Help Print this page 

Document 52016SC0400

Title and reference
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme REFIT and the 10 Priorities of the Commission Accompanying the document COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Commission Work Programme 2017 Delivering a Europe that protects, empowers and defends

SWD/2016/0400 final
Languages and formats available
BG ES CS DA DE ET EL EN FR GA HR IT LV LT HU MT NL PL PT RO SK SL FI SV
HTML html EN
DOC doc EN
PDF pdf EN
Multilingual display
Text

Brussels, XXX

SWD(2016) 400 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme
REFIT and the 10 Priorities of the Commission

Accompanying the document

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Commission Work Programme 2017

Delivering a Europe that protects, empowers and defends

{COM(2016) 710 final}


Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme

REFIT and the 10 Priorities of the Commission

25 October 2016



Table of Contents

Introduction    

Priority 1: A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment    

Priority 2: A Connected Digital Single Market    

Priority 3: A resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy    

Priority 4: A deeper and Fairer Internal Market with a Strengthened Industrial Base    

Priority 5: A Deeper and Fairer Economic and Monetary Union    

Priority 6: A Reasonable and Balanced Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.    

Priority 7: An area of Justice and Fundamental Rights based on Mutual Trust    

Priority 8: Towards a New Policy on Migration    

Priority 10: A Union of Democratic Change    

Note:

No REFIT initiatives are currently implemented in priority 9 - A Stronger Global Actor.

Introduction

This document presents the key developments and results of REFIT, the Regulatory Fitness and Performance programme 1 . It also contains detailed information on the first 22 REFIT Platform opinions and the way in which the Commission intends to follow-up on these.

REFIT aims to make sure that EU law remains fit for purpose and delivers the results intended by policy makers in the most efficient and effective way. It targets removing red tape and lowering costs without compromising policy objectives and EU high standards. REFIT is about regulating better, making EU legislation fit for purpose, simpler and less costly, aiming to ensure a clear, stable and predictable regulatory framework supporting the delivery of our common goals and allowing businesses and our citizens more freedom to pursue their goals.

REFIT works on the basis of the systematic evaluation of the performance of existing EU legislation or policies. This evaluation serves to identify inefficiencies, burdens, inconsistencies and gaps across the EU acquis. Where considered necessary, follow up can take the form of legislative revisions, simplification and codification of regulatory measures, measures to improve implementation, repeals of regulation and withdrawal of outdated proposals.

REFIT relies strongly on stakeholder input to focus its work. It is the citizens, the small entrepreneurs, the public administrators who benefit from the advantages but also face the inefficiencies of EU laws and their implementation by Member States on a daily basis. They are thus best placed to suggest where improvements can make a real difference. To this end, in 2015, the Commission set up the REFIT Platform to further improve the ongoing dialogue with stakeholders and Member States on improving EU legislation 2 . The Platform collects and assesses suggestions for the reduction of regulatory and administrative burdens stemming from EU regulation or its implementation by Member States. An online portal has been set up to this end 3 . The Commission has committed itself to react to all the resulting Platform's suggestions and explain how it intends to follow up 4 .  

REFIT requires a joint effort by all those involved in the design, approval, implementation and enforcement of EU law: the European Parliament, the Council, the Commission and the Member States and all other levels of government.

This document summarizes the key elements of the REFIT scoreboard 5 , the information tool through which the Commission regularly tracks and presents the progress of REFIT actions throughout the whole policy cycle from evaluation, to adoption and implementation, providing as much information as available on the final results compared to initial (simplification and savings) objectives. 

Since 2012, two screenings of the EU's regulatory acquis have been carried out to assess the performance of EU regulation and identify where REFIT actions can best be focused. Almost 200 initiatives for burden reduction and simplification have been launched, including withdrawals, repeals, evaluations and impact assessments to identify further possibilities. Under the Juncker Commission, 119 REFIT actions were included in the Commission Work programmes for 2015 and 2016 and 93 proposals in the EU legislative procedure have been identified for withdrawal, 90 of which have already been withdrawn. This work will continue in 2017 and it is strengthened by the recent work of the REFIT platform which issued 22 opinions to date. The Commission Work Programme lists (34 legislative initiatives under REFIT, 19 withdrawals, 16 repeals). It answers to the recommendations of the REFIT Platform by envisaging follow up for 21 out of 22 opinions issued to date (in 15 cases under this year's work programme). The sole exception regards the Platform recommendation for a standard VAT declaration, on which an earlier Commission proposal had to be withdrawn this year due to lack of support from the Council in the legislative procedure. Information on the exact content of the Commission follow up will continue to be tracked and communicated as the relevant Commission initiatives are finalized.



Priority 1: A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment

1.Context


Boosting jobs, growth and investment in a sustainable manner is key to further reduce unacceptable high unemployment and increase the welfare of Europe's citizens and the competitiveness of its businesses. Achieving these goals not only requires launching new initiatives but also making sure that the existing EU legislation is kept fit for purpose, unnecessary costs eliminated and rules simplified where possible. This is the purpose of the REFIT programme.

2.New REFIT Initiatives



During 2017, the Commission will follow-up on the seven opinions issued by the REFIT Platform. On the basis of an evaluation of the Drinking Water Directive and the European Citizen's Initiative 'Right2Water', the Commission will present a REFIT revision of the Drinking Water Directive in 2017 to adapt quality standards and risk prevention, improve access to information and transparency.

Follow-Up to REFIT Platform Opinions: Prompted by stakeholder submissions, the REFIT Platform issued seven opinions in this priority area which will be followed up by the Commission with initiatives in 2017.

On the Common Agricultural Policy, the REFIT Platform issued three opinions on the efficiency of the CAP, cross compliance and overlaps between Pillars I and II. The REFIT Platform Stakeholder group recommended to carry out a more strategic review of the CAP with a view to ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the CAP, while the Government group objected to such a review and, instead recommended to follow the existing evaluation planning established by Regulation 1306/2013. The Commission will be consulting the public throughout 2017 on the simplification and modernisation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to maximize its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals. This will focus on specific policy priorities for the future, taking account of the opinions of the Refit Platform

In its opinion on Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE), the REFIT Platform recommends action to implement a common harmonised reporting and registration system that takes enforcement and manageability into account without adding unnecessary burden on the Member States. In order to address this recommendation, the Commission is planning to propose an implementing act on a standard format and frequency of reporting by the end of 2017.

The Platform adopted 2 opinions on the Common Provision Regulation governing the Cohesion Fund, ERDF and ESF. It recommends that far-reaching legislative changes should be avoided in the interest of legal certainty, but that small changes to clarify rules, simplify implementation and remove inconsistencies should be envisaged and that this opinion be sent to the High Level Group on Simplification of the ESI Funds. The European Commission has transmitted this opinion to this group, which is currently preparing its reply to the Platform.

Concerning overlaps in legislation on chemicals and safety and health at work, the REFIT Platform considered that the Commission should raise awareness and issue guidance on the implementation of legislation in these areas. In response, the Commission plans to issue a Common Understanding explaining the interface between REACH and OSH legislation. In addition, several evaluations in this area will conclude during 2017 and assess the need for further action.

3.Progress and Results



Evaluations and follow-up: Following a review of Greening obligations under the Common Agricultural Policy after the first year of implementation, the Commission is working on targeted modifications to relevant delegated and implementing acts simplifying certain greening rules for farmers and national administrations in order to increase the acceptance of greening by farmers and to improve its environmental performance. A comprehensive evaluation of greening measures will be carried out in 2017.

The Commission is currently taking stock of reporting obligations across the environment acquis covering about 60 pieces of legislation and approximately 170 reporting obligations. In this context, the Commission plans to propose the repeal of the Standardised Reporting Directive and its associated reporting obligations 6 . Following on these preparatory activities, the Commission will take further action to streamline reporting requirements 7 .

In the area of environment, the results of not less than 11 evaluations are expected before the end of 2017. The fitness check on the Birds and Habitat directives is expected to be completed by the end of 2016.

Pending proposals and adopted legal acts: The Commission continues a comprehensive simplification of the Common Market Organization under the Common Agricultural Policy. The initiative should be completed in 2017 leading to the reduction of 200 implementing and delegated acts to around 40 8 . So far 8 new delegated regulations and 6 new implementing regulations have been adopted, 30 regulations have been repealed, 57 regulations have been declared obsolete and a further 18 delegated and implementing acts are planned for adoption by the end of 2016.

A proposal made in 2014 to simplify organic farming provisions is pending in legislative procedure. The initiative will modernise and harmonise the rules for organic production and improve consumer confidence by excluding contaminated products and aligning controls. The proposal foresees the elimination of 37 of the current 135 information obligations for operators.

In the area of fisheries, the Commission proposed a set of simplified technical rules for the protection of marine organisms to support a sustainable fishing policy with rules easier to follow and better enforceable. In addition, the Commission adopted a simplified framework for fishing authorizations with the objective of reducing costs to ship owners and national authorities and allow for effective and efficient enforcement of rules.

Implementation on the ground: Considerable cost savings to business, consumers and public administrations have been estimated for several initiatives in this priority area and confirmed by feedback from Member States and stakeholders:

Shipments of Waste: Cost reductions on the ground have reached up to 70%, exceeding initial estimations of 50% or EUR 44 million per year.

Environmental Impact Assessments: Annual direct savings are estimated at EUR 21.4 million for business and up to 5.3 million for public administrations. Savings will be checked on the ground through an evaluation planned for 2018.

Egg Labelling: Member States who fully implemented the requirements estimated cost reductions between 9% and 63% while initial estimations by the Commission amounted to 44% or approximately EUR 600 million.

However, in the case of Waste of electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) simplification benefits could not fully be realized as Council and Parliament did not maintain the Commission's proposal for a single registration for all EU obligations, with interoperability and data-transfer between Member State producer registers. In 2017, the Commission will propose an implementing act on a standard format and frequency of reporting.



Priority 2: A Connected Digital Single Market

1.Context



The Commission aims to create a Digital Single Market to make the EU's Single Market fit for the digital age – tearing down regulatory walls and moving from 28 national markets to a single European market. This could contribute EUR 415 billion per year to the EU economy and create hundreds of thousands of new jobs. Regulatory Fitness initiatives contribute to this objective by bringing down barriers and removing unnecessary costs, making the EU legislation fit for purpose. This leads to new opportunities for businesses and improves the offer to consumers. In order to release the full growth potential of a connected Digital Single Market, the Commission will deliver in 2017 a VAT package covering proposals on e-commerce, e-publications and e-books and initiatives on advancing the data economy.

2.New REFIT Initiatives



In its Work Programme for 2017, the Commission plans to carry-out a legislative revision of the Regulations on the European Agency for Network and Information Security (ENISA) and on the “.eu” top-level domain which will be updated to changing market circumstances. The planned mid term review of the implementation of the Digital Single market Agenda may identify further necessary proposals for the revision of existing legislation.

New evaluations: In 2017, the Commission will carry out an evaluation of EU legislation on the legal protection of databases.

3.Progress and Results



Evaluations and follow-up: Four regulatory evaluations have delivered results during 2016 and will all be followed-up by legislative reviews within the year. This concerns the following Directives:

Mini One-Stop-Shop: The existing one-stop shop allows businesses in the areas of telecom, broadcasting and electronic consumer services to declare and pay VAT in the Member State where they are established rather than where their customers are resident. By the end of 2016, the Commission will present a further legislative proposal to modernise and simplify VAT for cross-border e-commerce, in particular for SMEs. This will include extending the One-Stop-Shop to online sales of tangible goods to final consumers. The estimated saving to business is EUR 2.3 billion a year.

Audio-visual Media Services: The Commission proposal [COM(2016)287] will bring simplification and more flexibility to current rules. The economic benefit could amount to EUR 122 million for a single TV broadcaster or to EUR 441 million per year EU-wide for sponsorship.

The Satellite and Cable Directive: The initiative [COM(2016)594] aims to enhance cross-border access to broadcasting and related online services across the EU. Removing barriers in the digital single market will reward creators and creativity and strengthen the EU's broadcasting sector while giving consumers access to a wider variety of content across borders.

The Telecoms regulatory framework: This has been reviewed [COM(2016)590] to keep up with technological progress such as 5G. Costs resulting from market reviews could be reduced by 10-15%.



Pending proposals and adopted legal acts: In 2016, the legislator adopted the Commission's proposal on Strengthening Network and Information Security. The new Directive for collective rights management of musical works (CRM Directive) had to be transposed by Member States by April 2016.

Network and Information Security (NIS): The new act will reinforce cyber-security and increase confidence in the digital economy. Micro-enterprises have been exempted from some notification requirements.

The Directive on Collective Rights Management (CRM):  The functioning of Collective Rights Management Organisations (CMOs) will be improved by increasing their transparency and accountability towards their members and right holders. The Commission proposed an optional micro exemption for setting up a supervisory function and for certain financial reporting obligations which was not retained in legislative procedure.

VAT Mini One-Stop-Shop: Doing business in more than one Member State often means dealing with several tax administrations in different languages. Dealing with multiple VAT obligations can be very burdensome and costly for companies. The implementation on 1 January 2015 of a mini One-Stop-Shop for the EU providers of telecommunications, broadcasting and electronic services to consumers (Council Directive 2008/8/EC) was a big step forward in simplifying VAT compliance rules in the EU. The initial One-Stop-Shop system that was limited to non-EU providers of electronic services is now extended to EU businesses and to broadcasting and telecom services. It allows businesses to declare and pay the VAT in the Member State where they are established rather than where their customers are located. The estimated annual savings on administrative burden today are EUR 500 million. The portal is currently used by more than 14 000 businesses. Building on the existing set-up, the Commission will extend the Mini One-Stop-Shop in 2017 to cross-border online sales of goods to consumers, introducing a common VAT threshold to help start-up e-commerce businesses.


Priority 3: A resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy

1.Context



A European Energy Union will ensure that Europe has secure, affordable and climate-friendly energy. Wiser energy use while fighting climate change is both a spur for new jobs and growth and an investment in Europe's future. Building an Energy Union also requires looking at existing legislation and making sure it is fit for purpose, as simple as possible and with no unnecessary costs and burdens, making sure EU energy and climate legislation can fully deliver on its ambitious objectives and benefits. 

2.New REFIT Initiatives



In its Work Programme for 2017, the Commission will propose initiatives to gradually move to zero-emission vehicles which will also enhance competitiveness of the industry. These revisions will include rules on:

Clean Vehicles in order to improve procurement incentives and rules.

Cars and light commercial vehicles proposing CO2 emission standards post-2020. On the basis of the result of the evaluation which found that intermediary targets were met and EU rules had a positive impact on emission reductions for cars and vans as well as on energy security. The evaluation also revealed a significant discrepancy between real-world and test cycle emissions with adverse effects on the effectiveness and efficiency of the legislation.

Road charging applying the user-pay and polluter-pay principle, to propose improvements for those Member States choosing to use this tool, including including for the interoperability of electronic tolling services.

Combined transport in order to further promote intermodal transport in the EU and thus contribute to reducing emissions. The evaluation of combined transport rules showed that the potential benefits to the environment are not yet fully harvested. Up to EUR 2.1 billion of external costs could be saved annually with a moderate shift of freight away from roads to rail or waterways.

New evaluations: In 2017, the Commission will carry out an evaluation of the EU legal framework for energy taxation (Energy Tax Directive).

3.Progress and Results



Evaluations and follow-up: Before the end of 2016, a comprehensive Fitness Check on planning and reporting obligations in the area of Energy Union governance will conclude and evaluations on renewable energy and energy performance of buildings will deliver results and will be followed-up by revisions of the respective Directives.

With regard to the legislation on energy performance of buildings, preliminary findings indicate that removing the obligation to conduct a feasibility study of high efficiency alternative systems for new buildings could lead to cost savings of ca EUR 200 million per year. A simplified inspection regime for Member States authorities may deliver further savings of on average EUR 200 per inspection for ca. 13.5 million occasions of inspections in non-domestic buildings in 15 concerned Member States during 2020-2030.

Fitness Check on Planning and Reporting obligations of Energy Union Governance: The Fitness Check aims to quantify average administrative costs per Member State and the Commission stemming from 91 reporting obligations included in 31 pieces of legislation. This exercise is supported by surveys in all Member States and in depth interviews. On this basis, the Fitness Check will make recommendations on the basis of which existing planning and reporting obligations can be repealed, integrated into the new Governance reporting framework or need to be kept seperately.



Priority 4: A deeper and Fairer Internal Market with a Strengthened Industrial Base

1.Context



The Single Market is one of Europe’s greatest assets. It is an engine for building a stronger and fairer EU economy, creating the jobs, growth and competitiveness advantages Europe needs. More integrated and deeper capital markets will channel more funding to companies, especially SMEs, and infrastructure projects. Better worker mobility will let people move more freely where their skills are needed. And combating tax evasion and tax fraud will ensure that all contribute their fair share.

Regulatory Fitness initiatives contribute to these objectives making sure existing legislation on the Single Market is fit for purpose and can fully deliver on its objectives and benefits in as simple a way as possible and without undue burdens. REFIT initiatives are being pursued in a number of policy areas including competition; financial services; health and food safety; internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs; transport and mobility; taxation and customs and communications networks and technology.

2.New REFIT Initiatives



The Commission will carry-out the following legislative revisions within its Work Programme for 2017: 

In the area of competition:

The General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER) will be revised to facilitate appropriate public support for ports and airports.

In the area of taxation and customs:

The Commission will bring forward measures to implement the VAT Action Plan, to simplify VAT for smaller companies and set the foundations for a modern, more efficient, business-friendly and fraud-proof definitive VAT regime across Europe, taking account of the opinons of the REFIT Platform. A more effective and proportionate approach to VAT rates is a key element of this reform.

General arrangements for excise duty will be revised to align and ensure coherence between customs and excise legislation, improve legal certainty and ensure the uniform application of EU legislation. At the same time, the Commission will also revise the structures of excise duties applied to alcohol and alcoholic beverages. This follows on an evaluation.

Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB): In parallel with its Work Programme for 2017, the Commission is re-launching the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base with a compulsory common tax base as the first step.

Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB): Estimates indicate that regulatory measures could reduce time costs for setting up a new subsidiary in a Member State by up to 67%. If 5% of medium-sized companies would expand abroad, a one-off cost saving of around EUR 1 billion could be expected. If all multinational entities apply a CCCTB, recurring compliance costs could go down by about EUR 0.8 billion.

In the area of internal market, industry, entrepreneurship and SMEs:

The Commission will act to strengthen the single market in goods, notably by facilitating mutual recognition and addressing the increasing amount of non-compliant products on the EU market through revisions of the relevant legislation. This will allow entrepreneurs to offer their products more easily across borders while offering incentives to boost regulatory compliance and restoring the level playing field to the benefit of businesses and citizens.

In the area of mobility and transport:

The Commission will revise legislation on Training, Qualification, Licensing in Road Transport.

Rules for access to the International market for coach and bus services will be revised in order to improve competition on domestic coach markets and ensure non-discriminatory access to terminals and other infrastructure.

The Commission will propose how to simplify rules on access to the EU road haulage market, facilitate implementation and strengthen a level playing field.

In order to ensure a genuine level-playing field for the road transport industry and adequate working conditions, social legislation in road transport will be revised.

A code for small crafts will be proposed in order to facilitate and simplify the construction and cross-border trade of small passenger vessels as well as their registration, following up on the Fitness Check on EU passenger ship safety legislation.

In order to optimise the allocation of resources, increase flexibility in organising freight transport and improve productivity, legislation on Leasing of Vehicles will be revised.

Legislation on Road Infrastructure and tunnels safety will be revised to improve safety management practices, allow for a level playing field in safety management and reduce administrative burdens.

All of these proposals build on evaluation findings.

In the area of financial stability, financial services and Capital Markets Union:

The Commission will ensure follow up on the Call for Evidence on the cumulative impact of the EU regulatory framework for financial services.

Rules on OTC derivatives, central counterparties and trade repositories (EMIR) will be reviewed in order to eliminate disproportionate costs and burdens to small companies in the financial sector, corporates and pension funds and to simplify rules without putting financial stability at risk.



New evaluations: In 2017, the Commission will carry out evaluations in the following regulatory areas: financial conglomerates, motor insurance, national discretion in the audit regulation, prudential treatment of investment firms, feed additives, aerosol dispensers, liability for defective products, European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property, the European Standard Procurement Document, airport charges, and the common system of value added tax.

Follow-Up to REFIT Platform opinions: The REFIT Platform issued 12 opinions for the areas covered by this priority: 

In its opinion on Points of Single Contact, the REFIT Platform recommends the establishment of a single entry point for business in each Member State to assist companies operating in the Single Market. The Commission will address these concerns in a proposal on the Single Digital Gateway planned for the first half of 2017.

The Platform also issued 4 opinions in the area of Taxation and
Custom
Union. Two opinions on VAT reverse liability and on simplified VAT document requirements for intra-Community trade will be addressed by a legislative proposal on the definite VAT regime foreseen for 2017, in which the Commission has announced the aim to re-establish the principle of taxation of cross-border supplies in the same way as domestic supplies and extend the current Mini One-Stop-Shop to cover cross-border business-to-business supplies of goods. The opinion concerning the VAT information portal will influence the continuing work of the Commission with Member States on the best design for a web portal. The Commission made a proposal in 2013 for a standard VAT declaration but does not intend to return to the issue following its decision this year to withdraw the proposal.

2 opinions by the REFIT Platform on State Aid rules are feeding into the ongoing implementation of the existing legal framework. In the field of Health and Food Safety (Food contact materials and residues in live animals), the Commission will examine how the recommendations of the Platform could be addressed in the context of its implementation follow-up of EU food contact materials legislation and it plans to follow up on the opinion on veterinary medicinal residues in foodstuffs through a new delegated act planned for adoption before the entry into application of the new Official Control Regulation which is foreseen for adoption in legislative procedure later this year.

The opinion on the Construction Products Regulation will be addressed by the Commission as part of the on-going Fitness Check and through further consultations with stakeholders to improve the functioning of European standards for construction products due to start before the end of 2016.

In its opinion on financial reporting, the REFIT Platform identifies the need to streamline reporting to various supervisory authorities to reduce unnecessary administrative burden on financial institutions. This opinion complements the evidence gathered by the Commission as part of its 'Call for evidence' and will lead to a Fitness Check on financial reporting in 2017.

The Platform also issued an opinion on the Financial Conglomerates Directive (FICOD) recommending that the Commission undertakes a review. The Platform concerns will be taken into account in the ongoing evaluation, due to be completed early in 2017.

3. Progress and Results



Evaluations and follow-up: 25 evaluations are ongoing in this priority area and 8 evaluations have been finalized recently. These include for example:

Market access for transport of goods: Regulatory savings have been assessed at EUR 8-14 million, considerably lower than the expected EUR 172 million estimated at the time of adoption due to late implementation of the European Register of Road Transport Undertakings. Costs for setting up national registers are calculated at 70% lower than estimated. The findings will be followed up by a proposal in 2017 (see under point 2 above).

Port Reception Facilities: EU law has led to estimated savings of up to EUR 71 million annually through reduction of discharges at sea. The current reporting and notification provision can be further simplified to reduce administrative burdens. The evaluation findings will be followed up by a proposal in 2017 (see under point 2 above).

In 2016, the Commission adopted three proposals to amend existing legislation on passenger ship safety [COM(2016)369, 370 and 371] seeking to reap the simplification and saving potential (of up to 1 million euros annually) identified by the fitness check on passenger ship safety.

Pending proposals and adopted legal acts: Pending REFIT proposals include:

European Venture Capital and Social Entrepreneurship Funds: Amendments proposed by the Commission will make these two forms of specialised funds more attractive, reduce costs, and realise economies of scale. Current estimates suggest a total of EUR 32 million in cost savings over five years. The modified rules will further unblock the flow of capital, leading to increased confidence in cross-border investments and to better functioning of the internal market.

Prospectus Directive: Recourse to the new disclosure regime for SMEs is estimated to save SMEs around EUR 45 million per year while about 320 SMEs are likely to benefit. The alleviated disclosure regime for secondary issuances is likely to translate into additional savings of around EUR 130 million per year.

In 2016, the legislator adopted new legislation on animal health which promises major savings through simplification and more efficient rules for the prevention of animal diseases. It also offers possibilities to reduce administrative burdens by allowing the use of new technologies, such as electronic certificates, electronic identification and database interlinks. The simplification of rules for movement of animals can save up to EUR 39 million per year.

Implementation on the ground: New simpler rules apply in a number of areas from 2016 on. This includes:

Public Procurement: New simplified award procedures for public contracts are in force since April 2016. In particular the introduction of a European Standard Procurement document allows an easier access to public tenders in all Member States for business and in particular SMEs.

Elżbieta Bieńkowska, Commissioner responsible for Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs said: "By reducing the volume of documents needed, the European Single Procurement Document will make it easier for companies to take part in public award procedures. Public administrations will benefit from a wider range of offers ensuring better quality and value for money." 

Clinical Trials: New rules on clinical trials for new medicines gradually start applying. These new rules facilitate multinational trials and reduce costs. It is expected that pharmaceutical companies will save up to EUR 267 million annually in administrative burden and EUR 540 mio in compliance costs.

