natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
This method minimises anomalies and thus reduces penalties. 
Denna metod underskattar anomalier och minskar slunda pfljderna.
The impact of this method is all the greater in France, where the sample of parcels to be controlled was not systematically increased if anomalies were found. 
Metodens inverkan blir desto strre i Frankrike dr det urval av skiften som skulle kontrolleras inte p ett systematiskt stt utkades nr man fann anomalier.
In 2000, the Commission introduced clear rules to increase the sample to be checked when errors are found (6). 
Kommissionen infrde r 2000 tydliga regler fr att ka det urval somskallkontrollerasnrmanhittarfel(6).
(3) Commission Regulation (EC) No 1981/98 of 17 September 1998 4 amending Regulation (EC) No 762/94, (OJ L 256, 18.9.1998, p. 
P andra omrden varierar metoderna mellan medlemssta-(3) 4 ( ) 5 ( ) Kommissionens frordning (EG) nr 1981/98 av den 17 september 1998 om ndring av frordning (EG) nr 762/94 (EGT L 256, 18.9.1998, s.
8). () Commission Regulation (EC) No 2490/98 of 18 November amend-5 ing Regulation (EC) No 1981/98, (OJ L 309, 19.11.1998, p. 
8). Kommissionens frordning (EG) nr 2490/98 av den 18 november 1998 om ndring av frordning (EG) nr 1981/98 (EGT L 309, 19.11.1998, s.
27). () Pre-Agenda 2000 reforms: Article 4(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 805/68 (as amended) of 27 June 1968 on the common organisation of the market in beef and veal (OJ L 148, 28.6.1968 p. 
27). Reformer fre Agenda 2000: artikel 4 d i rdets frordning (EEG) nr 805/68 (ssom ndrad) av den 27 juni 1968 om den gemensamma organisationen av marknaden fr ntktt (EGT L 148, 28.6.1968, s.
24); and post-Agenda 2000 reforms: Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1254/1999 of 17 May 1999 on the common organisation of the 6 market in beef and veal (OJ L 160, 26.6.1999, p. 
24) och reformer efter Agenda 2000: artikel 6 i rdets frordning (EG)nr1254/1999avden17maj1999omdengemensammaorga-nisationen av marknaden fr ntktt (EGT L 160, 26.6.1999, s. 21).
21). () Commission Regulation (EC) No 2801/1999 of 21 December 1999 (OJ L 340, 31.12.1999, p. 
6 ()Kommissionensfrordning(EG)nr2801/1999avden21december 1999 (EGT L 340, 31.12.1999, s.
C 214/20 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 31.7.2001 53. 
C 214/20 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 31.7.2001 53.
Management information 54. 
Frvaltningsinformation 54.
The extent and quality of the information provided by the Member States needs to be improved (see paragraph 39). The Commission should continue its efforts to improve and evaluate this information, to better manage the Member StatesŐ implementation of IACS. 
Omfattningen och kvaliteten p den information som med-lemsstaternalmnarbehverfrbttras(sepunkt39).Kommis- sionenbrfortsttasinaanstrngningarattfrbttraochutvr-dera denna information, fr att bttre kunna frvalta medlemsstaternas genomfrande av IACS.
During the audit the Court found that: (a) the information on measures taken to implement IACS was neither systematically provided by the Member States, nor sought by the Commission. 
Under granskningen konstaterade revisionsrtten fljande: a) InformationomtgrderfrattinfraIACSlmnadesintep ett systematiskt stt av medlemsstaterna och efterfrgades inte heller av kommissionen.
The Member StatesŐ obligations to provide information were reinforced by regulation from 2000 (1); (b) the statistics on bovine premiums are used by the beef market section as part of its general review of the market situation, and to check that payments have not been made in excess of animal ceilings. 
Medlemsstaternas skyldighet att tillhandahlla information frstrktes genom en frordning frn 2000 (1). b) Statistiken ver ntkreatursbidrag anvnds av enheten fr marknaden fr ntktt som en del av deras allmnna versikt av marknadslget och fr att kontrollera att inte betalningar gjorts utver taket fr djurbidrag.
