COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a COUNCIL DIRECTIVE establishing an EU Emergency Travel Document and repealing Decision 96/409/CFSP
Date: 2018-05-31
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: EU national, European passport, consulate, diplomatic protection, free movement of persons, third country

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 31.5.2018  SWD(2018) 272 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a   COUNCIL DIRECTIVE establishing an EU Emergency Travel Document and repealing Decision 96/409/CFSP {COM(2018) 358 final} - {SEC(2018) 263 final} - {SWD(2018) 273 final}  
 
 
Proposal  for  a  Council  Directive  establishing  an  EU  Emergency  Travel  Document  and  repealing 
Decision 96/409/CFSP 

Executive Summary Sheet 

A. Need for action 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? Maximum 11 lines 

The  EU  Emergency  Travel  Document  (EU  ETD)  is  the  most  common  type  of  consular  assistance  provided  to 
unrepresented EU citizens in distress in third countries. Although not issued in great numbers, the help an EU 
ETD provides to citizens is crucial for their return home and it represents a visible demonstration of the value of 
EU  citizenship  and  solidarity  between  Member  States. Twenty  years after  the  introduction  of  the  EU  ETD,  the 
following problems with its implementation have been identified:   

 
 

a lack of enforceability of the pre-Lisbon CFSP Decision 96/409/CFSP;  
legal  uncertainty  due  to  discrepancies  between  the  Decision  and  the  more  recent  Consular  Protection 
Directive; 

  EU ETD security features are outdated and negatively impact its use and acceptance; 
  coordination  and  cooperation  among  Member  States  could  be  improved  in  order  to  facilitate  citizens’ 

access to the EU ETD. 

What is this initiative expected to achieve? Maximum 8 lines 

General objectives 

o  Strengthen EU citizenship by facilitating citizens’ right to consular protection abroad. 
o 

Improve security within the EU and its borders by improving the security features of the document. 

Specific objectives 

Improve document security in line with trends and existing policies on improving security. 

  Make EU ETD legislation enforceable and adapt it to Consular Protection Directive. 
 
  Simplify the issuing of EU ETDs for citizens and improve cooperation between the Member States. 
 

Improve acceptance of EU ETDs. 

What is the added value of action at EU level (subsidiarity) Maximum 7 lines 

A more secure EU ETD would contribute to the security of the Union by addressing the ‘weak link’ among travel 
documents that allow entry into the EU. It would also tackle fragmentation in the use of EU ETDs and increase 
recognition by third countries. This would in turn reduce the risk of citizens being denied access to aircraft or 
transit  through  third  countries,  allowing  them  to  more  easily  return  home.  EU  action  under  the  Lisbon  Treaty 
would allow for effective monitoring of implementation and facilitate enforcement of this EU citizenship right. 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? Maximum 14 lines 
Three principal policy options have been considered: 

B. Solutions 

  Policy Option 1: Status quo 
  Policy Option 2: New legislation – EU ETD with enhanced security features 
  Policy Option 3: New legislation – EU ETD with biometric chip 

Discarded options: 

  Soft measures (some soft measures are included in the preferred option) 
  Revoking the EU ETD Decision 
  Compulsory EU ETD for all citizens 

The preferred option is Option 2:  New legislation – EU ETD with enhanced security features. 

Who supports which option? Maximum 7 lines 
The  Council  and  the  European  Parliament  have  expressed  their  wish  to  keep  the  common  EU  ETD  and  see  it 
modernised,  with  focus  given  to  improving  its  security  features.  Consultations  with  EU  Member  States  have 
shown  that  the  vast  majority  of  them  would  see  Option  3  (biometric  chip)  as  too  costly  and  that  they  would 

1 

 
 
 
prefer  Option  2  (enhanced  security  features).  For  third  countries,  Option  2  would  be  sufficient  for  the  most 
frequent case of return journeys home. The Commission has also expressed its wish to improve the document’s 
security and would support Option 2. While citizens were not asked about specific security features, those who 
replied overwhelmingly supported a common format and improvements to the document’s acceptance.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines 

The preferred option will bring benefits in many areas, though these are not easily quantifiable. 

EU citizens would be able to rely on obtaining an EU ETD from all Member States’ consulates, in line with the 
current  EU acquis  on  citizens’  rights,  in  particular  the  Consular  Protection  Directive.  They  would  thus  benefit 
from  a  legal right  to an  EU  ETD  in  more  situations  than  is  envisaged  under  the  current EU  ETD  Decision  and 
from clearer issuing procedures and deadlines. 

Member States and the EU would benefit from more secure borders, due to the improved security features of 
the new EU ETD. The new document would also be more widely accepted and easier to process at the borders. 
Wider recognition would lead to financial savings for unrepresented citizens from reduced hassle costs and other 
savings, e.g. on hotel stays and alternative travel arrangements. The more secure EU ETD format, which will be 
multilingual and can be produced at EU-level, would also represent a cost-efficient alternative for Member States 
who  are  considering  replacing  outdated  national  ETDs.  Finally,  the  Commission  would  be  able  to  enforce  the 
new EU ETD legislation and monitor its implementation. 

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines 

The cost of the new document is expected to remain low, as the preferred option repurposes existing equipment 
used for visas, which is already available in EU Member States’ consulates and which consular staff are trained 
to use. The need for any additional training for the EU ETD is thus expected to remain low. 
The new EU ETD, including the ETD sticker, is expected to cost around 8 euros per document. Given that the 
number of ETDs issued by Member States to unrepresented citizens is estimated at around 1000 per year, the 
total financial impact is expected to be low. Whether the production costs for the new document will be passed 
on  to  citizens  will  depend  on  Member  States’  administrations.  However,  given  the  low  cost  of  production,  the 
potential financial impact of any increase is expected to remain low.  

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? Maximum 8 lines 
Some benefits from an improved EU ETD are expected to accrue to businesses, as employees may be able to 
return  to  work  more  quickly  if  the  EU  ETD  is  more  widely  accepted  and  more  quickly  issued.  Increased 
acceptance would also reduce airline carriers’ costs related to denial of boarding of citizens travelling on an EU 
ETD.  

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? Maximum 4 lines 

No  significant  impacts  are envisaged  given  the  small  numbers  of EU  ETDs  issued,  the  low  cost  of  production 
and low training needs. 

Will there be other significant impacts? Max 6 lines  

No other significant impacts are expected. 

D. Follow up 

When will the policy be reviewed? Maximum 4 lines  
In  addition  to  regular  monitoring  by  the  Member  States,  it  is  proposed  that  the  Commission  submit  an 
implementation report to the European Parliament and the Council five years after the entry into application of 
the legislative measures.  

2