CELEX: 51991PC0025
Language: en
Date: 1991-02-27
Title: PROPOSAL FOR A COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) AMENDING REGULATION (EEC) NO 918/83 SETTING UP A COMMUNITY SYSTEM OF RELIEFS FROM CUSTOMS DUTY

OSÉ»
        COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
                                            C0MC91) 25 final
                                            Brussels, 27 February 1991
                                Proposal for a
   wm
                           COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC)
W1:.} ï
                amending Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 setting up
                a Community system of reliefs from customs duty
                        (presented by the Commission)
     -i
•»fr
 ---pagebreak---                                EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM
I.       The   first   aim of   this proposal     Is to amend     the provisions of
         Title VI    (Articles 27    and   28) of   Regulation (EEC) No 918/83        by
         extending    the  administrative     simplification   contained    in   it   to
         cover all imports of goods of negligible value.
         This would mean that the simplification measure would be of real
         use   since   national    administrations   would  be   authorized     not   to
         recover   all   the minimal    amounts of duty    the cost of collecting
         which would be higher        than the amounts collected, owing to the
         opcioiing costs incurred.
         Furthermore, the customs provisions would be aligned as a result on
         the tax provisions which enable exemption from value-added tax to
         be granted on imports of negligible value up to a maximum value of
         ECU 22 (see amended Directive 83/181/EEC of 28 March 1983 1 ).             This
         alignment    would   help make    the simplification measure even         more
         useful.
II.  The    second   aim    of   this   proposal   concerns    the   review    of    the
     administrative procedure for granting reiIef for            imports of certain
     scientific instruments or apparatus Into the European Community (known
     as "UNESCO" rei iefs).
         1.    This system of reliefs has been applied          in the Community on
               the basis of Community provisions since 1975 and it now seems
               opportune    to   conduct   an  evaluation   of   its  operation      and
               usefulness.
1 OJ L 105, 23.4.1983, p. 38.
 ---pagebreak---                                       - 2 -
2. Components of this rei ief
       The scope of this relief is determined by a number of criteria.
       2.1.          The   beneficiary     must  be an educational      or   research
                     establishment;       It may belong to the public sector or
                      to the private sector, but in the latter case it must
                      be approved by the Member States' authorities.
       2.2.          The    instrument or apparatus must be         imported   solely
                      for non-commercial purposes.
       2.3. The   instrument    or   apparatus    must  be   used   solely    by  the
             establishment benefiting from the relief.
       2.4. The   imported    instrument    or apparatus must     be considered    as
             scientific      in    accordance      with     objective      technical
             character ist ics.
       2.5.          There must be no scientific         instruments or apparatus
                     of   equivalent     value   currently   manufactured     in  the
                     Commun i t y.
3. Petermipation of non-equivalence
   Since the criterion referred to in 2.5. above has to be asssessed in
   the   light of   all  Community    production,    the Member     State   in which
   relief   Is requested     cannot usually     provide  the answer on      its own.
   That is why in practice a two-stage procedure has been            introduced:
 ---pagebreak---                                  - 3 -
3.1. Stage one (without the Commission):
     The Member      State   in which    the relief    is requested    sends a
     request    for    information to the competent authorities          in the
     other    Member     States    (all  or   some)  In   accordance    with   a
     procedure worked out        in agreement with all the Member States
     in  the    Committee     on    Duty-Free   Arrangements    chaired    by  a
     Commission     representative.      The authorities conduct a survey
     of their countries' Industry;           this stage lasts at least four
     months, and may be extended at the request of a Member State.