Professional Qualifications: Since January 2016 simplified rules apply for the recognition of professional qualifications earned in another Member State. This includes the European Professional Card which is expected to deliver savings of up to 80 Euros for each user. However, there are concerns that implementation delays do not yet allow citizens and authorities in some Member States to enjoy full benefits.

Regulatory savings are reported by Member States and stakeholders regarding EU laws where simplification has already been applied for some time:

Refund of Value Added Tax: Cost savings to business reported by Member States in the refund of VAT after new and simpler rules have been implemented range between 30% and 35%.

Late Payments: Since the adoption in 2011 of the Directive on late payment, statistics have shown a steady decrease in average payment delays by businesses and in the public sector.

Late Payments: Average payment period (days) in the EU 2010-2014:



Priority 5: A Deeper and Fairer Economic and Monetary Union

1.Context



The Commission is working for a deeper and fairer Economic and Monetary Union in line with the report of the Five Presidents. Initiatives under REFIT are contributing to this goal by ensuring legislation in the areas of financial stability and financial services, social affairs and employment and statistics remain fit for purpose, are as simple as possible and do not involve undue burdens.

2.New REFIT Initiatives



Work planned in the Commission Work Programme 2017 under this priority includes legislative revisions in two regulatory areas:

Regulation 924/2009 on cross-border payments will be reviewed with a view to improve disclosure, reduce fees in cross-border transactions and extend its scope to all non-Euro currencies;

Directive 91/533/EC on Written Statements will be reviewed in order to improve the rules establishing employer's obligations to inform employees of the conditions applicable to the contract or employment relationship.

In addition, the Commission will provide guidance to ensure a more effective and fairer implementation of the Working Time Directive.

New Evaluations: In 2017, the Commission will evaluate legislation on part-time and fixed-term work. The Commission will also carry out an evaluation of the four decentralised EU agencies active in the field of employment and social policy, the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working conditions (EUROFOUND), the European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training (CEDEFOP), the European Training Foundation (ETF) and the European Agency for Safety and Health at Work (EU-OSHA).

Follow-up to REFIT Platform Opinions: The REFIT Platform opinion on environmental protection investment statistics recommends that the Commission continue its assessment on overlapping reporting requirements under different regulations and replaces the regulation on structural business statistics with the new Framework Regulation for integrating business Statistics (FRIBS). The Commission recognises that administrative burden is created by double reporting obligations and has examined the legal basis for environmental accounts. To address this, the Commission will make a legislative proposal on FRIBS in 2016 which should ensure that there are no overlapping reporting requirements – a simplification proposal for the Framework Regulation for Agricultural Statistics will also be adopted in 2016.

3.Progress and Results



Evaluations and follow up: Before the end of 2016, results are expected of evaluations of legislation on safety and health at work and on written statements, as illustrated by the below example: 

Evaluation of Written Statement Directive: The emerging findings of the evaluation show that the notification of a written statement to employees is not a disproportionate burden compared to the benefits it brings, e.g. legal certainty for both sides and less litigations. The average one-off administrative cost per employed person for all company sizes is estimated at 34 euros. – Following up to the evaluation, the Commission plans to review the Directive in 2017 to ensure it remains effective and efficienct (see above) .

Proposals and adopted legal acts: 4 proposals for simplification and burden reduction by the Commission are pending in legislative procedure and 5 legal acts have been adopted by Council and Parliament and implementation will be followed-up with Member States (see Scoreboard for details). Pending proposals include:

Integrating Social Statistics: The proposal made by the Commission in August 2016 is likely to deliver savings between EUR 3.1 million and EUR 34 million for statistical data collection costs depending on the implementation at national level. 

Implementation on the Ground: Information on implementation is available for two initiatives under this priority:

Company Accounts: Initial estimations of savings of around 47% of total administrative costs on average could be surpassed thanks to amendments in legislative procedure. Feedback on implementation by Member States showed savings in the range between 8% and 82%.

Annual Accounts of Micro Enterprises: Estimated savings were reduced by the legislator from EUR 6.3 billion to EUR 3.5 billion. Implementation feedback showed cost reductions between 42% and 70%.

Commissioner Marianne Thyssen said on the new framework for social statistics: "The new framework Regulation will bring together 7 existing surveys that are now carried out separately. This will avoid duplication of the data and improve data collection. By merging the 7 surveys, we make sure we use everywhere the same definitions, variables and precision requirements. This standardisation will increase substantially data comparability, make the analysis of the data easier and enable social statistics to be published earlier than today.  http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-16-2868_en.htm



Priority 6: A Reasonable and Balanced Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.

1.Context



EU trade policy is working to create a global system for fair and open trade, open up markets with key partner countries, to ensure that everyone plays by the rules and to promote trade as a force for sustainable development. Trade brings lower prices and a wider variety of goods to the consumer and helps businesses make the most of global opportunities thus boosting growth, jobs, competitiveness and investment in the EU. REFIT contributes to the achievement of trade policy goals by ensuring relevant legislation delivers on its objectives in the simplest way with the least costs for companies, citizens and public administrations.

In 2017 the Commission will insist on the need to urgently drive forward further improvement in Europe's trade defence mechanisms based on its Trade Defence Instrument reform proposals. 

President Juncker stressed the urgency of a reform of Trade Defence in the 2016 State of the Union address: "Being European also means standing up for our steel industry. We already have 37 anti-dumping and anti-subsidy measures in place to protect our steel industry from unfair competition. But we need to do more, as overproduction in some parts of the world is putting European producers out of business. This is why I was in China twice this year to address the issue of overcapacity. This is also why the Commission has proposed to change the lesser duty rule. The United States imposes a 265% import tariff on Chinese steel, but here in Europe, some governments have for years insisted we reduce tariffs on Chinese steel. I call on all Member States and on this Parliament to support the Commission in strengthening our trade defence instruments. We should not be naïve free traders, but be able to respond as forcefully to dumping as the United States."

2.Progress and Results



Proposals and adopted legal acts: A reform of Trade Defence Instruments proposed in 2013 by the Commission remains pending in legislative procedure. The reform proposals intend to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of two key trade defence instruments (anti-dumping regulation and anti-subsidy regulation) by increasing transparency, predictability and legal certainty, improving enforcement and facilitating the cooperation of all stakeholders concerned. The reform also includes specific provisions to assist SMEs in dealing with Trade Defence cases.

In 2016 the Commission adopted a proposal for recasting the system of export control of dual-use items to simplify the existing framework and reduce administrative burden for companies and public administrations. Thanks to the introduction of new EU General Export Authorisations (EUGEAs), controls would become four times less costly for companies, and up to 11 times less costly for licensing authorities. In addition, the number of products subject to control on transfers within the EU would be reduced by approximately 40%.

Commissioner Malmström said on the recast of export control for dual use items: "We are living in turbulent times. Preserving peace and protecting human rights are core objectives of the EU and our trade policy is essential to that aim. That's why we are proposing a set of modern rules to make sure that exports are not misused to threaten international security or undermine human rights". 

A comprehensive initiative to codify, recast and repeal trade legislation, streamline reporting requirements and to carry out alignment with requirements in the Lisbon treaty is reaching completion with the update of 26 acts (see scoreboard for details).



Priority 7: An area of Justice and Fundamental Rights based on Mutual Trust

1.Context



The EU strives to make life easier for Europeans who study, work, shop, travel or get married in other EU countries, so that citizens feel at ease and trust that their rights are protected, no matter where they happen to be in the European Union. To do this, the EU builds bridges between the different national legal systems. A borderless and seamless European justice area ensures that citizens can enjoy their rights across the continent. Regulatory Fitness initiatives contribute to this by examining if existing legislation is fit for purpose, whether laws can be simplified and unnecessary costs reduced.

2.New REFIT Initiatives



Under the Commission Work Programme 2017, work is planned for the legislative revision of the:

EU Consumer Law: Preliminary results under the on-going Fitness Check of EU Consumer Law show that cross-border misleading marketing practices create damages to businesses of more than EUR 500 million annually. A strengthened protection could significantly reduce the number of fraudulent practices.

Schengen Information System: The evaluation of the existing system pointed to a number of policy choices regarding scope, data protection, overall architecture and security of the system which could be assessed in the preparation of the proposal.

ePrivacy Directive to update it in the light of latest technological developments and taking into account the opinion of the REFIT Platform.

New Evaluations: In 2017, the Commission will carry-out a Fitness Check of counter-terrorism instruments.

Follow-up to REFIT Platform Opinions: In its opinion on the ePrivacy Directive, the REFIT Platform recommends that the revised ePrivacy Directive is aligned with the General Data Protection Regulation, that additional exceptions to the ‘consent’ rule for cookies are considered and that the Commission addresses national implementation problems. The Commission will pay particular attention to these recommendations in the context of the ePrivacy review, with a proposal for a revised directive planned for adoption early in 2017.

3.Progress and Results



Evaluations and follow-up: In 2016 and 2017, results are expected of Fitness Checks and evaluations in the areas of consumer law, emergency travel documents and equal treatment in social security. Since May 2015, two evaluations have been concluded and were followed-up by legislative proposals in the areas of consumer protection cooperation and recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility (Brussels IIA Regulation):

Consumer protection cooperation: The proposal (COM(2016)283) will help Member states to enforce EU law more efficiently and in a coordinated manner for cross border markets. This will in turn benefit consumers by making market conditions safe when purchasing across borders.

Brussels IIA Regulation (COM(2016)411): Citizens seeking recognition and enforcement of judgments in matrimonial matters and matters of parental responsibility will be able to reduce current average procedure costs of EUR 2,200 considerably through the abolition of the exequatur process (specific authorisation of enforcement of a judgment).

Pending proposals and adopted legal acts: Three main legal acts have been adopted by Council and Parliament and are being implemented and another 5 proposals by the Commission are pending in legislative procedure.

These include legislation on Personal Data Protection. Adopted in April 2016, a single European law for data protection will replace 28 national laws and lead to estimated savings of up to EUR 2.3 billion per year. The new EU law means direct benefits for citizens through better data protection and for businesses that will see their administrative burdens reduced and will be able to operate with one single legislative framework throughout the Union.

Joint Statement on the final adoption of the new EU rules for personal data protection: "The new rules will ensure that the fundamental right to personal data protection is guaranteed for all. The General Data Protection Regulation will help stimulate the Digital Single Market in the EU by fostering trust in online services by consumers and legal certainty for businesses based on clear and uniform rules. These rules are for the benefit of everyone in the EU. Individuals must be empowered: they must know what their rights are, and know how to defend their rights if they feel they are not respected. Our work in creating first-rate data protection rules providing for the world's highest standard of protection is complete. Now we must work together to implement these new standards across the EU so citizens and businesses can enjoy the benefits as soon as possible." Joint Statement by First Vice President Frans Timmermans, Vice President Andrus Ansip and Commissioner Vera Jourova  http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-16-1403_en.htm )



Implementation on the ground: two REFIT initiatives have reached the stage of implementation by Member States:

Package Travel: The Directive is estimated to save consumers EUR 430 million/year by reinforcing their rights. Simplification and cutting red-tape measures are expected to reduce costs for businesses by EUR 475 million per year.

Small Claims: The Regulation on small claims allows for a simplified and accelerated civil procedure for cross-border claims up to a certain maximum value. The Regulation was estimated to reduce average court proceeding costs by EUR 1,250 for any case which would otherwise have to be dealt with under national ordinary civil proceedings. The use of modern communication technologies promoted by the new Regulation could reduce costs of proceedings further by between EUR 300 and EUR 700 per case and shorten court proceedings by 9 days on average. The Commission proposed application of this procedure for claims up to a threshold of EUR 10.000. This was reduced by the legislator to EUR 5.000 with the result that estimated savings may not be fully realized.



Priority 8: Towards a New Policy on Migration

1.    Context

Under the European Agenda on Migration, the Commission has worked with the European Parliament, the Council and the Member States to enable a swift coordinated response to the refugee crisis and to outline a long-term framework based on solidarity and responsibility. Regulatory Fitness contributes to these objectives by ensuring that the current EU acquis on migration remains fit for purpose; that opportunities for simplification are used and that costs and burdens are reduced while the benefits of EU law are maintained.

2.    New REFIT Initiatives

Commission Work Programme 2017: In 2017, the Commission will carry-out a legislative revision of the Visa Information System (VIS) following up on the results of an evaluation. A comprehensive Fitness Check on legislation in the area of legal migration will also start in 2017.

Visa Information System: The evaluation of the Visa Information System completed in October 2016 found that the costs of setting up the VIS were outweighed by the gains brought by the system in terms of simplifying the visa procedure. At the same time the evaluation showed that Member States need to do more to implement the VIS in order to reap its full benefits and it recommends that the VIS regulatory framework is updated to respond to new challenges in visa, border and security policies.

3.    Progress and Results

Evaluations and follow-up: An evaluation of the legislation on unauthorized entry, transit and residence is expected to be completed before the end of 2016.

Pending proposals and adopted legal acts: While legal acts codifying the Schengen Borders Code and on Entry and stay in the EU for third-country nationals students, researchers and other groups have been adopted by the legislator in 2016, the Commission proposal on a revision of the Visa Code made in 2014 remains pending in legislative procedure.

Revision of the Visa Code: The proposal for a revision of the Visa Code aims to shorten and simplify procedures for short stays visits reducing costs and bureaucracy while maintaining a high level of security. As a result, the common visa policy would become more user-friendly and efficient for both the visa applicants and the visa issuing authorities.

Conditions for the entry and residence of third-country nationals for students, researchers and other groups: The recast Directive adopted on 11 May 2016 aligns, simplifies and improves existing provisions for entry and residence of certain third-country nationals. It will lead to a decrease of administrative burdens and enable more intra-EU mobility of third-country researchers and students and facilitate job-seeking and business creation.

The Schengen borders code codified in March 2016, will compile all existing amendments into one text, making the provisions clearer, more accessible and easier to apply.

Asylum: The Commission proposed a revision of the Common European Asylum System in order to move towards a fully efficient, fair and humane asylum policy which can function effectively both in times of normal and high migratory pressure.

Commissioner Dimitris Avramopoulos said on the adoption of the recast Directive on entry and residence of third-country nationals for students, researchers and other groups: "Hosting more students and researchers is good for the EU economy, promoting more contacts between young people from different educational and research cultures."



Priority 10: A Union of Democratic Change

1.    Context

Better regulation, accountability and transparency continue to be the core business model of this Commission and all EU institutions need to apply these principles in a consistent and committed manner in order to win back the trust of citizens.

2.    New REFIT Initiatives

Commission Work Programme 2017: To ensure that the EU's legal instruments have the intended effect, the Commission intends to step up its efforts on the application, implementation and enforcement of EU law. This includes proposals to simplify environmental reporting following the recent Fitness Check, and measures to facilitate access to justice and support environmental compliance assurance in Member States:

Simplification of environmental reporting: The Commission plans to enable the development of a more modern, effective and efficient monitoring and reporting for EU environment policy in order to reduce regulatory burdens and make environmental information more visible and accessible to citizens.

Access to Justice: The Commission will promote effective judicial protection at national level in environmental matters when implementing EU law while reflecting the case-law of the European Court of Justice.

Environmental Compliance Assurance: The Commission will support environmental compliance assurance in Member States. 

Follow-up to REFIT Platform Opinions: The REFIT Platform adopted an opinion on the European Citizens' Initiative suggesting that it could become more 'fit for purpose' through simpler requirements for the preparation of such initiatives and a revision of the legal framework. The Commission will consider this when it takes measures to simplify the implementation of the ECI.

(1) http://ec.europa.eu/info/law-making-process/evaluating-and-improving-existing-laws/refit-making-eu-law-simpler-and-less_en  REFIT was launched in December 2012 (see COM(2012)746). It builds on experience gained with the Administrative Burden Reduction (ABR) Programme implemented since 2007 and integrates other initiatives related to regulatory fitness such as the Simplification Programme and the follow up to the ABR programme (ABR+) and to the Top 10 consultation, as well as the SME Scoreboard:
(2)  The Platform is composed of high-level experts from business, civil society (including the social partners) the Economic and Social Committee, and the Committee of Regions and Member States. The Platform receives suggestions sent in via the 'Lighten the load – Have your say' website. It can bring in ideas from the Platform members themselves or their contact networks.
(3) http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/refit/simplification/consultation/consultation_en.htm#up  
(4)  COM(2015)215 final
(5)  SWD(2016)400, part 2.
(6)  In the context of the proposal for repeal of the Standardised Reporting Directive (91/692/EEC) planned for end 2016.
(7)  Initiative for Monitoring, Transparency and Focused Reporting planned in the Commission Work Programme for 2017.
(8)  Calculation based on the possibility for a single delegated and implementing regulation for each major heading of the CMO, including 15 Commission Regulations on marketing standards.
Top

Strasbourg, 25.10.2016

SWD(2016) 400 final

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme
REFIT and the 10 Priorities of the Commission

Accompanying the document

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

Commission Work Programme 2017

Delivering a Europe that protects, empowers and defends

{COM(2016) 710 final}


Table of Contents

Introduction

Priority 1: A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Agriculture and Rural Development

Initiatives in the area of Environment

Initiatives in the area of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries

Priority 2: A Connected Digital Single Market

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Communications Networks, Content and Technology

Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

Priority 3: A resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Climate action

Initiatives in the area of Energy

Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

Initiatives in the area of Transport

Priority 4: A deeper and fairer internal market with a strengthened industrial base

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Competition

Initiatives in the area of Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union

Initiatives in the area of Health and Food Safety

Initiatives in the area of Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs

Initiatives in the area of Transport

Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs

Priority 5: A Deeper and Fairer Economic and Monetary Union

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion

Initiatives in the area of Statistics

Priority 6: A Reasonable and Balanced Free Trade Agreement with the U.S.

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Trade Policy

Priority 7: Upholding the rule of law and linking up Europe’s justice systems

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality

Initiatives in the area of Communications Networks, Content and Technology

Priority 8: Towards a New Policy on Migration

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Migration and Home Affairs

Priority 10: A Union of Democratic Change

Overview

Initiatives in the area of Environment



REFIT Scoreboard

Introduction

The REFIT Scoreboard shows the current state of play in the implementation of 231 initiatives for simplification and burden reduction taken by the Commission in its Regulatory Fitness and Performance Programme (REFIT). 1

REFIT aims to make sure that EU law remains fit for purpose and delivers the results intended by policy makers in the most efficient and effective way. It targets removing red tape and lowering costs without compromising policy objectives and EU high standards. REFIT is about regulating better, making EU legislation fit for purpose, simpler and less costly, aiming to ensure a clear, stable and predictable regulatory framework supporting the delivery of our common goals and allowing businesses and our citizens more freedom to pursue their goals.

REFIT initiatives have been taken in nine Commission priority areas covering the whole policy cycle including: evaluations of the performance of EU regulation, Commission proposals for EU legislation, adopted EU legislation and feedback on implementation and results achieved on the ground by Member States and stakeholders. Estimates on regulatory costs and benefits are included wherever this information is available and input by the REFIT Platform is indicated.

Within each policy area, the scoreboard provides a timeline and groups related initiatives by policy area or subject. Each entry includes a summary and information on the state of play at each step of the policy cycle and provides a general indication of progress towards meeting Better Regulation aims.

For a summary of the key elements of the Scoreboard please refer to SWD (2016) 400 final, part 1. In the course of 2017, the Commission is planning to set up a web-based version of the Scoreboard on its Better Regulation Portal. This will improve user-friendliness and allow for more regular updates.

Feedback on the REFIT Scoreboard and on any initiative included in it is welcome at the following website: Lighten the Load – Have your Say



Priority 1: A New Boost for Jobs, Growth and Investment

Overview

1.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Agriculture

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Simplification of CMO and modernization of the CAP

Commission proposal

Several Regulations in the pipeline for 2016 and 2017

Legal act

18 Regulations (9 Delegated and 9 Implementing) already adopted

Greening

Evaluation

1) Review after first year of implementation (finalized 2016)

2) Evaluation

(expected Q4 2017)

Adjustment of DA/IA

(Expected Q4 2016)

Possible adjustment of IA (2017)

Organic Farming

Commission Proposal

24 March 2014

Legal Act

pending in legislative procedure6

State aid rules in agriculture

Evaluation

planned for 2017

Legal act

New legal framework applicable as from 01/07/2014

Implementation

Application on 01/01/2014 and 01/06/2014

Egg labelling (ABRPlus)

Commission proposal

1 July 2007

Legal Act

22 October 2007

Implementation

Applies with effect from 1 July 2007

POSEI programme

Evaluation

Ongoing and expected to be finalised Q4 2016



2.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Environment

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

EU Nature Legislation

Fitness Check

(ongoing)

Drinking Water Directive

Evaluation

(expected Q4 2016)

Commission proposal

planned in 2017

REACH

Evaluation (expected Q2 2017)

European Pollutant release and Transfer register (EPRTR)

Evaluation

(ongoing)

Strategic Environmental Assessment

Implementation Report
(expected Q1 2017)

Follow-Up evaluation
(planned to start in 2017)

Waste Policy

Fitness Check 2014

Circular Economy Proposal

2 December 2015

Circular Economy Legal Acts (pending)

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE)

Commission Proposal

(Adopted 3 December 2008)

Legal Act

(Adopted 4 July 2013)

Implementation

Application on 14 February 2014

Transposition Deadline 14 February 2014

Shipments of Waste 

Commission Proposal 

11 July 2013 

Legal Act 

15 May 2014

Implementation 

Application on 1 January 2016

Export for recovery of non-hazardous waste

(TRADE)

Evaluation

planned in 2018

Legal act

Adopted on 24 June 2014

Implementation

Application on 18th July 2014

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)

Commission Proposal adopted 2012

Legal Act adopted 2014

Implementation

Application on 16 May 2017

Transposition Deadline 16 May 2017

EMAS and EU Eco Label

Fitness Check

(ongoing)

Environmental Liability

Evaluation

(completed in 2016)

Commission Follow-Up

Infrastructure for Spatial Information (INSPIRE)

Evaluation

(completed in 2016)

Follow-Up

Noise

Evaluation

(ongoing)

Volatile organic compound emissions - Stage I and Stage II - Petrol Vapour Recovery (VOCs)

Evaluation VOCI

(Ongoing)

Evaluation VOCII

(Ongoing)

Protection of Animals used for Scientific Purposes

Review Report

(expected Q4 2017)

Wild animals in Zoos

Evaluation

(expected Q4 2017)

Flood Risks

Evaluation

Planned in 2018

Bathing Water

Evaluation

(expected 2019)

Marine Environment Policy

Evaluation

Planned in 2019



3.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy

Commission proposal

13 July 2011

Legal Act

11 December 2013 

Implementation

Applies with effect from 1 January 2014

Common market organisation in fishery and aquaculture

Commission proposal

13 July 2011

Legal Act

11 December 2013 

Implementation

Applies with effect from 1 January 2014

Technical Measures for the Protection of Marine Organisms

Commission proposal

11 March 2016

Fishing authorisation

Commission proposal

10 December 2015

Fisheries Control Regulation

Evaluation

ongoing and planned to be finalised Q4 2016

Initiatives in the area of Agriculture and Rural Development

Simplification of Common Market Organisation and Modernisation of the CAP

Overall State of Play:

Under implementation

Summary

Summary:

Within the simplification exercise of the Common Market Organisation, the Commisison reviews current regulations with the aim to simplify and reduce administrative burdens and increase the coherence between different sectors aligning them at the same time with Lisbon Treaty empowerments laid down in the new CMO Regulation. (Reg. 1308/2013).

The initiative will rationalise the Commission-level regulations linked to the Regulation on a Common Organisation of the Markets in agricultural products (CMO Regulation) by reducing more than 200 existing Commission Regulations into 40 implementing and delegated acts.

In addition, the Commission will take forward work and consult widely on simplification and modernisation of the Common Agricultural Policy to maximise its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals. This will focus on specific policy priorities for the future, taking account of the opinion of the REFIT Platform, and without prejudice to the Commisson proposal to revise the Multiannual Financial Framework.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

On the Common Agricultural Policy, the REFIT Platform issued three opinions on the efficiency of the CAP, cross compliance and overlaps between Pillars I and II. The REFIT Platform Stakeholder group recommended to carry out a more strategic review of the CAP with a view to ensuring the effectiveness and efficiency of the CAP, while the Government group objected to such a review and, instead recommended to follow the existing evaluation planning established by Regulation 1306/2013. The Commission will be consulting the public throughout 2017 on the simplification and modernisation of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) to maximize its contribution to the Commission's ten priorities and to the Sustainable Development Goals. This will focus on specific policy priorities for the future, taking account of the opinions of the Refit Platform.

Estimated savings and benefits

Savings and benefits of the CMO Simplification could not be quantified given data limitations. A qualitative analysis suggests:

Higher economic efficiency of the EU regulatory framework

Cuts in administrative burden for 1) economic actors 2) Member State adminsitrations 3) Commission services, through the replacement of more than 200 Commission regulations by 40 delegated and implementing regulations 2 .



