COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EX-ANTE EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the 'Fiscalis' programme for cooperation in the field of taxation
Date: 2018-06-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: EU programme, European tax cooperation, administrative cooperation, cross-border cooperation, single market, tax authorities, tax avoidance, tax law, tax offence

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 8.6.2018  SWD(2018) 323 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EX-ANTE EVALUATION Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the 'Fiscalis' programme for cooperation in the field of taxation {COM(2018) 443 final} - {SWD(2018) 324 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

PROBLEM STATEMENT AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT ................................................................. 3 

EU ADDED VALUE ............................................................................................................................ 9 

THE OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 12 

PREFERRED POLICY OPTIONS ..................................................................................................... 12 

4.1.  Preferred option description ............................................................................ 12 
4.2.  Subsidiarity, proportionality and intended legal basis .................................... 18 

5.  DELIVERY MECHANISMS ............................................................................................................. 19 

5.1.  Overall delivery mechanisms .......................................................................... 19 
5.2.  Synergies & complementarities with other EU action programmes and 

funds ................................................................................................................ 20 
5.3.  Other changes to delivery mechanisms ........................................................... 25 

6.  MONITORING AND EVALUATION .............................................................................................. 25 

6.1.  Final evaluation Fiscalis 2013 ......................................................................... 25 
6.2.  Monitoring Fiscalis 2020 ................................................................................. 25 
6.3.  Mid-term evaluation of Fiscalis 2020 .............................................................. 26 
6.4.  Ex-ante evaluation study ................................................................................. 26 
6.5.  Monitoring strategy of the performance .......................................................... 27 
Data for the monitoring ........................................................................................ 28 
6.5.1. 

6.5.2. 

Fiscalis programme core indicators ....................................................................... 28 

ANNEX 1: INTERVENTION OVERVIEW FOR EU TAX POLICY ........................................................ 30 

1 

 
Glossary 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

C2020 

CCN-CSI 

DAC 

ECJ 

eForms 

EMCS 

EPPO 

ESTAT 

F2020 

Fiscalis 

FTA 

FTT 

G20 

IOTA 

ISF 

MFF 

Customs 2020 Programme 

Common Communication Network/Common System Interface 

Council Directive 2011/16/EU on Administrative Cooperation in the field of 
taxation and repealing Directive 77/799/EEC of 15.02.2011 ( OJ L 64/1 of 
11.3.2011) and its amendments  

European Court of Justice 

Electronic forms for exchange of information between tax competent authorities 
under administrative cooperation 

Excise Movement and Control System 

European Public Prosecutor's Office 

Eurostat 

Fiscalis 2020 Programme 

The spending programme aimed at supporting the operation of tax systems 

OECD's Forum on Tax Administration 

Financial Transaction Tax 

Group of Twenty 

The Intra-European Organisation of Tax Administrations 

The Internal Security Fund 

Multi-annual Financial Framework 

MOSS scheme 

The Mini One-Stop-Shop 

OLAF 

OSS 

OECD 

PMF 

SME 

SMP 

The European Anti-Fraud Office 

One-Stop-Shop 

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 

Performance Management Framework 

Small and Medium-sized enterprise 

Single Market Programme 

TAXUD 

Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union 

TFEU 

TNA 

VAT 

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

Transaction Network Analysis 

Value-added tax 

2 

 
 
 
 
 
1.  PROBLEM STATEMENT AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT 

On  2  May  2018,  the  European  Commission  adopted  its  proposals  for  a  new 
Multiannual  Financial  Framework  (MFF)  for  2021-2027.  Under  these  proposals, 
the  Fiscalis  programme  will  have  a  budget  of  EUR 270  million  (in  current  prices) 
over this period. This ex-ante evaluation reflects the decisions of the MFF proposals 
and  focuses  on  the  changes  and  policy  choices,  which  are  specific  to  this 
programme.  

EU tax policy 

EU  tax  policy  supports  revenue  collection  for  the  EU  and  Member  States'  budgets. 
While initially it focussed on putting in place harmonising legislation mainly for indirect 
taxes,  it  has  over  the  years  widened  its  focus  more  on  coordination  on  tax  matters 
amongst  Member  States  and  the  fight  against  tax  fraud,  tax  evasion  and  tax 
avoidance.  EU  tax  policy  is  a  key  element  for  ensuring  the  proper  functioning  of  the 
single  market  including  by  avoiding  distortions  of  competition  through  taxation.  This 
policy  has  two  branches:  indirect  and  direct  taxation.  Both  are  addressed  in  the  EU 
cooperation  programme  Fiscalis,  which  provides 
funding  and 
implementation mechanisms for the EU's tax policy agenda.  

the  necessary 

Designed in 1993 purely as a training and exchange programme for tax officials, Fiscalis 
evolved over time to become a fully-fledged tax policy framework that actively fulfils 
an important element of the policy itself, namely  by enabling and boosting cooperation 
and  capacity  building  for  all  EU  tax  administrations.  The  various  Fiscalis  programmes 
have clearly been a game changer of the taxation landscape over the last 20 years and EU 
action  in  taxation  relies  to  a  large  extent  on  the  Fiscalis  programme,  which  offers  a 
flexible and simple framework for enabling tax cooperation with a substantial EU added 
value and impact despite its limited size.  

On  top  of  general  tax  provisions  (Article  110  –  112  TFEU)  which  aim  at  avoiding 
protectionism measures, there are additional Treaty provisions applicable to each branch: 

-  EU  regulatory  intervention  aiming  at  harmonising  taxes  is  limited  by  the  Treaties 
(Article 113 TFEU) to the area of indirect taxation (VAT and excise duties). In this 
domain – the largest source of revenue for national budgets – the Union developed a 
comprehensive set of rules as a fundament of the establishment and functioning of the 
single market and the avoidance of distortion of competition. The EU's intervention 
under  the  programme  aims  primarily  at  helping  Member  States  to  apply  the  rules 
correctly,  to  implement  the  EU  legislation  through  common  electronic  systems, 
facilitate compliance with  the help of databases and  to  adapt the implementation  of 
these rules to a constantly changing political and technological environment. 

- 

In the field of direct taxation (personal income tax and corporate tax), the Treaties 
confer no specific powers to the EU. The direct tax landscape is thus characterised by 
the  juxtaposition  of  different  tax  systems.  The  EU  can  rely  only  on  the  general  tax 
provisions  (Articles  110  –  112  TFEU)  and  those  relating  to  the  single  market 
(Articles  114-115  TFEU)  to  provide  overall  tax  governance  and  adopt  relevant  EU 
legislation. Given the global and trans-European nature of the challenges for Member 
States to protect their tax bases, the EU's intervention under the programme focusses 
on  setting  and  applying  common  principles  as  well  as  on  strengthening  the 
operational cooperation and the exchange of information and data between Member 

3 

 
States. Here again, Fiscalis is crucial in providing support for the implementation of 
the relevant EU legislation with cooperation activities and electronic systems. 

Recent trends  

The  FISCALIS  programme  must  be  adapted  in  order  to  take  into  account  the  needs  of 
recent developments in tax policy.  

Indeed,  over  the  recent  years,  the  political  agenda  has  been  increasingly  influenced  by 
tax  competition  between  countries  and  tax  avoidance  practices  by  companies.  Those 
phenomena goes well beyond Member States’ borders and involve also third countries. A 
series of tax scandals created expectations for the Union to take action to fight tax fraud, 
evasion  and  avoidance  as  they  tax  fraud  evasion  and  avoidance  as  they  distort 
competition,  jeopardise  the  functioning  of  the  single  market  and  undermine  social 
fairness.  

To  keep  pace  with  those  develoments,  the  number  of  initiatives  tabled  by  the 
Commission over the recent years increased tremendously (e.g. 4 amendments to DAC 
in only 3 years). Over the last 2-3 years, the tax agenda pursued at Union level therefore 
included many major initiatives with both communications announcing ambitious action 
plans  and  proposals  to  the  legislators  setting  out  concrete  steps  to  enhance  the 
functioning of taxation systems in the single market: DACs, VAT definitive regime, fair 
taxation.  The  full  implementation  and  application  of  the  recently  adopted  legislation  of 
this  agenda  is  still  on-going  and  will  require  a  coordinated  EU  approach.  The  Union 
equally should demonstrate that it is proactive and takes account of the (limited) capacity 
of Member States to take the necessary actions in isolation. 

Another  recent  development  which  must  be  taken  into  account  for  the  purposes  of 
designing the future Fiscalis programme is the adoption by the Commission on 21 March 
2018 of the proposals for the fair taxation of the digital economy1. One of the proposals 
concerns the introduction of a harmonised system of a digital services tax (DST)2, which 
is foreseen as an interim indirect tax. Subject to Council negotiations, the proposal for a 
Directive  on  the  DST  lays  down  a  One-Stop-Shop  mechanism  for  the  declaration  and 
payment  of  the  new  tax,  which  will  require  the  administrative  cooperation  among 
Member States.  

As  to  excise  duties,  recent  or  upcoming  developments  demonstrate  that  the  Fiscalis 
programme can bring significant help. Since 2010, the automation of the monitoring3 of 
cross-border  movements  of  excise  goods  under  duty  suspension  has  been  seen  by 
Member States and economic operators as an enormous improvement on its paper-based 
predecessor. However, some issues were identified in an evaluation performed in 2015: 
lack  of  synchronisation  between  excise  and  customs  procedures,  still  paper-based 
monitoring of the movements of excise goods released for consumption and business-to-
consumer  sales  requiring  a  local  tax  representative.  The  latter  two  were  deemed  very 
burdensome and especially detrimental to SMEs. Moreover, excise duty can also be seen 

1  

2  
3  

COM(2018) 147 final, C(2018) 1650 final, and COM(2018) 148 final. See also the impact assessment 
accompanying the proposals SWD(2018) 81 final. The proposals are presented in the Commission 
Communication "Time to establish a modern, fair and efficient taxation standard for the digital economy” 
COM(2018) 146 final 
COM(2018) 148 final 
Supported by the EMCS trans-European IT system 

4 

 
                                                            
as  a  tool  to  fight  climate  change  (e.g.  polluting  energy  products)  or  to  reduce  the 
consumption of potentially harmful new products (e.g. electronic cigarettes). 