3.2. Stage two (with the Commission):
     If following completion of procedure 3.1. no decision can be
     taken on the request for relief, the Member State concerned
     has   to   transmit    the dossier     to the Commission       (Commission
     Regulation (EEC) No 2290/83).          The Commission will immediately
     distribute copies of the dossier to the other Member                States
     and subsequently a translation (In English, French and German
     only) of the main pages of the documents.             The Member States
     have three months in which to adopt a position.               If a Member
     State    puts    forward   a   duly  reasoned   objection    during    this
     period, that objection          Is communicated by the Commission to
     the other 11 Member States and translated            in the same way as
     the initial dossier.         The Commission then consults the Member
     States In an ad hoc group convened under            its chairmanship in
     Brussels.      In many cases one meeting does not suffice and the
     dossier    is then re-examined at a subsequent meeting of the
     same group, and even at a third meeting.            The Commission then
     adopts a decision, which must            in any event be taken within
     nine months of the Commission's receipt of the request.                 The
     decision    is communicated       to the requesting Member state and
     published     In abridged      form  In the Official     Journal   of   the
     European Communities.
 ---pagebreak---                                        - 4 -
4. Evaluation of the procedure
   The   complexity    of  this   procedure   does not     need   Illustration:     the
   length of     the two stages described       In points 3.1. and 3.2.          is In
   Itself sufficient to give an idea of the problem.             On top of up to 13
   months' actual      examination    laid  down by     the Community     provisions,
   which   are furthermore      difficult  to keep    to, there are the        periods
   arising from the national administrative procedures, which means that
   the   average   period    which  elapses   between    the   Introduction    of   the
   request    by   the    importer   and   the   final    reply    from   customs    is
   one-and-a-half to two years.
   This procedure concerns only the non-equivalence criterion.
   The establishment of        this criterion may     reveal    divergent    interests
   among Member States, and it is therefore essential             to have a central
   arbitration authority (stage two), and          if there is arbitration, this
   must be based on detailed appraisal of the dossiers.               As in practice
   the dossiers often do not contain all            the   information   required    for
   their evaluation, requests for additional          information must be sent to
   the Member     States' authorities.      A technical     expert   from   the   Ispra
   Research Centre takes part in every meeting of the ad hoc group (ten a
   year).
   It is difficult to discuss the cases because not only is it necessary
   to compare and evaluate the capabilities of two or more instruments or
    items of apparatus but this evaluation has to be carried out                in the
   light of the specific features of the planned research project, and
   this frequently      leads to litigation, which continues even after             the
   Commission has taken its decision, as seen from the remarkable number
   of cases brought before the Court of Justice.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 5
The complexity of this procedure makes it very expensive, particularly
in terms of human resources:
(a)     in the Member States;
(b)     at   Commission     level,   as   regards   the   departments      directly
        concerned     (DG XXI)    and    those    Indirectly     Involved     (Ispra
        Research Centre, translators, interpreters at the ten meetings
        a year);
(c)      In the Court of jusiice and in the Commission's Legal Service
        as   a   result   of    the   disputes    which   the    Court    is   quite
        frequently called upon to settle.
5. The role of the criterion of non-eouI valence In the system
   5.1.   Quantitative aspect?
        The number of requests for relief            is between 600 and 700 a
        year In the European Community.          It has tended to decline over
        the    last  few    years.    Experience    shows   that,     of   all   the
        requests, at least 80% are accepted and among the rejections a
         large proportion are due not to the equivalence of Community
        products    but    the   non-sclent ifIc    nature    of    the   apparatus
         imported.
         In 1989, of a total of 98 requests rejected at national level,
        of   a  total   of   530   dossiers    handled   direct    by   the   Member
        States,*    only    43,   i.e. 9%,     were  rejected     because    of  the
        existence of Community equivalents.
        * Figure Includes only those dossiers in respect of which the
         Information         given         was        correctly          presented.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 6 -
         This is the usual percentage and the proportions are the same
         for requests handled by the Commission.            It may be concluded
         that usually a maximum of 10% of the requests for relief for
         imports   of   scientific     instruments    or   apparatus    Into   the
         Community are rejected on the grounds that equivalent products
         are available within the Community.
   5.2. Qua Iitatlve aspects
         The question    is whether    the equivalence criterion        is really
         justified in economic terms.       Since the system was designed to
         encourage    scientific     research    in    the   Community,     tariff
         protection paradoxically comes into play only when Community
         production    of    such    instruments    or    apparatus     is   fully
         competitive (equivalent) and so does not need to be protected.
