COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying the REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL pursuant to Article 278a of the Union Customs Code, on progress in developing the electronic systems provided for under the Code
Date: 2019-12-13
Institutions: Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, customs cooperation, customs territory (EU), customs union, information system, simplification of formalities

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 13.12.2019  SWD(2019) 434 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT   Accompanying the  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND THE COUNCIL pursuant to Article 278a of the Union Customs Code, on progress in developing the electronic systems provided for under the Code {COM(2019) 629 final}  
 
 
Table of Contents 
1. 
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 4 
2.  DETAILED INFORMATION ON PLANNING AND PROGRESS PER PROJECT .......................................... 6 
UCC REGISTERED EXPORTER SYSTEM (REX) ............................................................. 6 

2.1 

2.2 

UCC CUSTOMS DECISIONS ............................................................................................... 8 

2.3 
DIRECT  TRADER  ACCESS  TO  THE  EUROPEAN  INFORMATION  SYSTEMS 
(UUM&DS) ....................................................................................................................................... 10 

2.4 
UCC  ECONOMIC  OPERATOR  REGISTRATION  AND  IDENTIFICATION  SYSTEM 
UPGRADE (EORI2) ......................................................................................................................... 11 

2.5 

2.6 

2.7 

2.8 

UCC SURVEILLANCE 3 (SURV3) .................................................................................... 12 

UCC BINDING TARIFF INFORMATION (BTI) ............................................................... 13 

AUTHORISED ECONOMIC OPERATORS (AEO) UPGRADE ....................................... 15 

UCC INFORMATION SHEETS (INF) FOR SPECIAL PROCEDURES ........................... 18 

2.9 
UCC  NOTIFICATION  OF  ARRIVAL  (NA),  PRESENTATION  NOTIFICATION  (PN), 
AND TEMPORARY STORAGE (TS) ............................................................................................. 19 

2.10  UCC NATIONAL IMPORT SYSTEMS UPGRADE .......................................................... 28 

2.11  UCC SPECIAL PROCEDURES ........................................................................................... 32 

2.12  UCC GUARANTEE MANAGEMENT (GUM) ................................................................... 39 

2.13  UCC IMPORT CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRADE (ICS2) .................................................. 45 

2.14  UCC PROOF OF UNION STATUS (POUS) ....................................................................... 48 

2.15  UCC CENTRALISED CLEARANCE FOR IMPORT (CCI) .............................................. 51 

2.16  UCC NEW COMPUTERISED TRANSIT SYSTEM (NCTS) UPGRADE ......................... 58 

2.17  UCC AUTOMATED EXPORT SYSTEM (AES) ................................................................ 64 

3.  ANNEX 1 – PLANNING OVERVIEW – UCC WORK PROGRAMME PROJECTS .................................. 71 
4.  ANNEX 2 – ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS & KEY TERMS ............................................................. 72 

1 

 
 
 
 
 
Table of Figures 
Figure 1: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – REX1 ..................................................... 6 
Figure 2: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – UCC Customs Decisions ....................... 8 
Figure 3: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – UUM&DS ............................................ 10 
Figure 4: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – EORI2 .................................................. 11 
Figure 5: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – SURV3................................................. 12 
Figure 6: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – BTI Phase 2 ......................................... 13 
Figure 7: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – AEO Upgrade – Phase 1 ...................... 15 
Figure 8: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – AEO Upgrade – Phase 2 – Part 1 ......... 16 
Figure 9: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – AEO Upgrade – Phase 2 – Part 2 ......... 16 
Figure 10: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – INF ..................................................... 18 
Figure 11: Project Status as per Survey – NA ....................................................................................... 20 
Figure 12: Project Status as per Survey – PN ........................................................................................ 20 
Figure 13: Project Status as per Survey – TS ........................................................................................ 21 
Figure 14: Planned Milestones – NA .................................................................................................... 21 
Figure 15: Planned Milestones – PN ..................................................................................................... 22 
Figure 16: Planned Milestones – TS ..................................................................................................... 22 
Figure 17: Summary of Responses per Milestone – NA ....................................................................... 24 
Figure 18: Summary of Responses per Milestone – PN ........................................................................ 25 
Figure 19: Summary of Responses per Milestone – TS ........................................................................ 25 
Figure 20: Percentage of Completion per Phase – NA .......................................................................... 25 
Figure 21: Percentage of Completion per Phase – PN .......................................................................... 26 
Figure 22: Percentage of Completion per Phase – TS ........................................................................... 27 
Figure 23: Summary of Survey Responses – National Import Systems Upgrade ................................. 29 
Figure 24: Planned Milestones – National Import Systems Upgrade ................................................... 29 
Figure 25: Summary of Responses per Milestone – National Import Systems Upgrade ...................... 30 
Figure 26: Percentage of Completion per Phase – National Import Systems Upgrade ......................... 31 
Figure 27: Project Status as per Survey – Component 1 National SP EXP .......................................... 33 
Figure 28: Project Status as per Survey – Component 2 National SP IMP ........................................... 33 
Figure 29: Planned Milestones – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP ....................................................... 34 
Figure 30: Planned Milestones – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP ........................................................ 34 
Figure 31: Summary of Responses per Milestone – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP .......................... 36 
Figure 32: Summary of Responses per Milestone – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP .......................... 36 
Figure 33: Percentage of Completion per Phase – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP ............................. 37 
Figure 34: Percentage of Completion per Phase – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP ............................. 38 
Figure 35: Summary of Survey Responses – GUM – Component 1 ..................................................... 39 
Figure 36: Summary of Survey Responses – GUM – Component 2 ..................................................... 40 
Figure 37: Planned Milestones – GUM – Component 1 ....................................................................... 40 
Figure 38: Planned Milestones – GUM – Component 2 ....................................................................... 41 
Figure 39: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – GUM – Component 2 .................................... 42 
Figure 40: Summary of Responses per Milestone – GUM – Component 1 .......................................... 42 
Figure 41: Summary of Responses per Milestone – GUM – Component 2 .......................................... 43 
Figure 42: Percentage of Completion per Phase – GUM – Component 1 ............................................ 43 
Figure 43: Percentage of Completion per Phase – GUM – Component 2 ............................................ 44 
Figure 44: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – ICS2 – Release 1................................ 45 
Figure 45: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – ICS2 – Release 2................................ 46 
Figure 46: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – ICS2 – Release 3................................ 47 
Figure 47: Planned Milestones – PoUS ................................................................................................. 49 
Figure 48: Summary of Survey Responses – CCI – Phase 1 ................................................................. 52 
Figure 49: Figure 53: Summary of Survey Responses – CCI – Phase 2 ............................................... 53 
Figure 50: Planned Milestones – CCI – Phase 1 ................................................................................... 53 
Figure 51: Planned Milestones – CCI – Phase 2 ................................................................................... 54 
Figure 52: Summary of Responses per Milestone – CCI – Phase 1 ...................................................... 56 
Figure 53: Summary of Responses per Milestone – CCI – Phase 2 ...................................................... 56 

2 

 
 
Figure 54: Percentage of Completion per Phase – CCI – Phase 1 ........................................................ 57 
Figure 55: Project Status as per Survey – NCTS – Component 1 or Phase 5 ....................................... 59 
Figure 56: Project Status as per Survey – NCTS – Component 2 or Phase 6 ....................................... 59 
Figure 57: Planned Milestones – NCTS – Component 1 ...................................................................... 60 
Figure 58: Planned Milestones – NCTS – Component 2 ...................................................................... 60 
Figure 59: Summary of Responses per Milestone – NCTS – Component 1 ......................................... 62 
Figure 60: Summary of Responses per Milestone – NCTS – Component 2 ......................................... 62 
Figure 61: Percentage of Completion per Phase – NCTS – Component 1 or Phase 5 .......................... 63 
Figure 62: Project Status as per Survey – AES – Component 1 ............................................................ 65 
Figure 63: Project Status as per Survey – AES – Component 2 ............................................................ 65 
Figure 64: Planned Milestones – AES – Component 1 ......................................................................... 66 
Figure 65: Planned Milestones – AES – Component 2 ......................................................................... 66 
Figure 66: Summary of Responses per Milestone – AES – Component 1 ............................................ 68 
Figure 67: Summary of Responses per Milestone – AES – Component 2 ............................................ 68 
Figure 68: Percentage of Completion per Phase – AES – Component 1 .............................................. 69 
Figure 69: Percentage of Completion per Phase – AES – Component 2 .............................................. 70 
Figure 70: Planning Overview: UCC Work Programme Projects – Status Q4 2019 ............................ 71 

Table of Tables 
Table 1: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – REX1 ................................................................... 7 
Table 2: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – UCC Customs Decisions ..................................... 9 
Table 3: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – UUM&DS ......................................................... 10 
Table 4: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – EORI2 ................................................... 11 
Table 5: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – SURV3 .................................................. 12 
Table 6: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – BTI .................................................................... 14 
Table 7: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – AEO Upgrade .................................................... 17 
Table 8: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – INF .................................................................... 18 
Table 9: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – NA ..................................................................... 23 
Table 10: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – PN .................................................................... 23 
Table 11: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – TS .................................................................... 24 
Table 12: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – National Import Systems Upgrade .................. 30 
Table 13: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP ...................... 35 
Table 14: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP ...................... 35 
Table 15: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – GUM – Component 1 ...................................... 41 
Table 16: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – ICS2 ................................................................ 47 
Table 17: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – PoUS ............................................................... 50 
Table 18: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – CCI – Phase 1 .................................................. 55 
Table 19: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – CCI – Phase 2 .................................................. 55 
Table 20: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – NCTS – Component 1 ..................................... 61 
Table 21: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – NCTS – Component 2 ..................................... 61 
Table 22: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – AES – Component 1 ........................................ 67 
Table 23: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – AES – Component 2 ........................................ 67 
Table 24: Abbreviations and Acronyms ................................................................................................ 72 

3 

 
 
 
 
 
1.  INTRODUCTION 

The  Union  Customs  Code  (UCC)  requires  the  European  Commission  and  the  Member  States  to 
upgrade  some  existing  electronic  systems  and  introduce  some  new  systems  for  the  completion  of 
customs formalities. In total, the UCC requires the upgrading or creation of fourteen trans-European 
systems and three national systems.  

The UCC entered into force on 1 May 2016. However, the deadline for completion of the systems is 
set  out  as  2020,  2022  or  2025,  depending  on  the  system.    The  legal  deadlines  for  finalising  the 
technical  specifications  and  for  deploying  the  electronic  systems  are  laid  down  in  the  UCC  Work 
Programme (UCC WP). The detailed planning per project, containing also other milestones such as for 
the business case, business process modelling, vision document, conformance testing, etc. are defined 
in the Multi-Annual Strategic Plan for Customs (MASP-C). 

In  view of the reporting requirement established by Article 278(a) of the Regulation (EU) 2019/632 
amending Regulation (EU) 2013/952, the Commission is committed to provide an annual report to the 
European  Parliament  and  the  Council  on  the  progress  in  developing  the  electronic  systems  of  the 
UCC. The report assesses the progress of the Commission and the Member States in developing each 
of the electronic systems, taking particular account of the following milestones: 

(a)  The date of publication of the technical specifications for the external communication of the 

electronic systems; 

(b)  The period of conformance testing with economic operators; 
(c)  The expected and actual dates of deployment of the electronic systems.   

The  Commission  has  initiated  the  preparation  of  the  report  in  April  2019  in  order  to  deliver  a  first 
report  by  31  December  2019.  The  Commission  made  use  of  the  bi-annual  national  planning 
information provided by the Member States. The national planning information is mostly a reflection 
of  the  situation  on  30  June  2019.  In  addition,  the  Commission  outsourced  the  collection  of  the 
additional progress reporting information against the milestones indicated in the UCC WP and MASP-
C  2019  (=  baseline)  by  means  of  an  EU  survey  in  July  2019.  The  information  gathered  from  the 
survey  sent  to  Member  States  and  to  parts  of  the  Commission  consists  of  progress  information, 
qualitative  comments  and  quantitative  measurements  of  the  assessment  of  complexity  and  risk  in 
relation to the seventeen projects listed in the UCC WP.  

The seventeen electronic systems can be divided into three categories: i) eleven trans-European central 
systems  to  be  developed  or  upgraded  by  the  Commission  (often  requiring  as  well  developments  or 
upgrades by the Member States of national systems) ; ii) three decentralised trans-European systems 
that have to be developed or upgraded by the Commission but have a major national component to be 
implemented  by  the  Member  States;  and  iii)  three  national  systems  that  have  to  be  developed  or 
upgraded by the Member States themselves.  

In this document, the progress with the different projects for systems is presented as follows: 

  For the trans-European systems, the analysis refers to the European Commission’s activities 
only  when  central  while  for  the systems  that involve  national  input  and  even  in  some  cases 
national  components  the  analysis  refers  to  both  the  Commission’s  and  Member  States’ 
activities. For the national systems, only Member States’ activities are reported. 

  For projects that have already been initiated and even completed, an overview of the project 
progress, a summary of responses, as well as a visual illustration of progress against planned 
milestones is provided; 

  For  projects  that  have  not  yet  been  initiated,  an  overview  of  the  planned  project  progress 

together with a summary of the responses from the survey is provided; 

In the survey the Member States were also requested to give an indication of  

   -the degree of complexity of each project on a scale from 1 to 6, where 1 is the least complex and 6 
the most complex; 

4 

 
 
 
   -the  risk  of  not  deploying  the  IT  systems  by  the  dates  set  in  the  UCC  WP  and  MASP-C  2019 
according to three levels: low, medium and high.  