In addition, tax administrations are also faced with digitalisation, new economic models 
such as e-commerce and sharing economy on one hand and resource cuts on the other 
hand. These trends raise new challenges for the functioning and performance of national 
tax administrations. They call for better and innovative ways to carry out their core tasks, 
i.e.  collecting  taxes  which  directly  and  feed  the  national  and  indirectly  the  Union 
budgets.  

Beyond  the  political  ambition  of  the  Commission,  Member  States  as  well  are  insisting 
more and more on the need for support to national administrations, demonstrating the 
need for more and better - operational - cooperation between Member States to face the 
challenges on the European and international scene. 

Future  work  on  all  these  actions  will  be  guided  by  the  need  to  reduce  the  costs  and 
complexity of tax systems for both the administrations and the taxpayers and economic 
operators. For administrations, the development and full use of automated tools and risk 
management techniques would release human and budgetary resources to concentrate on 
achieving  targeted  objectives.  For  taxpayers  and  economic  operators,  decreasing  costs 
and complexity would encourage better tax compliance and facilitate trade.  

The Union should also promote more joint activities between direct and indirect taxes 
and between taxation and customs by enhancing communication and promoting a more 
systematic  sharing  of  best  practices  and  tools,  where  appropriate.  This  can  help  to 
improve  the  efficiency  of  audits  and  controls  and  reduce  the  burden  on  taxpayers  and 
economic operators.  

If the Union wants to achieve all – or even any – of these current and future goals, it 
must  act  decisively  and  continue  what  it  has  started:  it  should  provide  the 
appropriate framework and means to deliver on its ambitious tax agenda and well-
founded initiatives. The programme should thus be conceived and designed in such 
a  way  as  to  provide  an  enhanced  level  of  administrative  cooperation  compared  to 
the  past  and  administrative  agility  to  meet  these  –  identified  or  unknown  – 
evolutions, while also providing a consistent framework to monitor activities. 

Finally,  EU  tax  policy  has  been  recently  strongly  influenced  by  the  international 
context,  and  in  particularly  by  the  negotiations  at  G20  and  OECD  level.  In  this  fast-
moving  legal  and  international  environment,  there  is  a  momentum  (notably  at  OECD 
level) to deepen the cooperation on standard setting actions and allow to define not only 
the legal but also the IT frame that will govern tax policy in the coming years. Therefore, 
it appears that it would be in the interest of the Member States to influence the process by 
sharing  IT  elements  with  third  parties  to  benefit  from  streamlining  of  the  international 
framework and limiting the IT investments.  

Although  relatively  straightforward  with  Member  States,  international  cooperation 
with  third  countries  or  international  organisations  has  specific  constraints4,  in 
particular when the Fiscalis 2020 programme is involved. These constraints are both of a 
legal and of a financial nature. 

4  

See all details in the note "Provision of services and/or software to international entities" sent to the ITSC in 
advance of its 90th meeting: Ares(2016)2800271 

5 

 
 
                                                            
-  On  the  legal  side,  assuming  that  cooperation  with  third  countries  or  international 
organisations  can  occur  under  specific  agreements  (such  as  double  tax  treaties)  and 
that legislation is in place at EU level, an important constraint identified relates to the 
requirement of an international agreement concluded in accordance with Article 218 
TFUE between the Union and each third country that should make use of European 
electronic  systems  running  under  Fiscalis.  As  the  procedure  of  Article  218  TFUE 
requires time to be completed, it does not allow the UE to be reactive enough and to 
position itself as a major partner in the implementation of electronic systems with a 
worldwide 
is  a  multiplication  and 
internationalisation  of  interactions  with  third  country  administrations  in  terms  of  IT 
solutions,  the existing EU solutions would ideally have  to  be globalised if we want 
the  European  IT  solutions  to  be  kept  and  avoid  Member  States  from  having  to 
multiply  their  electronic  systems.  The  legal  constraints  which  are  very  burdensome 
and  time-consuming  would  need  to  be  overcome  in  the  near  future.  The  aspects 
linked  to  intellectual  property  rights  would  also  have  to  be  considered,  notably 
concerning  the  ownership  and  the  possible  restrictions  on  the  use  of  European 
electronic systems by third parties. 

In  a  context  where 

impact. 

there 

-  On the financial side, the questions arises if third countries/parties would have to pay 
for  getting IT  solutions  which  have been  developed  under  Fiscalis,  knowing  that  in 
some cases  the sharing of assets  will create  none  or  only  marginal  additional costs. 
These  impacts  on  the  Fiscalis  budget  would  have  to  be  evaluated  in  respect  to  its 
limited  envelope  and  focus  on  supporting  Member  States.  Fiscalis  supports  the 
current European electronic systems, but has a limited budgetary envelope until 2020 
(about 22M€ per year for IT capacity building) which does not guarantee that urgent 
needs  stemming  from  new  legislation  can  be  taken  into  account.  For  instance,  if 
progress in Council is swift on the recent Digital Services Tax (DST) proposal (2019 
at the latest) and Member States agree to introduce a legal base for intervention at EU 
level, a OSS relatively limited in scope could be subject to financing through Fiscalis. 

Overcoming  these  legal  and  budgetary  constraints  is  nevertheless  very  important  if  the 
EU wants to be a key player in the global tax context where more and more tax issues 
call for global solutions. The exportability of the IT solutions that Fiscalis helps putting 
in  place  is  crucial  for  their  sustainability.  If  the  EU  cannot  export  its  IT  solutions,  the 
consequence will be that they will be overrun by global solutions and that Member States 
will have to live with  two parallel IT worlds each having a cost price and jeopardizing 
the long term benefit of EU IT solutions. 

The  challenge  for  the  post-2020  programme  will  thus  be  to  propose  a  new  interaction 
model with the developments on the international scene as to:  

-  How  to  use  the  programmes  to  join  the  forces  of  the  Commission  and  the  Member 

States and promote a joint EU approach in the international fora;  

-  How to coordinate the EU legislative, operational and support activities and thereby 
avoid  the  duplication  of  efforts  or  even  parallel  running  of  similar  electronic 
systems and operations by Member States.  

Sharing consistently with third countries/parties the technical approach already in place 
for the functioning of the single market while replying to their international commitments 
will be beneficial for Member States and for the EU. This cooperation could then develop 
into a common IT framework under the OECD conventions. 

6 

 
In addition, sharing IT assets and experience with the OECD presents an opportunity for 
the  EU  to  propose  its  IT  solutions  and  set  of  technical  standards  while  positioning  as 
being a major player at global level in the field of implementing taxation policies on a 
practical and technical point of view. 

As EU tax policy has been recently mainly driven by the international context, the 
programme  should  in  the  future  allow  under  flexible  conditions  organising  joint 
actions  and  sharing  EU  developed  and  funded  IT  assets  with  international 
organisations and third countries.  

In addition, a Multi-Annual Strategic Plan for Taxation will allow for a better planning of 
budgetary and human resources both at national and EU level. Accompanying reporting 
duties  have  been  introduced  to  allow  for  a  better  monitoring  of  IT  capacity  building 
actions. 

The upcoming withdrawal of the UK from the EU implies disentangling the UK as a 
Member  State  from  all  taxation  electronic  systems  financed  by  Fiscalis  2020.  The 
implications  and  costs,  however,  cannot  be  precisely  estimated  and  are  therefore  not 
covered  in  this  paper  as  they  are  still  largely  unknown  at  this  stage  of  the  ongoing 
negotiations between the EU and the UK.  

Problem 

Against  this  background,  the  EU  and  the  national  tax  administrations  suffer  from  a 
problem of insufficient capacity and insufficient cooperation – both within the EU and 
with third countries – to carry out effectively and efficiently their missions. The drivers at 
the root of this problem are two-fold: 

-  unequal capacity of tax administrations: unequal skills, which entails that some may 
be  more  advanced  /  agile  than  others  to  respond  to  the  identified  trends;  unequal 
functioning, which entails inconsistencies in the quality of processes and operations, 
with  some  being  more  performing  than  others;  unequal  electronic  systems,  which 
entails that some may be better equipped with electronic systems than others; 

-  obstacles  for  cooperation  between  tax  administrations  and  other  stakeholders: 
strategic  obstacles  (divergence  in  terms  of  priorities  and  strategic  objectives,  fiscal 
competition, etc.), geographical obstacles (relations among Member States and with 
third  countries),  legal  obstacles  (non-harmonised  tax  systems,  mismatches  of  rules, 
uneven  interpretation  of  tax  concepts,  etc.)  and  administrative  obstacles  (different 
processes, interoperability, etc.). 

Consequences 

The effect of this performance problem is an inadequate functioning of tax systems in the 
EU, which in turn jeopardises the functioning of the  single market and the 4 freedoms, 
undermines social fairness and affects EU competitiveness because of its indirect effects:  

-  negative effect on tax bases (tax fraud, erosion, avoidance, etc.) and subsequently EU 

and national budgets; 

-  administrative burden falling on citizens and businesses (including SMEs); 
-  negative impact on competitive positioning of EU: less EU companies operate cross 
border and foreign companies are discouraged from entering and operating on the EU 
market; or, third country operators may be unduly advantaged by the possibilities to 
avoid VAT created by insufficient cooperation between EU tax administrations.  

7 

 
Source: Deloitte 2018 study 

In  view  of  this  changing  environment,  the  Union  has  reached  an  important 
milestone in terms of potential furthering European integration and accompanying 
the national tax administrations on their way to becoming modern administrations 
and interacting more actively. Deepening the integration is the next logical step to 
enable  tax  administrations  to  respond  efficiently  to  the  current  and  upcoming 
challenges.  Member  States  suggested  considering  in  particular  more  enhanced 
operational cooperation and tackling better innovation5.  

