COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Subsidiarity Grid Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2019/631 as regards strengthening of the CO2 emission performance standards for new cars and new light commercial vehicles in line with the Union’s increased climate ambition
Date: 2021-07-14
Institutions: Directorate-General for Climate Action, European Commission
Subjects: air quality, commercial vehicle, energy consumption, environmental standard, greenhouse gas, motor car, motor vehicle, motor vehicle pollution, pollution control measures, reduction of gas emissions

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 14.7.2021  SWD(2021) 188 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Subsidiarity Grid Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Regulation (EU) 2019/631 as regards strengthening of the CO2 emission performance standards for new cars and new light commercial vehicles in line with the Union’s increased climate ambition             {COM(2021) 556 final} - {SEC(2021) 556 final} - {SWD(2021) 613 final} - {SWD(2021) 614 final}  
 
 
Subsidiarity Grid 

1.  Can the Union act? What is the legal basis and competence of the Unions’ intended action? 

1.1 Which article(s) of the Treaty are used to support the legislative proposal or policy initiative? 

The legal basis for this proposal is Article 192 of the Treaty of the Functioning of the European Union 
(TFEU). In accordance with Article 191 and 192(1) TFEU, the European Union shall contribute to the 
pursuit, inter alia, of the following objectives: preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the 
environment; promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide 
environmental problems, and in particular combating climate change. 

1.2 Is the Union competence represented by this Treaty article exclusive, shared or supporting in 
nature? 

In the case of environment, the Union’s competence is shared. 

2.  Subsidiarity Principle: Why should the EU act? 

2.1 Does the proposal fulfil the procedural requirements of Protocol No. 21: 

-  Has there been a wide consultation before proposing the act? 
- 

Is there a detailed statement with qualitative and, where possible, quantitative indicators 
allowing an appraisal of whether the action can best be achieved at Union level? 

The  Commission  organised  an  on-line  public  consultation  between  13  November  2020  and  5 
February 2021 on the EU Survey website aiming to gather opinions from citizens, organisations and 
industry stakeholders on the justifications, objectives, potential design and scope as well as impacts 
of  the  initiative.  The  inception  impact  assessment  was  open  to  public  feedback  on  the  Better 
Regulation Portal between 29 October and 26 November 2020. 

In  addition,  the  Commission  services  engaged  in  extensive  bilateral  consultations  with  public 
authorities within the EU, as well as with business associations, social partners, individual companies 
and NGOs. 

Articles 191 to 193 of the TFEU confirm and specify EU competencies in the area of climate change. 
Climate  change  is  a  trans-boundary  problem,  which  cannot  be  solved  by  national  or  local  action 
alone. Coordination of climate action must be taken at European level and, where possible, at global 
level.  EU  action  is  justified  on  grounds  of  subsidiarity  as  set  out  in  Article  5  of  the  Treaty  of  the 
European  Union.  Since  1992,  the  European  Union  has  worked  to  develop  joint  solutions  and  drive 
forward global action to tackle climate change. More specifically, action at EU level will provide for 
cost  effective  delivery  of  the  2030  and  long-term  emission  reduction  objectives  while  ensuring 
fairness and environmental integrity.  

In  light  of  the  emission  reduction  target  for  2030,  and  in  the  perspective  of  the  climate  neutrality 
objective to be achieved by 2050, stronger EU action is needed.  

1 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX:12016E/PRO/02&from=EN  

1 

 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
                                                           
The explanatory memorandum of the proposal and the impact assessment under chapter 3 contain 
sections on the principle of subsidiarity.   

2.2 Does the explanatory memorandum (and any impact assessment) accompanying the 

Commission’s proposal contain an adequate justification regarding the conformity with the 
principle of subsidiarity? 

Both the explanatory memorandum and the  accompanying impact assessment  specify that climate 
change  is  a  trans-boundary  problem  that  cannot  be  effectively  solved  by  national  or  local  action 
alone. Coordination of climate action is necessary at EU level and, where possible, at global level, and 
EU action is justified on grounds of subsidiarity.  