However, they were not referred to by the Clearance-of-accounts Directorate, or cross-checked against the non-regulatory IACS statistics. 
Statistiken anvnds emellertid inte av direktoratet fr avslutning av rkenskaperna och den dubbelkontrolleras inte heller mot icke lagstadgad IACS-statistik.
A full review of the quota and premia paid for the claim years 1997 onwards is planned by the Commission as part of its annual plan for 2001; (c) IACSstatisticsrelatingtoaidapplications,administrativecon-trols and inspections are a key tool for making analyses. These key statistics were provided on a non-regulatory basis only, and is a specific regulatory requirement from 2000 (1). 
En fullstndig granskning av kvoter och bidrag som utbetalats fr anskningsret 1997 och framt planeras av kommissionen som en del av dess rsprogram fr 2001. c) IACS-statistiken ver bidragsanskningar, administrativa kon-trollerochinspektionerrettviktigtanalysinstrument.Dessa vsentligastatistiskauppgifterharlmnatsutanattlagstift-ningen krvt det, och sdana krav finns i frordningarna sedan r2000(1).Medlemsstaternataroftalngtidpsigfratt lmna denna statistik.
For example, in June 2000 data on controls for bovine animals from Spain, Ireland and Italy for 1998 were still missing or incomplete. 
I juni 2000 till exempel saknades fortfarande uppgifter, eller fanns det endast ofullstndiga uppgif-terfrnSpanien,IrlandochItalienomkontrolleravntkrea- tur 1998.
In addition, while the Commission regularly evaluated the area aid statistics in summary reports, there had been no such report on the animal premia since 1994; (d) the annual reports by the certifying bodies are required by legislation to give the information and assurances required under the clearance-of-accounts procedure, and are not specifically required to analyse IACS. 
Dessutom lmnade kommissionen regelbundet utvrderande sammanstllningar av statistiken fr arealstd, men ingen sdan sammanstllning hade gjorts av djurbidragen sedan 1994. d) Lagstiftningen krver att de attesterande organens rsrapporter lmnar den information och de skerheter som krvs enligt frfarandet fr avslutande av rkenskaperna, och det krvs inte uttryckligen att de skall analysera IACS.
Consequently the extent of informa-1 () Article 17 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2801/1999 of 21 December 1999 (OJ L 340, 31.12.1999, p. 
Fljaktligen varie-1 () Artikel 17 i kommissionens frordning (EG) nr 2801/1999 av den 21 december 1999 (EGT L 340, 31.12.1999, s.
29). tion in the reports about IACS varies (2), and an important potential source of management information about the implementation of IACS is lost. 
29). rar omfattningen av information om IACS (2) i rapporterna ochenviktigpotentiellkllatillfrvaltningsinformationom infrandet av IACS gr frlorad.
This has already been criticised sev-eraltimesbytheCourt.Inits1998AnnualReport(3),the Court pointed out that the certifying bodies do not systematically refer to the results of IACS inspections. In its Special Report No 22/2000 (4) on the reformed clearance-of-accounts procedure, the Court pointed out that certifying bodies did not adequately check the on-the-spot inspection process, nor analyse information on error rates and penalties applied as a result of IACS controls. 
Detta har redan vid flera till-fllenkritiseratsavrevisionsrtten.Irsrapportenfr1998(3) ppekade revisionsrtten att de attesterande organen inte sys-tematiskthnvisartillresultatenavIACS-inspektioner.Iden srskilda rapporten nr 22/2000 (4) om det reformerade frfarandet vid avslutande av rkenskaperna ppekade revisionsrtten att de attesterande organen inte i tillrckligt hg grad kontrollerade hur kontrollerna p platsen genomfrdes och intehelleranalyseradeinformationomfrekvensenavfelak-tigheter och pfljder som tillmpats som en fljd av IACS-kontroller.