         When a better     instrument    is placed on the market by a firm
         outside   the   Community,    protection    of   Community    production
         immediately ceases to apply.         It must therefore be admitted
         that in economic terms the usefulness of the criterion of the
         equivalence of Community products is a very relative concept.
6. Conclusions
   Given   its  limited usefulness and the relatively           small number of
   cases in which it plays a decisive role, the Commission has come to
   the   conclusion    that    the   equivalence    criterion     is  not    worth
   retaining in the system of "UNESCO" reliefs.
   The abolition of this criterion         is therefore proposed, but        it is
   understood    that  the granting     of   relief   remains    subject   to  the
   criteria listed under 2.1., 2.2., 2.3. and 2.4. above.
 ---pagebreak---                                                     - 7 -
     When the equivalence criterion is abolished, the two-tier procedure
      referred to under 3.1. and 3.2. above will no longer apply. Rather
      than take decisions on individual cases of imports of scientific
      instruments or apparatus, the Commission will confine itself to
      establishing general guide IInes relating to the criteria still
      applicable, similar to the steps it usually takes to ensure that
      customs legislation is uniformly applied. The application of the
      criteria in individual cases of requests for reliefs will then
      become the sole responsibility of the relevant national authorities
      in the light of these general guidelines.
      The abolition of the equivalence criterion will also make the work
      of the national administrations easier; in view of the uncertainty
      regarding the assessment of this criterion, at present they do not
      always manage to take unambiguous decisions consistent with those
      adopted by their counterparts in the other Member States.
Other cases In which iilfi e q u i v a l e n c e                         CriterlQD       LS at   present
a p p l i c a b l e under Community rules
      The third aim of the proposed r e g u l a t i o n Is to extend the
      a m e n d m e n t s p r o p o s e d for s c i e n t i f i c instruments and a p p a r a t u s to
      other e d u c a t i o n a l , s c i e n t i f i c or cultural g o o d s .
      The p r o v i s i o n s at present a p p l i c a b l e p r o v i d e for the a p p l i c a t i o n of
      an e q u i v a l e n c e c r i t e r i o n and rules of p r o c e d u r e similar to those
      set out above for Instruments and a p p a r a t u s intended for medical
      r e s e a r c h , e s t a b l i s h i n g medical d i a g n o s e s or c a r r y i n g out medical
      treatment and for a r t i c l e s for the u s e of h a n d i c a p p e d p e r s o n s other
      than blind people»
 ---pagebreak---                             - 8
It appears even more pointless to maintain these provisions here
than In the case of scientific instruments and apparatus, for the
fol lowing reasons:
1.    The relief for medical equipment is very limited in scope
      since it applies only to goods imported as a gift. There is a
      danger that the complexity of applying the equivalence
      criterion will deprive this limited measure of the little
      substance it has.
2.    With regard to imports of goods for the use of handicapped"
      persons, the Member States have of their own accord stopped
      Implementing the two-tier procedure provided for in Community
      texts and over the last ten years of operation of these relief
      arrangements have adopted a liberal attitude which meant that
      the équivalence criterion was disregarded.
      In any event, only one case was put to the Commission, and
      this happened in 1979, immediately after the adoption of the
      first Community measures establishing a relief in this sphere.
      The information supplied by the Member States during an
      exchange of views arranged by the Commission revealed that the
      national administrations had not implemented any measure
      designed to assess the equivalence of the goods in question,
      and the recognition of the right to the relief depended on the
      status of the recipient (handicapped person or specialized
      institution) and the nature of the equipment imported (article
      specially designed for a handicapped person).
3.    The equivalence criterion is still more difficult to apply
      than in the case of scientific instruments or apparatus owing
      to the impossibility of keeping solely to objective technical
      data, which      are   in themselves     open   to   differing
      interpretations, as already pointed out.