EU reply for post 2020 era 

From its beginning, the Juncker Commission identified taxation as part of its 10 priorities 
and  pursued  an  ambitious  agenda  aimed  at  fairer  taxation  and  more  transparency.  It 
streamlined  the  European  Semester  to  cater  for  more  dialogue  at  all  levels,  included 
taxation as a specific policy area and created an advisory European Fiscal Board as part 
of its broader effort to enhance the EU’s economic governance framework. 

More recently, the White Paper on the future of Europe6 and associated reflection papers 
called on the EU to continue to take action for tax justice and transparency, both in the 
EU and globally. Fair and modern tax policies and enhanced operational cooperation can 
and  should  indeed  play  a  decisive  role  in  distributing  the  benefits  of  globalisation  and 
economic growth fairly amongst the citizens and narrowing income inequalities, thereby 
strengthening social cohesion.  

With  this  in  mind,  it  will  remain  equally  important  to  provide  stronger  instruments  to 
tackle tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance as well as to deal with third countries that 
refuse to play fair. International rules will therefore remain a specific area of focus and 
cooperation beyond the EU borders needs to be fully supported and simplified by the EU.  

5  
6 

In particular during the Fiscalis Workshops held in 2016 and 2017 
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/white-paper-future-europe-reflections-and-scenarios-eu27_en  

8 

 
 
 
                                                            
The  success  of  EU  tax  policy  over  the  last  decade  is  due  to  its  integrated  approach  of 
legislation and implementation made possible by Fiscalis. .This success formula is also a 
source  of  inspiration  for  other  fora  such  as  IOTA  or  FTA  (OECD  Forum  on  Tax 
Administration)  which  apply  the  EU  method  and  get  their  first  positive  results.  These 
international  organisations  have  perfectly  understood  that  the  current  and  future 
challenges  –  which  are linked to  potential  complete  digitalisation  and  dematerialisation 
of operations and the need for agility and adaptability of tax administrations – lie with the 
implementation of rules, at a time where the conception of legislation in the tax arena is 
being  stabilised.  The  Union  should  therefore  maintain  and  even  expand  its  successful 
approach but this  can only be done if the necessary budgetary means are made available 
to do so. 

The Union should therefore continue to promote  this integrated and practical approach. 
As  such,  it  could  demonstrate  to  EU  citizens  and  businesses  that  the  EU  brings  added 
value for ensuring fair taxation by helping tax administrations to collect the taxes due. As 
demonstrated by the many recent new initiatives in taxation, it is of utmost importance to 
continue to actively support and strengthen the functioning of the taxation systems in the 
single  market,  while  contributing  to  the  gradual  elimination  of  existing  barriers  and 
distortions within the single market. 

2.  EU ADDED VALUE 

Looking  back  at  EU  interventions  in  the  tax  area  over  time,  one  can  now  see  that  the 
following landscape (see Annex 1) has taken form: 

  EU  interventions  resulting  in  harmonisation  of  tax  law  based  on  Article  113 
TFEU. Such legislation is due to the wording of the legal provision itself limited 
to the indirect taxation area and covers VAT, excise duties and energy taxation. 
ECJ  jurisprudence  of  2006  clarified  that  this  legal  basis  refers  both  to  material 
rules and procedural rules. An example of procedural rules is the regulation which 
set the rules for administrative cooperation for VAT. A more recent example of 
an EU intervention in this area is the FTT proposal (category 1). 

  EU  interventions  resulting  in  –  not  harmonisation  but  –  approximation  of  tax 
laws and administrative actions based on Article 114 or 115 TFEU. As opposed 
to Article 113 TFEU, Articles 114 and 115 are non-tax specific provisions which 
allow  adopting  EU  measures  which  are  deemed  necessary  for  establishing  and 
ensuring the functioning of the single market. The Fiscalis programme was in the 
past exclusively based on Article 114 (and its predecessor Article 95 TEC) as a 
measure to support the single market. In this sense, the creation and maintenance 
of 
intervention  which  allows  electronically 
interconnecting  all  tax  administrations  which  need  to  be  able  to  exchange 
information  amongst  them  for  the  purpose  of  a  well-functioning  single  market 
(category 2). 

the  CCN/CSI 

is  an  EU 

  More recently – with the last generation of Fiscalis 2020 – an additional part has 
been  added  which  is  administrative  cooperation  aiming  at  improving  Member 
States'  administrative  capacity 
(category  3). 
Administrative capacity building is the umbrella that encompasses processes and 
procedures,  electronic  systems  and  human  capacity.  Indeed,  Article  197  TFEU 
allows  the  EU  to  adopt  regulations  which  shall  establish  measures  to  support 
Member States in their effort and responsibility to implement Union law. 

implement  Union 

law 

to 

9 

 
Where Fiscalis based on Article 1147 provides for a (partially constraining) cooperation 
framework  with  measures  necessary  for  the  functioning  of  the  single  market  (shared 
competence),  Fiscalis  under  Article  197  TFEU  provides  for  a  voluntary  cooperation 
framework that Member States can choose to make use (supporting competence).  

Fiscalis  has  always  played  an  important  role  for  supporting  and  facilitating  the 
implementation of the EU interventions at the first level. Indeed, the implementation 
of  the  VAT  directives  and  the  directives  for  excise  duties  often  required  cooperation 
actions in terms of electronic systems (and related support), common best practices and 
administrative procedures and a common interpretation of the EU measures set at the first 
level.  What  characterises  these  activities  is  that  they  accompany  the  implementation  of 
category 1 and 2 EU measures which directly aim at harmonising or approximating tax 
law, be it material or procedural tax rules. 

As  regards  the  lessons  learned,  the  existence  of  the  Fiscalis  programme  brings  a 
significant –added value by providing financial means to work out common and shared 
implementation mechanisms for EU tax legislation. Indeed, a significant part of the EU 
tax  legislation  requires  electronic  systems  to  be  put  in  place  for  allowing  exchanging 
information in relation to tax payers (citizens or businesses) or cross-border transactions. 
This  exchange  of  information  amongst  Member  States  takes  place  because  Fiscalis 
allows financing electronic systems or at least their common components and agreeing at 
operational level on the business and technical requirements of these electronic systems. 
Without  Fiscalis  no  common  electronic  systems  would  be  developed  and  many  EU 
legislative acts would remain unimplemented or their implementation would suffer from 
important delays and technical obstacles.  

Capacity  building  could  be  further  developed  with  more  focus  on  enhanced 
administrative  cooperation  whereby  Member  States  work  together  by  themselves  – 
without  necessarily  the  leadership  and  support  of  the  Commission  –  to  make  changes 
happen in tax fields of direct interest to them. 

The EU added value of Fiscalis has been confirmed by the preliminary results of the Mid 
Term evaluation of Fiscalis 2020 stating that the programme as a whole complements tax 
initiatives at national level. Indeed, European electronic systems developed newly under 
Fiscalis  2020  build  upon  systems  for  information  sharing  already  in  place.  This 
demonstrates  that  they  are  absolute  pre-requisite  where  cooperation  and  information 
sharing has and would otherwise not come about. 

In a nutshell, the programme delivers very tangible results: 

-  As regards activities which stem directly from Union law and aim at implementing in 
a  harmonised  way  the  EU  acquis,  with  both  (i)  activities  on  the  correct 
implementation  of  Union  legislation  (VAT  directives,  excise  duties  directives)  and 
legislation  on  administrative 
(ii)  electronic  systems  development  further 
cooperation in taxation:  

to 

o  The  number  and  variety  of  European  electronic  systems,  that  has  increased 
over time with e.g. the creation of a common database for tax rulings and is 

7  

Article 114 TFUE concerns the adoption of the measures for the approximation of the provisions laid down 
by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States which have as their object the establishment 
and functioning of the internal market.  

10 

 
                                                            
still increasing with the automatic exchange of financial account information 
since September 2017 or the TNA, ;  

o  The operation and improvement of EMCS over time;  

o  All  the  support  to  effective  administrative  cooperation  between  Member 
States, thanks e.g. to the electronic forms and other computerised formats as 
IT tools or the country profiles8 developed by a project group on the practical 
aspects of administrative cooperation;  

o  The presence of one Member State in another Member State in administrative 
offices  and  the  participation  in  administrative  enquiries  and  –  subject  to  an 
appropriate legal basis – even joint audits by tax officials; 

o  The  development  and  operation  of  the  MOSS  and  in  the  coming  years  the 

OSS for VAT purposes 

-  As  regards  activities  aimed  at  improving  the  administrative  capacity  of  the 
participating countries, i.e. lifting up the quality of the individual administrations and 
their  components  up  to  a  higher  level,  by  (i)  enhancing  systems,  tools,  processes, 
procedures  and  techniques  for  administering  taxes;  (ii)  improving  the  structure  and 
policy of the administration so as to fulfil all its core duties; and (iii) developing the 
skills and knowledge of its human resources:  

o  The workshops such as e.g. the event being organised by TAXUD legal units 
with national judges to explain to them and train them in relation to the key 
principles of EU tax legislation;  

o  The project groups allowing e.g. exchanging experience and good practices in 
the area of e-audit and compliance risk management, discussing with Member 
States  the  removal  of  withholding  tax  barriers  and  the  creation  of  a  code  of 
conduct in the context of the Capital Market Union;  

o  Expert teams - introduced since Fiscalis 2020 programme – which allow for 
enhanced  operational  cooperation  between  Member  States  and  under  the 
coordination  of  one  of  them;  as  an  example  in  direct  taxation,  6  Member 
States worked together in the DAC2 IT collaboration expert team in order to 
establish  joint  specifications  of  the  national  IT  components  necessary  to 
support  the  automatic  exchange  of  financial  account  information;  recent 
feedback  from  the  participating  countries  indicates  that,  despite  some 
practical  difficulties  mainly  due to  the  first-time  use  of  this  new  instrument, 
the  experience  is  a  clear  success  and  the  return  on  investment  is  promising; 
there is accordingly room for learning from these first experiences and in the 
light thereof to promote the instrument use it more widely and extensively.  

o  The  numerous  working  visits,  which  allow  discussing  specific  topics  and 
which  in  view  of  the  benefits  reaped  is  more  and  more  used  by  tax 

8  

Each  country  profile  lists  the  operational  details  of  administrative  cooperation  in  a  specific  Member  State, 
such  as  its  internal  organisation,  information  directly  available,  procedures  to  gather  more  information, 
special provisions as regards the notification of taxpayers subject to a request for information in view of data 
protection  laws,  retention  period  of  documents  etc.,  which  all  reduce  and  simplify  contacts  between  tax 
administrations.  

