COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT [ ] Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products, , amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and repealing Regulation (EU) 305/2011
Date: 2022-03-30
Institutions: Directorate-General for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs, European Commission
Subjects: EC conformity marking, European standard, building materials, green economy, harmonisation of standards, market approval, market supervision, quality standard, single market, technical standard

Executive Summary Sheet 

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 30.3.2022  SWD(2022) 89 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  […] Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products, , amending Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and repealing Regulation (EU) 305/2011 {COM(2022) 144 final} - {SEC(2022) 167 final} - {SWD(2022) 87 final} - {SWD(2022) 88 final}  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Impact  assessment  for  the  revision  of  Regulation  (EU)  No  305/2011  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the 
Council laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products 

Why? What is the problem being addressed? Maximum 11 lines 

A. Need for action 

The  evaluation  of  the  Construction  Products  Regulation  and  the  feedback  received  from  EU  authorities  and 
stakeholders point clearly to shortcomings in its functioning. Its objectives have not been achieved and barriers 
to the free movement of construction products in the single market persist.  

This underperformance is due to a number of overarching issues, identified in the evaluation:  

  a malfunctioning standardisation process 
  hampered implementation on the ground in EU countries 
  over-complex and unclear rules 
  ambiguous relationship between the Regulation and other EU legislation, and/or national rules.  

Finally, the Regulation is not able to contribute to on broader policy priorities, particularly the green and digital 
transitions, because it lacks rules to this effect.  

There is clear potential  for making  these rules more suitable for  new business  models and the data economy, 
and making construction products considerably more sustainable and innovative. 

What is this initiative expected to achieve? Maximum 8 lines 

The general objectives are:   

1) to achieve a well-functioning single market for construction products 

2) to contribute to the objectives of the European Green deal  

These general objectives are complemented by the following specific objectives:  

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

unblocking the technical harmonisation system  

reducing national barriers to trade for products covered by the Regulation  

improving enforcement and market surveillance  

providing more clarity (more comprehensive definitions, reducing overlaps  and collision rules with other 
legislation) and simplification  

reducing the administrative burden on companies, including through simplification and digitalisation 

ensuring construction products are safe 

reducing  the  climate  and  environmental  impact  of  construction  products,  including  by  applying  digital 
tools (digital product passport). 

What is the value added of action at the EU level? Maximum 7 lines  

Revising  the  Construction  Products  Regulation  can  improve  the  overall  functioning  of  the  single  market  for 
construction products, particularly by addressing the current issues relevant to the standardisation  process and 
removing barriers to the single market, such as overlapping rules at EU or national level. 

This can increase legal certainty and make the conditions for competition fairer in  the construction ecosystem, 
while ensuring a high level of safety and protection for health and the environment.  

Improved market surveillance can improve trust in the system across the EU.  

Finally, a revision enables the environmental sustainability of construction products to be improved. This is best 
dealt with at EU level. 

EN 

  EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
B. Solutions 

What  legislative  and  non-legislative  policy  options  have  been  considered?  Is  there  a  preferred 
choice or not? Why? Maximum 14 lines  

  Option A – baseline scenario: no change to the Regulation but improving implementation through guidance 

and other soft law measures. 

  Option B - repairing the Regulation: clarifying and streamlining its scope, ensuring consistency with other 

EU legislation and addressing environmental aspects of construction products. 

  Option C - focusing the Regulation: including all the elements described in option B, as well as the 

following 3 sub-options, which can be combined:  

– sub-option C1 – limiting the Regulation’s application to assessment methods 
– sub-option C2 – limiting its scope to core areas 
– sub-option C3 – making the common technical language optional for manufacturers. 

  Option D - improving the Regulation: Building on Option B, requirements dealing with product-inherent 

characteristics may also be introduced, to protect health, safety and the environment. Such product-specific 
requirements can be formulated via 3 sub-options, (D1 and D2 can be combined): 

– sub-option D1 – new rules approach for product requirements 
– sub-option D2 – technical specifications approach for products requirements 
– sub-option D3 – a hybrid solution between D1 and D2 (keeping the core elements of each). 

  Option E - repealing the Regulation: The Regulation would be repealed, products would rely on mutual 

recognition between Member States.  

Conclusion 

Option D is the preferred option, as the analysis has shown this is the best way to achieve the objectives. 