The  main  outcomes  of  the  progress  reporting  exercise  of  2019  and  the  assessments  in  terms  of 
complexity, risks and mitigating measures has been included in the Report from the Commission to 
the European Parliament and the Council pursuant to Article 278a of the Union Customs Code, on 
progress in developing the electronic systems provided for under the Code. The detailed information 
and progress reporting per project is part of this staff working document.  

5 

 
 
 
 
2.  DETAILED  INFORMATION  ON  PLANNING  AND  PROGRESS  PER 

PROJECT 

2.1  UCC REGISTERED EXPORTER SYSTEM (REX) 

2.1.1  The  UCC  Registered  Exporter  System  (REX)  is  a  trans-European  system.  It  contains 
information  both  on  Registered  Exporters  established  in  GSP  countries  (countries 
benefiting  from  the  EU  Generalised  Scheme  of  Preferences  (GSP)  that  provides 
preferential  access  to  the  EU  market)  and  on  EU  economic  operators  or  in  Partner 
Countries Switzerland, Norway and Turkey exporting to GSP countries and certain other 
countries.  

No  risks  were  identified  during  the  implementation  of  REX1  and  the  project  was  successfully 
concluded on 1 January 2017. Furthermore, REX2 was put into production at the end of 2018. On the 
date of the latest update on the status of the project (22/03/2019) there were:  

  33,922  active  REX  registrations  for  exporters  resident  in  Beneficiary  countries  (REX  BC 

module); 

  34,188  active  REX  registrations  for  EU  operators  resident  in  Member  States  (REX  MS 
module) (including 35 registrations from Partner Countries Switzerland, Norway and Turkey); 

2.1.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below represents the actual completion versus the planning foreseen for REX1. The three 
completed  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the  technical  specifications  (30/06/2015),  conformance 
testing (31/12/2016) and the deployment (01/01/2017).  

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1)  Technical Specifications 
2)  Conformance Testing 
3)  Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 1: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – REX1 

6 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the below table indicates that there were no divergences in the planning compared to the 
dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 1: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – REX1 

7 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of CompletionUCC Registered Exporter System (REX)31/03/201530/06/2015100%No dates in WP31/12/2016100%01/01/201701/01/2017100%Project NameTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeployment 
 
 
 
 
 
2.2  UCC CUSTOMS DECISIONS 

The UCC Customs Decisions system is designed to achieve harmonisation of the processes relating to 
the  application  for  a  customs  decision,  the  decision  taking  and  the  decision  management.  This 
harmonisation is put into practice via the standardisation and electronic management of the application 
and decision/authorisation data across the Union. The system covers all applications and decisions that 
may  have  an  impact  in  more  than  one  Member  State.  Member  States  also  have  the  right  to  use  the 
Customs Decisions system to manage their national customs decisions, if they so wish.  

In  regards  to  the  submission  of  an  application,  economic  operators  need  to  possess  an  “Economic 
Operator Registration and Identification” (“EORI”) number and then connect to the EU Trader Portal 
on  the  Europa  website  by  authenticating  themselves  via  the  Uniform  User  Management  &  Digital 
Signature  (UUM&DS).  The  system  is  vital  to  ensure  the  Union-wide  validity  of  applications  and 
decisions and it also simplifies the conduct of business for economic operators. It thus creates a level 
playing  field  among  all  economic  operators  irrespective  of  their  size  and    ensures  that  all  EU 
businesses can compete in the global market.  

The  project  was  fully  deployed  on  02/10/2017.  The  Commission  published  training  modules,  user 
guides and an e-Learning module in support of the deployment and the usage of the system. The e-
Learning module is available on the Europa website, allowing economic operators to learn about the 
approach selected by each Member State (i.e. central, combined or hybrid).  

The  Commission  has  adopted  mitigating  measures  to  correct  IT  implementation  errors  compared  to 
the baseline and to address issues regarding the User Interface (UI) design as identified by the Member 
States.  Additionally,  it  has  explored  and  addressed  differences  between  the  baseline  project 
documentation and the legislation.  Furthermore, some updates have been proposed and implemented 
to keep the Trader Portal on the Europa website efficient and up-to-date.  

2.2.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below presents the plan versus the actual completion. The three milestones referred to below 
are the technical specifications (completed 31/12/2015), conformance testing (completed 30/09/2017) 
and the deployment (completed 02/10/2017). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 2: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – UCC Customs Decisions 

8 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the table below highlights that there were no divergences in the planning compared to the 
dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 2: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – UCC Customs Decisions 

9 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of CompletionUCC Customs Decisions31/12/201531/12/2015100%No dates in WP30/09/2017100%02/10/201702/10/2017100%Project NameTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeployment 
 
 
 
 
 
2.3  DIRECT TRADER ACCESS TO THE EUROPEAN INFORMATION SYSTEMS 

(UUM&DS) 

The  Direct  Trader  Access  to  the  European  Information  Systems  system  comprises  Uniform  User 
Management  and  Digital  Signature  components.  The  system  aims  to  provide  a  service  for  user-to-
system interfaces targeted to the electronic customs systems provided for in the UCC. In essence, the 
UUM&DS  system  facilitates  a  direct  and  harmonised  trader  access  to  the  customs  systems.  Both 
components  will  be  integrated  into  the  portals  of  all  pertinent  systems  on  deployment  of  the  latter, 
providing  support  for  issues  regarding  identity,  access  and  user  management.  In  this  way,  the 
processes will be fully compliant with security policies.  

The first deployment of the project was completed and implemented together with the UCC Customs 
Decisions  system  on  2/10/2017.    The  system  has  also  been  incorporated  into  other  completed  UCC 
electronic projects such as the BTI and AEO is ready for usage in other systems once they have been 
completed.  The  project  will  further  evolve  including  also  system-to-system  interfaces  and  digital 
signature.  Their  use  will  be  particularly  relevant  to  the  Information  Sheets  (INF)  for  Special 
Procedures system, the Import Control System (ICS2) and the Proof of Union Status system. 

Twenty-seven  Member  States  have  completed  the  connectivity  configuration.  The  Commission  has 
delivered  operational  documentation  to  the  Member  States  and  has  created  an  economic  operator’s 
manual and Service Desk guidelines. In the survey, the Commission reports no risks pertaining to on-
time delivery. In fact, the system is now in place but the existence of multiple stakeholders, as well as 
the  complex  integration  of  this  system  with  other  UCC  projects  mentioned  above,  may  carry  some 
risks for future projects.  

2.3.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below compares the plan with the actual completion. The three milestones referred to below 
are the technical specifications (completed 30/09/2015), conformance testing (completed 30/09/2017) 
and the deployment (completed 02/10/2017).  

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 3: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – UUM&DS 

In addition, the table below highlights that there are no divergences in the planning compared to the 
dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 3: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – UUM&DS 

10 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of CompletionUUM&DS31/12/201530/09/2015100%No dates in WP30/09/2017100%02/10/201702/10/2017100%Project NameTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeployment 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.4  UCC  ECONOMIC  OPERATOR  REGISTRATION  AND  IDENTIFICATION 

SYSTEM UPGRADE (EORI2) 

This system upgrade provided for minor changes to the existing trans-European Economic Operator 
Registration  and  Identification  system.  These  changes  enabled  the  registration  and  identification  of 
economic operators of the Union, as well as third-country operators and persons apart from economic 
operators. EORI2 has been in operation since 05/03/2018 

2.4.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below compares the plan with actual completion. The three milestones referred to below are 
the technical specifications (completed 31/07/2016), conformance testing (completed 28/02/2018) and 
the deployment (completed 05/03/2018). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 4: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – EORI2 

In addition, the table below highlights any divergences in the planning compared to the dates set in the 
Work Programme.   

Table 4: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – EORI2 

11 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of CompletionEORI230/06/201631/07/2016100%No dates in WP28/02/2018100%05/03/201805/03/2018100%DeploymentProject NameTechnical SpecificationsConformance Testing 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.5  UCC SURVEILLANCE 3 (SURV3) 

The  SURV3  system  introduces  an  upgrade  to  the  standard  exchange  of  information  in  the  earlier 
(SURV2) system to align the system with UCC requirements. This database records and centralises all 
EU  trade  data  (imports  and  exports)  that  national  customs  authorities  provide  on  a  daily  basis.  The 
upgrade  implements  electronic  data-processing  techniques  and  establishes  adequate  functionalities 
needed for processing and analysing the full surveillance dataset obtained from Member States. 

The  project  consisted  of  three  phases.    Phase  1 has  been  in  production  since  02/10/17.    Elaboration 
activities of phase 2 (current Surveillance and CDC functionality) and Phase 3 (new reports) were duly 
completed. The construction of phases 2 & 3 started in January 2018. A unique software release (2) 
covered  phases  2  &  3.  The  system  was  successfully  deployed  on  01/10/2018  although  some  data 
migration is ongoing as the full use and benefits of the system will manifest when all Member States 
submit the legally defined import and export data from the Member States ‘upgraded national systems. 

2.5.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below compares the plan with the actual completion. The three milestones referred to below 
are the technical specifications (completed 30/09/2016), conformance testing (completed 30/09/2018) 
and the deployment (completed 01/10/2018). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 5: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – SURV3 

In addition, the below table highlights that there were no divergences in the planning compared to the 
dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 5: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – SURV3 

12 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual end date from survey% of CompletionSURV330/09/201630/09/2016100%No dates in WP30/09/2018100%01/10/201801/10/2018100%Project NameTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeployment 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.6  UCC BINDING TARIFF INFORMATION (BTI) 

The project for a UCC Binding Tariff Information system aims to upgrade the existing trans-European 
(EBTI-3) database containing all binding tariff information that has been issued by customs authorities 
of  Member  States.  Economic  operators  apply  for  binding  tariff  decisions  in  order  to  have  legal 
certainty in advance that they are applying the correct classification to goods they are importing into 
the or exporting from the EU. The customs authorities concerned must then record their decisions in 
the BTI database.  

The changes will ensure the following: 

(a)  Alignment of the EBTI-3 system to the UCC requirements; 
(b)  Alignment of the system to the new Customs Decisions system; 
(b) Addition to the system of declaration data required for surveillance purposes; 
(c) Monitoring of the usage by economic operators of BTI decisions which is compulsory for 
Member States; 
(d) Monitoring and management of the extended usage of BTI; 

The BTI project is divided into two parts or phases. The first phase consists of two steps. Step 1 aims 
to allow Member States to input the datasets in customs declarations, as provided for under the UCC, 
until the deployment of the Automated Export System (AES) and the upgrade of the National Import 
Systems.    Step  2  addresses  the  obligation  on  Member  States  to  control  the  BTI  usage  based  on  the 
newly required declaration dataset and on the alignment of the BTI system to the customs decisions 
process. 

The second phase implements the electronic means for economic operators to make BTI applications 
and  receive  decisions.  Economic  operators  will  thus  benefit  from  an  EU-harmonised  and  electronic 
trader interface for their applications and decisions. 

Concerning  the  status  of  the  project,  by  October  2017  both  steps  1  and  2  of  the  first  phase  were 
successfully completed. The second phase faced a delay of two quarters during the elaboration phase 
(vision  document,  technical  specifications  and  application  specifications).  Nevertheless,  the  overall 
planning  still  remained  on  target  and  entered  into  operation  on  01/10/2019.  The  construction  of  the 
access for this system to the EU Customs Trader Portal was also completed. 

2.6.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below shows the actual completion versus the foreseen planning for BTI Phase 2. The three 
milestones  referred  to  below  are  the  technical  specifications  (actual  completion  30/06/2018), 
conformance testing (planned completion 01/07/2019) and the deployment (01/10/2019). 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1)  Technical Specifications 
2)  Conformance Testing 
3)  Deployment 

Planned

Actual

13 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 6: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – BTI Phase 2 

In addition, the table below highlights that there were no divergences in the planning compared to the 
dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 6: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – BTI 

14 

Project NameTarget date from Work ProgrammeActual End Date from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Actual End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Actual End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  UCC BTI - Phase 1 - Step 130/06/201610/06/2016100%21/02/2017100%01/03/201701/03/2017100%UCC BTI - Phase 1 - Step 230/06/201602/09/2016100%25/02/2017100%02/10/201702/10/2017100%UCC BTI - Phase 230/06/201830/06/2018100%01/07/2019100%01/10/201901/10/2019100%No dates in WP 
 
 
 
 
2.7  AUTHORISED ECONOMIC OPERATORS (AEO) UPGRADE 

Following the legal changes adopted in the UCC, the Authorised Economic Operators (AEO) upgrade 
aims to improve the system of applications and authorisations for AEO status. The project consists of 
two  phases.  Phase  1  implemented  major  enhancements  to  the  existing  AEO  system,  in  light  of  the 
harmonisation  to  the  decision-taking  procedure  for  customs.  Phase  2  will  implement  the  electronic 
form  with  a  view  to  providing  a  harmonised  interface  for  economic  operators  to  submit  their  AEO 
applications and to receive their AEO decisions electronically. The upgraded system will be deployed 
in  two  releases:  Part  1  for  the  submission  of  the  AEO  applications  and  the  decision-taking  process 
(Phase 2 Part 1) and Part 2 for the other processes (Phase 2 Part 2) 

For  the  second  phase,  the  Commission  delivered  a  new  version  of  documentation  to  the  Member 
States  at  the  end  of  March  2019.    The  Commission  reported  that  implementation  started  on 
25/01/2019,  deployment  preparation took  place  in June  2019 and  conformance testing  took  place  in 
July 2019. 