11 

 
                                                            
administrations with 41 visits in 2014 and then 198 in 2015, 171 in 2016 and 
127  in  2017;  tax  administrations  select  mostly  themes  in  relation  to  fight 
against fraud, avoidance and aggressive tax planning (e.g. on transfer pricing 
issues) for their working visits. 

o  Technical assistance, which developed  significantly since the  financial crisis 
and whereby the programme lends support – jointly with SRSP9 - not only to 
those  specific  Member  States  benefitting  from  assistance  but  also  more 
generally to all countries to whom Country Specific Recommendations on the 
need  to  strengthen  tax  collection  have  been  addressed  in  the  context  of  the 
European Semester exercise.  

3.  THE OBJECTIVES  

The  programme's  general  objective  is  to  support  the  single  market,  foster  Union 
competitiveness  and  protect  the  financial  and  economic  interests  of  the  Union  and  its 
Member States.  

The  Programme  has  the  specific  objective  to  support  tax  policy,  tax  cooperation  and 
administrative capacity building, including human competency and the development and 
operation of the European electronic systems.  

Given the particular challenges and objectives of Fiscalis, the specific objectives of the 
new  programme  will  be  mainly  addressed  at  the  level  of  the  programme  structure  and 
priorities.  Traditional  delivery  mechanisms  will  remain  in  place  as  direct  management 
through  mainly  grants  and  procurement  proved  to  be  effective.  The  identity  of 
beneficiaries – tax administrations – prevent using certain instruments such as equity or 
quasi-equity investments, loans or guarantees, or other risk-sharing instruments. 

4.  PREFERRED POLICY OPTIONS 

4.1. 

Preferred option description 

The  current  Fiscalis  2020  programme  offers  a  flexible  and  simple  framework  for 
enabling  cooperation  and  integration  with  a  demonstrated  EU  added  value  and  impact 
despite its limited size (0,02% of total EU budget over period 2014-2020). It provides the 
operational,  organisational,  methodological  and  budgetary  framework  to  implement  the 
EU tax policy objectives and activities through: 

Actions 

Annual average 
amounts of the 
F2020 budget  
in nominal 
terms 

IT capacity building, which consists in developing, maintaining and 
operating European electronic systems relating to the exchange of tax 
information; 
Joint actions, which consist in cooperation mechanisms such as expert 

22,4 €m 

8,1 €m 

9 

Regulation  (EU)  2017/825  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  17  May  2017  on  the 
establishment  of  the  Structural  Reform  Support  Programme  for  the  period  2017  to  2020  and  amending 
Regulations (EU) No 1303/2013 and (EU) No 1305/2013, OJ L 129, 19.5.2017, p. 1. 

12 

 
                                                            
teams, allowing for enhanced operational cooperation, and enable 
officials to carry out joint operational activities under their core 
responsibilities, share experience and join efforts to deliver on tax 
policy 
Human competency building (incl. support activities), which consists 
in developing a human competence framework and training content 
made available through e-learning modules or otherwise, all 
supporting the professional skills of tax officials 
Total 

1,4 €m 

31,9 €m 

As  no  action  seems  fit  for  delivering  alone  on  the  general  and  specific  objectives  as  a 
whole,  a  combination  of  actions  will  be  required.  The  evaluation  and  monitoring 
activities  of  the  programmes  and  the  external  study  and  related  stakeholder’s 
consultations  allowed  identifying  in  total  a  set  of  5  complementary  actions10,  i.e.  two 
more possible actions than under the current programme:  
- 
- 
-  Human capacity building;  
-  Support  to  international  cooperation  (new)  in  order  to  allow  the  EU  stepping  into 

IT capacity building;  
Joint actions;  

activities at international level (see above under “Recent trends”) 

-  Support  to  voluntary  structural  cooperation  or  centralisation  (new)  in  order  to 
centralise  activities  between  Member  States  willing  to  do  so,  paving  the  way  to 
possible fully centralised activities.  

10  

The  Fiscalis  2020  programme  currently  includes  a  small  support  line  (100  €k/yr).  Although  marginal  in 
amount, this support line is of critical importance for the proper implementation of the programme: it  may 
cover  a.o.  mission  and  representation  expenses,  conference  and  meeting  costs,  costs  of  Committees, 
information  and  management  systems,  ICT  equipment  and  services.  Although  not  discussed  in  this  impact 
assessment, it is proposed to keep this support line and even to increase slightly its amount in the post-2020 
programme in view of its increasing use. 

13 

 
 
                                                            
Depending  on  the  level  of  ambition  in  terms  of  support  and  contribution  of  the  future 
programme  to  tax  policy,  each  of  the  four  remaining  actions  may  either  be  stopped  or 
cover a reduced or extended scope, as shown in the figure below:  

ACTIONS 

IT capacity 
building 

SCOPE 

0-None 

1-Legacy 2020 

2-Future projects 

3-Innovation 

Joint actions 

0-None 

1-Limited basic  
joint actions 

2-All basic  
joint actions 

3-Enhanced 
operational 
cooperation 

Human capacity 
building  
(incl. support) 

0-None 

1-Focused training 

2-All basic human 
capacity actions 

3-Enhanced human 
capacity building 

International 
cooperation 

0-None 

1a-Joint events 

2a-Joint actions 

1b-Shared IT 
specifications  

2b- Shared specific 
software modules 

3b- Shared fully 
functional 
application 

Centralisation 

0-None 

1-Voluntary structural 
cooperation 

2-Centralisation 

The scope of each action under the on-going Fiscalis 2020 programme is highlighted in green.  

ACTIONS 

IT capacity 
building 

SCOPE 

0-None 

1-Legacy 2020 

2-Future projects 

3-Innovation 

Joint actions 

0-None 

1-Limited basic  
joint actions 

2-All basic  
joint actions 

3-Enhanced 
operational 
cooperation 

Human capacity 
building  
(incl. support) 

0-None 

1-Focused training 

2-All basic human 
capacity actions 

3-Enhanced human 
capacity building 

International 
cooperation 

0-None 

1a-Joint events 

2a-Joint actions 

1b-Shared IT 
specifications  

2b- Shared specific 
software modules 

3b- Shared fully 
functional 
application 

Centralisation 

0-None 

1-Voluntary structural 
cooperation 

2-Centralisation 

The scope of each action under the preferred option for the future Fiscalis programme is 
highlighted in orange.  

Building  on  these  various  actions  and  their  possible  scope,  a  large  number  of 
modulations  is  possible.  In  line  with  the  feedback  gathered  the  Member  States' 
consultations and as shown on the figure on next page, this ex-ante evaluation proposes 
the following policy option. 

14 

 
 
KEY FEATURES OF CURRENT FISCALIS 2020 PROGRAMME AND PREFERRED OPTION FOR FUTURE PROGRAMME 

ACTIONS 

IT-1: Legacy 2020 

IT-2: New projects 

IT-3: Innovation 

JA-1: Basic joint actions 

JA-2: Enhanced operational cooperation 

Human capacity building 

International cooperation 

Centralisation 

Current 2020 
programme 

OPTION 3 
Continuity 
“plus” 

+++ 

+++ 

0 

+++ 

++ 

+++ 

+ 

0 

+++ 

+++ 

+ 

+++ 

++ 

++ 

++ 

0 

Legend: 0: not possible / +: to a very limited extent / ++: to some extent / +++: to a good extent 

15 

 
 
 
 
The  Union  needs  to  seize  the  political  momentum  where  tax  issues  are  high  on  the 
political agenda to consider offering more services to Member States in this challenging 
period for tax administrations, in particular more operational cooperation. In areas such 
as  the  taxation  of  the  digital  economy,  e-commerce,  use  of  new  technologies, 
administrative  cooperation,  fight  against  VAT  fraud,  measuring  VAT  gap  or  tax 
recovery, the EU has an opportunity to shape the agenda. This scenario therefore aims at 
providing  the  programme  with  the  financial  and  cooperation  means  to  cope  with  these 
new  challenges  and  thereby  bring  strong  EU  added  value  for  a  limited  budget  in 
supporting  Member  States  in  building  administrative  capacity  and  managing  their  tax 
systems.  

This scenario proposes to effectively address the present and incoming challenges in 
the  taxation  field  and  to  deliver  on  and  implement  the  ambitious  tax  policy.  It  would 
allow providing common solutions – identified in new EU regulatory interventions – and 
more  effective  tools  to  the  identified  common  problems.  In  particular,  the  policy 
initiatives against tax fraud and tax evasion, the introduction of major tax reforms such as 
the  VAT  definitive  regime  or  the  Common  Consolidated  Corporate  Tax  Base  and  the 
progress  in  the  area  of  excise  duties,  energy  taxation  and  other  future  EU  initiatives 
would depend on Fiscalis for their implementation. In addition, the bottom-up approach 
whereby  national  tax  administrations  themselves  actively  identify  areas  of  enhanced 
operational  cooperation  could  equally  be  continued  leading  to  further  "de  facto" 
European  integration.  The  programme  would  be  an  enabler  for  modern  and  efficient 
national tax administrations which interact and perform in a digital environment and deal 
with emerging challenges and trends. 