 ---pagebreak---                                         - 9 .-
       Apart from these quite specific reasons, It would of course be very
       strange    for  the abolition of       the equivalence criterion and       the
        resulting    rules   of   procedure     not  to  be  extended   to   medical
       equipment and articles for the use of handicapped persons, since
        these goods have always been          linked, in legislative terms, with
        scientific instruments and apparatus in order to form a homogeneous
        whole within the reliefs system.
        In order    to maintain the similarity between the wording of the
        Articles, this being a means of stressing the link, the wording of
        the amendments contained in this Regulet Ic • \z identical.
IV. The   text   resulting    from   the   proposed   amendments, as   set   out    in
    Annexes I to IV to the proposed regulation, differs from the present
    text as fol lows:
        1.   For goods of negligible value:
                       extension of the relief to all direct imports from a
                       non-Community country, up to a value of ECU 22.
        2.   For scientific       instruments and apparatus, medical       apparatus
             and articles intended for handicapped persons:
                       abolition of the non-equivalence condition;
                        introduction of exclusions for certain equipment;
                       provision for drawing up a list of equipment which may
                       be   imported   duty    free as part of    the  implementing
                       provisions.
             The last two components are intended to prevent any danger of
             misuse     which    might    result    from  the   abolition    of    the
              non-equivalence condition.
V.      Parliament does not have to be consulted on this proposal               for a
        regulation since it is based on Article 28 of the EEC Treaty.
 ---pagebreak---                                    M
                                 Proposal for
                      Council Regulation (EEC) No.../..
                                    of ...
               amending Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 setting up
              a Community system of reliefs from customs duty
The Council of the European Communities,
Having regarc u   u.c Treaty establishing tht European Economic Community,
and in particular Article 28 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas  the administrative   simplification provided  for in Article 27 of
Council Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 of 28 March 1983 setting up a Community
system of reliefs from customs duty must,     if  it is to be effective, be
applied to all imports of goods of negligible value;
Whereas the whole of Title VI of Regulation (EEC) No 918/83 must be amended
accordingly;
Whereas the provisions of Articles 52 to 56, 63a and 63b, and 72 to 74 of
Regulation (EEC) 918/83 must be revised in the light of experience in order
to remove conditions which are expensive and complicated to apply and thus
to facilitate imports of the goods in question;
 ---pagebreak---                                          M.
Whereas   the  condition   of  non-equivalence     of   Community    products   should
therefore be abolished, since, where        It Is still really applied, it does
not succeed In providing effective protection as It comes too late In the
process of development of these products, and since its implementation is
fraught with disputes amongst experts which can sensibly be settled only by
more or less systematically giving way to the importer's            interests and by
recognizing   his  right   to  a   relief   owing  to   the  special     circumstances
surrounding his Import,
HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:
                                      Article 1
The provisions of Articles 27, 52 to 56, 63a and 63b, and 72 to 74 of
Regulation (EEC) No 918/83     are   hereby   replaced   by  the   corresponding   new
provisions set out in Annexes I to IV respectively to this Regulation.
                                      Article 2
The   references  made   in Regulation (EEC) No 918/83       to the    provisions    of
Articles 27, 52 to 56, 63a and 63b and 72 to 74 of Regulation (EEC) 918/83
must be amended accordingly.
                                      Article 3
This Regulation    shall   enter   Into force on     the third    day   following   its
publication In the Official Journal of the European Communities.
 It shall apply from 1 January 1992.
This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in
at I Member States.
Done at Brussels, ...                               For the Council
                                          The President
 ---pagebreak---   M
ANNEX
 ---pagebreak---                                       A
                                  TITLE VI
                         GOODS OF NEGLIGIBLE VALUE
                                 Article 27
Subject to Article 28, any goods of negligible value dispatched direct from
a third country to a natural or     legal person in the Community  shall be
admitted free of import duties.
'Goods of negligible value' means goods the intrinsic value of which does
not exceed a total of ECU 22.
                                 Article 23
The relief shall not apply to the following:
(a) alcoholic products;
(b) perfumes and toilet waters;
(c) tobacco or tobacco products.
