REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 of December 2008 on the export of cultural goods 1 January 2014 - 31 December 2017
Date: 2019-09-26
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: administrative cooperation, application of the law, border control, cultural object, customs cooperation, customs formalities, customs inspection, export (EU), export licence, heritage protection

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 26.9.2019  COM(2019) 429 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 of December 2008 on the export of cultural goods  1 January 2014 - 31 December 2017  
 
 
Table of Contents 

1.  Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2 

2. 

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 3 

3.  Context of the Regulation ............................................................................................................... 3 

3.1 European context .......................................................................................................................... 3 

3.2 International context ..................................................................................................................... 4 

4. 

Implementation of the Regulation ................................................................................................... 4 

4.1 Objectives and Performance ......................................................................................................... 4 

4.2 Definition of cultural goods .......................................................................................................... 5 

4.3 Age and financial thresholds ......................................................................................................... 6 

4.4 Standard export licence figures ..................................................................................................... 6 

4.5 Specific and general open licences ............................................................................................... 7 

4.6 Exemption from export licence requirement................................................................................. 8 

4.7 Reasons for rejecting a licence application ................................................................................... 8 

4.8 Licence form issues ....................................................................................................................... 8 

4.9 Cancellation or revocation of licences .......................................................................................... 9 

4.10 Use of electronic systems ............................................................................................................ 9 

4.11 Penalties and other measures .................................................................................................... 10 

4.12 Cooperation between authorities ............................................................................................... 10 

4.13 Material and human resources .................................................................................................. 11 

5.  Conclusions and outstanding issues .............................................................................................. 11 

6.  ANNEXES .................................................................................................................................... 13 

Table 1. Standard Licences issued by Member States * ................................................................... 13 

Table 2. Specific Open Licences in circulation ................................................................................ 14 

Table 3. General Open Licences in circulation ................................................................................. 15 

Table 4. Applications for Standard Licences refused ....................................................................... 16 

Table 5. Non-compliant consignments detected ............................................................................... 17 

Table 6. Standard licences issued by Member States, versus Standard licences refused & Non-
compliant consignments detected ..................................................................................................... 18 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
1.  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

This  report  reviews  the  implementation  of  the  export  licencing  system  for  cultural  goods 
established by Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 on the export of cultural goods and Commission 
Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1081/2012.1  

The  report  is  based  on  data  provided  by  the  Member  States  in  response  to  a  questionnaire 
covering  all  aspects  of  implementation  of  the  export  licencing  system.  It  covers  the  period 
from 2014 to 2017. The figures reported in the annex relate to three types of export licences: 
standard licences, specific open licences (repeated temporary exports by private persons) and 
general open licences (repeated temporary exports by museums and similar institutions).   

The report also provides information on current initiatives and challenges for the future, such 
as  improving  the  cooperation  between  Member  States  authorities  involved  in  the 
implementation  of  the  Regulation,  promoting  a  common  understanding  of  the  Regulation’s 
provisions  by  the  Member  States,  identifying  best  practices  for  competent  authorities  and 
customs  in  investigating  the  provenance  of  cultural  goods,  and  exploring  the  technical, 
financial  and  legal  possibilities  to  use  electronic  means  for  the  issue  and  control  of  export 
licences,  such  as  the  development  or  link  to  a  centralised  electronic  system  which  would 
interface with national customs clearance systems. 

1 Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 requires the Commission to periodically present a report on the 
implementation  of  the  Regulation  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council  and  the  European  Economic  and 
Social Committee. 

2 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
2.  INTRODUCTION 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  116/2009  on  the  export  of  cultural  goods2    ('the  Regulation') 
subjects  the  export  of  certain  cultural  goods  outside  the  European  Union's  ('EU')  customs 
territory  to  the  presentation  of  an  export  licence  and  ensures  that  exports  of  those  goods 
undergo uniform controls at the Union's external borders. Annex I defines the material scope 
of the Regulation by listing the categories of cultural goods to which it applies, as well as by 
setting minimum age and/or value requirements for the majority of the categories listed. 

Export licences are issued by the competent authority of the last Member State in the territory 
of  which  the  cultural  object  was  definitively  and  lawfully  located.  Customs  controls  then 
ensure that cultural goods can only leave the EU's customs territory if they are accompanied 
by a valid export licence.  

In order to ensure that the export licences provided for in the Regulation are uniform, it was 
necessary to lay down rules governing the drawing up, issuing and use of the licence form. 
The  Implementing  Regulation  (EU)  No  1081/20123  provides  for  three  types  of  export 
licences  (standard  licence,  specific  open  licence  and  general  open  licence)  and  sets  out  the 
rules  for  their  application.  Certain  Member  States’  national  law  may  impose  further 
restrictions,  including  the  requirement  to  obtain  a  licence,  for  the  movement  of  objects 
designated as national treasures.  