Concretely,  this  option  would  propose  a  comprehensive  framework  to  address 
coherently the challenges identified above:  
-  On top of the continuity of existing electronic systems as of 2020 ("legacy 2020"), IT 
capacity  building  would  ensure  that  new  IT  projects  can  be  on-boarded  as  it  has 
happened so far; in addition, innovation would be made possible, i.e. some budget is 
also  available  for  working  on  new  technologies  and  trends  (e.g.  e-commerce,  big 
data, data analytics, blockchain…), cyber-attacks and other unforeseen events.  

-  Cooperation  would  be  increased  and  intensified  –  although  only  limited  additional 
financial  means  would  be  required  –  in  order  to  help  simplify  rules,  improve 
compliance, prevent where possible and fight fraud and increase transparency as well 
as  to  accompany  the  enhanced  exchange  of  information  brought  about  by  new  IT 
developments.  Such  increased  cooperation  would  materialize  not  only  through  the 
traditional  joint  actions  and  capacity  building  activities  but  also  through  enhanced 
operational cooperation.  

Over the recent years, a cascade of new EU directives and regulations has been adopted. 
As  they  require  accompanying  IT  solutions  –  many  of  which  have  not  yet  been  put  in 
place  –,  the  budget  is  increasingly  devoted  to  operating  and  maintaining  electronic 
systems.  This  trend  is  expected  to  continue  and  even  accelerate  given  the  pace  of 
technological development and emerging needs that can be better covered with strong IT 
tools.  

A budget for new IT expenditure would be welcome to allow developing new electronic 
systems  and  financing  their  operation  as  required  by  the  future  legislation.  Experience 
shows  indeed  that tax policy  is  not static but  has  to  react  dynamically  to real economy 
developments  that  are  not  easy  to  identify  in  advance  (e.g.  the  digital  economy, 
transparency  rules).  It  is  therefore  predictable  that  there  will  be  a  need  to  deliver  in 

16 

 
programmatic terms to the challenges as they happen, although it is difficult to identify 
currently the mix of activities and systems to develop and we have to rely on the recent 
past  experience.  In  this  view,  TAXUD  has  already  initiated  a  new  legislative  initiative 
related  to  the  collection  of  payment  data  from  the  payment  service  providers  and  its 
exchange  between  the  tax  administrations.  This  initiative  will  imply  new  common 
standards  for  the  collection  of  data  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  development  of  new  IT 
solution for the exchange of data (being a central repository or a distributed application) 
on the other hand. 

This scenario should also allow taking into account innovation (e.g. digitalisation, new 
business models, adoption of new, disrupting IT capabilities such as blockchain and data 
analytics,  that  are  being  currently  examined,  capable  to  increase  effectiveness  and 
efficiency  of  the  existing  and  future  European  electronic  systems)  and  factor  in  news 
risks (e.g. cyber-attacks); it would also allow covering the costly evolution towards more 
interoperability with customs and other law-enforcement authorities and thus contribute 
to the realisation of the Digital Single market. 

Additional  major  challenges  will  affect  taxation  in  a  near  future  and  it  does  not  only 
concern IT. For example, the VAT system needs to be entirely revamped in order to be 
able  to  deal  with  the  emerging  sharing  economy  models  or  the  increasing  e-commerce 
issues.  This  requires  a  strong  and  efficient  cooperation  –  through  traditional  joint 
actions  such  as  workshops,  project  groups  or  working  visits  –  between  agile,  flexible, 
efficient and responsive tax administrations in order to protect not only national, but also 
the European budget.  

As identified through the stakeholder’s consultations, it would however be opportune to 
go beyond these traditional tools and develop further enhanced operational cooperation 
under  project-based  undertakings,  i.e.  closer  forms  of  cooperation  that  empower  tax 
administrations to work more in clusters on a thematic or geographic basis and, thereby, 
make  changes  happen  faster  while  at  the  same  time  rationalising  efforts,  creating 
operational  integration  and  facilitating  interaction  by  establishing  closer  working 
relationships,  systematic  sharing  of  expertise  and  experiences.  The  progressive  but 
constant  shift  over  the  recent  years  towards  such  enhanced  cooperation  would  deserve 
more  means  to  reach  its  full  potential.  Such  enhanced  cooperation  will  bring  benefits 
both on the business side (e.g. organisation of large scale joint audits to tackle complex 
cross-border  topics  such  as  issues  with  transfer  pricing)  and  the  IT  side  (e.g.  joint 
drafting  of  specifications  of  national  components  allowing  ultimately  more 
approximation in the tax practices).  

Finally  and  in  view  of  the  tax  scene  being  more  and  more  driven  by  the  international 
context,  the  programme  should  be  more  open  to  cooperation  with  international 
organisations, in particular the OECD and related bodies such as the Global Forum for 
Tax  Administrations  or  the  Forum  for  Tax  Administration.  Recognising,  where 
appropriate in view of policy objectives, these international organisations as partners for 
the  execution  of  the  Fiscalis  programme  and  favouring  the  joint  organisation  of  events 
and  actions  and  deepened  cooperation  on  legislative  and  operational  activities  in  these 
cases  would  allow  significant  progress  for  a  better  achievement  of  EU  tax  policy.  As 
regards  IT,  whereas  the  development  of  joint  fully  functional  applications  could  be 
foreseen in specific cases, focusing on joint specifications and collaborative development 

17 

 
of specific modules11 in view of the respective strengths would already bring significant 
added value while implying no significant financial investment by any of the parties.  

With  only  a  small  increase  in  the  resources  allocated  to  Fiscalis  under  the  next 
MFF, the EU can maintain its current role and capacity of steering the tax agenda 
implementation 
by  combining  tax  regulatory 
approaches  with  specific  and  meaningful  EU  actions  in  the  tax  field.  All  the 
substantial  enhancements  suggested  under  this  scenario  would  allow  reinforcing 
exponentially  the  effects  of  the  well-established  joint  actions  and  IT  /  human 
capacity  building  initiatives  and  thereby  reaping  significantly  more  benefits  from 
Fiscalis. 

interventions  with 

integrated 

4.2. 

Subsidiarity, proportionality and intended legal basis 

The EU tax objectives of fighting against tax fraud, tax evasion and tax avoidance as well 
as  supporting  the  functioning  of  the  single  market  and  competitiveness  cannot  be 
achieved by the EU or Member States alone. Common rules and European cooperation 
are  needed  to  enable  the  European  Commission  and  participating  countries  to  jointly 
work  out  common  solutions  and  best  practices  at  operational  level  to  deliver  on  these 
objectives and face all related challenges.  

Such  a  high  degree  of  cooperation  and  coordination  can  only  be  achieved  with  a 
centralised  approach,  ideally  at  Union  level.  Fiscalis  activities  are  more  cost-effective 
than if each participating country were to set up individual cooperation frameworks on a 
bilateral  or  multilateral  basis  and  develop  national  IT  solutions  for  transnational 
problems.  The  Fiscalis  activities  and  mechanisms  of  cooperation  moreover  allow 
deepening  significantly  the  trust  amongst  national  tax  administrations  that  is  necessary 
for a smooth cooperation and co-functioning of EU tax systems in the single market.  

Against this background, the Fiscalis programme will concentrate the EU intervention on 
setting  up  efficient  mechanisms  (and  the  indispensable  IT  tools)  for  administrative 
cooperation, aiming at providing more effective means to national tax administrations in 
their fight against tax fraud while indirectly facilitating taxpayer’s tax compliance. 

Articles  114  and  197  TFEU  provide  the  legal  basis  for  EU  intervention  as  regards 
respectively the establishment and functioning of the single market and the improvement 
of the administrative capacity of participating countries to implement Union law. 

11  

The  EU  computerised  format  for  the  automatic  exchange  of  information  on  immovable  property  is  one 
example of such a specific module. The OECD has included this automatic exchange of information its work 
programme  for  several  years  but  it  has  only  a  basic  one  at  its  disposal.  In  view  of  the  entry  into  force  of 
automatic  exchange  under  the  DAC  in  2015,  the  EU  developed  a  comprehensive  computerised  format. 
Subject to appropriate provisions in the programme, the EU could finance the adaptation of its format in view 
of  a  mandatory  automatic  exchange  of  such  information  under  the  joint  EU-OECD  auspices  and  thereby 
promote the EU agenda against tax fraud on the international scene while ensuring the consistency for EU 
Member States with IT systems developed inside the EU.  

18 

 
                                                            
5.  DELIVERY MECHANISMS  

5.1.  Overall delivery mechanisms 

Management mode  

is 

implemented 

the 
The  programme 
Commission  services  have  to  review  and  accept  every  single  action  in  view  of:  the 
objectives  and  conditions  embedded  in  the  regulation;  the  adopted  annual  work 
programme;  and  the  eligibility  criteria  contained  in  the  financing  decision/grant 
agreements.  

through  direct  management.  Concretely, 

It  is  proposed  to  keep  this  management  mode  as,  given  the  nature  of  the  programme’s 
activities, its focus on tax administrations as beneficiaries and the national sovereignty of 
Member  States  as  regards  taxation,  it  provides  for  the  most  efficient  allocation  of 
financial  resources  and  greatest  impact  possible.  Indeed,  it  offers  both  flexibility  and 
steering power to the Commission for allocating yearly through its financing decision the 
appropriate funds according to priorities agreed with Member States through comitology, 
including emerging needs.  

Types of intervention 

About  80%  of  programme’s  expenditures  relates  to  IT  capacity  building  and  is  made 
directly  by  the  Commission  through  procurement.  As  regards  most  joint  actions,  the 
beneficiaries  are  exclusively  public  authorities  and  grants  fulfil  all  identified  needs. 
Therefore, no opportunity or need in terms of types of intervention was identified other 
than  the  current  public  procurement  contracts,  grants  and  to  a  minor  extent 
reimbursement of expert costs.  