55. The audit found that there are very wide variations in the statistics reported by Member States, which makes them difficult to interpret. 
55. tistiska uppgifter som rapporterades av medlemsstaterna, vilket gr dem svra att tolka.
The main findings from an analysis of the 1998 statistics are: (a) the percentage of field inspections (in respect of both animal and area aids), that detect errors varies between over 80 % and practically 0 %, depending on the aid scheme and the Member State (see Illustration 7); (b) the percentage of aid applications which are found by administrative controls to have discrepancies varies between over 35%topractically0%,dependingontheaidschemeandthe Member State (see Illustration 8); (c) regarding the results of field inspections for area aid, some countries report mostly minor errors and hardly any serious errors (5) (especially Ireland and the United Kingdom), and others report much more serious errors (especially Italy, Greece and Spain) with relatively few minor errors (see Illustration 9); (d) regarding the results of field inspections for animal premium inspections, some countries reported hardly any serious errors (especially Ireland, Portugal and Austria) while others reported many more (especially Italy, Greece, Spain and Germany) (see Illustration 10). 
En analys av statistiken frn 1998 visar huvudsakligen fljande: a) b) c) d) (2) 3 ( ) 4 () 5 () Andelen kontroller p fltet (fr bde djurbidrag och areal-std)vidvilkafelpvisasvarierarmellanmern80%ochi praktiken 0 %, beroende p stdsystem och medlemsstat (se illustration 7). Andelen stdanskningar som vid administrativa kontroller visatsighaavvikelservarierarmellanmern35%ochprak-tiskt taget 0 %, beroende p stdsystem och medlemsstat (se illustration 8).
(2) For example, the 1998 reports by certifying bodies from France give significant information on the operation of the systems relating to IACS, while the reports from the United Kingdom give relatively little. (3) Annual Report concerning the financial year 1998, paragraph 2.92 4 (OJ C 349, 3.12.1999). () Special Report No 22/2000 on evaluation of the reformed clearance-5 of-accounts procedure (OJ C 69, 2.3.2001). () In this context a serious error is defined as an overdeclaration by more than 20 %, which has the effect of excluding the entire area claimed from aid. 
Rapporterna frn de attesterande organen i Frankrike fr 1998 innehller till exempel omfattande information om hur systemen i anslutning till IACS fungerar, medan rapporterna frn Frenade kungariket sgerrelativtlite. Revisionsrttens rsrapport fr budgetret 1998, punkt 2.92 (EGT C 349, 3.12.1999). Srskild rapport nr 22/2000 om utvrderingen av det reformerade frfarandet vid avslutande av rkenskaperna (EGT C 69, 2.3.2001).
31.7.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 214/21 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Illustration 7 Percentage of inspections finding errors in 1998 Area aid Special beef Suckler cow Source: Basic data obtained from Commission DG AGRI (IACS statistics for 1998). 
31.7.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 214/21 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Illustration 7 Andel kontroller dr fel pvisats under 1998 Arealstd Srskilt nttkttsbidrag Am-och dikor Klla: Grundlggande uppgifter frn kommissionens GD Jordbruk (IACS-statistik fr 1998).
45 % 40 % 35 % 30 % 25 % 20 % 15 % 10 % 5% 0% Area aid Special beef Suckler cow Illustration 8 Errors found by administrative controls in 1998 NB: Austria and Sweden did not provide all information for area aid and suckler cow applications, respectively. Source: Basic data obtained from Commission DG AGRI (IACS statistics for 1998). 
45 % 40 % 35 % 30 % 25 % 20 % 15 % 10 % 5% 0% Anmrkning: Klla: Grundlggande uppgifter frn kommissionens GD Jordbruk (IACS-statistik fr 1998). Arealstd Srskilt nttkttsbidrag Am-och dikor Illustration 8 Fel som pvisats vid administrativa kontroller under 1998 sterrike och Sverige lmnade inte all information om anskningar avseende arealstd respektive am-och dikor.