The  updated  lists  of  authorities  empowered  to  issue  export  licences  are  published  in  the 
Official  Journal,  as  well  as  the  list  of  customs  offices  empowered  to  handle  export 
formalities4. 

The objective of the Regulation is to reconcile the fundamental principle of free movement of 
goods with that of the protection of national treasures within the historical framework of the 
creation of the internal market which abolished all internal borders between Member States. 

In accordance with Article 10 of the Regulation, the Commission is required periodically to 
present  a  report  on  the  implementation  of  the  Regulation  to  the  European  Parliament,  the 
Council and the European Economic and Social Committee.  

The  present  report  draws  on  information,  including  statistical  data  on  the  use  of  licences, 
provided  by  Member  States  in  response  to  a  questionnaire  covering  all  aspects  of 
implementation  of  the  export  licencing  system,  and  on  discussions  at  the  Expert  Group  of 
customs issues related to cultural goods.   

3.  CONTEXT OF THE REGULATION 

3.1 European context 

The system introduced at EU level by the Regulation is complementary to other instruments 
and  initiatives  aiming  at  the  protection  of  cultural  property.  The  most  relevant  of  those  is 

2  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  116/2009  of  18  December  2008  on  the  export  of  cultural  goods  (OJ  L  39, 
10.2.2009, p. 1). 
3 Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1081/2012 of 9 November 2012 for the purposes of Council 
Regulation (EC) No 116/2009 on the export of cultural goods (OJ L 324, 22.11.2012, p. 1). 
4 The most recent publication of these references can be found in the OJ C 71, 24.2.2018, p. 5. 

3 

 
                                                           
Directive 2014/60/EU on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory 
of  a  Member  State5.  The  Directive  allows  the  return  of  any  cultural  object  identified  by  a 
Member State as a national treasure possessing artistic, historic or archaeological value. For 
this purpose, the central authorities in charge of the Directive in Member States are required 
to  cooperate  and  exchange  information  on  unlawfully  removed  cultural  objects  by  making 
use of the Internal Market Information System (IMI). 

Another  important  complement  to  the  Regulation  is  the  recently  adopted  European 
Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) No 2019/880 on the introduction and the import of 
cultural goods6. This new instrument lays down the rules and conditions for the temporary or 
permanent  import in  the Union of cultural  goods which were created or  discovered in  third 
countries,  as  well  as  for  shipments  of  such  goods  in  transit.  Due  to  its  external  trade 
dimension, the typology of Regulation (EU) No 2019/880 was primarily inspired by the 1970 
UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export 
and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property7. 

Lastly,  two  related  ad  hoc  Union  measures,  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  1210/20038  and 
Council Regulation (EU) No 36/20129, prohibit trade in cultural goods with Iraq and Syria.  

3.2 International context 

At international level the most relevant instrument with regard to the export of cultural goods 
is the 1970 UNESCO Convention. To date, the Convention numbers 140 States Parties and 
has been ratified by 26 Member States. 

4.  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REGULATION 

4.1 Objectives and Performance 

The Regulation lays down uniform rules for the control of cultural goods before their export 
from  the  Union's  customs  territory  in  order,  on  the  one  hand,  to  maintain  free  movement 
within the internal market, and on the other, to protect the national treasures of the Member 
States.  Overall,  Member  States  consider  that  the  Regulation  has  achieved  these  objectives. 
However, areas for improvement have also been identified.  

In particular regarding the fight against the illicit trade in cultural goods, the Regulation has 
performed  quite  well.  Most  Member  States  consider  its  licencing  system  a  very  important 
instrument  to  ensure  the  legality  of  trade  with  third  countries,  especially  when  it  comes  to 
cultural goods which require an export licence regardless of their value (e.g. archaeological 

5 Directive 2014/60/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 on the return of cultural 
objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State and amending Regulation (EU) No 1024/2012 
(Recast) (OJ L 159, 28.5.2014, p. 1). 
6 European Parliament and Council Regulation (EU) No 2019/880 of 17 April 2019 on the introduction and the 
import of cultural goods (OJ L 151, 7.6.2019, p. 1). 
7 Paris, 14 November 1970. 
8 Council Regulation (EC) No 1210/2003 of 7 July 2003 concerning certain specific restrictions on economic 
and financial relations with Iraq and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2465/96 (OJ L 169, 8.7.2003, p. 6). 
9  Council  Regulation  (EU)  No  36/2012  of  18  January  2012  concerning  restrictive  measures  in  view  of  the 
situation in Syria and repealing Regulation (EU) No 442/2011 (OJ L 16, 19.1.2012, p. 1). 

