COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directives 1999/62/EC, 1999/37/EC and (EU) 2019/520, as regards the charging of vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures
Date: 2021-11-16
Institutions: Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission
Subjects: axle tax, common transport policy, motor vehicle, polluter pays principle, reduction of gas emissions, road transport, toll, transport infrastructure, vehicle tax

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 16.11.2021  COM(2021) 693 final 2017/0114 (COD)  COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT  pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union  concerning the position of the Council on the adoption of a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directives 1999/62/EC, 1999/37/EC and (EU) 2019/520, as regards the charging of vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures  
 
2017/0114 (COD) 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT 

pursuant to Article 294(6) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union 

concerning the 

position of the Council on the adoption of a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directives 1999/62/EC, 
1999/37/EC and (EU) 2019/520, as regards the charging of vehicles for the use of certain 
infrastructures 

1. 

BACKGROUND 

Date of transmission of the proposal to the European Parliament and 
to the Council 
(document COM(2017) 275 final – 2017/0114 COD): 

1 June 2017. 

Date  of  the  opinion  of  the  European  Economic  and  Social 
Committee: 

18 October 2017. 

Date of the opinion of the European Committee of the Regions: 

1 February 2018. 

Date of the position of the European Parliament, first reading: 

25 October 2018. 

Date of transmission of the amended proposal: 

Non applicable 

Date of adoption of the position of the Council: 

9 November 2021. 

2. 

OBJECTIVE OF THE PROPOSAL FROM THE COMMISSION 

The  Commission  proposed  a  revision  of  Directive  1999/62/EC  (“Eurovignette”)  on  31  May 
2017,  as  part  of  the  first  Mobility  Package  (“Europe  on  the  Move”).  This  amendment 
addresses the road charging aspects of that directive. 

The objective of the initiative is to make progress in the application of the 'polluter pays' and 
'user  pays'  principles,  thereby  promoting  financially  and  environmentally  sustainable  and 
socially equitable road transport. This includes the aim to  

 

 

 

contribute to the implementation of Paris Agreement and to the achievement of EU’s  
climate goals through a reduction of CO2 emissions from road transport; 

reduce  the  risk  of  discrimination  vis-à-vis  occasional,  mostly  foreign  users,  in 
particular of passenger cars; and to 

address specific shortcomings of the existing legislation, i.e. a better fulfilment of its 
objectives,  notably  via  simpler  application  of  external  cost  charging  that  currently 
requires a cumbersome process of justification and notification, and the introduction 
of a new option of congestion charging. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

 
 
3. 

COMMENTS ON THE POSITION OF THE COUNCIL 

3.1. 

Type of charging (tolls and/or vignettes) 

(a)  Heavy duty vehicles (HDVs) 

While  the  Commission  proposed  to  phase  out  time-based  charging  (i.e.  user  charges 
commonly known as vignettes) after 6 years, according to the Council position 

 

Vignettes  for HDVs shall  be phased out  on the core  trans-European transport 
network (TEN-T) within 8 years 

  With up to two additional years for common systems of user charges (i.e. the 

Eurovignette Treaty1) 

 

justified  cases 
Except 
traffic/population density or the risk of traffic diversion). 

in  duly 

(related 

to  costs/benefits 

linked 

to 

In  addition,  the  possibility  to  apply  a  ‘combined  charging  system’  would  allow  Member 
States already having tolls in place to introduce vignettes, i.e. impose user charges on roads or 
vehicles categories that are not currently tolled, under certain conditions. 

The Commission  would have preferred to  phase  out  vignettes on the entire TEN-T network 
for  all  HDVs.  Also,  the  scope  of  application  of  the  combined  charging  system  could  be 
reflected more precisely in the relevant legal provision. At the same time, such provision must 
be  read  in  the  context  of  the  Directive  and  its  recitals,  and  its  application  is  limited  by  the 
tolling  systems  already  in  place  today.  In  view  of  the  relatively  limited  impact  on 
infrastructure  and  external  costs  of  smaller  HDVs  (that  are  not  currently  tolled  in  a  few 
Member  States),  and  in  view  of  the  safeguards  available  (i.e.  prior  notification  of  the 
Commission)  in  case  of  justified  exceptions  and  the  introduction  of  combined  charging 
systems, the Commission can accept the compromise. 

(b)  Light vehicles 

The  Commission  also  proposed  to  phase  out  vignettes  for  light  vehicles.  However,  the  co-
legislators agree on the possibility for Member States to maintain and introduce vignettes for 
those vehicles (private cars, light commercial vehicles and minibuses). 