2.7.1 

 Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below compares the plan for the AEO Upgrade  - Phase 1 with the actual completion. The 
three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the  technical  specifications  (completed  31/03/2016), 
conformance testing (completed 28/02/2018) and the deployment (completed 05/03/2018). 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 7: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – AEO Upgrade – Phase 1 

15 

 
 
 
 
 
 
The chart below compares the plan to the actual completion for the AEO Upgrade – Phase 2 – Part 1. 
The  three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the  technical  specifications  (completed  31/12/2018), 
conformance testing (29/07/2019) and the deployment (01/10/2019). 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 8: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – AEO Upgrade – Phase 2 – Part 1 

The chart below compares the plan to the actual completion for the AEO Upgrade - Phase 2 – Part 2. 
The  three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the  technical  specifications  (completed  31/12/2018), 
conformance  testing  (planned  completion  06/11/2019)  and  the  deployment  (planned  completion 
16/12/2019). 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 9: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – AEO Upgrade – Phase 2 – Part 2 

16 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the below table highlights that there are no divergences in the planning  compared to the 
dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 7: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – AEO Upgrade 

17 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned/actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned/actual end date from survey% of CompletionAEO Upgrade - Phase 131/03/201631/03/2016100%28/02/2018100%05/03/201805/03/2018100%AEO Upgrade - Phase 2 - Part 131/12/201831/12/2018100%29/07/2019100%01/10/201901/10/2019100%AEO Upgrade - Phase 2 - Part 231/12/201831/12/2018100%06/11/2019100%16/12/201916/12/20190%Technical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentProject NameNo dates in WP 
 
 
 
 
2.8  UCC INFORMATION SHEETS (INF) FOR SPECIAL PROCEDURES 

The  aim  of  the  UCC  Information  Sheets  (INF)  for  Special  Procedures  project  is  to  develop  a  new 
trans-European system to support and streamline the processes of data management and the electronic 
handling of data in the domain of Special Procedures.  

The  technical  specifications  were  completed  on  30/06/2018.  A  pilot  was  put  in  place  on  1  October 
2018,  including  the  deployment  of  the  EU  Customs  Trader  Portal.  This  allowed  for  further 
improvements to the system and no risks for completion by 2020 have been identified. 

2.8.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below compares the planning and the actual completion. The three milestones referred to are 
the  technical  specifications  (completed  30/06/2018),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion 
10/04/2020  and  the  deployment  (planned  completion  01/06/2020).  For  this  project,  the  Commission 
used  the  method  of  agile  delivery  and  deployed  a  pilot  version  on  15  January  2019.  This  allowed 
sufficient time  to  make  further  improvements  to the  INF  system  and  the  EU  Customs  Trader  Portal 
before going live with the full system in 2020.  

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 10: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – INF 

In addition, the table below demonstrates that so far there are no divergences in the planning compared 
to the dates set in the Work Programme.   

Table 8: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – INF 

18 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned/actual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned/actual end date from survey% of CompletionINF30/06/201830/06/2018100%No dates in WP10/04/20200%01/06/202001/06/20200%Project NameTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeployment 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.9  UCC NOTIFICATION OF ARRIVAL (NA), PRESENTATION NOTIFICATION 

(PN), AND TEMPORARY STORAGE (TS) 

The goal of this project is to define the processes at national level in respect of the notifications known 
as  Notification  of  Arrival  (NA),  Presentation  of  the  goods  (PN)  and  Declaration  for  Temporary 
Storage (TS), as described in the UCC. It also aims to support harmonisation across the Member States 
as regards the data exchange between trade and customs. Further, the project covers the automation of 
processes at the national level. 

2.9.1  Summary of Responses 

Notification of Arrival (NA) 

BG, DE and EE mention that the NA will be used simultaneously with the rollout of Release 2 of the 
ICS2  project.  BG  further  mentions  that  this  would  cover  the  implementation  of  the  new  Entry 
Summary Declaration (ENS) obligations pertaining to business and risk management processes for all 
goods in air traffic. DE advised that the NA will be updated in line with the planning for  Release 2 of 
ICS2  for  which  activities  have  not  yet  started.  GR  is  facing  issues  in  aligning  the  Shared  Trader 
Interface  (STI)  functionality  with  the  national  implementation  and  foresees  a  delay  beyond  the 
deadline. It is examining alternative solutions due to the fact that no contract is in place yet.   

The responses identify two special cases relating to the application of the NA feature. SE mentioned 
that the planned end date for deployment Q4 2024 is the date when all operators should be migrated. 
Since  there  will  be  a  phased  approach  their  intention  is  that  several  operators  should  be  migrated 
before  the  Q4  2022  depending  mainly  on  the  mode  of  transport.  SE  are  also  considering  different 
measures  for  example  more  effective  working  methods  to  possibly  finalise  this  project  earlier. 
Furthermore, SE highlights the importance of the link to ICS2. Additionally, any developments from 
the expert team focused on new approaches to develop and operate Customs IT systems (ETCIT II) or 
from the European Maritime Single Window (EMSW) project are important factors to be taken into 
consideration.  These  developments  could  potentially  affect  the  project  plan.  As  for  IE,  it  will  not 
require that carriers send an arrival notification, based on the provision of UCC Art. 133 which gives 
the possibility of waiving the implementation of NA if the Member States already have a system in 
place  whereby  information  on  arrivals  is  available  to  customs  authorities.  IE  reports  that  it  receives 
and  stores  all  arrivals  information  from  the  Airport  and  Maritime  authorities  and  consults  this 
information  electronically  as  required.  IE  affirms  that  it  will  ensure  that  this  consultation  system  is 
operating as expected as part of its end-to-end testing. 

Presentation Notification (PN) 

BE identifies the risk and complexity as high due to the fact that the project is being developed jointly 
with other Member States. EE mentions the short timeframe for developing the PN, as well as a lack 
of  resources  as  main  risks.  A  risk  is  also  identified  by  GR,  as  it  will  be  developing  a  temporary 
solution  for  the  ICS2  Release  1  and  a  long-term  solution  in  parallel.  IE  reports  that  the  PN  will  be 
delayed but will remain within the deadline, identifying the instability of Annex B data, in particular 
because  of  the  addition  of  data  relating  to  Low  Value  Consignments  and  the  VAT  Directive,  as 
contributing  factors.  SE  highlighted  the  same  issues  as  with  the  Notification  of  Arrival  mentioning 
also the impact of data requirement changes. 

Temporary Storage (TS) 

BE classifies the risk as high, mentioning the need to implement the project with other Member States 
as the main element of risk. EE reports that the implementation of Temporary Storage will be delayed, 
but that the overall project will deliver on time. It attributes this predicted delay to the interdependence 
of this project with others, namely the ICS2, National Export System and National Import System. SE 

19 

 
 
 
 
 
attributes the complexity of the project to the changes in the EU Customs Data Model (EUCDM) and 
the Annex B. SE further mentions that its system was ready for deployment in December 2018, but 
decided  to  wait  for  the  stabilisation  of  the  EUCDM  and  a  formalisation  of  the  decision  regarding 
Annex B.  

NA/PN/TS 

Pertaining  to  the  projects  as  a  whole,  CY  and  GR  note  that  there  is  a  risk  of  not  meeting  the  key 
milestone deadlines due to the fact that they have not yet completed their tender processes. SK also 
faces a risk of delay, but reports that the key deadlines will be met. SK is currently in the process of 
performing an impact analysis and therefore no mitigating measures are foreseen yet. CZ identifies a 
high  risk  concerning  national  financial  resources  for  all  three  projects,  as  well  as  because  of  the 
complexity  of  the  applications.  MT  reports  that  it  intends  to  collaborate  with  BE  on  the 
implementation  of  all  three  projects  and  thus  sees  this  as  a  risk  and  as  a  factor  contributing  to  the 
complexity.  PT  mentions  that  the  changes  in  the  UCC  DA/IA  Annex  B  could  create  uncertainty 
regarding the effectiveness and applicability of the ongoing development work. Thus, PT will engage 
in a reassessment of this work, which may result in additional costs. Due to the aforementioned point, 
PT  foresees  some  delays,  but  overall  expects  the  project  to  remain  within  the  deadline.  Its  main 
concern  is  that  it  would  like  to  see  a  consolidation  of  the  data  elements  to  be  requested.  As  far  as 
mitigating  measures  are  concerned,  PT  intends  to  increase  its  internal  resources  with  the  view  to 
meeting the deadlines of the project.   LV  indicated  that  their  TS  system  has  been  updated  for  all 
transport modes while their NA/PN systems have been updated for the air transport mode. 

The  figures  below  provide  an  overall  summary  of  the  survey  responses  received  from  the  Member 
States regarding the status of their project activities. 

Figure 11: Project Status as per Survey – NA 

Figure 12: Project Status as per Survey – PN 

20 

 
 
 
 
 
Figure 13: Project Status as per Survey – TS 

2.9.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below presents the planning foreseen for NA. The three milestones referred to below are the 
technical  specifications  (planned  completion  01/03/2022),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion 
01/10/2022) and the deployment (planned completion 01/12/2022). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 14: Planned Milestones – NA 

The chart below presents the planning foreseen for PN. The three milestones referred to below are the 
technical  specifications  (planned  completion  01/07/2021),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion 
01/09/2022) and the deployment (planned completion 31/12/2022). 

21 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 15: Planned Milestones – PN 

The chart below presents the planning foreseen for TS. The three milestones referred to below are the 
technical  specifications  (planned  completion  01/07/2021),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion 
01/09/2022) and the deployment (planned completion 31/12/2022). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 16: Planned Milestones – TS 

22 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the tables below highlight any known divergences in the planning compared to the dates 
set in the Work Programme.  BE, DE, FI, PL and SE have indicated a planned deployment date which 
is later than the one foreseen in the Work Programme. 

Table 9: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – NA 

BE & SE have indicated a planned deployment date for PN, which is later than the one foreseen in the 
Work Programme. 

Table 10: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – PN 

23 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start/actual end from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/11/20190%01/11/20200%15/03/20210%BEIn Progress10%01/06/20220%01/02/20230%BG01/12/20200%01/01/20210%15/03/20210%CY03/02/20200%04/10/20210%03/06/20220%CZ01/01/20200%01/10/20210%01/05/20220%DEN/AN/AN/AN/A01/03/20230%DKIn Progress5%Not providedNot providedNot providedNot providedEEN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AES30/06/20200%30/09/20210%31/01/20220%FI01/04/20210%01/06/20220%15/03/20230%FR01/01/20210%01/09/20210%01/04/20220%GR01/11/20200%01/09/20220%01/12/20220%HR30/09/20190%30/09/20210%30/09/20220%HU30/06/20210%Blank0%21/12/20220%IEN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLT01/03/20210%14/03/20220%31/12/20220%LU01/07/20210%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%LV05/06/2017100%22/09/2017100%24/09/2017100%MT01/02/20210%01/03/20220%01/10/20220%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PL31/12/20210%01/03/20220%01/01/20230%PT01/01/20200%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%ROIn Progress10%01/07/20220%01/12/20220%SE01/03/20220%01/10/20220%30/09/20240%SI01/07/20200%01/07/20210%01/04/20220%SK01/01/20210%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedN/A31/12/2022Project NameRespondeeUCC Notification of Arrival (NA)Technical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentTo be defined by MS and for Notification of Arrival in line with ICS2 planningTarget date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start/actual end from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/11/20190%01/11/20200%15/03/20210%BEIn Progress5%01/06/20220%01/03/20230%BG28/02/2018100%01/12/2018100%07/01/2019100%CY03/02/20200%04/10/20210%03/06/20220%CZ01/01/20200%01/10/20210%01/05/20220%DEIn Progress50%In Progress50%In Progress30%DKIn Progress5%Not providedNot providedNot providedNot providedEEIn Progress5%In Progress0%In Progress0%ES30/06/20200%30/09/20210%31/01/20220%FIIn Progress5%N/AN/A15/03/20210%FR01/06/20200%01/09/20210%01/03/20220%GR02/11/20200%01/09/20220%01/12/20220%HR30/09/20190%30/09/20210%30/09/20220%HU30/06/20210%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%IEIn Progress90%31/05/20200%26/11/20200%ITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLT01/07/20210%01/10/20220%01/12/20220%LU01/07/20210%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%LV05/06/2017100%22/09/2017100%24/09/2017100%MT01/02/20210%01/03/20220%01/10/20220%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PL01/01/20200%01/03/20220%01/09/20200%PT01/01/20210%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%ROIn Progress10%01/07/20220%01/12/20220%SE01/05/20200%01/05/20210%30/09/20240%SI01/07/20200%01/07/20210%01/04/20220%SK01/01/20210%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedConformance TestingDeployment31/12/2022N/ATo be defined by MS and for Notification of Arrival in line with ICS2 planningProject NameRespondeeUCC Presentation Notification (PN)Technical Specifications 
 
 
 
 
BE has indicated a planned deployment date for TS which is later than the one foreseen in the Work 
Programme.  In  addition,  NL  was  unable  to  provide  planning  information  as  they  use  an  Agile1 
approach that only foresees planning six quarters in advance. 

Table 11: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – TS 

2.9.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The below figures summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar is 28 (responses from the 28 Member States). 

Figure 17: Summary of Responses per Milestone – NA 

1 A method of project management, used  especially for software development,that is characterised by the division of tasks 
into short phases of work and frequent reassessment and adaptation of plans. 