Financial instruments12 are not suitable financing instruments, as they aim at addressing 
market  failures  in  the  provision  of  external  financing  and  are  therefore  unfit  for  the 
objectives  and  the  beneficiaries  (Member  States  &  Candidate  Countries)  of  the 
programme.  

Eligibility rules & co-financing rates 

Eligibility rules are fundamental and should remain limited to a list of eligible actions in 
order  to  keep  the  programme  simple  and  flexible  for  all  actors,  whether  Commission 
services  as  central  management  team  or  participating  countries  as  beneficiaries.  They 
may also cover other expenses specified in the regulation, including some technical and 
administrative assistance expenses.  

Co-financing rates are up to 100% in certain cases. They are set out in the annual work 
programmes in the cases where actions require the awarding of grants.  

Conditionality 

The  programme  aims  at  fostering  (voluntary)  cooperation  between  Member  States. 
Against  this  background,  it  would  be  counterproductive  to  subject  participation  in 

12  

Financial instruments are "Union measures of financial support provided on a complementary basis from the 
budget in order to address one or more specific policy objectives of the Union. Such instruments may take 
the form of equity or quasi-equity investments, loans or guarantees, or other risk-sharing instruments, and 
may, where appropriate, be combined with grants" (see Article 2(p) of the Financial Regulation). 

19 

 
                                                            
activities  to  any  particular  condition,  except  the  appropriate  profile  and  qualifications, 
including language skills, of participants in activities.  

Work programmes and comitology 

The Commission shall adopt work programmes by means of implementing acts adopted 
through comitology, i.e. the Commission is assisted by a committee that has to provide a 
positive option at qualified majority before the annual work programme is adopted as an 
implementing act. This allows for adjustments during the programme duration and gives 
appropriate flexibility to implement the objectives of the programme in accordance with 
the  most  up-to-date  needs  and  challenges  identified  in  a  collaborative  way  by  the 
Commission and participating countries. The strong involvement of Member States in the 
comitology procedure demonstrates the importance they give to the programme. 

Prevention of errors, irregularities or fraud (audit, controls) 

The  programme  presents  a  low  risk  profile  in  view  of  the  identity  of  beneficiaries,  i.e. 
Member States and other participating countries. Standard provisions on the protection of 
the financial interests of the Union as foreseen in the Financial Regulation are therefore 
deemed sufficient.  

Simplification & flexibility 

As explained above, the programme is already streamlined with a strong focus on outputs 
and results. The on-going programme already implements all simplifications identified in 
past  evaluations.  The  main  additional  simplification  identified  would  consist  in  an 
extended  use  of  lump  sums  /  unit  costs  and  the  possibility  to  adopt  multi-annual  work 
programmes to avoid the annual administrative burden of comitology.  

Whereas  flexibility  is  usually  a  key  consideration  when  establishing  EU  action 
programmes  in  order  to  ensure  that a  programme  and  its  objectives  are able  to  address 
new  policy  needs  and  priorities  over  its  period  of  execution,  predictability  is  the  key 
concern in the case of the Fiscalis programme. Over the last 25 years, the programme has 
indeed  evolved  from  a  mechanical  support  approach  to  an ambitious  policy  framework 
that  fulfils  an  important  element  of  the  tax  policy  itself.  It  has  now  reached  a  stage  of 
maturity  that  makes  it  critical  to  the  functioning  of  tax  administration  itself,  not  in  the 
least  because  of  the  operational  focus  and  the  IT  capacity built  over  the  years.  Against 
this background and in view of the broad scope of intervention that allow encompassing 
almost all aspects of tax cooperation and activities, predictability– and not flexibility – is 
the key concern for the operations of future programmes.  

5.2. 

Synergies  &  complementarities  with  other  EU  action  programmes 
and funds 

An important consideration for the Commission in preparing the post-2020 MFF is also 
to  look  at  synergies  and  complementarities  across  programmes  in  order  to  step  up  the 
added value of EU intervention. 

This  ex-ante evaluation should therefore be read jointly  with other  proposed EU action 
programmes and funds that pursue similar objectives in related fields of competence and 
especially:  

20 

 
-  The Customs programme13, that supports cooperation in the field of customs;  
-  The  Single  Market  Programme14,  which  supports  EU  actions  for  achieving  a  better 

functioning of the single market; 

-  The Justice, Rights and Values programme15, that  
-  The  EU  Anti-Fraud  programme16,  that  combats  fraud  and  other  illegal  activities 

affecting the financial interests of the Union;  

-  The  Reform  Support  programme17,  that  helps  specific  EU  countries  build  more 
institutions,  stronger  governance  frameworks  and  efficient  public 

effective 
administrations; 

-  The Digital Europe programme18 and other IT synergies;  
-  Horizon Europe19 and other research and innovation actions. 

It also analyses the option to merge the programme with its customs equivalent, despite 
the failure of this solution in the past.  

Customs programme 

Significant  synergies  exist  already  at  operational  level  with  the  other  TAXUD 
programme for customs, Customs 2020. In the field of IT, there is cross-fertilisation and 
joint  funding  of  common  IT  components  such  as  the  secured  network  (Common 
Communication Network). Identical IT management approaches and common horizontal 
support mechanisms are also in place. Moreover, the same type of actions is used and a 
similar approach for human capacity building and training is followed. The programme 
management, in terms of proposal management, action management, implementing acts, 
performance  monitoring,  is  fully  streamlined.  In  addition,  there  is  an  emerging  and 
growing  need  for  joint  activities  between  taxation  and  customs,  in  particular  in  the 
domain of e-commerce and the customs control of excise products.  

On  the  one hand,  merging  the  two programmes  might present some benefits. A unique 
programme  for  both  tax  and  customs  officers  would  promote  the  cooperation  between 
these two bodies at national level and EU level and would better respond to the need of 
cross-border  cooperation  between  the  two  different  bodies.  National  customs  and  tax 
administrations could thus cooperate and participate in different activities together. This 
might lead to efficiency gains and the development of common approaches. 

Nonetheless,  on  the  other  hand,  there  are  four  main  reasons  that  led  to  decide  not  to 
consider the merge as a relevant policy option. 

First,  the  two  programmes  support  the  implementation  of  different  policies  lying  on 
different  legal  Treaty  bases.  Customs  policy  is  an  area  of  exclusive  EU  competence, 
where  the  ultimate  objective  is  that  customs  administrations  act  as  if  they  were  one. 
Subject  to  unanimity rules,  taxation policy remains an area of national  sovereignty and 
competence  where  the  EU  is  only  entitled  to  take  measures  for  ensuring  the  proper 
functioning  of  the  single  market.  This  distinction  is  reflected  at  the  level  of  the 
programmes:  Customs  is  based  on  Article  33  TFEU  and  aims  at  supporting  the 

13  
14  
15 
16  
17 
18 
19 

COM(2018) 442 
COM(2018) 441 
COM(2018) 383 
COM(2018) 386 
COM(2018) 391 
COM(2018) 434 
COM(2018) 435 

21 

 
                                                            
functioning  and  modernisation  of  the  customs  union  while  Fiscalis  is  based  on  Article 
114 and 197 TFEU and aims at improving the proper functioning of the taxation systems 
in the single market.  

Second,  the  two  programmes  support  different  policies  with  different  objectives. 
Although  the  operational  elements  and  outputs  of  both  programmes  are  quite  similar, 
important  nuances  appear  however.  The  Customs  programme  supports  the  coherent 
application and effective implementation of Union law and policy in the field of customs. 
This operational objective of Customs aims to create the same customs experience across 
the different participating countries. The equivalent objective in Fiscalis does not exist, 
as  this  programme  does  not  seek  the  uniformity  of  tax  legislation.  At  the  level  of  the 
higher level impacts of the set objectives, important differences exist also. The Customs 
programme  is  a  supporting  tool  that  aims  at  contributing  to  ensure  that  customs 
administrations  act  as  one,  thus  contributing  to  the  achievement  of  the  full  potential  of 
the Customs Union, while Fiscalis targets the improvement the proper functioning of the 
taxation  systems  in  the  single  market  by  enhancing  cooperation  between  participating 
countries Customs aims at contributing to protect the financial and economic interests of 
the Union and Member States, to increase safety and security. Fiscalis contributes to the 
fight against tax fraud, tax evasion and aggressive tax planning and the implementation 
of  Union  law,  in  particular  on  administrative  cooperation.  The  two  programmes  differ 
thus substantially in terms of ambition. 

Third, the merger of the two programmes would only bring benefits to a marginal extent. 
The  two  programmes  already  have  a  common  management  and  shared  processes.  In 
addition,  the  two  programmes  already  present  almost  the  same  type  of  eligible actions, 
which facilitates considerably their management at both EU and national level as in many 
Member States the two programmes are managed by the same entity. This mirroring of 
actions  also  facilitates  cross-fertilisation  between  customs  and  tax  administrations 
already today. Therefore, as the organisational and management synergies already exist 
between  the  two  programmes,  it  is  unlikely  that  the  merger  would  bring  significant 
economies of scale from this point of view.  

Fourth, although a unique programme could be perceived as a promising tool to improve 
the cooperation between tax and customs officers, it could also neglect the specific needs 
of  each  body.  In  addition,  a  single  programme  could  also  hamper  the  visibility  of  one 
body  compared  to  the  other.  It  could  be  possible  that  in  some  cases  one  of  the  two  is 
considered  more  significant  than  the  other  according  to  the  strategic  priorities  of  the 
country. This scenario is currently avoided as the two programmes are set up to respond 
to the specific needs of each body, and ensure their respective visibility. 

The  combination  of  these  reasons  indicates  that  a  merger  is  not  a  good  option  and  has 
therefore been discarded. 

Single market programme 

Despite its relevance for and being a fundamental enabler of the Single Market, the tax 
programme remained a stand-alone programme under the Single Market budget heading 
in view of its specific and highly integrated features.  