4 

 
                                                           
objects, parts of monuments, etc.), whereas for other categories of cultural goods there have 
been cases where the object was deliberately undervalued to be exported without licence.  

Member  States  point  out  that  more  information  regarding  each  other’s  national  heritage 
legislation would help  the competent  authorities in  charge of issuing licences to  fight  illicit 
trade  more  effectively.  Regarding  the  efficacy  of  customs  controls,  those  can  always  be 
improved by consecrating more human and material resources at the external borders and by 
identifying and adopting best practices.  

A Project  Group was  created in  2017  with  the aim to  examine the Member States working 
methods  used  for  the  purpose  of  investigating  the  provenance  of  cultural  goods,  both  by 
competent authorities (when receiving licence applications) and by customs (when examining 
shipments  or  verifying  export  licences),  and  in  order  to  identify  best  practices  and  develop 
practical advice for issuing licences and customs controls. 

Other  means  identified  by  Member  States  to  improve  the  overall  performance  of  the 
Regulation  include  guidance  for  understanding  the  terms  'definitively  and  lawfully  located' 
that determine the Member State which is competent to issue the export licence.10 This would 
prevent  unscrupulous  operators  from  temporarily  moving  a  cultural  good  to  a  different 
Member State only for the purposes of applying for a licence in a Member State other than 
the one which designates and protects the object as a national treasure. 

4.2 Definition of cultural goods 

The Regulation does not define what is a cultural good. Instead, it lists 15 categories of goods 
in  its  Annex  I,  which  are  those  falling  within  its  scope.  Most  of  categories  listed  are 
accompanied by minimum age and value limits, below which the cultural goods do not need 
an  export  licence.  It  is  generally  considered  as  the  product  of  a  compromise  based  on  the 
categories listed in Article 1 of the 1970 UNESCO Convention with the addition of age and 
value thresholds. In general, it is considered that Annex I provides an adequate framework. 

With regard to  understanding the exact  scope of the categories listed in  Annex  I, particular 
difficulties with uniform reading by Member States have been identified with certain types of 
cultural  goods  such  as  coins;  the  coverage  of  collections  of  items  as  opposed  to  single 
specimens  in  category  13.b,  the  classification  of  liturgical  icons  as  paintings  or  as  parts  of 
monuments11, as well as differing opinions among Member States  on whether the listing of 
certain types of goods in category 15.a is exhaustive or indicative.  

A subgroup created by the Committee of Article 8 of the Regulation was tasked in 2013 with 
compiling  the  prevailing  opinions  on  how  to  read  the  different  categories  of  cultural  goods 
and has identified the main differences between Member States on the above issues. It should 
be  also  noted  that,  in  particular  with  regard  to  the  classification  of  liturgical  icons,  the 
clarifications  brought  by  the  new  Regulation  (EU)  No  2019/880  on  the  import  of  cultural 
goods  are  expected  to  settle  the  matter  (liturgical  icons  and  statues  are  parts  of  religious 
monuments). 

10 Unfortunately there have been no related cases that have ever reached the European Court of Justice, and as a 
result there is no specific definition of these two terms. 
11 The  main practical difference is that paintings (category  3) has a  value  threshold of 150,000 euro,  whereas 
parts of monuments (category 2) would require an export licence regardless of market value. 

5 

 
                                                           
4.3 Age and financial thresholds 

The age thresholds set by the Regulation for certain categories of cultural goods are generally 
considered  adequate.  Possible  improvement  of  these  provisions  in  the  future  may  concern 
clarifying  the  age  threshold  for  means  of  transport,  increasing  some  minimum  thresholds 
from 50 to 70 years and setting a minimum age limit for the category of collections to avoid 
unnecessary controls of vast numbers of contemporary articles by customs.  

The  financial  thresholds  are  considered  rather  high  by  the  majority  of  the  Member  States, 
while a minority of 3 Member States consider that they should be further raised.  

The  value  stated  in  the  export  licence  application  is  most  often  the  transaction  value 
appearing on the invoice - in the case of exports by private persons, whereas for temporary 
exports  by  museums  for  exhibition  abroad  the  value  required  to  be  stated  is  that  of  the 
insurance policy.  

