
Subjects: approximation of laws, chemical product, civil defence, dangerous substance, explosive, illicit trade, market approval, marketing standard, terrorism, trade restriction

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Strasbourg, 17.4.2018  SWD(2018) 105 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council  on the marketing and use of explosives precursors, amending Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 on the marketing and use of explosives precursors  {COM(2018) 209 final} - {SWD(2018) 104 final}  
 
 
Executive Summary Sheet 

Impact  assessment  accompanying  the  proposal  for  a  Regulation  on  the  marketing  and  use  of  explosives 
precursors, amending Annex XVII to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 and repealing Regulation (EU) No 98/2013 
of the European Parliament and of the Council on the marketing and use of explosives precursors 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? Maximum 11 lines 
Regulation 98/2013 regulates the marketing and use of explosives precursors (i.e. chemical substances that can 
be misused to manufacture homemade explosives (HMEs)). Whilst the Regulation has reduced the availability of 
explosives precursors to members of the general public and improved the reporting of suspicious transactions, 
the  evaluation  showed  that  the  main  objectives  have  only  been  partially  reached.  Two  important  problems 
remain. First, explosives precursors continue to be misused for the manufacturing of HMEs, which threatens EU 
citizens’ security. Secondly, economic operators still face unnecessary obstacles to the free movement of these 
substances in the internal market. These problems are the result of: (i) an inadequate restriction level, (ii) new 
and  evolving  threats,  (iii)  insufficient  awareness  along  the  supply  chain,  (iv)  lack  of  effective  application  and 
enforcement of existing controls, (v) fragmentation of the restriction and control system, and (vi) lack of clarity in 
the Regulation. Without EU intervention, the problems are expected to persist.  

What is this initiative expected to achieve? Maximum 8 lines 
By  further  restricting  access  to  certain  explosives  precursors  and  strengthening  controls,  aligning  restrictions 
with  the  evolving  threat,  increasing  enforcement  by  competent  authorities,  and  improving  the  transmission  of 
information along the supply chain, the initiative aims to prevent the misuse of explosives precursors and ensure 
a high level of security. The functioning of the internal market will be strengthened by facilitating intra-EU trade 
and  preventing  the  distortion  of  competition,  as  well  as  through  clarification  of  the  Regulation  and  uniform 
application of the rules.  

What is the value added of action at the EU level? Maximum 7 lines  
Because of the transnational nature of the problems, EU action is needed. Attacks with HMEs have taken place 
in  various  Member  States  and  the  threat  remains  high.  If  terrorists  obtain  precursors  in  Member  States  with 
fewer  restrictions/lower  controls,  they  can  use  them  to  commit  attacks  anywhere.  This  practice  can  only  be 
prevented if Member States harmonise their control systems and enforce the rules uniformly. The barriers and 
uncertainties  faced  by  economic  operators  are  the  result  of  fragmented  restriction  and  control  systems  and  a 
lack  of  clarity  in  the  Regulation.  These  issues  can  only  be  solved  by  harmonising  Member  States’  laws  and 
clarifying the Regulations’ provisions, which can only be done at EU level.   

B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? Maximum 14 lines  
The following policy options have been considered:  
•  Policy  option  0  (Baseline)  –  The  Commission,  in  consultation  with  the  Standing  Committee  on  Precursors 
(SCP), will continue to monitor and facilitate the application of the Regulation; 
• Policy Option 1 (Non legislative) – Reinforce the application of the Regulation with non-legislative measures; 
• Policy Option 2 (Legislative – revision of the existing framework) – Increase the effectiveness and efficiency of 
the restrictions, enforcement by public authorities, and compliance by the supply chain; 
• Policy Option 3 (Legislative – overhaul of the current framework) – Introduce further controls along the supply 
chain. 

Having  analysed  and  compared  the  different  options,  policy  option  2  was  identified  as  the  preferred  policy 
option.  This  option  would  address  both  the  identified  problems  and  contribute  to  the  identified  general  and 
specific objectives. Moreover, the proposed measures would strengthen and clarify the existing legal framework, 
without touching upon the essential characteristics. As the existing Regulation has at least partially reached its 
main objectives, a complete overhaul seems unnecessary.  

Who supports which option? Maximum 7 lines  

Policy  option  2  is  the  preferred  policy  option  of  all  consulted  stakeholder  groups  (i.e.  manufacturers,  retailers, 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
members of the general public, public authorities). Some measures receive more support from some stakeholder 
groups  than  others,  but  overall  stakeholders  agree.  Policy  option  2  could  be  combined  with  certain  non-
legislative measures from policy option 1. Policy option 1 alone is viewed as insufficient, whereas policy option 3 
is generally considered disproportionate and too costly to implement.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines                                       
Policy option 2 meets the general objectives of the initiative to a large extent and would contribute equally to all 
the security-oriented and internal  market-related specific objectives. The social impacts  of the proposed policy 
measures would be positive, particularly with regard to public health and new employment opportunities in the 
research and development sector due to a need for alternative products and products with lower concentrations 
of restricted substances. Whereas the overall economic impact would be negative, policy option 2 would have a 
positive  impact  on  competition  and  would  create  a  more  level  playing  field  for  manufacturers.  No  positive 
environmental impacts are expected.  

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines                                       
Policy  option  2  would  have  would  have  slightly  negative  economic  impact.  The  main  groups  affected  are 
consumers  (reduced  product  choice)  and  producers  (decreased  consumption  and  demand  of  restricted 
products).  Given  the  size  of  the  market  for  members  of  the  general  public,  there  would  not  be  a  significant 
impact  on  the  turnover  of  the  chemical  sector  as  a  whole.  The  precise  environmental  impacts  are  difficult  to 
estimate, but a potential shift to less environmental-friendly substances and use of greater quantities of the same 
product  in  lower  concentrations  would  have  a  negative  impact  on  the  environment.  If  consumers  use  larger 
quantities,  this  would  also  entail  increased  packaging  and  transport.  In  terms  of  social  impacts,  the  proposed 
measures would negatively affect certain non-professional consumers of explosives precursors, who use these 
substances for hobbies or household activities. The exact impact will depend on the substance concerned and 
the alternatives available.  

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? Maximum 8 lines 

The  proposed  measures  will  have  a  stronger  impact  on  companies  specialising  in  the  supply  of  (highly 
concentrated) restricted explosives precursors in comparison to enterprises selling a boarder range of products, 
including  alternative  substances.  The  measures  are  expected  to  have  a  stronger  impact  on  SMEs  and  micro-
enterprises, which often have smaller sales volumes and might not have the capacity to diversity their product 
offer. Nevertheless, the measures will have to be applied fully to ensure a high level of security.  

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? Maximum 4 lines 
Whilst the preferred policy option would increase the costs and administrative burden of national authorities, the 
proposed measures would not have significant impacts on national budgets and administrations.  

Will there be other significant impacts? Max 6 lines  
Policy  option  2  would  have  a  marginal  impact  on  fundamental  rights.  The  proposed  measures  would  have 
slightly negative impacts on the freedom to conduct a business and the right to the protection of personal data.  

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed? Maximum 4 lines  
Two  years  after  the  deadline  for  implementation,  the  Commission  will  submit  a  report  to  the  European 
Parliament  and  the  Council  to  assess  the  initiative’s  state  of  play.  A  formal  evaluation  of  the  effectiveness, 
efficiency,  relevance,  coherence  and  EU  added  value  of  the  framework  will  be  carried  out  six  years  after  the 
deadline for implementation. 

2