COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT IMPACT ASSESSMENT Accompanying the document Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCILestablishing the 'Customs' programme for cooperation in the field of customs
Date: 2018-06-08
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, EU programme, customs, customs cooperation, customs union, information system, third country

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 8.6.2018  SWD(2018) 321 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  IMPACT ASSESSMENT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a  REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing the 'Customs' programme for cooperation in the field of customs {COM(2018) 442 final} - {SEC(2018) 295 final} - {SWD(2018) 322 final}  
 
 
Table of contents 

1. 

INTRODUCTION: POLITICAL AND LEGAL CONTEXT ............................................................... 4 

1.1.  Scope and context .............................................................................................. 4 
1.2.  Lessons learned from previous programmes ..................................................... 8 
The Customs programme ........................................................................................ 8 
1.2.1. 

1.2.2. 

Evaluation activities ................................................................................................. 9 

1.2.3. 

Consultation activities ........................................................................................... 11 

2. 

THE OBJECTIVES ............................................................................................................................ 13 

2.1.  Challenges for the programmes of the next MFF ............................................ 13 
2.2.  Objectives of the programmes of the next MFF .............................................. 17 

3. 

PROGRAMME STRUCTURE AND PRIORITIES ........................................................................... 18 

3.1.  Option 1: EU27 - baseline ............................................................................... 21 
3.2.  Option 2: critical mass ..................................................................................... 22 
3.3.  Option 3: continuity “plus” ............................................................................. 23 
3.4.  Option 4: structural centralisation ................................................................... 25 
3.5.  Subsidiarity, proportionality and intended legal basis .................................... 26 

4.  DELIVERY MECHANISMS OF THE INTENDED FUNDING ...................................................... 28 

4.1.  Overall delivery mechanisms .......................................................................... 28 
4.2.  Synergies & complementarities with other EU action programmes and 

funds ................................................................................................................ 30 

5.  HOW WILL PERFORMANCE BE MONITORED AND EVALUATED?....................................... 34 

5.1.  Monitoring strategy of the performance .......................................................... 34 
5.2.  Data for the monitoring ................................................................................... 34 
5.3.  Customs programme core indicators ............................................................... 35 
5.4.  Evaluations ...................................................................................................... 36 

ANNEX 1: PROCEDURAL INFORMATION ............................................................................................ 37 

ANNEX 2: STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION ....................................................................................... 38 

ANNEX 3: EVALUATION RESULTS ....................................................................................................... 58 

ANNEX 4: INTERVENTION LOGIC OF PROGRAMME ........................................................................ 61 

1 

 
Glossary 

Term or acronym 

Meaning or definition 

ACB 

ART 

BCP 

C2020 

CCN 

CELBET 

Administrative Capacity Building 

Activity Reporting Tool 

Border Crossing Point 

Customs 2020 programme, as established by Regulation (EU) No 1294/2013 

Common Communication Network 

Customs Eastern and South-Eastern Land Border Expert Team, an expert team 
established under the C2020 programme and aimed, among others, at taking stock of 
the situation at the EU external land frontier and mapping it in terms of presence of 
customs officers and available equipment for all BCPs 

ECA 

European Court of Auditors 

ECOFIN 

Economic and Financial Affairs (Council) 

EP 

EPPO 

ESTAT 

Europol 

European Parliament 

European Public Prosecutor Office 

Eurostat 

European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation 

F2020 or Fiscalis 

Fiscalis 2020 programme, as established by Regulation (EU) No 1286/2013 

Hercule 

HOME 

ICS/ICS2 

IT 

JRC 

MASP 

MFF 

NGO 

OECD 

OLAF 

Hercule III programme, as established by Regulation (EU) No 250/2014 that protects 
the EU's financial interests by supporting action to combat irregularities, fraud and 
corruption affecting the EU budget 

Directorate-General for Migration and Home Affairs, the Commission service in 
charge of asylum, migration, security (police) and border-visa policies 

Import Control System – See http://ec.europa.eu/ecip/help/faq/ens7_en.htm for more 
information 

Information Technology 

Joint Research Centre 

Electronic Customs Multi-Annual Strategic Plan – See 
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/general-information-customs/electronic-
customs_en for more information  

Multiannual Financial Framework 

Non-governmental organisation 

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development 

European Anti-Fraud Office, the Commission service in charge of the protection of 
EU financial interests 

OPEX 

Operational expenditure 

Participating 
countries 

Member States and Third Countries associated to the Programme in accordance with 
the provisions of Article 5 of the proposed Regulation 

2 

 
PICS 

PMF 

SRSS 

Programme Information and Collaboration Space online collaboration  

Performance Measurement Framework, put in place to implement Article 17 of 
Regulation (EU) No 1294/2013 

Structural Reform Support Service, the Commission service in charge of helping EU 
countries to design and carry out structural reforms as part of their efforts to support 
job creation and sustainable growth 

TAXUD 

Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, the Commission service in 
charge of taxation and customs policy 

TFEU 

UCC 

VAT 

WCO 

WTO 

Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

Union Customs Code, as established by Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 

Value Added Tax 

World Customs Organisation 

World Trade Organisation 

3 

 
 
 
 
1. 

INTRODUCTION: POLITICAL AND LEGAL CONTEXT 

1.1. 

Scope and context 

On  2  May  2018,  the  European  Commission  adopted  its  proposals  for  a  new  Multiannual 
Financial  Framework  (MFF)  for  2021-2027.  Under  these  proposals,  the  Customs  programme 
will  have  a  budget  of  EUR  950  million  (in  current  prices)  over  this  period.  This  impact 
assessment report reflects the decisions of the MFF proposals and focuses on the changes and 
policy choices which are specific to this programme.  

For  50  years,  the  customs  union,  implemented  by  national  customs  authorities,  has  been  a 
significant  example  of  successful  integration  in  the  EU.  The  customs  union  covers  all  trade  in 
goods. It has enabled the EU not only to remove internal borders but also to compete with the 
rest of the world. The EU's single market, which allows any business established in the EU to sell 
its  goods  and  invest  throughout  the  EU  without  any  internal  borders,  would  be  impossible 
without the tariff-free environment provided by the Customs Union and the role the latter plays 
in overseeing imports and exports.  

Internationally,  the  EU  is  now  the  largest  trading  block  in  the  world,  accounting  for  15 %  of 
world trade1, and thus has a far stronger position in trade negotiations with third countries than 
would any Member State negotiating alone. In implementing the EU commercial policy, customs 
handle an enormous volume of trade on a daily basis: the total statistical value2 of EU-28 trade 
flow  was  €3.46  trillion  in  2016  (€1.75  trillion for  export  and  €1.71  trillion  for  import)  or  €9.5 
billion a day. 4.3 million businesses are registered by customs to trade goods in and out of the 
EU.  The total  number  of  customs  declarations3  has  been constantly  growing over  the last five 
years  reaching  the  level  of  313  million  in  2016  or  10  declarations  per  second,  with  98 %  of 
customs declarations being made electronically. 

The  fast,  secure  and  cost-effective  operation  and  performance  of  the  EU  external  trade  is 
critical for  the predictable  and  competitive  operation  of  EU  enterprises  and  economies.  OECD 
and  World  Bank  trade  policy  studies4  have  estimated  that  typically  a  10 %  reduction  in 
processing time of external trade allows about 2.5 to 3.5 percent growth of trade.  

The customs union helps safeguarding the financial interests of the Union and of the Member 
States. Customs duties represent about 15.2 % of the EU budget (€20 billion in 2016). Customs 
also  collect  the  VAT  on  imported  goods.  They  are  responsible  for  tracking  illegal  cross-border 
flows of goods and fighting fraud schemes with a significant financial impact on national and EU 
budgets (e.g. targeting the undervaluation of imported textiles from the Far East). 

Moreover, customs authorities have been given an increasing number of tasks in their role as 
guardians  of  the  external  EU  border  (land,  water  and  air)  regarding  goods  and  now  they  also 
protect the public against terrorist, health, environmental and other threats, and protect nature 
and  the  environment  itself.  Customs  authorities  apply  a  list  of  more  than  60  non-customs 
legislations relating to, among others, dual use goods, firearms, drug precursors, movement of 
cash,  intellectual  property  rights,  public  health,  product  safety  and  consumer  protection,  the 
protection of wildlife and of the environment. Customs authorities play a critical role in securing 

1  

2  
3  
4  

The total statistical value of EU-28 trade flow was €3.5 trillion in 2016 or €9.5 billion a day (source: 
Eurostat). 
Source: Eurostat 
Source: DG TAXUD 
OECD Trade Policy Papers 21, 42, 118, 144 and 150 and 157 and Djankov, Simeon; Freund, Caroline & 
Pham, Cong S.: "Trading on Time", World Bank / Doing Business, (2006 and 2008) : Report (2008, 
modified in 2010) 

4 

 
                                                            
the  integrity  of  the  supply  chain  and  preventing  terrorist  and  crime  organisations  from  freely 
moving  their  funds.  This  increasing  role  in  the  security  area  is  recognised  in  the  Commission 
Action  Plan  for  strengthening  the  fight  against  terrorist  financing5  and  the  EU  Strategy  and 
Action  Plan  for  customs  risk  management:  tackling  risks,  strengthening  supply  chain  security 
and facilitating trade6.  

The  Customs  Union  has  therefore  evolved  considerably  over  the  last  fifty  years  and  customs 
authorities now successfully perform a wide variety of tasks at borders. The responsibilities of 
Member States' customs authorities have extended beyond their traditional role in supervising 
and  facilitating  EU  trade  and  its  economic  interest  by  taking  on  an  increasing  number  of 
responsibilities  in  the  field  of  safety  and  security  with  a  view  to  protecting  the  public  against 
terrorist,  health, environmental and  other threats.  Given  this  broad  mandate,  customs  is  now 
effectively the lead authority for the control of goods at the EU's external borders. In particular, 
customs have assumed a front line position in the fight against terrorism and organised crime, 
with  the  introduction  of  an  EU-wide  Common  Risk  Management  Framework  and  customs 
control  movements  of  large  amounts  of  cash  to  combat  money  laundering  and  terrorist 
financing. In order to play their role efficiently and effectively, customs need to be able to count 
on state-of-the-art technology and efficient European electronic systems. 

However, there are many new challenges ahead. New trends and technologies - digitalisation, 
connectedness,  the  internet  of  things,  data  analytics,  artificial  intelligence  and  blockchain 
technology – present both opportunities and threats. New business models such as e-commerce 
and supply chain optimisation are emerging and must be framed and properly checked. At the 
same time, public finances are under pressure, the volumes of world trade are increasing, fraud 
and smuggling are a constant and growing concern and there are persistent transnational crime 
and  security  threats.  Strategies  adopted  in  other  policy  areas  impact  on  and  expand  customs 
tasks. Resources and  funding are  needed,  in  particular  to  develop  and  maintain  the  European 
electronic  systems  that  are  now  crucial  to  the  operation  of  the  Customs  Union.  Meanwhile, 
work on the many customs-related implications of the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from 
the  EU  must  be  prioritised.  All  of  this  is  putting  EU  customs  authorities  under  increasing 
pressure and requires an even closer cooperation. 

Since  2016,  the  Union  Customs  Code  (UCC)  is  the  new  legal  customs  framework.  The  UCC  is 
meant as a natural evolution towards a modern customs environment for which the results and 
benefits will be grasped only when it will be implemented in its full capacity by the end of 2025.  

The objectives  of  the UCC  are  to  streamline  customs  legislation  and  procedures,  offer  greater 
legal certainty and uniformity to businesses, increase clarity for customs officials throughout the 
EU, simplify customs rules and procedures, facilitate more efficient customs transactions in line 
with  modern-day  needs,  reinforce  swifter  customs  procedures  for  compliant  and  trustworthy 
economic operators (AEO) and complete the shift by customs to a paperless and fully electronic 
and interoperable environment. In practice, the major goals of the UCC aim to extend the use of 
common  instruments  such  as  EU  authorizations,  to  end  paper-based  procedures  as  well as  to 
reinforce risk management for safety and security with a view to advance cargo information.  

These  objectives  cannot  be  reached  without  IT  solutions,  central  connections  and  common 
development. Substantial and ongoing investment in European electronic systems is therefore 
needed:  

5  
6  

COM(2016) 50 final 
COM(2014) 527 final 

5 

 
                                                            
- 

The UCC has triggered a massive digitalisation project with 17 different electronic systems, 
building on the currently available network of electronic systems. These systems touch upon 
all customs procedures and will therefore be at the heart of the functioning of the customs 
union.  Responsibility  for  these  IT  projects  is  shared  between  national  customs  authorities 
and the Commission.  

-  Also,  as  acknowledged  in  the  Reflection  Paper  on  Harnessing  Globalisation7,  further 
investments  could  be  made  in  EU  customs  risk  management  in  order  to  facilitate  and 
accelerate legitimate EU trade, while ensuring the safety and security of citizens by stopping 
harmful  or  dangerous  goods  permeating  EU  borders  and  protecting  the  financial  and 
economic interests of the Union and the Member States. 

When  fully  implemented,  the  UCC  will  enhance  the  competitiveness  of  European  businesses 
and  rebalance  the  important  equilibrium  between  customs  controls  and  facilitation  of  the 
legitimate  flow  of  goods  transiting  or  moving  in  and  out  of  the  Union,  without  sacrificing  the 
important  public  goods  (security,  health  protection,  financial  interests,  IPR,  …)  mentioned 
before.  

The  customs  union  remains  a  foundation  of  the  Union  and  a  fundamental  enabler  of  the 
Internal Market and the other EU political priorities. It has a key function not only in view of 
its  traditional  role  in  duty  collection  for  the  Union  budget  but  also  because  customs 
authorities hold a key role in ensuring external border and supply chain security, contributing 
to the security of the European Union. In order to make the customs union work in practise, 
the  Commission  and  the  customs  administrations  of  the  Member  States  need  to  design 
common solutions to common problems. They need to be able to count on efficient European 
electronic  systems  with  central connections  and  a  common  development in  order  to  reduce 
costs for all. 

The upcoming withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU implies disentangling the United 
Kingdom as a Member State from all existing customs electronic systems financed by Customs 
2020.  These  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 United Kingdom. 

The key role of customs for the Union is widely acknowledged at political level.  

As underlined in the Reflection Paper on the Future of EU Finances8, even in a scenario where 
the trend and volume of EU action would be significantly reduced (so called "scenario 2 - Doing 
less  together"  in  the  Reflection  Paper),  customs  would  need  to  be  maintained  as  part  of  the 
core  single  market  programmes.  Moreover,  recognising  that  a  strong  and  well-managed 
customs union can enable the EU to prosper and develop competitive businesses, to safeguard 
its  revenue  sources  and  protect  the  public  against  terrorist,  health,  environmental  and  other 
threats, the Commission adopted in December 2016 a Communication9 on "Developing the EU 
Customs Union and Its Governance", which detailed a number of solutions for a more cohesive 
and  uniform  application  of  the  common  customs  rules,  a  better  cooperation  of  customs  with 
other  border  management  and  security  authorities,  and  a  more  comprehensive  long-term 
strategy for the development and maintenance of customs electronic systems. 

The  Council  also  repeatedly  insisted  on  the  crucial  role  that  the  Customs  Union  plays  in 
contributing to the EU prosperity and competitiveness as well as the security and safety of EU 

7  
8  
9  

COM(2017) 240 final 
COM(2017) 358 final 
COM(2016) 813 final 

6 

 
                                                            
residents  by  enabling  and  protecting  the  EU  Single  Market.  In  March  2017,  ECOFIN  adopted 
specific Council conclusions10 both on customs funding and on developing the EU customs union 
and  its  governance  acknowledging  that  the  EU  customs  authorities  and  their  role  in  the 
management  of  the  external  border  have  undergone  a  number  of  changes  since  the 
establishment  of  the  customs  union  and  that  those  changes  and  responsibilities  create 
challenges  that  require up-to  date  customs  IT support. In  this  respect,  ECOFIN recognised  the 
need  for  "high  quality  electronic  customs  systems  which  are  essential  tools  to  facilitate  and 
accelerate legitimate trade and to enhance the economic development and competitiveness of 
the  EU,  whilst  carrying  out  the  necessary  controls  and  contributing  to  the  security  of  goods 
moving  across  the  external  EU  borders".  ECOFIN  also  underlined  the  need  "to  ensure  correct, 
effective  and  timely  implementation  of  the  UCC  and  its  IT  Work  Programme"  and  "to  ensure 
resources for the continued successful operation of the Customs Union".  

In several resolutions11, the European Parliament also considered that “the Customs Union is a 
cornerstone  of  the  European  Union  as  one  of  the  largest  trading  blocks  in  the  world,  and 
whereas it is essential for the proper functioning of the single market for the benefit of both EU 
businesses  and  citizens”.  Therefore,  it  also  called  “to  come  up  with  a  clear,  coherent  and 
ambitious  strategy  and  timeline  to  ensure  that  any  elements  that  are  necessary  for  the 
enforcement of the EU customs systems are covered by appropriate proposals that are aligned 
with and fit for purpose for the current evolution of global trade and the implementation of the 
EU trade policy agenda”. In particular, it suggested “to take a proactive approach in this respect, 
in particular through a co-financing arrangement to ensure the development of interoperable IT 
systems  and  to  guarantee  interoperability  with  other  IT  systems  for  health  and  animal  health 
certificates”.  

Last  but  certainly  not  least,  the  Union  has  also  –  beyond  its  internal  political  ambitions  –  to 
comply and deliver on its international obligations under the WTO and, in particular, to ensure 
that EU customs acts as one.  

Against  this  backdrop,  this  impact  assessment  supports  policy  decision-making  on  the  post-
2020  MFF  in  the  field  of  customs.  It  meets  the  requirements  of  the  financial  regulation  in 
respect of preparing an ex-ante evaluation. 