State of Play:

18 Regulations (9 Delegated and 9 Implementing) have already been adopted. Another 12 are in the pipeline for 2016 and further 6 for 2017

Legal acts

All Commission-level regulations linked to the Regulation on a Common Organisation of the Markets in agricultural products (CMO Regulation)

Adopted Regulations:

Olive oil aid: Delegated Regulation (EU) No 611/2014 (11 March 2014)

Implementing Regulation (EU) No 615/2014 (6 June 2014)

Vine plantings: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/560 (15 December 2014)

Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/561 (7 April 2015)

Apiculture: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/1366 (11 May 2015)

Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1368 (6 August 2015)

Producer cooperation: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/232 (15 December 2015)

Wine programmes: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1149(15 April 2016)

Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1150 (15 April 2016)

Sugar: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1166 (17 May 2016)

Trade mechanisms – licences: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1237 (18 May 2016)

Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1239 (18 May 2016)

Public intervention/Private Storage: Delegated Regulation (EU) 2016/1238 (18 May 2016)

Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1240 (18 May 2016)

Regulations on the pipeline:

Member States' notifications (ISAMM): CIS completed January 2016. Implementing regulation currently subject to further review and discussion with MS and SJ. Adoption planned Q4.

Fruit and vegetables: Discussion of draft DA/IA with MS nearly concluded, but internal Commission discussions continuing. Adoption anticipated by end Q4.

Trade mechanisms – TRQs: Discussions of draft DA/IA started with MS. Adoption planned Q4.

Carcass classification: Discussion of draft DA/IA with MS nearly concluded. Adoption planned Q4.

Trade mechanisms – residual issues: Discussion of a first issues paper with MS June 2016.

School schemes: CIS to be launched shortly. Adoption planned Q4.

Alignment/simplification of Commission implementing regulation on wine registers

Alignment/simplification of Commission implementing regulation on wine quality terms

Possible alignment/simplification of marketing standards

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Simplification and Burden Reduction.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Reduction of error rate, and improved coherence/consistency.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. The analysis is mainly qualitative: important reductions are expected in administrative burdens for 1) economic actors 2) Member States' administrations 3) Commission services.



Greening / Environmental Focus Areas

Overall State of Play

Review after one year of application completed

Adjustment of secondary legislation ongoing

Evaluation of basic act planned for Q4 2016 (by end 2017)

Possible revision of main legal act in 2018

Summary

Summary:

The initiatives in this area should provide a full overview on how this new policy instrument is performing, identify main obstacles to its implementation and come forward with concrete suggestions for simplification leading to reduced administrative costs.

The first step was a review carried out in the first half of 2016 assessing how the greening system was applied in its first year. The results of this review were fed into the ongoing process of adjusting the underlying secondary legislation, which is to be finalised by the end of 2016. A Commission report on implementation of EFA is scheduled in 1Q 2017. The Commission is also launching a full-fledged evaluation of the performance of the full set of greening provisions, which is to be completed by end 2017. The results of this evaluation will be used to inform discussion on the post-2020 CAP.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

The two REFIT Platform opinions on Cross-compliance rules and overlaps between Pillars I and II in the CAP include recommendations from some members of the Stakeholder group that the Commission examines the system of controls applying to Pillar II, introduces "soft measures" (simplification of requirements placed on farmers within the existing framework), possibly leading to the revision of the legislation in the context of a broader CAP review. There was also support from some Stakeholder group members that the Commission examines the possibility to introduce a "more targeted, risk-based and proportionate controls regime" under Pillar II. Some members of the Government group supported urgent review of Pillars I and II with a view to simplification, while others considered it too early to undertake this work that would require modification of the basic acts.

The Commission will pay particular attention to these recommendations in the forthcoming evaluation on greening and ensure that there is a primary focus on the direct payments greening component.

The overall scope of the evaluation is the full set of green direct payments.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission will analyse these aspects in future studies on the administrative burden and the costs of managing the Common Agricultural Policy to be launched in 2017. The findings of these studies are to be published before the end of 2018. The efficiency of the greening measures will also be assessed as part of the forthcoming evaluation on greening planned to start in Q4 2016.



State of Play:

Release of SWD(2016) 218

Ongoing work on delegated and implementing regulations

Review after one year of application (SWD)

Scope

The review aimed at assessing the experience after one year of implementation of greening and identifying possible areas for regulatory adjustment at the level of the relevant secondary legislation (Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 639/2014, Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 641/2014).

Evaluation Findings

The review identified issues for simplification in the underlying secondary legislation (delegated and implementing acts). These fall into the following categories:

-better specification or clarification of what is required from farmers and national administrations;

-eliminating some burdensome technical requirements (making sure that this does not lead to lowering of environmental benefits);

-providing more flexibility or alternative options where this increases the environmental and climate benefits of greening; and

-further harmonisation of some requirements and conditions.

Estimated savings and benefits

The quantitative assessment of benefits is not possible at such an early stage of greening implementation. After only one year of implementation, sufficient hard data on the costs and burdens associated with the new greening measures is still not available (as explained in the ‘Review of greening after one year’ (SWD (2016) 218).

The Commission will analyse these aspects in future studies on the administrative burden and the costs of manage the CAP to be launched in 2017. The findings of these studies are to be published before the end of 2018. The efficiency of the greening measures will also be assessed as part of the forthcoming evaluation on greening planned to start in Q4 2016.

State of Play:

The adjustment of DA/IA is ongoing and is to be completed by Q4 2016.

Commission Delegated / Implementing Acts

Scope:

The review of the first year of implementation of greening identified a number of issues requiring simplification at the level of the relevant secondary legislation. They relate mainly to the need to facilitate procedures for farmers and national administrations with a view to increasing the take up of greening and ensuring its effectiveness and efficiency in meeting its environmental objectives.

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The main policy objective is to facilitate the implementation of greening for farmers and public administrations in view of increasing its take up. For this purpose, it is necessary to clarify some provisions and to simplify the administrative management, without jeopardising the CAP environmental policy objectives and sound financial management.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The final purpose is to ensure effectiveness and efficiency of the scheme as regards its environmental objectives and facilitate its implementation by farmers and/or national administrations as simpler rules normally reduce the risk of non-compliance.

Estimated savings and benefits

Quantitative assessment of costs and benefits is not possible at this stage. After only one year of implementation, sufficient hard data on the costs and burdens associated with the new greening measures is still not available (as explained in the ‘Review of greening after one year’ (SWD (2016) 218).

The Commission will analyse these aspects, including the benefits and costs of the adjustments to the Delegated and Implementing Acts, in future studies on the administrative burden and the costs of management of the CAP to be launched in 2017.

The efficiency of the greening measures will also be assessed as part of the forthcoming evaluation on greening planned to start in Q4 2016. 

State of Play:

Planned start Q4 2016

Completion Q4 2017

Evaluation

Scope:

The focus of the evaluation is on the full set of green direct payments.

The purpose of this evaluation is to evaluate the impacts of the green direct payment scheme as implemented by Member States. The evaluation will give a full overview on how this new policy instrument is performing against its objectives and should provide a solid evidence basis for considering possible policy changes in the greening domain.

Evaluation findings:

Expected for Q4 2017

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected for Q4 2017



Organic farming

 Overall State of Play

Proposal in March 2014

Pending in legislative procedure- Legal Act expected early 2017

no challenge to REFIT objectives in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

The initiative aims at modernising and harmonising the internal rules for organic production, the elimination of exceptions and flexibilities. It also aims at improving consumer confidence in organics by adopting provisions for the exclusion of contaminated products and aligning controls with the official controls framework. It creates a level playing field for imported goods. It also simplifies and clarifies the organic farming rules.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission proposal foresees elimination of 37 of the current 135 information obligations by operators.

Due to the absence of data, the potential savings for operators could not be quantified.

The initiative will increase the competitiveness of EU operators by harmonising the rules and eliminating current flexibilities on imports. It will also reduce certification costs for operators, by application of the risk analysis criteria, introduction of group certification and fee transparency.



State of Play:

Proposal from the Commission of 24 March 2014 – COM(2014) 180

Commission Proposal

Commission proposal to revise:

   Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 of 28 June 2007 on production and labelling of organic products and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91;

   Commission Regulation (EC) No 889/2008 of 5 September 2008 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 on organic production and labelling of organic products with regard to organic production, labelling and control

   Commission Regulation (EC) No 1235/2008 of 8 December 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 as regards the arrangements for imports of organic products from third countries

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The proposal includes the following simplification benefits:

Improvements to the overall quality of the legislation including clarifications and the filling of legislative gaps, improved accessibility as the specific organic production rules are gathered in one Annex of the Regulation;

production rules: removal of ineffective provisions and simplification of procedures for operators and national administrations, improved harmonisation by limiting exceptions, reinforcement of a risk-based approach on controls;

imports: simplification through a compliance regime for control bodies;

small farmers: significant simplification through group certification allowing for more proportionate inspection and record-keeping requirements;

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Review and simplification of the legal framework for organic farming.

Specifically, the proposal intends to:

remove obstacles to the sustainable development of organic production in the EU,

guarantee fair competition for farmers and operators and improve the functioning of the internal market,

achieve a level playing field inside the Union and with respect to imported products,

maintain or improve consumer confidence in organic products,

stimulate the growth of the organic market and of the number of corresponding jobs.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified.

State of Play:

pending in legislative procedure

Legal Act

Debate in Legislative Procedure

Inter-institutional discussions have not led to questioning the simplification objectives pursued by the Commission.

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State aid rules in agriculture

Overall State of Play

Legal act adopted in 2013

Application in 2014

Evaluation planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

The updated State aid rules applicable to the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas in the period 2014 – 2020 are better adapted to the objective of achieving growth in the rural economy and improved business and living conditions in rural areas.

The inclusion of further categories of aid in the scope of the agricultural block exemption regulation have led to simpler and speedier State aid clearance procedures. The increased ceilings for de minimis aid also means that Member States now have larger possibilites of granting aid without prior notification to the Commission. De minimis aid is perceived as being a useful tool to react quickly to urgent problems with less administrative costs, in particular as regards aid to SMEs.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings in terms of reduction of Member States administrative costs could not be fully quantified. However, it should be noted that:

85 % of the State aid cases are dealt with as exemptions under the block exemption regulation, since its adoption in 2014, compared to 70 % under the previous regulation.

The increase of the de minimis ceilings by 100 % means a significant reduction of Member States' administrative costs, but there are no figures available to measure this aspect.



State of Play:

'De Minimis' Regulation:

Adoption by the Commission on 18 December 2013

Regulation (EU) No 1408/2013.

Legal act

'De Minimis' Regulation:

   Commission Regulation (EU) No 1408/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid in the agriculture sector. This Regulation is replacing Commission Regulation (EC) n° 1537/2007.

State Aid Guidelines:

   European Union Guidelines for State aid in the agriculture and forestry sector and in rural areas 2014-2020 (2014/C 204/01)

Regulation on block-exemptions:

   Commission Regulation (EU) No 702/2014 of 25 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 193, 1.7.2014, p. 1).

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The legal framework for State aid in the agricultural and forestry sectors and in rural areas became fully applicable on 1 July 2014. The extended scope of the agricultural block exemption regulation has contributed to speedier State aid clearance procedures. That regulation and the new de minimis rules make is easier for Member States to grant aid without prior notification to the Commission.

Estimated savings and benefits

The increase of the de minimis ceilings by 100 % means a significant reduction of Member States' administrative costs, but due to the absence of data, the savings could not be quantified.



State of Play:

Application on 01/01/2014 and 01/06/2014

Evaluation Planned for 2017

Implementation

'De Minimis' Regulation: applicable since 1 January 2014

State Aid Guidelines and Regulation on block-exemptions: applicable since 1 July 2014

Member States' fulfilment of transparency requirements has been facilitated by way of a new IT tool set up at Commission level.

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Information provided by Member States on their national aid schemes is available on the State aid Transparency public search page:

https://webgate.ec.europa.eu/competition/transparency/public/search/home/

The annual State aid scoreboard provides data on Member States' expenditure under authorised aid schemes: http://ec.europa.eu/competition/state_aid/scoreboard/index_en.html

Estimated savings and benefits

85 % of the State aid cases are dealt with as exemptions under the block exemption regulation, since its adoption in 2014, compared to 70 % under the previous regulation.



Egg labelling (ABRPlus)

Overall State of Play

Simplification entered into force on 1 July 2007

Cost reductions reported between 9% and 63%  

Summary

Summary:

The EU marketing standards for eggs adopted in 2007 provided more legal clarity and flexibility to large and small egg operators. In particular, small egg producers can be exempted from having to mark their producer code on their eggs when they are sold directly to consumers.

Estimated savings and benefits

The main savings resulted from allowing better business organisation and more proportionate investments for small and large egg operators. Total savings have been estimated at arournd EUR 600 million.



State of Play:

Adopted on 1 July 2007 

COM(2011)626

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The main objective was to reduce the administrative burden for egg producers and packers.

Which other objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Member States can exempt small egg producers from the requirement to mark eggs with the producer code, when the eggs are sold directly to the consumer on a local market;

Introduction of a single 10-day-limit for collecting, grading, marking, packing of eggs and marking of packs, in order to allow producers and packing stations to better organise their daily work by planning the collection, grading marking and packing of eggs in a more rational way;

Introduction of less rigid requirements for equipment for packing stations and increased flexibility for operators for record keeping, in order to facilitate the organisation of business activities.

Estimated savings and benefits

The estimated total cost savings at the time of the Commission proposal were EUR 1,29 billion. Taking into account the "business as usual factor", which was considered to be 53 %, the total administrative burden reduction was estimated at around to EUR 600 million.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 22 October 2007

Legal act

Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007

This Regulation replaced Council Regulation (EC) No. 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 589/2008 of 23 June 2008 laying down detailed rules for implementing Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 as regards marketing standards for eggs

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

There were no major changes regarding the marketing standards of eggs in the legal act of 2013 compared to the legal act in 2007. The benefits were retained.

Estimated savings and benefits

Given that no major changes took place, the estimated savings were did not change.



State of Play:

Application date 1 July 2007

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 (and Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 which replaced it) introduced simplification options for Member States to exempt producers with less than 50 laying hens from labelling requirement.

11 Member States fully implemented both exemptions. (BG, CZ, EE, IE, IT, CY, LT, PT, SL, SE, UK). A further 5 Member States said that they fully implemented the measure, though it is unclear if they implemented both (EL, ES, HU, NL, SK).

6 Member States partially implemented the measure, which means only one of the exemption requirements (DK, DE, LV, MT, AT, FI).

Estimated savings and benefits

In 5 Member States that fully implemented the requirments cost reductions were estimated to range between 9% and 63% (CZ, LV, SI, SE, UK), while the initial estimation by the Commission predicted savings of administrative burden of around 44%.



POSEI programme

Overall State of Play

Evaluation expected to conclude Q4 2016

Summary

Summary:

An evaluation of the POSEI programme is ongoing, in order to provide an overall assessment of the impacts of the specific agricultural measures carried out for the outermost regions (POSEI programmes) and smaller Aegean Islands (PIME programme).

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected Q4 2016



State of Play:

Ongoing.

Planned to be finalised Q4 2016.

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the POSEI programmes, covering the entry into force of Regulation (EU) No 247/2006 until at least 2014 for the Outermost Regions: the Canary islands (Spain), the Azores and Madeira (Portugal) and the French overseas departments (Guadeloupe, French Guiana, Réunion, Martinique and Mayotte).

It also takes into account the implementation of the Rural Development Programmes for these areas as well as the relevant elements of the direct payments and single CMO regulation and other EU and national legislation having an impact on the performance of the POSEI programmes.

Given the similarities in objectives and measures, the evaluation also covers the measures introduced by Regulations (EU) No 1405/2006 and (EU) No 229/2013 for the smaller Aegean islands, until at least 2014.

Evaluation findings:

Expected Q4 2016

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected Q4 2016


Initiatives in the area of Environment

Natura 2000 / EU Nature Legislation

Overall state of play

ongoing

Fitness Check due for Completion Q4/2016

Follow-Up not yet determined

Summary

Summary:

The Commission carries out a Fitness Check of EU Nature Legislation.

Estimated savings and benefits

To be updated when the SWD is finalised



State of Play:

Ongoing - Expected to be finalised in Q4 2016

Fitness Check

Scope:

Fitness Check of:

Council Directive 2009/147/EEC on Birds

Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora

Evaluation findings:

Results of the Fitness Check are expected in Q4 2016. Natura 2000 Fitness Check Website:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/fitness_check/index_en.htm  

Estimated savings and benefits

To be updated when the SWD is finalised



Drinking Water Directive

Overall State of Play

Evaluation expected to complete Q4 2016

Proposal planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption. The result of this evaluation should be available during the fourth quarter of 2016. A legislative proposal is planned for 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected Q4 2016



State of Play:

Expected to be finalised in Q4 2016

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Directive 98/83/EC on the quality of water intended for human consumption

This evaluation follows on from the European Citizens Initiative on the "Right to Water". A study has been contracted to provide support.

Evaluation findings:

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.

State of Play:

Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) will the Commission pursue?

Revision of the Drinking Water Directive.

Which purpose will the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings

Information not yet available.



REACH

Overall state of play:

Implementing adopted in 2016

Evaluation to be finalised Q2 2017

Common Understanding Document on REACH/OSH planned for 2017

Summary

Summary

The Commission adopted an implementing Regulation in 2016, and evaluation of REACH is ongoing and expected to be completed by mid-2017.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

The REFIT Platform opinion on the interface between REACH and occupational health and safety recommends that the Commission should raise awareness and issue guidance on the implementation of legislation in this legislation. In response, the Commission will issue a Common Understanding explaining the interface between REACH and OSH legislation. In addition, several evaluations in this area will conclude during 2017 and assess any need for further action.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 5 Jan 2016

Commission implementing regulation (EU) 2016/9

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objectives did the Commission pursue?

Improving the implementation of REACH.

The regulation sets rules to make sure that the data-sharing agreements in substance information exchange forums (SIEFs) are clear and comprehensive. Potential registrants joining a SIEF are given the right to request a breakdown of the study and administrative costs that make up the price for the joint registration. 

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Improving the implementation of REACH

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified.

State of Play:

On going, planned to be finalised by mid 2017

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the REACH Regulation 1907/2006/EC

Evaluation findings:

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



European Pollutant release and Transfer register (EPRTR)

Overall state of play

Evaluation expected to complete Q2 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Regulation 166/2006/EC concerning the establishment of a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register. The result of this evaluation will support the report to the Council and the European parliament on the implementation of the E-PRTR that is planned for 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Ongoing - Expected to be finalised in Q2 2017

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Regulation 166/2006/EC concerning the establishment of a European Pollutant Release and Transfer Register

Evaluation findings:

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Strategic Environmental Assessment

Overall State of Play

Implementation Report Expected for Q1-2017

Follow-Up Evaluation Planned for 2017 -18

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is carrying out an implementation report to assess the application and effectiveness of Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment. The implementation report will also assess the potential for simplification.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Expected to be finalised in Q1 2017

Implementation Report

Scope:

Implementation report on the application and effectiveness of Directive 2001/42/EC on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (SEA Directive)

The second implementation report will evaluate the application and effectiveness of the Directive across the EU Member States.

Evaluation findings:

Expected in Q1 2017

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected in Q1 2017.



Waste Policy

Overall State of Play

Fitness Check 2014

Circular Economy Package adopted in 2015

Legal Acts: adoption pending

Summary

Summary:

A comprehensive FitnessCheck of the acquis in this area in 2014 confirmed that legislation is effective in achieving the environmental and resource efficiency objectives for which they were designed.

In 2015, the Commission adopted an ambitious Circular Economy Package, which included revised legislative proposals on waste, to boost competitiveness, foster sustainable economic growth and generate new jobs.

The revised legislative proposals on waste set clear targets for increasing recycling and reducing landfilling of waste and establishes an ambitious and credible long-term path for waste management and recycling to stimulate Europe's transition towards a circular economy.

Other benefits include:

Contributing to the EU's efforts to develop a sustainable, low carbon, resource efficient and competitive economy by maintaining the value of products, materials and resources in the economy for as long as possible, and minimising waste.

Protecting businesses against scarcity of resources and volatile prices, helping to create new business opportunities and innovative, more efficient ways of producing and consuming.

Creating local jobs at all skills levels and opportunities for social integration and cohesion.

Saving energy and avoiding negative impacts on climate, biodiversity, air, soil and water.

Estimated savings and benefits

As an indication of the potential benefits, it has been estimated that waste prevention, ecodesign, re-use and similar measures could bring net savings of €600 billion, or 8% of annual turnover, for businesses in the EU, while reducing total annual greenhouse gas emissions by 2-4 %. In the sectors of re-use, re-manufacturing and repair, for example, the cost of remanufacturing mobile phones could be halved if it were easier to take them apart. If 95% of mobile phones were collected, this could generate savings on manufacturing material costs of more than €1 billion. A shift from recycling to refurbishing light commercial vehicles, where collection rates are already high, could save material inputs by €6.4 billion per year (about 15% of material budget)and €140 million in energy costs and reduce GHG emissions by 6.3 million tonnes.



State of Play:

Finalised in 2014 -SWD(2014) 209

Fitness Check

Scope:

Fitness check of Five Waste Stream Directives accompanying the document Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council reviewing the targets in Directives 2008/98/EC on waste, 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste, and 1999/31/EC on the landfill of waste, amending Directives 2000/53/EC on end-of-life vehicles, 2006/66/EC on batteries and accumulators and waste batteries and accumulators, and 2012/19/EC on waste electrical and electronic equipment.

Evaluation findings:

The Fitness Check concluded that all five Waste Stream Directives screened have proven to be effective instruments of European waste policy. All the directives assessed have been effective at various degrees in achieving the environmental and resource efficiency objectives for which they were designed.

Estimated savings and benefits

A comprehensive assessement of costs and benefits was undertaken as part of the waste policy and targets review under the Circular Economy package, including through modelling.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on2 December 2015

Adoption by the legislator: pending

Savings: 25-30 billion (2015-2035)

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Administrative burden reduction and simplification of reporting requirements.

Which purpose did the Commission pursue?

The revised legislative proposals on waste set clear targets for reduction of waste and established an ambitious and credible long-term path for waste management and recycling. Key elements of the revised waste proposal include:

­A common EU target for recycling 65% of municipal waste by 2030;

­A common EU target for recycling 75% of packaging waste by 2030;

­A binding landfill target to reduce landfill to maximum of 10% of municipal waste by 2030;

­A ban on landfilling of separately collected waste;

­Promotion of economic instruments to discourage landfilling ;

­Simplified and improved definitions and harmonised calculation methods for recycling rates throughout the EU;

­Concrete measures to promote re-use and stimulate industrial symbiosis – turning one industry's by-product into another industry's raw material;

Economic incentives for producers to put greener products on the market and support recovery and recycling schemes (e.g. for packaging, batteries, electric and electronic equipment, vehicles).

Estimated savings and benefits

-Savings: the net social benefits are estimated at 25-30 billion euro for the period 2015-2030

-Job creation – 170.000 direct jobs could be created by 2035, most of them impossible to delocalize outside the EU;

-GHG emission reduction – more than 600 millions of tons of green house gas could be avoided between 2015 and 2035;

-Positive effects on the competitiveness of the EU waste management and recycling sectors as well as on the EU manufacturing sector (better extended producer responsibility schemes, reduced risks associated with raw material access);

-Reinjection into the EU economy of secondary raw materials which in turn will reduce the dependency of the EU on raw materials imports;

-Administrative burden reduction by simplifying reporting requirements on Member States saving an estimated 280 man-days per year and exemptions for establishments collecting or transporting small amounts of non-hazardous waste.

State of Play:

Pending in legislative Procedure

Legal Acts

Debate in Legislative Procedure

Discussion is on-going in the Council and the European Parliament; trialogues are expected in the first half of 2017. The positions of the Council and the Parliament are divergent what concerns the level of ambition of the targets and some provisions.

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The adoption of the legislative proposals could be expected by end 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

The change in the estimated benefits depends on the level of the targets that will be agreed by the elegislator. The impact assessement has shown that higher targets lead to greater benefits.

The overall reduction of the administrative burden will depend on the exact content of the obligations that may be eventually adopted by the co-legislators.



Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE)

Overall State of Play:

Proposal December 2008

Legal Act 2012: Benefits reduced by legislator

Transposition Deadline : 14 February 2014

Summary

Summary:

The recast WEEE Directive 2012/19/EU clarifies producer reponsibilities and includes an SME exemption for take-back obligations.

The Commission's proposal for one single registration for all EU obligations, with interoperability and data-transfer between Member State producer registers was not maintained by the legislator,the associated simplification benefits could therefore not be realized. The introduction of harmonisation elements on registration and reporting in the recast WEEE Directive 2012/19/EU, is expected to reduce administrative burdens. 

The Commission's proposal for one single registration for all EU obligations, with interoperability and data-transfer between Member State producer registers was not maintained by the legislator,the associated simplification benefits could therefore not be realized.

Input from the REFIT Platform 

In its opinion on Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) the REFIT Platform recommends that the Commission "take action in order to implement a common harmonised reporting and registration system of EEE producers", that takes enforcement and manageability into account without adding unnecessary burden on the Member States. The Platform further specifies that this action should be carried out in time to allow its implementation by mid-2018. The opinion confirms the evidence gathered by the European Commission and reinforces the need for action.