As regards the proportionality of vignette prices, the Commission proposed somewhat lower 
limits for short-term vignettes than the ones provided for in the Council position. At the same 
time, the Council position now requires Member States to make available daily vignettes that 
represent a significant step towards more proportionate pricing for light vehicles. In addition, 
review  clauses  on  the  rules  applicable  to  light  vehicles  at  large  and  specifically  on  the 
treatment  of  light  commercial  vehicles  (LCVs)  are  included,  as  requested  by  the  European 
Parliament. 

More proportionate pricing is in line with the Commission proposal. 

1 

Denmark, Luxembourg, Sweden and The Netherlands  still apply this common system of user charges 
for heavy goods vehicles: https://www.eurovignettes.eu/    

EN 

2 

  EN 

 
 
                                                 
3.2. 

Variation of charges based on environmental performance 

(a)  Heavy duty vehicles 

The  Commission  proposed  to  replace  the  variation  based  on  Euro  emission  class  by  a 
mandatory variation based on CO2 emissions of HDVs (with air pollutants to be addressed 
by  external  cost  charging,  cf.  section  3.3).  In  the  absence  of  a  baseline  at  the  time  of  the 
proposal, the Commission proposed to develop the details in delegated acts. 

In its first reading position, the European Parliament largely followed the proposal and only 
made limited amendments related to the treatment of zero-emission operations, which are in 
line  with  the  Council  position.  Council  developed  the  details  of  variation  based  on  CO2 
emissions  for  HDVs  building  on  the  CO2  standards  adopted  in  20192.  In  parallel,  Council 
extended the obligation to vary charges also to vignettes (user charges). 

In view of the recent proposal on an emission trading system for road transport3, the Council 
position  includes  a  review/evaluation  clause  to  address  any  real  and  perceived  risk  of 
duplication in carbon pricing. 

The  Commission  supports  the  methodology  for  varying  charges  based  on  CO2  emissions 
developed in the Council text together with a review clause. 

(b)  Light vehicles 

The  Commission  proposed  to  vary  road  charges  also  for  light  vehicles  based  on  their 
environmental  performance,  i.e.  taking  into  account  both  CO2  and  pollutant  emissions.  The 
co-legislators agree that the variation of charges for passenger cars should be optional.  

According  to  the  Council  position,  Member  States  will  be  required,  where  technically 
practicable,  to  vary  tolls  and  the  annual  user  charge  for  vans  (a  subset  of  LCVs)  and 
minibuses according to the environmental performance of the vehicle, from 2026. The scheme 
provided  in  Article  7gb  and  Annex  VII,  based  on  the  latest  emission  standards,  would  be 
indicative. Member States that choose to apply a different scheme (e.g. in terms of emission 
performance criteria, the extent of variation, or possibly including other criteria) would have 
to  justify  their  choice  and  notify  the  Commission.  However,  Member  States  may  choose  to 
apply  reductions  to  zero-emission  vehicles  only,  without  varying  the  charges  for  other 
vehicles and without notifying the Commission. 

Although the Commission would have preferred a similar rule for all LCVs, it can support the 
compromise  as  the  principle  of  the  variation  of  charges  reflecting  the  cost  of  road  use  is  in 
line with the Commission proposal. 

3.3. 

External cost charging 

The Commission proposed to simplify external cost charging (with directly usable reference 
values) and to make it mandatory for HDVs, at least on those parts of the network where the 
external cost of air pollution and/or noise is higher than average. The final Council position 

2 

3 

Regulation (EU) 2019/1242 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 setting CO2 
emission  performance  standards  for  new  heavy-duty  vehicles  and  amending  Regulations  (EC)  No 
595/2009  and  (EU)  2018/956  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  and  Council  Directive 
96/53/EC, OJ L 198, 25.7.2019, p. 202–240 
Proposal  for  a  Directive  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  amending  Directive 
2003/87/EC, Decision (EU) 2015/1814 and Regulation (EU) 2015/757 [COM(2021) 551 final] 

EN 

3 

  EN 

                                                 
extended the scope of this obligation by making it applicable on the entire tolled network at 
the latest four years after the entry into force of the amending directive. 

Member  States  will  have  to  apply  external  cost  charging  for  pollution  as  a  rule  except  in 
specific  duly  justified  cases,  which  is  a  welcome  increase  in  ambition  compared  to  the 
Commission proposal. 