This  impact  assessment  should  be  read  in  conjunction  with  other  proposed  EU  action 
programmes  and  funds  that  pursue  similar  objectives  in  related  fields  of  competence  and 
especially:  
- 
- 

The Fiscalis programme12, that supports cooperation in the field of taxation;  
The  EU  Anti-Fraud  programme13  (formerly:  “Hercule  III”),  that  combats  fraud  and  other 
illegal activities affecting the financial interests of the Union;  
The  Single  Market  Programme14,  which  supports  EU  actions  for  achieving  a  better 
functioning of the internal market; 
The  Internal  Security  Fund15  and  Integrated  Border  Management  Fund16  (with  its  2 
components  about  border  and  visa  policy  as  well  as  customs  control  equipment),  which 

Outcome of the Council Meeting – 3543rd Council meeting (Economic and Financial Affairs) – Brussels, 23 
May 2017 (Document 9581/17: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/22301/st09581en17-vf.pdf) 
See for example: European Parliament resolution on tackling the challenges of the Union Customs Code 
implementation (2016/3024(RSP)) 
COM(2018) 443 
COM(2018) 386  
COM(2018) 441 
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Internal Security 
Fund 

7 

- 

- 

10  

11  

12  
13  
14  
15  

 
                                                            
promote the implementation of the Internal Security Strategy and support law enforcement 
cooperation and the management of the Union's external borders;  
The  Reform  Support  programme17  that  provides  tailor-made  technical  support  to  EU 
countries; and 
The Digital Europe Programme18. 

- 

- 

1.2.  Lessons learned from previous programmes 

1.2.1.  The Customs programme 

Although  the  customs  union  is  an  area  of  exclusive  competence  with  a  high  degree  of 
harmonised  EU  legislation,  the  implementation  of  this  legislation  remains  entirely  with  the 
individual  Member  States.  The  main  added  value  of  the  customs  cooperation  programmes, 
since early 90s, is to provide the framework, mechanisms and budget for cooperation between 
national customs administrations themselves, between them and the Commission, traders and 
other  players  involved  in  the  management  of  the  external  border  in  order  to  reach  a  deeper 
operational  integration.  Such  deeper  operational  cooperation  between  the  national  customs 
administrations  is  crucial  to  face  global  and  trans-European  challenges  such  as  terrorism, 
globalisation  and  e-commerce  in  an  efficient  and  coherent  way  across  Europe  as  the  customs 
union can only be as strong as its weakest link.  

The programmes are traditionally construed around two strands of activities: 
-  Activities  which  stem  directly  from  Union  legislation  as  regards  the  functioning  of  the 
customs  union,  i.e.  ensuring  the  implementation  of  the  Union  legislation  in  a  harmonised 
way and developing European electronic systems in accordance with obligations in the EU 
legislation;  

-  Activities which aim at improving the administrative capacity of the customs administrations 
of  the  participating  countries,  i.e.  lifting  the  quality  of  the  individual  administrations  and 
their components up to a higher level:  

o  Enhancing  systems, 

tools,  processes,  procedures  and 

techniques 

for 

o 

administering customs duties;  
Improving the structure and policy of customs administrations so as to fulfil all 
their core duties;  

o  Developing skills and knowledge of human resources.  

The second strand of activities, administrative capacity building (ACB) activities, has deepened 
significantly over the years:  
- 

Initially the ACB activities were focussing on putting in place approaches and processes that 
were  starting  from  the  assumption  that  customs  administrations  had  the  same  needs.  As 
such,  the  activities  proposed  a  "one  size  fits  all"  approach  involving  all  participating 
countries.  Over  the  years,  it  became  clearer  that  there  are  substantial  differences  in  the 
needs  of  the  administrations  and  that  ACB  activities  should  consider  this.  Gradually  more 
tailor made activities were initiated taking on board regional and individual country needs 
aiming  through  administrative  capacity  building  at  bringing  them  at  a  common  higher 
standard. 

-  More  recently,  expert  teams  were  created  to  foster  operational  cooperation  between 
Member States. A good example of this is "CELBET" where 11 Member States work together 
in  the  management  of  the  land  border  in  respect  of  6  specific  strands:  risk  management, 

16  

17  
18  

Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing, as part of the 
Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for customs control equipment 
COM(2018) 391 
COM(2018) 434 

8 

 
                                                                                                                                                                                 
- 

- 

operational  controls,  equipment  and  procurement,  training,  evaluation  and  performance, 
cooperation;  
The  number  of  working  visits  is  increasing  significantly  over  time  although  a  drop  can  be 
noticed in some countries likely due to cuts in human resources;  
The number and variety of ACB activities embedded in European electronic systems is also 
increasing  with  e.g.  the  definition  and  development  of  a  new  joint  risk  management  tool 
(ICS2).  

This evolution towards enhanced administrative capacity is also in line with the Treaties. Article 
3 of the TFEU, under the principle of sincere cooperation, calls for the Union and the Member 
States  to  assist  each  other  in  carrying  out  tasks  that  flow  from  the  Treaties.  Article  33  TFEU 
foresees  specifically  customs  cooperation  while  197  TFEU  stipulates  that  effective 
implementation of Union law by the Member States shall be regarded as a matter of common 
interest.  Effective  implementation  of  the  customs  union  in  the  EU  should  thus  be  seen  as  a 
‘collaborative  project’,  not  only  because  Member  States  benefit  when  others  correctly 
implement common rules but also because they learn from the experiences of other Member 
States,  and  the  programmes  are  an  excellent  tool  in  this  respect.  They  also  enable  the 
Commission to fulfil its part of the sincere cooperation. 

The programme evolved over time from a targeted support to the customs union legislation 
towards  a comprehensive  policy  framework  that contributes  to  the  European integration  of 
the operational implementation of the customs policy. There was a step up from working first 
only on harmonisation issues stemming from Community legislation (common understanding, 
developing  European  electronic  systems)  towards  furthering  integration  at  implementation 
level. In addition, the customs programme has provided over time more support to customs 
with its enlarged responsibilities in the areas of safety and security and the implementation of 
non-customs  legislation  on  top  of  the  initial  pure  fiscal  competences  for  protecting  the 
financial and economic interests of the Union and its Member States. Activities tend thus to 
enter more and more into the domain of operational core duties of customs administrations 
and  the  programme  paves  thereby  the  way  towards  a  common  administrative  culture  and 
operational implementation.  

1.2.2.  Evaluation activities 

The  final  evaluation19  of  the  Customs  2013  programme  reported  a  strong  EU  added  value, 
particularly  regarding  its  role  in  supporting  the  implementation  of  EU  customs  legislation  at 
national  level.  The  national  administrations  expressed  the  view  that  the  electronic  systems 
funded through the programme were highly complementary to national initiatives. This led to 
reductions in costs, which would not have been possible if each Member State had to develop 
similar  electronic  systems  on its own.  It also  helped  to  implement EU  legislation  more  quickly 
and at a lower cost. This added value is most present in the area of  IT where the programme 
allows  developing  and  running  a  series  of  European  electronic  systems.  Without  the 
programmes, Member States would have to go for bilateral and multilateral approaches, which 
would  have  been  much  more  costly  and  slower  without  a  guarantee  for  having  ultimately  a 
common  IT  approach.  In  this  sense,  one  Euro  spent  at  EU  level  for  the  development  of  a 
common IT part equals 5 Euros invested at national level. 

At  the  same  time,  the  final  evaluation  of  the  Customs  2013  programme  identified  a  specific 
issue in relation to insufficient national investments, which may delay the EU-wide deployment 
of  customs  electronic  systems.  The  programme  financed  the  EU  specifications  of  European 

19  

https://publications.europa.eu/s/fKSa  

9 

 
                                                            
electronic  systems  and  Member  States  bore  the  costs  of  making  national  systems  compatible 
with the EU specifications. The evaluation notes that, according to Member States’ officials, the 
costs to national administrations are of a similar degree as those borne by the Commission and 
that implementation and upgrades of European electronic systems can be especially expensive 
for  Member  States  if  national  systems  are  complex  and  if  there  is  a  lack  of  integration  of 
national systems. As national components of the European electronic systems are not financed 
by  Customs  2020  but  are  borne  by  Member  States,  national  budget  constraints  can  thus 
jeopardize the correct implementation of European electronic systems.  

A mid-term evaluation of Customs 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  leading  to  convergence  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  European  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 customs 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. 

Besides  these  periodic  evaluations  of  the  programme,  the  Customs  2020  Regulation  requires 
the  Commission  to  monitor  the  programme  and  the  actions  under  it  in  partnership  with  the 
participating  countries.  For  this  purpose,  the  Commission  has  set  up  a  comprehensive 
Performance  Management  Framework  (PMF)  containing  indicators  and  data  collection 
processes  for  the  various  programme  actions.  Three  progress  reports20  on  monitoring  results 
were published so far, covering the years 2014, 2015 and 2016. The indicators give an overall 
positive assessment and suggest that the Customs 2020 programme is on course to fulfilling its 
objectives  and  that  it  plays  an  important  role  in  facilitating  the  implementation  and 
development  of  EU  customs  policy.  As  such,  it  contributes  actively  to  having  skilled, 
interconnected  and  responsive  customs  administrations  in  order  to  ensure  the  financial  and 
physical protection of the EU's interests at the border.  

In  addition  to  these  evaluation  and  monitoring  activities,  the  European  Court  of  Auditors 
carried  out  recently  an  audit21  on  EU  import  procedures.  It  observed  that  “EU  action 
programmes  have  boosted  knowledge-sharing  and  cooperation  between  Member  States  but 
they  have  not  been  effective  in  ensuring  that  all  customs  administrations  act  as  if  they  were 
one”.  Beyond  the  programme, the Court identified  that  “shortcomings in  the  legal  framework 
and  an  ineffective  implementation  impact  the  financial  interests  of  the  EU”.  Against  this 
background,  it issued several recommendations  that the programme  could help implement. It 
recommended, among other, to:  

20  
21  

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/customs-cooperation-programmes/reference-documents_en 
European Court of Auditors, Special report - Import procedures: shortcomings in the legal framework and 
an ineffective implementation impact the financial interests of the EU, approved on 7 November 2017, 
available on-line https://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR17_19/SR_CUSTOMS_EN.pdf, pages 
11-12.  

10 

 
                                                            
- 

- 

“consider  all  available  options  to  strengthen  support  for  national  customs  services  in  their 
important EU role in the new Multiannual Financial Framework”;  
“in the next Multiannual Financial Framework propose that the next EU action programmes, 
which support the Customs union, should be used to contribute to financial sustainability to 
the customs European Information Systems”.  

1.2.3.  Consultation activities 

Although  the  next  programme  may  benefit  from  adjustments  identified  from  past  experience 
and  aim  at  getting  even  more  impact  and  added  value,  it  needs  first  and  foremost  to  be  in  a 
position  to  reply  to  the  challenges  over  the  period  2021-2027  and  to  pave  the  way  for  the 
periods beyond that multi-annual financial framework.  

The  Commission  commissioned  an  external  study  to  support  this  impact  assessment  by 
providing  quantitative  and  qualitative  information.  The  objective  of  this  assignment  was  to 
identify  the key  drivers  setting the customs  scene in  a  post 2020  context,  the  problems to  be 
faced by the customs union and the Member States' customs administrations and the objectives 
for an EU-level intervention based on the identified drivers and problems (Task 1); identify the 
possible  EU  policy  options  to  achieve  the  objectives  and  deploy  a  future  EU  financing 
intervention  and  assess  the  identified  options'  expected  economic,  social  and  environmental 
impacts  (Task  2);  and  compare  the  options  according  to  the  set  criteria  (such  as  efficiency, 
effectiveness, relevance, coherence) and rank them with reasoned arguments (Task 3).  

The study included dedicated consultation activities to gather more broadly the view from all 
stakeholders. Considering the particular scope of the programme (customs administrations are 
the only direct beneficiaries), these consultations concentrated on customs 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  Customs  2020 
participants,  consultants  and  international  organisations  (e.g.  WCO)  complemented  these 
activities.  

The external study and the related consultation activities confirmed the challenging times ahead 
of  customs  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 an equal interpretation and implementation of the customs union 
and,  on  the  other  hand,  more  enhanced  operational  cooperation  and  better  addressing 
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,  among  others,  policy  challenges  and  needs  for  EU  intervention  as  regards  the  customs 
union.  4052  respondents  provided  feedback  out  of  which  only  13  reported  that  they  have 
experience  with  the  Customs  2020  programme,  representing  0.32 %  of  the  total  number  of 
respondents. Also, only 7 comments referred to customs. This very limited number of instances 
relating to customs confirms the limited overall interest of the public at large and the relevance 
of  the  programme  objectives  –  and  focus  of  stakeholders’  consultations  –  on  customs 
administrations.  

The conclusions drawn from experience by the evaluation and monitoring  activities indicate 
that the programme is a strong basis for improving further the customs union, replying to the 
needs  of  customs  administrations,  while  some  adjustments  would  allow  reaping  even  more 
benefits.  In  addition,  the  external  study  identified  precisely  the  many  and  significant 
challenges ahead of the customs union and – indirectly – the programme.  

11 

 
12 

 
 
 
2.  THE OBJECTIVES  

2.1.  Challenges for the programmes of the next MFF  

The  functioning  of  the  customs  union  and  the  further  integration  of  the  operational 
implementation by the national customs administrations that run it remain entirely dependent 
on the Customs programme, which offers a flexible and simple framework for enabling customs 
cooperation  and  integration  with  a  huge  EU  added  value  and  impact  despite  its  limited  size 
(0.05 % of total EU budget over period 2014-2020).  

Concretely,  the  on-going  Customs  2020  programme  provides  an  operational,  organisational, 
methodological  and  budgetary  framework  to  implement  EU  customs  policy  objectives  and 
activities through the following actions:  

Actions 

Annual average 
amounts of the 
C2020 budget  
in nominal terms 

IT capacity building, which consist in developing, maintaining and operating 
European electronic systems relating to export, import and transit of goods 
and which allow the evolution from paper-based to electronic customs 
Joint actions, which consist in cooperation mechanisms – such as 
workshops, project groups, working visits – enabling officials to carry out 
joint operational activities under their core responsibilities, share 
experience and join efforts to deliver on customs policy 
Human competency building, which consists in developing a human 
competency framework and training content made available through e-
learning modules or otherwise, all supporting the professional skills of 
customs officials and empowering them to fulfil their role on a uniform basis 
Total 

€63.0 m 

€9.7 m 

€2.0 m 

€74.7 m 

Table 1: Annual average budget of the Customs 2020 programme 

The  modernisation  of  the  customs  union  under  the  UCC  requires  upscaling  significantly  this 
framework under the next MFF: 

- 

- 

The  UCC  introduces  a  set  of  major  changes  in  the  way  customs  functions  in  the  EU, 
modernising, simplifying and digitalising many aspects of this work: the UCC provides that 
all exchange of information between customs authorities and between economic operators 
and customs authorities and storage of such information is to be made using electronic data 
processing techniques. The Work Programme relating to the development and deployment 
of the electronic systems provided for in the UCC therefore sets out an extensive plan for 
the development of these systems in order to ensure the correct application of the Code. In 
total, there are 17 core systems in the  Work  Programme, of which 14 are trans-European 
systems (developed by the Commission, in cooperation with the Member States) and three 
are  strictly  national (prepared  and  developed  by  the Member  States). These  core  systems 
are  moreover  complemented  by  a  range  of  other  existing  or  to  be  developed  electronic 
systems in the customs field.  
The UCC requirements also involve ambitious improvements to the existing import control 
system  (ICS).  ICS  provides  advance  cargo  information  and  was  proposed  as  a  security 
amendment to the Customs Code following the 9/11 terrorist attacks. It was agreed in 2005 
and  became  operational  in  2009-11.  However,  even  before  ICS  became  fully  operational, 
the  2010  Yemen  terrorist  incident  and  an  in-depth  evaluation  in  2011-12  had  identified 
critical weaknesses and gaps in the initial system. The Risk Management Strategy and Action 

13 

 
Plan22  therefore  involves  a  further  set  of  actions  to  combat  weaknesses  in  the  security  of 
the supply chain, one of which is the major evolution of the ICS (ICS2).  

Because  of  the  complexity  of  all  these  European  electronic  systems,  the  overall  budget  –  in 
terms of both development and, later  on, operation and maintenance  – is very substantial. In 
particular,  ICS2  dwarfs  the  other  customs  IT  developments  in  terms  of  size  and  scale:  the 
successive  layering  of  more  rigorous  (and  politically  justified)  risk  management  requirements 
has resulted in an almost exponential increase in the levels of ambition and complexity of the 
project  as  compared  to  its  predecessor,  the  existing  ICS.  As  a  consequence,  the  historical 
financial envelope allocated to the programme for IT capacity building will clearly be insufficient 
in the next MFF. Over the whole period 2021-2027, €855.5 million will be necessary only to run 
existing European electronic systems and develop, deploy and operate the ones foreseen by 
the  EU  customs  legislation  already  adopted  as  of  now  –  with  thus  strictly  no  margin  in  this 
amount  for  any  other  IT  system  that  customs  policy  would  require  beyond  the  obligations 
established by the UCC.  