While some applicants appear reticent to state a value and some others are not able to give an 
estimate,  for  standard  export  licences,  most  Member  States  systematically  refer  to  the 
customs value that is stated in the customs declaration at export. 

The majority of the respondent Member States consider that, if possible, it would be useful to 
develop a uniform approach with regard to the valuation of cultural goods.  

4.4 Standard export licence figures 

The  number  of  standard  licences  issued  by  Member  States  during  the  period  2014  to  2017 
was 70,433 (see also Table 1 in annex for yearly data). 

Standard licences by Member State 2014-2017 

In descending order, the main categories for which licence applications were received during 
the  reporting  period  were:  archaeological  goods  (mostly  for  exhibitions);  incunabula, 
manuscripts  and  maps;  various  antiques  of  category  15  such  as  jewellery,  musical 

6 

 
 
instruments, furniture, clocks, arms, toys, carpets, etc. (mostly for definitive export); followed 
by paintings, mosaics, watercolours, gouaches and sculptures.  

4.5 Specific and general open licences 

Specific open licences may be issued for a specific cultural good temporarily exported on a 
regular basis by a private person (Art. 10 of the Implementing Regulation). During the period 
2014-2017, the number of specific open licences issued was 1,428 (see also Table 2 in annex 
for yearly data). A significant number of Member States report that they do not provide for 
the issue of such licences. The Member States which issue specific open licences do so 
mostly for musical instruments exported for artistic performances or for antique means of 
transport exported for exhibitions. 

Apart from two Member States, all the others have issued relatively low numbers of such 
licences within the reporting period. 

Specific Open Licences in circulation by Member State 2014 – 2017 

 TITLE 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[CATEGORY 
[PERCENTAGE] 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 
[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

The  maximum  period  of  validity  of  specific  open  licences  is  set  by  the  Implementing 
Regulation  at five  years. The majority of the Member States who issue such licences apply 
that  limit;  however,  some  exceptions  exist  where  the  maximum  length  of  validity  is  either 
unspecified or shorter (1- 3 years). 

General  open  licences  (Art.  13  of  the  Implementing  Regulation)  allow  for  the  temporary 
export on a regular basis of cultural  goods by museums and similar institutions. During the 
period 2014-2017 the number of general open licences issued was 1,501 (see also Table 3 in 
annex  for  yearly  data).  The  maximum  period  of  validity  of  such  licences  is  also  set  at  five 
years. The majority of the Member States who issue such licences apply a shorter limit. The 
length generally depends on the insurance coverage or the needs for the loan or exhibition. 

7 

 
 
 
 
General Open Licences in circulation by Member State 2014-2017 

C 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

[CATEGORY 
NAME] 
[VALUE] 
[PERCENTAGE] 

4.6 Exemption from export licence requirement 

Only one of the respondent Member States reported that they have made use of the possibility 
not  to  require  an  export  licence,  as  provided  for  in  Article  2(2),  for  items  which  are 
considered of limited archaeological or scientific interest. The main argument for making use 
of the possibility is that archaeological objects which are not the direct product of excavations 
are  deemed  to  have  limited  scientific  value  because  of  their  separation  from  their  archaeo-
historical context. 

4.7 Reasons for rejecting a licence application 

Only few Member States have refused to issue an export licence because the cultural goods in 
question  were  covered  by  national  legislation  protecting  national  treasures  of  artistic, 
historical or archaeological value in accordance with subparagraph 3 of Article 2(2). In most 
cases,  an  export  licence  application  is  rejected  or  withdrawn  by  the  applicant  for  other 
reasons  such  as:  insufficient  proof  of  licit  provenance;  non-compliance  with  the  applicable 
rules;  the  object  is  a  fake;  or  the  issue  of  which  Member  State  is  competent  to  issue  the 
licence has not been resolved.  

Cases  where  the  applicant  refuses  to  provide  further  information  on  provenance  when 
requested and then immediately withdraws their application are rare. When that happens, the 
majority  of  Member  States  reject  the  application,  inform  the  applicant  and,  if  there  is 
suspicion of illicit provenance, they also inform the appropriate law enforcement authorities 
about the case. 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
4.8 Licence form issues 

The following issues have been identified with regard to the use of licence forms: 

The  inclusion  of  photographs  in  the  licence  application  is  a  very  important  element,  as  it 
allows  to  identify  the  object  by  customs  when  controlling  the  export  licence.  The  vast 
majority of the Member States require photographs when it comes to definitive exports. Some 
exceptions  are  made  by  certain  Member  States  in  cases  of  temporary  exportation  of 
collections or for particularly bulky archaeological objects of low value or books which have 
no particular identifiable markings. 

