COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on on common rules promoting the repair of goods and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Directives (EU) 2019/771 and (EU) 2020/1828
Date: 2023-03-22
Institutions: Directorate-General for Justice and Consumers, European Commission
Subjects: Internet, after-sales service, consumer information, consumer law, goods and services, maintenance, product life, single market, sustainable product

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 22.3.2023  SWD(2023) 60 final  COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT  EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT  Accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on on common rules promoting the repair of goods and amending Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, Directives (EU) 2019/771 and (EU) 2020/1828     {COM(2023) 155 final} - {SEC(2023) 137 final} - {SWD(2023) 59 final}  
 
 
Executive Summary Sheet  

Impact assessment on the initiative on Sustainable consumption of goods – promoting repair and reuse  

A. Need for action 

What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?  

The initiative delivers on the Commission priority of the green transition, specifically the European Green 
Deal and its objective of sustainable consumption. When consumer products become defective, consumers 
often do not seek to repair  or reuse them, but discard them prematurely,  although the products  could be 
repaired and reused. This happens when consumers choose replacement instead of repair under the legal 
guarantee of the Sale of Goods Directive (SGD) and outside the legal guarantee when consumers do not 
choose to repair. This leads to an increase of generated waste and unnecessary CO2 emissions as well as a 
waste of valuable resources. 

The problem of premature disposal of repairable consumer goods exists across the EU and a wide range of 
consumer goods. More than two thirds of the respondents to the public consultation (65-74%) supported to 
solve the problem at EU level. 

What should be achieved? 

In  order  to  promote  sustainable  consumption  through  repair  and  reuse  of  viable  consumer  goods,  this 
initiative aims to increase repair of defective consumer goods and reuse of goods within and beyond the 
legal guarantee. 

The Commission is pursuing the Green Deal objective of sustainable consumption in a holistic manner. On 
the  supply  side,  the  Ecodesign  for  Sustainable  Products  Regulation  proposal  (ESPR)  promotes  the 
reparability of products. On the demand side, the proposal for a Directive on Empowering consumers for 
the green transition (ECGT) enables consumers to take informed purchasing decisions. As both proposals 
do not lead on their own to more repairs in the after-sales phase, this initiative adds a third dimension. It 
promotes repair as a remedy during the legal guarantee and provides new tools to consumers and businesses 
promoting repair beyond the legal guarantee.  

All these three measures are aiming at achieving more sustainable consumption. They are designed to have 
a cumulative effect and together they cover the entire lifecycle of a product. Accordingly, they have to be 
seen together. 

What is the value added of action at the EU level (subsidiarity)?  

The  SGD  has  already  fully  harmonised  remedies  for  defective  consumer  goods.  If  these  rules  are  to  be 
changed in order to promote repair and reuse of goods within the legal guarantee, it needs to be done at EU 
level.  Furthermore,  national  measures  promoting  repair  and  reuse  of  consumer  goods  outside  the  legal 
guarantee would create or increase fragmentation in the Single Market.  

B. Solutions 

What are the various options to achieve the objectives? Is there a preferred option or not? If not, 
why? 

1 

 
 
The options to promote repair and reuse of goods within the legal guarantee are: prioritising repair within 
the remedies system of the SGD whenever it is cheaper than replacement; making repair the primary remedy; 
prolonging the liability period in the context of repair; aligning the liability period of refurbished goods with 
new goods and replacing defective goods with refurbished goods.  

The options to facilitate and encourage repair and reuse of goods beyond the legal guarantee are: providing 
information  on  repair  by  producers  and  by  a  matchmaking  platform  on  repair  and  refurbished  goods  at 
national or EU level; enhancing transparency and conditions for repair by voluntary commitments; obliging 
repairers to issue a repair quote on price and conditions for repair, and obliging producers to repair goods 
subject to reparability requirements under EU law or all products against a price.  

The preferred options package includes elements from both clusters, with a focus on addressing repair 
beyond the legal guarantee as the largest share of defects appears in this scenario and hence the potential to 
increase repair is the highest. The preferred option consists of the following options:  

-  Prioritising repair whenever it is cheaper than replacement during the legal guarantee.  
-  Obligation on producers to inform if they offer repair and on their possible obligation to repair.  
-  A platform at national level, matchmaking consumers with repairers of key consumer goods, and 

promoting refurbished goods. 