Explanation as to the requested increase of the programme’s budget  
European electronic systems play a key role in the implementation of the EU customs policy and the major 
part of the funding under the programme is dedicated to these systems.  
The Union Customs Code (UCC) project to modernise and computerise customs processes across the EU 
is  critical  to  strengthen  the  Customs  Union,  the  security  of  the  EU  and  to  facilitate  trade.  The  new  law 
applies since May 2016 and work is ongoing to upgrade existing European electronic systems.  
A  major  goal  of  the  UCC  project  is  the  shift  to  a  complete  use  of  electronic  systems  for  interactions 
between trade and customs and the end of paper based procedures. This implies to have fully connected 
customs  processes  working  across  the  EU  with  all  national  administrations  able  to  interact  together 
seamlessly. The full benefits of the modernisation programme under the UCC can only be obtained when 
all UCC electronic systems, and in particular those of the Member States and traders, are working. Until 
then some transitional measures apply, providing essentially for the continuation of existing IT and paper 
based systems until specific new electronic systems are in place. 
This  IT  programme  consists  of  17  major  projects.  The  projects  include  entirely  new  ones  (such  as 
centralised clearance) as well as many upgrades of existing electronic systems (such as the NCTS transit 
system)  and  implies  thus  a  complex  set  of  changes  and  additions  to  an  already  functioning  network  of 
electronic systems. These projects involve both the Commission and Member States. 
In discussions with both Member States and trade in 2016 and 2017 it has become increasingly clear that 
for technical and budgetary reasons it is not possible to set up all the electronic systems under the current 
MFF. While the major part will be ready by 2020, in particular the core of the complex Import Control 
System  (ICS  2  and  related  modules)  which  will  allow  strengthening  customs  controls  based  on  a 
sophisticated risk analysis and which is an ambitious customs contribution to the EU security agenda will 
need to be developed under the next MFF. It is the financing of this system(s) that is the main reason for 
the increase in funding in the next programming period.  
Capacity of organisation to absorb increase in funding and agency  
As mentioned above, the increase in funding will mainly serve to develop and operate European electronic 
systems. These activities are carried out through public procurement and closely monitored with a network 
of external contractors and collaboration agreements with Member States. The current Commission model 
is mature and heavily capitalising on the management of teams of external contractors.  
In  order  to  face  the  increased  IT  activity  TAXUD  has  aligned  its  organisational  structure  to  allow 
exploiting synergies internally and with other services and has submitted to the European Parliament and 
the Council a report on IT strategy (COM (2018)178 final) setting out various options for the mid-to long-
term  IT  strategy:  Shared  IT  supplier,  a  structure  (agency)  operating  at  EU  level  or  other  collaboration 
solutions for the Member States. As indicated in this strategy, the option of a new agency has been raised 
in  Member  State  discussions.  At  this  stage  in  the  development  of  thinking  the  Member  States  have  not 
agreed on a clear orientation on the use of a new structure/agency to take over some of the development 

22  

COM(2014)527 

14 

 
 
                                                            
and/or operation/maintenance of customs electronic systems. Member States are very much concentrated 
on delivery of the complex web of projects that are provided for in the UCC and see little chance of major 
changes  in  the  way  they  carry  out  their  activities  for  this  purpose.  This,  however,  does  not  exclude  to 
explore this option further for the mid-to long-term future as set out in Annex 2 ("Tentative timeline") of 
the IT strategy. 
Capacity to absorb the budget increase and risk for the implementation and success of the programme  
The  increase  of  the  budget  represents  a  true  challenge  for  TAXUD.  As  explained  above,  TAXUD  will 
however  be  able  to  build  on  the  recognised  maturity  of  its  IT  organisation  and  ecosystem.  Moreover, 
changes have already been implemented in order to place TAXUD in the position to reply to this challenge.  
In  addition,  in  order  to  ensure  coherence  and  coordination  between  the  programme  and  the  MASP,  the 
relevant  provisions  of  the  Decision  70/2008/EC  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  15 
January 2008 on a paperless environment for customs and trade will be included in the programme. This 
Decision  indeed  requests  the  Commission  to  draw  up,  in  close  cooperation  with  the  Member  States,  a 
multi-annual  strategic  plan  for  customs  for  creating  a  coherent  and  interoperable  electronic  customs 
environment for the Union. However, the development and operation of the European electronic systems 
included in this MASP are mainly funded by the Programme and its integration in the programme would 
provide more coherence and coordination. As all relevant provisions of the Decision are now taken over 
either by Regulation (EU) 952/2013 or this Programme, Decision 70/2008/EC should be repealed.  

Moreover,  as  identified  by  the  external  study  and  the  various  consultation  activities,  customs 
performance  has  been  influenced  over  the  recent  years  by  significant  new  trends  such  as 
globalisation inducing exponentially growing volumes of goods – and corresponding data – and 
ever-increasing  security  threats  and  transnational  crime.  In  addition,  new  challenges  arise 
through  rapidly  changing  technologies  (digitalisation,  connected-ness,  Internet  of  things, 
blockchain), business models (e-commerce, supply chain optimisation), modes of transport (rail 
cargo notably from East Asia as an alternative to maritime trade) and reduced public financial 
and human means.  

All  these  trends  constantly  increase  the  pressure  to  improve  the  performance  of  the  customs 
union and enlarge the scope of the tasks to be performed by customs administrations, which in 
turn triggers problems of insufficient uniformity and efficiency underpinning the functioning of 
the customs union. The drivers at the root of this problem are three-fold:  

-  unequal capacity of customs 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; 

-  uneven interpretation and implementation of legislation (UCC and other);  
- 
limited data visibility for customs data analysis carried out at national level; 
-  obstacles  for  cooperation  between  customs  administrations  and  other  stakeholders: 
strategic obstacles  (divergence in terms of priorities and strategic objectives, competition, 
etc.),  geographical  obstacles  (relations  among  Member  States  and  with  third  countries), 
legal  obstacles  (absence  or 
legal  cooperation  framework,  uneven 
interpretation  of  customs  rules,  etc.)  and  administrative  obstacles  (different  processes, 
interoperability, etc.). 

inadequacy  of 

The  effect  of  this  performance  problem  is  that  the  customs  union  is  unable  to  reach  its  full 
potential,  which  in  turn  jeopardises  the  functioning  of  the  internal  market  and  the  four 
freedoms,  wrecks  social  fairness  and  undermines  EU  competitiveness  because  of  its  indirect 
effects:  
- 
- 

financial interests of the EU and budget at risk; 
illicit  trade  in  restricted  and  prohibited  goods,  which  impact  on  the  EU  environment, 
security, health and safety; 

15 

 
 
- 
- 

illicit trade and fraud in customs transactions; 
red tape and more burdensome customs handling for business and citizens, limiting the full 
deployment of the EU single market and the EU competitiveness. 

In view of this changing environment and with the entry into force of the UCC and progressive 
deployment  of  related  electronic  systems,  the  Union  has  reached  an  important  milestone  in 
terms  of  potential  furthering  European  integration  and  accompanying  the  national  customs 
administrations  on  their  way  to  becoming  modern  administrations  and  interacting  as  though 
they were one. Deepening this integration is the next logical step to enable customs to respond 
indicated  above,  stakeholders’ 
efficiently  to  the  current  and  upcoming  challenges.  As 
consultations suggested considering in particular more enhanced operational cooperation and 
tackling better innovation.  

As  part  of  the  preparation  of  the  new  MFF,  the  Commission  also  paid  particular  attention  to 
crosscutting objectives, such as flexibility, programme’s performance, coherence and synergies 
as well as simplification. As the programme and customs policy delivery are heavily nested and 
considering  the  operational  nature  of  actions  under  the  programme,  the  critical  crosscutting 
objective of the next MFF – as duly identified in the EP resolutions, Council conclusions and ECA 
recommendations  –  is  obviously  predictability,  i.e.  the  sufficient  and  timely  availability  of 
financial resources for delivering on policy objectives.  

There  is  also  a  strong  and  increasing  call  for  deeper  operational  cooperation  and  possible 
centralisation  in  specific  areas,  such  as  IT,  as  also  underlined  in  the  recent  EP  resolutions, 
Council  conclusions  and  ECA  recommendations.  The  programme  does  currently  not  work  on 
these dimensions, but it would be legitimate to aspire by 2030 to having significantly deepened 
the  integration  of  the  customs  union,  driven  not  through  more  legislation  –  this  is  already  in 
place  –  but  through  a  deepening  of  the  connective  tissue:  adequately  resourced  joint  IT 
developments  providing  a  stronger  backbone,  deeper  cross-border  agency  cooperation 
underpinned by more visible Union financial support for equipment providing more integrated 
operational limbs, reaping synergies in data analysis at Union level, a functioning single window 
environment  and  robust  comparable  performance 
indicators  (and  state-of-the-art  data 
analytics)  providing  a  more  visible  face,  possibly  all  held  together  by  a  dedicated  body,  and 
benefiting from the fact that customs is an area where Member States do actually want to work 
more closely together. 

Against this backdrop, there is a strong case for a more centralised provision of IT solutions for 
customs instead of the current delivery model (part Commission, part national, and part hybrid). 
That  would  also  offer  the  basis  for  deepening  operational  cooperation  in  the  area  of  data 
analysis.  The  current  set  of  IT  developments  will  inevitably  have  to  be  delivered  under  the 
existing  division  of  responsibilities,  because  they  are  already  underway.  However,  now  is  the 
time to be planning to be in a position to do better when the next round of IT upgrades will be 
needed after 2025. Discussions on this have already started, including at ministerial level at the 
informal  ECOFIN23  in  Tallinn,  and  more  preparatory  work  is  required.  The  next  Customs 
programme  needs  to  be  geared  to  help  us  to  support  a  progressive  evolution,  through  the 
lifetime of  the programme,  towards  a deeper  integration  in  this  area.  Without prejudging  the 
outcome  which  would  require  appropriate  legal  analysis  and  cost/benefit  exercises,  there 
remains a case to explore further the medium/long-term possibility of creating an EU Customs 
IT Agency. The size, scale and permanence of the challenges would justify such a reflection. It 
could also provide the embryo for a further deepening of operational integration between EU 
customs authorities in a subsequent future step. Such a move towards establishing a completely 

23  

https://www.eu2017.ee/political-meetings/ECOFIN 

16 

 
                                                            
integrated  border  management  would  ensure  the  homogeneity  of  reactions  towards  external 
partners  and  would  allow  tackling  fully  and  efficiently  the  future  challenges  such  as  e-
commerce. 

This  is  a  challenging  proposition  but  the  issue  is  both  important  and  topical  –  as  recent 
discussions  demonstrated.  The  Commission  has  now  issued  a  report  on  the  IT  strategy24  for 
customs, outlining its vision to underpin the IT strategy, the strategic options and aspects to be 
further considered. The next multi-annual financial framework exercise provides a "window of 
opportunity" to explore this idea further, and all stakeholders should seriously consider seizing 
it.  

Finally,  funding customs control equipment is a long-standing political issue  that gained even 
more  prominence  recently  with  dedicated  Council  conclusions25.  The  current  programme 
regulation does not allow such financing, but an efficient and secured Customs Union thanks to 
proper  control  equipment  can  be  considered  without  doubt  a  European  public  good.  To  this 
end,  a  specific  Customs  Control  Equipment  component  will  be  created  under  the  new 
Integrated  Border  Management  fund  that  will  favour  inter-service  cooperation  and  allow 
synergies between the Commission DGs and the national departments in charge of the control 
of goods and persons in accordance with the promotion of an integrated border management 
control approach. A specific impact assessment26 is presented to this respect. 

2.2.  Objectives of the programmes of the next MFF 

Against this backdrop, the Programme has the general objective to support the customs union 
and  customs  authorities  to  protect  the  financial  and  economic  interests  of  the  Union  and  its 
Member States, to ensure security and safety within the Union and to protect the  Union from 
unfair and illegal trade while facilitating legitimate business activity.  

The  Programme  has  the  specific  objective  to  support  the  preparation  and  uniform 
implementation  of  customs  legislation  and  policy  as  well  as  customs  cooperation  and 
administrative  capacity  building,  including  human  competency  and  the  development    and 
operation of the European electronic systems for customs.  

Given  the  particular  challenges  and  mission  of  customs,  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  and  the  identity  of  beneficiaries  –  customs 
administrations – prevent using certain instruments such as equity or quasi-equity investments, 
loans or guarantees, or other risk-sharing instruments.  

24  

25  
26  

Report (COM(2018) 178 final) from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the IT 
strategy for customs  
Outcome of the Council Meeting 9581/17, adopting adopted conclusions on customs funding (7586/17) 
Commission  Staff  Working  Document  –  Impact  assessment  accompanying  the  documents:  Proposal  for  a 
Regulation establishing the Asylum and Migration Fund; Proposal for a Regulation establishing the Internal 
Security Fund; Proposal for a  Regulation establishing, as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, 
the instrument for financial support for border management and visa; Proposal for a Regulation establishing, 
as part of the Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for customs control 
equipment. 

17 

 
 
 
                                                            
3.  PROGRAMME STRUCTURE AND PRIORITIES 

To reach the set objectives a combination of action types will be required as for previous and 
on-going  programmes.  The  evaluation  and  monitoring  activities  of  the  programmes  and  the 
external  study  and  related  stakeholder  consultations  identified  a  set  of  five  complementary 
actions27, i.e. two more actions than under the current programme:  
- 
- 
-  Human capacity building;  
- 
-  Customs control equipment funding (new).  

IT capacity building;  
Joint actions;  

Support for centralisation (new);  

Given  its  particular  nature  and  its  strong  connection  to  security,  the  issue  of  customs  control 
equipment  funding  is  subject  to  a  specific  impact  assessment26  as  part  of  the  new  Integrated 
Border Management Fund. It is therefore not considered in this document.  

In  light  of  the  changes  to  customs  controls  brought  about  by  the  UCC,  it  would  also  be 
important  to  devote  sufficient  resources  to  supporting  Member  States  to  put  in  place  the 
required  control  systems  and  processes  (e.g.  audits)  to  implement  an  effective  customs 
framework.  Support 
their 
interconnectedness across Member States, should be prioritised. 

these  systemic  changes, 

the  transition  to 

including 

for 

Depending  on  the  level  of  ambition  in  terms  of  support  and  contribution  of  the  future 
programme to customs policy, each of the 4 remaining actions may either be stopped or cover a 
reduced or extended scope, as shown in the table below:  

ACTIONS 

IT capacity 
building 

0-None 

1-Legacy 2020 

SCOPE 

2-Legally 
committed 
UCC systems 

3-Future 
projects 

4-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 

Centralisation 

0-None 

1-Voluntary structural 
cooperation 

2-Centralisation 

Table 2: Possible actions and their scope for the customs programme 

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

Building  on  these  various  actions  and  their  possible  scope,  a  large  number  of  modulations  is 
possible.  For  example,  it  goes  without  saying  that  the  afore-mentioned  need  to  progressively 
deepen operational cooperation across the customs union (see section 1.2) is not limited to the 
implementation of any one of the following options; there may also be intermediate steps taken 

27  

The Customs 2020 programme currently includes a small support line (€100 000/yr). Although marginal in 
amount, this support line is of critical importance for the proper implementation of the programme. Although 
not discussed in this impact assessment, it is proposed to keep this support line and even increase slightly its 
amount in the post-2020 programme in view of its increasing use. 

18 

 
                                                            
by interested Member States on a voluntary basis, as indeed is already the case for example in 
the CELBET format. In line with the feedback gathered from evaluation and monitoring activities 
as  well  as  stakeholder’s  consultations  and  as  shown  on  the  figure  on  next  page,  this  impact 
assessment analyses four options clearly differentiated in terms of structure and priorities.  

19 

 
 
ACTIONS 

Current 2020 
programme 

OPTION 1 
EU27: -15 % 
(Baseline) 

OPTION 2 
Critical 
mass 

OPTION 3 
Continuity 
“plus” 

OPTION 4 
Structural 
centralisation 

IT-1: Legacy 2020 

IT-2: Legally committed UCC 
systems after 2020 (incl. ICS2) 

IT-3: New projects 

IT-4: Innovation 

JA-1: Basic joint actions 

JA-2: Enhanced operational 
cooperation 

Human capacity building 

Centralisation 

+++ 

0 

+++ 

0 

+++ 

+ 

++ 

0 

++ 

0 

0 

0 

+ 

0 

+ 

0 

+++ 

+++ 

+ 

0 

+ 

+ 

+ 

0 

+++ 

+++ 

+++ 

++ 

+++ 

+++ 

++ 

0 

++++ 

++++ 

++++ 

++++ 

++++ 

++++ 

++++ 

++++ 

Legend: Funding of Union components: 0: inexistent / +: to a limited extent / ++: to a good extent / +++: to a full extent / ++++: extended to national components 

Figure 1: Key features of current customs 2020 programme and options for future programme 

20 

 
 
 
3.1.  Option 1: EU27 - baseline 

This  scenario  envisages  maintaining  the  objectives  and  fundamental  arrangements  of  the 
current Customs 2020 programme to support the functioning and modernisation of the customs 
union.  It  would  however  account  for  the  withdrawal  of  the  United  Kingdom  from  the  EU  and 
would  thus  correspond  to  a  customs  union  budget  limited  to  an  average  €62.3 m  per  year 
(against €74.7 m currently).  

It would strive for maintaining the essential, but this would come at a cost:  
- 

IT capacity building would be significantly impaired as only one of the four threads could be 
(hardly)  implemented:  the  continuity  of  (UCC)  legacy  2020.  No  new  customs  IT  projects 
could be launched, the development of the new risk management system (ICS2) would have 
to be stopped – leading to a write off of €62 m of investment and operational costs incurred 
under the C2020 programme – and innovation would not be possible. 

-  Cooperation could no longer support customs implementation as a whole: the cooperation 
budget would be devoted exclusively to joint actions supporting the IT capacity building and 
to a much lesser extent to some relating human capacity building.  

This scenario would impose a thorough reconsideration of laws and operations in the customs 
field,  as  regards  both  the  traditional  role  of  customs  (protection  of  EU  financial  interests 
through the collection of customs duties and trade facilitation) and their involvement in security 
and safety actions at the EU border. The current acquis and relevant legislation in place would 
have  to  be  reviewed,  as  the  budget  for  the  programme  would  not  allow  financing  all  its 
implementation 
correct 
implementation of legal initiatives and electronic systems could not be prepared and discussed 
with Member States.  

Important  accompanying  measures 

requirements. 

the 

for 

The development/operation of the legally committed UCC electronic systems,  in particular the 
much  needed  ICS2  systems  for  stepping-up  customs  risks  management  in  the  EU  for  security 
purposes, would not be possible at EU level. Member States would have to take over, but the 
advantages  of  a  central  system  would  be lost. National  systems  would also not  come without 
significant inefficiencies as every euro spent currently at EU level generates an estimated cost-
reduction by 5 euro for Member States.  