24 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start/actual end from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/02/20210%01/02/20220%01/06/20220%BEIn Progress5%01/06/20220%01/03/20230%BG28/02/2018100%01/12/2018100%07/01/2019100%CY03/02/20200%04/10/20210%03/06/20220%CZ01/01/20200%01/10/20210%01/05/20220%DEIn Progress50%In Progress50%In Progress30%DKIn Progress5%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%EEIn Progress5%30/09/20200%01/01/20210%ES30/06/20200%30/09/20210%31/01/20220%FI01/10/20190%N/AN/A01/10/20210%FR01/01/20210%01/09/20210%01/03/20220%GR02/11/20200%01/09/20220%01/12/20220%HR30/09/20190%30/09/20210%30/09/20220%HU03/06/20210%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%IEIn Progress90%31/05/20200%26/11/20200%ITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLT01/03/20210%14/03/20220%31/12/20220%LU01/07/20210%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%LV05/06/2017100%22/09/2017100%24/09/2017100%MT01/02/20210%01/03/20220%01/10/20220%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PL01/01/20200%01/09/20200%01/01/20210%PT01/01/20210%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%ROIn Progress10%01/07/20220%01/12/20220%SEDelayed - 8 quarters50%Delayed - 8 quarters50%30/09/20220%SI01/07/20200%01/07/20210%01/04/20220%SK01/01/20210%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedN/A31/12/2022DeploymentTo be defined by MS and for Notification of Arrival in line with ICS2 planningProject NameRespondeeUCC Temporary Storage (TS)Technical SpecificationsConformance Testing 
 
 
  
 
                                                      
Figure 18: Summary of Responses per Milestone – PN 

Figure 19: Summary of Responses per Milestone – TS 

Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following figures. Regarding NA, the following Member States have not yet started: AT, BG, CY, CZ, 
ES, FI, FR, GR, HR, HU, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SE, SI and SK. IT and the UK did not provide 
information. Lastly, DE, EE and IE marked NA as Not Applicable. 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

10% 

5% 

E
B

K
D

V
L

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

100% 
100% 
100% 

Figure 20: Percentage of Completion per Phase – NA 

25 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Regarding PN, the following Member States have not yet started: AT, CY, CZ, ES, FR, GR, HR, HU, 
LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SE, SI and SK. IT and the UK did not provide information.  

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

50% 
50% 

30% 

5% 

5% 

5% 

5% 

E
B

G
B

E
D

K
D

E
E

I
F

E
I

V
L

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

100% 
100% 
100% 

90% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

Figure 21: Percentage of Completion per Phase – PN 

26 

 
 
 
 
 
Regarding TS, the following Member States have not yet started: AT, CY, CZ, ES, FI, FR, GR, HR, 
HU, LT, LU, MT, NL, PL, PT, SI and SK. IT and the UK did not provide information.  

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

5% 

5% 

5% 

E
B

G
B

E
D

K
D

E
E

E
I

V
L

E
S

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

50% 
50% 

30% 

50% 

50% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

90% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 

Figure 22: Percentage of Completion per Phase – TS 

27 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.10  UCC NATIONAL IMPORT SYSTEMS UPGRADE 

The project will implement all processes and data requirements deriving from the UCC which relate to 
imports  of  goods  into  the  EU.  The  existing  national  import  systems  must  be  upgraded  in  line  with 
these  new  UCC  requirements.  The  upgrade  mainly  relates  to  the  changes  for  the  "Release  for  free 
circulation"  procedure  (standard  procedure  and  the  simplifications),  but  also  covers  the  impact  of 
changes in other electronic systems. This project covers the national customs declarations processing 
systems, as well as national accountancy and payment systems.  

2.10.1  Summary of Responses 

SE  classifies  the  complexity  of  the  project  as  medium-high  (5  on  a  scale  out  of  6).  SE’s  survey 
responses refer exclusively to the standard declaration, while the simplified declaration and the Entry 
in  the  Declarant’s  Records  (EIDR)  will  follow  at  a  later  stage.  SE  states  that  everything  will  be 
operational as of 30 September 2022. Furthermore, it identifies the risk level as medium because of the 
uncertainty with the data model.  

IE considers the risk as low, foreseeing delays due to the Annex B data changes and to the new Low 
Value  Consignments  requirements,  but  reporting  that  the  deadlines  will  be  met.  EE  mentions  risks 
pertaining to a lack of resources.  

DK  and  MT  both  see  the  highest  level  of  complexity  with  a  high  risk  level  due  to  the  many 
dependencies  with  other  systems,  parallel  developments  and  the  plethora  of  stakeholders  involved. 
Furthermore, DK reports delays due to internal issues, while affirming that some mitigating measures 
are foreseen. DK explained that a release-based strategy is followed, which means that conformance 
tests, deployment and migration will happen in multiple iterations. The dates provided in the survey 
pertain to Release 2.  

LU  assesses  the  complexity  as  medium-high  (5  on  a  scale  of  6)  due  to  the  integration  of  import 
functionalities with various other systems including but not limited to: BTI, SURV3, EOS, AEO and 
REX.  LU  further  sees  the  limited  number  of  customs  experts  -  both  those  in  the  customs 
administration  and  those  that  could  be  of  assistance  to  the  software  developers  -  as  a  contributing 
factor for the high risk. Additionally, LU reports that the Agile methodology employed in its software 
development activities makes it difficult to provide clear indications on starting dates of activities.  

CZ  identifies  the  complexity  as  medium-high  (on  a  scale  of  6)  due  to  the  application  process  and 
medium  risk  owing  to  the  high  national  financial  resources  needed.  CY  rates  the  complexity  as  the 
highest and the risk as low, while it has not yet concluded the tender awarding process.  

PT underscores the complexity of the project and states that recurrent changes to the data requirements 
make  it  difficult  to  determine  whether  the  work  completed  continues  to  be  correct  and  applicable. 
Consequently, additional costs are created by the need to reassess the aforementioned developments 
thus further adding to the complexity of the deliverables. Taking into account the fact that the deadline 
for the conclusion of the harmonisation and amendment of UCC-DA Annex B2 data requirements and, 
eventually to UCC-DA Annex A is the end of 2019, PT expresses concern about the planning of the 
project.  The  figure  below  provides  an  overall  summary  of  the  survey  responses  received  from  the 
Member States regarding the status of their project activities. 

2  European  Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2015/2446  of  28  July  2015  supplementing  Regulation  (EU)  No 
952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards detailed rules concerning certain provisions of the Union 
Customs Code (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 1). 

28 

 
 
                                                      
 
Figure 23: Summary of Survey Responses – National Import Systems Upgrade 

2.10.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The  below  chart  represents  the  foreseen  planning.  The  three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the 
technical  specifications  (planned  completion  01/07/2021),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion 
01/07/2022) and the deployment (planned completion 31/12/2022). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 24: Planned Milestones – National Import Systems Upgrade 

29 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the tables below highlight any divergences in the planning compared to the dates set in the 
Work Programme. LU reported a very minor delay in the deployment date of two days than the one 
foreseen in the Work Programme. Therefore, it was decided not to highlight this as an actual delay in 
the table below. 

Table 12: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – National Import Systems Upgrade 

2.10.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The figures below summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar is 28 (responses from the 28 Member States). 

Figure 25: Summary of Responses per Milestone – National Import Systems Upgrade 

30 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start/actual end from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/02/20210%01/02/20220%01/06/20220%BE01/06/2019100%01/03/20210%30/09/20210%BG28/02/2018100%01/12/2018100%07/01/2019100%CY01/02/20200%02/08/20210%03/06/20220%CZ01/01/20200%01/10/20210%01/05/20220%DEIn Progress50%In Progress50%In Progress30%DKIn Progress5%01/03/20220%31/12/20220%EEIn Progress50%30/06/20200%29/12/20200%ES30/06/20200%30/09/20210%31/01/20220%FIIn Progress50%01/06/20200%In Progress20%FRIn Progress20%01/09/20210%29/12/20220%GR31/03/20210%31/03/20220%31/12/20220%HRIn Progress10%01/01/20220%01/01/20210%HU30/06/20210%01/07/20220%21/12/20220%IEIn Progress90%31/05/20200%26/11/20200%IT30/06/2019100%30/06/20200%15/12/20200%LT01/09/20200%01/03/20220%31/12/20220%LU01/07/20210%31/03/20220%02/01/20230%LV30/10/2017100%01/06/2018100%03/06/2018100%MT01/06/20210%01/02/20220%01/09/20220%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PL01/01/20200%01/09/20200%01/01/20210%PT01/01/20210%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%RO01/01/20200%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%SEIn Progress50%01/10/20200%30/09/20220%SI01/07/2019100%01/07/20200%01/10/20200%SK30/11/2016100%30/04/2017100%30/06/2019100%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedProject NameUCC National Import Systems UpgradeTo be defined by MSN/A31/12/2022DeploymentRespondeeTechnical SpecificationsConformance Testing 
 
 
 
 
 
Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following figures. The following Member States have not yet started: AT, CY, CZ, ES, GR, HU, LT, 
LU, MT, NL, PL and PT. The UK did not provide information.  

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

E
B

G
B

E
D

K
D

E
E

I
F

R
F

R
H

E
I

T
I

V
L

E
S

I
S

K
S

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

5% 

30% 

20% 
20% 

10% 

50% 
50% 

50% 

50% 

50% 

100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

90% 

Figure 26: Percentage of Completion per Phase – National Import Systems Upgrade 

31 

 
 
 
 
 
2.11  UCC SPECIAL PROCEDURES 

This national project aims to accelerate, facilitate and harmonise Special Procedures across the Union 
by  means  of  providing  common  business  process  models.  The  national  systems  will  implement  all 
UCC  changes  required  for  all  the  special  procedures  (customs  warehousing,  end-use,  temporary 
admission  and  inward/outward  processing).  It  should  be  noted  that  in  many  Member  States  the 
implementation  of  this  project  occurs  within  the  context  of  the  upgrades  of  the  national  import  and 
export systems. 

In  terms  of  planning,  this  project  will  be  implemented  in  two  parts.  The  first  component  is  the 
"National  Special  Procedures  EXP"  (NSP  EXP)  with  the  view  to  providing  the  required  national 
electronic  solutions  for  the  export-related  special  procedure  activities.  The  second  component  is  the 
"National  Special  Procedures  IMP"  (NSP  IMP)  with  the  view  to  providing  the  required  national 
electronic solutions for the import-related special procedures activities. 

2.11.1  Summary of Responses 

BG and DE report that the first component of the UCC Special Procedures will be implemented in-line 
with  and  as  part  of  the  national  UCC  Automated  Export  System  (AES)  project,  while  the  second 
component,  will  be  implemented  as  part  of  the  national  import  system.  CY  and  GR  are  currently 
facing  delays  regarding  the  awarding  of  the  tender;  no  contracts  are  in  place  yet  in  these  Member 
States.  DK  indicates  that  it  is  following  a  release-based  strategy,  including  conformance  tests, 
deployment and migration in multiple iterations, while stressing that this shall not affect their national 
planning.  Similarly,  Regarding  the  first  component  the  (NSP  EXP)  SE  plans  to  follow  a  phased 
implementation  of  the  project  and  start  with  standard  declaration  where  they  plan  to  be  fully 
operational with all traders migrated by Q4 2023. As a next step, the process will continue with the 
simplified declaration, entry in the declarants’ records and centralised clearance. They plan to be fully 
operational by Q4 2025.   

CZ  and  ES  alike  identified  the  project  complexity  as  medium-high  (5  on  a  scale  out  of  6).  CZ 
identifies  a  medium  risk  level  pertaining  to  the  lack  of  resources  and  financial  concerns.  DK  views 
Component  2  as  being  highly  risky  and  complex,  taking  into  consideration  the  dependencies  with 
other  systems,  the  multitude  of  stakeholders  involved,  and  the  parallel  development  of  features  that 
this project requires. It considers scarcity of resources as a possible risk, while some delays have been 
observed  due  to  internal  issues.  Nevertheless,  DK  reiterates  that  the  overall  delivery  will  meet  the 
deadline and that mitigating measures are in place, with others currently planned.  

IE  and  SK  also  report  a  risk  of  delay  against  the  Work  Programme  deadlines.  Both  Member  States 
note  that  a  lack  of  resources  is  their  main  concern.  IE  further  mentions  the  instability  of  data 
requirements for the electronic systems, in particular the additions of  the new requirements for Low 
Value  Consignments3  and  the  e-commerce  requirements  coming  from  the  VAT  Directive4.  SI 
identifies a medium risk level, mentioning new functionalities, new data structures, and the transitional 
period as factors that contribute to a timeline uncertainty.  

PT  underscores  the  complexity  of  the  project  and,  specifically  regarding  Component  2,  states  that 
recurrent changes to the data requirements make it difficult to determine whether the work completed 
continues  to  be  correct  and  applicable.  Consequently,  additional  costs  are  created  by  the  need  to 
reassess the aforementioned developments thus further adding to the complexity of the deliverables.  

3  European  Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2019/1143  of  14  March  2019  amending  Delegated  Regulation  (EU) 
2015/2446 as regards the declaration of certain low-value consignments  
4 Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax 

32 

 
 
                                                      
Taking into account the fact that the deadline for the conclusion of the harmonisation and amendment 
of UCC-DA Annex B5 data requirements and, eventually to UCC-DA Annex A is the end of 2019, PT 
reports  an  increased  complexity  of  the  project.  PT  further  identifies  interdependencies  with  the 
development  of  all  national,  central  and  other  Member  States’  systems,  as  well  as  national  and  EU 
entities  connections,  as  a  decisive  factor  that  contributes  to  the  project’s  complexity.  Regarding  the 
deadlines  for  the  harmonisation  of  data  requirements,  PT  mentions  as  further  factors  that  could 
contribute to delays, the lack of data consolidation in particular because of later additions. However, 
PT  foresees  completing  the  project  within  the  deadline.  PT  also  plans  an  increase  of  its  internal 
resources and further support to the Commission activities related to the consolidation of UCC Annex 
B as mitigating measures to meet the deadlines. 

The  figures  below  provide  an  overall  summary  of  the  responses  received  from  the  Member  States 
regarding the status of their project activities. 

Figure 27: Project Status as per Survey – Component 1 National SP EXP 

Figure 28: Project Status as per Survey – Component 2 National SP IMP 

5  European  Commission  Delegated  Regulation  (EU)  2015/2446  of  28  July  2015  supplementing  Regulation  (EU)  No 
952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards detailed rules concerning certain provisions of the Union 
Customs Code (OJ L 343, 29.12.2015, p. 1). 