On the basis of the Platform opinion and other evidence gathered, the Commission is planning further simplification and development of reporting and registration arrangements in the first half of 2017. This will give Member States the time to adapt (if needed) their existing national registration systems by mid-2018. A study has been finalised in January 2016 on the format for the registration and reporting and action is planned in the first half of 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

The first reports from the Member States on the implementation of the Directive were submitted by the end of September 2016. Their analysis wil provide information to assess the actual impacts/ benefits from the implementation of the Directive.

The adoption of an implementing act establishing the format for registration and reporting and the frequency of reporting to the register provided for in the recast WEEE Directive (Article 16(3)), which is planned to be adopted in 2017, is expected to reduce administrative burdens substantially, especially for producers active in more than one Member State.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 03/12/2008

Ref COM(2008)810

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

One of the core objectives of the Commission's WEEE recast proposal was the reduction of unnecessary administrative burdens by clarifying that producer responsibilities are based on a European approach. In line with this, it had proposed one single registration for all EU obligations, with interoperability and data-transfer between Member State producer registers.

In line with the objective to reduce unnecessary administrative burdens especially for SMEs the proposal provided for distributors with a selling area below 400 square metres to be exempted from requirements to tack-back very small WEEE, though distributors with a larger selling area will have such an obligation.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The main objectives of the Commission proposal were to improve coherence with existing EU legislation (e.g. Waste Framework Directive), to enhance the implementation and enforcement of current provisions in order to achieve better results concerning especially the collection of WEEE and to lessen the administrative burden on businesses.

Estimated savings and benefits

The overall cost savings from harmonised registration and reporting was estimated to €66.3 million

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 4 July 2012

Directive 2012/19

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

Negotiations between Parliament, Council and Commission resulted in a compromise which contained a national approach to producer obligations as demanded by the Council, however coupled with harmonisation elements on registration and reporting. With these elements, the recast WEEE Directive 2012/19/EU is expected to cut unnecessary burdens substantially. Proportionally, SMEs are presumed to benefit the most.

While the recast WEEE Directive (Article 5(2)c) foresees an obligation for distributors to provide for the collection of very small WEEE free of charge to end-users and with no obligation to buy EEE of an equivalent type, small shops (with a sales surface of up to 400 square metres) are exempt from this obligation to protect them from disproportionate costs.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission's proposal for one single registration for all EU obligations, with interoperability and data-transfer between Member State producer registers was not maintained by the legislator,the associated simplification benefits could therefore not be realized. No specific quantified update of the estimated savings was performed.



State of Play:

Application on 14 February 2014

Transposition Deadline 14 February 2014

Evaluation Planned for XX

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

A number of Member States were late in transposing the Directive. The year 2016 is the first year of implementation in all 28 Member States.

The first report by Member States shall cover the period from 14 February 2014 to 31 December 2015. The reports shall be made available to the Commission by 30 September 2016. Information on implementation is therefore currently being processed.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not available.

The first implementation reports from MS were submitted by the end of September 2016. Their analysis will provide informationon the savings from the implementation of the SME exemption for take-back obligations.

The introduction in the recast WEEE Directive (Article 16(3)) of the request to the Commission to adopt an implementing act establishing the format for registration and reporting and the frequency of reporting to the register, is expected to reduce administrative burdens substantially, especially for producers active in more than one Member State. The adoption of the implementing act is expected at the end of 2017. Not specific information on the savings from the adoption of the implementing act is available.

State of Play:

Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Implementing act on a standard format and frequency of reporting

Which REFIT objective(s) will the Commission pursue?

Legislative - Implementing act on a standard format and frequency of reporting.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

In its opinion on Waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) the REFIT Platform recommends that the Commission take action in order to implement a common harmonised reporting and registration system that takes enforcement and manageability into account without adding unnecessary burden on the Member States. The Platform further specifies that this action should be carried out in time for allowing implementation by mid-2018.

The Opinion confirms the evidence gathered by the European Commission and reinforces the need for action. On the basis of the Platform Opinion and other evidence gathered, the Commission is planning further simplification and development of reporting and registration arrangements for in the first half of 2017. This time schedule will give to Member States the time to adapt (if needed) the existing national registration systems by mid-2018.

Which other objectives will the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Shipments of waste

Overall State of Play

Proposal 2013

Legal Act 2014

Date of application: 1 January 2016 

Savings on the ground exceeded estimations

Summary

Summary:

The initiative should lead to a reduction in administrative costs by companies and public administrations in the management of waste shipments and at the same time allow for increased repatriation of illegal waste shipments.

Estimated savings and benefits

Savings were estimated in 2010 at EUR 44 million corresponding to 50% of the administrative baseline burden.

These savings were confirmed in legislative procedure. Member States feedback on implementation in spring 2015 showed cost reductions beyond those initially estimated by the Commission totalling up to 70% of the administrative baseline burden for 5 Member States.

The evaluation of the Waste Shipment Regulation to be carried out by 2018-19 will assess whether the WSR generates any unnecessary administrative or technical barriers.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 11/07/2013

COM(2013)516

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objectives did the Commission pursue?

Proposal of a mandatory electronic data interchange between national authorities and operators for waste shipments in order to reduce administrative burden and costs associated with the management of waste shipments and the repatriation of illegal waste shipments.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Strengthen the provisions regarding the enforcement of rules and inspections covered by Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 with a view to ensuring regular and consistent planning of inspections.

Introduce the possibility for competent authorities in Member States to require evidence from waste exporters in order to check the legality of shipments.

The initiative should help ensure a more uniform implementation of the Regulation with a focus on problematic waste streams, It should also facilitate the access to raw materials.

Estimated savings and benefits

In 2010, the High Level Group of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burden estimated that the introduction of an appropriate e-Government system to replace the manual processing of the large amounts of notification and movement documents throughout the Union could generate annual savings of up to €44 million.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 15 May 2014

Reference Regulation (EU) No 660/2014

Legal Act

Debate in Legislative Procedure

Parliament proposed a mandatory electronic data interchange for the submission of waste shipment related documents, as soon as the relevant technical and organisational requirements have been adopted.

The Council rejected the introduction of a mandatory electronic data interchange as Member States prefer to continue with an optional approach. However, the Council proposed that the Commission adopts implementing acts establishing the technical and organisational requirements for an electronic data interchange if this proves to be feasible.

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

In order to reach a final agreement, the institutions accepted the position of the Council with some minor modifications. Administrative burden is potentially increased due to the new right of competent authorities to require evidence from waste exporters. This improves the likelihood that the environment objectives of the measure will be attained, albeit at increased cost. The possibility of a system of voluntary electronic exchange of data proposed by the Commission to reduce administrative burden is put back to the time when the Commission can confirm the practical arrangements for such a system. The introduction of a mandary system, supported by Parliament, would seem possible only after the voluntary system had proven its worth.

Estimated savings and benefits

Estimated savings were not updated following the legislative procedure.



State of Play:

Application on 1 January 2016

Date of application: 12/07/2007

Evaluation Planned for 2018-2019

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

In 2014, Member States reported that 11 Member States had fully implemented the simplification requirement, while 9 Member States had not implemented it. In view of the planned review of the Waste Shipment Regulation an evaluation is planned for 2018-2019.

Estimated savings and benefits

In Member States where these measures were already implemented, analysis in 2014 showed cost reductions beyond those estimated by the Commission.

The costs and benefits associated with the implementation of the Waste Shipment Regulation for the different stakeholders, at local, national and EU level will be measured in the context of the evaluation planned for 2018-2019.

Export for recovery of non-hazardous waste

Overall State of Play

Commission Regulation adopted 2014

Evaluation scheduled for 2018

Summary

Summary:

Tthe periodic updates according to Art. 37 of the Waste Shipment Regulationwere intended to ensure that EU legislation on exports to certain non-OECD countries of non-hazardous waste (Regulation (EC) 1418/2007) is consistent with provisions for import of such waste in these countries. This prevents EU exports being shipped but then rejected in a third country and facilitates smooth trading relationships. Furthermore it avoids the export of certain non-hazardous waste to countries that are not able to process such waste, thus reducing the risk of environmental damage.

Estimated savings and benefits

No assessment has been made of monetary savings, but the increased consistency has reduced the possibility of commercial losses due to inconsistencies between EU export and third country import rules.

Regulatory Costs and benefits will be assessed as part of the evaluation of Regulation (EC) 1013/2006 (Waste Shipment Regulation) planned for 2018.



State of Play:

Commission Regulation 733/2014

adopted on 24 June 2014

Legal Act

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Reduced administrative burden coming from the update and streamline of Regulation 1418/2007 in relation with:

ensuring legal certainty for economic operators exporting non-hazardous waste from the EU to partner countries;

minimising error-risk

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Periodical update of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1418/2007 on exports to certain non-OECD countries of non-hazardous waste as required by Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, on the basis of information submitted by partner countries.

This update was carried out through Commission Regulation (EU) No 733/2014 of 24 June 2014.

Estimated savings and benefits

Savings have not been estimated. Regulatory Costs and benefits will be assessed as part of the evaluation of Regulation (EC) 1013/2006 (Waste Shipment Regulation) planned for 2018.



State of Play:

Application on 18th July 2014

Evaluation Planned for 2018

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Implementation reporting is made annually in the framework of the general Waste Shipment Regulation..

Estimated savings and benefits

Regulatory Costs and benefits will be assessed as part of the evaluation of Regulation (EC) 1013/2006 (Waste Shipment Regulation) planned for 2018.



Environmental impact assessment (EIA)

Overall State of Play

Proposal in 2012

Legal act in 2014

Application in May 2017

Annual savings of up to € 26.7 million estimated

Summary

Summary:

The initiative lightens unnecessary administrative burdens and makes it easier to identify and assess potential significant impacts, without weakening existing environmental safeguards. The quality of the decision-making process is reinforced, current levels of environmental protection will be improved, and businesses should enjoy a more harmonised regulatory framework.

The changes are forward looking, and emerging challenges that are important to the EU as a whole in areas like resource efficiency, climate change, biodiversity and disaster prevention are reflected in the assessment process. 

Estimated savings and benefits

The estimated annual direct savings of this initiative amount to € 4.3 to 5.3 million (Member States authorities) and € 21.4 million (developers). These direct savings were confirmed in the legislative process.

Direct administrative savings further to the one-stop shop are expected less than 1% with regard to the baseline scenario, due to its non-mandatory character imposed by the co-legislators.

Wider socio-economic benefits (in terms of competitiveness, internal market and decrease in costs on delays) are equally likely to be reduced due to amendments in the legislative process (non-mandatory character of one-stop shop, no mandatory scoping and refusal to harmonise all time-frames at EU level).



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 26/10/2012

Ref COM(2012)628

Commission Proposal

Which purpose did the Commission pursue?

The Directive simplifies existing procedures mainly through:

the establishment of a mandatory one-stop shop with a view to streamlining the various environmental assessments (resulting from Directives on Nature, water, SEA…).

the introduction of time-frames for specific stages of the EIA process.

the simplification of the screening process.

the introduction of mandatory scoping.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The Directive on Environmental Impact Assessment aims to provide a high level of protection of the environment and to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation of projects, plans and programmes with a view to reduce their environmental impact.

The Directive ensures public participation in decision-making and thereby strengthens the quality of decisions. The projects and programmes co-financed by the EU (Cohesion, Agricultural and Fisheries Policies) have to comply with the EIA Directive to receive approval for financial assistance.

Estimated savings and benefits

The above changes should lead to direct administrative savings for Member States' authorities of € 4.3 to 5.3 million and to developers of € 21.4 million per year.

In addition, regulatory benefits would be increased in terms of competitiveness in the internal market and in terms of a decrease in costs on delays.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 16 April 2014

Reference Directive 2014/52/EU

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

Compared to the proposal, the adopted directive has not retained some important elements for the efficiency objective of the proposal:

- specific time-frames for some steps of the decision-making to be set at EU level (especially maximum time-frames) could not be agreed although they would have made the EIA process more streamlined and efficient and would have provided better legal certainty to industry and business;

- mandatory scoping was rejected;

- The scope of the one-stop shop was limited to the EIA and the Nature Directives (for other Directives, the one-stop shop is only voluntary). In addition, Member States have a margin for discretion to use the one-stop shop; The legislators vested an obligation to the Commission to provide a guidance regarditn the setting of any coordinated or joint procedures for projects (streamlining) that are simultaneously subject to assessments under the EIA Directive and the Habitats, Birds, Water Framework and Industrial Emissions Directives. The Commission published the guidance document in the form of a Commission notice on 27.07.2016, OJ 27.07.2016, C 273.

Estimated savings and benefits

The direct annual administrative savings for authorities [€ 4.3 to 5.3 million] and developers [€ 21.4 million] are expected to remain.

Wider socio-economic benefits (in terms of competitiveness, internal market and decrease in costs on delays) will be more limited (due to the non-mandatory character of one-stop shop, no mandatory scoping and refusal to harmonise all time-frames at EU level) as well as direct administrative savings further to the one-stop shop are expected less than 1% with regard to the baseline scenario, due to its non-mandatory character.



State of Play:

Application on 16 May 2017

Transposition Deadline 16 May 2017

Evaluation Planned for 2024

Implémentation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

No implementation report foreseen by the Directive.

According to the revised Article 12(2), every six years from 16 May 2017, Member States shall inform the Commission, where such data are available, of:

(a) the number of projects referred to in Annexes I and II made subject to an environmental impact assessment in accordance with Articles 5 to 10;

(b) the breakdown of environmental impact assessments according to the project categories set out in Annexes I and II;

(c) the number of projects referred to in Annex II made subject to a determination in accordance with Article 4(2);

(d) the average duration of the environmental impact assessment process;

(e) general estimates on the average direct costs of environmental impact assessments, including the impact from the application of this Directive to SMEs.

Estimated savings and benefits

Impacts will be assessed through an evaluation planned in 2024.



EMAS and EU Eco-label

Overall State of Play

Fitness Check due for Completion Q4/2016

Follow-Up not yet determined

Summary

Summary

The purpose of this initiative is to analyse the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and the EU added value of the EU Ecolabel and EMAS regulations including possible coherence issues and to evaluate and assess the contribution to competitiveness, sustainable consumption and production. In doing so, the fitness check will assess if these regulations are fit for purpose, whether the objectives of these regulations have been met and whether implementation has been done in a cost-effective way.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Expected to be finalised in Q4 2016

Fitness Check

Scope:

Fitness Check of:

Regulation (EC) No 1221/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the voluntary participation by organisations in a Community eco-management and audit scheme (EMAS)

Regulation 66/2010 of the European Parliament and the Council on the EU Ecolabel

Evaluation findings:

Expected Q4 2016.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected Q4 2016



Environmental liability

Overall State of Play

Evaluation finalised in 2016

Follow-Up through a Multiannual Rolling Programme

Summary

Summary:

The evaluation showed that the Environmental Liability Directive (ELD) improved the situation of environmental liability in the EU, at the same time implementation varies significantly between Member Sates and data on implementation is missing.

The Commission will propose a multi-annual rolling work programme to Member States’ experts and stakeholders in order to improve the evidence base and help align national solutions.

Moreover, the Commission will continue to provide administrative support measures. 

Estimated savings and benefits

Remediation costs for operators average around EUR 42,000 for one environmental liability case if five major cases exceeding EUR 1 million are disregarded. The environmental benefits should according to the applicable economic valuing and equivalency analysis correspond to the remedial and prevention costs.

Concrete data regarding benefits, other than the figures on prevented and remedied environmental damage is difficult to draw. The evaluation confirmed that the principle that precaution and prevention helps to avoid remediation costs works.



State of Play:

Finalised in 2016

COM/2016/0204

SWD(2016) 121 {SWD(2016) 122 

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Directive 2004/35/EC on environmental liability with regard to the prevention and remedying of environmental damage (ELD)

Evaluation findings:

The key findings emerging from this report are that the Directive has improved:

the standards of prevention and restoration of environmental damage,

the application of the ‘polluter pays’ principle,

strict liability across the EU for environmental damage,

EU-wide liability for biodiversity damage, and

public participation and access to justice for people affected and NGOs.

At the same time, implementation still varies significantly from one Member State to another in terms of the number of ELD cases and the way the Directive is implemented. The observed ‘patchwork’ of environmental remediation, together with the lack of some key data on implementation and on the cost (both administrative and financial security), is a major challenge.

Estimated savings and benefits

Remediation costs for operators: The total costs of remediation in the EU within the reporting period 2007 – 2013 amounted to around EUR 6 million without five major losses, and EUR 180 million if the five major instances are included The remediation costs turn on the average for one environmental liability case around EUR 42,000, if the five cases exceeding EUR 1 million are disregarded. The environmental benefits should according to the applicable economic valuing and equivalency analysis correspond to the remedial and prevention costs.

Administrative costs for authorities: Only a few Member States provided information and data on administrative costs: The Flemish Region of Belgium indicated EUR 55,000/year (gross) of annual administrative costs, Bulgaria EUR 135,613 per year (265,975 Bulgarian Lev) and Spain overall EUR 20,000 per year in staff costs, and between EUR 684,000 and EUR 2 million of administrative costs of the autonomous communities and cities in Spain.

State of Play:

Follow-up through a Multi annual Rolling Work Programme

Commission Follow-Up

Follow-Up by the Commission:

The Commission will propose a multi-annual rolling work programme to Member States’ experts and stakeholders in order to improve the evidence base and help align national solutions.

Moreover, the Commission will continue to provide administrative support measures, such as

(a) guidance or interpretative notices on key issues ('significance');

(b) training programmes; and

(c) helpdesks for practitioners (covering competent authorities, operators, loss adjusters, financial security providers, affected individuals, NGOs, etc.) providing information, assistance and assessment support for risk and damage evaluations.

Follow-Up by Member States:

To complement these efforts, the Commission recommends that all Member States undertake to:

support their implementation efforts with proactive initiatives (such as guidance documents, training, electronic tools for risk analysis, baseline setting, financial security models etc.) as some Member States have done already;

exchange administrative experiences and best practices and support each other in capacity-building efforts;

review their interpretation of key provisions of the Directive, in particular in relation to 'significance';

record data on ELD incidents and publish ELD registers if they have not done so already;

systematically gather the necessary data that can document that the application of the Directive in their country is effective, efficient and in line with the overall situation in the EU.

Estimated savings and benefits

Follow-Up by the Commission and by Member States will improve implementation and impacts of the ELD and gather the necessary data for the next evaluation which should focus on assessing EU added value, efficiency and effectiveness of the Directive and on the quantification of regulatory costs and benefits.

A follow-up evaluation is planned for 2021 to 2023 (i.e. the adoption of the next REFIT evaluation is planned between five to seven years after the adoption of the first REFIT evaluation of 2016)



Infrastructure for Spatial Information (INSPIRE)

Overall State of Play

Evaluation completed 20 July 2016

Follow-Up Actions determined

Summary

Summary:

The evaluation showed that greater effort at all levels by all actors is needed. To this end, the Commission proposes a number of actions for both Member States and at EU level.

This includes a requirement for Member States to step up their efforts in implementation (e.g. on their coordination activities) and review of the effectiveness of their data policies.

Estimated savings and benefits

The implementation costs reported in the evaluation varied from 0.5 to 13.5 million €/year with most Member States reporting between 2 to 3 million €/year. In most cases this is below the original estimates which ranged from 4 to 8 million €/year in the initial impact assessment.

On benefits, Member States reported mostly in qualitative terms. They generally consider that benefits are yet to be fully realised but that they are starting to emerge in terms of improved data access, better cooperation across the public sector, skills and capacity building, less duplication of work, improved information for supporting environmental policy, better e-government services to citizens and business.

A few Member States reported quantitative impact assessments, presenting estimates of future benefits.



State of Play:

Finalised 20 July 2016

COM(2016)478, SWD(2016) 243, SWD(2016) 273

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Directive 2007/2/EC establishing an Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community (INSPIRE)

Evaluation findings:

The evaluation of the INSPIRE Directive confirms that the overall relevance of the Directive to meeting policy needs in an efficient manner remains high, and is expected to increase with time, given the drive towards a digital economy as set out by the Digital Single Market strategy which includes important elements of the Directive.

Good progress in implementation been made in only the few Member States where the necessary investments were made and implementation of the Directive was aligned with wider national action on open data policies and better eGovernment services. The implementation gaps identified are significant and result from accumulated delays in the process, underlining the differences in speed and quality of implementation.

As a result, overall effectiveness has suffered. In particular, the significant remaining obstacles created by the data policies in many countries impede effective progress and perpetuate the administrative burden because data cannot be easily shared between administrations. Nonetheless, some Member States have shown that the process is possible and report positively on the resultant benefits, if only in qualitative terms.

This is confirmed by the evaluation of efficiency from front-runner Member States that invested in implementation early on, developed more open data policies and aligned the INSPIRE Directive with their national priorities on open data and the drive for eGovernment. Upfront costs however are higher than benefits since data will have to be made available in the required ways first before being used for end-user applications. Many Member States made insufficient investments, probably because of the economic crisis.

The evaluation of coherence has uncovered areas needing attention, in particular the development of the data policies creating obstacles in the internal (digital) market which is also of relevance to the ‘free flow of data’ initiative.

Finally, future EU added value can be significant. Addressing the above-mentioned issues and focusing on end-user needs and applications in a cross-border and EU context can assist implementation and help prioritise resources and investments.

Estimated savings and benefits

The evaluation estimated specific regulatory benefits and costs.

The reported implementation costs varied from 0.5 to 13.5 million €/year with most Member States reporting between 2 to 3 million €/year. In most cases this is below the original estimates which ranged from 4 to 8 million €/year in the initial impact assessment.

The administrative burden relate to the monitoring or reporting obligations under INSPIRE. Four countries(FI, LT, SE, SK) provided estimates of the financial costs of monitoring and reporting combined. SE reported 0.75% (mio€ 0,033 of 4,7, LT 0,9% (mio€ 0,045 of 0.4975) , FI 4% (mio€ 0,067 of 1.63) of the implementation cost. This indicates that the administrative burden appears to be low. Overall, these administrative costs identified for the implementation of the INSPIRE are far lower than the benefits and administrative cost savings that can be achieved through a modern and shared spatial data infrastructure.

On benefits, Member States reported mostly in qualitative terms. They generally consider that benefits are yet to be fully realised but that they are starting to emerge in terms of improved data access, better cooperation across the public sector, skills and capacity building, less duplication of work, improved information for supporting environmental policy, better e-government services to citizens and business.

A few Member States143 reported quantitative impact assessments, presenting estimates of future benefits.

State of play

Non-legislative follow-up planned for 2017

Commission Follow-Up

Follow-Up by the Commission:

The Commission proposes a number of actions at EU level and at Member State level to improve implementation and impact of INSPIRE.

The Commission will:

A.evaluate the shortcomings of the national data policies in relation to Article 17 of the Directive in more detail and explore synergies with the ‘free flow of data’ initiative under the Digital Single Market with the view to resolving these issues through that;

B.review, and possibly revise, the INSPIRE rules, in particular on spatial data harmonisation, to take into account the implementing risks and complexities with a view to reducing them (simplifying requirements);

C.assist the Member States in applying and implementing the INSPIRE Directive (simplification of use), e.g. by the use of common tools, and promote priority setting together with the Member States.

D.work closely with Member States to explore opportunities arising from the use of existing EU-level funding programmes to help capacity building and close the INSPIRE implementation gaps (e.g. through the Interoperability Solutions Administrations).

Other actions in the context of the Digital Single Market will also contribute to implementing the INSPIRE Directive (e.g. the eGovernment Action Plan and the European Interoperability Framework). The Commission together with the Member States will also promote the inclusion of INSPIRE services and data harmonisation in relevant EU initiatives (e.g. Copernicus, Horizon 2020), Commission departments, European agencies and international partners to the EU.

These and other relevant actions will be discussed between the Commission departments, assisted by the European Environment Agency and the Member States in the context of the ongoing INSPIRE Maintenance and Implementation Framework following the adoption of this report. "

As a result of these discussions, the Commission will propose a multi-annual rolling work programme to Member States’ experts and stakeholders in order to implement the proposed actions.

Follow-Up by Member States:

Member States should step up their efforts in implementing (e.g. on their coordination activities) and critically reviewing the effectiveness of their data policies. This applies in particular to those Member States lagging behind the most if they are to meet future implementation deadlines. In addition, Member States, in consultation with the Commission, are recommended to:

1)give priority to environmental spatial datasets, in particular those linked to monitoring and reporting, and those identified in relevant global processes.  

2)improve coordination between the national INSPIRE implementation and eGovernment, open data and other relevant processes at national level.

Estimated savings and benefits

Follow-Up by the Commission and by Member States will improve implementation and impacts of INSPIRE and gather the necessary data for the next evaluation which should focus on assessing EU added value, efficiency and effectiveness of the Directive and on the quantification of regulatory costs and benefits.

A follow-up evaluation is planned for 2021



Environmental Noise



Overall State of Play

Evaluation to be finalised Q4 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Directive 2002/49/EC relating to the assessment and management of environmental noise, the results of this evaluation should be available before the end of 2016.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected 2017



Volatile organic compound emissions - Stage I and Stage II - Petrol Vapour Recovery (VOCs)

Overall State of Play

Evaluations scheduled for completion Q4 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Directive 94/63/EC on the control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions resulting from the storage of petrol and its distribution from terminals to service stations and Directive 2009/126/EC on Stage II petrol vapour recovery during refuelling of motor vehicles at service stations. The results of these evaluations should be available before the end of 2016.

