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 establishing a European Maritime Single Window environment and repealing Directive 2010/65/EU
Date: 2018-05-17
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, administrative cooperation, administrative formalities, common ports policy, exchange of information, harbour installation, harmonisation of standards, maritime safety, maritime transport, simplification of formalities

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 17.5.2018  SWD(2018) 182 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 establishing a European Maritime Single Window environment and repealing Directive 2010/65/EU {COM(2018) 278 final} - {SEC(2018) 230 final} - {SWD(2018) 181 final}  
 
 
Impact assessment on a Proposal for a European Maritime Single Window Environment 

Executive Summary Sheet 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed?  
The reporting environment for ships is highly inefficient today, due to non-harmonisation, reporting requested via 
several entry points and low levels of sharing of submitted data (shipping operators being frequently requested 
to submit the same data to several authorities). Taken together, reporting has therefore become a burdensome 
task for shipping operators. Around 4.6 million staff hours are spent on reporting every year in the EU with 
high potential for administrative burden reduction. 

What is this initiative expected to achieve?  
The  proposal  aims  to  establish  a  truly  harmonised,  simplified  and  comprehensive  reporting  environment.  This 
should strengthen the single market, improve competitiveness of maritime transport, and contribute to the digital 
multimodal transport chain. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level?  
To  succeed  in  creating  a  harmonised  reporting  environment,  legal  action  at  EU-level  is  necessary.  Policies 
developed and implemented on international or national level are unlikely to produce harmonisation in this field.  

B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? 
The options considered are:  
A)  Binding  technical  specifications  for  achieving  harmonised  reporting  gateways  (front-ends)  to  the  National 
Single Windows (NSWs) either with comprehensive information scope (option A1) or limited information scope 
(option A2); 
B)  Common  IT  solution  for  a  reporting  gateway  front-end  component  in  all  NSWs  with  comprehensive  (option 
B1) or limited (option B2) information scope; 
C) A central Maritime Single Window reporting gateway established at EU-level, with comprehensive (option C1) 
or limited (option C2) information scope. 
Based on stakeholder acceptance, effectiveness, cost-efficiency, risks and coherence, the proposed preferred 
option is B1. 

Who supports which option? 
The  initiative  has  strong  support  from  the  main  stakeholder  groups.  Shipping  companies  and  ship  agents 
generally  prefer  a  comprehensive  scope  and  centralised  solution  as  guarantee  for  harmonisation.  Member 
States mostly favour the comprehensive scope and a decentralised solution (harmonising front-end of NSWs). 

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 
The main benefit is the significant reduction in administrative burden for shipping operators: saving 22-25 million 
staff hours in 2020-2030 to a value of EUR 625-720 million. The reduced burden and improved efficiency will 
increase  competitiveness  of  maritime  transport,  with  positive  impact  on  jobs,  growth  and  reduced  CO2 
emissions. Other benefits expected are efficiency gains (multimodal) from better use of data in ports; increased 
job satisfaction and higher attractiveness of the profession; safety and security gains.  

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? 
The main costs are for development and adaptation of software; and annual operational costs including regular 
updates of the software. The total estimated costs for 2020-2030 are EUR 29.4 million (MS + COM). 

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

The  reduced  administrative  burden  and  simplified  reporting  will  release  staff  resources,  bringing  added  value 
especially to SMEs.  

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? 

1 

 
 
 
 
The  estimated  average  cost  per  Member  State  is  EUR  1.15  million  for  2020-2030.  This  includes  one-off 
investments and annual costs.  

Will there be other significant impacts? 
No  

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed? 
An evaluation of impacts should be initiated 5 years after implementation. Regular updates will take place in line 
with legal and technical developments. 

2