Although initiatives at the national, regional and local level can create synergies, alone they will not 
be sufficient. Lack of coordinated EU action via the strengthening of CO2 emission standards would 
translate  into  a  risk  of  market  fragmentation  due  to  the  diversity  of  national  schemes,  differing 
ambition levels and design parameters. On their own, individual Member States would also represent 
too small a market to achieve the same level of results, therefore, an EU wide approach is needed to 
drive industry level changes and to create economies of scale. 

2.3 Based on the answers to the questions below, can the objectives of the proposed action be 

achieved sufficiently by the Member States acting alone (necessity for EU action)? 

This proposal aims to contribute to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the EU to achieve 
the  updated  target  for  2030  and  climate  neutrality  by  2050  by  setting  strengthened  CO2  emission 
performance standards for passenger cars and light commercial vehicles. 

(a)  Are there significant/appreciable transnational/cross-border aspects to the problems being 

tackled? Have these been quantified? 

The problem tackled, i.e. climate change, is inherently of a transnational/cross-border nature. 

(b)  Would national action or the absence of the EU level action conflict with core objectives of 

the Treaty2 or significantly damage the interests of other Member States? 

National action could conflict with the core objectives of the Treaty, notably the objective set out in 
Article  32,  which  establishes  in  letter  (c)  ‘the  objective  of  avoiding  distorting  conditions  of 
competitions within the custom union’.  

Due to the diversity of national schemes, differing ambition levels and regulatory design parameters, 
national  action  could  result  in  market  fragmentation,  with  a  risk  of  tailoring  national  legislation  to 
suit  local  industry  and  increased  compliance  costs  (passed  on  to  consumers)  for  both  component 
suppliers and vehicle manufacturers.  

(c)  To what extent do Member States have the ability or possibility to enact appropriate 

measures? 

Member  States  have  the  ability  and  possibility  to  address  CO2  emissions  from  transport,  notably 
through fiscal measures, and this may create synergies  with the  CO2  emission standards. However, 
those measures would not be sufficient to tackle the problem, in particular for the longer-term and 
in a sufficiently coherent manner, taking into account the need to drive change at EU-wide level and 

2 https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/eu-in-brief_en  

2 

 
 
 
 
                                                           
to create economies of scale. 

(d)  How does the problem and its causes (e.g. negative externalities, spill-over effects) vary 

across the national, regional and local levels of the EU? 

The problem and its causes are present across national, regional and local levels throughout the EU. 

(e)  Is the problem widespread across the EU or limited to a few Member States? 

The need to address climate change and reduce CO2 emissions from road transport is widespread 
across the EU.  

(f)  Are Member States overstretched in achieving the objectives of the planned measure? 

No,  the  measure  is  intended  to  support  climate  policy  in  the  EU  and  the  CO2  emission  standards 
notably support Member States in meeting their targets under the Effort Sharing Regulation. 

(g)  How do the views/preferred courses of action of national, regional and local authorities 

differ across the EU? 

The policy instrument of setting CO2 emission performance standards for new vehicles is recognized 
as a key tool for reducing CO2 emissions from road transport.  

2.4 Based on the answer to the questions below, can the objectives of the proposed action be 

better achieved at Union level by reason of scale or effects of that action (EU added value)? 

Reducing  greenhouse  gas  emissions  is  a  trans-boundary  issue  that  requires  effective  action  at  the 
largest  possible  scale.  The  CO2  emission  performance  standards  for  cars  and  light  commercial 
vehicles will tackle specifically the increasing CO2 emissions from road transport. Acting at EU-wide 
level offers the opportunity to leverage the full potential of the internal market to create economies 
of scale.  

(a)  Are there clear benefits from EU level action?  

Yes 

(b)  Are there economies of scale? Can the objectives be met more efficiently at EU level (larger 

benefits per unit cost)? Will the functioning of the internal market be improved? 

Yes,  the  measure  specifically  aims  at  preventing  market  fragmentation  and  by  driving  change 
towards zero-emission mobility at EU-wide level, economies of scale can be achieved. 

(c)  What are the benefits in replacing different national policies and rules with a more 

homogenous policy approach? 