Evaluation of Directive 94/63/EC on the control of volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions resulting from the storage of petrol and its distribution from terminals to service stations.

Evaluation of Directive 2009/126/EC on Stage II petrol vapour recovery during refuelling of motor vehicles at service stations

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected Q4 2016



Protection of animals used for scientific purposes

Overall State of Play

Review Report to be finalised Q4 2017

Evaluation scheduled for 2019

Summary

Summary:

A review is ongoing. Due to the relatively early timing of the review and the partly delayed transposition into certain national legislations of the Member States (last national legislation adopted only in May 2015), there is only limited experience of the Directive. It is unlikely that the Directive's projected benefits, especially in terms of improved welfare and science, will have fully materialised. Therefore, the focus of the review is on assessing the impacts of the Directive on the basis of preliminary findings in selected targeted areas. A full evaluation will then be carried out in 2019.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Expected to be finalised in Q4 2017

Evaluation – review report

Scope:

Report on:

Directive 2010/63/EU on the Protection of Animals used for Scientific Purposes

The Directive took full effect in 2013 with national transposing measures pending for some Member States in the beginning of 2015.

As this initiative precedes the submission of data from Member States to feed into the implementation report due in 2019, the focus of this report will in particular be on scientific progress and whether there are any emerging problems with implementation impacting negatively on science or animal welfare. It will also be informed by the European Citizens Initiative.

An evaluation is scheduled for 2019.

Evaluation findings:

Expected Q4 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

An evaluation is planned in 2019. 



Wild animals in zoos

Overall State of Play

Evaluation expected to complete Q4 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Directive 1999/22/EC relating to the keeping of wild animals in zoos. The result of this evaluation should be available Q4 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected Q4 2017



Flood risks

Overall State of Play

Evaluation Planned for 2018

Summary

Summary:

The Commission will cary-out in 2018 an evelaution of Directive 2007/60/EC on the assessment and management of flood risks. The objective of the Directive is the establishment of a framework for measures to reduce the risks of flood damage.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected in 2018



Bathing water

Overall State of Play

Evaluation planned for 2019 

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is planning to evaluate Directive 2006/7/EC on bathing. The result of this evaluation should be available by the end of 2019.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected in 2019



Marine environment policy

Overall State of Play

Evaluation planned for 2019 

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is planning to evaluate Directive 2008/56/EC on marine environment policy. The result of this evaluation should be available by the end of 2019.

Estimated savings and benefits

Expected in 2019



Initiatives in the area of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries

Reform of the Common Fisheries Policy

Overall state of Play

Proposal adopted on 13 July 2011

Legal acted adopted on 11 December 2013

It applies with effect from 1 January 2014

Evaluation Planned for 2020

Summary

Summary:

In 2011 a major reform of the EU Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) started which continues efforts to simplify and reduce unnecessary burdens.

The proposed simplification objectives were generally supported by the European Parliament and the Council and achieved with no significant variations from the Commission proposal.

Major benefits are 1) the simplification of the implementation procedures of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) covering from conservation of marine biological resources through market organisation to aquaculture; 2) switch-over from a common to a regional approach of fisheries management (regionalisation) that aims to reduce regulatory burden and increase flexibility, acceptance and ownership by operators and thus better compliance; 3) the simplification of the acquis by integrating in the CFP Regulation the measures on conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, the measures on the management of fishing fleets registered in the Community outermost regions and the measures concerning the Regional Advisory Councils.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were therefore analysed qualitatively.

Actual savings will be assessed in the evaluation of the CFP that is planned for 2020.



State of Play:

Proposal adopted on 13 July 2011

COM(2011)425

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Simplify the implementation procedures of the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) covering from conservation of marine biological resources through market organisation to aquaculture.

Introduce a regional approach to management. Decentralisation and empowerment of stakeholders is expected to increase compliance. The Regulation will set the general principles, overall targets and timeframes, Member States will decide, in cooperation with the local industry, the measures to achieve targets on deadline. This approach will reduce regulatory burden and increase flexibility, acceptance and ownership by operators and thus better compliance.

Simplify the acquis by integrating in the CFP Regulation the measures on conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources, the measures on the management of fishing fleets registered in the Community outermost regions; the measures concerning the Regional Advisory Councils; and the Data collection framework (the integration of the latter was not retained in the adopted text).

Which other objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

To ensure that fishing and aquaculture activities provide long-term sustainable environmental, economic and social conditions and contribute to the availability of food supplies;

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were therefore analysed qualitatively.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 11 December 2013

Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The proposed simplification objectives were achieved with no significant variations from the Commission proposal.

Estimated savings and benefits

Costs and benefits will be assessed in the evaluation of the CFP that is planned for 2020


State of Play:

It applies with effect from 1 January 2014 – Regulation (EU) No 1380/2013

Transposition Deadline N/A as it falls under exclusive competence

Evaluation Planned for 2020

Implementation

Implementation reported by Member States

Report on the balance between the fishing capacity of their fleets and their fishing opportunities (Article 22) are issued every year since March 2015.

Yearly report on the execution of Member States national data collection programmes (Article 25) is also issued.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Common market organisation in fishery and aquaculture

Overall state of Play

Adopted

Proposal adopted on 13 July 2011

Legal act adopted on 11 December 2013

Applies with effect from 1 January 2014

Summary

Summary:

As part of the Reform package of the CFP, it reduced 27 legal acts (four Council Regulations and 23 Commission implementing Regulations) to 3 legal Acts (1 co-decided Regulation and 2 implementing acts).

The yearly Regulations fixing the parameters for the operation of the intervention mechanisms (i.e. one Council Regulation and 6 Commission implementing Regulations) have been abolished. The 6 intervention mechanisms have been reduced to a single storage one that has strongly reduced the notification and reporting obligations for both Member States and producer organisations.

The CMO instruments is financed now by a single fund, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) instead of the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and the European Fisheries Fund (EFF).

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were analysed qualitatively in 2011.

Actual savings will be assessed within the evaluation of the CFP that is planned for 2020.



State of Play:

Proposal adopted on 13 July 2011

COM(2011)416

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

As part of the Reform package of the CFP, it reduces 27 legal acts (four Council Regulations and 23 Commission implementing Regulations) to 3 legal Acts (1 co-decided Regulation and 2 implementing acts).

The yearly Regulations fixing the parameters for the operation of the intervention mechanisms (i.e. one Council Regulation and 6 Commission implementing Regulations) are abolished. The 6 intervention mechanisms are reduced to a single storage one. This strongly reduces the notification and reporting obligations for both Member States and producer organisations.

The CMO instruments will be financed by a single fund (the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund) instead of the current European Agricultural Guarantee Fund and the European Fisheries Fund.

Which other objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

To ensure that the common organisation of the common markets for fisheries and aquaculture products contributes to achieving the objectives of the new CFP. It aims to strengthen the competitiveness of the EU industry, improve the transparency of the markets, and ensure a level playing field for all products marketed in the Union.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the estimated savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were analysed qualitatively.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 11 December 2013

Reference Regulation (EU) No 1379/2013

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The Regulation contributes to a major simplification of the acquis by integrating 27 legal acts (four Council Regulations and 23 Commission implementing Regulations) into 3 legal Acts (1 co-decided Regulation and 2 implementing acts).

In addition, the yearly Regulations fixing the parameters for the operation of the intervention mechanisms (i.e. one Council Regulation and 6 Commission implementing Regulations) have been repealed and the 6 intervention mechanisms are reduced to a single storage one. This increases transparency and despite the new information obligation on fishing gears introduced by the co legislator, the new Regulation strongly reduces the notification and reporting obligations for both Member States and producer organisations as proposed by the Commission. Therefore, the major burden reductions sought by the Commission were achieved, with only a relatively small addition of an information obligation introduced by Parliament. 

Estimated savings and benefits

No update was performed.



State of Play:

Applies with effect from 1 January 2014

Transposition Deadline N/A as to it falls under exclusive competence

Evaluation Planned for 2020 (as part of the CFP evaluation)

Implementation

Application: 1 January 2014, with the exception of Chapter IV on consumer information and Article 45 (Amendments to Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 'the control regulation') which shall apply from 13 December 2014

Implementation reported by Member States

N/A

Estimated savings and benefits

Savings will be assessed during the evaluation planned in 2020.



Technical Measures for the Protection of Marine Organisms

Overall state of Play

Proposal adopted on 11 March 2016

Pending in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary

Across all Union sea basins and non-Union waters in which Union vessels operate there are currently more than 30 regulations which contain technical measures. The evaluation of the existing technical measures regulations showed that the current technical measures are overly complex and have been largely ineffective. They do not have clear, well-defined objectives and targets nor do they provide positive incentives which reward responsible practices and incentivise compliance. Control of the measures is costly and the governance structure they operate in currently is inflexible and very much top-down with limited consultation with stakeholders.

The commission proposal aims at simplifying the framework of technical measures in the context of the reform of the CFP and making it more effective, by integrating the different technical measures regulations in an overall regulation and implementing rules per sea-basins.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were therefore extensively analysed qualitatively but without specific quantitative estimates.



State of Play:

Adopted on 11 March 2016

COM(2016) 134

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

To develop a new simplified technical measures framework in the context of the reform of the CFP. Integrating the different technical measures regulations in an overall regulation and implementing rules per sea-basins. A similar integration was achieved as regards control in 2009 with dispersed control provisions being gathered into a single consistent instrument. Control techniques will evolve in line with technological developments.

The new landing obligation requires existing legal and practical impediments to be removed while the new framework is being developed, the proposal for an “Omnibus Regulation” to amend, among other, the existing technical measures as a first step to adapt the “acquis” to the new CFP.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Optimise the contribution of technical measures to achieving the key objectives of the new CFP, i.e. to ensure the protection and conservation of marine biological resources and the reduction of the impact of fishing activities on fish stocks and on marine eco-systems provisions

Create the flexibility required to adjust technical measures by facilitating regionalised approaches (consistent with the objectives in Union law).

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the estimated savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were therefore extensively analysed qualitatively, without defining specific quantitative targets.



Fishing authorisations

Overall state of Play

Proposal adopted on 10 December 2015

Pending in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

Regulation (EC) No1006/2008 on Fishing Authorisation (the ‘FAR’) deals with authorisations of Union vessels to fish outside Union waters and authorisations granted to third country fishing vessels to operate in Union waters. The revision of the FAR aims at clarifying and simplifying the current provisions, in particular in terms of responsibilities at Union, national and operator level, as well as bringing the FAR in line with the Basic Regulation (Common Fisheries Policy) and the Control Regulation. It proposes the following:

- Harmonising procedures to grant fishing authorisations, and clear allocation of tasks to the Commission, Member States and ship-owners.

- Simplified system that aims to harmonise highly variable data requirements from Member States and improve the control of the external fishing fleets.

- Creation of a database managed by the Commission to increase transparency in the activities of fishing vessels and facilitate the communication of fisheries data in a using a unique standard (UN/ CEFACT)

- Ensured consistency with the IUU (rules to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing) and control legal frameworks; as well as with the objectives of the external dimension of the CFP policy in terms of sustainability and enforcement.

- Deterrence of 'abusive reflagging', meaning, changing the flag with the objective of circumventing the laws, and regulating private authorisations between ship-owners and a third country (granted outside FPA).

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were therefore analysed qualitatively without defining specific targets.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 10 December 2015

COM(2015)636

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Revision of the current Fishing Authorisation Regulation (FAR) to simplify the current system, harmonise highly variable data requirements from Member States and improve the efficiency of sanctions.

The proposed Regulation will ensure consistency between the FAR, the IUU (rules to combat illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing) and control legal frameworks; as well as with the objectives of the External Dimension of the CFP policy in terms of sustainability and enforcement.

The proposal will also prevent repetitive and abusive reflagging, meaning, changing the flag with the objective of circumventing the laws, and regulate private authorisations (granted outside FPA) and simplify and clarify tasks between the Commission and Member States' authorities.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Revision of the current Fishing Authorisation Regulation (FAR) to properly address the objectives of the new Common fishery Policy and to provide consistency with the Fisheries Control Regulation

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the estimated savings could not be quantified. Simplification and reduction of administrative burden were therefore analysed qualitatively without defining specific targets.



Fisheries Control Regulation

Overall state of Play

Evaluation Ongoing and expected to be finalised by Q4 2016

Follow-Up Planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission carries out and evaluation and planes a proposal to follow-up in 2017.

The evaluation of Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 (hereinafter ‘the Control Regulation’) responds to the legal obligation in Article 118(3) according to which an evaluation of the impact of this Regulation on the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) shall be undertaken by the Commission five years after the entry into force.

Main goal of this evaluation is to get an overview on the current status of implementation of the Control Regulation in the Member States and its overall impact after five years from entry into force.

Estimated savings and benefits

To be updated once the SWD is finalised.



Priority 2: A Connected Digital Single Market

Overview

1.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Communications Networks, Content and Technology

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Domain Name Regulation

Evaluation planned

Commission proposal

Adoption foreseen Q3 2017

Legal protection of databases

Evaluation

planned

Commission Proposal

Adoption foreseen Q3 2017

ENISA (European Union Agency for Network and Information Security)

Evaluation

Started in October 2016, planned to be finalised by Q2 2017

Commission Proposal

Adoption foreseen end 2017

Audiovisual Media Services Directive

Evaluation

Finalised Q2 2016

Commission Proposal

25 May 2016

CRM

Commission Proposal

11 July 2012

Legal Act

26 February 2014 

Implementation

Transposition deadline: 10 April 2016

Satellite and Cable Directive 93/83/ECC

Evaluation

14 September 2016

Commission Proposal

14 September 2016

Framework for electronic communications networks and services

Evaluation

14 September 2016

Commission proposal

14 September 2016

Strengthening Network and Information Security

Commission Proposal

7 February 2013

Legal Act

06 July 2016

Implementation

Transposition Deadline 9 May 2018



2.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

VAT Mini One Stop shop /

Modernising VAT for cross-border B2C (Business to Consumer) E-Commerce

Evaluation

Finalised by mid-2016

Commission Proposal

Planned for Q4 2016

Initiatives in the area of Communications Networks, Content and Technology

Domain Name Regulation

State of Play

Evaluation and proposal planned for 2017

Summary

Summary

Over the past decade, the top Level Domain (TLD) market place has undergone significant changes that provide both strategic challenges and opportunities for the .eu top-level domain (TLD). An evaluation of Regulation EC 733/2002 establishing the “.eu” top-level domain (TLD) and Regulation EC 874/2004 laying down public policy rules concerning the implementation and functions of the .eu top Level Domain will be carried out in 2017. Its result will feed the revision of those two Regulations, with the view to update them and ensure that they remain fit-for-purpose.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not available yet



Legal protection of databases

Overall State of Play

Evaluation planned for 2017

Summary

Summary

The DSM strategy sets out the Commission's intention to address the emerging issues of ownership, interoperability, usability and access to data in situations such as business-to-business, business to consumer, machine generated and machine-to-machine data. Furthermore it plans to encourage access to public data to help drive innovation.

Against this background, the objective of this evaluation will be (i) to assess whether the Directive still fulfils its policy goals of providing protection of databases, including those not protected under copyright, while taking into account users' legitimate interests and (ii) to determine whether the Directive is still adapted in view of the development of new technologies, new business models based on data exploitation, and emerging policy and legal frameworks on data access and ownership in view of the growing importance of data in today's economy.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not available yet



ENISA (European Union Agency for Network and Information Security)

Overall state of Play:

Evaluation started Oct 2016 (results expected Q2 2017) and proposal planned for end 2017

Summary

Summary

This initiative focuses on the review of Regulation No 526/2013 (ENISA Regulation) that sets out the mandate, objectives and tasks for the European Union Agency for Network and Information Security.

ENISA's Regulation (art. 32) requires the Commission to conduct an evaluation of the Agency by June 2018 and, based on its results, to prepare for a possible revision of the current mandate, due to expire in 2020.

The EU cybersecurity landscape is rapidly evolving both on the threat side, with the increase in the frequency, sophistication and potential impact of cyber-threats, and on the policy and regulatory having regard to the recently adopted Directive on Security of Network and Information Systems (NIS Directive) and the priorities set by the Digital Single Market Strategy.

Against this background, the Commission will anticipate the review of ENISA's Regulation in order to timely prepare for any decision regarding the extension of the Agency's mandate and any changes to it. The main objective is to assess to the performance and impact of the agency in its current form and if needed propose a modified mandate to best support the EU to achieve network and information security policy objectives.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not available yet



Simplification of Audiovisual Media Services Directive

Overall State of Play:

- evaluation May 2016

- proposal May 2016 (pending in legislative procedure)

Summary

Summary:

The Commission carried out and evaluation and presented a proposal in 2016.

The Audio-visual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) aims to create and ensure the proper functioning of a single European market for audio-visual media services, while contributing to the promotion of cultural diversity, providing an adequate level of consumer protection and safeguarding media pluralism. Its evaluation confirmed the need for update and simplification.

The Commission proposal introduces new flexibility mechanisms where restrictions only applicable to TV are no longer justified, while at the same time ensuring that consumers will be sufficiently protected in the on-demand and Internet world. This is done while making sure that innovation will not be stifled.

The AVSMD will aim at enhancing the protection of minors including in video-sharing platforms, a fair contribution of all media services to cultural diversity, a fair treatment between TV broadcasting and on-demand services and an improved implementation of the Directive including via the revision of the procedures supporting the country of origin principle and the provisions related to the independence of regulators.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, costs and benefits of the current AVMSD could not be quantified.

In relation with the Commission proposal savings are expected to result from the simplification of the country of origin principle in the area of commercial communications:

oRegulators: savings can be up to EUR 5.3 milion per year for the EU.

oTV broadcasters: economic benefit resulting from the flexibility of the 12 minutes rule can go up to EUR 122 million for one TV broadcasters. Economic benefits related to product placement can go up to EUR 1.2 million per year for the EU and for sponsorship up to EUR 441 million for the EU per year.



State of Play:

Finalised Q2 2016

SWD(2016)0170

SWD(2016)0171

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the Audio-visual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) - Directive 2010/13/EU.

Evaluation findings:

The evaluation concluded that there is scope for simplification, specifically of the procedures that support the application of the Country of Origin principle (i.e. the criteria determining jurisdiction over providers and the derogation and cooperation procedures limiting freedom of reception and retransmission in specific cases).

Some other rules are no longer fit to attain these objectives, primarily due to market developments and changes in viewing patterns. In particular, the evaluation has shown that there is room for improving and updating the rules on commercial communications.

The evaluation has identified two main sets of issues:

Insufficient protection of minors and consumers when consuming videos on video-sharing platforms.

Lack of a level playing field between traditional broadcasting and on-demand services, and internal market weaknesses stemming from the fact that some of the AVMSD rules are not sufficiently precise.

Estimated savings and benefits

The frequent changes in legislation and the varying nature of pre-existing legislation at the national level made a quantification of costs exceedingly complex.

Industry has been unable to contribute quantitative data on compliance costs stemming from the AVMSD.

In the absence of data, the costs and benefits of the current AVMSD could not be quantified.



State of Play:

25 May 2016

COM(2016)287 

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

-Simplify and clarify the procedures to apply the country of orgin principle

-Improve flexibility and clarity of rules on commercial communications

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

-Enhance consumer and minors protection, in video sharing platforms

-Establish more effective and fair rules on promotion of European works

-Ensure more effective and fair rules on the protection of minors in on-demand services

-Ensure regulatory impartiality across the EU.

Estimated savings and benefits

Savings quantified are related to country of origin principle:

Regulators: expected savings resulting from the facilitation of the identification of the country of origin.

Rules on commercial communications no longer fit for purpose:

Regulators: savings can be up to EUR 5.3 milion per year for the EU.

TV broadcasters: economic benefit resulting from the flexibility of the 12 minutes rule can go up to EUR 122 million for one TV broadcaster. Economic benefits related to product placement can go up to EUR 1.2 million per year for the EU and for sponsorship up to EUR 441 million for the EU per year.



Copyright and licensing of musical works for online use (CRM Directive)



Overall State of Play

- proposal July 2012

- legal act Feb 2014

- transposition April 2016

- evaluation Apr 2021

Summary

Summary:

The Directive on collective management of copyright and related rights and multi-territorial licensing of rights in musical works for online use in the internal market (CRM Directive) is expected to improve the functioning of Collective Management Organisations (CMOs), in particular by increasing their transparency and accountability towards their members and right holders.

Given that it is essential to create the conditions conducive to the most effective licensing practices by CMOs in an increasingly cross-border context, the Directive prescribes in addition basic conditions for the provision by CMOs managing authors’ rights in musical works of multi-territorial lincesing for online use.

The Commisison proposed an optional micro exemption for setting up a supervisory function and for certain financial reporting obligations, this exemption was not retained inlegislative procedure.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, savings (including the micro exemption) could not be further quantified.

Implementation monitoring and an evaluation scheduled for 2021 will seek to quantify costs and benefits.

Costs: The bulk of yearly compliance costs stemming from the preparation of annual accounts, the annual report and audit of the accounts has been estimated at a relatively low level of EUR 5300 for small collecting societies – this corresponds to 0.4% of an EU average small collecting society's annual turnover.



State of Play:

Proposal adopted on 11 July 2012

COM(2012)372

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

A micro exemption was proposed for setting up a supervisory function and for certain financial reporting obligations. This was an option for Member States to exempt micro-enterprises aimed at minimising the regulatory burden of these companies.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

- ensure the better governance and greater transparency of collective rights management on behalf of rightholders.

- facilitate the multi-territorial licensing of online rights of authors in musical works by collective management organisations and make it easier for online service providers to obtain such licences.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, savings (including the micro exemption) could not be further quantified.

Implementation monitoring and an evaluation scheduled for 2021 will seek to quantify costs and benefits.

Costs: Most costs stemming from the application of the Directive's provisions relate to the application of new rules for the handling of funds (no data available), financial reporting and audit (the overall cost is estimated at approximately EUR 4.1 million per year on average for all collecting societies in the EU - depending on the size of the CMO, this would amount to EUR 5300 for small, EUR 14100 for medium-sized and EUR 46,700 per large collecting society.

State of Play:

Adopted in legislative procedure on 26 February 2014

Directive 2014/26/EU

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The optional exemption for micro-companies proposed by the Commission was removed by the legislator. 

However, the final adopted text strengthens the position of micr-company right holders whose rights are managed by CMOs

CMOs manage funds of third parties (right holders) and it is argued that right holders including SMEs should be involved in the monitoring of activities of the CMO management and have access to reliable information.

Estimated savings and benefits

The fact that the exemption was removed means that the regulatory burden on micro-enterprises is not expected to be minimised.

During the discussions in the Council the issue was raised that the burden would not be too high on micro-CMOs because generally their activity is on a smaller scale and therefore the financial reporting obligation would be proportionally less burdensome (as the financial data would be much simpler than in the case of large CMOs).



State of Play:

Transposition Deadline: 10 April 2016

Report on the application of the Directive to be done by April 2021

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

In May 2016, infringement proceedings have been launched against those Member States that had not transposed the Directive into national law. To date, 11 Member States have communicated their national implementing measures to the Commission.

According to Article 40 of the Directive, an evaluation / report on the application of the Directive is to be completed by 10 April 2021.

Impacts / Savings Confirmed?

No evidence on impacts is provided given the recently expired deadline for transposition.



Review of the Satellite and Cable Directive 93/83/ECC



Overall State of Play

evaluation sept 2016

proposal Sept 2016 (pending in legislative procedure)

Summary

Summary:

The Commission proposed a revision of the Satellite and Cable Directive in 2016 following to an evaluation.

The evaluation was carried out to assess the functioning of the Directive as well as to help in assessing whether the similar mechanisms as set out in the Directive should be extended to cover broadcasters' online transmissions and certain retransmission services.

The evaluation showed that the mechanisms put in place by the Directive have facilitated the clearance of copyright and related rights for cross-border satellite broadcasts and for the simultaneous retransmissions by cable of broadcasts from other Member States.

It however pointed out that the directive - due to the technology-specific nature of its provisions - does not apply to the new digital technologies used for transmission and retransmission of TV and radio programmes that have emerged in recent years.

Building on those findings, the Commission made a proposal for a new Regulation in order to facilitate access to more television and radio programmes from other EU countries.

In particular, it introduces the application of the country of origin to some online transmissions of broadcasting organisations, and the collective management of rights to retransmissions by means equivalent to cable.

The proposed regulation is expected to enhance consumers’ access to TV and radio programmes from other Member States.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, both the costs and benefits of the current Directive and the savings of the Commission proposal could not be quantified.

The proposed regulation is expected to reduce transaction costs for broadcasters and operators of retransmission services whereby enabling them to offer broadcasters’ online services across borders/to retransmit TV and radio programmes from other Member States.



State of Play:

Finalised - 14 September 2016

SWD(2016)308, SWD(2016)309

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of all the core provisions of Directive 93/83/EEC establishing, respectively, the "country of origin" principle for satellite broadcasting and the two-stop-shop copyright clearing mechanism for cable retransmission (individual licensing by broadcasters combined with mandatory collective management of all other - "underlying" - rights).