-  Voluntary commitments to an EU easy repair standard.  
-  An  obligation  on  those  offering  repair  to  issue  a  quote  on  price  and  conditions  for  repair  in  a 

standardised form. 

-  Obligation on producers of goods subject to reparability requirements under EU law to repair outside 

the legal guarantee against a price. 

What are different stakeholders’ views? Who supports which option?  

A clear majority of stakeholders responding to the public consultation agreed with the problems identified.  

An option of  prioritising repair whenever it is  cheaper than replacement  was found effective by  a  slight 
majority  of  all  stakeholders,  including  a  majority  of  responding  EU-citizens,  business  stakeholders  and 
public authorities. A majority of consumer and environmental organisations found the measure ineffective. 
Several MS supported this option.  

Half of all responding stakeholders supported the effectiveness of voluntary commitments promoting repair. 
Especially business stakeholders found this measure effective, while a majority of responding environmental 
organisations and half of consumer organisations found the measure ineffective.  

On the producer’s obligation to repair against a price, a slight majority of respondents considered this should 
apply where defects result from wear and tear, and half considered that it should apply where defects occur 
after the legal guarantee expires. Business stakeholders had a different view: only a minority considered that 
defects resulting from wear and tear should be covered.  

C. Impacts of the preferred option 

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

The environmental impact of the preferred option has to be seen together with those of the ESPR and the 
ECGT, as they are designed to have a cumulative effect. In 15 years this initiative will save 18.4 million 
tons CO2, while the ESPR will save 471 million tons and the ECGT 0.33-0.47 million tons. The combined 

2 

 
 
environmental impact is therefore very significant. The ESPR CO2 savings are much higher since the ESPR 
is  aiming  for  far-reaching  changes  in  product  manufacturing,  but  at  the  same  time  this  initiative  saves 
considerably more CO2 compared to the ECGT. The initiatives also help each other to generate their impact. 

Businesses will face losses due to forgone sales and reduced production of new goods. The very significant 
consumer savings (EUR  176.5  billion in  15  years) exceed the  costs on businesses.  The preferred option 
package changes consumers’ consumption patterns towards sustainability in the long term so the consumers 
spend  less  money  due  to  less  consumption.  The  losses  of  businesses  therefore  reflect  a  transfer  from 
businesses’ revenues to consumers’ welfare and the consumers are likely to invest the saved money in the 
overall economy, which in turn will lead to growth and investment. 

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

EU traders and producers will have losses in GVA due to reduction of sales and production of new goods 
and as they have to comply with new information requirements and the obligation to repair. The business 
adjustment costs are high but not inadequate given the substantial impact of the initiative. 

What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness?  

SMEs will also incur business costs mentioned above. Although adjustment and administrative costs relative 
to business revenues are disproportionately higher for SMEs, the overall balance of costs and benefits under 
the preferred option is expected to be slightly beneficial for SMEs as a whole. The reason is that SMEs in 
the repair sector will benefit, while the manufacturing and retail sector, including the SMEs in this sector, 
will be somewhat disadvantaged by the initiative. 

Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?  

Public authorities are not expected to encounter significant enforcement costs. The national platform will 
cause some costs for IT development and maintenance of the platform, as well as awareness raising.   

Will there be other significant impacts?  

Third-country producers may lose due to a decrease in sales of new imported goods. However, this impact 
may also have a longer-term positive global impact as those producers may gain an incentive to switch to 
production of more durable goods.  

Proportionality?  

The preferred options package puts forward a balanced approach respecting the principle of proportionality. 
For promoting repair in the context of the legal guarantee, national laws are amended only to the minimum 
extent  necessary  to  achieve  the  objective.  The  option  does  not  interfere  with  well-established  national 
arrangements on liability periods. For other options falling outside the legal guarantee, harmonisation at EU 
level  is  limited only to  those options,  notably the quote and obligation to repair, which have an  internal 
market dimension. Where a national level solution is effective, i.e. the repair platform, this is the preferred 
choice.  In  the  context  of  the  ‘easy  repair  standard’,  the  design  of  the  option  is  shaped  as  a  voluntary 
commitment to avoid far-reaching interference into national laws regulating services. 

D. Follow up 

3 

 
 
When will the policy be reviewed?  

The initiative will be evaluated 5 years after its entry into application.  

4