Belgium Denmark Finland Sweden Germany Greece United Kingdom EU-15 Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria Portugal Belgium Denmark Finland Sweden Germany Greece United Kingdom EU-15 Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria Portugal Percentage of aid applications 
Belgien Finland Sverige Danmark Tyskland Frenade kungariket EU-15 Grekland Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal Finland Belgien Danmark Sverige Frenade kungariket Tyskland Grekland EU-15 Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal Andel av stdanskningar
C 214/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 31.7.2001 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Illustration 9 Types of errors found by area aid field inspections in 1998 20 % and greater Between3%and20% Up to 3 % Source: Basic data obtained from Commission DG AGRI (IACS statistics for 1998). 
C 214/22 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning 31.7.2001 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Illustration 9 Typer av fel som pvisats vid kontroller p fltet av arealstd under 1998 20%ochmer Mellan3%och20% Upp till 3 % Klla: Grundlggande uppgifter frn kommissionens GD Jordbruk (IACS-statistik fr 1998).
Illustration 10 Types of errors found by field inspections of bovine animals in 1998 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% NB: Italy did not provide information for applications excluded. Source: Basic data obtained from Commission DG AGRI (IACS statistics for 1998). 
Illustration 10 Typer av fel som pvisats vid kontroller p fltet av ntkreatur under 1998 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Anmrkning: Italien lmnade ingen information om uteslutna anskningar Klla: Grundlggande uppgifter frn kommissionens GD Jordbruk (IACS-statistik fr 1998).
No payment for two years No payment for the year Partially sanctioned Belgium Denmark Portugal Finland Germany Greece Sweden United Kingdom Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria Portugal Belgium Denmark Germany Finland Sweden United Kingdom EU-15 Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria EU-15 
Ingen betalning fr tv r Ingen betalning fr ret Sanktion delvis tillmpad Belgien Danmark Finland Sverige Tyskland Grekland Frenade kungariket EU-15 Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal Belgien Danmark Finland Sverige Tyskland Grekland Frenade kungariket EU-15 Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal
31.7.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 214/23 57. 
31.7.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 214/23 57.
The average discrepancy rate 21 % 20 % 19 % 18 % 17 % 16 % 15 % 14 % 13 % 12 % 11 % 10 % 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% found on inspection, excluding Italy, was 1,3 % in 1998 and 1999; regarding inspections of bovine animals the statistics are incomplete and for some Member States incoherent. 
Enanalysavutvecklingenavstatistikenfrkontrollerpfl-tet frn 1997 till 1999 visar huvudsakligen fljande: b) a) Frkontrolleravarealstdravvikelsefrekvensenlg(utomi Italien)ochtenderarattsjunka.r1999hadesjumedlems-stateravvikelsersomundersteg1%avdekontrolleradearea- 21 % 20 % 19 % 18 % 17 % 16 % 15 % 14 % 13 % 12 % 11 % 10 % 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% lerna (se illustration 11).
Evolution of discrepancies in areas found with field inspections (%) Illustration 11 1997 1998 1999 NB: Greece had not provided statistics for 1999 (by 1.2.2001). 
Utveckling av arealavvikelser som pvisats vid kontroller p fltet (%) Illustration 11 1997 1998 1999 Grekland hade inte lmnat ngon statistik fr 1999 (den 1 februari 2001).
Source: Court of Auditors review of the CommissionŐs IACS statistics. 
Anmrkning: Klla: Revisionsrttens granskning av kommissionens IACS-statistik.
Percentage of area inspected with discrepancies Belgium Denmark Germany Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria Portugal Finland Sweden United Kingdom EU-15 
Andel av kontrollerade arealer med avvikelse Belgien Danmark Tyskland Grekland Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal Finland Sverige Frenade kungariket EU-15
C 214/24 120 % 110 % 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% EN Official Journal of the European Communities Illustration 12 Special Beef premium Ń Evolution of discrepancies found during field inspections (%) 31.7.2001 1997 1998 1999 NB: Greece did not provide statistics for 1997 nor Italy for 1999. 