Evaluation findings:

The evaluation showed that the mechanisms put in place by the Directive have facilitated the clearance of copyright and related rights for cross-border satellite broadcasts and for the simultaneous retransmissions by cable of broadcasts from other Member States.

It however pointed out that the directive - due to the technology-specific nature of its provisions - does not apply to the new digital technologies used for transmission and retransmission of TV and radio programmes that have emerged in recent years.

Effectiveness: there are indications that the specific mechanisms introduced by the Directive have facilitated the clearance of copyright and related rights for (free-to-view) cross-border satellite broadcasts and for the simultaneous retransmissions by cable of broadcasts from other Member States. Similarly, these mechanisms can be considered to have contributed to ensuring a high level of protection for right holders and have improved, to different extents, access to TV and radio programmes from other Member States. The negotiation and mediation mechanisms established under the Directive have been used to a varying, but overall limited, degree; they were found helpful in the cases where they have been used.

EU added value: with regard to satellite broadcasting, the Directive has provided significant added value, since no action with a comparable result could have been taken at the Member State level. As regards cable retransmission, action at the Member State level is possible, but the Directive has provided added value by establishing harmonised rules across the internal market.

Estimated savings and benefits

Despite a limited amount of evidence, the Directive can be considered to have been a cost-efficient and beneficial intervention. It has not created administrative burden or significant compliance / implementation costs for either stakeholders or Member States.

The Directive has helped to reduce the transaction costs for the licensors and the licensees. Certain identified specific costs resulting from the application of the Directive (CMO fees charged for managing cable retransmission rights) can be regarded to be outweighed by benefits - savings in transaction costs.

However, it was not possible to obtain quantitative data concerning the potential costs and benefits generated by the application of the Directive.

This is mainly due to the following factors: (i) the confidentiality of such data; (ii) the difficulty of extracting data concerning the Directive from wider data sets; (iii) the fact that the Directive has been in place for a long time



State of Play:

-adopted on 14 September 2016

-COM(2016)594

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Building on the experience with the application of the Satellite and Cable Directive, the Commission proposed to adopt a new Regulation which aims at facilitating access to more television and radio programmes online from other EU countries and at facilitating certain retransmissions of television and radio programmes from other Member States.

In particular, it introduces the application of the country of origin to some online transmissions of broadcasting organisations, and the collective management of rights to retransmissions by means equivalent to cable.

A review of the existing provisions of the Satellite and Cable Directive has not been proposed, as no particular issues with its application have been identified.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The Commission pursues the objective to improve cross-border access to television and radio programmes in Europe.  

Estimated savings and benefits

Based on the Impact Assessment carried out by the Commission in 2016, the proposed measures would reduce the transaction costs (in particular, for broadcasting organisations and operators of retransmission services), while it is not expected to have disruptive effects on right holders. The introduction of mandatory collective management of rights for certain retransmissions would affect the licensing choices of right holders but only in a limited manner. The proposed measures would enhance consumers’ access to TV and radio programmes from other MS and thus bring benefits to consumers.

However, it was not possible to obtain data for quantification of the estimated costs and benefits (data confidentiality). 



Regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services

Overall State of Play

Evaluation Sept 2016

Proposal Sept 2016 (pending in legislative procedure)

Summary

Summary:

The EU's regulatory framework for electronic communications is a series of rules which apply throughout the EU Member States. It encourages competition, improves the functioning of the market and guarantees basic user rights. The overall goal is for European consumers to be able to benefit from increased choice thanks to low prices, high quality and innovative services. EU law has helped the prices of telecoms' services fall by around 30% in the past decade. The rules are simple, flexible, technology-neutral and aim at deregulation in the longer term.

Building on the evaluation of the framework which dates from 2009, the review of the telecoms framework aims at adapting the current regime to the main market and technological developments occurred in the sector. In recent years, market structures have evolved, with monopolistic market power becoming increasingly limited, and at the same time electronic communications and the telecoms sector in particular have now acquired a vital importance for most sectors of the overall economy. Consumers and businesses are increasingly relying on data and internet access services instead of traditional telephone and other communication services.  

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission proposal is expected to lead to an increase of investment and consumption with a cumulative effect on growth of 1.45 % and on employment of 0.18% by 2025, assuming the reforms are implemented by 2020. Labour productivity is also expected to increase by 0.8% during the period 2020-2025.

In terms of access regulation, the proposal tabled by the Commission is expected to lead to an increase of the period in between successive market reviews from 3 to 5 years, which should increase certainty for stakeholders and reduce administrative costs. Costs savings have been estimated at 10-15% of the current costs involved with market reviews (a saving of up to €7.5m)

More consistent spectrum assignment will generate total benefits of €146.5 billion a year. The preferred option for services might contribute to cost savings in the telecoms and many other industries. The only foreseeable additional costs are associated with the number-related obligations imposed on providers of OTT communication services and those related to access to emergency services when a standardised technical solution is available. 

State of Play:

Finalised 14 September 2016

SWD(2016)313

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of: the Framework Directive 2002/21/EC as amended, the Authorisation Directive 2002/20/EC as amended, the Access Directive 2002/19/EC as amended, the Universal Service Directive 2002/22/EC as amended, the BEREC Regulation 1211/2009, the Radio Spectrum Decision 676/2002/EC, the Radio Spectrum Policy Group Decision 2002/622/EC, Decision 243/2012/EU establishing a multiannual radio spectrum policy programme (RSPP).

Evaluation findings:

The specific objectives of the framework (promoting competition, realising the single market and protecting consumer interests) remain valid; most regulatory areas remain relevant e.g., spectrum management and access regulation.

The regulatory framework has been effective in delivering a competitive sector overall, with benefits for end-users; the achievements of the framework in protecting end-users and in ensuring a safety net (universal service) are significant;

Regulatory consistency has been achieved only to a limited extent;

Connectivity has emerged as the underlying driving force for digital society and the digital economy, underpinned by technological changes and evolving consumer and market demands; 

The benefits of the framework - for most operators, end-users and society as a whole - greatly outweigh the costs of implementing it;

A certain level of complexity is unavoidable to ensure a well weighted intervention

However, in several areas, administrative burden could be reduced without making the provisions less effective.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the costs and benefits of the existing framework could not be quantified.

In the absence of reporting requirements imposed by the regulatory framework on Member States and operators regarding administrative costs and burdens, the efficiency conclusions are qualitative, rather than based on actual calculations.




State of Play:

- Proposal adopted 14/09/2016

- COM(2016)590

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The initiative aims to remove legislation which has become obsolete or not necessary, such as a number of lex specialis provisions concerning end-user rights, where the lex generalis provides adequate end-user protection.

It aims at ensuring coherence with other pieces of EU law, such as in the area of audiovisual, consumer and data protection. Furthermore, coherence between regulation aimed at incentivising competitive network roll-out and the EU financing and State aid rules in the sector is reinforced.

It aims at ensuring consistency in particular by recasting four Directives and their amendments (from 1 up to 3 amendments each) into one comprehensive and consistent Directive. Ipso facto, the recasting increases the readability and accessibility of EU electronic communications law. Overall, this has a significant simplification effect.

The initiative seeks to enhance the effectiveness of the framework by harmonising the competences of the national regulatory authorities and by empowering them to act in all areas which are relevant for regulation.

The procedures and steps necessary for imposing ex ante sector specific regulation have been simplified wherever this was possible without compromising the quality and appropriateness of the resulting regulation.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The general objective is to ensure that the pro-competitive framework leads to unconstrained connectivity as the basis for a digital single market.

The specific objectives are:

to contribute to ubiquitous connectivity in the internal market.

to promote competition and user choice in the internal market.

to simplify the regulatory intervention and to achieve internal market coherence.

The internal market remains an objective of the framework and underpins each objective of the review.

A number of potential synergies and trade-offs between objectives have also been identified.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission proposal is estimated to lead to an increase of investment and consumption and it is expected that there will be a cumulative effect on growth of 1.45 % and on employment of 0.18 % by 2025, assuming the reforms are implemented by 2020. Labour productivity is also expected to increase by 0.8 % during the period 2020-2025.

The Commission proposal is expected to lead to an increase of the period in between successive market reviews from 3 to 5 years, which should increase certainty for stakeholders and reduce administrative costs. Costs savings have been estimated at 10-15% of the current costs involved with market reviews (a saving of up to €7.5m).

More consistent spectrum assignment will generate total benefits of €146.5 bn a year. The preferred option for services might contribute to cost savings in the telecoms and many other industries.



Strengthening Network and Information Security (NIS)

Overall State of Play:

Legal Act Adopted by the Legislator and Benefits Retained

Summary

Summary:

The Commission proposed reinforcing cyber-security in the Union by ensuring that all Member States have minimum capabilities and a strategy for a high level of Network and Information Security (NIS) in their terittory, and developing the cooperation between competent authorities through the creation of a network between national authorities and the Commission.

An exemption for micro-enterprises was foreseen in the original proposal as regards security and notification requirements.

Other benefits relate to the effects of increased confidence in the digital economy and a likely cost reduction of security incidents, including malicious attacks.

The proposal was adopted by the legislator in July 2016 (Directive (EU) 2016/1148).

Estimated savings and benefits

The directive increases confidence in the digital economy and decreases costs of security incidents, including malicious attacks.

According to the World Economic Forum, in the next ten years there is a 10% likelihood of a major Critical Information Infrastructure breakdown with potential economic damages of over $250 billion.

Due to the limited availability of data, estimated savings could not be further quantified.

In relations with costs, the total additional NIS compliance costs are estimated to be in the range of EUR 1 to 2 billion. -The total cost for notifying breaches on an annual basis at the EU level is estimated to be EUR 212 500.



State of Play:

Adopted 7 February 2013

COM(2013)48 final

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The proposal includes an exemption for micro-enterprises.

Under Article 14(8), microenterprises (as defined in Commission Recommendation 2003/361/EC) are exempted from the security and notification requirements under Article 14(1) and 14(2), which provide that public administrations and market operators:

take appropriate technical and organisational measures to manage the risks posed to the security of the networks and information systems which they control and use in their operations; and

notify to the competent authority incidents having a significant impact on the security of the core services they provide.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The aim of the Directive is to reinforce cyber-security in the Union by ensuring that all Member States have minimum capabilities and a strategy for a high level of NIS in their territory, and developing the cooperation between competent authorities through the creation of a network between national authorities and the Commission.

Estimated savings and benefits

Savings:

Assessing the magnitude of the possible benefits is extremely difficult for a number of reasons as for example the incomplete view of the frequency and gravity of NIS incidents.

NIS incidents would have no or little impact when NIS measures are in place. Other benefits are more general and relate for example to the effects of increased confidence in the digital economy. There is a likely contribution to decreasing the costs of security incidents, including malicious attacks. According to the World Economic Forum, in the next ten years there is a 10% likelihood of a major Critical Information Infrastructure breakdown with potential economic damages of over $250 billion.

Due to the absence of data, estimated savings could not be further quantified.

Costs:

Costs for the Member States:

The costs for NIS capabilities and cooperation would vary across the Member States, according to the respective current level of preparedness.

Approximately EUR 2.5 million per CERT (Computer Emergency Response Team) in case there is a country that has not yet established national/governmental CERT body.

As regards NIS competent authorities, it is likely that Member States would choose to designate existing bodies as competent authorities and assign additional tasks to these bodies. The corresponding additional average costs would be EUR 360 000 per Member State. The total theoretical maximum cost would be EUR 9.72 million across the EU and de facto lower, since some Member States already have coordinating cyber security centers or bodies in place.

As regards pan-European cyber-incident exercises, the estimated costs per MS for one exercise (assuming that it takes place every two years) is EUR 55 555.

The costs related to the cooperation among the competent authorities within the network would stand at approximately EUR 6000 per year per Member State.

Compliance costs for public administrations and key private players concerning security measures:

The total additional NIS compliance costs are estimated to be in the range of EUR 1 to 2 billion.

Costs for public administrations and key private players associated with reporting NIS incidents with a significant impact:

The total cost for notifying breaches on an annual basis at the EU level is estimated to be EUR 212 500.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 06/07/2016

Directive (EU) 2016/1148

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The definition of "operators of essential services" which will be required to take appropriate security measures and to notify serious incidents to the relevant national authority was extended by water and digital infrastructure sectors (initially operators in the energy, transport, banking, financial market infrastructures and health sectors).

As regards digital service providers (DSPs) the agreed text covers online marketplaces (equivalent to e-commerce platforms in the original proposal), cloud computing services and search engines. Compared with the original proposal, it does not include internet payment gateways, as these are now covered by the revised Payment Services Directive; application stores, as these are to be understood as being a type of online marketplace; and social networks, as per the Council's political agreement with the European Parliament.

Overall, the agreed text endorses the core objectives of the Commission proposal, namely to ensure a high common level of security of network and information systems.

Estimated savings and benefits

No changes to the estimated costs and benefits in legislative procedure.



State of Play:

Application on 10 May 2018

Transposition Deadline 9 May 2018

Evaluation Planned for 9 May 2021

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Not available yet.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not available yet.



Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

VAT Mini One Stop shop

Overall state of play

evaluation results expected Q4 2016

Proposal planned for Q4 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Mini One Stop Shop (2008/8/EC) has been introduced in 2015 in order to simplify the payment of VAT for B2C supplies of telecommunications, broadcastings and electronically supplied services under the new place of supply rules.

The emerging findingsof the evaluation of the Mini One Stop Shop show that the new rules have been implemented effectively and are widely appreciated by business and the majority of Member States.

Building on the success and lessons learnt, the Commission intends to modernize and extent the Mini One Stop Shop to cross-border B2C (Business to Consumer) E-Commerce.

Estimated savings and benefits and benefits

It is estimated that the Mini One Stop Shop mechanism has saved business EUR 500 million or EUR 40 000 per business compared to the alternative of direct registration (95% reduction compared to the alternative of direct registration).

A proposal to extend and modernise the Mini One Stop Shop is expected to reduce administrative burdens for business by EUR 2.3 billion annually.



State of Play:

evaluation results expected Q4 2016

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the Mini One Stop Shop (2008/8/EC) which is applied since 1 January 2015.

The assessment covers the implementation of the Mini One Stop Shop to ensure that it meets its primary objective of simplifying the payment of tax for B2C supplies of telecommunications, broadcastings and electronically supplied services under the new place of supply rules.

Evaluation findings:

The new place of supply rules for intra-EU supplies of telecommunications, broadcasting and electronically supplied services are an important step in ensuring the destination principle of VAT which is the agreed position of the Commission and Member States. However, it is recognised that the destination principle also makes life more difficult and costly for businesses who are required to account for the VAT due to the Member States of their consumers, and therefore simplification measures are needed.

Overall, the emerging findings of the evaluation show that the new rules have been implemented effectively. In particular, the business community has been very satisfied with the introduction of the 2015 changes, Business has recognised the efforts taken to communicate these changes and the issuance of comprehensive guidance material. Business has also recognised the benefits of bringing together business and Member States prior to the introduction of the changes to ensure that these were workable.

The introduction of the Mini One Stop Shop is seen by business and the majority of Member States as an essential system for the collection of taxes and making compliance as easy as possible. The timely and relatively error-free introduction of 28 individual but intra-connected IT portals now used by in excess of 12 000 businesses is a significant achievement.

It should also be recognised that such a system whereby Member States are collecting substantial tax revenues on behalf of each other is not only a key milestone for the EU VAT system but also for the single market.

There are, however, lessons to be learned from the 2015 changes notably regarding the lack of a cross-border threshold as well as the rules for the identification of the location of customers have caused difficulties for micro-businesses and start-up. These issues can be addressed in the new initiative on B2C without causing distortions in the single market. Another key consideration, driven by the spirit of the Digital Single Market (DSM) strategy, is that doing business cross-border should be as similar as possible as doing business within the/your own Member State.

In the new proposal scheduled for 2016 to extend the Mini One Stop shop to cross-border supplies of tangible goods, the Commission and Member States intend to consider both the positives and the learning points from the 2015 changes. The need to have clear rules and robust IT specifications together with ongoing support from the Commission services is essential. It is also critical that any changes are communicated to those businesses who will be affected, whether in the EU or in third countries. In this respect, particular attention needs to be focused on SMEs with both the Commission and Member States reaching out to such businesses. In addition, it is essential that Member States introduce a cross-border e-commerce compliance strategy to ensure that any abuses are identified and addressed, and therefore businesses will face a level playing field.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Mini One Stop Shop has been very successful with EUR 3 billion paid through it in 2015, representing up to EUR 18 billion in trade and 70% of the total in this sector. This mechanism has saved business in one year EUR 500 million or EUR 40 000 per business (95% reduction compared to the alternative of direct registration), and thus contributed to reducing unnecessary burdens on business.

State of Play:

Planned for Q4 2016

Commission Proposal 

Which REFIT objective(s) will the Commission pursue?

Proposal to Modernise VAT for cross-border B2C (Business to Consumer) E-Commerce.

The inititive will simplify VAT rules and break down VAT barriers for cross border trade and make it easier for businesses to register and account for VAT in respect of cross-border B2C supplies of goods and services. It is expected that small start-up e-commerce businesses will benefit most.

This initiative was recommended by the Commission expert group on taxation of the digital economy. It will facilitate the Digital Single Market and provide a level playing field for business.

Which other objectives will the Commission pursue?

The proposal will aim at:

extending the current single One Stop Shop mechanism to cross-border (intra-EU and third country) online sales of tangible goods to private consumers,

introduce a common EU-wide simplification measure (VAT threshold) to help small start-up e-commerce businesses,

allow for home country controls including a single audit of cross-border businesses for VAT purposes.

remove the import VAT exemption on importation of small consignments from suppliers in third countries, together with the introduction of simplified collection measures.

It builds on the REFIT evaluation of the current Mini One Stop Shop.

Estimated savings and benefits

The proposal is expected to reduce administrative burdens for business by EUR 2.3 billion annually. It should also be stressed that it is estimated that 430 000 businesses will benefit from the new microbusiness threshold.

Priority 3: A resilient Energy Union with a Forward-Looking Climate Change Policy

Overview

1.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Climate Action

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Fuel Quality Directive

Evaluation

Expected to be finalised in Q1 2017

Heavy Duty Vehicles CO2 emissions monitoring system

Commission proposal

Planned 2017

CO2 emissions from cars 

Evaluation

Finalised in 2015

Commission proposal

Planned 2017 

CO2 emissions from vans 

Evaluation

Finalised in 2015

Commission proposal

Planned 2017 

Fluorinated greenhouse gases

Commission proposal

07 November 2012

Legal act

01 January 2015

Implementation

Application on 1 January 2015

Verification and accreditation of CO2 emissions

Legal act

21 June 2012

Implementation

Application on 1 January 2013

Emissions monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gases

Legal act

01 January 2013

Implementation

Application on 1 January 2013

Carbon Capture and Storage Directive 2009/31/EC

Evaluation

15 January 2015

Binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States from 2021 to 2030

Evaluation

Finalised in July 2016

Commission proposal

20 July 2016



2.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Energy

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Renewable Energy    

Evaluation

Adoption planned Q4 2016

Commission proposal

Foreseen adoption Q4 2016

Review of the Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings (EPBD)

Evaluation

Planned for Q4 2016

Commission proposal

Foreseen adoption Q4 2016

Regulation of the Supply Agency of the European Atomic Energy Community 

Commission proposal

Planned for 4Q 2016

Safety Standards for Radiation Protection

Commission proposal

29 September 2011

Legal act

5 December 2013

Implementation

Application on 6 February 2018

Energy Union Governance – Planning and Reporting obligation 

Evaluation

Adoption planned Q4 2016

3.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

EU legal framework for energy taxation (Energy Tax Directive)

Evaluation

Planned for 2017

4.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Transport

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Combined Transport

Evaluation

Finalised in 20 April 2016 

Commission proposal

Planned for 2017

Promotion of Clean and Energy-efficient Road Transport Vehicles ("clean vehicles")

Evaluation

External evaluation report finalised September 2015

Commission proposal

Planned for 2017

Revision of the Eurovignette Directive 1999/62

Commission proposal

Planned for 2017

European Electronic Toll Service (EETS)

Evaluation

SWD planned to be finalised Q4 2016

Commission proposals

Planned for 2017

Initiatives in the area of Climate action

Fuel Quality Directive

Overall state of play

Evaluation results expected by Q1 2017

Summary

Summary:

Evaluation of the Fuel Quality Directive, concerning Directive 98/70/EC relating to the quality of petrol and diesel fuels (the Fuel Quality Directive (FQD)). Evaluation on a number of specific Articles of the FQD (articles 1 to 9a, excluding article 7a to 7e).

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Heavy Duty Vehicles CO2 emissions monitoring system

Overall state of play

Proposal planned in 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is considering a proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Monitoring of Heavy Duty Vehicles' (HDV) fuel consumption and CO2 emissions with a view to improving purchaser information. - Action to reduce the emissions and energy consumption of HDVs is in line with the Commission priorities set out in the Energy Union Communication and in the Low-emission mobility Strategy.

Measures to increase fuel efficiency and reduce CO2 emissions from heavy duty vehicles and buses are envisaged in the Energy Union Communication and in the Low-emission mobility Strategy.

Such measures will increase market transparency and ensure a better understanding of CO2 emission levels and fuel consumption from these vehicles. Increasing market transparency will facilitate the uptake of the most energy efficient HDVs, thereby improving EU road transport's competitiveness as fuel represents a significant share of its operating costs. The increased push for fuel-efficient technology should also contribute to the competitiveness of the European HDV industry.

This measure is also a necessary step for other medium to long term policy measures, such as emissions standards. This is because neither fuel consumption nor CO2 emission from HDVs are currently measured in a standardised manner.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



CO2 emissions from cars

Overall state of play

Legal act April 2009

Evaluation 2015

Proposal planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 sets out the framework for reducing CO2 emissions of new passenger cars thereby contributing to meeting the global challenge of keeping climate change below 2º C of pre-industrial levels by reducing GHG (Green Houses Gases) emissions in the EU.

Regulation (EU) No 333/2014 amends the 2009 Regulation and defines the modalities of meeting the target of 95 g CO2/km for new passenger cars. By proposing exemptions from the CO2 targets for manufacturers with less than 1000 car registrations, the new Regulation reduces administrative burden without negative effects for the overall CO2 reductions.

The Regulations establish a regulatory regime until around 2020 and, because of the long timeframe needed for industry planning, request the Commission to make new proposals for the period after this.

The Commission is planning to revise these regulations in 2017.

Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 has been subject to a REFIT evaluation (report issued in 2015), together with the similar Regulation on light commercial vehicles (vans).

Taken together, cars and vans account for around 15% of EU CO2 emissions and 17% of final energy consumption.

Further action to reduce the emissions and energy consumption is in line with the Commission priorities set out in the Energy Union Communication.

Estimated savings and benefits

The economic benefit of the introduction of a de-minimis treshold for small-volume manufacturers under Regulation (EU) No 333/2014 is to reduce the administrative burden for each manufacturer by around € 25,000 and for the Commission by around €10,000 per application, as the need for a derogation procedure is avoided

So far, data on the number of manufacturers that benefitted from the exemption from the targets that was introduced by the legislation is limited and the benefits on the ground of this change cannot be properly assessed yet. In 2015, 24 car manufacturers have made use of the exemption, representing 0.029% of car registrations in that year. There is no data available yet to quantify the actual reduction in administrative burden as it is too early.



State of Play:

Proposal planned for 2017

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) will the Commission pursue?

To reduce the climate impact of cars in line with the requirements of EU climate policy and the 2030 climate and energy framework in a cost-effective, technology and competitively neutral manner while improving the competitiveness of EU manufacturing.

Car emissions of CO2 represent a large share of current EU greenhouse gas emissions. Ensuring that greenhouse gas emissions from these vehicles are reduced forms a key part of the least cost approach to meeting the EU's climate objectives.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



CO2 emissions from vans

Overall state of play

Legal act May 2011

Evaluation 2015

Proposal planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

Regulation (EC) No 510/2011 sets out the framework for reducing CO2 emissions from new light commercial vehicles (vans). Regulation (EU) No 253/2014 sets out the modalities of meeting the target of to 147 g CO2/km for new vans. By proposing exemptions from the CO2 targets for manufacturers with less than 1000 van registrations, the new Regulation reduces administrative burden without negative effects on the overall CO2 reductions.

The Regulations establish a regulatory regime until around 2020 and, because of the long timeframe needed for industry planning, request the Commission to make new proposals for the period after this.

The Commission is planning to revise these regulations in 2017.

Regulation (EC) No 510/2011 has been subject to a REFIT evaluation (report issued in 2015), together with the similar Regulation on cars.

Taken together, cars and vans account for around 15% of EU CO2 emissions and 17% of final energy consumption.

Further action to reduce the emissions and energy consumption is in line with the Commission priorities set out in the Energy Union Communication.

Estimated savings and benefits

The economic benefit of the introduction of a de-minimis threshold for small-volume manufacturers under Regulation (EU) No 253/2014 is to reduce the administrative burden for each manufacturer by around € 25,000 and for the Commission by around €10,000 per application, as the need for a derogation procedure is avoided.