33 

 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                      
 
2.11.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The  charts  below  present  the  planning  foreseen.  The  three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the 
technical  specifications  (planned  completion  01/10/2022  for  Component  1  and  30/06/2022  for 
Component 2), conformance testing (planned completion 15/6/2023 for Component 1 and 07/01/2022 
for  Component  2)  and  the  deployment  (planned  completion  01/12/2023  for  Component  1  and 
31/12/2022 for Component 2). 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 29: Planned Milestones – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 30: Planned Milestones – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP 

34 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the below tables highlight any known divergences in the planning compared to the dates 
set in the Work Programme6.  

Table 13: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP 

Table 14: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP 

6 Since the compilation of this data the following Member States have indicated in the context of the national project plans 
that they will bring forward their deployment dates for AES Component 1 which is linked to this project: AT, BE, BG, DK, 
FR, HR, LT, LU, MT, NL, PT, SK. 

35 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/08/20210%01/08/20220%01/12/20220%BEN/AN/A03/02/20200%02/03/20200%BG15/12/20210%01/01/20230%01/11/20230%CY02/10/20190%01/02/20220%02/02/20230%CZ01/01/20200%01/10/20210%01/05/20220%DEIn Progress50%07/09/20200%06/03/20210%DKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedEE01/03/20200%30/09/20210%31/12/20220%ES31/12/20190%01/01/20210%01/07/20210%FI01/01/20210%01/04/20220%01/03/20230%FRIn Progress10%03/01/20220%30/11/20230%GR30/04/20210%N/AN/A31/12/20220%HR31/03/20210%31/03/20230%31/03/20230%HU30/06/20220%01/07/20220%01/12/20230%IE30/09/20210%08/01/20230%31/10/20230%ITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLT01/03/20210%01/03/20220%31/12/20220%LU01/10/20220%01/04/20220%01/04/20230%LV01/11/20200%01/08/20220%05/02/20230%MT01/07/20200%01/10/20210%31/01/20220%NL01/01/20210%01/04/20230%01/04/20230%PLIn Progress20%17/09/20200%31/03/20210%PT01/01/20220%15/06/20230%01/12/20230%ROIn Progress10%01/01/20230%01/12/20230%SE01/05/20210%01/10/20220%30/11/20230%SIIn Progress30%01/11/20210%01/06/20220%SK01/10/20210%01/11/20220%01/12/20230%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedUCC Special Procedures (SP) - Component 1 – National SP EXP01/12/2023To be defined by MSN/ARespondeeTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentProject NameTarget date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/02/20210%01/02/20220%01/06/20220%BE01/05/2019100%01/02/20200%01/05/20200%BG28/02/2018100%01/12/2018100%07/01/2019100%CY03/02/20200%02/08/20210%03/06/20220%CZ01/01/20200%01/10/20210%01/05/20220%DEIn Progress50%In Progress50%In Progress30%DKIn Progress5%01/03/20220%01/10/20220%EEIn Progress50%30/06/20200%29/12/20200%ES31/12/20190%01/01/20210%01/07/20210%FI01/08/20190%N/AN/A01/10/20210%FRIn Progress20%01/09/20210%29/12/20220%GR31/03/20210%N/AN/A31/12/20220%HRIn progress0%01/01/20220%31/12/20220%HU30/06/20220%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%IEIn Progress90%31/05/20200%26/11/20200%IT30/06/2019100%30/08/20200%15/12/20200%LT01/03/20210%01/03/20220%31/12/20220%LU01/07/20210%31/03/20220%02/01/20230%LV30/10/2017100%01/06/2018100%03/06/2018100%MT01/07/20200%01/10/20210%31/01/20220%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PLIn Progress20%01/09/20200%01/02/20210%PT01/01/20210%01/07/20220%31/12/20220%ROIn Progress10%01/07/20220%01/12/20220%SEIn Progress50%01/10/20200%30/09/20220%SI01/07/2019100%01/07/20200%01/10/20200%SK01/10/20200%01/11/20210%01/12/20220%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedConformance TestingDeploymentN/A31/12/2022To be defined by MSProject NameUCC Special Procedures (SP) - Component 2 – National SP IMPRespondeeTechnical Specifications 
 
 
  
 
 
 
                                                      
2.11.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The below figures summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar is 28 (all Member States). 

Figure 31: Summary of Responses per Milestone – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP 

Figure 32: Summary of Responses per Milestone – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP 

Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following  figures.  Regarding  Component  1,  the  following  Member  States  have  not  yet  started:  AT, 
BG, CY, CZ, DK, EE, ES, FU, GR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PT, SE, SK. FR, IT and the 
UK did not provide information. BE marked Component 1 as Not Applicable.  

36 

 
 
 
 
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

50% 

20% 

30% 

E
D

L
P

I
S

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

Figure 33: Percentage of Completion per Phase – SP – Component 1 Nat SP EXP 

37 

 
 
 
 
 
Regarding Component 2, the following Member States have not yet started: AT, CY, CZ, ES, FI, GR, 
HR, HU, LT, LU, MT, NL, PT, SK. FR and the UK did not provide information.  

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

E
B

G
B

E
D

K
D

E
E

E
I

T
I

V
L

L
P

E
S

I
S

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

30% 

5% 

20% 

50% 
50% 

50% 

50% 

90% 

100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 

Figure 34: Percentage of Completion per Phase – SP – Component 2 Nat SP IMP 

38 

 
 
 
 
 
2.12  UCC GUARANTEE MANAGEMENT (GUM) 

The  UCC  Guarantee  Management  (GUM)  project  aims  to  assure  the  effective  and  efficient 
management of the different types of guarantees. 

The  system  is  comprised  of  two  components.  The  first  component  is  "GUM".  GUM  is  a  trans-
European system that will cover the management of the comprehensive guarantees that may be used in 
more than one Member State. GUM would also cover the monitoring of the reference amount for each 
customs  declaration,  supplementary  declaration  or  appropriate  information  needed.  Transit  is  an 
exception to the above and is handled as part of the NCTS project. As the project initation phase is still 
ongoing,  the  exact  scope  and  implementation  approach  is  not  yet  fully  decided  upon  and  will  take 
form in the context of the approval of the business case document. Alternative ways of re-using other 
systems is looked into. This decision may then also impact the second component of the project, which 
is the "National Guarantee Management" system. In addition to GUM, the electronic systems existing 
at the national level which manage the valid guarantees in one Member State are to be upgraded. 

2.12.1  Summary of Responses 

BG views the risk and complexity as low since the GUM – Component 1 project activities depend on 
the decisions taken at the European Commission level. CY also finds the risk as low but mentions that 
the complexity is high (6), while adding that the tender process awarding has not yet concluded. CZ 
considers that the complexity is high (6) and the risk level is also high, more specifically pertaining to 
GUM – Component 1, stating that a considerable amount of financial resources will be required. After 
a  follow-up  call  with  CZ,  the  updated  dates  are  in  full  compliance  with  the  Work  Programme. 
Regarding, GUM – Component 2, CZ also identifies risks pertaining to financial resources. DE reports 
that this project depends on decisions still to be taken on the business case at EU level and as such 
there is no justification to start national development activities at this stage. 

LU  assesses the  project  complexity  and  risk  as  medium  (4).  The complexity  of  the  GUM  project is 
mostly determined by its integration with its national accounting system. LU sees a medium risk due 
to the limited number of customs experts in the administration and in IT roles, while it also underlines 
its use of an Agile approach as a factor that makes it difficult to provide future development dates.. FR 
estimates the risk level as high due to possible impacts on its national Guarantee management system. 
In addition, FR mentions issues with the preparedness of the regulatory office, marking the complexity 
of the project as the highest (6).  

The  figures  below  provide  an  overall  summary  of  the  survey  responses  received  from  the  Member 
States and the Commission regarding the status of project activities. 

Figure 35: Summary of Survey Responses – GUM – Component 1 

39 

 
 
 
Figure 36: Summary of Survey Responses – GUM – Component 2 

2.12.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The  charts  below  present  the  planning  foreseen.  The  three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the 
technical  specifications  (planned  completion  30/09/2022  for  Component  1  and  30/11/2024  for 
Component  2),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion  01/04/2025  for  Component  1  and 
02/01/2025 for Component 2) and the deployment (planned completion 01/06/2025 for Components 1 
and 2). 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 37: Planned Milestones – GUM – Component 1 

40 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 38: Planned Milestones – GUM – Component 2 

In addition, the tables below highlight any known divergences in the planning compared to the dates 
set in the Work Programme. 

Table 15: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – GUM – Component 1 

41 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  European Commission01/10/20200%06/09/20230%01/10/20230%AT01/05/20230%01/05/20240%01/09/20240%BE01/10/20230%01/04/20240%01/01/20250%BG30/09/20220%01/04/20250%01/06/20250%CY01/09/20220%02/10/20230%02/10/20240%CZ31/03/20220%30/06/20250%01/06/20250%DEN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ADKIn Progress15%01/01/20250%01/05/20250%EEN/AN/A02/01/20250%01/06/20250%ES30/09/20220%01/10/20230%01/06/20250%FI01/01/20210%01/10/20240%01/04/20250%FR01/01/20220%01/04/20250%01/06/20250%GR30/06/20230%30/09/20240%01/06/20250%HR30/09/20210%31/12/20240%01/06/20250%HU30/11/20240%02/12/20240%01/06/20250%IE30/09/20220%31/03/20240%31/10/20240%ITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLT01/12/20210%01/12/20230%01/01/20250%LU01/07/20230%01/12/20240%01/01/20250%LVN/AN/AN/AN/A02/03/20250%MT01/07/20210%30/06/20220%31/03/20230%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PLNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedPT01/06/20200%01/07/20220%01/01/20230%RO01/04/20240%01/07/20240%01/04/20250%SE01/03/20230%01/10/20230%01/10/20230%SI01/01/20220%01/01/20250%01/06/20250%SK01/09/20230%01/04/20240%01/06/20250%UKNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedProject NameRespondeeTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentGUM - Component 130/09/2022N/A02/06/2025 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 39: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – GUM – Component 2 

2.12.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The figures below summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar in Figure 40 is 29 (responses from the 28 Member States plus 
the European Commission). The sum of each bar in Figure 41 is 28 (responses from the 28 Member 
States). 

Figure 40: Summary of Responses per Milestone – GUM – Component 1 

42 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned/actual End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/05/20230%01/05/20240%01/09/20240%BE01/06/20210%01/06/20220%01/09/20230%BG28/02/2018100%01/12/2018100%07/01/2019100%CY01/09/20220%02/10/20230%02/10/20240%CZ01/10/20220%01/10/20220%01/06/20230%DEN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ADKIn Progress15%01/01/20250%01/05/20250%EE30/06/20200%01/05/20210%01/10/20210%ES30/06/2016100%01/07/2016100%01/09/2016100%FI01/01/20210%01/10/20240%01/04/20250%FRNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%GR31/12/20240%Not providedNot provided31/03/20250%HR30/06/20230%02/01/20250%01/06/20250%HU30/11/20240%02/12/20240%01/06/20250%IEIn Progress90%31/05/20200%26/11/20200%ITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLTIn Progress15%In Progress15%01/12/20200%LU01/07/20230%01/12/20240%01/01/20250%LVN/AN/AN/AN/A03/06/2018100%MT01/06/20210%30/06/20220%31/03/20230%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PLNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedPT01/01/20210%01/01/20230%02/06/20240%RO30/06/20240%30/09/20240%01/06/20250%SEN/AN/AN/AN/A01/10/20200%SI01/01/20220%01/01/20250%02/03/20200%SK01/09/20230%01/04/20240%01/06/20250%UKNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedProject NameRespondeeTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentGUM - Component 2To be defined by MSN/A01/06/2025 
 
 
 
 
 
Figure 41: Summary of Responses per Milestone – GUM – Component 2 

Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following figures. Regarding Component 1, the only Member State that has started is DK. IT, PL and 
the UK did not provide information.  Lastly, DE marked Component 1 as Not Applicable. 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Technical Specifications

15% 

K
D

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Figure 42: Percentage of Completion per Phase – GUM – Component 1 

Regarding Component 2, the following Member States have not yet started: AT, BE, CY, CZ, EE, FI, 
HR, HU, LU, MT, NL, PT, RO, SI and SK. FR, GR, IT, PL and the UK did not provide information.  
DE marked Component 2 as Not Applicable. Lastly, LV updated their National guarantee system 
together with their national import system on 03/06/2018.  

43 

 
 
 
 
 
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

G
B

K
D

S
E

E
I

T
L

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

15% 

15% 
15% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 

90% 

Figure 43: Percentage of Completion per Phase – GUM – Component 2 

44 

 
 
 
 
 
2.13  UCC IMPORT CONTROL SYSTEM UPGRADE (ICS2) 

The goal of the UCC Import Control System Upgrade (ICS2) project is to strengthen the safety and 
security of the supply chain for all modes of transport and especially air cargo. The aim is to do so 
through improving data quality, data filing, data availability and data sharing in regards to the entry 
summary  declaration  and  related  risk  and  control  information.  The  main  purpose  of  the  system  is 
implementing the new requirements resulting from the UCC. The new requirements are in regards to 
the  lodgement  and  treatment  of  pre-arrival  declarations  (“entry  summary  declarations”  –  “ENS”), 
namely the provision of ENS data and the exchange of that data.  

