COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION of the REFIT Review of Regulation EC 733/2002 establishing the “.eu” top-level domain (TLD) and Regulation EC 874/2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the .eu TLD Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the implementation and functioning of the .eu Top Level Domain name and repealing Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2004
Date: 2018-04-27
Institutions: Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology, European Commission
Subjects: European symbol, Internet address, digital single market, regulation of telecommunications, technical specification

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 27.4.2018  SWD(2018) 122 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE EVALUATION of the REFIT Review of Regulation EC 733/2002 establishing the “.eu” top-level domain (TLD) and Regulation EC 874/2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the .eu TLD Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the implementation and functioning of the .eu Top Level Domain name and repealing Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 and Commission Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 {COM(2018) 231 final} - {SEC(2018) 205 final} - {SWD(2018) 120 final} - {SWD(2018) 121 final}  
 
 
The .eu Top Level Domain (TLD) was established in 2006 by Regulation (EC) No 733/2002 
of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 April 2002 on the implementation of the 
.eu Top Level Domain and by Regulation (EC) No 874/2004 of 28 April 2004 laying down 
public  policy  rules,  concerning  the  implementation  and  functions  of  the  .eu  TLD  and  the 
principles  governing  the  registration  of  domain  names.  The  .eu  TLD  enables  European 
businesses and citizens to participate in e-commerce and to enhance participation in the online 
single market while contributing to the creation of a European Internet identity.  

In the context of the 2017 Commission Work Programme, the Commission has initiated the 
revision  and  modernisation  of  the  .eu  Regulations  under  the  Regulatory  Fitness  and 
Performance  Programme  (REFIT).  This  REFIT  exercise  assessed  whether  the  .eu  legal 
framework  still  serves  its  purpose.  Much  has  changed  in  the  market  and  regulatory 
environment  since  the  .eu  Regulations  were  first  adopted.  In  2002,  less  than  10%  of  the 
world’s  population  was  online;  by  2017,  almost  half  the  world  is  connected  to  the  Internet. 
Social  media  platforms  did  not  exist,  nor  did  smart  phones.  The  domain  name  market  was 
transformed  since  2013  with  the  introduction  of  more  than  1300  new  generic  Top  Level 
Domains (gTLDs) – providing EU consumers with extended choice and new business models 
into  the  domain  name  industry.  The  EU  regulatory  environment  has  also  evolved  to  take 
account of the digital revolution, with major legislative programmes and strategies such as the 
Digital  Single  Market,  and  the  recognition  that  security  risks  associated  with  the  online 
environment pose critical threats to economic and social well-being. 

In  conducting  this  evaluation  of  the  .eu  regulatory  intervention,  the  Commission  consulted 
with  relevant  stakeholders.    Efforts  were  made  to  bring  the  survey  to  the  attention  of 
stakeholders,  including  through  news  releases  and  Twitter.  The  stakeholder  survey  was 
supplemented  with  a  survey  of  European  ccTLD  registries,  written  contributions  from  a 
number  of  stakeholders,  and  proactive  1:1  consultations  by  the  Commission  with  key 
stakeholders including the current .eu Registry. 

To  achieve  the  objective  of  ensuring  that  the  Regulations  continue  their  benefits  under 
changed circumstances, the evaluation addressed five key questions: 

Effectiveness:  how  successful  has  the  EU  intervention  been  in  achieving  or  progressing 
towards its objectives? The .eu Regulations have been efficient in making .eu domains widely 
available throughout the EU, at a low cost to consumers. While the .eu Regulations have been 
effective in supporting ecommerce and the internal market, there are signs of relative decline 
in the .eu TLD’s performance. 

Efficiency:  what  is  the  relationship  between  the  resources  used  by  the  intervention  and  the 
changes  generated  by  it?  The  .eu  Regulations  are  causing  inefficiency  which  places  the  .eu 
TLD at a competitive disadvantage in the market, reducing the possible benefits in terms of 
supporting ecommerce or the single market.  

Relevance:  what  is  the  relationship  between  the  needs  and  problems  in  society  and  the 
objective of the intervention, and how do they correspond to the wider EU policy objectives 
and priorities? The objectives of the .eu Regulations continue to be relevant to EU citizens, as 
indicated  in  the  high  level  of  uptake,  active  usage,  and  renewal  of  .eu  domains  by  business 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
 
and institutions throughout the EU. However, the .eu Regulations are over-complex, and are 
no longer in step with international best practices.  

Coherence: an analysis of the ‘internal’– and 'external’ coherence of the intervention. There 
are  numerous  indicators  that  the  intervention  is  no  longer  fully  coherent:  an  over-rigid 
regulatory  burden  places  the  .eu  Registry  at  a  competitive  disadvantage  amid  toughening 
market  conditions;  the  .eu  Regulations  do  not  reflect  subsequent  EU  priorities  such  as  the 
Digital  Single  Market;  they  do  not  reflect  international  best  practices  in  multi-stakeholder 
governance. 

EU added value: the .eu domain has by definition a cross-border dimension. The existence of 
a specific domain name for the European Union under a very clear and identifiable common 
label is an important and valuable building block for a European online identity. This section 
therefore gives a comprehensive analysis of the importance of EU action. 

The original .eu Regulations were pivotal in enabling the creation of a dedicated namespace 
for  the  European  Union,  but  are  no  longer  effective,  efficient,  or  coherent  in  today’s  fast-
changing technological market environment.   

The .eu TLD, first launched in 2006 in accordance with the .eu Regulations, is a success. The 
operation of the .eu TLD is self-funded, and results in the .eu Registry’s surplus being paid 
over to the EU institutions each year. In addition to these direct financial contributions, the .eu 
Registry undertakes public benefit activities which might otherwise have to be funded by the 
EU taxpayer. Despite being a late-comer to the European TLD market, the .eu Registry has 
managed to establish a healthy market share throughout the EU and EEA, building excellent 
relationships with its channel to market of 700 registrars. Its rate of renewal and growth are in 
line with industry trends in the EU.   

In conclusion, the overall objectives behind the original intervention remain relevant – the .eu 
domain has become established as a contributor to e-commerce, the single market and the EU 
identity. Meanwhile, the external environment has changed: any technological industry is fast 
moving and to survive, market players need to be flexible and responsive.  The market is still 
feeling the impact of a market shock from the introduction of 1,300 new domains, combined 
with slowing rates of growth across the domain market in the EU. These factors are causing 
an  evolution  in  the  business  models  of  registries  and  practices.    To  fulfil  its  potential  as  a 
trusted,  innovative  namespace  for  the  European  Union,  the  .eu  TLD  must  be  enabled  to 
compete on an equal footing in the market, while supporting governance and operations that 
adhere to the highest standards, EU values and international best practices. 

2