The Implementing Regulation provides in its Article 5 that Sheet N° 312 of the export licence 
form  should  be  returned  to  the  issuing  competent  authority  to  confirm  that  the  export  has 
indeed taken place and that the licence was used, but this is done only in 20% of the cases.  

In the absence of a central electronic registering system, it is quite difficult to check whether 
Sheet N° 3 has been returned, especially if the goods have exited the Union's territory via a 
different Member State. Some Member States report that they are examining ways to improve 
these  controls.  It  should  be  noted  that  the  new  regulation  on  the  import  of  cultural  goods 
provides  for  the  creation  of  a  centralised  electronic  system  to  manage  the  documentary 
requirements. The system could be designed in a manner that would permit to cover also the 
needs of the export licencing scheme, including the verification that the export took place. 

4.9 Cancellation or revocation of licences 

About half of the Member States have legislation providing for the revocation or cancellation 
of licences after they have been issued, either by specific provisions related to cultural goods 
or through general administrative law which calls for the revocation of an administrative act 
when  it  is  based  on  misleading  or  false  information.  However,  only  one  Member  State  has 
revoked licences (three) during the reporting period.  

Licences can be cancelled by the applicant after they have been issued. In such cases, most 
Member  States  require  the  return  of  the  licence  to  be  registered  as  cancelled.  A  significant 
number of Member States report that when the licence is not used within its validity period, 
the competent authority is not always been made aware of it because in most cases they do 
not get back Sheet N° 3 of the form (see point 3.8 above). 

4.10 Use of electronic systems 

Export licences are issued electronically only in one Member State. In several more Member 
States the application can be filled in and submitted electronically (e.g. by filling in an active 
.pdf file online) but its signing and then the issue of the export licence itself is still done on 
paper. The use of a paper-based system is primarily due to the constraints and requirements 
set by the implementing Regulation for the prevention of forgery. Some of the Member States 
would  like  and  have  made  plans  to  develop  a  system  to  issue  licences  electronically.  In 
particular,  three  Member  States  have  explored  the  possibility  to  create  a  joint  system  and 
examined issues of data protection and confidentiality of national authorisations. 

12 The form comprises three sheets : No 1 constitutes the application, No 2 is for the holder of the licence and 
No 3 is to be returned to the issuing authority, once the cultural good has exited the Union. 

9 

 
                                                           
17 Member States stated that they would consider it useful to develop a common electronic 
database or online service at EU level for issuing export licences. 3 Member States would be 
against it because they prefer to continue using their own databases (which cover both 
national and Union export licences) or because they believe that differences in interpretation 
of the provisions would hamper the system, while 2 Member States have not expressed a 
position on the matter. In any case, the change to an electronic system would require an 
amendment of the Implementing Regulation provisions which impose the issue of licences on 
paper. 

4.11 Penalties and other measures 

Member States are required by the Regulation to adopt rules on effective, proportionate and 
dissuasive  penalties  applicable  to  infringements  of  its  provisions.  In  the  majority  of  cases 
these penalties are both administrative and penal and may consist in the imposition of fines 
and imprisonment terms (of maximum 2.5 years on average).  

In addition to these measures, some Member States have also adopted other measures such as 
confiscation of the cultural goods; measures regarding the import of cultural goods from third 
countries  and  cultural  goods  traded  by  terrorist  or  warring  factions;  requirement  for  art 
dealers  to  keep  inventories  and  registers  of  transactions;  and  fines  for  failing  to  notify  the 
return of a cultural good exported under a temporary licence.  

4.12 Cooperation between authorities 

In  all  Member  States,  customs  is  the  authority  primarily  responsible  for  the  control  of  the 
existence and conformity of export licences at the border. In carrying out these tasks, customs 
are  in  some  cases  assisted  by  the  police  and/or  other  border  security  or  internal  revenue 
services.  

Although the Regulation does not provide for specific administrative cooperation procedures, 
exchanges between authorities in charge of implementing the Regulation have been identified 
as a necessary means to improve its performance, especially in cases where a Member State 
other than the one to whose cultural heritage the  object belongs is called to issue an export 
licence.   

Co-operation between competent authorities of different Member States is not frequent. Few 
of them contact their counterparts in another Member State to request information on national 
legislation, to check if an item is designated as a national treasure, to find out more about its 
provenance  or  to  verify  certification  documents  issued  there.  Most  of  the  Member  States 
competent authorities had no contacts with their counterparts in other Member States during 
the reporting period, while a few have had 5-20 contacts. 