In terms of project architecture, this project will lead to a complete new architecture of the existing 
trans-European  ICS  system.  The project  will  also facilitate  collaboration  amongst  Member  States  in 
the process of risk analysis. In terms of planning, the project will be implemented in three  phases or 
releases. Release 1 will cover the obligation on the relevant economic operators (postal operators and 
express carriers in air transport) to provide the minimum data i.e. ENS pre-loading dataset. Release 2 
will  cover  the  implementation  of  complete  new  ENS  obligations  and  related  business  and  risk 
management processes for all the goods in air traffic. Release 3 will cover the implementation of the 
complete new ENS obligations and related business and risk management processes for all goods in 
maritime  and  inland  waterways,  road  and  rail  traffic  (this  includes  goods  in  postal  consignments 
transported in these means of transport).  

The  Commission  centrally  develops  this  project  and  the  technical  specifications  were  completed  on 
30/06/2018. The complexity is high (6 out of 6) due to very high required availability that affects the 
infrastructure requirements. Furthermore, it underlines the dependencies on other systems, as well as 
the  fact  that  conformance  testing  with  economic  operators  systems  is  required.  Nevertheless,  the 
Commission classifies the risk as low, reporting that on-time delivery is probable.  

2.13.1  Overview of Project Progress 

The  below  charts  represent  the  actual  completion  versus  the  plan.  The  three  milestones  referred  to 
below  are  the  technical  specifications  (completed  30/06/2018  for  all  three  releases),  conformance 
testing (planned completion 15/03/2021 for Release 1, 01/03/2023 for Release 2 and 01/03/2024 for 
Release 3) and the deployment (planned completion 01/10/2021 for Release 1, 02/10/2023 for Release 
2 and 01/10/2024 for Release 3).  

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

esFigure 44: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – ICS2 – Release 1 

45 

 
 
  
 
 
 
3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 45: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – ICS2 – Release 2 

46 

 
 
 
 
 
 
s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 46: Planned versus Actual Completion of Milestones – ICS2 – Release 3 

In addition, the table below indicates no known divergences in the planning compared to the dates set 
in the Work Programme.   

Table 16: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – ICS2 – Release 1 

47 

Target date from Work ProgrammeActual end date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned end date from survey  % of CompletionUCC Import Control System Upgrade (ICS2)Release 130/06/201830/06/2018100%No dates in WP13/04/20200%01/10/202115/03/20210%Technical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentProject Name 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.14  UCC PROOF OF UNION STATUS (POUS) 

PoUS is a new trans-European system which is designed to allow storage, management and retrieval 
of certain types of documents (e.g. T2L, T2L/F, customs goods manifest) that traders provide to prove 
the Union status of their goods. The system will improve the uniformity of the procedures across the 
European  Union  and  contribute  to  the  establishment  of  a  more  consistent,  harmonised  and  thus 
simplified process related to customs clearance for Union goods.  

A  system  will  be  created  that  it  will  include  a  Central  Repository  for  the  storage  and  exchange 
between Customs Authorities across all Member States of data and documents dealing with proof of 
Union status. 

At the moment of the survey, the business case document was not yet finalised and discussions were 
taking  place  on  the  scope  and  the  most  appropriate  implementation  options  (central  system  versus 
hybrid system versus decentralised system, possibly combined with collaboration initiatives). Whilst 
substantial  progress has occurred in the second half of 2019 as regards the PoUS project, the outcome 
of  the  survey  shows  the  uncertainties  in  the  Member  States  on  whether  they  (need  to)  consider 
additional  national  developments.  Discussions  are  ongoing  between  the  Commission,  the  Member 
States  and  the  trade  community  to  analyse  and  determine  the  most  suitable  steps  forward  for  this 
project and to conclude on the acceptance of the updated business case document by end 2019. Since 
the survey was conducted it has been decided to take the hybrid approach and a phased development is 
now envisaged. There are ongoing legal discussions about certain aspects, once these are finalised the 
results will be considered. 

2.14.1  Summary of Responses 

Member States will have the option of using the central PoUS system or developing their own national 
version. Several Member States conveyed their intention to use the system developed by the European 
Commission:  BG,  DE,  EE,  ES,  FI,  LT,  LV,  RO,  SE  and  SI.  DK  expressed  the  view  that  Member 
States opting to use the Commission system will be subject to the delivery dates indicated in the Work 
Programme. In terms of the overall project status, PT thought it might be necessary to develop national 
technical specifications for the purpose of communications with economic operators.  

Those  Member  States  opting  to  develop  their  national  versions  of  PoUS  identified  risks  for 
compliance with the timeline and the predicted milestones. The process of awarding the tender is still 
in  progress  for  CY,  while CZ  reported that  technical and  business documentation  are  unavailable  at 
this stage, due to its ongoing review cycle. CY views the risk as low and the project complexity high 
(6  on  a  scale  of  6).  CZ  marks  both  project  complexity  (3  out  of  6)  and  the  risk  level  as  medium. 
During a follow-up communication, CZ indicated that they would follow the latest deadlines provided 
by  the  Work  Programme,  yet  revealed that  it  had  not  yet  appointed  a  National  Project Manager.  IE 
expressed  the  same  willingness  to  readjust  national  planning  deadlines  so  as  to  comply  with  the 
timeline.  SK  voiced  a  concern  regarding  the  sufficiency  and  expertise  of  its  human  resources, 
identifying the project as medium risk with a medium complexity (3 out of 6). It does not yet foresee 
any mitigating actions as its impact analysis is still ongoing.  

2.14.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The  chart  below  presents  the  planning.  The  three  milestones  referred  to  below  are  the  technical 
specifications 
(planned  completion 
01/03/2024) and the deployment (planned completion 01/03/2024). 

(planned  completion  31/03/2022),  conformance 

testing 

48 

 
 
s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 47: Planned Milestones – PoUS 

Taking  into  account  the  new  developments  during  the  second  half  of  2019  as  regards  the 
implementation approach for the PoUS project, it is not possible to report any firm divergences known 
at this stage in the planning compared to the dates set in the Work Programme.  DK, ES, GR, HR, HU 
and LU have stated that they foresee a deployment date that is later than the one foreseen in the Work 
Programme. However, as at the moment of drafting the report the phased approach to the project was 
not yet concluded and reflected, only the date of 01/03/2024 was mentioned and Member States were 
only asked to report against this date. In the final version of the UCC WP, a two-phased approach was 
agreed  in  order  to  allow  the  customs  goods  manifest  implementation  to  be  linked  to  the  European 
Maritime  Single  Window  implementation.  As  Member  Stats  were  not  asked  to  distinguish  progress 
versus  phase  1  and  phase 2,  these  were  not reflected.  The delays  highlighted in  the  table  below  are 
against the initial date of 01/03/2024 and not against  the agreed dates of the two phases 01/03/2024 
and  2/06/2025.  As  none  of  the  dates  referred  to  by  Member  States  were  later  than  2/06/2025  (i.e. 
deployment  deadline  for  phase  2),  the  highlights  in  red  in  the  table  below  are  not  necessarily  to  be 
considered as delays. In addition it has to be explained that Member States have provided dates if they 
considered that this activity would be required at national level and have not provided dates or "N/A" 
(not applicable) when they considered this activity would occur at EU level. 

49 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Table 17: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – PoUS 

50 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  European Commission01/01/20200%01/01/20230%01/06/20230%AT01/08/20220%01/08/20230%01/12/20230%BE01/03/20230%01/09/20230%01/02/20240%BG31/12/20210%31/03/20230%01/06/20230%CY04/10/20210%03/10/20220%02/10/20230%CZ01/03/20220%01/09/20230%01/01/20240%DEN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ADK31/03/20220%03/07/20230%01/03/20240%EE31/06/20220%31/03/20240%01/03/20240%ES30/09/20220%30/03/20240%01/10/20240%FIN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AFRTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedGR31/12/20220%31/03/20230%31/03/20250%HR30/06/20200%30/09/20240%31/03/20250%HU31/05/20220%01/06/20230%01/06/20250%IE01/09/20220%01/09/20230%01/03/20240%ITNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedLTN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ALU01/07/20230%01/06/20240%01/01/20250%LVN/AN/AN/AN/A01/03/20240%MT10/10/20220%30/06/20230%01/06/20230%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%Not Started0%PL04/01/20210%01/06/20230%02/01/20240%PTN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ARO01/06/20200%01/01/20240%01/03/20240%SEN/AN/AN/AN/A01/10/20230%SI01/07/20210%31/07/20230%01/03/20240%SK01/01/20220%01/10/20220%01/06/20230%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedN/A01/03/2024Conformance TestingDeploymentProject NameRespondeeUCC Proof of Union Status (PoUS)Technical Specifications31/03/2022 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.15  UCC CENTRALISED CLEARANCE FOR IMPORT (CCI) 

The UCC Centralised Clearance for Import (CCI) project aims to coordinate between Member States 
the system for processing customs declarations and for authorising the release of goods into customs 
procedures, allowing economic operators to centralise in one place in the EU their customs declaration 
activities. 

In  terms  of  the  planning  approach  as  a  trans-European  system,  the  project  contains  components 
developed centrally and nationally. The project will be implemented in two phases.  

Phase  1  will  cover  the  combination  of  centralised  clearance  with  standard  customs  declarations  and 
with  simplified  customs  declarations  and  related  supplementary  declarations  (which  regularise 
simplified  customs  declarations).  In  addition,  this  Phase  will  cover  the  placing  of  goods  under  the 
following  customs  procedures:  release  for  free  circulation,  customs  warehousing,  inward  processing 
and end-use. As regards the types of goods involved, this Phase will cover all types of goods with the 
exception of excise goods and goods subject to common agricultural policy measures. The functional 
specifications have been completed and work is ongoing as regards the technical specifications. Phase 
2  will  cover  everything  that  is  not  covered  by  Phase  1,  namely  the  combination  of  centralised 
clearance  with  customs  declarations  through  an  entry  in  the  declarant’s  records  and  related 
supplementary  declarations;  supplementary  declarations  regularising  more  than  one  simplified 
customs declaration; the placing of goods under the temporary admission procedure; and excise goods. 

2.15.1  Summary of Responses 

BG reports that CCI  -  Phase 1 has been implemented at national level as part of its national import 
system, while for Phase 2 the planning has not yet started. Therefore, BG has assessed the complexity 
high but the risk low. 

CY has not yet concluded the awarding of the tender process. CZ judges the risk and complexity as 
medium.  Regarding  Phase  1,  CZ  finds  the  complexity  assessment  challenging  as  it  only  had  the 
opportunity to approve the business documents7 very recently. CZ further reports that it participated in 
the Project Group (PG) for the preparation of the above documents, and is now waiting for next steps 
to be defined by the PG. This might lead to a delay in the deployment. Regarding Phase 2, CZ again 
faces difficulty in accurately assessing the complexity because it only participated in the last Customs 
Business  Group  (CBG)  meeting  which  focused  on  Phase  2  (Import)  (03/06/2019).  During  this 
meeting, the Commission presented the draft business case. After the formal approval of the business 
case  CZ  reports  it  will  continue  with  the  next  steps.  The  risk  CZ  sees  in  Phase  2  pertains  to  the 
business and IT documentation that is still not available and it states that this might interfere with their 
ability to meet the milestones.  

DE  notes  a  low  risk  for  the  overall  project  and  classifies  the  complexity  as  medium-high  (4), 
highlighting that the specifications have not yet been finalised. No delays are predicted at this stage.  

In  DK’s  assessment,  the  primary  complexity  lies  not  in  the  technical  aspects,  but  with  the  practical 
issues  regarding  the  harmonisation  between  Member  States  (e.g.  national  codes,  regulations  and 
statistics). For this reason it assesses both the complexity and the risk as being medium. Furthermore, 
DK  reports  a  delay  in  developing  the  import  solution  and  platform  necessary  for  handling  CCI.  In 
order  to  mitigate  this,  it  has  included  high-level  requirements for  CCI  handling  in  its  tender  for  the 
new import solution. It classifies the risk as medium due to the parallel development (with export and 
transit).  

7 CCI Phase 1 - Scope Document, UCC CCI for Import - Vision document and EU Customs Functional Requirements BPM 
Report for CCI 

51 

 
 
                                                      
LU  judges  the  complexity  as  the  highest  possible,  attributing  it  to  the  interdependencies  with  other 
export systems such as but not limited to: BTI, SURV3, EOS, AEO and REX. LU sees a medium risk 
with the limited number of customs experts involved in the administration and in consulting with the 
software developers, while it underlines its use of an Agile approach as a factor that makes it difficult 
to provide future development dates.  

MT classifies the risk and complexity as high for both phases. This is due to the fact that it is difficult 
to assess complexity before specifications are finalised. 

PT also judges the complexity at a level of 6 out of 6. PT finds that since this project will be developed 
and implemented within the National Import System, which is highly complex, the integration of CCI 
- Phase 2 will also be complex. The development of this system is also linked to the development of 
all national, central and other Member States’ systems, which increases the interdependencies and the 
complexity of the “global system”.  

SK  finds  the  risk  low  and  mentions  that  while  there  may  be  delays  these  should  not  affect  the  key 
milestones.  SK  further  mentions  that  an  impact  analysis  is  ongoing  and  therefore  no  mitigation 
measures are foreseen yet.  

The  European  Commission  finds  both  the  risk  and  the  complexity  as  moderate  in  view  of  the 
agreement achieved on the business case for Phase 2 in October 2019. 

The  figures  below  provide  an  overall  summary  of  the  survey  responses  received  from  the  Member 
States and the European Commission regarding the status of their project activities. 