The  proposal  is  not  replacing  national  policies,  since  it  is  an  amendment of  an existing  Regulation. 
Coordinated  EU  action through  the  strengthening  of  CO2  emission  standards  for  cars  and vans  can 
catalyse the transformation of the automotive sector, and it can provide the entire automotive value 
chain  with  the  necessary  long-term,  stable  market  signal  and  regulatory  certainty  needed  to make 
the large capital investments that are necessary to deploy zero-emission vehicles on the market.  

(d)  Do the benefits of EU-level action outweigh the loss of competence of the Member States 
and the local and regional authorities (beyond the costs and benefits of acting at national, 
regional and local levels)? 

3 

 
 
Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is fundamentally a trans-boundary issue that requires effective 
action at the largest possible scale. The EU, as a supranational organisation is well-placed to establish 
effective climate policy in the EU. EU-level action in the form of CO2 emission performance standards 
for cars and vans will also support Member States in meeting their targets under the Effort Sharing 
Regulation. 

(e)  Will there be improved legal clarity for those having to implement the legislation? 

The proposal provides legal clarity for the automotive industry and sets a clear pathway for moving 
towards zero-emission mobility. 

3.  Proportionality: How the EU should act 

3.1  Does the explanatory memorandum (and any impact assessment) accompanying the 

Commission’s proposal contain an adequate justification regarding the proportionality of the 
proposal and a statement allowing appraisal of the compliance of the proposal with the 
principle of proportionality? 

Yes, the proposal complies with the proportionality principle because it does not go beyond what is 
necessary in order to achieve the Union’s objectives of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in a cost-
effective manner, while ensuring fairness and environmental integrity.  

The  Climate  Law  agreed  by  the  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  has  endorsed  an  overall 
economy-wide  and  domestic  reduction  in  greenhouse  gas  emissions  of  at  least  55%  below  1990 
levels by 2030 and climate neutrality by 2050.  

This  proposal revises  the existing  CO2  emission  standards  for  cars  and  light  commercial  vehicles  to 
contribute  to  the  reduction  of  greenhouse  gas  emissions  as  part  of  a  comprehensive  package  of 
coherent proposals with a view to reaching the overall climate objectives.  

3.2 Based on the answers to the questions below and information available from any impact 
assessment, the explanatory memorandum or other sources, is the proposed action an 
appropriate way to achieve the intended objectives? 

The  proposed  action  builds  on  an  existing  and  well-functioning  policy  that  has  demonstrated  its 
ability to ensure reductions in CO2 emissions from cars and light commercial vehicles. 

(a)  Is the initiative limited to those aspects that Member States cannot achieve satisfactorily on 

their own, and where the Union can do better? 

Yes 

(b)  Is the form of Union action (choice of instrument) justified, as simple as possible, and 

coherent with the satisfactory achievement of, and ensuring compliance with the objectives 
pursued (e.g. choice between regulation, (framework) directive, recommendation, or 
alternative regulatory methods such as co-legislation, etc.)? 

The proposal sets out amendments to an existing Regulation. This instrument is necessary in order to 
ensure  direct  applicability  and  enforcement  throughout  the  EU  of  automotive  manufacturers’ 
obligation to meet their CO2 emission targets. 

(c)  Does the Union action leave as much scope for national decision as possible while achieving 

4 

 
 
 
  
 
satisfactorily the objectives set? (e.g. is it possible to limit the European action to minimum 
standards or use a less stringent policy instrument or approach?) 

Yes  

(d)  Does the initiative create financial or administrative cost for the Union, national 

governments, regional or local authorities, economic operators or citizens? Are these costs 
commensurate with the objective to be achieved? 

Strengthening  of  the  CO2  emission  targets  is  likely  to  increase  investment  costs  for  manufacturers 
and  automotive  component  suppliers  in  research,  development  and  market  deployment  of  zero-
emission technologies. 

For users of vehicles, the impact assessment shows the benefits in terms of total costs of ownership 
for consumers in particular through increased fuel cost savings. 

(e)  While respecting the Union law, have special circumstances applying in individual Member 

States been taken into account? 

The  CO2  emission  standards  set  targets  to  be  complied  with  by  the  automotive  industry  operating 
across the Union.  

5