C 214/24 120 % 110 % 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning Illustration 12 Srskilt ntkttsbidrag Đ Utveckling av avvikelser som pvisats vid kontroller p fltet (%) 31.7.2001 1997 1998 1999 Anmrkning:Greklandlmnadeingenstatistikfr1997ochItalieningenfr1999.DanmarklmnadeingenfullstndigstatistikfrdetrerenochFrankrikeingenfr1997.
Figures for Finland in 1997 are inconsistent as they show a percentage of discrepancy higher than 100 %. 
Uppgifterna fr Finland 1997 r inkonsekventa d de visar en frekvens av avvikelser som verstiger 100 %.
Source: Court of Auditors review of the CommissionŐs IACS statistics. 
Klla: Revisionsrttens granskning av kommissionens IACS-statistik.
160 % 150 % 140 % 130 % 120 % 110 % 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Illustration 13 Suckler cow premium Ń Evolution of discrepancies found during field inspections (%) 1997 1998 1999 NB: Greece did not provide statistics for 1997 nor Italy for 1999. 
160 % 150 % 140 % 130 % 120 % 110 % 100 % 90 % 80 % 70 % 60 % 50 % 40 % 30 % 20 % 10 % 0% Illustration 13 Bidrag fr am-och dikor Đ Utveckling av avvikelser som pvisats vid kontroller p fltet (%) 1997 1998 1999 Anmrkning:Greklandlmnadeingenstatistikfr1997ochItalieningenfr1999.Danmarklmnadeingenfullstndigstatistikfr1998.UppgifternafrDanmarkochFinland rinkonsekventaddevisarenfrekvensavavvikelsersomverstiger100%.
Belgium Denmark Finland Sweden Germany Greece United Kingdom EU-15 Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria Portugal Belgium Denmark Finland Sweden United Kingdom EU-15 Germany Greece Spain France Ireland Italy Luxembourg Netherlands Austria Portugal Percentage of animals with discrepancies Percentage of animals with discrepancles 
Belgien Danmark Finland Sverige Tyskland Grekland Frenade kungariket EU-15 Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal Belgien Danmark Finland Sverige Frenade kungariket EU-15 Tyskland Grekland Spanien Frankrike Irland Italien Luxemburg Nederlnderna sterrike Portugal Andel djur med avvikelser Andel djur med avvikelser
31.7.2001 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 214/25 58. 
31.7.2001 SV Europeiska gemenskapernas officiella tidning C 214/25 58.
In conclusion, the evidence suggests that administrative controls and field inspections are being applied and reported differently in each Member State. 
Sammanfattningsvis tyder granskningsresultatet p att administrativa kontroller och kontroller p fltet tillmpas och rapporteras olika i olika medlemsstater.
Furthermore, some of the information sought by the Commission from the Member States is not adapted to the specific requirements of the schemes. 
Vidare r en del av den information kommissionen begr frn medlemsstaterna inte anpassad till stdsystemens specifika krav.
In consequence, incorporating such figures leads to an incorrect analysis of the consolidated statistics. 
Fljaktligen skulle det leda till en felaktig analys om dessa siffror inkluderades i den samlade statistiken.
However by June 2000, no reports on inspections relating to bovine identification and registration for 1998, i.e. the first year of operation, had been received from Germany, Greece, Ireland, Luxembourg, Austria and Sweden. Belgium sent the proposed structure of a report only. 
Det krvs plitliga system fr identifiering och registrering avntkreaturfrattmanskallkunnakontrollerabidragfrnt-kreaturochspradjurochntktt.Ijuni2000hadeemellertid ingarapporteromkontrolleravseendeidentifieringochregistre-ring fr 1998, det vill sga det frsta ret systemet var i funktion, erhllits frn Tyskland, Grekland, Irland, Luxemburg, sterrike och Sverige.