The Council added the option to charge also for the cost of CO2 emissions as an alternative to 
(or to be used in combination with) the variation of the infrastructure charge for HDVs based 
on CO2 emissions (cf. section 3.2). While this represents another clear increase in ambition, it 
will  lead  to  duplication  of  carbon  pricing  where  the  applicable  national  fuel  tax  already 
includes  a  CO2  component,  and  if  road  transport  fuels  are  included  in  emission  trading  as 
proposed  by  the  Commission  in  July.  As  mentioned  in  section  3.2,  review  clauses  should 
provide safeguards to minimise such risk. One such review clause obliges the Commission to 
adjust  the  amounts  chargeable  for  CO2  emissions  taking  into  account  the  effective  carbon 
price  applicable  to  road  transport  fuels  in  the  EU.  The  Commission  considers  that  the 
safeguards are sufficient and supports the possibility to charge for the cost of CO2 emissions 
as long as that is not fully covered by a more suitable instrument, such as emission trading or 
fuel taxation. 

3.4. 

Congestion charging 

The  Council  position  on  the  option  of  congestion  charging  is  largely  in  line  with  the 
Commission  proposal: Member States may introduce a  congestion charge on  any section of 
their  road  network  that  is  subject  to  congestion,  and  the  charge  shall  apply  in  a  non-
discriminatory  manner  to  all  vehicle  categories.  The  Council  replaced  the  maximum 
chargeable costs by reference values that may be exceeded under specific conditions, subject 
to notification to the Commission. It also added one exception in line with the position of the 
European Parliament, i.e. Member States may exempt, partially or fully, minibuses, buses and 
coaches. The Commission can support these changes. 

3.5.  Mark-up 

As proposed by the Commission, mark-ups could be applied in any sensitive area (not only in 
mountainous  regions),  and  the  revenue  generated  from  the  mark-up  has  to  be  invested  in 
financing  the  development  of  transport  services,  or  in  the  construction  or  maintenance  of 
transport infrastructure of the core trans-European network. 

According to the Council position, a mark-up could exceed the current maximum of 25%, but 
only if all involved Member States agree, in which case it could be up to 50%. This is not in 
conflict with the Commission proposal either. 

3.6. 

Use of revenues and reporting 

As proposed by the Commission, the Council position requires that, in addition to earmarking 
of revenues from mark-ups, Member States use at least the financial resources equivalent to 
the revenues from any optional congestion charge for reducing the problem of congestion or 
for the benefit of sustainable transport. 

On reporting, Council could not agree with the requirement of an evaluation of the quality of 
the  tolled  road  network  proposed  by  the  Commission.  On  other  aspects,  the  positions  of 
Council and the European Parliament  have been  well-aligned, covering the various charges, 

EN 

4 

  EN 

variations per vehicle category, as well as the revenues collected, their use, and the evolution 
of the environmental performance of vehicles using toll roads. 

The Commission supports these improvements. 

3.7. 

Exemptions 

Council  wants  to  maintain  a  possibility  to  exempt  existing  concession  contracts  from  the 
obligation to vary charges or apply external cost charging, which the Commission can accept. 
New,  renewed  or  substantially  amended  concessions  would  not  be  exempted.  For  this 
purpose, the definition of a substantially amended tolling arrangement was developed based 
on the Commission proposal. 

The  possibility  to  exempt  vehicles  below  12  tonnes  would  be  removed,  as  proposed  by  the 
Commission, at the latest after 5 years. 

The Council position allows exempting 

 

 

 

vehicles below 7.5 tonnes used for craft purposes 

vehicles used by disabled persons 

historical vehicles 

While the Commission’s policy has been to limit the number of exemptions, the ones that are 
maintained are unlikely to cause any significant distortion and would not have a meaningful 
impact  on  the  environmental  objectives  of  the  proposal.  This  is  because  they  would  only 
relate  to  a  relatively  small  segment  of  goods  vehicles  below  7.5  tonnes  used  for  craft 
purposes,  historical  vehicles,  and  vehicles  used  by  disabled  persons,  all  of  which  run 
negligible distances compared to other vehicles, especially on toll roads. The Commission can 
therefore accept these exemptions. 

4. 

CONCLUSION 

Despite somewhat  decreasing the level  of  ambition on certain  aspects  (phasing out of time-
based  charges,  variation  of  charges  for  light  vehicles,  exemptions),  the  Council  position 
increases the ambition on a number of other equally important points. These are: 

 

 

 

 

 

Strengthening the provision on CO2-based charging, notably by extending it to  any 
remaining vignette systems 

Mandatory external cost charging for pollution on the entire tolled network 

An option to charge for the external cost of CO2 emissions  

More flexible application of congestion charging and mark-ups 

Daily vignettes for the occasional users of light vehicles. 

As such, the Council position represents significant progress in fairer and more efficient road 
pricing and thus in the implementation of the ‘polluter pays’ and ‘user pays’ principles. This 
amendment of the Eurovignette Directive is  a key element of the European Green Deal and 
the Commission supports it. 

EN 

5 

  EN