The authority responsible for issuing export licences, i.e. the ‘competent authority’, is in the 
majority  of  –  but  not  all  -  cases  the  national  Ministry  of  Culture.  About  a  fourth  of  the 
respondent Member States have entrusted this task to more than one services specialised in 
the  protection  of  national  heritage,  sometimes  depending  on  the  category  to  which  the 
cultural  good  belongs,  e.g.  archaeological  objects;  historical  archives,  etc.  In  two  Member 
States  with  a  federal  structure  these  services  are  decentralised.  A  few  Member  States  also 

10 

 
involve other public entities with relevant expertise in the issue of export licences such as the 
national library, the national museum or their department of environment.  

With regard to the cooperation between customs and competent authorities within the same 
Member  State,  most  Member  States  confirm  that  their  national  authorities  involved  in  the 
implementation  of  the  Regulation  are  co-operating  in  a  sufficient  and  effective  manner, 
although seven of them believe that there is still room for improvement. A significant number 
of Member States reported that they have taken  steps aimed at  improving such cooperation 
among national authorities, such as signing memoranda of understanding, organising regular 
joint meetings or drafting joint reference guides or national procedural guidelines which can 
or have been used also in training sessions for the officials of the national agencies/authorities 
concerned. 

With regard to co-operation with other national services or bodies, about half of the Member 
States have written cooperation agreements with  the national  police, other law enforcement 
agencies, prosecutors, etc.   

Some  Member  States  customs  or  competent  authorities  have  established  co-operation  also 
with  authorities  in  third  countries  or  with  international  organisations  and  bodies  which  are 
active  in  the  field  of  fighting  illicit  trade  in  cultural  goods  such  as  Interpol,  the  World 
Customs Organisation (WCO), Europol, etc. 

16  Member  States’  customs  have  organised  and/or  participated  in  joint  targeted  actions 
against  illicit  trade  with  other  authorities  or  organisations,  such  as  the  operation  Pandora  I 
(conducted  in  November  2016)  and  Pandora  II  (conducted  in  November  2017)  in  co-
operation  with  Interpol,  Europol,  UNESCO  and  the  WCO  and  joint  operations  Colosseum 
and  Odysseus  in  co-operation  with  the  WCO  Regional  Intelligence  Liaison  Office  for 
Western  Europe,  Interpol,  the  European  Anti-Fraud  Office  (OLAF),  the  European 
Commission’s Taxation and Customs Union Directorate-General (TAXUD), the International 
Council  of  Museums,  the  Italian  Ministry  of  Cultural  Heritage  and  the  Italian  ‘Guardia  di 
Finanza’. 

When customs detect a suspect consignment, they usually follow it up by detaining the item 
and contacting the competent authority who, in  most cases, investigates the possible breach 
of  law  together  with  the  police  and  the  prosecutor.  If  it  is  affirmed  that  the  cultural  good 
cannot be exported, they seize it (in some cases this decision is taken by the Member State's 
competent authority). 

4.13 Material and human resources 

The  needs  in  personnel  and  resources  for  the  implementation  of  the  Regulation  have 
remained stable in  the majority of the Member States during the reporting period.  In a  few 
Member  States  slightly  more  experts  in  cultural  matters  are  needed  for  the  issue  of  export 
licences  –  although  it  is  sometimes  difficult  to  assess  if  the  increased  need  is  due  to 
applications for Union or for national  export licences  - while two of the  reporting Member 
States consider their services as chronically understaffed.   

11 

 
5.  CONCLUSIONS AND OUTSTANDING ISSUES 

Based on the feedback received from Member States for the reporting period 2014-2017, the 
Regulation seems to be performing well in terms of achieving its objectives and is perceived 
as an important legal instrument for protecting the Member States cultural heritage.  

Co-operation between the authorities in charge of applying the Regulation across the Union is 
identified as a possible aspect where implementation can be improved. Possible actions that 
Member States could undertake to that effect include organising training sessions, exchanges 
of information, participation in joint operations and assistance in identifying the provenance 
and legal status of cultural goods. 

Responding to the call by Member States to develop a set of best practices (See Section 6.3 of 
the  previous  report  on  the  implementation  of  Regulation  (EC)  No  116/200913),  a  Project 
Group  was  created  under  the  Customs  2020  programme,  whose  objective  is  to  study  the 
current  implementation  in  the  Member  States  and  identify  best  practices  in  controlling 
cultural  goods,  both  at  competent  authority  level  (control  of  provenance  for  the  issue  of 
licences)  and  at  customs  level  (control  of  shipments  at  export  and  verification  of  export 
licences). 