The  Union  would  thereby  be  giving  a  negative  signal  to  the  Member  States  and  the  national 
customs administrations that are committed to achieving the implementation of the UCC. The 
weakening  of  the  customs  union  would  in  turn  result  in  a  weakening  of  the  internal  market. 
The capacity of customs to deliver on other EU policy goals, such as the security agenda, would 
also be severely hampered. The impacts would moreover extend to other DGs relying on TAXUD 
managed  electronic  systems,  such  as  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  (OLAF)  and  the 
Directorate-General for Statistics (ESTAT) or, in the future, the new European Public Prosecutor 
Office (EPPO).  

A  scenario  of  15 %  reduction  would  hardly  allow  just  maintaining  the  customs  union  at  its 
level  of  2020.  In  the  absence  of  budget  for  developing,  by  2025,  the  remaining  electronic 
systems  required  by  the  UCC,  the  Union  would  have  to  review  its  customs  legislation  and 
repeal a significant part of the enhancements brought to customs operations by the adoption 
of the new UCC in 2016. As a result, this could impact the EU's international commitments at 
the  World  Trade  Organisation  under  which  the  customs  administrations  of  Member  States 
should work and operate as if they were one single entity. This would also compromise other 
EU policy objectives, in particular the security agenda.  

21 

 
3.2.  Option 2: critical mass 

This scenario would aim at delivering on the obligations established by the legislation to date 
and  by  legislation  currently  in  the  legislative  pipeline,  i.e.  ensure  the  complete  and  reliable 
operation  of  the  existing  electronic  systems  as  well  as  the  development  /  operation  of  the 
electronic  systems  legally  committed  in  the  UCC  legislation  in  application  since  May  2016  or 
legally foreseeable in view of existing legislative proposals in discussion. Thereby, it would aim 
at  achieving  the  customs  modernisation  as  foreseen  under  the  UCC  in  2016  towards  more 
effective, efficient and secure customs procedures and deliver on a limited set of other concrete 
proposals28.  

Concretely, it would focus on developing and deploying all foreseen and foreseeable European 
electronic systems:  
- 

In addition to running European electronic systems existing at the end of 2020 as per option 
1,  completing  the  remaining  legally  committed  UCC  electronic  systems  by  2025  would  be 
possible  under  this  scenario  thanks  to  budget  allocations  in  line  with  the  Multi-Annual 
Strategic  Plan29  (MASP)  agreed  with  Member  States.  Also,  some  limited  resources  are 
foreseen  to deliver on recent proposals.  However, no  other new  customs  IT projects  than 
those already identified would be possible and there would be no margin of manoeuvre for 
innovation.  

-  Cooperation  would  also  not  support  customs  implementation  as  a  whole:  cooperation 
would be devoted mainly  to  joint actions  supporting the IT  capacity building  and  to  some 
relating human capacity building. 

Efforts  would  concentrate  on  completing  the  legally  committed  UCC  electronic  systems  – 
namely import, export and transit – and targeting full implementation of all movement systems. 
The  ability  to  achieve  the  full  implementation  of  the  UCC  –  and  thus  European  customs 
administrations  being  able  to  face  the  challenges  of  digitalisation  in  a  globalised  and 
increasingly unsecure world – would depend on a significant increase in the resources allocated 
under  the  next  MFF.  A  mongst  the  UCC  electronic  systems,  a  particular  system  needs  to  be 
highlighted: the Import Control System 2 (ICS2) for customs risk management. This system will 
allow  customs  authorities  to  deal  with  security  threats  in  a  much-improved  way.  Despite  its 
importance and relevance, it will only be developed by 2025 as recently agreed with Member 
States in view of its complexity and budgetary implications. Achieving the full implementation of 
the  UCC  and  continuing  the  started  public  administration  modernisation  would  enable 
European  customs  administrations  to  face  the  current,  but  not  future,  challenges  of 
globalisation, security threats, drastic and exponential development of e-commerce, inter alia.  

The main increase in expenditure will come from the additional electronic systems in operation 
(largely increased OPEX), scaling-up and further development of the risk management systems 
(Import Control System 2), indispensable to ensure security and safety of the entirety of the EU. 
Based  on  the  latest  MASP  version,  the  minimal  budget  required  under  this  scenario  would 
amount to €999.9 m:  

ACTIONS 

SCOPE 

IT capacity building 

1-Legacy 2020 

2-Committed UCC systems 

AMOUNT 

€445.3 m 

€410.1 m 

28  

29  

E.g. Commission Proposal COM(2016) 825 for a Regulation on controls on cash entering or leaving the 
Union and Commission Proposal COM(2017) 375 for a Regulation on the import of cultural goods. 
https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/general-information-customs/electronic-customs_en  

22 

 
 
                                                            
Joint actions 

1-Limited basic joint actions 

Human capacity building (incl. support) 

1-Focused training 

3-Foreseeable other electronic systems 

Total at current (nominal) prices 

Total at constant (2017) prices 

€89.6 m 

€47.7 m 

€7.1 m 

€999.9 m 

€868.9 m 

Table 3: Minimal budget of the post-2020 customs programme (“Critical mass”) 

With  no  other  ambition  than  achieving  the  UCC  implementation  and  already  proposed 
legislation, this scenario would however impose a thorough reconsideration of ambition in the 
customs field.  

With  basically  no  further  IT  development  after  UCC  implementation,  the  capacity  of  the 
customs  union  to  face  upcoming  challenges  would  be  seriously 
impaired.  Customs 
administrations need to adjust to the constantly changing and increasingly sophisticated trade 
patterns, business requirements and fraud environment. As a part of the public administration 
and keeping abreast with the digital economy development, customs must also continue in its 
quest to interconnect with other public authorities, making the most of the data available and 
cutting the red tape. Stopping investments and developments would equal going backwards. 

In addition, in the absence of means to continue joint actions and human capacity building at 
the  current  level  of  EU  intervention,  continuing  with  the  initiated  deeper  operational 
cooperation and integration of national customs administrations would be substantially slowed 
down and  reduced. The Commission would  therefore  have no  other choice  but to  review  the 
new customs strategy and governance as set out in its Communication COM(2016)813 final of 
21.12.2016 with a view to substantially decreasing its level of ambitions.  

Finally, there would be basically no means to support an integrated approach of the proposed 
Customs  Control  Equipment  component  with  this  programme.  This  situation  would  prevent 
reaping all the benefits of that new Union initiative. Although a crucial element on its own and 
with strong links with border management, customs control equipment can indeed not deliver 
its full added value without a strong connection with and support from all other customs actions 
under  this  programme.  Equipment  is  indeed  only  one  element  of  a  comprehensive  customs 
framework:  equipment  is  of  limited  use  if  not  properly  coordinated  and  integrated  with 
exchange  of  information,  risk  management,  sharing  of  best  practices  as  regards  controls  inter 
alia  and  will  entail  training  activities  for  ensuring  proper  use.  The  future  customs  programme 
need to encompass these aspects. 

Although this option would allow securing all foreseen UCC electronic systems (including ICS2) 
and  proposals  currently  in  discussion,  no  other  development  would  be  possible  after  their 
implementation and cooperation would be limited to supporting the implementation of the 
UCC. This would be in essence a regression in terms of IT and overall customs operations. In 
view of the challenges facing the customs union, it would not take long before the EU would 
lose significantly in terms of competitiveness and be more vulnerable to security and safety 
threats. The limited resources would also impair the added value of the new customs control 
equipment.  

3.3.  Option 3: continuity “plus” 

The  scenario  3  proposes  to  effectively  address  the  present  and  upcoming  challenges  of  the 
customs union. It aims to make possible those actions necessary to strengthen the performance 
of  customs  administrations  everywhere  in  the  EU.  Highly  performing  customs  administrations 

23 

 
that act as one for an effective  customs union will in turn contribute to a well-functioning  EU 
internal market, protect the financial and economic interests of the Union and Member States 
and support other EU objectives, in particular the security agenda.  

Concretely, this option would propose a comprehensive framework to  address coherently the 
challenges identified above:  
-  On top of ensuring the continuity of the existing and foreseeable electronic systems and the 
landing  and  operation  of  the  UCC-committed  ones,  IT  capacity  building  would  aim  at 
ensuring  that  new  (non-UCC)  customs  IT  projects  can  be  on-boarded  and  innovation  is 
possible, i.e. some budget is also available for working on new technologies, cyber-security 
and the likes.  

-  Cooperation  would  be  substantially  increased  in  order  to  reinforce  the  capacities  of  the 
customs administrations to engage with other authorities (including tax authorities for VAT 
and excise purposes), to ensure compliance, fight fraud and increase security, to work more 
in  clusters  on  a  thematic  or  geographic  basis  on  concrete  operational  problems  (expert 
teams) and to accompany the deeper integration brought about by the new IT environment.  
Execute  better  performance  management  and  measurement  to  ensure  that  customs 
services across the customs union increasingly "act as one". 

- 

As in option 2, important efforts will thus  concentrate on completing the core UCC electronic 
systems by 2025.  

Resources would also be available to continue IT developments beyond the UCC and therefore 
ensure the evolution of IT capacity, including analytical capacity, with EU customs policy over 
time. Moreover, there would be a limited margin of manoeuvre for facing news risks (e.g. cyber-
attacks) or integrating innovation, which may be required given the pace at  which technology 
evolves. In the emerging digital environment, customs authorities and their counterparts need 
to be able to keep pace with drastically evolving technological solutions and trade models – 
such  as  the  upcoming  blockchain  approach  already  tested  in  a  number  of  public  and  private 
domains.  

However, the implementation of the UCC and development of electronic systems is not the final 
goal  but  only  the  starting  point  for  a  demanding  process  whereby  European  customs 
administrations are evolving towards modern administrations able to deal with the increased 
number  of  core  tasks  incumbent  on  them  due  to  external  factors  (e.g.  digitalisation,  security 
threats).  The  growth  of  e-commerce,  especially  from  Asia,  poses  a  complete  set  of  new 
challenges for customs administrations for which comprehensive policy responses are still being 
developed, and their implementation cannot be postponed until 2030.  

More effective and efficient customs administrations are needed and would be possible through 
deeper  co-ordination  of,  and  co-operation  between,  operational  services  on  the  ground. 
Current  pilot  projects  already  give  very  good  and  promising  results  for  closer  practical 
cooperation (from simple things as sharing X-ray scans to joint risk and data analytics to detect 
fraud patterns). In the area of IT, increased cooperation is also required between the Member 
states to reduce overall costs, in order to avoid the development, maintenance and operation of 
similar electronic systems. In addition, the programme would also allow supporting under this 
option the deep integration and powerful combination of the new Customs Control Equipment 
component  with  this  programme,  thereby  leveraging  exponentially  the  total  added  value  of 
these two Union actions.  

A single window for the economic operators and trade interacting with EU customs for customs 
and  non-customs  legislation  would  perfectly  fit  in  this  priority;  it  would  provide  a  way  for 
traders moving goods into and around the Union to avoid being trapped in the verticality of our 

24 

 
policy silos and enable them to operate through a horizontally integrated single interface which 
both government and business could use to fulfil and verify regulatory requirement. 

Synergies  will  be  created  with  the  Customs  Control  Equipment  instrument  (CCE)  of  the 
Integrated  Border  Management  Fund  insofar.  Indeed,  while  the  CCE  will  be  used  only  for 
purchase,  maintenance  and  upgrade  of  equipment,  the  Customs  programme  will  be  used  for 
facilitating  cooperation  between  Member  states  (assessment  of  needs  and  exchange  of 
experiences, inter alia) and the training of officials for the use of such equipment.   

All  these  elements  put  together  will  permit  to  strengthen  the  performance  of  customs 
administrations  everywhere  in  the  EU,  and  thus  the  customs  union,  through  innovative  and 
shared solutions. In addition, by fostering cooperation with other services and authorities, this 
scenario  would  allow  customs  administrations  to  continue  adequately  implementing  60+  EU 
non-customs legislations (health, agriculture…) that are delegated to them.  

It  is  worth  highlighting  here  that,  given  the  particular  nature  of  the  suggested  enhanced 
activities  here  (enhanced  operational  cooperation  and  focused  innovation),  the  amounts  at 
stake  remains  extremely  limited,  while  their  impact  will  be  exponential  as  they  will  also 
reinforce significantly the existing actions.  

This scenario of “continuity plus” is both the necessary minimum for the customs union  – to 
continue to function and deliver – and the next logical step – after the adoption of the UCC –. 
Without significant additional funds  for ensuring  IT  development  required by  the  legislation 
and an extremely limited increase for enhanced operational cooperation and innovation, the 
programme cannot support the functioning of the customs union and thereby its contribution 
to  the  single  market  and  many  other  EU  objectives,  including  the  security  agenda.  Customs 
need  to  adjust to  the  constantly  changing  and increasingly  sophisticated  business  and fraud 
environment.  Stopping  investments  and  developments  would  equal  going  backwards  and 
imply writing off significant investments already made. 

Current  cooperation  mechanisms  and  tools  must  be  further  optimised  if  the  maximum 
benefits  of  the  customs  union  and  the  internal  market  are  to  be  obtained:  in  line  with  EU 
international commitments at the World Trade Organisation, the customs administrations of 
Member  States  should  work  and  operate  as  if  they  were  one  single  entity.  This  would  be 
aligned with the political messages in the recent Commission Communication on developing 
the EU customs union and its governance. Achieving all this in times of increased expectations 
towards the Union delivering on its fundamentals – of which the customs union is a part – is 
therefore politically and economically vital. 

3.4.  Option 4: structural centralisation 

There  is  an  increasing  and  strong  need  for  stronger  homogeneity  in  the  operational 
implementation  of  customs  policy  with  a  view  to  ensuring  a  level  playing  field  between  all 
Member States.  

Whereas  the  design  of  the  customs  policy  (legislation  and  all  other  political  and  policy 
orientations) should remain at the level of the EU, a structured centralised approach in the form 
of  an  agency  or  another  type  of  entity  for  the  implementation  of  the  operational  aspects  of 
customs  policy  would  ensure  that  customs  policy  is  applied  uniformly  throughout  the  EU.  It 
would also favour a uniform attitude towards third countries. It would facilitate dealing with the 
increasing challenges customs are faced with (e.g. e-commerce, emerging IT models). It would 
finally  deepen  the  operational  integration  between  customs  authorities  and  with  other  law 
enforcement bodies within the EU in a subsequent future step with a view to having a complete 

25 

 
integrated border management. At the end, it would contribute to Member States acting as if 
they were one. 

As discussed in section 2.1 above, the idea of creating an EU customs IT agency could provide a 
response. 

However, the current priority, as agreed with Member States, is to deliver the complete set of 
complex  UCC-committed  electronic  systems.  This  presents  a  real  challenge  for  both  the 
Commission  and  Member  States.  Given  that  success  will  be  possible  only  if  all  stakeholders 
mobilise all resources available on the MASP execution and ensure sufficient focus until 2025, a 
transitional phase towards any longer-term solution is needed. The future programme should 
therefore  be  seen  as  a  transition  programme,  facilitating  the  preparation  of  and  progressive 
evolution towards such possible deeper customs integration. Deeper IT and a possible agency 
should be seen as a driver in this respect. 

Such a transitional phase under the next MFF could if needed bring together only the Member 
States wishing to take part in a more centralised approach on a voluntary basis in the domain of 
IT,  before  leading  to  a  more  structural  approach  that  could  potentially  concern  all  Member 
States and domains of operational implementation of customs policy under the following MFF.  

Centralisation  –  whether  transitional  or  directly  fully  structural  –  is  another  option  to 
strengthen  the  performance  of  customs  administrations  in  the  EU  and  deliver  on  the 
programme’s  objectives.  It  would  however  represent  a  change  of  operating  model,  which 
requires preparation and is therefore largely unrealistic for the next MFF in view of the legal 
and IT challenges in the immediate term.  

3.5. 

Subsidiarity, proportionality and intended legal basis 

Although  the  customs  union  is  an  area  of  exclusive  competence  with  a  high  degree  of 
harmonised  EU  legislation,  the  implementation  of  this  legislation  remains  entirely  with  the 
individual  Member  States.  The  customs  union  can  therefore  only  be  as  strong  as  its  weakest 
link.  Strong  cooperation  is  essential  to  reach  a  deeper  operational  integration  and  to  enable 
customs  authorities  in  the  different  Member  States  to  act  as  if  they  were  one,  as  well  as  to 
ensure correct collection of customs duties (15 % of the EU budget, i.e. €20 billion in 2016) as 
well  as  import  Value  Added  Tax  and  excise  duties.  The  European  Court  of  Auditors  recently 
identified weaknesses in the implementation and, depending on its structure and priorities, the 
future programme could help addressing them.  

As  the  activities  in  the  customs  area  are  of  a  cross-border  nature,  facing  global  and  trans-
European  challenges  such  as  terrorism,  globalisation  and  e-commerce  in  an  efficient  and 
coherent  way  across  Europe  cannot  be  achieved  by  the  EU  or  Member  States  individually. 
Cooperation and operational integration between national customs administrations are needed 
to  enable  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.  The  Customs  programme  offers  a  Union  framework  for 
cooperation  among  national  customs  administrations, 
including  on  matters.  Customs 
cooperation is founded a highly secured, dedicated communication network and a multitude of 
interconnected  and 
interoperable  European  electronic  systems  which  national  customs 
authorities  use  to  carry  out  their  activities  jointly  and  individually,  including  with  economic 
operators.  The  resulting  set-up  is  substantially  more  cost  efficient  than  if  each  Member  State 
were to set up its individual cooperation framework on a bilateral or multilateral basis. 

26 

 
Without the programme, participating countries would have to go for bilateral and multilateral 
approaches,  which  would  be  much  more  costly  and  slower  without  a  guarantee  for  having 
ultimately a common EU approach. This EU added value is most present in the area of IT where 
the programme allows developing and running a series of European electronic systems. 