Figure 48: Summary of Survey Responses – CCI – Phase 1 

52 

 
 
 
 
Figure 49: Figure 53: Summary of Survey Responses – CCI – Phase 2 

2.15.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The charts below present the planning for CCI Phases 1 and 2. The three milestones referred to below 
are the technical specifications (planned completion 30/09/2020 for Phase 1 and 30/06/2022 for Phase 
2), conformance testing (planned completion 01/10/2023 for Phase 1 and 31/12/2024 for Phase 2) and 
the deployment (planned completion 01/12/2023 for Phase1 and 01/06/2025 for Phase 2). 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 50: Planned Milestones – CCI – Phase 1 

53 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 51: Planned Milestones – CCI – Phase 2 

54 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the tables below highlight any known divergences in the planning compared to the dates 
set in the Work Programme.   

Table 18: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – CCI – Phase 1 

Table 19: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – CCI – Phase 2 

55 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  European CommissionIn Progress60%07/12/20210%01/03/20220%AT01/02/20210%01/02/20220%01/06/20220%BE06/01/20200%05/04/20210%31/12/20210%BG15/12/20210%01/01/20230%01/11/20230%CY02/02/20210%09/09/20220%01/09/20230%CZ01/06/20200%01/01/20230%01/06/20230%DE01/10/20210%30/09/20220%01/08/20220%DK01/01/20210%01/01/20230%01/08/20230%EE30/09/20210%30/06/20220%31/12/20220%ES31/12/20200%30/03/20220%01/10/20220%FI01/10/20210%01/04/20230%01/10/20230%FR01/05/20200%01/09/20210%01/03/20220%GR31/12/20220%30/06/20240%31/12/20220%HR31/03/20210%01/01/20230%01/12/20230%HU30/09/20200%01/06/20230%01/12/20230%IE30/09/20210%31/03/20230%31/10/20230%IT31/12/20200%31/12/20210%01/03/20220%LT31/12/20210%02/01/20230%01/12/20230%LU01/10/20210%01/06/20220%01/04/20230%LV01/12/20200%04/07/20220%25/09/20220%MT01/06/20200%01/01/20210%01/08/20220%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%01/12/20230%PLIn Progress10%15/06/20200%01/12/20230%PT15/12/20210%15/06/20230%01/12/20230%RO01/10/20200%01/07/20230%01/12/20230%SE01/03/20230%01/10/20230%01/10/20230%SI01/06/20200%01/10/20210%01/11/20210%SK01/09/20210%01/09/20220%01/12/20230%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot provided01/12/2023N/A30/09/2020CCI - Phase 1Conformance TestingDeploymentRespondeeProject NameTechnical SpecificationsTarget date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  European Commission01/01/20210%15/07/20230%30/09/20230%AT01/05/20230%01/05/20240%01/09/20240%BE04/04/20220%04/09/20230%15/01/20230%BGNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedCY02/02/20220%02/10/20230%06/01/20250%CZ01/10/20220%01/10/20240%01/02/20250%DE01/11/20220%30/09/20230%31/03/20230%DK01/02/20240%01/06/20240%01/01/20250%EE01/04/20220%01/03/20240%31/12/20240%ES30/09/20220%30/03/20240%01/10/20240%FI01/10/20210%01/04/20230%01/10/20230%FRNot Started0%Not Started0%01/06/20250%GR30/06/20210%N/AN/A31/03/20250%HR31/03/20220%01/12/20240%01/03/20250%HU30/06/20210%01/12/20240%01/06/20250%IE30/09/20220%31/03/20240%31/10/20240%IT30/06/20230%31/12/20240%01/03/20250%LT01/10/20220%03/11/20240%01/06/20250%LU01/06/20230%01/06/20240%01/01/20250%LV10/01/20230%01/07/20240%22/09/20240%MT01/06/20220%01/01/20240%01/08/20240%NLNot Started0%Not Started0%01/06/20250%PL01/04/20220%15/12/20240%01/06/20250%PT01/06/20230%01/12/20240%01/06/20250%RO01/09/20220%01/01/20250%01/06/20250%SE01/03/20240%01/10/20240%01/10/20240%SI01/01/20220%01/09/20240%01/01/20250%SK01/06/20230%01/04/20240%01/06/20250%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot provided30/06/2022CCI - Phase 2N/A02/06/2025Project NameRespondeeTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeployment 
 
 
 
 
 
2.15.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The figures below summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar is 29 (responses from the 28 Member States plus the European 
Commission). 

Figure 52: Summary of Responses per Milestone – CCI – Phase 1 

Figure 53: Summary of Responses per Milestone – CCI – Phase 2 

Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following  figure.  Regarding  Phase  1,  the  Commission  is  currently  working  on  the  technical 
specifications to be provided to the Member States for the development of the national components. 
PL is the only Member State that has started. The UK did not provide information.  CCI – Phase 2 has 
not yet started. 

56 

 
 
 
 
 
 
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E

n
o
i
s
s
i
m
m
o
C

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

10% 

L
P

Conformance Testing

Deployment

60% 

Figure 54: Percentage of Completion per Phase – CCI – Phase 1 

57 

 
 
 
 
 
2.16  UCC NEW COMPUTERISED TRANSIT SYSTEM (NCTS) UPGRADE 

The  aim  of  this  project  is  to  align  the  existing  trans-European  New  Computerised  Transit  System 
(NCTS) to the new UCC legal provisions including the alignment of information exchanges to UCC 
data requirements, the upgrade and development of interfaces with other systems such as AES and the 
Excise Movement and Control System (EMCS) in addition to new safety and security requirements. 

In  terms  of  the  planning  approach,  the  project  is  divided  into  two  components.  Component  1,  the 
‘NCTS Phase 5’ includes steps to provide for the registration of ‘en-route’ events, for the alignment of 
information exchanges to UCC data requirements and for the upgrade and development of interfaces 
with  other  systems.  The  system  includes  some  parts  to  be  developed  centrally  but  the  main 
components are to be developed at national level. 

Component 2, the ‘NCTS Phase 6’ aims to include potential new requirements in the field of safety 
and security data elements in transit customs declarations. These requirements relate to goods brought 
into the customs territory of the Union and are also incorporated in the UCC Import Control System 
Upgrade  2  (ICS2).  The  scope  and  implementation  solution  will  be  agreed  upon  during  the  project 
initiation  phase  early  2020,  as  the  business  case  has  not  yet  been  started.  The  lack  of  clarity  of  the 
implementation  requirements  for  this  phase  2  is  the  reason  why  some  Member  States  have  not  yet 
provided dates or reported "N/A" (not applicable). 

2.16.1  Summary of Responses 

The Commission pointed out in its Overview of the Customs Information Systems8 that the NCTS is a 
system  that  is  already  in  operation,  with  multiple  stakeholders,  and  the  functioning  of  this  existing 
system cannot be jeopardised.  

Component  1  requires  many  changes  in  specifications,  especially  message  structures,  making  the 
transition to the new system extremely complex.  

The high complexity (partially due to the decentralised architecture and the migration to the new phase 
of the system during a transition window) of this project means that there are many associated risks. 
Despite  this,  no  delays  have  materialised  so  far  and  the  project  is  currently  on  track.  The  technical 
specifications were completed in the second half of 2019 in collaboration with the Member States and 
Trade  associations.  All  national  administrations  have  indicated  to  be  ready  within  the  foreseen 
deployment window in the Work Programme, starting operations in Q1 2021 until Q4 2023. DE and 
PL will be forerunner Member States entering into operations in the first half of 2021, followed by FR 
in  the  second  half.  At time  of  writing  the  report, the Member  States  are  finalising  their plans  and a 
number have reacted positively to the call of the Commission to bring forward the deployment date 
(see also footnote). The risks are at this stage under control. The Commission sets up a coordination 
programme to follow up the implementation plan of the Member States. 

Some specific issues raised: BG reports that the national planning has not yet commenced for NCTS 
Phase 6 (Component 2). CY reports that due to possible delays in the process of awarding the tender, 
there  may  be  an  impact  on  its  ability  to  meet  the  milestone  deadlines.  CZ  and  ES  identify  risks 
pertaining  to resourcing  and  financial  constraints.  DE  notes  that further  business  analysis  for  NCTS 
Phase 6 is required to ensure seamless trade logistics at the border when combined with ICS2. CZ is 
concerned at the complexity of the project, while SE notes that all dates provided are indicative and 
marks the complexity as medium (4 on a scale out of 6). SE also notes that there is a risk since the data 
requirements are not yet stable and changes can have an impact on the timelines. Lastly, SK, despite 
marking  the  project  as  low  risk,  reports  that  its  impact  analysis  is  still  ongoing  and  that  so  far  no 

8 DG TAXUD Customs Information Systems Overview of the Status of the MASP-C Projects Brussels, 22 August 2019 

58 

 
 
                                                      
mitigating  actions  are  being  taken.  In  short,  while  some  delays  are  expected,  it  is  expected  that  all 
deadlines set out in the Work Programme will be met.  

The  figures  below  provide  an  overall  summary  of  the  survey  responses  received  from  the  Member 
States and the European Commission regarding the status of their project activities. 

[CELLRANGE], 
[CATEGORY 
NAME] 

[CELLRANGE], 
[CATEGORY 
NAME] 

[CELLRANGE], 
[CATEGORY 
NAME] 

Figure 55: Project Status as per Survey – NCTS – Component 1 or Phase 5 

Figure 56: Project Status as per Survey – NCTS – Component 2 or Phase 6 

2.16.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The charts below present the planning for both Components 1 and 2. The three milestones referred to 
are the technical specifications (planned completion 31/12/2019 for Component 1 and 30/06/2022 for 
Component  2),  conformance  testing  (planned  completion  15/06/2023  for  Component  1  and 
31/12/2021 for Component 2) and the deployment (planned completion 01/12/2023 for Component 1 
and 01/01/2025 for Component 2). 

59 

 
 
 
 
 
 
3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Completed

Figure 57: Planned Milestones – NCTS – Component 1 

3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 58: Planned Milestones – NCTS – Component 2 

60 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the tables below highlight any known divergences in the planning  compared to the dates 
set in the Work Programme9.  

Table 20: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – NCTS – Component 1 

Table 21: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – NCTS – Component 2 

9 Since the compilation of this data the following Member States have indicated in the context of the national project plans 
that they will bring forward their deployment dates: AT, BG, DK, HR, LU, NL, PT, RO, SK. 

61 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start/actual start date from survey% of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of completionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned end date from survey  % of CompletionEuropean CommissionCompleted100%24/11/20200%01/03/20210%AT01/08/20210%01/08/20220%01/12/20220%BEIn Progress90%01/04/20220%24/04/20220%BG15/12/20210%01/01/20230%01/11/20230%CY02/10/20190%01/02/20220%03/06/20220%CZ01/01/20200%01/01/20220%01/10/20220%DEIn Progress50%17/09/20200%06/03/20210%DKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedEE01/07/20200%30/09/20210%31/12/20220%ES31/05/20200%30/09/20220%01/04/20230%FI01/01/20210%01/04/20220%01/03/20230%FR06/01/20200%01/10/20210%22/12/20210%GR30/04/20210%16/02/20220%01/11/20220%HR30/09/20200%31/03/20230%03/06/20230%HU01/01/20210%31/10/20220%29/09/20230%IE30/09/20210%08/01/20230%31/10/20230%ITIn Progress25%05/07/20210%02/02/20220%LT01/03/20220%02/01/20230%01/12/20230%LUIn Progress10%01/03/20220%01/12/20230%LV01/02/20210%03/10/20220%05/02/20230%MT01/06/20200%01/04/20230%31/03/20230%NLIn Progress20%01/04/20230%01/04/20230%PLIn Progress25%17/09/20200%31/01/20210%PT15/12/20220%15/06/20230%01/12/20230%ROIn Progress10%01/01/20230%01/12/20230%SE01/02/20220%01/10/20220%30/09/20230%SIIn Progress30%01/08/20210%01/03/20220%SK01/02/20210%01/02/20220%01/12/20230%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentProject NameRespondeeN/A01/12/2023UCC New Computerised Transit System (NCTS) Upgrade - Component 131/12/2019Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start/actual start date from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned end date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  European Commission01/10/20210%01/10/20230%01/06/20240%AT01/11/20230%01/11/20240%01/03/20250%BE01/01/20240%01/01/20250%01/06/20250%BGNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedCY01/03/20220%02/10/20230%02/10/20240%CZ01/07/20220%01/01/20240%01/10/20240%DEN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ADK01/09/20220%01/01/20240%01/04/20250%EE31/01/20230%30/06/20240%01/10/20240%ES30/09/20220%30/03/20240%01/10/20240%FI01/04/20220%01/10/20230%01/04/20240%FRTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedTo be determinedGR30/06/20230%15/12/20240%15/03/20250%HR30/09/20200%31/03/20230%03/06/20230%HU30/09/20220%01/10/20240%01/06/20250%IE30/09/20220%31/03/20240%31/10/20240%ITN/AN/AN/AN/AN/AN/ALT01/10/20220%03/11/20240%01/06/20250%LU01/12/20220%01/06/20240%02/12/20240%LV04/10/20230%04/11/20240%02/03/20250%MT01/06/20200%01/04/20230%31/03/20230%NL01/01/20220%01/03/20240%01/06/20250%PLNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedPT01/06/20240%01/12/20240%01/06/20250%RO01/12/20210%01/10/20230%01/06/20250%SE01/06/20230%01/06/20240%01/06/20250%SINot Provided0%01/08/20240%01/06/20250%SK01/02/20230%01/02/20240%01/06/20250%UKNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedNot ProvidedConformance TestingDeploymentProject NameRespondee02/06/2025N/A30/06/2022UCC New Computerised Transit System (NCTS) Upgrade - Component 2Technical Specifications 
 
   
 
  
 
                                                      
2.16.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The figures below summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar is 29 (responses from the 28 Member States plus the European 
Commission). 