With regard to promoting the uniform understanding of the categories in the Annex I to the 
Regulation discussions are ongoing at Expert Group level. The adoption of Regulation (EU) 
No  2019/880  is  considered  as  a  positive  development,  as  the  clarifications  it  contains 
regarding  the  classification  of  liturgical  icons  as  parts  of  monuments  will  provide  the 
necessary legal certainty. 

Finally,  Member  States  confirm  more  than  ever  the  need  to  move  from  a  system  of  paper 
export licences to an electronic, paperless system. In their opinion, such a move will facilitate 
the  issue  and  control  of  export  licences,  will  allow  better  monitoring  of  their  use  and  will 
promote  better  co-operation  between  the  Member  States  administrations  in  charge  of 
implementing  the  Regulation.  Regulation  (EU)  No  2019/880  on  the  introduction  and  the 
import of cultural goods provides for the development of such a centralised electronic system 
to  deal  with  the  issue  of  import  licences  and  the  submission  of  importer  statements  to 
customs.  Its  development  should  take  into  consideration  the  possibility  to  cover  also  the 
management of export licences. 

13 COM(2015) 144 final, 1.4.2015. 

12 

 
 
 
                                                           
6.  ANNEXES 

Table 1. Standard Licences issued by Member States * 

Year 

BE 

BG 
CZ 
DK (3) 
DE 
EE 
IE 
EL 
ES 
FR 
HR 
IT (1) 
CY 
LV 
LT 
LU 
HU 
MT 
NL 
AT 
PL 
PT (2) 
RO (3) 
SI 
SK 
FI 
SE 
UK 

Total 

2014 

410 

0 
24 

1201 
0 
14 
1 
731 
3102 
17 
566 
3 
0 
0 
2 
6 
23 
214 
525 
121 
229 

2015 

389 

3 
7 

1311 
0 
18 
2 
834 
2925 
20 
635 
3 
0 
9 
11 
28 
26 
317 
543 
81 
230 

2016 

355 

8 
80 

1332 
2 
6 
2 
822 
2968 
16 
559 
2 
2 

7 
55 
20 
314 
808 
81 
280 

5 
1 
0 
265 
12642 

20102 

3 
2 
10 
99 
11553 

19059 

4 
1 
6 
226 
10746 

18702 

2017 

346 

3 
101 

1161 
4 
7 
2 
779 

24 

3 
1 
0 
2 
30 
33 
398 
690 
8 
358 

8 

3 
137 
8472 

12570 

2014-2017 

Share of total 
in % 

1500 

14 
212 

5005 
6 
45 
7 
3166 
8995 
77 
1760 
11 
3 
9 
22 
119 
102 
1243 
2566 
291 
1097 

20 
4 
19 
727 
43413 

70433 

2,13% 

0,02% 
0,30% 

7,11% 
0,01% 
0,06% 
0,01% 
4,50% 
12,77% 
0,11% 
2,50% 
0,02% 
0,00% 
0,01% 
0,03% 
0,17% 
0,14% 
1,76% 
3,64% 
0,41% 
1,56% 

0,03% 
0,01% 
0,03% 
1,03% 
61,64% 

100,00% 

(*) One licence might cover several cultural objects; figures refer to both definitive and temporary. 
(1) 2014: 242 def. 324 temp. 2015: 364 def. 271 temp. 2016: 307 def. 252 temp. 
(2) 2014: 3 substituted; 2015: 4 canceled 
(3) No statistical data provided 

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 2. Specific Open Licences in circulation 

2014 

Year 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2014-2017 

Share of total 
in % 

0 
0 
0 

109 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
212 
0 
4 
0 

1 

0 
0 
183 
509 

0 
0 
0 
0 
111 
0 
0 
0 
0 
18 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
638 
0 
29 
0 
0 
3 
0 
0 
0 
629 
1428 

0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
7,77% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
1,26% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
44,68% 
0,00% 
2,03% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,21% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
44,05% 
100,00% 

BE 
BG 
CZ 
DK (1) 
DE 
EE 
IE 
EL 
ES 
FR 
HR 
IT 
CY 
LV 
LT 
LU 
HU 
MT 
NL 
AT 
PL 
PT 
RO (1) 
SI 
SK 
FI  
SE 
UK 
Total 

0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
12 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
70 
0 
12 
0 

1 
0 
0 
0 
67 
162 

0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
167 
0 
6 
0 

0 
0 
0 
0 
238 
416 

(1) No statistical data provided 

0 
0 
0 

2 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
189 
0 
7 
0 

1 
0 
0 
0 
141 
341 

14 

 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 3. General Open Licences in circulation  