Articles 33, 114 and 207 TFEU provide the legal basis for EU intervention as regards respectively 
customs cooperation, the establishment and functioning of the internal market and commercial 
policy.  EU  action  is  also  required  because  of  obligations  stemming  from  international 
agreements, in particular under the remit of the World Trade Organisation.  

27 

 
 
 
4.  DELIVERY MECHANISMS OF THE INTENDED FUNDING 

4.1.  Overall delivery mechanisms 

Management mode  

The  programme  is  implemented  through  direct  management.  Concretely,  the  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.  

It  is  proposed  to  keep  this  management  mode  as,  given  the  nature  of  the  programme’s 
activities,  its  focus  on  customs  administrations  as  beneficiaries  and  the  EU's  exclusive 
competence  for  the  customs  union,  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.  

Intervention logic 

As established by the various evaluations, the intervention logic of the programme (see Annex 
4) appears to bring the expected added value. It is therefore not proposed to change it but only 
to adapt it to the option retained.  

Types of intervention 

About 90 % of programme’s expenditures relates to IT capacity building and is made directly by 
the Commission through procurement. As regards 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 external expert costs.  

Financial instruments30 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 

In  order  to  keep  the  programme  simple  and  flexible  for  all  actors  –  whether  Commission 
services  as  central  management  team  or  participating  countries  as  beneficiaries  –,  eligibility 
rules are fundamentally limited to a list of eligible action types, without complex conditions or 
criteria.  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.  

30  

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). 

28 

 
                                                            
Conditionality 

The programme aims at fostering (voluntary) cooperation between Member States. Against this 
background, it would be counterproductive to subject participation in activities to any particular 
condition,  except  the  appropriate  profile  and  qualifications,  including  language  skills,  of 
participants in activities.  

EU funding of customs control equipment – addressed in a separate impact assessment26 - may 
on  the  contrary  be  subject  to  external  conditionality  in  relation  to  this  programme.  In  those 
cases,  funding  of  EU  customs  control  equipment  would  be  possible  only  if  the  benefitting 
authority has participated to certain joint actions or human capacity building activities and has 
thereby demonstrated the needs for and necessary capacity to use that equipment.  

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 
opinion 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. In view of the long-term objective of the programme, 
multi-annual  instead  of  annual  work  programmes  would  reduce  the  administrative  and 
legislative burdens for all parties involved.  

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 Regulation31 are therefore deemed sufficient.  

Simplification & flexibility 

As explained above, the programme is already very simple with a strong focus on outputs and 
results.  The  on-going  programme  already  applies  all  simplifications 
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.  

identified 

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 
customs  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 customs policy itself. It reached a stage of maturity and became indispensable 
with  regard  to  the  functioning  of  the  customs  union  and  the  customs  administrations 
themselves, not 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  customs  cooperation  and  activities,  predictability–  and  not  flexibility  –  is 
the key concern for the operations of future programmes.  

31  

http://ec.europa.eu/budget/biblio/documents/regulations/regulations_en.cfm  

29 

 
                                                            
Still,  as  explained  above,  the  programme  has  been  intrinsically  designed,  both  in  terms  of  its 
overall structure and its implementation modalities, to provide the required level of flexibility. 
Concretely, all actions are covered by one single budget line and implementation modalities are 
determined by work programmes adopted via comitology. As all actions fall under one budget 
line, there is no need to determine in the basic act their respective share within the total budget 
line: the allocation between actions and the delivery mode  (grant or procurement) of each of 
them are established when preparing the work programme and corresponding annual financing 
decision.  This  gives  both  the  much  needed  overall  predictability  of  the  programme  and  the 
required flexibility for its execution. In addition, all actions subject to the award of a grant are 
included in one single grant agreement32. Individual proposals for activities are then approved 
by  TAXUD  over  the  year  if  they  fulfil  the  objectives  of  the  work  programme  and  meet  the 
priorities  and  eligibility  criteria  of  the  grant  agreement.  Finally,  if  credits  remain  available  by 
year-end,  procurement  identified  in  relation  to  the  subsequent  year  is  anticipated  –  where 
possible - in order to ensure the highest possible level of execution of the budget. 

4.2. 

Synergies & complementarities with other EU action programmes and funds 

DG TAXUD assessed the option to merge the programme with a programme that addresses EU 
taxation (Fiscalis), as well other ways to bring it closer to other programmes. 

Fiscalis programme 

Significant  synergies  exist  already  at  operational  level  with  Fiscalis33,  the  other  TAXUD 
programme  for  taxation.  In  the  field  of  IT,  there  is  cross-fertilisation  and  joint  funding  of 
common  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  Internal  Market.  This 

32  

33 

In the current programme, about 5 “expert teams” per year are subject to individual grants because of the 
amounts involved. In order to simplify even further the overall management of the programme, it is 
envisaged to move away from these exceptions and to adapt the procedures in order to embed the necessary 
controls directly within the grants. 
COM(2018) 443 

30 

 
                                                            
distinction is reflected at the level of the programmes: Customs is based on Article 33 TFEU and 
aims  at  supporting  the  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 internal market.  

Second, the two programmes support different policies with different objectives.  

  Specific  objectives  are  different.  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. 

  The two programmes share to some extent similar operational objectives. 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 operational objective in Fiscalis does not exist, as this programme does not 
seek  the  uniformity  of  tax  legislation.  In  addition,  as  far  as  the  general  objectives  are 
is  a 
concerned,  the  programmes  differ  significantly.  The  Customs  programme 
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 internal market by enhancing cooperation between participating countries. The two 
programmes differ substantially in terms of ambition. 

Third,  the  merge  of  the  two  programmes  would  only  bring  benefits  to  some  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 merge 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 the merge is not a foreseeable option and has 
therefore been discarded. 

31 

 
Single Market Programme 

Although the customs union is a precondition and a fundamental enabler of the Single Market 
and  related  policies,  the  customs  (and  tax)  programmes  remained  stand-alone  programmes 
under  the  Single  Market  budget  heading  in  view  of  their  own  specific  and  highly  integrated 
features and were not incorporated in the Single Market Programme34.  

However, links exist with the Single Market Programme, which contemplates a series of budget 
lines  for  supporting  the  delivery  of  the  Single  Market  in  the  wider  sense  as  an  important 
contribution  to  empower  citizens,  consumers,  businesses  and  administrations.  They  are 
included in the scope of the Single Market Programme to ensure their uninterrupted delivery. 

In particular, the Single Market Programme 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 role in the area of EU customs and tax 
policy, an important framework condition for the Single Market. This approach will allow links 
(e.g. through common framework contracts) with other Union actions under this programme. 

Internal  Security Fund and Instrument for Border Management and Visa 

Customs  cooperation,  as  supported  by  the  programme,  has  also  many  relations  with  the 
Internal  Security  fund35,  which  supports  actions  as  regards  the  prevention,  detection  and 
investigation  of  criminal  offences  by  police  and  other  law  enforcement  authorities  (Art.  87 
TFEU),  and  the  instrument  for  Border  Management  and  Visa36,  a  part  of  Integrated  Border 
Management Fund, which finances actions as regards migration and border management (Art. 
77+81 TFEU). As mentioned, customs authorities have indeed an important role for protecting 
EU citizens e.g. by reinforcing at the external borders the control of items that can be used to 
perform terrorist acts (firearms, chemicals, explosives, radioactive materials) or finance terrorist 
activities (cash or cultural goods).  

However, no merger would make sense as the respective legal bases, programmes' objectives 
and intervention logics are widely different.  

Still, the interlinks between customs cooperation and other policy areas related to security and 
border  control  call  for  a  more  joined-up  and  cross-sectorial  approach  at  operational  level, 
including through better use of and interoperability between electronic systems (e.g. access by 
the future European Public Prosecutor Office to customs data held by TAXUD) or development 
of synergies and technologies for joint operations and controls. Therefore, rather than a merger 
of the programmes, a better operational collaboration across Commission services and relevant 
national  authorities  would  allow  exploiting  the  full  potential  of  closer  cooperation  between 
customs authorities and other agencies and authorities, including law enforcement authorities.  

EU anti-fraud programme37  

As  the  customs  programme  aims  at  supporting  the  customs  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 

34 
35 

36 

37 

COM(2018) 441 
Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Internal Security 
Fund 
Proposal  for  a  Regulation  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  establishing,  as  part  of  the 
Integrated Border Management Fund, the instrument for financial support for border management and visa 
COM(2018) 386 

32 

 
                                                            
this  takes  place  outside  the  customs  programme.  Given  the  particular  mandate  of  OLAF,  no 
additional synergies could be identified.  

Reform Support programme38 

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

Digital Europe Programme39 and other 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 parts is rather different.  

The revision of the UCC deployment beyond 2020 – accomplished in 2017 and resulting a.o. in 
the  revised  MASP  –  and  increasing  Member  State  demands  for  support  in  reducing  their  IT 
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  at  senior  management  level  and  with  Member  States 
allowed choosing between various options and defining a proper strategy, which has been set 
out in the recent communication/report24 on IT strategy. The preferred strategy is to continue 
TAXUD operations while:  

-  at  short  term:  fine-tuning  the  internal  organisation  and  continuing  to  build  on  the 

- 

- 

relationship with DIGIT, particularly as regards data centre management;  
for  the  medium  term  (2020):  building  on  collaboration  initiatives  with  Member  States 
designed to foster a possible movement towards external shared IT suppliers to reduce IT;  
in the long term (2025): exploring potential synergies with existing agencies or other multi-
DG solutions (as they too develop).  

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  blocks40  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 

38 
39 
40 

COM(2018) 391 
COM(2018) 434 
https://ec.europa.eu/cefdigital/wiki/display/CEFDIGITAL/CEF+Digital+Home  

33 

 
                                                            
interoperability.  Where  relevant,  they  will  also  consider  the  European  Interoperability 
Framework41,  which  gives  specific  guidance  on  how  to  set  up  interoperable  digital  public 
services,  and  the  Rolling  Plan  for  ICT  standardisation42,  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 FinTech43 adopted in March 2018 or the work of the EU Blockchain 
Observatory and Forum44. 

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

5.  HOW WILL PERFORMANCE BE MONITORED AND EVALUATED? 

5.1.  Monitoring strategy of the performance 

The impact of the Customs 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 Customs programme will be also 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  Customs  legal  act  will  provide  for  an  interim  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. The report will also be presented in the Programme’s Committee. 

5.2.  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 customs 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. 

41 

42 
43 
44 

Communication  (COM(2017)134)  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the 
European  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  on  a  “European 
Interoperability Framework – Implementation Strategy”,  
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  

34 

 
                                                            
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 
- 
-  Customs Union Performance Measurement; 
-  DG TAXUD business units own statistics gathered via questionnaires and surveys specific for 

Studies and surveys 

their area of work and relevant for the programme 

-  Other bodies 

5.3.  Customs programme core indicators 

The  monitoring  system  of  the  programme  builds  on  the  experience  developed  under  the 
previous  programme.  It  is  structured  in  three  different  levels  addressing  different  political 
priorities:  
- 

Level  1  as  regards  the  policy  cluster  (for  the  communication  on  political  priorities  of  the 
“Single  Market,  Innovation  and  Digital”  heading  as  a  whole  –  not  treated  as  such  in  this 
document),  
Level  2  as  regards  the  programme  (for  the  key  performance  reporting  of  this  “Customs 
Programme”) and 
Level 3 as regards complementary performance information (for the broader performance 
management of the programme).  

- 

- 

The  most  meaningful  indicators  for  the  next  generation  of  the  programme  are  Level  2 
indicators.  They  are  presented  in  the  table  below,  following  contributions  from  the  Mid-term 
Evaluation of the Customs 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 (e.g. customs union performance). Because change in these indicators is affected by 
many  factors,  a  causal  relationship  cannot  be  established  to  attribute  change  directly  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.  

The following core indicators45 have been identified as relevant for measuring the performance 
of the programme’s specific objective: 

Specific objective 
Support the preparation and uniform implementation of customs legislation and policy as well 
as customs cooperation and administrative capacity building, including human competency and 
the development and operation of the European electronic systems for customs. 

45  

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

35 

 
                                                            
Indicators 
(1) 

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 participants 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: Use of key European electronic systems aimed at increasing 
interconnectivity and moving to a paper-free Customs Union (number of messages 
exchanged and consultations carried out) 
Indicator 8: UCC completion rate (percentage of milestones reached for implementing 
UCC systems) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 
(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

Table 4: Core indicators of the new customs programme 

As regards Level 3 indicators, the experience of the Customs 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. This planned simplification will follow the conclusions of the Mid-Term Evaluation of 
Customs  2020  (currently  on-going).  It  will  also  include  indicators  as  regards  the  completion  / 
integration of the EU-wide customs IT system as this is the main spending area.  

5.4.  Evaluations 

An  interim  evaluation  (3.5  years  after  the  adoption  of  the  programme's  Regulation)  will  be 
submitted  to  the  European  Parliament  and  to  the  Council,  assessing  the  functioning  of  the 
programmes and identifying potential obstacles to the achievement of its objectives. 

A final evaluation report of the Programme will also be submitted to the European Parliament 
and  the  Council,  assessing  the  long-term  impact  and  sustainability  of  the  effects  of  the 
Programme.  

36 

 
 
 
Annex 1: Procedural information 

1. LEAD DG(S), DECIDE PLANNING/CWP REFERENCES 

The  lead  Directorate-General  is  the  Directorate-General  for  Taxation  and  the  Customs  Union 
(DG TAXUD).  

This initiative got the following political agreements: 

-  Commission Work Programme: 2018 Annex I, initiative 2 

-  Agenda Planning: not applicable 

- 

Inception Impact Assessment: not applicable 

2. ORGANISATION AND TIMING 

The works for this initiative started in May 2017 with a spending review of on-going EU action 
programmes  and  funds  and  continued  until  May  2018  with  the  preparation  of  impact 
assessments and corresponding legislative proposals. 

The  following  Directorates-General  were  invited  to  the  Inter-Service  Steering  Group  (ISSG): 
AGRI,  BUDG,  COMP,  DGT,  ECFIN,  ENV,  FISMA,  GROW,  HOME,  MARE,  MOVE,  NEAR,  OLAF,  SG 
(incl. SRSS), SJ, TRADE.  

The Inter-Service Steering Group was chaired by the Secretariat General. It met three times to 
discuss the file. The last meeting of the steering group took place on $$ $$$$$ 2018. 

3. CONSULTATION OF THE RSB 

The Regulatory Scrutiny Board on 25.4.2018 examined the Impact Assessment report.  

The Board issued a positive opinion with reservations on 27.4.2018. According to the opinion: 
“The Board notes the evolving role of EU customs. It understands that the policy intention is to 
scale up the current Customs programme in line with earlier policy decisions. The Board gives a 
positive  opinion,  with  a  recommendation  to  further  improve  the  report  with  respect  to  the 
following key aspects: 

1.  The  report  does not provide  enough  elements on  the IT projects  that  would justify  the 
doubling  of  the  overall  budget  under  the  new  MFF,  especially  as  80%  of  the  IT 
developments  are  to  be  completed  by  2020.  It  also  does  not  demonstrate  that  the 
current administrative capacity and sharing of responsibilities between the Commission 
and the Member States are adequate with such an increase in the budget.  

2.  Although stakeholders and the evaluation have identified the current monitoring system 
as  burdensome,  the  report  does  not  elaborate  on  the  simplification  of  monitoring 
arrangements and indicators going beyond the legal base indicators.” 

Sections 2.1, 4.1 and 5.2 of the report have been amended accordingly.  

4. EVIDENCE, SOURCES AND QUALITY 

Information  on  evidence  gathered,  sources  consulted  and  quality  is  contained  in  the  relevant 
sections of the report  and in Annex 2.  

37 

 
 
 
Annex 2: Stakeholder consultation  

INTRODUCTION 

The consultation strategy consisted of the following key activities: 

1.  Workshop with customs administrations of Member States and Candidate Countries 
2.  Survey addressing customs administrations of Member States and Candidate Countries 
3.  Case studies in selected countries  
4.  Project group with Member States’ and Candidate Countries’ selected representatives 
5.  Open Public Consultation 

This annex presents in detail each of these activities and thereafter the conclusions reached.  

CONSULTATION ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT 

1.  Workshops with customs administrations of Member States and Candidate Countries 

The  external  stakeholder  consultation  was  launched  by  a  3  days’  workshop  in  June  2016 
(Customs  2020  workshop  in  Dubrovnik,  21-23  June  2016).  In  the  workshop,  the  Customs 
2020  programme  committee  members  and  policy  representatives  from  the  programme 
participating  countries  were  requested  to  contribute  to  the  identification  of  the  key 
challenges in customs policy in the next decade. The representatives of the administrations 
were also invited to elaborate on possible solutions and pinpoint those elements that could 
be addressed by the support of a future EU intervention programme.  

A second workshop was held in September 2017 (Customs 2020 workshop in Paris, 27-29 
September  2017).  In  this  workshop,  the  Customs  2020  programme  committee  members 
and  policy  representatives  from  the  participating  countries  were  updated  on  the  state  of 
play  of  the  preparation  of  the  next  programme  and  exchanged  views  on  the  features  it 
should have to respond to the actual needs. 

2.  Survey addressing customs administrations of Member States and Candidate Countries 

A survey of 25 questions was addressed to the Customs 2020 participating countries aiming 
at  gathering  customs  administrations’  views  on  the  implementation  of  the  current 
programme  and  insights  for  future  cooperation  supported  by  the  programme.  The 
questions addressed:  
- 

information  on  the  functioning  of  the  Customs  2020  Programme,  and  particularly  the 
impact  of  its  different  activities  on  your  administration,  as  well  as  the  level  of 
satisfaction of your organisation with such activities 
general  and  specific  trends  influencing  the  functioning  of  the  customs  union  and  the 
work of the customs administrations in it 

- 

-  problem points and areas of the customs administrations 
The  survey  was  launched  in  December  2017  and  the  administrations  were  requested  to 
reply by 18 January 2018. By the given deadline, 25 countries provided their feedback.  