The content of the reports received varies greatly between Member States, making analysis of the state of implementation difficult (1) (see also paragraph 42 for weaknesses related to bovine identification and registration). 
Innehllet i de rapporter som erhlls varierar stort mellan medlemsstaterna, vilket gr det svrt att analysera hur lngt infrandet kommit (1) (se ven punkt 42 om brister avseende identifiering och registrering av ntkreatur).
Evaluation of IACS and enforcing implementation 61. 
Utvrdering av IACS och verkstllande av infrande 61.
Evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness of IACS is particularly important as it is the principal means of control of most of expenditure under the CAP. 
Det r srskilt viktigt att utvrdera IACS effektivitet och ndamlsenlighet eftersom det r det viktigaste instrumentet fr kontroll av strre delen av utgifterna inom den gemensamma jordbrukspolitiken.
The information which is collected is often either inaccurate, late, or non-comparable, which complicates such evaluations (see paragraphs 54 to 59). 
Den information som samlas in r ofta antingen felaktig, sen eller ojmfrbar, vilket frsvrar sdana utvrderingar (se punkterna 54Đ59).
Some information relevant to such an evaluation has not been sought, e.g. costs of administering IACS in the Member States or savings produced by IACS in terms of reductions made to incorrect aid applications. 
En del information som skulle vara relevant fr en sdan utvrdering har inte begrts in, ssom kostnaderna fr att administrera IACS i medlemsstaterna eller besparingar som gjorts genom IACS i form av minskat std fr felaktiga anskningar.
In its Special Report No 22/2000 (2), the Court pointed out that the Commission did not require pay-ingagenciestoquantifysanctionsapplied,sothatthevalueof errors detected through IACS was not calculated. 
I sin srskilda rapport nr 22/2000 (2) ppekade revisionsrtten att kommissionenintekrvdeattutbetalningsstllenaskullekvanti-fieratillmpadesanktioner,vilketinnebarattvrdetfrdefelsom upptcktes genom IACS inte berknades.
(1) The CommissionŐs Health and Consumer Protection Directorate-General was preparing, in July 2000, a Regulation to provide detailed 2 guidance for Member States on the structure of this annual report. () Special Report No 22/2000 on the evaluation of the reformed clearance-of-accounts procedure (OJ C 69, 2.3.2001). 
(1) Kommissionens generaldirektorat fr hlsa och konsumentskydd arbetade i juli 2000 med att utarbeta en frordning som skulle ge medlemsstaterna detaljerade riktlinjer fr strukturen p denna rliga rap-2 port. () Srskild rapport nr 22/2000 om utvrderingen av det reformerade frfarandet vid avslutande av rkenskaperna (EGT C 69, 2.3.2001).
The information available was not systematically exploited in such an evaluation. 
Den tillgngliga informationen utnyttjades inte alltid systematiskt i denna utvrdering.
Moreover, the implementation of IACS as such is not routinely reported on by the Commission. 
Dessutom rapporterar inte kommissionen rutinmssigt om infrandet av IACS.
The last time the Commission produced a document evaluating the overall implementation of IACS was in July 1998, when it reported to Parliament in the context of the 1996 discharge procedure (3). 
Senaste gngen kommissionen lade fram ett dokument med en utvrdering av det vergripande infrandet av IACS var i juli 1998 nr den rapporterade till parlamentet i samband med 1996 rs frfarande fr beviljande av ansvarsfrihet (3).
The reports produced following the CommissionŐs missions to Member States for area aid and animal premium schemes as part of the clearance-of-accounts procedure do not systematically report on the implementation of all the elements of IACS, although key and ancillary control weaknesses are identified. 
I de rapporter som utarbetas efter kommissionens revisionsbesk i medlemsstaterna avseende arealstd och djurbidrag som ett led i frfarandet fr avslutande av rkenskaperna rapporterar man inte systematiskt om infrandet av alla delar av IACS, ven om brister avseende de grundlggande kontrollerna och stdkontrollerna ppekas.