 ---pagebreak--- ANNEX M ---pagebreak---                                       fi
                              Articles 52 to 56
                                  Article 52
1. Subject to Articles 53 to 58, scientific instruments and apparatus which
are not Included In Article 51 shall be admitted free of import duties when
they are imported exclusively for non-commercial purposes.
2. The relief referred to in paragraph 1 shall be limited to scientific
instruments and apparatus which are intended for:
     -  either public establishments principally       engaged   in education or
        scientific research and those departments of public establishments
        which are principally engaged in education or scientific research,
     -  or  private   establishments    principally  engaged    in education   or
        scientific research and approved by the competent authorities of
        the Member States to receive such articles duty free.
                                  Article 53
The relief shall also apply to:
(a)  spare  parts,   components  or   accessories   specifically    suitable  for
scientific   instruments  or  apparatus,    provided  that   such   spare  parts,
components or accessories are imported at the same time as such instruments
or apparatus or, where they are imported subsequently, that they can be
identified    as    being    intended     for    instruments     or    apparatus:
 ---pagebreak---                                         fi
     which   have previously    been admitted duty   free, provided  that   such
      instruments or apparatus are still of a scientific nature at the time
     when relief    is requested for the specific spare parts, components or
     accessories, or
     which would be entitled      to relief at the time when such relief      is
     requested for the specific spare parts, components or accessories;
(b) tools to be used for the maintenance, checking, calibration or repair
of  scientific    instruments  or  apparatus, provided   that these  tools   are
imported at the same time as such instruments ana apparatus or, where they
are  imported subsequently, that they can be      identified as being   intended
for instruments or apparatus:
     which   have   previously  been admitted  duty  free, provided   that  such
      instruments or apparatus are still of a scientific nature at the time
     when relief is requested for the tools, or
     which would be entitled      to relief at the time when such relief       is
      requested for the tools.
 ---pagebreak---                                        A
                                    Article 54
For the purposes of Articles 52 and 53:
     'scientific instrument or apparatus' means any instrument or apparatus
     which, by reason of     its objective technical   characteristics and the
     results which it makes it possible to obtain, Is mainly or exclusively
     suited to scientific activities,
      'imported for non-commercial purposes' shall be considered to apply to
     scientific     instruments   or    apparatus intended   to  be   used   for
     non-profit-making scientific research or educational purposes.
                                     Article 55
No relief shall    in any event be granted for items of equipment      in common
use and household and domestic equipment, whether or not used directly in
educational activities or scientific research.
                                     Article 5g
A list of instruments and appliances which may be imported duty free shall
be drawn up    if necessary,   in accordance with the procedure    laid down in
Article 143 (2) and (3).
 ---pagebreak--- ANNEX I I I ---pagebreak---                                         / &
                                    TITLE XIVa
INSTRUMENTS  AND    APPARATUS   INTENDED   FOR  MEDICAL   RESEARCH,   ESTABLISHING
MEDICAL DIAGNOSES OR CARRYING OUT MEDICAL TREATMENT
                                   Article 63a
1.   Instruments and apparatus intended for medical research, establishing
     medical diagnoses or carrying out medical treatment which are donated
     either by a charitable or philanthropic organization or by a private
     individual    to  health  authorities, hospital     departments   or  medical
     research    institutions approved by the competent       authorities of   the
     Member   States    to receive   such   articles  duty   free, or   which  are
     purchased by such health authorities, hospitals or medical           research
     institutions     entirely   with   funds   supplied   by   a  charitable   or
     philanthropic organization or with voluntary contributions, shall be
     admitted free of import duties, always provided that it is established
     that:
        (a)   the donation of the instruments or apparatus in question does
              not conceal any commercial Intent on the part of the donor;
              and
         (b)  the donor is in no way connected with the manufacturer of the
               instruments or apparatus for which relief is requested.