3.  Case studies in selected countries  

In-depth interviews were conducted with a set of relevant stakeholders in 9 Member States 
selected for the case studies. Such stakeholders included: 
-  Customs Administrations: to collect information to refine the problem assessment and 

in-depth information on specific customs policy areas;  

38 

 
 
 
-  Business  organisations:  These  associations  provided  insights  on  the  key  drivers  and 
problems  in  the  field  of  customs  policy  in  general  with  regard  to  the  case  study 
identified.  

-  A  sample  of  economic  operators  in  each  Member  State:  These  associations  provided 
insights  on  the  key  drivers  and  problems  in  the  field  of  customs  policy  in  general  and 
with regard to the case study identified.  

COUNTRIES ADDRESSED 

CASE STUDY TOPIC 

BE  HR  CZ  DK  EE 

FR 

IT  MT  PL 

Data and information 

Trade facilitation and single window 

eCommerce and digital trade 

External border protection (land) 

External border protection (sea) 

External border protection (air) 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

Table 5: Overview of case studies 

The  selection  of  the  case  studies  started  from  acknowledging  the  fact  that  different 
Member States face different thematic and geographical challenges in the future and have 
different  needs 
in  terms  of  customs  collaboration,  depending  on  their  diverse 
characteristics  (e.g.  location,  organisational  structure  of  the  Customs  administration, 
characteristics of businesses and characteristics of trade flows).  

The case studies were designed to provide concrete insights on Member States current and 
future problems or challenges that the programme is already helping to address or could 
help address in the future. These problems/challenges can be derived from both the general 
and  specific  trends  identified  in  the  preliminary  problem  tree  or  from  more  permanent 
features such as the geographical location of the Member States.  

While the case studies were selected starting from concrete (current and future) problems 
and challenges, they also covered other important aspects, such as the possible solutions 
and  activities  a  new  programme  could  promote.  Each  case  study  addressed  three  main 
elements: 
-  What is  the  current trend/situation with regard to  the topic object of  the case study? 

(e.g. current trend/situation with regard to e-commerce) 

-  How does this topic affect customs authorities? (e.g. emergence of new challenges for 

customs authorities dealing with increase in amount of low value shipments);  

-  What could the programme do to help Customs administrations? (e.g. which solutions 
or tools the future programme could put in place to address the challenges and impact 
related to e-Commerce?) 

In addition, a set of cross-dimensional elements were addressed in all case studies, such as: 
- 
Interaction  and  cooperation  between  EU  customs  administrations  and  possible 
improvement  of  the  current  EU  organisational  and  cooperative  models  amongst  the 
national  customs  administrations,  with  third  countries,  trade  and  other  national 
authorities, including tax authorities and international organisations.  

-  Administrative capacity building and potential improvement in the areas of:  

o  equipment  and  infrastructure  (European  electronic  systems  –  common  and 
national components), customs detection technology, functional assets (such as 
buildings, border management facilities, communication tools);  

39 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
o  human resources;  
o  customs administration processes and procedures 

The case studies embraced also the angle of forward-looking and innovative solutions in all 
those aspects.  

4.  Project group with Member States’ and Candidate Countries’ selected representatives 

The Commission created a dedicated project group to provide detailed input for the study 
contributing  to an Impact Assessment concerning a possible legislative proposal for an EU 
action programme for Customs for the period post-2020. More specifically, the group was 
mobilized to: 

-  discuss about their experience/interaction with the current Customs 2020 programme; 
- 

examine  and  validate  the  present  and  future  trends  identified  by  the  study  team  and 
their effects on customs;  
explore  the  current  and  coming  needs,  and  the  expected  contribution  of  the 
programme; 
review and validate the main elements of the building blocks to take into consideration 
for the policy options on the future of the Customs programme; and to 

- 

- 

-  provide input to the analysis of the impacts of the identified draft policy options. 

The  Project  Group  consisted  of  the  representatives  of  the  countries  who  responded 
positively to the call for participation: of Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, 
France, Germany, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey. The 
group  convened  2  live  meetings  in  July  and  October  2017  and  collaborated  by  electronic 
means in between the meetings.  

5.  Open Public Consultation 

A centralised multi-programme Open Public Consultation is being led and managed by the 
Secretariat General. This consultation contributes to the evaluations of existing EU financial 
programmes covering several policy areas and the Impact Assessment in preparation of the 
sectoral programmes. The public consultations on the MFF clusters were carried out on EU 
Survey between 10 January 2018 – and 9 March 2018.  

CONSULTATION RESULTS 

1.  Workshops with customs administrations of Member States and Candidate Countries 

1.1.  The 2016 workshop consisted in identifying all challenges that Customs administrations 
are likely to face in the 10/15 coming years, in classifying them in the following clusters 
and in considering how the future customs programme could contribute to replying to 
these – or part of these- clusters of challenges. 

The workshop concluded the following points: 

1.  Need  for  a  clear  customs  policy  strategy  in  all  domains.  In  particular,  participants 
insisted  on  the  need  to  issue  without  delay  the  Customs  Governance  Communication 
and  expressed  their  wish  to  update  the  2008  Commission  Communication  on  the 
Strategy for the Evolution  of the Customs Union  (COM(2008) 169 final) as new trends 
and  threats  have  emerged  which  require  adaptations  and  evolutions  of  this  strategy. 
They  underlined  that  the  implementation plan  announced by  this  communication  had 
not  been  implemented.  The  notion  of  Customs  Agency  was  also  mentioned  as  a  way 
forward deserving further reflections. 

40 

 
2. 

In  this  context,  particular  emphasis  was  put  on  the  absolute  necessity  to  design  of  a 
strategic framework for IT. In particular, participants insisted on the need to define the 
level of commitment at EU level by identifying the Member States which are ready to be 
engaged  and  to  which  level  of  commitment.  They  also  insisted  on  the  necessity  to 
identify the structure of collaboration between Member States and the Commission.  

o 

o 

In  this  context  "IT  collaboration"  was  mentioned  as  being  a  way  forward  to 
further  explore.  Collaboration  in  general  is  characterised  by  a  common 
objective, pooled resources in a formal structure and balanced ownership. 

 In the context of “IT Collaboration” the overall objective is the implementation 
of  electronic  systems.  This  can  be  development  of  IT  Software,  IT  solutions 
(design,  specifications  etc.),  IT  components  (architecture,  platforms  etc.)  or 
other elements that support an IT solution (e.g. testing). 

o  Taking also into account the budget constraints faced by public administrations, 
opinions  are converging  to  a  consensus  that the traditional  way  of  developing 
similar functionalities 28 times is a waste of public funds.  

o  Working in a  more  synchronised,  coordinated and/or  collaborative  way  allows 
Member States not only to save money and time but also to increase the quality 
of  their  IT solutions.  Indeed,  IT  Collaboration further  promotes  reusability  and 
interoperability of electronic systems.  

o 

Investing in developing IT projects in a more coordinated and collaborative way 
is  expected  to  reduce  the  cost,  complexity  and  time  needed  to  develop  and 
maintain Member States’ electronic systems.  

3.  Enhanced operational cooperation through a wide use of expert teams to be further 
explored as a means to allow geographical or thematic deep cooperation between MS 
was  mentioned  as  being  a  way  forward  for  better  integration,  efficiency  and 
effectiveness of the functioning of the customs union. 

4.  The customs programme is the main instrument to implement customs policy and to 
achieve its objectives. To this end, participants highlighted the necessity to identify first 
the  strategic  objectives  of  the  customs  policy,  including  IT,  before  designing  the  next 
generation of programmes that needs to be tailor-made. 

5.  A  sound  communication  strategy  aimed  at  decision  makers  and  the  public  at  large  is 
needed  to  enhance  the  visibility  and  to  shed  light  on  the  evolving  role  of  customs 
towards security and safety. Indeed, all participants underlined the lack of recognition 
of  the  customs  role.  Compared  to  taxation,  customs  administrations  are  ignored  by 
decision  makers  and  the  public  which  do  not  understand  why  there  are  still  customs 
services in the EU as internal borders have been eliminated. The roles and missions of 
customs are unknown, which makes also difficult to attract new skilled staff to replace 
the  ever  aging  population  of  customs  officials  and  the  subsequent  loss  of  knowledge 
and competences in all countries. Therefore, a clear need for a communication strategy 
to  be  initiated  by  the  Commission  has  been  identified.  Such  communication  should 
address first the public at large with simple and easy messages using the modern tools 
(Facebook,  Twitter)  and  should  highlight  the  protecting  role  of  customs  for  citizens. 
Attracting  the  attention  of  the  public  would  subsequently  make  customs  more 
attractive for decision makers at the highest level.  

6.  As  to  human  resources,  a  customs  "Public  Relations  Agency"  was  mentioned  for 
attracting  skilled  new  staff.  The  customs  competency  framework  should  be  further 

41 

 
implemented  while  an  EU  training  centre  (even  virtual)  could  support  specialised 
training needs. 

7.  For what concerns equipment  and infrastructure, the challenge  will be to obtain (EU) 
funds  for  obtaining  necessary  (EU)  funds  for  necessary  national  investments.  The 
possible  solutions  identified  are  to  have  a  dedicated  customs  fund  for  financing,  to 
develop  a  joint  usage  of  equipment  and  infrastructure  and  to  support  MS  to  benefit 
from non-customs EU funds. 

8.  Cooperation/Coordination needs to be enhanced at all levels: within the Commission, 
between  MS  departments,  between  MS  and  with  third  parties  (including  Candidate 
countries)  and  between  programmes.  To  achieve  this  objective  and  inter  alia,  it  is 
necessary to identify the need for possible legal changes, to explore the promotion of 
EU data model   and to make an inventory of areas where cooperation and collaboration 
is needed, relevant and feasible (bringing real added value). 

9.  The  Commission  can  bring  facilitation,  guidance  and  support  to  MS  for  better 
implementing  EU  customs  law  by  developing  a  methodology  for  monitoring  and 
evaluation for the implementation of legislation, by setting up a centre of excellence or 
an expert team for the interpretation of legislation, by establishing a help system at EU 
level and between Member States, by creating a list of contact persons responsible for 
various areas in the Member States. 

10. To  this  end,  monitoring  of  the  implementation  of  EU  law  can  bring  added  value. 
Modalities should be further explored on how to bring support to MS at best (e.g.: peer 
reviews). Monitoring should be understood in a positive way (help and support to MS 
by the Commission and/or other MS) and not negatively (identification of potential lack 
of implementation for further infringements procedures).  

During the workshop, the participants also expressed the following suggestions: 

  Objectives:  Upgrade  the  objectives  of  Customs  2020  to  encompass  harmonised 
functioning,  innovation  and  modernisation  -  as  a  general  objective.  As  to  specific 
objectives,  keep  the  current  ones  plus  visibility  (support  for  recognition  of  customs), 
digital  environment,  customer  compliance,  cooperation,  enforcement,  safety  and 
security. The legal basis should be extended to Article 87 TFUE; 

  Participants/ Beneficiaries: Primarily Member States customs authorities, but allow for 
more  involvement  of  trade  representatives,  more  activities  for  operational  level 
officers;  involve  more  easily  partner  organisations,  authorities  and  bodies,  as  well  as 
international organisations; 

  Eligible actions: The current ones should be kept. New ones should be added especially 
as  regards  new  cooperation  methods 
(webinars,  video  conferences,  virtual 
collaboration), crisis management/swift reaction teams, enhanced collaboration for IT, 
think thanks and benchmarking, joint cross border activities, peer to peer reviews, and 
in a nutshell, all types of activities without limitations or specifications.  

 

Implementation  framework  and  management  mode:  The  current  management  of 
direct management is the preferred one but more autonomy could be granted to expert 
teams.  Annual  Work  Programmes  is  the  preferred  approach  but  the  multi  annual 
dimension  of  certain  actions  (such  as  e-Commerce)  should  be  borne  in  mind  when 
elaborating them. 

42 

 
  Financial  framework:  Maintain  the  grants  and  procurement  as  financial  intervention 
types.  For  equipment,  some  options  should  be  explored:  using  more  directly  other 
financial  instruments,  having  a  separate  customs  fund  and/or  simplifying  financial 
management. 

The stakeholder consultation provided insight in  the future policies and needs of the customs 
policy anticipated in the next decade:  

Cluster 

General Description 

Detailed description 

- Deepening EU Customs Union 
- How to respond properly and efficiently to all 
requirements (UCC implementation; electronic 
systems …); Customs Union Performance 
(including KPI‘s); Protecting the interests of the 
EU; Governance reform; Customs agency(ies)?! 
- Customs agency? 
- Possibility of disintegration (?exit) 
- Diversity of MS  
- National vs EU priorities 
- Strategy of customs union 
- Exchange of information 
- UCC implementation, also post 2020 
- Rigid legislation and bureaucracy in BXL (multiple 
working groups, etc.) 
- Competence gaps 
- Candidate countries 
- Customs Governance. Many decisions should be 
taken at the right level without undue delay, 
balancing the interests of MS. 
Quality of Administration 
- Crosscutting 
- Diverse administrations/common rules 
- Undermining purpose of common rules 
Convergence / uniformity 
Keeping European Customs Union together  
Maintain the integrity of Customs Union across all 
crises. Customs Union is a pillar of the EU and for 
International trade and the welfare of its 
members. 
Transparency 
- Crosscutting 
- Demand for more transparency 
- Make use of it 
- Cost of transparency 
Governance of the Customs Union 
- Customs 
- Management/organisation of customs union – 
operational management body 
- Political/policy and competency challenge 
Border/internal market management 
Description of the challenge:  
- Crosscutting 
- Application of common law to diverse member 
states 
- Managing an integrated union in a global world 
- Adapting to new technological developments 
(3D printing; new transport means – drones,…)  
- New working methods (video-conferences; social 
media) 
- Need for swift reaction of customs to new 
challenges. Ongoing monitoring is essential 
- Fast reaction to new crisis 

Functioning of the 
customs union 

MS pointed that new trends and 
threats have emerged requiring 
adaptations and evolutions of 
the EU customs strategy. The EU 
is faced with having to balance 
the interests of the MS with 
diverse administrative cultures 
while the implementation of the 
UCC has to be achieved in a 
coherent and efficient manner, 
with the disintegration 
possibility, and dealing with 
crises such as migration. This is 
why, MS insisted on the need to 
issue without delay the Customs 
Governance Communication and 
expressed their wish to update 
the 2008 Commission 
Communication on the Strategy 
for the Evolution of the Customs 
Union (COM(2008) 169 final). 
They underlined that the 
implementation plan announced 
by this communication had not 
been implemented. The notion 
of Customs Agency was also 
mentioned as a way forward 
deserving further reflections. 

Change management 

The globalisation and the 
digitalisation bring along new 
business models and 
technological developments. The 
customs need to adapt rapidly to 
these changes and implement 
working methods which allow 

43 

 
Cluster 

General Description 
customs coping effectively to 
these trends. 

Cooperation 

IT capacity building & IT 
strategy 

MS pointed that ensuring 
cooperation within the 
Commission, among MS 
departments, between MS and 
third parties (including CC) and 
programmes is one of the 
challenges of the next decade. 
To achieve this it is necessary to 
identify the need for possible 
legal changes, to explore the 
promotion of EU data model and 
to make an inventory of areas 
where cooperation and 
collaboration is needed, relevant 
and feasible (bringing real added 
value). 

MS pointed out that they are 
facing budgetary restrictions 
while having to implement the 
UCC electronic systems (existing 
or new), ensure their 
compatibility and manage 
increasing volumes of data. 
Therefore, with a view to the IT 
development and support and 
the related financing of 
electronic systems for the UCC 
implementation, MS insisted on 
the need to define the level of 

44 

Detailed description 

Evolution of business models VS current taxing 
rights and processes (including customs) 
Description of the challenge:  
- Crosscutting 
- Globalisation 
- Digitalisation 
- IP based economy 
Simplify complexity 
Description of the challenge:  
- Crosscutting 
- Adaptation of tax and customs rules to evolving 
business models 
- Risk of uncoordinated approaches 
- Loopholes 
- Double taxation 
- Enhanced cooperation with 3rd countries 
(exchange of information; joint border crossings; 
support and technical assistance; promotion of EU 
data model; Customs Blueprints) 
- Cooperation is important at all levels 
- EU MS, candidate countries, 3rd countries, 
international organisations, intra-commission and 
intra-DG cooperation and coordination (DG 
TAXUD, DG Home and OLAF) 
- Non-customs agencies 
- Limited legal bases 
- Cooperation with other authorities 
- Collaboration with tax administration 
- Cooperation with other involved agencies in case 
of crisis 
- Defined roles of stakeholders and shared 
resources in crisis 
- Customs is not sufficiently involved in FTA 
negotiations and implementation. Risk of 
unrealistic customs provisions may (and do) 
appear in FTAs 
- Exchanges of information with customs of 
neighbouring countries (scope needs to be 
defined and agreed) 
- Cooperation between all involved stakeholders 
- Partnership and trust 
Joined up government 
Description of the challenge:  
- Crosscutting 
- Feeding in other policy considerations into tax 
and customs law 
- Effective support of other policies 
- More holistic approach to government 
- IT development & support & development and 
financing of new electronic systems 
- Implementation of new electronic systems. This 
includes creation of common data base, 
maintenance, costly expertise. Financing is a 
challenge for customs authorities. Basic issue is to 
what extend should we elaborate joint electronic 
systems (to work together) 
- IT funding 
- UCC electronic -systems 
- Compatibility between different electronic 
systems 
- Managing big data 

 
 
Cluster 

Implementation of EU 
policy and law 

Role of customs & 
Visibility 

General Description 
commitment at EU level by 
identifying the Member States 
which are ready to be engaged 
and to which level of 
commitment. They also insisted 
on the necessity to identify the 
structure of collaboration 
between Member States and the 
Commission, including the need 
to set-up an IT strategy. 