Technical Specifications

9 

19 

Conformance Testing

28 

Deployment

1 

1 

1 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Completed

In Progress Delayed Not Started Not Applicable Not Provided

Figure 59: Summary of Responses per Milestone – NCTS – Component 1 

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

23 

23 

23 

1 

1 

1 

5 

5 

5 

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Completed

In Progress Delayed Not Started Not Applicable Not Provided

Figure 60: Summary of Responses per Milestone – NCTS – Component 2 

62 

 
 
 
 
 
Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following  figures.  Regarding  Component  1,  the  following  Member  States  have  not  yet  started:  AT, 
BG, CY, CZ, DK, EE, ES, FI, FR, GR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LV, MT, NL, PT, SE, and SK. The UK did 
not provide information.  

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100% 

90% 

50% 

25% 

20% 

25% 

n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E

o
i
s
s
i
m
m
o
C

Technical Specifications

n

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

E
B

E
D

Deployment

Technical Specifications

T
I

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

10% 

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

U
L

L
N

L
P

O
R

Technical Specifications

10% 

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

30% 

I
S

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Figure 61: Percentage of Completion per Phase – NCTS – Component 1 or Phase 5 

63 

 
 
 
 
 
 
2.17  UCC AUTOMATED EXPORT SYSTEM (AES) 

The AES consists of an upgrade of both the existing trans-European Export System and the existing 
national  export  systems.  It  aims  to  implement  the  UCC  requirements  for  export  and  exit  of  goods 
including re-export.  

In terms of planning, the system is comprised of two components. The first component relates to the 
"Trans-European  AES".  The  aim  of  the  project  is  to  further  develop  the  existing  trans-European 
Export  Control  System  (ECS)  in  order  to  implement  a  full  AES  that  would  cover  the  business 
requirements  for  processes  and  data  brought  about  by  the  UCC.  These  processes  and  data  would 
include the coverage of simplified procedures and centralised clearance for export. It is also envisaged 
to  cover  the  development  of  harmonised  interfaces  with  the  Excise  Movement  and  Control  System 
(EMCS)  and  NCTS.  As  such,  AES  will  enable  the  full  automation  of  export  procedures  and  exit 
formalities. The system includes some parts to be developed centrally but the main components are to 
be  developed  at  national  level.  The  second  component  related  to  the  upgrade  of  the  national  export 
systems. 

2.17.1  Summary of Responses 

The Commission services in their response viewed the project as highly complex, due to the fact that it 
requires migration from an existing system and a plethora of changes in the messages exchanged. The 
aim must be to ensure that the transition is completed in a smooth manner and that it leads successfully 
to the new system.  

The high complexity (partially due to the decentralised architecture and the migration to the new phase 
of the system during a transition window) of this project means that there are many associated risks. 
Despite  this,  no  delays  have  materialised  so  far  and  the  project  is  currently  on  track.  The  technical 
specifications were completed in the second half of 2019 in collaboration with the Member States and 
Trade associations.   

All national administrations have indicated to be ready within the foreseen deployment window in the 
Work  Programme,  starting  operations  in  Q1  2021  until  Q4  2023.  DE  and  PL  will  be  forerunner 
Member  States  entering  into  operations  in  the  first  half  of  2021.  At  time  of  writing  the  report,  the 
Member  States  are  finalising  their  plans  and  a  number  have  reacted  positively  to  the  call  of  the 
Commission to bring forward the deployment date (see also footnote). The risks are at this stage under 
control. The Commission sets up a coordination programme to follow up the implementation plan of 
the Member States. 

Some specific issues raised: CY foresees delays in meeting the deadlines and milestones, as it has not yet 
initiated its tender process. Similarly, GR has no contract in place yet. IE is at the stage of reviewing 
and providing feedback on the AES documentation provided by the Commission. SE notes that there 
is  a  risk  since  the  data  requirements  are  not  yet  stable  and  changes  can  have  an  impact  on  the 
timelines.  SE  plans  to  follow  a  phased  implementation  of  the  project  and  to  start  with  standard 
declaration. As a next step, SE will continue with the simplified declaration, entry in the declarant’s 
record and centralised clearance at export. SE will have a phased approach with a preliminary date for 
publication of the first technical specification on 1/05/2021, start of conformance testing on 1/10/2022, 
and a migration period from the 1/10/2022 with a planned end date of deployment the 30/11/2023. All 
dates provided by SE are preliminary. 

SK is performing an impact analysis and does not foresee mitigating measures at this stage. CZ and ES 
share a concern pertaining to the lack of resources and the high complexity of the project. CZ judges 
the  complexity  as  medium-high  (5  on  a  scale  out  of  6)  while  ES  views  the  project  as  falling  under 
level 6, corresponding to the highest project complexity denoted in the survey. 

64 

 
 
The  figures  below  provide  an  overall  summary  of  the  survey  responses  received  from  the  Member 
States and the European Commission regarding the status of their project activities. 

Figure 62: Project Status as per Survey – AES – Component 1 

Figure 63: Project Status as per Survey – AES – Component 2 

2.17.2  Overview of Project Progress 

The chart below represents the planning for both Components 1 and 2. The three milestones referred 
to  below  are  the  technical  specifications  (planned  completion  31/12/2019  for  Component  1  and 
01/09/2022 for Component 2), conformance testing (planned completion 01/10/2023 for Component 1 
and  01/10/2023  for  Component  2)  and  the  deployment  (planned  completion  01/12/2023  for 
Component 1 and 01/12/2023 for Component 2). 

65 

 
 
   
 
 
 
3

2

1

0

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Actual

Figure 64: Planned Milestones – AES – Component 1 

s
e
n
o
t
s
e
l
i

M

f
o

r
e
b
m
u
N

3

2

1

0

1) Technical Specifications 
2) Conformance Testing 
3) Deployment 

Planned

Figure 65: Planned Milestones – AES – Component 2 

66 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
In addition, the tables below highlight some divergences in the planning compared to the dates set in 
the Work Programme10.   

Table 22: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – AES – Component 1 

Table 23: Comparison of Planned and Actual Dates – AES – Component 2 

10 Since the compilation of this data the following Member States have indicated in the context of the national project plans 
that they will bring forward their deployment dates: AT, BE, BG, DK, FR, HR, LT, LU, MT, NL, PT, SK. 

67 

Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  European CommissionCompleted100%24/11/20200%01/03/20210%AT01/08/20210%01/08/20220%01/12/20220%BEIn Progress75%01/04/20220%30/09/20220%BG15/12/20210%01/01/20230%01/11/20230%CY02/10/20190%01/02/20220%02/02/20230%CZ01/01/20200%01/01/20220%01/10/20220%DEIn Progress50%21/09/20200%06/03/20210%DKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedEE31/03/20200%30/09/20210%31/12/20220%ES31/03/20200%10/01/20220%01/07/20220%FI01/01/20210%01/04/20220%01/03/20230%FRIn Progress10%01/11/20210%30/11/20230%GR30/04/20210%16/02/20220%01/11/20220%HR30/09/20200%31/03/20230%30/06/20230%HU31/12/20210%31/10/20220%30/09/20220%IE30/09/20210%08/01/20230%31/10/20230%ITIn Progress25%05/07/20210%02/02/20220%LT01/03/20220%02/01/20230%01/12/20230%LU01/10/20210%01/09/20220%01/04/20230%LV01/11/20200%01/08/20220%05/02/20230%MT01/07/20200%01/02/20230%01/09/20230%NLIn Progress0%01/04/20230%01/04/20230%PLIn Progress30%17/09/20200%31/03/20210%PT01/01/20220%15/06/20230%01/12/20230%ROIn Progress10%01/01/20230%01/12/20230%SE01/05/20210%01/10/20220%30/11/20230%SIIn Progress30%01/11/20210%01/06/20220%SK01/12/20200%01/12/20210%01/12/20230%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedDeploymentProject NameRespondeeTechnical SpecificationsConformance Testing01/12/2023N/A31/12/2019AES - Component 1Target date from Work ProgrammePlanned start from survey% of CompletionTarget date from Work Programme  Planned start from survey  % of Completion from Survey Target end date from Work Programme  Planned End Date from survey  % of Completion from Survey  AT01/08/20210%01/08/20220%01/08/20220%BEIn Progress10%01/07/20230%31/12/20230%BG15/12/20210%01/01/20230%01/11/20230%CY02/10/20190%01/02/20220%02/02/20230%CZ01/01/20200%01/01/20220%01/10/20220%DEIn Progress50%07/09/20200%06/03/20210%DKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedEE31/03/20200%30/09/20210%31/12/20220%ES31/03/20200%10/01/20220%01/07/20220%FI01/01/20210%01/04/20220%01/03/20230%FR01/12/20200%03/01/20220%30/11/20230%GR30/04/20210%16/02/20220%01/11/20220%HR30/09/20200%31/03/20230%30/06/20230%HU31/05/20220%01/06/20230%01/12/20230%IE30/09/20210%08/01/20230%31/10/20230%ITIn Progress25%05/07/20210%02/02/20220%LT01/03/20220%02/01/20230%01/12/20230%LU01/10/20210%01/04/20220%01/04/20230%LV01/11/20200%01/08/20220%05/02/20230%MT01/07/20200%01/02/20230%01/09/20230%NLIn Progress0%01/04/20230%01/04/20230%PLIn Progress20%17/09/20200%31/03/20210%PT01/01/20220%15/06/20230%01/12/20230%ROIn Progress10%01/01/20230%01/01/20230%SE01/05/20210%01/10/20220%30/11/20230%SIIn Progress30%01/11/20210%01/06/20220%SK01/12/20200%01/12/20210%01/12/20230%UKNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedNot providedTechnical SpecificationsConformance TestingDeploymentAES - Component 2To be defined by MSN/A01/12/2023Project NameRespondee 
 
   
 
 
 
  
 
                                                      
2.17.3  Analysis of Progress against Milestones 

The figures below summarise the status per milestone (technical specifications, conformance testing 
and deployment). The sum of each bar in Figure 64 is 29 (responses from the 28 Member States plus 
the European Commission). The sum of each bar in Figure 65 is 28 (responses from the 28 Member 
States). 

Figure 66: Summary of Responses per Milestone – AES – Component 1 

Figure 67: Summary of Responses per Milestone – AES – Component 2 

68 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Additional  details  regarding  the  specific  percentage  of  completion  per  milestone  can  be  seen  in  the 
following  figures.  Regarding  Component  1,  the  following  Member  States  have  not  yet  started:  AT, 
BG, CY, CZ, DK, EE, ES, FI, GR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PT, SE, and SK. The UK did 
not provide information.  

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

100% 

75% 

50% 

n
a
e
p
o
r
u
E

n
o
i
s
s
i
m
m
o
C

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

E
B

E
D

R
F

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

10% 

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

25% 

T
I

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

L
P

Conformance Testing

Deployment

30% 

Technical Specifications

10% 

O
R

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Technical Specifications

30% 

I
S

Conformance Testing

Deployment

Figure 68: Percentage of Completion per Phase – AES – Component 1 

69 

 
 
 
 
 
 
Regarding  Component  2, the  following  Member  States  have  not  yet  started:  AT,  BG,  CY,  CZ,  DK, 
EE, ES, FI, GR, HR, HU, IE, LT, LU, LV, MT, NL, PT, SE, and SK. FR and the UK did not provide 
information. 

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

E
B

E
D

T
I

L
P

O
R

I
S

Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment
Technical Specifications
Conformance Testing
Deployment

50% 

10% 

10% 

25% 

20% 

30% 

Figure 69: Percentage of Completion per Phase – AES – Component 2 

70 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
3.  ANNEX 1 – PLANNING OVERVIEW – UCC WORK PROGRAMME PROJECTS  

In the figure below, a visual overview of the planning status of the UCC Work Programme Projects is 
presented as of Q4 2019. The overview provides the timeline of the development of the projects.  The 
‘N’  symbol  indicates  the  projects  that  are  national.  The  other  projects  are  related  to  trans-European 
systems, which might have a central architecture or decentralised architecture. 

Figure 70: Planning Overview: UCC Work Programme Projects – Status Q4 2019 

71 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
4.  ANNEX 2 – ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS & KEY TERMS 

Description 
Authorised Economic Operator 
Automated Export System 
Business Process Model 
Binding Tariff Information 
Common Agricultural Policy 
Customs Business Group 
Centralised Clearance for Import 
Customs Duties Calculation 
European Commission 
Delegated Act 

Acronym 
AEO 
AES 
BPM 
BTI 
CAP 
CBG 
CCI 
CDC 
COM 
DA 
DG TAXUD  Directorate General for Taxation and Customs Union 
European Binding Tariff Information 
EBTI 
Electronic Customs Coordination Group 
ECCG 
Export Control System 
ECS 
Entry in the Declarant's Records  
EIDR 
Excise Movement and Control System 
EMCS 
European Maritime Single Window 
EMSW 
Entry Summary Declaration 
ENS 
Economic Operators Registration and Identification 
EORI 
Economic Operator System 
EOS 
Grant for expert team on new approaches to develop and operate Customs IT systems 
ETCIT II 
European Union Customs Data Model 
EUCDM 
Export 
EXP 
Generalised Scheme of Preferences 
GSP 
Guarantee Management 
GUM 
Implementing Act 
IA 
Import Control System; Import Control System 2 
ICS; ICS2 
Import 
IMP 
Information Sheet 
INF 
Multi-Annual Strategic Plan 
MASP 
New Computerised Transit System 
NCTS 
Member State 
MS 
National Export System 
NES 
National Special Procedures 
NSP 
Project Group 
PG 
Quarter 1/2/3/4 
Q1/2/3/4 
Registered Exporters System 
REX 
Shared Trader Interface 
STI 
Union Customs Code 
UCC 
User Interface 
UI 
UUM&DS  Uniform User Management & Digital Signature 
VAT 

Value Added Tax 

Table 24: Abbreviations and Acronyms 

72