Commission Regulation (EC) No 1001/2007 of 29 August 2007 amending Regulations (EC) No 800/1999 and (EC) No 2090/2002 as regards controls in the framework of export refunds on agricultural products

30.8.2007 EN Official Journal of the European Union L 226/9
COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1001/2007
of 29 August 2007
amending Regulations (EC) No 800/1999 and (EC) No 2090/2002 as regards controls in the framework of export refunds on agricultural products
THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1784/2003 of 29 September 2003 on the common organisation of the market in cereals (1), and in particular Article 18 thereof, and the corresponding provisions of the other regulations on the common organisation of the markets in agricultural products,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 386/90 of 12 February 1990 on the monitoring carried out at the time of export of agricultural products receiving refunds or other amounts (2), and in particular Article 6 thereof,
Whereas:
(1) Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 of 15 April 1999 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products (3) requires in particular that certain documentary proof be presented to show that the products for which export refunds are claimed have in fact been imported in their unaltered state into a specific third country, when a differentiated refund applies for that third country. The procedures concerning such proof should be simplified whilst safeguarding the financial interests of the Community. The Commission and the Member States should monitor the use of simplified procedures and take appropriate action in the case of abuse.
(2) In practice, the third countries for which export refunds for a given product are differentiated to lower than average or zero values are generally situated close to the Community whilst refund levels tend to be set at a higher, identical level for countries which are more remote from the Community. In many cases, exporters have problems obtaining proof of importation into these more remote countries.
(3) The countries for which the higher, identical levels of refund have been set may be considered as a ‘remote refund zone’ for the product concerned. However, remote countries for which the differentiated part of the refund is lower than average or zero should be excluded from such zone. Also those countries in respect of which a real risk of trade deflection exists, or all countries for sectors in respect of which a real risk of trade deflection exists should be excluded from such zone.
(4) Where an export declaration is made for a country in a remote refund zone and export is made by container sea transport, the combination of commercial container management, transport documentation and the relatively inflexible transport modality gives a reasonable level of assurance that the products have been imported into the specific third country. Under these circumstances, proof that the products have been transported to and unloaded in a country in the remote refund zone could be provided by the combination of a transport document to the port in the country of destination or the port serving the hinterland of destination, and a declaration of unloading.
(5) If a container carrier’s commercial, computerised tracking and tracing system meets the operational security norms as set out in Annex I to Commission Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 of 21 June 2006 laying down detailed rules for the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 1290/2005 as regards the accreditation of paying agencies and other bodies and the clearance of the accounts of the EAGF and of the EAFRD (4), and provides information equivalent to that contained in transport documents, Member States may decide to use such information instead of the paper documents, as proof of transport to the country of destination.
(6) Article 17 of Regulation (EC) No 800/1999 provides for derogations limited to EUR 2 400 and 12 000 on differentiated parts of the refund for contiguous or remote destinations. It is considered useful to provide for a new derogation for containerised sea transport to remote refund zones by requiring the transport document and one of the declarations of unloading referred to in point (a), (b) or (c) of Article 16(2). Such derogation may be granted only if information is provided on the unloading in the port situated in the remote refund zone. In order to ensure the reliability of the proof generated under such derogations, they should be granted under revocable authorisations.
(7) In order to reduce the risk of substitution, all means of transport or packages should be sealed save in exceptional cases where the products may be identified by some other means in accordance with Article 340a and Article 357 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2454/93 of 2 July 1993 laying down provisions for the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2913/92 establishing the Community Customs Code (5). This requirement has been laid down in Article 7 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2090/2002 of 26 November 2002 laying down detailed rules for applying Council Regulation (EEC) No 386/90 as regards physical checks carried out when agricultural products qualifying for refunds are exported (6). As that requirement is part of the formalities concerning the export declaration and of general character, it should be deleted from Regulation (EC) No 2090/2002 and a similar provision should be included in Regulation (EC) No 800/1999.
(8) The customs office of exit needs information in the T5 control copy as to whether products presented to it qualify for a substitution check required in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation (EC) No 2090/2002. As T5 control copies may also be used for products not qualifying for substitution checks, box 107 of the T5 control copy should bear information in case products are exported with a right to refunds.
(9) Regulations (EC) No 800/1999 and (EC) No 2090/2002 should therefore be amended accordingly.
(10) The provisions of this Regulation related to proof of arrival at destination should apply in respect of refund applications submitted from the date of entry into force of this Regulation. Since this Regulation is intended to simplify the administration of the scheme for operators and Member States alike, it should also be possible, at the request of the exporter, to apply it in respect of refund applications submitted before that date, provided that the time limit for submission of proof has not expired.
(11) The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the relevant Management Committees,