So far, data on the number of manufacturers that benefit from the exemption that was introduced by the legislation is limited and the benefits on the ground of this change cannot be properly assessed yet. In 2015, 9 van manufacturers have made use of the exemption, representing 0.11% of van registrations in that year. There is no data available yet to quantify the actual reduction in administrative burden as it is too early.

State of Play:

Finalised in 2015

No evaluation SWD (contractor report)

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Regulations 443/2009 and 510/2011 on CO2 emissions from light-duty vehicles

Evaluation findings:

The evaluation support study confirms that the 2015 (cars) and 2017 (vans) emission targets have both been achieved before the deadline and that manufacturers are in a strong position to meet their 2020 targets. It also confirms that the Regulations have a positive impact on emission reductions for cars and vans as well as on energy security. Also, their impact on competitiveness and innovation seems to be positive.

Concerning the effectiveness of the Regulations, the evaluation support study highlighted one significant weakness, i.e. the increasing discrepancy between real-world and test cycle emissions. This will be addressed by the switch to a new worldwide harmonised test protocol (WLTP).

The problems with the test cycle have also affected the efficiency of the legislation as the benefits have been smaller than they would have been if the divergence between test cycle and real-world performance had not been increasing. The report also highlighted that the costs to manufacturers estimated ex-ante were much higher than has been the case in reality. Both Regulations have generated net economic benefits to society and the targets for both have proved to be much cheaper to reach for manufacturers than predicted. However, lifetime fuel expenditures savings have been lower than expected, mostly because of the increasing divergence between test cycles and real-world emissions performance. These aspects will be considered in the impact assessment supporting the new Commission proposals to revise the legislation.

Estimated savings and benefits

Both of the Regulations have generated net economic benefits to society. The car CO2 Regulation has abatement costs of -€46 per tonne of CO2 abated, compared to ex-ante estimates of +€32/tCO2 to +€38.7/tCO2. The overall cost effectiveness of the LCV Regulations has been estimated at -€173/tCO2, which compares favourably with the ex-ante estimates of -€38.9/tCO2 to €32.6/tCO2. The LCV CO2 Regulation has also generated net emissions savings, although these are smaller than anticipated, primarily because the baseline emissions used in the Impact Assessment are likely to have been overestimated.

Costs to manufacturers have been much lower than anticipated, because abatement technologies have, in general, proved to be less costly than expected. For passenger cars, the ex-post average unit costs associated with meeting the fleet-average 130 gCO2/km target have been estimated at €183 per car. By contrast, the ex-ante estimates ranged from €430 to €984 per car. For LCVs, average ex-post costs for meeting the 175 gCO2/km target have been estimated at €115 per vehicle, as opposed to the ex-ante estimate of €1,037 per vehicle.

Part of the reason that the ex-ante costs for LCVs were so high is because the level of effort required to reduce emissions to 175 g CO2/km is likely to have been overestimated for the original Impact Assessment.

Lifetime fuel expenditure savings for both cars and LCVs have been lower than originally anticipated in the Impact Assessment, primarily because of the increasing divergence between test cycle and real-world emissions performance. Linked to these fuel expenditure savings are losses in fuel tax revenues. For passenger cars, fuel tax revenues are estimated to have reduced by €22 billion over the time period 2006 to 2013, whilst for LCVs, the reduction in fuel tax revenue over the period 2010 to 2013 is estimated to be €1 billion.

State of Play:

Proposal planned for 2017

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

To reduce the climate impact of cars and light commercial vehicles in line with the requirements of EU climate policy and the 2030 climate and energy framework. This should be done in a cost-effective, technology and competitively neutral manner while improving the competitiveness of EU manufacturing.

Light commercial vehicle emissions of CO2 represent a large share of current EU greenhouse gas emissions. Ensuring that greenhouse gas emissions from these vehicles are reduced forms a key part of the least cost approach to meeting the EU's climate objectives.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Fluorinated greenhouse gases

Overall state of play

Proposal Nov 2012

Legal act adopted Jan 2015

Summary

Summary

The initiative is aiming at a more ambitious legislation on reducing fluorinated greenhouse gas emissions in the Union while keeping a cost-effective approach and respecting the principle of proportionality.

Companies that trade (import, export, produce) less than 100 tons of CO2 equivalent of fluorinated greenhouse gases per annum are exempted from reporting requirements.

Member State authorities that need to fullfil new obligations in relation to training and certification programmes of personnel and companies can do so with minimum efforts since the new Regulation allows for adaptations to existing systems, also allowing time for these adaptations to take place (until 2017).

Estimated savings and benefits

Reduction of administrative burden for SMEs due to the exemption from reporting requirements. However, savings are expected to be relatively limited since the market of fluorinated greenhouse gases is dominated by a limited number of large suppliers.

Mitigation of administrative requirements by allowing for adaptations to existing certification and training systems, in due time.



State of Play:

07/11/2012

COM(2012)643

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The objective of the Commission proposal was to simplify and clarify Regulation (EC) No 842/2006 by minimising administrative burden while ensuring a higher level of ambition in reducing the use of fluorinated greenhouse gases in the Union.

In the Commission proposal, companies that trade (import, export, produce) 1,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent or less of fluorinated greenhouse gases per annum are exempted from reporting requirements. This exemption benefits predominantly SMEs.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The proposed Regulation aimed at reducing the use of fluorinated gases which account for around 2% of all EU greenhouse gas emissions but have a much more potent global warming effect by creating tradeable quotas for their use. The gradual reduction in their use is to be achieved principally by issuing supply quotas to circa 100 large EU firms.

Estimated savings and benefits

The benefit is the cost efficient saving of 71 Mt CO2eq by 2030 or two-thirds of today's HFC emissions. Overall economic effects are small, with the input/output model suggesting a small, positive impact on overall output (up to 0.009%) and GEM-E3 predicting a small decline (up to -0.006).

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 01/01/2015

Reference Regulation (EU) No 517/2014

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The impact of the reduction of the reporting threshold from 1000 tons to 100 tons is limited since the market of fluorinated greenhouse gases is dominated by a limited number of large suppliers.

However, the replacement of the proposed ban on pre-filling of equipment before import in the EU was replaced by an authorisation system which increased the number of companies affected by the quota-system considerably (now >1500 companies registered). This negative impact has now been mitigated by implementing a flexible mechanism allowing small companies to more easily obtain such authorisations at lower costs and via a userfriendly online tool.

Estimated savings and benefits

No update of the savings estimations carried out.



State of Play:

Application on 1 January 2015

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Data on implementation is not yet available, as the Regulation applied from 1 January 2015.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information pending



Verification and accreditation of CO2 emissions

Overall state of play

Legal act adopted June 2012

Summary

Summary:

The Commission Regulation (EU) N° 600/2012, laying down provisions for the verification of emissions reports, minimises as much as possible the cost of verification by applying a risk-based approach and allowing the waiver in certain cases of the obligation to conduct site visits of EU ETS operators' installations.

Estimated savings and benefits

Reduced cost of verification for EU Member States and for EU ETS operators through a proportionate approach and a reduced number of site visits. Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified.



State of Play:

21 June 2012

Commission Regulation (EU) No 600/2012

Legal act

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The Regulation was proposed in order to establish a simplified system of annual verification and accreditation of CO2 emissions, drawing on national best practices. This system aims at application of a consistent approach based on internationally agreed standards and a proportionate basis including possibility to reduce as much as possible the number of site visits without affecting the robustness of the verifier's opinion.

To this end, the Regulation defines conditions for waiving the necessity of site visits to certain installations. It mainly concerns installations:

Analysed through a risk analysis and where all relevant data can be remotely accessed by the verifier

With low emissions, i.e. emitting less than 25,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum

With straightforward processes and systems 

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

This Commission Regulation lays down provisions for the verification of emissions reports submitted pursuant to the EU Emissions Trading System (Directive 2003/87/EC) and for the accreditation and supervision of verifiers.

Estimated savings and benefits

The cost of verification varies greatly depending on the relative wealth of the country (affecting the wages and other costs), the scale of emissions and the size and complexity of the installation concerned. Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. A recent study commissioned by the European Commission (2016) estimates that the average cost of verification, for EU ETS operators to be ca. 6800 euros per installation. The verification system adds credibility to reported data and reduces the costs that would otherwise be incurred by the Member States (the need for them to validate data, systems and carry out site inspections).



State of Play:

Application on 1 January 2013

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

All installations benefit from the risked-based approach forming the basis of the Commission Regulation.

The EU Member States are only required to approve the verifier's decision not to carry out a site visit in the case of larger installations. All small emitters (60% of all installations) may waive site vists simply based on the verifier's professional recommendation.

The Commission, in consultation with the EU Member States regularly updates its templates and guidance documents with a view to continual improvement of the cost-effectiveness of the system, minimising costs for operators and EU Member States. The most recent update was endorsed on 19/08/2016 concerning further appropriate relaxations possible in the criteria applying to waive of verifier site visits.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information pending



Emissions monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gases

Overall state of play

Legal act adopted in June 2012

Summary

Summary:

The Commission Regulation (EU) N° 601/2012 on the monitoring and reporting of GHG emissions, minimises as much as possible the cost of monitoring by, for example, a tiered approach proportionate to scale of emissions, allowed derogations to avoid unreasonable costs, additional derogations for small emitters, and provision for application of simplified monitoring plans.

Estimated savings and benefits

Reduced monitoring costs for EU ETS operators and EU Member States thanks to the various dispensations provided by the Regulation, especially simplified monitoring plans. Due to the absence of data, the savings could not be quantified..



State of Play:

21 June 2012

Commission Regulation (EU) No 601/2012 

Legal act

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Small emitters producing less than 25,000 tonnes CO2 per annum are automatically allowed to apply a simplified monitoring plan.

Aircraft operators are allowed to produce simplified monitoring plans provided they operate 243 flights or fewer over a four month period or produce less than 25,000 tonnes CO2 per annum .

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The Regulation was proposed in order to improve the monitoring and reporting of greenhouse gas emissions to support implementation of Directive 2003/87/EC which established a trading scheme for greenhouse gas emissions.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. The cost of monitoring and reporting varies greatly depending on the relative wealth of the country (affecting the wages and other costs), the scale of emissions and the size and complexity of the installation concerned. A recent study commissioned by the European Commission (2016) estimates that the average cost of monitoring amounts to:

For EU Member States: on average ca. 720 euros per installation

For EU ETS operators: on average, ca.. 35,000 euros per installation



State of Play:

Application on 1 January 2013

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

The opportunity for Member States to take further advantage of costs savings within the existing regulatory framework is recognised. For example, only six countries (5 EU Member States and Lichtenstein) have so far reported that they have applied the option of allowing installations to use standardised or simplified monitoring plans. In addition, only three countries (2 EU Member States and Iceland) have reported used of a simplified tool developed by Eurocontrol for small aviation emitters. The Commission continues work to raise Member State awareness of available cost-saving oportunities.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet availabile.

Carbon Capture and Storage Directive

Overall state of play

Evaluation published January 2015

Summary

Summary:

The CCS Directive is considered as fit-for-purpose and as putting the necessary regulatory framework in place for safe CO2 capture, transport and storage while allowing the Member States sufficient flexibility in the implementation of the CCS Directive. The evaluation found that the guidance documents need to be revised when there is more experience with CCS projects in the EU, which is not expected to happen before 2020. The Commission is following continuously the developments in the sector.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, it was not possible during the evaluation to assess the efficiency of the CCS Directive. The impact assessment for the CCS Directive estimates the administrative costs to 2030 to be €17.8 million, with 70% of this falling on operators, 26% on Member States and 4% on the Commission. In 2015, the evaluation support study concluded that there has not yet been enough experience of CCS regulation to doubt, or suggest adjustments to those numbers, though the lack of experience also means that they cannot be confirmed.



State of Play:

Finalised on 15 January 2015

No evaluation SWD (contractor report)

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Carbon Capture and Storage Directive 2009/31/EC

Evaluation findings:

The CCS Directive is considered as fit-for-purpose and as putting the necessary regulatory framework in place for safe CO2 capture, transport and storage while allowing the Member States sufficient flexibility in the implementation of the CCS Directive. The guidance documents need to be revised once there is more experience with CCS projects.

Estimated savings and benefits

At the time of the evaluation, it was not possible yet to provide an answer on the efficiency of the CCS Directive as there was insufficient evidence. The impact assessment for the CCS Directive estimates the administrative costs to 2030 to be €17.8 million, with 70% of this falling on operators, 26% on Member States and 4% on the Commission. In 2015, the evaluation support study concluded that there has not yet been enough experience of CCS regulation to doubt, or suggest adjustments to those numbers, though the lack of experience also means that they cannot be confirmed.



Binding annual greenhouse gas emission reductions by Member States from 2021 to 2030

Overall state of play

Proposal made in July 2016 pending in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

The objective of the Commission proposal is to achieve 30% greenhouse gas emission reductions in the the sectors outside of the EU Emissions Trading System (non-ETS) compared to 2005, in a manner that is fair for Member States given their different capacities, while ensuring cost efficiency and environmental integrity at EU level.

Estimated savings and benefits

The proposed Regulation will reduce administrative costs associated with compliance monitoring and reporting by approximately €345,000-460,000 per year.



State of Play:

Adopted 20/07/2016

COM/2016/0482

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Less frequent compliance checks are recommended in the Commission proposal, i.e. every five years instead of annually, that will significantly reduce the administrative burden for both Member States and the European Commission while maintaing and simplifying annual reporting.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The Commission proposal sets national emission targets for every Member State for 2030 expressed as a percentage reduction from 2005 emission levels as well as access to new flexibilities to achieve those targets cost effectively. Collectively, these national targets give an overall EU reduction of 30% in the sectors covered by the proposal. The 2030 targets range from 0% to -40% compared to 2005 levels.

Estimated savings and benefits

It was estimated that a domestic 40% reduction of GHG emissions would lead to additional energy system costs of 0.15–0.54% compared to GDP in 2030.

Administrative costs associated with compliance checks will be reduced by approximately €345,000-460,000 per year.

There are no direct reporting obligations or other administrative consequences for businesses, SMEs or micro-enterprises.



Initiatives in the area of Energy

Renewable Energy

Overall state of play

Pending

Evaluation and legislative proposal planned for adoption end 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating the Renewable Energy (RES) Directive and is planning to make a poposal to follow-up on its results before the end of 2016.

The European Council in October 2014 set a binding EU-level target of at least 27% for the share for renewable energy (RES) in final energy consumption in the EU by 2030. The planned Renewable Energy Package, including a proposal for a renewed Renewable Energy Directive will ensure the delivery of the renewable energy target for 2030 as set by the European Council.

Preliminary findings of the evaluation of the current Renewable Energy Directive showed a number of shortcomings while confirming the overall effectiveness of the directive. Hence, whilst Member States are on track to meet their nationally binding renewable energy target for 2020, progress towards more streamlined authorisation procedures is limited and the Guarantees of origin scheme is not yet working effectively. Lack of clear provisions on grid access rules, best practice for support schemes and cooperation mechanisms resulted in more costly than necessary renewable energy deployment.

The Commission Proposal for a new Renewable Energy Directive will address these shortcomings. It will establish an accountable and reliable system for target achievement, create the market conditions that allow for cost-efficient financing and integration of renewable energy into the market, address remaining challenges with regard to the mainstreaming, deployment, uptake and integration of renewable energy in the EU energy markets, improve the bioenergy sustainablity policy and promote cooperation between Member States in regional approaches.

Estimated savings and benefits

The proposal will ensure the cost-efficient delivery of the binding EU-level target of at least 27% of renewable energy in the EU's final energy consumption.

Additional information on the savings will be provided once the Commission proposal has been adopted.



State of Play:

Publication planned end 2016

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the Renewable Energy (RES) directive (Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources).

The entire Directive was evaluated with the exception of the reporting, planning and monitoring obligations for Member States and Commission which are covered by the parallel REFIT exercise on monitoring and reporting in the energy acquis. It mainly covers the period 2010-2015 (noting that RES Directive already dates back to 2001) and the 28 Member States.

Preliminary evaluation findings:

The Directive has met its main measurable objective (Member States are currently on track for 2020 RES targets) and overrriding policy objectives (GHG reduction, security of supply, competitiveness).

However, the emerging findings of the evaluation indicate that cost effectiveness is compromised by 1) lack of clear provisions for biofuel sustainability 2) lack of detailed guidance on support schemes and cooperation mechanisms 3) changes compared to the original proposal in the finally adopted proposal (Guarantees of origin), but then in return improved again by much faster than anticipated technology cost decreases. The Directive scored well with stakeholders in the Fitness Check concerning the binding common reporting template, less well for administrative costs linked to biofuels sustainbility. Coherence with internal market provisions will be looked at in depth in the upcoming review.

Estimated savings and benefits

Benefits:

GHG (Green house Gases): 380 Mt of gross avoided CO2 emissions at EU level in 2014. Fossil fuel displacement: renewables' production allowed the EU to cut its demand for fossil fuels by 114 Mtoe in 2014 (approximately 10 % of total fossil fuel consumption).

Avoided imported fuel costs: they amounted to around €20bn in 2014 due to increasing use of renewable energy.

Direct influence of RES policies on GDP remains below 0.5% in 2014. Employment in the RES sector has grown in the EU despite the economic crisis and exceeded original estimations. The EU renewable energy industry currently employs 1.11 million workers. The EU is one of the key global players with regard to net employment creation in the renewable energy sector. In 2014, it had the second highest per-capita employment in the area of renewable energy sector, behind Brazil. In the same year, the RES industry had a combined turnover of 144 billion EUR.

In 2013, European companies held 30% of all patents for renewable technologies.

Costs:

No full quantification possible as Member States are not obliged to submit cost data. Partial quantification based on data availability, see below.

Support costs:

The EU 28 weighted average RES & CHP support cost tripled from 2008 to 2015. In 2015, Germany recorded the highest rate of RES & CHP support accounting for 6.3 €c/kWh (household prices). The smallest amount of the same cost, 0.45 €c/kWh, was recorded in Croatia

Spain's annual feed-in premium/feed-in tariff payments of around EUR 6.8 billion in 2013 supported 73.8 TWh of generated electricity. As a result of support scheme reform, this has been reduced to EUR 5.4 billion in 2015 to support 56.9 TWh179. Germany spent EUR 20.4 billion for the EEG surcharge in 2013 and EUR 21.8 billion in 2015 for approx. 160 TWh of generated electricity.

The reporting obligation in Art 22 of the RES Directive causes median annual costs for Member States at 4,407 Euros with high benefits. (source REFIT energy acquis). The evaluation found the administrative burden from the biofuel sustainability scheme quite significant with one-off costs estimated at 120.000 euros and annual running costs of 40.000 per Member State.

State of Play:

Proposal planned for end 2016

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Simplification and modernisation to make sure the Renewable Energy Directive remains fit for purpose

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The initative will target (jointly with the initative on energy union governance) ensuring that the new 2030 EU level target is attained collectively, create the market conditions that allow for the cost-efficient financing and integration of renewable energy into the market, address the remaining challenges with regard to the mainstreaming, deployment, uptake and integration of renewable energy in the EU energy markets, improve the bioenergy sustainablity policy and promote cooperation between Member States in regional approaches.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Energy performance of buildings

Overall state of play

Evaluation and legislative revision planned for publication / adoption end 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings (EPBD) and is planning to propose a legislative review on this basis including the "Smart finance for smart buildings" initiative (Energy Efficiency package).

The energy efficiency contribution to moderation of demand is one of the key dimensions to achieve a resilient Energy Union. In this context especially the buildings sector has an important efficiency potential. The buildings stock is the largest single energy consumer in the EU and represents 40% of EU energy consumption. In addition, about 75% of the housing stock is energy inefficient and has a high cost-effective energy efficiency potential. The REFIT evaluation found that the EPBD resulted in a strengthening of minimum energy performance requirements in building codes in Member States between 2005 and 2013 of e.g. 66% for new buildings in France and 60% for new and existing residential buildings in Ireland.

Efficiency could be boosted if renovation rates would increase from the current estimated 0,5-1,2% to above 2%. However there is a need to stimulate investment by buildings owners and to address the issue that financing if often hampered by the small-scale of many building projects.

The evaluation revealed relatively limited regulatory failures. It showed that there is however scope for simplifying and streamlining outdated measures, and for enhancing compliance through fine tuning of existing provisions and better linking them with financial support. Additionally the evaluation points to the scope for modernisation of the Directive in the light of technological developments and the need to increase building renovation rates while supporting the decarbonisation of buildings in the long-term.

The main objective of the review of the EPBD, including the 'Smart Financing for Smart Buildings' initative is therefore to address these shortcomings and to promote a greater take-up of energy efficiency in the buildings sector. This will help deliver cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions and contribute to ensuring the securty of energy supply in the EU. The initative is also expected to have a positive impact on the overall economy and especially SMEs by improving the competetiveness of European construction and energy services industries while boosting innovation and creating or retaining jobs in Europe.

Estimated savings and benefits

In 2013, 37 Mto additional final energy savings in buildings in the households and services sectors were achieved compared to 2007. During the same period, GHG emissions are estimated to have been reduced by 63 Mt CO2 (i.e. 8% of the 1990 emissions of household and service sector), mainly in the household sector. 72,000 direct and indirect maintained jobs can be associated with the energy renovation of the EU building stock.

The Commission proposal is expected to deliver an additional 28 MtoE of energy savings. The transposition of the revised Directive results in additional compliance cost and administrative costs such as an estimated additional €1bn – €3bn average annual investment for installation/upgrading of building automation. However, the removal of the obligation to conduct a study on the feasibility of alternative high efficiency alternative systems for new buildings could lead to cost savings of ca 200 million Euros/year.

The simplified inspection regime for Member States authorities is estimated to result in savings of average 200 euros per inspection for ca. 13.5 million occasions of inspections in non-domestic buildings in the 15 concerned Member States during 2020-2030 (assuming full compliance).



State of Play:

Planned for Q4 2016

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings.

As the transposition deadline was 9 July 2012 and the application deadline for most provisions 9 January 2013, limited data is available about the actual impact of the recast EPBD.

Preliminary Evaluation findings:

The evaluation shows that the Directive is effective and is delivering on its general and specific objectives.

There is evidence of around 48.9 Mto of additional final energy savings in 2014 in buildings compared to the 2007 baseline of the EPBD. These savings occur mainly within the scope of the EPBD – space heating, cooling and domestic hot water – and a significant part can be attributed to factors influenced by policy interventions. This figure of 48.9 Mto in 2014 is in line with the 2008 Impact Assessment supporting the EPBD, which estimated that the Directive would deliver 60 to 80 Mto of final energy savings by 2020.

The evaluation shows that the overall architecture of the Directive, combining minimum requirements and certification, is working, in particular for new buildings.

Targets for all new buildings to be of nearly zero-energy by 2020 have proved to set a 'future-proof' vision for the sector and mobilise stakeholders accordingly.

However, the evaluation identified ways in which national transposition and implementation can be further developed through better enforcement, compliance monitoring and evaluation.

At EU level, opportunities for simplification or modernisation of outdated provisions and streamlining existing provisions in the light of technological progress were detected (e.g. in particular, the requirement to assess the technical, environmental and economic feasibility of high-efficiency alternative systems, or the regular inspection of heating and air conditioning systems ).

In conclusion, the evaluation reveals relatively limited regulatory failures. There is however scope for simplifying and streamlining outdated measures, and for enhancing compliance through fine tuning of existing provisions and better linking them with financial support. Additionally the evaluation points to the scope for modernisation of the Directive in the light of technological developments and the need to increase building renovation rates while supporting the decarbonisation of buildings in the long-term.

Estimated savings and benefits

Benefits:

In 2013, compared to the recast EPBD's 2007 baseline, around 37 Mtoe additional final energy savings were realised in buildings in the households and services sectors (neutralising other factors such as climate , and the economic crisis). During the same period, GHG emissions are estimated to have been reduced by 63 Mt CO2 (i.e. 8% of the 1990 emissions of household and service sector), mainly in the household sector. 72,000 direct and indirect maintained jobs can be associated with the energy renovation of the EU building stock. The EPBD intervenes in synergy with other EU legislation (notably for product efficiency) and is thus expected to have contributed to such benefits.

By design, the EPBD includes provisions to ensure its cost-effectiveness. The cost-optimal benchmarking methodology to steer existing national energy performance requirements towards cost-efficient levels is working. This methodology ensures that Member States are not required to set minimum energy performance requirements which are not cost-effective over the estimated economic lifecycle. Member States have made use of this option.

Costs:

Concerning EPCs, certification is sometimes seen as an administrative burden. However, with a relatively limited additional transaction cost (in the range of 85-140 € for an apartment or single family house EPC, valid for 10 years), EPCs are proven to have positively influenced property valuation (in the range of up to 5-10% higher sale or rental prices both for the sale and rental market, hence effectively contributing to the creation of a demand driven market for energy efficiency in buildings.

As regards administrative costs, the 2010 revision ensured continuity of national efforts to transpose and implement the 2002 EPBD. The main provisions, scope and structure were therefore retained in a conscious effort to ease transposition of the 2010 Directive and limit related administrative burden. Member States have estimated total costs of national implementation at a level of 160.8M€ for all Member States (without clarifying if these are linked to the recast EPBD specifically).