BE 
BG 
CZ 
DK (1) 
DE 
EE 
IE 
EL 
ES 
FR 
HR 
IT 
CY 
LV 
LT 
LU 
HU 
MT 
NL 
AT 
PL 
PT 
RO (1) 
SI 
SK 
FI 
SE 
UK 
Total 

2014 

0 
1 
0 

0 
0 
0 
6 
177 
0 
1 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
29 
0 

21 
0 
0 
0 
0 
236 

(1) No statistical data provided 

Year 

2015 

2016 

2017 

214-217 

Share of total 
in % 

0 
3 
0 

244 
0 
0 
4 
201 
0 
3 

0 
4 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
30 
0 

40 

0 
7 
0 
536 

0 
9 
0 
0 
389 
0 
0 
17 
803 
0 
5 
0 
2 
4 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
124 
0 
0 
141 
0 
0 
7 
0 
1501 

0,00% 
0,60% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
25,92% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
1,13% 
53,50% 
0,00% 
0,33% 
0,00% 
0,13% 
0,27% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
8,26% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
9,39% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,47% 
0,00% 
100,00% 

0 
5 
0 

0 
0 
0 
4 
199 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
29 
0 

40 
0 
0 
0 
0 
278 

0 
0 
0 

145 
0 
0 
3 
226 
0 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
36 
0 

40 
0 
0 
0 
0 
451 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 4. Applications for Standard Licences refused 

2014 

Year 

2015 

2016 

2017 

2014-2017 

Share of total 
in % 

BE (1) 
BG 
CZ 
DK (3) 
DE 
EE 
IE 
EL 
ES 
FR 
HR 
IT (2) 
CY 
LV 
LT 
LU 
HU 
MT 
NL 
AT 
PL 
PT 
RO (3) 
SI 
SK 
FI 
SE 
UK 
Total 

0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
3 
70 
0 
0 
75 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
2 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
1 
13 
165 

0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
1 
58 
0 
0 
50 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 
0 

0 
0 
1 
0 
17 
129 

0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
1 
45 
0 
0 
87 
0 
0 
0 
0 
2 
4 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
1 
0 
6 
146 

0 
0 
1 

2 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 

0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 

0 

1 
0 
16 
26 

(1) No information available for 2014, 2015, 2016 
(2) Refusal of certificates of free circulation. 
(3) No statistical data provided 

0 
0 
1 
0 
2 
0 
0 
5 
173 
0 
0 
212 
0 
5 
0 
0 
3 
6 
0 
2 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3 
1 
52 
466 

0,00% 
0,00% 
0,21% 
0,00% 
0,43% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
1,07% 
37,12% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
45,49% 
0,00% 
1,07% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,64% 
1,29% 
0,00% 
0,43% 
0,21% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,64% 
0,21% 
11,16% 
100,00% 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 5. Non-compliant consignments detected 

Year 

2015 
0 
0 
1 

2014 
0 
0 
0 

2016 
0 
0 
1 

2017 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
3 
0 
0 
0 
9 
0 
0 
0 
0 
64 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
77 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
38 
1 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
4 
0 
0 
49 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
16 
3 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
25 

3 
0 
0 
0 
0 

0 

0 
0 
0 
0 

2 
0 
3 
0 
0 

0 

6 
0 
0 
14 

2014-2017 

Share of total 
(in %) 

0 
0 
2 
0 
3 
0 
0 
3 
0 
0 
0 
19 
0 
0 
0 
0 
118 
6 
0 
3 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
11 
0 
0 
165 

0,00% 
0,00% 
1,21% 
0,00% 
1,82% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
1,82% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
11,52% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
71,52% 
3,64% 
0,00% 
1,82% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
6,67% 
0,00% 
0,00% 
100,00% 

BE (1) 
BG 
CZ 
DK (2) 
DE 
EE 
IE 
EL 
ES 
FR  
HR 
IT 
CY 
LV 
LT 
LU 
HU 
MT 
NL 
AT 
PL 
PT 
RO (2) 
SI 
SK 
FI 
SE 
UK 
Total 

(1) No information available for 2014. 2015 and 2016. 
(2) No statistical data provided. 

17 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 6. Standard licences issued by Member States, versus Standard licences refused 
& Non-compliant consignments detected  

2011-2013 

2014-2017 

Standard export licences issued 

69895 

70433 

Applications for standard export licences 
rejected 

318 

0,45% 

466 

0,66% 

Non-compliant consignments detected 

147 

0,21% 

165 

0,23% 

18