2.    The relief shall also apply, subject to the same conditions, to:
        (a)   spare parts, components or accessories specifically suitable
              for the above instruments or apparatus, provided that these
              spare parts, components or accessories are          imported at the
              same time as such instruments and apparatus or, where they are
               imported subsequently, that they can be identified as being
               Intended for instruments or apparatus previously admitted duty
              free-,
 ---pagebreak---                                        h
        (b)  tools to be used for the maintenance, checking, calibration or
             repair of instruments or apparatus, provided that these tools
             are   imported  at   the  same     time   as  such   instruments   and
             apparatus or, where they are imported subsequently, that they
             can   be  identified   as  being     intended   for   instruments   or
             apparatus previously admitted duty free.
                                  Article 6 3 P
For  the purposes of Article 63a, and      in particular     with   regard  to the
instruments or   apparatus  and  the recipient      bodies  referred   to  therein,
Articles 55, 56, 57 and 58 shall apply mutatis mutandis.
 ---pagebreak--- ANNEX IY ---pagebreak---                                               M/
                                  Articles 72 to 74
2. Articles for the use of other handicapped persons.
                                      Article 72
     1. Articles specially designed for the education, employment or social
        advancement    of   physically     or   mentally     handicapped      persons    other
        than blind persons shall         be admitted      free of     Import    duties where
        they are   imported:
             either by handicapped persons themselves for their own use;
             or   by    institutions     or    organizations       that    are    principally
             engaged    in the education of or the provision of assistance to
             handicapped       persons    and    are    authorized      by    the   competent
             authorities of the Member States to receive such articles duty
             free.
     2. The relief    referred to     in paragraph 1 shall         apply to spare parts,
        components     or    accessories      specifically       for     the    articles    in
        question,    and    to   the   tools     to   be   used    for    the   maintenance,
        checking, calibration or repair of the said articles provided that
        such spare parts, components, accessories or tools are                    imported at
        the same   time as the said articles, or, where                 they    are   imported
        subsequently,     that   they   can   be    Identified    as   being    intended   for
        articles which      previously    admitted      duty   free, or      which   would  be
        entitled   to relief at the time when such relief                  is requested    for
        the specific     spare parts, components or accessories and                  tools  in
        question.
 ---pagebreak---                                            #
                                ' Article 73
No relief shall be granted for the following:
     -   articles   intended   for    the  treatment   or   rehabilitation   of
         handicapped persons;
     -   diagnostic and testing equipment used by medical institutions;
         items  of  equipment   in  common   use and  household   and  domestic
        equipment ;
         in general terms, all articles which have simply been modified and
         have not had their technical characteristics adapted to make them
         suitable for use solely by handicapped persons.
                                   Article 74
A list of articles which may be admitted duty free shall be drawn up, if
necessary, in accordance with the procedure      laid down in Article 143 (2)
and (3).
 ---pagebreak---                            FICHE FINANCIERE
1. Ligne budgétaire concernée : Chap. 12 art. 120
2. Intitulé de I 'act ion : Proposition de modification du règlement
   (CEE)    n'   918/83    du   Conseil     du    28/03/1983    relatif    à
   l'établissement     du    régime     communautaire     des    franchises
   douanières.
3. Base Juridique : Art. 28 du Traité-CEE.
4. OblectIf de I'action : Suppression d'une des conditions prévues
   pour l'octroi de I? franchise à I'Importâtior C'T         instruments CJ
   appareils scientifiques, des appareillages médicaux et des objets
   destinés aux personnes handicapées.
5. Coût de l'action :
   La suppression de la condition de non-équivalence de productions
   communautaires   va   entraîner    la  non   perception   de   ressources
   propres   (droit de douane) dans un nombre de cas en fait            très
    limité :
   - une   cinquantaine   dans   l'ensemble   de   la Communauté   pour  les
      Instruments et appareils scientifiques,
   - un nombre plus réduit pour les appareillages médicaux,
   - probablement    aucun   pour   les  objets    destinés  aux   personnes
      handicapées dans la mesure où la condition de non-équivalence
      n'est plus réellement appliquée par les Etats membres.