Links  exist  however  with  the  Single  Market  Programme  (SMP),  which  contemplates  a 
series of budget lines for supporting the delivery of the single market in the wider sense 
to  empower  citizens,  consumers,  businesses  and 
as  an 

important  contribution 

22 

 
administrations.  They  are  included  in  the  scope  of  the  Single  Market  Programme  to 
ensure their uninterrupted delivery. 

The  SMP  comprises  the  customs  and tax policy development support budget  line. This 
budget line finances a series of punctual activities  – mainly studies - which support the 
Commission  in  its  policy  developing  and  designing  role  in  the  area  of  EU  tax  policy. 
This integration will allow links (e.g. through common framework contracts) with other 
Union actions under this programme. 

Justice, Rights and Values programme 

Potential but very modest synergies with JUST were also identified as regards training of 
judges and judicial clerks and similar capacity building actions of other law-enforcement 
authorities.  Synergies  as  regards  the  protection  of  EU  financial  interests  might  also 
develop further in the future with the new European Public Prosecutor's Office (EPPO), 
which,  as  part  of  its  duties,  might  need  access  to  tax  information,  e.g.  information 
available under EUROFISC (a platform funded by Fiscalis where Member States have a 
multilateral  exchange  of  information  for  the  early  detection  of  fraud  schemes)  or 
information  gathered from the future Transaction Network  Analysis for enhanced VAT 
risk management. 

Reform Support programme 

The  Commission’s  Structural  Reform  Support  Service  coordinates  and  provides  tailor-
made  technical  support  to  individual  EU  countries,  in  cooperation  with  the  relevant 
Commission  services.  The  support  is  notably  provided  through  the  Reform  Support 
Programme.  The  objective  is  to  help  specific  EU  countries  build  more  effective 
institutions,  stronger  governance  frameworks  and  efficient  public  administrations.  Such 
support  reinforces  the  capacity  of  EU  countries  to  design  and  implement  policies  to 
support  job  creation  and  sustainable  growth.  Inter  alia,  areas  of  support  include 
governance  and  public  administration,  revenue  administration  and  public  financial 
management,  rule  of 
law,  anti-corruption,  anti-money-laundering  and  anti-fraud 
activities, migration and border control.  

In  recent  years,  bridges  were  built  between  the  Fiscalis  2020  programme  and  Reform 
Support Programme to complement the structural reform process set up for Greece and 
Cyprus  by  SRSS.  Specialised  tax  support  and  expertise  is  available  and  has  been 
mobilised  for  the  sake  of  the  reform  of  the  tax  administration  in  Greece.  This 
complementarity  whereby  the  dedicated  Fiscalis  programme  is  primarily  dealing  with 
ensuring the implementation of EU tax policy across all countries while the interventions 
of SRSS and its relevant programme focus on providing tailor made assistance through 
dedicated projects to individual Member States should be maintained.  

EU anti-fraud programme for the protection of financial interests  

As  the  Fiscalis  programme  aims  at  supporting  the  tax  authorities  in  protecting  the  EU 
financial interests, it has connections with the activities carried out by OLAF as regards 
combating  fraud  for  the  protection  of  Union  financial  interests  in  accordance  with  Art. 
325  TFEU.  Currently,  various  cooperation  mechanisms  are  in  place  between  TAXUD 
and  OLAF  but  this  takes  place  outside  the  Fiscalis  programme.  Given  the  particular 
mandate of OLAF, no additional synergies could be identified.  

23 

 
Digital Europe programme and IT synergies 

Finally, there are possibly synergies to exploit in the area of IT with all programmes that 
run (significant)  electronic systems. This is  certainly true for the business agnostic part 
(e.g.  data  centres)  while  the  situation  for  business  specific  part  is  probably  rather 
different. 

The  multiplication  or  required  electronic  systems  and  an  increasing  Member  State 
demand for support in reducing their IT (development) burden raise the issue of both the 
TAXUD delivery model and possible synergies and the long-term operation of customs 
electronic systems in the EU.  

Discussions across Commission services led to the conclusion that the preferred strategy 
is  to  continue  TAXUD  operations  while  in  the  short  term  fine-tuning  the  internal 
organisation  and  continuing  to  build  on  the  relationship  with  DIGIT,  particularly  as 
regards data centre management;  

More  generally  speaking,  actions  carried  out  in  relation  to  the  development,  operation 
and maintenance of European electronic systems will consider as far as possible the reuse 
of  the  building  blocks20  of  the  Connecting  Europe  Facility  (CEF)  as  they  promote 
compliance  to  the  eIDAS  regulation,  support  the  implementation  of  the  Tallinn 
Declaration and enable EU-wide interoperability. Where relevant, they will also consider 
the European Interoperability Framework21, which gives specific guidance on how to set 
up  interoperable  digital  public  services,  and  the  Rolling  Plan  for  ICT  standardisation22, 
which aims at facilitating the identification and development of necessary ICT standards. 
Where  applicable,  coordination  and  synergies  will  also  be  searched  with  other  relevant 
initiatives concerns about fraud and cybersecurity risks as well as in the field of FinTech 
and blockchain, such as the European Commission action plan on FinTech23 adopted in 
March 2018 or the work of the EU Blockchain Observatory and Forum24. 

Horizon Europe and research and innovation  

Policy relevant knowledge is becoming more and more important for all policies. Policy 
relevant  knowledge  will  be  necessary  to  find  new  ways  how  tax  incentives  and  tax 
systems  as  a  whole  can  contribute  to  encourage  sustainable  investments  and  make  the 
economy and our societies move towards low carbon futures. This will help to unleash 
new  opportunities  and  create  jobs  in  the  bioeconomy  and  in  the  circular  economy. 
Synergies with the Horizon Europe programme and other research and innovation actions 
may provide useful support in this regard.  

Conclusion 

In  terms  of  structure  and  positioning  of  the  programme,  the  Commission  services 
explored  a  variety  of  options  to  reap  more  benefits  from  mergers  or  at  least  synergies. 
There is however no simple answer: all options have advantages and drawbacks and none 

20 
21 
22 
23 
24 

https://ec.europa.eu/cefdigital/wiki/display/CEFDIGITAL/CEF+Digital+Home  
COM(2017) 134  
https://ec.europa.eu/growth/industry/policy/ict-standardisation_en  
https://ec.europa.eu/info/business-economy-euro/banking-and-finance/fintech_en#action-plan  
https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/european-commission-launches-eu-blockchain-
observatory-and-forum  

24 

 
                                                            
shows  obvious  efficiencies  or  savings.  On  balance,  there  is  at  this  stage  a  reasonably 
strong case to continue with the current setting.  

5.3.  Other changes to delivery mechanisms 

Taxation can no longer be dealt with only at EU level but requires intensive international 
cooperation,  mainly  through  the  G20:  automatic  exchange  of  information  and 
transparency  can  be  effective  only  if  similar  measures  are  promoted  and  agreed  at 
worldwide level. The implementation of orientations or decisions taken should be better 
addressed at EU level, especially so as to allow for swift solutions. Identified obstacles 
are  non-availability  of  funds  under  TAXUD  programmes,  lengthy  legal  procedures 
needed  for  concluding  international  bilateral  agreements  on  the  use  of  European 
electronic  systems,  complex  or  non-available  financial  instruments  to  cover  the  money 
stream  from  third  countries  towards  the  Commission  to  cover  for  the  investment  and 
maintenance  costs.  The  impact  of  these  obstacles  is  at  the  political  level  as  it  leads  to 
missed opportunities for the EU to steer the global scene and to guarantee that Member 
States will be able to use the EU IT solutions also worldwide.  

Against  this  backdrop,  it  is  proposed  to  allow  the  Commission  to  take  administrative 
arrangements with relevant interlocutors to facilitate and speed up the internationalisation 
of its cooperation in particular of the European electronic systems. 

6.  MONITORING AND EVALUATION 

6.1. 

Final evaluation Fiscalis 2013 

The Decision establishing the Fiscalis 2013 programme carries a legislative requirement 
for  independent  mid-term  and  final  evaluations.  The  final  evaluation25  findings  were 
broadly  positive  with  regard  to  the  Fiscalis  2013  programme’s  contribution  to  policy-
level objectives. The European electronic systems helped identifying and combatting tax 
fraud  and  tax  evasion  by  exchanging  information  and  thereby  improved  revenue 
collection  and  protected  the  financial  interests  of  Member  States  and  the  EU.  The 
integration  of  EU  electronic  systems  with  national  applications  was  identified  as  an 
important influencing factor to ensure that the information could be used to its full effect, 
e.g.  for  further  risk  analysis.  The  human  networks  between  tax  officials  created  by 
Fiscalis  2013  were  also  highlighted  as  one  of  the  most  important  effects  of  the 
programme.  They  contribute  towards  a  “common  approach”  related  to  tax  fraud. 
According to the evaluation, ceasing Fiscalis would likely imply an overall reduction in 
Member  States'  ability  to  combat  tax  fraud  and  evasion  and  a  reduced  effectiveness 
within  national  administrations.  This  would  probably  lead  to  loss  of  tax  revenues,  risk 
distorting  competition  and,  ultimately,  this  would  have  a  detrimental  effect  on  the 
functioning of the single market.  

6.2.  Monitoring Fiscalis 2020 

Besides  these  periodic  evaluations  of  the  programme,  the  Fiscalis  2020  Regulation 
required  the  setup  of  a  comprehensive  and  permanent  Performance  Management 
Framework (PMF) as a monitoring framework for the programme and its actions. Three 

25 

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/resources/documents/common/ 
publications/studies/fiscalis2013_final_evaluation.pdf 

25 

 
                                                            
progress  reports26  were  published  so  far,  covering  the  years  2014,  2015  and  2016.  The 
indicators  give  an  overall  positive  assessment  of  Fiscalis  2020  and  suggest  that  the 
programme is on course to fulfilling its objectives and that it plays an important role in 
facilitating the implementation and development of EU taxation policies. Fiscalis 2020 is 
marked  by  the  successful  introduction  of  new  types  of  cooperation  (expert  teams)  that 
allow  structured  operational  cooperation  amongst  experts  from  Member  States  on 
common  projects  on  a  longer  term  and  result-driven  basis  (1  year  and  more).  More 
generally speaking, Fiscalis also generates economies of scale as it reduces costs of (IT) 
development  and  implementation  for  taxpayers  and  businesses,  and  it  strengthens  the 
Member States' and EU influence on the international scene. 