The implementation of customs 
policy in a coordinated and 
strategic way. Member States 
highlighted the need for the 
Commission – TAXUD – to 
accompany them in facilitating 
such implementation, by 
allowing the establishment of 
guidance on all types of 
legislation or other measures. 
With the customs programme 
being the main instrument to 
implement customs policy and to 
achieve its objectives, MS 
highlighted the necessity to 
identify first the strategic 
objectives of the customs policy, 
before designing the next 
generation of programmes that 
needs to be tailor-made. 

MS underlined the lack of 
recognition of the customs role. 
Compared to taxation, customs 
administrations are ignored by 
decision makers and the public 
which do not understand why 
there are still customs services in 
the EU as internal borders have 
been eliminated. The roles and 
missions of customs are 
unknown, which makes also 
difficult to attract new skilled 
staff to replace the ever aging 
population of customs officials 
and the subsequent loss of 
knowledge and competences in 
all countries. The evolving role of 
customs towards security and 
safety remains obscure to the 
public and decision makers. 

45 

Detailed description 

- Data mining 
- Data protection, Data security 
- Cybercrime 
- Cyber attacks 
Future IT implementation 
Description of the challenge:  
- Crosscutting with taxation 
- Too big for individual player (MS and/or COM) 
- Huge operational requirements (availability, 
security,…) 
- High costs for creation and operations 
- UCC implementation in practice 
- Equal treatment of clients 
- Infringements and sanctions (harmonising minor 
infringements, compliance, equal treatment) 
- Common key performance indicators 
- UCC implementation things to be completed: 
Centralized clearance, etc,  
- Monitoring of implementation of UCC (IT, 
procedural aspects, etc) 
- Support for implementation (and alignment with 
EU standards and legislation procedures and 
practice for candidate countries) 
Leading internationally 
Description of the challenge:  
- Customs: expend the transit convention, the 
custom union, new FTAs.  
- Need to address the decreasing revenue 
collection. 
Simplify customs = short, simple and clear 
legislation, no need for guidance etc. 
Description of the challenge:  
- Partly Crosscutting 
- The intention of the legislation is often not clear, 
not a clear understanding of the intention 
- New role of customs 
- Safety and security 
- Recognising as important for political level and 
public 
- Political will and support (national and 
international level) 
- Increase compliance 
- Attractiveness to work for customs 
- More communication and advertising is needed. 
(PR strategy needed explaining the role and 
importance of customs) 
- Role of customs on national and EU level – 
collection of duties; safety and security; visibility;  

added value / communication (In/out & Out/in) 
Communicate/add the Social Protection dimension 
of the Customs Union to regain citizen trust 
Customs: Compromise globalisation/Trade 
Facilitation with social protection. Recognize that 
social Protection is already in part addressed by 
current customs processes (counterfeit, Special 
Procedures, product safety,…). It will address Euro-
sceptiscism. 
Visibility of customs  
Description of the challenge:  
- Customs 
- Strong voice missing  

 
 
Cluster 

General Description 

Resources - Human 
resources 

As to human resources, trends 
point to the challenge of aging of 
the customs staff and the need 
of ensuring effective training and 
transfer of knowledge as 
customs need to respond to 
increasing demands with 
reduced resources. 

Resources - Equipment 
and infrastructure 

Being faced with globalisation, 
security threats and possibly 
(economic) migration issues, EU 
needs a customs policy to 
support common or at least 
coordinated operational border 
management to effectively adapt 
to these trends. Given the 
general lack of national 
resources to deal with new ways 
and areas of control, for what 
concerns the required 
equipment and infrastructure 
necessary for customs to 
perform their core duties, the 
challenge will be to obtain (EU) 
funds for necessary national 
investments. 

Trade facilitation and 
evolution 

The challenge for customs is to 
ensure the protection of the 
financial and economic interest 
of the EU, contribute to safety 
and security in a manner which 
does not interfere with the flow 
of legitimate trade.  The 
Member States highlighted that 

46 

Detailed description 
- Relevance of customs unknown to 
governments/citizens 
- Lack of resources (aging customs staff; 
equipment; infrastructure; training) 
- New skills 
- New tasks 
- Training and transfer of knowledge 
- Modern working methods 
- Funding 
- Limited, delayed availability of translated 
documents and materials to be improved. (MFF) 
- Renewal of customs HR (aging customs staff- a 
challenge for all EU customs services) 
- Lack of resources (aging customs staff; 
equipment; infrastructure; training) 
- Financing national programmes/priorities with 
EU funds - Obtaining necessary EU funds for 
national customs investments (priorities for EU 
funds are set nationally where customs is not 
necessary the first priority) 
- Growing demands with reduced resources 
- Budgeting 
- Protection of customs officers: dangerous goods 
- equipment needed 
- Limited financial resources 
- Infrastructure and equipment 
- Common EU resources 
- New ways of controls (detections) 
- Resources needed for specific (basic) and 
important customs functions 
- More attention needed on EU internal border in 
the context of customs role (including budgetary 
provisions for customs) 
- External Borders: Lack of common and minimum 
standards for customs offices (equipment, 
organisation, logistics); Adapted to port, airport, 
rail, land border; 
- Role of customs more strengthened; Funding;  
Financing of Customs Union 
Description of the challenge:  
- Customs 
- National vs./and EU 
- Both revenue and costs to be looked at 
- Not strong/important enough to get resources 
Capacity building 
Description of the challenge:  
- Cross cutting  
- Need of specialised equipment  
- Need for expertise 
Keep the Customs Union efficient and affordable.  
Customs: consolidate IT/Laboratories/Equipment's 
costs by shared investment and operation. 
Maintaining skilled workforce. Keeping up with 
technology. 
Trade facilitation 
- Trade facilitation (e-commerce, single window; 
mutual AEO recognition with 3rd countries; SBA; 
cooperation with trade; SSTL; e-services for 
customers) 
- Impact of the implementation of the FTAs 
concluded by the EU with third countries 
- E-commerce (changes of business models) 

 
 
 
Cluster 

Security 

General Description 
the pressure on customs in the 
national, EU and global context 
to support and facilitate 
legitimate trade has been and is 
increasing. In light of the 
changing trade environment 
underpinned by tendencies of 
globalisation and e-commerce, 
customs authorities face 
constant new challenges and 
ever increasing demand for 
improved services. Member 
States also emphasised that the 
free trade agreements and 
similar international associations 
make the collection of customs 
duties insignificant and the role 
of customs administrations soon 
will be completely redirected 
towards safety-security related 
purposes. As such, national 
administrations struggle to 
provide expected revenue to 
national treasuries, for which 
they are often strongly criticizes. 

Over the last two decades the 
role of customs has significantly 
transformed. Customs is no 
longer seen as a body to collect 
customs duties and related taxes 
but as the guardian of the 
external borders of the EU with 
the responsibility to stop all 
goods and prevent all activities 
which could have a negative 
impact on the safety and security 
of the EU citizens, nature and 
the environment and culture, or 
which damages the financial and 
economic interest of the EU. 
This role requires operational 
methodologies which enable 
customs officers to efficiently 
identify harmful 
consignments/goods. It is only 
possible with reinforced EU risk 
management and competent, 
skilled staff. Member States 
acknowledged that these efforts 
require strong collaboration at 
the EU level and also with other 
(non-customs) 
agencies/authorities and 
expressed their concern about 

47 

Detailed description 

- Trade facilitation (Self-assessment, single 
window, centralised clearance, reduction of 
burdens for economic operators) 
- Accessibility of electronic systems 
- Single Window: need to work together, sharing 
information with other services involved (how to 
reasonably improve). Leading role of customs 
needed. 
- Principle should be to avoid/ minimise the 
burden for legitimate traders but also for customs 
authorities.  
- Higher standards of modernization are needed 
(eg: SBA. Compliance in the SBA context)  
Trade evolution 
- Facing tensions in global trade (ability to act 
rapidly; new FTAs; sanctions) – reduction of trade 
barriers, ASEM  
- Globalisation: New markets; Changing trade 
lines; implementation of the Trade facilitation 
Agreement and of any future bilateral trade 
agreement (FTA) concluded between the EU and 
third countries; Changing Risk analysis; New 
economic areas 
- Growing of e-commerce: Change of structure of 
customs clients; Protection of financial interests, 
under valuation; Capacity to control; Prohibitions 
and restrictions; Health protection, IPR, Product 
safety 
- E-commerce: new solutions are needed & 
Multiple challenges: fiscal (de minimis principle), 
security, health, handling of small (postal) 
consignments, risk management. How to 
communicate to the public what are the threats 
related with Internet shopping. 
Security 
- Security (dual use-goods; fight against terrorism; 
ICS 2.0; use of APNR; role of customs in this area) 
- Protection of society (IPR, medicines; cultural 
goods, drugs ) 
- Fight against terrorism: legal basis, cooperation 
with all involved agencies and services, financing, 
exchange of information, skills 
- Terrorism: Cultural heritage, Terrorism financing, 
Smuggling of weapons, firearms, Money 
laundering 
- Migration 
- Crisis management 
- Environmental protection 
- Supply chain security 
- Diversity of customs control standards 
- Risk management 
- Involvement of customs in other related areas, 
such as migration, terrorism, taxation. 
- Increased globalization (of tourism): causing 
potential smuggling threat. Need to monitor and 
control. Resources might be necessary. 
- Combating terrorism and crime to be balanced 
with traditional customs tasks (budget priority for 
EU and governments) 
- Fight against terrorism (equipment, control at 
internal borders, collaboration with other 
services, human resources. 

 
Cluster 

General Description 
the availability of resources 
(human and budgetary) to fulfil 
the increasing and more and 
more versatile control tasks. 

Detailed description 

Table 6: Insight in the future policies and needs of the customs policy anticipated in the next decade  
as resulting from stakeholders’ consultations 

1.2.  The 2017 workshop allowed the participants to reflect on the proposed building blocks 

and their impact on the future programme  

The participants reflected on the proposed building blocks and their impact on the future 
programme as such enriching the impact assessment study. The participants generally felt 
that the list of identified building blocks was complete and accurate. Participants addressed 
each of the building blocks and reported that: 

•  Vision  –  The  programme  should  allow  for  setting  up  permanent/semi-permanent 
cooperation structures, including for IT and human competency building and be prepared to 
assist  crisis  management.  A  more  uniform  and  harmonised  implementation  within  the 
customs union should be the ultimate goal. 

•  Activities  –  The  programme  should  have  the  widest  possible  array  of  tools:  all  current 
options should be available in the future but with the flexibility to make them tailor made 
for  arising  needs  and  the  possibility  to  add  new  tools  (e.g.  communication  and  visibility; 
research and innovation, joint customs operations) 

•  Beneficiaries  –  The  main  beneficiaries  should  remain  the  national  customs 
administrations  but  the  programme  should  also  consider  the  indirect  impacts  on  citizens 
and involve more structurally academics, universities. 

•  Geographical  focus  –  The  programme  should  address  regional  (including  non-EU) 
cooperation  approach  mainly  in  terms  of  Eastern  and  Mediterranean  neighbouring 
countries  and  cooperation  with  other  customs  unions  and  international  organisations 
(WTO, WCO, World Bank) 

• Participants – The programme should maintain the flexibility to mobilise expertise from all 
public bodies, including third countries' customs authorities, economic operators, academic 
world  and  international  organisations,  though  the  primary  participants  should  come  from 
the EU national customs administrations. 

•  Funding  –  Funds  should  provide  easy  access  and  fair  distribution  mechanisms  to 
access/purchase customs control equipment. This includes the need that the 20% retailed 
by  the  countries  is  actually  circled  back  to  the  customs  administrations.  The  programme 
should  consider  asking  for  compensation  from  economic  operators  participating  in 
programme activities or benefiting from its outputs. 

• Governance – The programme should involve the MS more in budget spending decisions 
and ensure the follow up and monitoring of activities. 

In addition the plenary discussions stated that: 

• Funding and a fair distribution of funds is an important matter, especially in relation to 
customs control equipment. 

48 

 
 
• Synergies between the Customs, the Fiscalis and other EU programmes should be 
reinforced. 

• The next programme generation has the potential to act as a bridge or transition 
programme to the post-2030 era and therefore the reflection on the long-term future of 
customs is needed already now. 

2.  Survey addressing customs administrations of Member States and Candidate Countries 

In the survey, customs administrations assessed the extent to which customs specific trends 
are  having  an  impact  on  customs  administrations  activities  in  the  next  10  years.  The 
answers can be summarized as follows: 

Figure 2: Impact of specific trends on customs administrations activities in the next 10 years 

In terms of the trends, the survey highlighted that the challenge most frequently referred to 
as  having  to  a  considerable  or  great  extent  an  impact  upon  the  success  of  the  Customs 
Union  as  a  whole  is  the  unequal  capacity  of  customs  administrations  in  terms  of  IT.  The 
uneven interpretation and implementation of the legislation comes second on the list. 

49 

 
 
Figure 3: Challenge having an impact upon the success of the Customs Union as a whole 

The survey also indicated that a majority of respondents – 17 out of 25 – currently recur to 
other programmes for funding equipment. The most common funding programme recurred 
to by customs administration is Hercules, with 11 respondents out of 25. Three respondents 
have also declared recurring to structural funds, two to ESF and one to IPA.  

Most  of  the  respondent  declare  however  not  having  an  easy  access  to  other  source  of 
funding.  The  main  obstacles  reported  by  the  respondents  are  related  to  complicated 
procedures  or  bureaucracy,  internal  competition  or  different  priorities.  A  respondent  also 
emphasized  that  these  funds  are  not  designed  to  support  customs  needs  or  only  very 
partially. 

The customs authorities furthermore highlighted that a majority of them  – 17 out of 25  – 
consider ‘insufficient uniformity and efficiency’ as being to a considerable extent a problem 
for the functioning of the Customs Union as a whole. The same proportion – 16 out of 25 – 
is  considering that  this  problem should,  to  a  considerable  extent, be  addressed  through  a 
future Customs programme in the coming 10 years. It is to note that 2 respondents did not 
consider it as being a problem for Customs Union as a whole, nor did they envisaged it to be 
addressed by a future EU Customs programme. 

With regards to capacity related to human resources, the survey has confirmed that almost 
half  of  respondents  find  differences  in  human  resource  capacity  between  at  European 
customs  administrations  is  a  crucial  factor  in  the  functioning  of  the  Customs  Union  as  a 
whole. 

The survey revealed that the vision that comes the most frequently to the forefront – 23 out 
of 25 respondents – as helping their organisations to improve capacity, cooperation within 
the  EU  and  with  third  countries,  as  well  as  to  carry  out  effectively  and  efficiently  their 
missions  is  ‘Supporting  the  functioning  of  the  Customs  Union  and  protecting  borders  and 
citizens’. 

50 

 
 
Figure 4: Vision as to human resources 

According  to  the  results  of  the  survey,  the  activities  for  the  participating  countries  the 
programme  should  concentrate  on  are:  development  and  maintenance  of  common 
European electronic systems (92 % of respondents), exchange of experience, best practices, 
mutual learning and knowledge management (92 %); and training, learning and competency 
building activities (96 %). 

3.  Case studies in selected countries  

A. Data and information 

The  case  study  concluded  that  in  terms  of  operational  processes  and  structures,  the 
programme should increase its focus on customs processes and their alignment. Since the 
uniformity  of  data  across  the  EU  is  regularly  limited,  the  programme  should  also  support 
customs administrations in ensuring appropriate levels of data quality. In this respect, the 
programme  should  continue  defining  and  enforcing  standard  data  formats.  However, 
synergies  with  existing  data  formats  should  be  duly  sought  and  materialised.  Where 
relevant, experimentation with innovations that may benefit overall data quality should be 
promoted. 

In terms  of  electronic systems  and  infrastructure,  the  programme should  keep supporting 
the  uniform  implementation  of  the  various  customs  electronic  systems  included  in  the 
in  particular,  the  UCC.  Next  to  assisting  customs 
electronic  customs  project  and, 
administrations in implementing these electronic systems, the programme should leverage 
emerging technologies. As the maturity of the national electronic systems is often diverse, 
the  programme  should  also  promote  the  exchange  of  best  practices  –  especially  on  risk 
analyses. Furthermore, the programme should enforce the only-once principle by avoiding 
overlapping electronic systems or by increasing system interoperability. 

In terms of human resources, customs administrations generally lack an adequate amount 
of  people  with  the  right  knowledge  and  skills  to  deal  with  data  and  information.  In  this 
particular context, the programme may support a ‘centre of excellence’ performing customs 
intelligence work at the EU level. Moreover, the programme could support universities and 
other schools in establishing and delivering customs-specific courses on data science. Such 
courses  may  be  included  in  a  dedicated  EU  Customs  University  funded  under  the 
programme. 

In  terms  of  cooperation,  the  programme  should  continue  supporting  data  exchanges 
between  countries  and  their  public  administrations.  Where  relevant,  common  databases 
and services containing as much customs-related data as possible might be established. In 

51 

 
 
this  respect,  the  programme  could  support  the  mapping  of  where  particular  data  can  be 
found.  Furthermore,  it  is  essential  that  the  programme  identifies  and  operationalises  as 
many  synergies  as  possible  with  other  policy  areas  and  their  respective  programmes.  In 
order  to  increase  the  cooperation  and  interaction  between  customs  and  third  party 
organisations at the EU level, the functioning of the Trade Contact Group (TCG) should also 
be  improved.  Finally,  the  programme  may  offer  guidance  to  customs  administrations  in 
dealing  with  aspects  restricting  the  data  exchange  and  sharing  between  customs 
administrations, other public administrations, as well as third party organisations. 

B. Trade facilitation, single window and centralised clearance 

The  case  study  shows  that  the  Customs  financing  programme  could  be  supportive  of  the 
smooth  and  efficient  move  towards  more  trade  facilitation  without  giving  in  to  risk 
management  obligations,  a  trend  which  is  recognized  by  Member  States  and  economic 
operators. The UCC legal package provides ample tools to make life easier for business, such 
as self-assessment and centralised clearance. At the same time, commitments were made 
on  the  implementation  of  a  single  window  with  the  entry  into  force  of  the  WTO  Trade 
Facilitation Agreement. 