Who supports which option? Maximum 7 lines  

Many stakeholders are in favour of maintaining the current Regulation (baseline option A), although, at the same 
time,  these  stakeholders  wished  for  action  to  be  taken  that  requires  a  revision.  Both  among  business 
associations and companies there is majority support for option A.  

Among public authorities, a little less than half prefers this option.  However, feedback from EU countries in the 
course of the consultations showed a preference for a revision.  

Option B is preferred by the EU citizens who responded, whereas option D is preferred by NGOs (in both cases, 
by around a third of the respondents in each group).  

Option C received very little support.  

The repeal option (E) is strongly rejected by all stakeholders groups.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines                                       

Option  D  would  allow  us  to  address  the  main  shortcomings  of  the  current  Regulation:  an  underperforming 
standardisation  process,  national  barriers  to  trade,  ineffective  market  surveillance  and  lack  of  clarity  and 
simplification.  

Option  D  would  lead  to  a  better  functioning  single  market  for  construction  producers  and  rising  cross-border 
trade.  

It  would  also  maximise  the  potential  of  digitalisation  to  reduce  administrative  burden,  allowing  all  Regulation-
related information and documentation to be processed in digital form.  
Further  reduction  of  administrative  burden  for  manufacturers  would  be  achieved  by  eliminating  the  overlap 
between the CE marking and the Declaration of Performance. EU governments would be able to exempt micro-
companies not trading across borders from the obligations of the Regulation.  

Option D would effectively address the goals stemming from the  Industrial Policy Strategy, the Standardisation 

EN 

  EN 

 
 
 
Strategy, European Green Deal, the Circular Economy Action Plan and other linked initiatives, in the context of 
construction products.  

Option  D  would  allow  environmental  and  product  safety  requirements  to  be  established  independently  of 
construction works-related performance, and should contribute to the decarbonisation of the built environment. 

Option D would have a positive impact particularly on safety, compliance and quality of the built environment.  

What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise main ones)? Maximum 12 lines                                       

Option D is expected to lead to an increase of some €200 million annually in costs for manufacturers – equal to 
approximately 8% of the baseline costs.  

This increase is driven by  higher compliance costs, administrative burden and regulatory charges in relation to 
CE  marking  and  Declaration  of  Performance  (DoP),  but  partly  offset  by  cost  reductions  related  to  removing 
national requirements.  

Overall,  thanks  to  different  measures,  including  the  possibility  of  using  electronic  means  for  all  documentation 
and information requirements, a single entry point for registering and providing all documentation, etc., Option D 
is expected to bring about a net reduction in the administrative burden (see Annex 3 of the impact assessment 
report for more detail). 

How will businesses, SMEs and micro-enterprises be affected? Maximum 8 lines 

The revision of the Regulation aims to improve the single market for construction products. It will create a level 
playing field for all producers, especially small and medium businesses in all EU countries.  
Producers will have to meet more obligations to bring their products to the market, but at the same time, they will 
have more business opportunities. Simplification requirements specifically aim to provide micro-companies with 
simplified procedures when assessing and verifying performance.  
Moreover,  EU  governments  will  be  empowered  to  exempt  certain  micro-businesses  from  the  Regulation’s 
obligations.  The  intended  planned  work-sharing  and  the  technical  fine-tuning  with  the  Sustainable  Products 
Initiative will avoid unnecessary burdens for businesses of all sizes.  
A  better  functioning  single  market  will  give  construction  companies  access  to  a  broader  choice  of  products. 
Overall, producers and the construction eco-system will benefit from the revision.  

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations? Maximum 4 lines 

On the one hand,  EU countries  will have to provide  more resources for market  surveillance,  which is currently 
understaffed.  

On  the  other  hand,  the  revision  will  greatly  support  EU  countries  in  their  responsibility  for  the  safety  of 
construction works. Thus, the overall impact on national budgets will not likely be significant. 

Will there be other significant impacts? Max 6 lines  

No other significant impact is expected.  

When will the policy be reviewed? Maximum 4 lines  

D. Follow up 

Policy monitoring and evaluation will be centred on the core issues to be addressed by the revision.  

It is proposed that the revised Regulation should be evaluated no sooner than 8 years after its application date.  

EN 

  EN