    Il n'est pas possible de chiffrer très précisément           l'Incidence
   financière qui doit rester minime.
 ---pagebreak---                                       AS
Fiche d'Impact de certains actes législatifs sur les PME et l'emploi
     1.    OBLIGATIONS ADMINISTRATIVES DECOULANT DE L'APPLICATION DE
           LA LEGISLATION POUR LES ENTREPRISES
           NEANT
     2.    AVANTAGES POUR L'ENTREPRISE
           OUI/NON
           LESQUELLES
     3.    INCONVENIENTS POUR L'ENTREPRISE
           (coûts supplémentaires)
           OUI/NON
           CONSEQUENCES
           * (voir annexe)
     4.    EFFETS SUR L'EMPLOI * (voir annexe)
     5.    Y-A-T-IL  EU CONCERTATION PREALABLE AVEC LES PARTENAIRES
           SOCIAUX ?
           OUI/NON
           AVIS DES PARTENAIRES SOCIAUX
     6.    Y-A-T-IL UNE APPROCHE ALTERNATIVE MOINS CONTRAIGNANTE ?
           NON
           Au  demeurant   la franchise   repose sur  des dispositions
           Internationales acceptées par la Communauté.
 ---pagebreak---                                          3&
Point 3.
CONSEQUENCES
La suppression de     la condition de non-équivalence aura pour effet de
faciliter bien entendu l'importation de matériels tiers susceptibles de
concurrencer des productions communautaires. Toutefois, les effets sur
 les P.M.E. en seront limités pour les raisons suivantes :
       l'application limitée de cettecondition dès 4 présent
       Pour les Instruments et appareils scientifiques seules cinquante
       demandes d'admission      en franchis© environ sont      refusées  chaque
       année dans l'ensemble de la Communauté.
       Pour  les appareils médicaux, la franchise ne s'applique qu'à un
       nombre   limité   de   situations,   celles  tenant   à   des  dons,  sur
       lesquelles   la disparition de      la condition d'équivalence     n'aura
       pas d'effet slgnifiticat If.
       Pour les objets destinés aux personnes handicapées, la condition
       d'équivalence    n'est   plus observée dans    la pratique et donc sa
       disparition    formelle    ne  devrait  pas  modifier     le  niveau  des
       importation effectuées en franchise au demeurant limité.
       le fait que ie refus de La IranctLlse n'interdit pas l'importation
       et n'a pas un effet riiLllement__dLssuaslf sur la décision d'achat
       d'un matériel tiers par suite des taux relativement minimes des
       droits de douane applicables. La concurrence des matériels tiers
       s'exerce donc déjà pleinement.
       Le maintien de la perception la oius Importante puisque ia taxe
       sur  la valeur    ajoutée   reste exigible à     l'égard   de toutes  les
       Importations de ces matériels.
 ---pagebreak---                                      ï\r
      l'Intervention  partielle   des  P,M,,E,  flans  les  productions
      concernées. En effet au moins pour les Instruments ou appareils
      scientifiques, ainsi   que pour  les appareillages médicaux,   la
      production des matériels admis en franchise apparaît au travers
      des cas observés dans le passé être principalement     le fait de
      firmes de taille importante et non de P.M.E.
      Les P.M.E. Interviennent ici dans les productions à façon ou dans
      les modifications d'équipements standard produits par de grandes
      firmes, mais souvent sans qu'il soit possible de reconnaître
      l'équivalence de leurs produits.
4.    EFFETS SUR L'EMPLOI
Impossible à déterminer mais probablement Inexistant pour les raisons
exposées ci-dessus au point 3.
 ---pagebreak---                                                                                ISSN 0254-1475
                                                                   COM(91) 25 final
                                                      DOCUMENTS
   N                                                                                       02
                                 Catalogue number : CB-CO-91-082-EN-C
                                                               ISBN 92-77-69572-2
PRICE                        1-30 pages: 3.50 ECU        per additional 10 pages: 1.25 ECU
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
L-2985 Luxembourg