Both Member States and economic operators require practical support in the application of 
the new trade facilitation concepts brought by the EU. In the first place such support should 
come  from  the  European  Commission,  guiding  Member  States  and  the  market  in  the 
implementation of the UCC. Also, the sharing of best practices is very much  welcomed by 
the authorities, both within the EU and with forerunning third countries. In the benefit of 
business, an even interpretation and implementation of legislation by customs is important, 
something  that  is  even  more  the  case  when  it  comes  to  trade  facilitation  concepts  that 
encounter an intra-EU application, such as centralized clearance. 

Considering the new UCC trade facilitating concepts, Member States have to deal with new 
working  methods,  processes  and  procedures.  Such  change  requires  new,  highly  skilled 
profiles that can adequately deal with those evolutions. Such change requires also adequate 
IT tools, in order to communicate with (i) other agencies at national level (e.g. food safety 
agency  sharing  information  through  the  single  window)  and  (ii)  the  authorities  of  other 
Member States (e.g. in the context of centralised clearance and of single window). 

C. eCommerce and digital trade 

Customs  administrations  across  the  EU  are  attempting  in  different  ways  to  deal  with  the 
sudden  growth  of  eCommerce  trade  flows.  Whereas  the  general  approach  seems  to 
‘surrender‘ to the need to facilitate trade, there is a general sense of dissatisfaction with the 
limited  means  (data)  and  tools  (regulatory  frameworks  and  equipment)  to  carry  out  the 
control function in an appropriate manner. Consequently, illicit trade, counterfeit goods and 
potentially unsafe goods can now enter into the EU as result of the incapability of customs 
administrations to take appropriate action.  

This  case  study  on  eCommerce  (and  digital  trade)  has  especially  brought  to  the  fore  the 
need to address the fragmented and inadequate legislative framework on eCommerce, the 
importance  of  quality  data  to  be  improved,  the  relevance  of  interoperability  of  electronic 
systems in the EU, as well as matters related to revenue collection and security. There is a 
strong  sense  across  customs  administrations  as  well  as  economic  operators  (especially 
express  couriers,  and  in  the  future  perhaps  platforms  on  eCommerce)  to  work  in 
collaboration  towards  an  improved  situation.  The  role  for  a  future  customs  cooperation 
programme  could  be  to  facilitate  this  ambition.  Alignment  with  existing  international 
organisation efforts, such as in context of WCO, is key to realize results. 

52 

 
D. External border protection: land border, sea border and air border 

Through  the  in-depth  perspectives  provided  on  the  management  of  the  EU’s  sea,  air  and 
land  borders,  the case  studies  have  provided distinct  as  well as  shared features  of  border 
management in the EU.  

Overall,  it  can  be  said  that  the  case  studies  have  proved  a  valuable  tool  in  supporting  an 
integrated  and  in-depth  understanding  of  the  key  ingredients  impacting  upon  customs 
performance  across  the  EU,  and  upon  the  functioning  of  the  Customs  Union  as  a  whole. 
Through  the  thematic  analysis  of  border  protection  of  sea,  air  and  land,  the  case  studies 
pointed towards more similarities (than differences) between Member States.  

The case studies have confirmed that the efficiency of border protection and facilitation at 
the  sea,  air  or  land  borders,  differs  across  Member  States,  as  a  result  of  differences  in 
organisational  capacity,  strategic  priorities,  and  (innovative)  collaborations.  Fulfilling  a  key 
role  in  the  control  and  facilitation  role  at  the  different  borders,  the  risk  management 
processes  and  availability,  quality  and  exchange  of  data  through  up  to  date  and  inter-
operable  IT  systems  have  proved  crucial  capacities  required  to  ensure  uniformity  and 
efficiency  of  border  management.  The  current  situation,  where  risk  profiling  remains  a 
member  state  driven  exercise  across  the  EU,  continues  to  pose  risks  for  the  security  and 
protection function at the borders. 

With  regards  to  equipment,  the  case  studies  on  external  border  management  in  the  EU 
have also pointed towards a diverse of challenges faced by the customs administrations in 
different EU member states. These challenges range from the financing of ‘hard’ equipment, 
to  the  lack  of  data  on  availability  or  experience  with  equipment,  the  procurement, 
maintenance as well as (shared) use of equipment. The case studies have shown that whilst 
equipment  needs  in  the  context  of  CELBET  (land  facing  countries  in  Eastern  Europe) 
supported the insights into equipment, there is a need for additional comprehensive study 
to provide insights on the size of the equipment related problems for other member states 
and/or  sea  and  air  border  specific  perspectives.  The  changing  trade  landscape  especially 
demands  for  a  continuous  monitoring  of  equipment  availability,  also  to  respond  to  new 
types  of  crises  and  threats,  and  support  the  broadening  of  roles  and  responsibilities  of 
customs (into the security area).  

With a view to cooperation, the case studies on external border protection of land, sea and 
air,  have  pointed  to  development  of  new  ways  of  collaboration.  In-country,  customs 
administrations  are  increasingly  taking  over  tasks  and  responsibilities  with  border  agents, 
mainly in the context of land and sea border management. Reflecting the challenging  new 
trade  patterns  (notably  e-commerce),  customs  administrations  also  enter  into  innovative 
collaborations  with  economic  operators  (express  delivery  services),  sharing  sometimes 
equipment  and  exchanging  data,  to  mitigate  risks  related  to  their  control  function.  In 
addition,  customs  and  universities  are  teaming  up  to  develop  new  types  of  innovative 
equipment solutions. 

Finally, the case studies on external border management have equally pointed towards the 
importance of agile organisations, strategically focused and future-oriented perspectives, in 
order to prevent crisis situations at the border where the control function cannot be carried 
out  in  an  optimal  manner.  With  a  view  to  the  fast-changing  trade  patterns,  as  well  as 
logistics  and  transport  developments  linked  to  that,  a  pro-active  and  strategic  stance  is 
required  by  customs  administrations  in  order  to  secure  investments  are  done  in  the  right 
fields. An example is the fact that customs administrations have expressed that as a result 
of  e-commerce ‘they have been somewhat  caught  by  surprise’,  and  do  not  currently avail 
over  the  relevant  equipment  tools  to  carry  out  control  functions.  At  the  same  time, 

53 

 
eCommerce continues to impact mainly the air border, which may also change as result of 
new railway-roads from China taking over the transport of eCommerce packages. 

4.  Project group with Member States’ and Candidate Countries’ selected representatives 

The Project Group identified common needs related to all presented trends: 

- 

Tapping into expertise outside customs (e.g. on Blockchain, security, environment) and 
highlighting competence centres in Member States 

-  Combining  digital  and  physical  ways  of  working  (blended  project  groups,  blended 

trainings) 
Increasing capacity to react fast (task forces, fast lanes) 

- 
-  Allowing innovation and possibility to fail  
- 
-  Considering governments and customs as one = more cooperation with others for the 

Trusting Member States in spending money and focusing on ex post controls 

provision of services 

Interactivity of the programme activities 

-  Balance trade facilitation and compliance against enforcement based on access to data 
- 
-  Permanent central structure 
-  Application of the customs competency framework (e.g. using a customs curriculum) 
-  More structural approach for educating customs officers in the field 
-  Balance between training existing staff and hiring new staff 
-  Knowledge sharing 
- 
- 
- 

Equipment 
Expert teams, i.e. task forces 
Transparency 

Il also produced the attached mind map presented on next page.  

54 

 
Figure 5: Customs needs and trends as identified by the project group 

55 

 
 
5.  Open Public Consultation 

4 052 respondents  provided  feedback  on  the  open  public  consultation.  Out  of  the 
respondents  13  reported  that  they  have  experience  with  the  Customs  2020  programme, 
representing  0.32 %  of  the  total  number  of  respondents.  This  very  limited  number  of 
reference  to  customs  confirms  the  limited  overall  interest  of  the  public  at  large  and  the 
relevance  of  the  programme’s  objectives  –  and  focus  of  stakeholders’  consultations  –  on 
customs administrations.  

Out of the 9517 comments, 7 contained the key word “customs”: 

 

“Synergies  between  Horizon  2020,  Customs  2020  and  Fiscalis  2020  programmes 
managed  by  the  National  Tax  and  Customs  Administration  are  shared.  Due  to  the 
involvement in the three programmes, the creation of a single ‘Customs’ Fund and 
the  possibility  to  procure  assets  for  customs  purposes  under  the  Customs  2020 
programme can be supported. 

  Current  funds  are 

important  for  modernisation  of  customs  administrations, 
facilitation and improvement of customs controls. Enhance cooperation between EU 
Member  States  and  ensure  exchange  of  best  practice,  thus  promoting  common 
approach to customs controls at the external borders. 

  Allowing  for  the  acquisition  of  equipment  for  customs  control  would  greatly 
contribute  to  better  use  of  the  possibilities  offered  under  the  Customs  2020 
programme  and to increasing the effectiveness  of  the  opportunities offered by  the 
programme. 

  The  objective  of  Horizon  2020  financial  support  is  to  promote  research  and 
innovation  in  the  EU,  the  technological  developments  that  it  supports  directly  or 
indirectly, but also to contribute to increasing the effectiveness of the functioning of 
tax, customs and investigation authorities. The aim of the Customs 2020 and Fiscalis 
2020 programmes is to support the functioning and modernisation of the Customs 
Union,  to  fight  tax  evasion  and  to  support  the  implementation  of  EU  law.  These 
objectives will be pursued by building European information systems, by facilitating 
administrative  cooperation  and  by 
increasing  the  administrative  capacity  of 
participating  countries  to  reduce  the  burden  on  tax  and  customs  administrations 
and compliance costs for customers. 

  There is a lack of programme and funds that directly supports purchase of customs 
equipment.  Purchase  of  equipment  necessary  for  customs  controls  could  be 
supported by programmes for support for the functioning of various aspects of the 
single market (including goods, services, taxation, company law) – standardisation, 
assistance to citizens and businesses, enforcement. 

  As to the importance of strengthening synergies among programmes/funds in order 
to avoid possible overlaps/duplication, it is fundamental to group/merge those with 
similar scopes (e.g. Customs 2020 and Anti-Fraud Information System). 

  The  European  Commission  is  in  a  unique  position  to  strengthen  inter-country 
relations and assure cooperation and synergies at a European level. EC can promote 
standardisation  at  all  levels  while  promoting  the  implementation  of  technologies 
that can prove beneficial to the European  society  while regulating their use. There 
are many examples where such intervention could prove beneficial. For example the 
legal  and  regulatory  framework  for  the  circulation  of  Automated  Vehicles  in  the 
European  Transport  network,  the  common  approaches  towards  security  and 
customs control for goods and people across countries, the interoperability of health 
or other data across countries, organisations and platforms, the open form of data 
(e.g  in  transport)  for  third  party  applications.  The  aforementioned  topics  refer 
mainly  to  the  H2020  work  programme.  The  European  Commission  can  play  a  vital 

56 

 
role in enforcing in a mid-to-long term scale decisive actions on such issues and thus 
imposing  a  de  facto  cooperation  among  Member  States  that  can  lead  to  tangible 
results that can be implemented. Member States at national, regional and local level 
can  push  forward  in  that  direction  but  evidently  in  many  cases  follow  a  different 
path that hinders interoperability and cross-country implementation.” 

57 

 
 
Annex 3: Evaluation results 

The  Decision  establishing  the  Customs  2013  programme  carries  a  legislative  requirement  for 
independent  mid-term  and  final  evaluations.  The  final  evaluation46  findings  were  broadly 
positive  with  regard  to  the  Customs  2013  programme’s  contribution  to  policy-level  objectives 
and  in  terms  of  helping  customs  authorities  to  work  as  one.  The  biggest  gains  can  be 
summarised as follows: 

- 

- 

Enhancing  safety  and  security,  including  the  full  implementation  of  the  Import  Control 
System  and  the  Customs  Risk  Management  System  as  well  as  the  mainstreaming  of  the 
Authorised Economic Operator and Economic Operator Systems.  

Facilitation of trade, allowing the Customs Union to become more secure while carrying out 
fewer  of  the  manual  controls  that  slows  down  the  flow  of  trade  and  speeding  the  transit 
process. 

-  Protection of the EU’s financial interests, due to the use of centralised databases and the 

enhanced effectiveness of risk management systems.  

The  achievements  made  during  the  period  under  review  were  not  assesses  as  a  simple 
continued evolution of already on-going trends. Rather, they were significant and path breaking 
(especially regarding the introduction of electronic systems related to security and safety) and 
indicative of major developments towards the realisation of the key programme objectives. 

The evaluation identified a strong case for the EU added value of the programme, particularly 
regarding  its  role  in  supporting  the  implementation  of  EU  legislation  at  national  level.  The 
electronic  systems  funded  through  the  programme  are  highly  complementary  to  national 
initiatives  and  mostly  relate  to  implementing  such  legislation.  This  led  to  reductions  in 
administrative  costs  that  would  result  from  each  Member  State  needing  to  develop  similar 
electronic  systems  on  its  own.  The  networking  fostered  through  the  joint  actions  of  the 
programme  was  also  considered  crucial  for  several  reasons,  including  ensuring  the  consistent 
application  of  common  legislation,  spreading  best  practices  and  building  the  trust  needed  for 
administrations to act is if they were one administration.  

The evaluation also discovered some problems that inhibited the full implementation of some 
electronic  systems  and  /  or  slowed  down  the  harmonisation  process.  The  included  relatively 
minor  functional  problems  and  the  fact  some  Member  State  administrations  found  the  costs 
associated  with  implementing  and  maintaining  national  versions  of  the  electronic  systems 
funded through the programme to be difficult to bear.  

Based  on  the  findings  of  the  evaluation,  there  were  ten  recommendations  to  improve  future 
iterations of the Customs programme, which were grouped in five domains:  

-  Programme  management:  develop  specific  and  measurable  goals  that  can  be  achieved 
during  the  life  of  the  programme  (including  the  provisions  of  the  Union  Customs  Code  in 
addition  to  the  programme’s  existing  specific  objectives);  develop  a  comprehensive 
monitoring  framework  to  track  performance  and  to  identify  issues  of  concern  in  a  timely 
manner  and  streamline  the  platforms  used  for  sharing  documents  and  facilitating 
communication between the Commission and Member States. 

46  

https://publications.europa.eu/s/fKSa 

58 

 
                                                            
-  Policy implementation: take an active approach toward the achievement of policies aimed 

at centralised customs clearance 

- 

Joint actions: ensure joint actions are flexible and adaptable as well as more goal-oriented 
and  accountable;  develop  a  more  systematic  mechanism  to  review  longstanding  joint 
actions periodically and communicate more with national administrations on the outcomes 
of joint actions. 

-  Programme-funded  electronic  systems:  address  technical  issues  and  user  problems  of 
specific  electronic  systems  that  inhibit  their  contribution  to  key  customs  processes  and 
enhance the integration of EU and national electronic systems. 

- 

Efficiency:  use  potential  efficiency  gains  to  make  the  case  for  further  harmonisation  and 
integration of electronic systems. 

The Decision establishing the Customs 2020 programme also requires the conduct of mid-term 
and final evaluations. The mid-term evaluation is ongoing (Final Report by 30 June 2018), and 
the preliminary findings can be summarised as follows47: 

-  Relevance:  the  level  of  interest  shown  by  national  administrations  in  actively  engaging  in 
the  programme  suggests  there  is  alignment  between  the  programme  activities  and  actual 
need. Working visits were considered by national authorities as the most useful type of joint 
actions, followed closely by seminar, workshops, project groups and the newly introduced 
Expert Teams.  

- 

- 

Effectiveness: customs authorities agree that the programme's joint actions contributed to 
improving  the  exchange  of  information  between  administrations.  The  training  modules 
developed under the programme had led to a more uniform approach to the application of 
EU customs law among participating countries.  

Efficiency:  procedures  for  preparing  the  programme  cycle  and  the  Annual  Work 
Programmes were in general positive. In relation to the PMF, it implementation was mostly 
considered successful. Though the data generated is mainly self-reported, it appears to be 
collected  systematically  and  generate  useful  information.  However,  it  is  not  clear  to  what 
extent  the  PMF  data  is  used  to  take  management  decision  or  is  used  as  an  early  warning 
system  to  steer  programme  interventions.  There  is  a  need  to  simplify  the  current 
monitoring system, especially regarding the number of impact indicators and the length of 
action follow-up forms.  

-  Coherence:  broad  levels  of  agreement  exist  on  joint  actions'  contribution  to  national 
initiatives by supporting the consistent application of EU law and by managing the European 
electronic  systems.  It  has  also  been  reported  that  supported  initiatives  under  the 
programme are complementary to initiatives at national level.  

- 

47  

-EU added value: national customs administrations were generally positive about the extent 
to which the programme is achieving results that would not have been possible by national 
administrations acting alone. A high proportion of respondent to evaluation questionnaires 
also  found  that  the  programme  is  instrumental  for  building  trust  and  leading  to 
convergence with the customs administration of EU Member States and other participating 
countries  (candidate  countries  and  potential  candidates).  Initial  interviews  also  point  to 
efficiency gains though pooling of resources, especially in the area of IT (economies of scale 

Limited coverage of IT domain, as replies to IT questionnaire and case studies were still not finalised at the time of 
drafting this IA.  

59 

 
                                                            
ad  reduced  development  costs).  Initial  findings  also  suggest  challenges  for  national 
authorities  to  align  national  considerations  with  EU  customs  requirements:  diverging 
interests  may  in  some  cases  act  as  a  barrier  to  realise  EU  added  value  and  few  national 
authorities  also  expressed  frustration  when  having  to  adjust  their ambition  to  that  of  less 
advanced national customs administrations. 

60 

 
  
Annex 4: Intervention logic of programme 

Figure 6: Intervention logic of the new programme 

61