6.3.  Mid-term evaluation of Fiscalis 2020 

A mid-term evaluation of Fiscalis 2020 is on-going and its final report is due by 30 June 
2018. The (draft) recommendations indicate that the programme is providing strong EU 
added value, building trust and fostering strong cooperation between Member States and 
also with other participating countries (candidate countries and potential candidates). The 
programme  also  eases  the  implementation  of  EU  legislation,  while  allowing  efficiency 
gains (through pooling of resources) especially in the area of  electronic systems (where 
EU intervention is resulting in economies of scale and reduced development costs) and 
training modules (where EU intervention is reported as saving time and money for some 
administrations).  Participants  have  also  reported  a  high  and  growing  interest  in  joint 
actions  (particularly  working  visits,  seminars  and  workshops)  as  an  effective  tool  that 
contributes  to  cooperation  and  to  improve  the  exchange  of  information  between  tax 
authorities.  The  introduction  of  Expert  Teams  is  seen  as  a  powerful  vehicle  to  drive  a 
deeper  cooperation  (on  a  regional  or  thematic  basis)  given  its  specific  funding 
arrangements  and  operational  setup.  Some  participants  pointed  out  the  possibility  of 
increasing  the  current  distribution  of  funds  in  favour  of  this  administrative  capacity 
building  activity.  Finally,  the  current  monitoring  system  has  been  found  to  create 
substantial burdens on administrations and the Commission. This seemed partially due to 
the high number of indicators, which were difficult to manage and were not always fed 
into decision-making.  

6.4.  Ex-ante evaluation study  

The Commission commissioned an external study to support this ex-ante evaluation by 
providing quantitative and qualitative information. The objective of this assignment was 
to identify the key drivers setting the taxation scene in a post 2020 context, the problems 
to be faced by the EU single market and Member States' tax administrations in relation to 
taxation in the period post 2020 which could be addressed under a future EU financing 
intervention,  taking  into  account  the  nature  of  the  identified  drivers  and  their 
consequences  and  help  the  Commission  with  identifying  objectives  for  an  EU-level 
intervention based on the identified drivers and problems (Task 1); identify possible EU 
policy options to achieve the objectives set by the Commission and deploy a future EU 
financing intervention in response to the drivers and problems identified and assess the 
identified  options'  expected  economic,  social  and  environmental  impacts  (Task  2); 
comparing  the  options  according  to  the  set  criteria  (such  as  efficiency,  effectiveness, 
relevance, coherence) rank the options with reasoned arguments (Task 3).  

26  

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/fiscalis-programme/reference-documents_en  

26 

 
                                                            
The  study  included  dedicated  consultation  activities  to  gather  more  broadly  the  view 
from  all  stakeholders.  Considering  the  particular  scope  of  the  programme  (tax 
administrations are the only direct beneficiaries), these consultations concentrated on tax 
administrations  by  means  of  discussions  in  a  project  group,  country  visits/case  studies 
and  dedicated  surveys.  Interviews  with  business  associations,  NGOs  and  academics  as 
well as  with Fiscalis 2020 participants, consultants and international organisations (e.g. 
OECD) complemented these activities.  

The external study and the related consultation activities confirmed the challenging times 
ahead of tax administrations and the need for an ambitious programme around 2 key 
dimensions: on the one hand, continuity and reinforcement of (IT and human) capacity 
building  and  cooperation  actions  for  a  proper  application  of  EU  and  national  tax 
provisions  and,  on  the  other  hand,  more  enhanced  operational  cooperation  and  better 
tackling innovation.  

Last but not least, an open public consultation on "EU funds in the area of investment, 
research & innovation, SMEs and single market" was launched aiming at gathering the 
views  of  citizens  on  a.o.  policy  challenges  and  needs  for  EU  intervention  as  regards 
taxation.  4052  respondents  provided  feedback  out  of  which  only  6  reported  that  they 
have  experience  with  the  Fiscalis  2020  programme,  representing  0.15 %  of  the  total 
number of respondents. Also,  only 47 comments referred to taxation. This very limited 
number of instances relating to Fiscalis confirms the limited overall interest of the public 
at  large  and  the  relevance  of  the  programme  objectives  –  and  focus  of  stakeholders’ 
consultations – on tax administrations.  

The conclusions drawn from experience by the evaluation and monitoring activities 
indicate  that  the  programme  is  a  strong  basis  for  replying  to  the  needs  of  tax 
administrations and some adjustments would allow reaping even more benefits. In 
addition,  an  external  study  allowed  identifying  precisely  and  the  open  public 
consultation  confirmed  the  many  and  significant  challenges  ahead  of  EU  tax 
systems and the single market and – indirectly – the programme.  

6.5.  Monitoring strategy of the performance 

The impact of the future Fiscalis programme is to be assessed through interim and final 
evaluations  as  well  as  by  monitoring  on  an  ongoing  basis  a  set  of  high-level  key 
performance indicators. 

The results and outputs of the programme will be regularly subject to assessment through 
a  comprehensive  monitoring  system,  based  on  defined  indicators,  in  line  with  the 
Commission's  commitment  to  monitor  the  EU  budget  and  ensure  the  accountability  for 
value for money. 

The basic legal act will provide for both an interim evaluation and a final evaluation of 
the  programme,  in  line  with  the  requirements  of  the  Better  Regulation  Guidelines.  The 
Commission will monitor the programme and the actions under it in cooperation with the 
participating countries.  

On  a  yearly  basis,  a  programme  progress  report  containing  a  summary  of  performance 
over  the  course  of  the  previous  year  in  relation  to  the  programme’  objectives  and  the 
related output and result indicators. 

27 

 
6.5.1.  Data for the monitoring 

Data  for  measuring  performance  will  be  drawn  from  various  data  collection  tools.  The 
main tools envisaged at present are action follow-up forms, event assessment forms and a 
regular poll of tax officials. 

Throughout the programme, depending on the future opportunities to collect data at more 
disaggregated level, there will be an attempt to make use of new tools. 

In  addition  to  the  data  collected  via  the  tools  described  above,  data  to  feed  into  the 
indicators comes from a variety of sources, namely: 

- 
IT statistics; 
-  Data analytics 
-  Studies and surveys 
-  DG  TAXUD  business  units  own  statistics  gathered  via  questionnaires  and  surveys 

specific for their area of work and relevant for the programme 

-  Other bodies 

6.5.2.  Fiscalis programme core indicators 

The monitoring system of the programme builds on the experience developed under the 
previous  programme.  The  most  meaningful  indicators  for  the  next  generation  of 
programme are presented in the table below, following contributions from the Mid-term 
Evaluation of the Fiscalis 2020 Programme, advice from JRC and recommendations from 
the  ECA.  Since  the  programme  plays  a  supporting  role,  helping  participating  country 
administrations  to  share  information  and  boost  their  capacity,  the  monitoring  system 
focuses on following the progress of the programme’ activities in terms of indicators at 
outputs  (e.g.  number  of  guidelines  produced)  and  results  (e.g.  actual  use  of  such 
guidelines)  levels.  These  are  the  aspects  where  available  data  can  be  linked  to  the 
performance of the programme in concrete ways.  

Whenever possible, it also follows indicators in areas related to the programme’s high-
level objectives. Because change in these indicators is affected by many factors, a causal 
relationship  cannot  be  established 
to  programme 
performance. In other words, a causal relationship cannot be established. For this reason, 
rather than devoting substantial resources to collecting impact-level indicators expressly 
for monitoring the programme, it is proposed to track a limited number of indicators that 
are already being collected for various policy-related purposes. These will help gauge the 
direction of travel and ensure that the programme targets issues across its main activity 
areas that are most urgent for its stakeholders.  

to  attribute  change  directly 

The  experience  of  the  Fiscalis  2020  programme  suggested  (based  on  the  mid-term 
evaluation) that its monitoring system placed substantial burdens on administrations and 
DG  TAXUD,  without  leading  to  big  improvements  in  the  programme’s  design  and 
management.  In  part,  this  seemed  due  to  the  sheer  number  of  indicators,  which  were 
difficult  to  manage  and  feed  into  decision-making.  For  this  reason,  DG  TAXUD  will 
consider the possibility to simplify the monitoring system and make it more purposeful 
and result-oriented.  

28 

 
The  following  core  indicators27  have  been  identified  as  relevant  for  measuring  the 
performance of the programme’s specific objective: 

Specific objective: 
Support tax policy, tax cooperation and administrative capacity building, including 
human competency and the development and operation of the European electronic 
systems 
Indicators: 
(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

Indicator 1: Union Law and Policy Application and Implementation Index 
(Number of actions under the Programme organised in this area and 
recommendations issued following those actions) 
Indicator 2: Best Practices and Guideline Index (number of actions under the 
Programme organised in this area; percentage of tax administrations that made 
use of a working practice/guideline developed with the support of the 
Programme) 
Indicator 3: Learning Index (Learning modules used; number of officials trained; 
quality score by participants) 
Indicator 4: Collaboration Robustness Index (degree of networking generated, 
number of face-to-face meetings, number of on-line collaboration groups) 
Indicator 5: Availability of European electronic systems (in time percentage 
terms) 
Indicator 6: Availability of the Common Communication Network (in time 
percentage terms) 
Indicator 7: IT simplified procedures for the national administrations and 
economic operators (number of registered economic operators, numbers of 
applications and number of consultations in the different electronic systems 
funded by the Programme) 

27  

Availability and reliability of data were key considerations for selecting these core indicators.  

29 

 
 
                                                            
Annex 1: Intervention overview for EU tax policy  

30