Finally, the 2010 Directive has partially succeeded in ensuring that buyers/tenants/owners receive good quality information at a reasonable cost on the energy performance of buildings and about the performance of their heating and air-conditioning systems (see specific sections below).

Due to the diversity and disaggregation of the buildings sector, it remains challenging to acquire good data on building characteristics, energy use, and financial implications of renovation in terms of cost savings or asset values. This lack of data has negative consequences on the market perception of the cost-effective energy saving potential of the EU building stock, on enforcement tracking, on monitoring and evaluation. EPC registers/databases can be a key instrument for reinforced compliance, improve the knowledge on the building stock and better inform policy makers and support the decisions of market players.

Enforcement, compliance and implementation represent a challenge for several aspects of the EPBD.

State of Play:

Proposal planned for Q4 2016

Commission proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Simplification and modernisation to make sure the EPBD remains fit for purpose.

Review of the Directive 2010/31/EU on the energy performance of buildings (EPBD), including the "Smart finance for smart buildings" initiative (Energy Efficiency package).

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The general objective of the review of the EPBD, including the 'Smart Finance for Smart Buildings' Initiative is to promote greater take-up of energy efficiency in the buildings sector and deliver cost-effective greenhouse gas emission reductions as well as to contribute to ensuring security of energy supply in the Union.

Specific objectives of the initiative are (1) to address the shortcomings identified by the evaluation of the EPBD so as to ensure it remains fit for purpose (REFIT component); and (2) to consider the need for additional measures relating to energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in buildings, with a 2030 perspective; (3) to deliver improved access to funding and stimulate investments ('Smart Financing for Smart Buildings').

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission proposal is likely to include a proposal to remove the obligation to conduct a study on the feasibility of alternative high efficiency alternative systems for new buildings – under Article 6 of the EPBD- which could lead to cost savings of ca 200 million Euros/year.

It further proposes a simplified inspection regime for Member State authorities which are estimated to result in savings of average 200 euros per inspection for ca. 13.5 million occasions of inspections in non-domestic buildings in the 15 concerned Member States during 2020-2030 (assuming full compliance).



Regulation of the Supply Agency of the European Atomic Energy Community

Overall state of play

Proposal planned for Q4 2016

Summary

Summary and benefits:

The Commission is planning a legislative update in order to:

- redefine, to the extent necessary, the working methods of European supply agency (ESA), in coherence with the market evolution;

- alleviate, to the extent feasible, procedural burdens on market players, though taking due account of Euratom Law requirements;

- analyse the past experience on contractual information, with more precise indicators;

- concentrate on areas where diversification is still a challenge and further enhance diversification requirements;

- better monitor the nuclear material flows in and out of the Community with a view to security of supply.

Estimated savings and benefits

The planned actions concern updating the current rules (which have been revisited the last time 40 years ago) with a view to achieving more legal certanity, streamlining procedures and increasing effectiveness and efficiency.



State of Play:

Proposal planned for Q4 2016

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Simplification aspects include the extension of the application of simplified contract procedures from natural uranium to also special fissile materials.

Legislative update of the Regulation of the Supply Agency of the European Atomic Energy Community of 5 May 1960 determining the manner in which demand is to be balanced against the supply of ores, source materials and special fissile materials (OJ P 032 11/05/1960 p. 0777-0779, and OJ L 193 25/07/1975 p. 0037-0038)

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The existing Rules of the Supply Agency have not been modified since 1975, and therefore it is necessary to update and clarify them to take into account changes in the functioning of the nuclear fuel market. The existing Rules would be repealed and replaced.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Safety Standards for Radiation Protection

Overall state of play

Proposal adopted Sept 2011

Legal act adopted Dec 2013

Application Feb 2018

Summary

Summary:

The revision merges five Directives to improve their coherence and clarity and to ensure better operational implementation of the requirements.

The new Basic Safety Standards Directive offers now in a single document and a coherent and consistent set of definitions and requirements for the protection of workers, patients and members of the public.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings could not be quantified. The assessment is qualitative.



State of Play:

Adopted on 29/09/2011

COM(2011)593

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Merging of five Directives to improve the coherence of Euratom legislation. The proposal further improves the clarity of the text and ensures better operational implementation of the requirements.

The new Basic Safety Standards Directive offers now in a single document and a coherent and consistent set of definitions and requirements for the protection of workers, patients and members of the public.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Modernisation of the European Basic Safety Standards in radiation protection by taking account of the latest scientific knowledge and technological progress, as well as of operational experience with current legislation, and consolidating the existing acquis of Euratom radiation protection legislation into one single piece of legislation, merging five Directives and upgrading a recommendation to become legally binding.

Estimated savings and benefits

Given data limitations, quantification has not been carried out.

State of Play:

Adopted – on track

5 December 2013 – Council Directive 2013/59/EURATOM

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The REFIT objectives (simplification through consolidation) proposed by the Commission have been confirmed in legislative procedure.

Estimated savings and benefits

Given data limitations, quantification has not been carried out.



State of Play:

Application on 1 February 2018

Transposition Deadline 6 Feb 2018

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Implementation will start after the transposition deadline, 6 February 2018.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Energy Union Governance – Streamlining of Planning and Reporting obligations

Overall state of play

Fitness Check results expected end 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Commission carries out a Fitness check in order to establish an inventory of 91 reporting and planning obligations in the EU energy acquis and to assess whether they should be kept, abandoned or integrated into the new Governance reporting framework.

Estimated savings and benefits

Administrative burdens on Member States administrations has been quantified at 227 million euros due to reporting and planning obligations duties in 2020-2030 based on current provisions.



State of Play:

Ongoing - adoption planned end 2016

Fitness Check

Scope:

Assessment of 91 reporting and planning obligations in the EU energy acquis contsining reporting and planning obligations for Member States/Commission, with the view to determine whether they should be kept, abandoned or integrated into the new Governance reporting framework.

Evaluation findings:

Preliminary results show that 39 obligations should be kept separate from the streamlined energy union governance reporting, 19 should be repealed, 18 be integrated into the new Governance reporting framework and 15 kept separate.

(to be updated)

Estimated savings and benefits

Costs occurred by all 28 Member States resulting from all energy planning reporting and monitoring obligations are estimated at 20 million Euros per year.

Due to the limited availability of data, benefits could not be quantified but are described qualitatively. 



Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

EU legal framework for energy taxation (Energy Tax Directive)

Overall State of Play

Evaluation planned 2017

Evaluation

Summary :

Evaluation of the EU legal framework for energy taxation.

Estimated savings and benefits



Initiatives in the area of Transport

Combined Transport

Overall State of Play

Evaluation finalised on 20 April 2016

Proposal planned for 2017

Summary

Summary :

The Commission evaluated Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States.

In order to further promote intermodal transport in the EU and thus contribute to reducing emissions, the Commission will propose a legislative revision in 2017.

The Directive is found to be relevant for its objective to reduce negative externalities, however gaps were identified as regards effectiveness and efficiency. On this basis, the Directive will be revised to improve its efficiency and effectiveness and ensure further promotion of intermodal transport in the EU.

Estimated savings and benefits

A moderate shift of freight away from roads is estimated to create an estimated annual saving of up to EUR 2.1 billion of external costs.



State of Play:

Finalised - 20 April 2016-

SWD(2016)140 and SWD(2016)141

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Council Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States

Evaluation findings:

The Directive has considerably contributed to the development of the combined transport (CT) market in the EU (CT operations in the EU have quadrupled during the last two decades). However, although the general freight transport volumes have grown continuously, it has not been possible to considerably reduce the share of road transport in the modal split of EU freight transport activities. Therefore there is still a need for fostering modal shift away from road to ensure less negative externalities for society. As road transport continues to be cheaper and more flexible for various reasons, support for the use of alternative modes is still needed.

The CT Directive improved the functioning of the internal market and the competiveness of the CT industry, which in turn helps to reduce negative externalities in the EU. Without EU level action, the cross-border CT services would be faced with barriers resulting from different legal systems making the cross-border CT services uncompetitive at best and causing a reverse shift to road at worst.

However, some provisions are not entirely effective due to ambiguous language or limited scope.

Inconsistent implementation by Member States and the limitations on enforcement by the Commission are the main elements causing efficiency loss. The provisions on the transport documents are also inefficient.

Estimated savings and benefits

During the period of 23 years that the Directive has provided support to combined transport, considerable growth of the sector has taken place supporting the aim of transport policy and shifting in the magnitude of 2.5 trillion tonne-kilometres of freight away from road. This shift creates a saving of up to €2.1 billion of external costs annually (2011).

At the same time, the Directive does not create considerable additional costs to the industry and the costs to national administrations (cost of tax incentives) are considerably lower than the benefits for the society. For example, for Germany, the annual cost for tax reimbursements and exemptions is €2 mio annually.

State of Play:

In preparation for 2017

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Simplification and improvement of effectiveness and efficiency

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Proposal for the amendment of the Directive 92/106/EEC of 7 December 1992 on the establishment of common rules for certain types of combined transport of goods between Member States, to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the Directive as well as ensuring further promotion of intermodal transport in EU. Certain problematic provisions are to be clarified and simplified, which will facilitate their implementation by Member States and bring about a more uniform application across the EU. Extension of the scope will be considered in the impact assessment.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not yet available



Promotion of Clean and Energy-efficient Road Transport Vehicles

Overall state of Play

planned

External evaluation report finalised in Sep 2015

Commission proposal planned for Q4 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission evaluated Directive 2009/33/EC on the promotion of clean and energy efficient road transport vehicles (the “Clean Vehicles Directive”) and is considering a legislative revision in 2017.

The Directive aims to stimulate the market for clean and energy-efficient vehicles by requiring various procurers to take account of lifetime environmental and energy impacts when purchasing road transport vehicles.

While the needs at which the Directive is targeted, i.e. the need to decrease transport’s CO2 and pollutant emissions and to increase its energy efficiency and competitiveness, are pertinent, the evaluation showed that tools applied were not able to achieve these goals. The setup of the current Directive prevented it from having significant impacts on the public procurement of all vehicle categories. Due to developments in the services sector, the number of vehicles actually purchased by public entities alone is not high enough to have a substantial impact on the market and promote the up-take of alternative vehicles.

Estimated savings and benefits

The estimated achieved cost/benefit ratio of the current Directive is very low but remains positive. The benefits of the policy – reflecting CO2 and pollutant emissions reduction and fuel efficiency savings - are estimated to be in the range of EUR 42.6 to EUR 521.1 million, against total costs of around EUR 34.6 to EUR 431.0 million.



State of Play:

External evaluation report - September 2015

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Directive 2009/33/EC on the promotion of clean and energy-efficient road transport vehicles

Evaluation findings:

The impacts of the Clean Vehicle Directive are very limited to date due to inter alia its extremely limited scope, the absence of a definition of a “clean vehicle” and the perceived complexity of the monetisation methodology which lead to public authorities using the other given options given where transposition made this possible.

Therefore the estimated achieved overall benefit to cost ratio of the Directive is extremely low but remains positive.

There is some evidence to suggest that the Directive and the accompanying initiatives have supported best practice exchange.

A full repeal of the Directive would be unlikely to have significant practical impacts on the market and the current level of demand for clean vehicles.

With a repeal the broader message – provided by the only harmonised methodology for the internalisation of external costs in the acquis – would be lost. A repeal would only be possible together with a linked amendment of the current horizontal public procurement law.

For buses, waste collection vehicles and other heavy duty vehicles primarily used by/in the service of public authorities, the potential impact would probably be greater as there is a lack of a wider policy framework to reduce the CO2 emissions of these vehicles.

A partial repeal – i.e. retaining only the monetisation methodology in its current format – would bias towards diesel vehicles, which already tends to be the dominant technology in the heavy duty vehicle market.

Estimated savings and benefits

The estimated achieved cost/benefit ratio is very low but remains positive. The benefits of the policy – reflecting CO2 and pollutant emissions reduction and fuel efficiency savings - are estimated to be in the range of EUR 42.6 to EUR 521.1 million, against total costs of around EUR 34.6 to EUR 431.0 million. As the the monetisation methodology for choosing clean and energy efficient vehicles has not often been used by national authorities the administrative costs associated with the Directive are relatively limited (less than EUR 2.3 million on an annual basis).

State of Play:

Planned for Q4 2017

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The general objective of the legislative revision of the Directive is to increase the demand and deployment of cleaner vehicles thus strengthening the competitiveness of the EU industry while decreasing CO2 and pollutant emissions of transport.

To achieve this goal, the specific policy objectives of this initiative can be defined as (1) increasing the public procurement of all categories of clean vehicles, (2) adjusting the available options to provide adequate incentives to procure/develop cleaner vehicles and (3) adjusting and simplifying the existing monetisation methodology to remove counter-incentives to the procurement/development of cleaner vehicles.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The purpose of the review is to tackle three main problems that were detected by the ex-post evaluation of the CVD concerning (1) the overall functioning of the Directive, (2) its ineffectiveness and inefficiency in reducing GHG and pollutant emissions and (3) the particularly high emphasis on fuel consumption in the monetisation methodology. In turn, it should increase the demand for and deployment of cleaner vehicles thus strengthening the competitiveness of the EU industry while decreasing CO2 and pollutant emissions of transport.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Revision of the Eurovignette Directive

Overall state of Play

Commission proposal planned for Q2 2017

Summary

Summary:

Revision of Directive 1999/62/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 1999 on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures

Directive 1999/62/EC provides common rules for deploying road charges applicable to heavy goods vehicles on the TEN-T network and on motorways.

Applying the user-pay and polluter-pay principle, the Commission intends to propose improvements for those Member States who choose to use road charging, including for the interoperability of electronic tolling services.

The proposed revision of the Directive will address the following objectives:

1. Preserve the TEN-T roads and broader EU road network in good maintenance condition, to avoid disruptions in the European transport system;

2. Reduce congestion on the roads which are of importance for cross-border traffic (TEN-T network);

3. Reduce disparities in road charging policies across the EU to better reflect the real cost of road use including environmental costs;

4. Ensure that road charging schemes do not discriminate non-resident motorists.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



European Electronic Toll Service

Overall state of Play

evaluation results expected end 2016

Legislative revision planned planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is carying out an evaluation of Directive 2004/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the interoperability of electronic road toll systems in the Community. and is considering a legislative proposal within its Work Programme for 2017. 

Applying the user-pay and polluter-pay principle, the Commission intends to propose improvements for those Member States who choose to use road charging, including for the interoperability of electronic tolling services

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

evaluation results expected end 2016

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of Directive 2004/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the interoperability of electronic road toll systems in the Community and Commission Decision 2009/750/EC of 6 October 2009 on the definition of the European Electronic Toll Service and its technical elements (notified under document C(2009) 7547)

Directive 2004/52/EC provides for the creation by the market of a European Electronic Toll Service, according to the definition provided in Decision 2009/750/EC.

Decision 2009/750/EC defines the European Electronic Toll Service, the deployment of which by the market is mandated in Directive 2004/52/EC.

Evaluation findings:

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.

State of Play:

Legislative revision planned for 2017

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Revision of Directive 2004/52/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the interoperability of electronic road toll systems in the Community.

Directive 2004/52/EC provides for the creation by the market of a European Electronic Toll Service, according to the definition provided in Decision 2009/750/EC.

Revision of Commission Decision 2009/750/EC of 6 October 2009 on the definition of the European Electronic Toll Service and its technical elements (notified under document C(2009) 7547)

Decision 2009/750/EC defines the European Electronic Toll Service, the deployment of which by the market is mandated in Directive 2004/52/EC.

The proposed revision will address the following objective:

Wide-scale interoperability of electronic tolling services in the EU, thereby facilitating cross-border movement of goods and people by reducing the cost and burden of compliance with the obligation to pay tolls.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.

Priority 4: A deeper and fairer internal market with a strengthened industrial base

Overview

1.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Competition

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Simplified procedure for Merger Control

Evaluation

Planned in 2017

Legal act

5 December 2013 

Implementation

Applies with effect from 1 January 2014

Merger Control

Evaluation

ongoing
(following-up on White paper COM(2015)449 final)

Simplified Procedure Notice for State Aid

Review

Planned to be finalised in 2017

Communication under preparation

General Block Exemption Regulation - extension to ports and airports

Commission proposal planned in 2017 



2.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Follow-up to Call for evidence – Financial Services Legislation

Fitness Check 
planned for 2017

Communication on Follow-Up planned in 2017 (CWP 2017)

European Market Infrastructure Regulation (EMIR)

Commission proposal

Planned in Q1 2017

National discretions in the audit package

Evaluation

Planned in 2017

Prudential treatment of investment firms

Evaluation

Planned in 2017

Financial Conglomerates Directive

Evaluation

planned in Q1 2017

Motor Insurance Directive

Evaluation

Planned in 2017

European Long Term Investment Funds (ELTIF)

Commission proposal

adopted 26 June 2013

Legal act

adopted 20 April 2015

Implementation

Entry into force 08 December 2015

Insurance distribution

Commission proposal

adopted 3 July 2012

Legal act

adopted 20 January 2016

Implementation

Date of effect: 22 February 2016

Review of the European Venture Capital (EuVECA) and European Social Entrepreneurship (EuSEF) Fund regulations 

Commission proposal

adopted 14 July 2016

Review of the Prospectus Directive

Evaluation

Finalised on 30 November 2015

Commission proposal

adopted 30 November 2015

Legal act

Pending in legislative procedure



3.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Health and Food Safety

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Animal health law

Commission proposal

6 May 2013

Legal act

9 March 2016 

Implementation

Application on 21 April 2021

Official controls on the agri-food chain

Commission proposal

6 May 2013

Residues in live animals – delegated act

Planned for 2018

Plant health

Commission proposal

6 May 2013 - 

Legal act

Pending in legislative procedure

Clinical Trials

Commission proposal

17 July 2012

Legal act

16 April 2014 

Implementation

Application starts from October 2018 / Transition period until 2021

Zootechnical legislation

Commission proposal

11 February 2014 

Legal act

8 June 2016

Implementation

Application on 1 November 2018, Article 65 from 19 July 2016

Transposition Deadline 1 November 2018

Veterinary medicines

Commission proposal

10 September 2014

Legal act

Pending in legislative procedure

Medicated feed

Commission proposal

10 September 2014 

Legal act

Pending in legislative procedure

Food information

Guidelines and database

in preparation

 

Nutrition and Health Claims made on Food

Evaluation

Ongoing and expected to be finalised by Q1 2018 

Pesticides

Evaluation

Ongoing and expected to be finalised by Q2 2018

General food law

Evaluation

Ongoing and expected to be finalised beginning 2017

Feed additive legislation

Evaluation

Planned in 2017

Food contact materials legislation

Implementation

Follow-up



4.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Mutual Recognition for Goods

Evaluation 
Results expected 2017

Commission Proposal Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Public procurement

Evaluation
Planned for 2019

Commission proposal

20 December 2011

Legal act

26 February 2014

Implementation

Application on 17 April 2014

Transposition 18 April 2016

Standard Procurement Document

Evaluation
Planned for 2017

Legal act

Adopted by the Commission on 5 January 2016

Implementation linked to that of the Public procurement Directives (see above)

Standard Forms for public procurement

Legal act

11 November 2015

Implementation linked to that of the Public procurement Directives (see above)

Late Payments Directive 

Evaluation
Finalised 26 August 2016

Commission proposal

8 April 2009 

Legal act

16 February 2011

Implementation

Application on 16 March 2013

Transposition Deadline March 2016

Construction Products 

Fitness check

Ongoing and planned to be finalised end 2017

Commission proposal

23 May 2008 

Legal act

9 March 2011

Implementation

Application on 1 July 2013

Recognition of professional qualification

Evaluation
Planned for 2019

Commission proposal

19 December 2011

Legal act

20 November 2013

Implementation

Transposition Deadline 18 January 2016

Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights

Evaluation

Ongoing and planned to be finalised end 2016

Commission proposal

Planned Q4 2016

Market surveillance

Commission proposal

13 February 2013

Legal act

Pending in legislative procedure

Lifts Directive

Evaluation

Ongoing, planned to be finalised by mid-2017

Machinery Directive

Evaluation

Ongoing , planned to be finalised by end 2017

Oil Refining industry

Fitness check

Finalised Q1 2016

Forest based industries

Cumulative Cost Assessment

Ongoing planned to be finalised 2016

Chemicals industry

Cumulative Cost Assessment

Finalised 11 July 2016

Chemicals legislation (other than REACH)

Fitness check

Ongoing planned to be finalised end 2017

Firearms Directive

Evaluation

Finalised Q4 2015

Remedies for public procurement)

Evaluation

Ongoing planned to be finalised end 2016

Commercial Agents

Evaluation

July 2015

Standardisation

Evaluation

1 June 2016

Pre-packaging

Evaluation

4 July 2016

Glass and ceramics industries

Cumulative Cost Assessment

Ongoing to be finalised 2017

Design System

Evaluation planned

Aerosol Dispensers

Evaluation planned

Liability for defective products 

Evaluation planned

European Observatory on Infringements of Intellectual Property

Evaluation planned

Digital Single Gateway

Commission proposal

Planned in 2017



5.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Transport

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Recording Equipment in Road Transport

Commission proposal

19 July 2011 

Legal act

1 March 2014 

Implementation

1 March 2014

Market access rules in road freight transport

Evaluation

Planned to be finalised Q4 2016

Commission proposals

In preparation (2017)

Training and certification of seafarers

Evaluation

Planned to be finalised Q1 2017

Safety Rules and Standards for Passenger Ships/ Small Crafts

Fitness check

16 October 2015

Proposal on Small Crafts
Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Road Infrastructure and Tunnel Safety

Evaluation

External evaluation report finalised June 2015

Commission proposal

Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017) 

Port Reception Facilities

Evaluation

31 March 2016

Commission proposal

In preparation

Training, Qualification, Licensing in Road Transport

Evaluation

October 2014

Commission proposal

Planned in 2017 (CWP 2017)

Better Functioning of the Market for Bus and Coach Services

Evaluation

Expected 2017

Commission proposal
Planned in 2017 (CWP 2017)

Enhancement of the social legislation in road transport

Evaluation

Expected 2017

Commission proposal
Planned in 2017 (CWP 2017)

Leasing of Vehicles

Evaluation
Results expected 2017

Commission proposal
Planned in 2017 (CWP 2017)

Maritime Acquis

Fitness check

To be finalised Q2 2017

Airport charges

Evaluation

To be finalised Q3 2017



6.Overview of REFIT Initiatives in the area of Taxation and Customs Union

Evaluation

Commission Proposal

Legal Act

Implementation

Common Customs Tariff

Commission proposal

Foreseen adoption by Q3 2017

General arrangements for excise duty

Proposal
Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Excise duties on alcohol and alcoholic beverages

Evaluation
Expected to be finalised 2016

Proposal
Planned in 2017 (CWP 2017)

Tobacco Excise

Evaluation

21 December 2015

Commission proposal

Adoption foreseen Q3 2017

Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB)

Commission proposal

Adoption planned Q4 2016

Definitive VAT system for cross border trade

Proposal
Planned for Q3 2017

VAT Rates

Commission

proposal planned in Q3 2017

SME VAT Package

Evaluation

Planned Q1 2017

VAT e-invoicing directive

Evaluation

To start in 2018

Refund of value added tax

Commission proposal

29 October 2004

Legal act

12 February 2008

Implementation

Application on 1 January 2010 

Initiatives in the area of Competition

Simplified procedure for Merger Control

Overall state of play

- Application on 1 January 2014

- Evaluation 2017 (as part of the evaluation of the Merger Control Regulation)

Summary

Summary:

The purpose of the initiative is to simplify and expedite the examination of concentrations that are unlikely to raise competition concerns. This would lead to:

(i) a significant increase in the number of cases reviewed under simplified procedure; and

(ii) a reduction in pre-notification periods for both simplified and non-simplified cases.

The expected benefits have indeed started to materialise and are expected to continue. The evaluation started in 2016 for merger control will confirm their extent.

Estimated savings and benefits

An increase of 5-10% in the number of cases reviewed under simplified procedure has been noted. No precise monetary figures are available but in 2014 the simplified procedure was applied to 68% of all final Commission decisions in mergers, corresponding to an increase of 8 percentage points in the number of simplified decisions compared to 2013.

In 2015, the simplified procedure was applied to approximately 70% of all final Commission decisions in mergers. DG Competition expects this trend to continue. Up to July 2016 approximately 73% of all final Commission decisions were adopted under the simplified procedure. 

Furthermore, there are indications that the new rules on simplified cases and the streamlined information requirements for all cases have resulted in reduced pre-notification periods in both simplified and normal procedure cases.

Estimations of savings and benefits will be provided in the framework of the evaluation of certain aspects of the merger control Regulation within the limits of data availability.

The evaluation of certain aspects of the merger control Regulation will assess to what extent the Simplification Package (2013) has contributed to the reduction of the burden (in terms of workload and resources spent) incurred by the Commission and businesses for having certain categories of typically unproblematic cases subject to EU merger control and whether there is scope for a further reduction of such a burden without affecting the effectiveness of EU merger control.



State of Play:

Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. - 5 December 2013

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1269/2013-5 December 2013

Legal act

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

To make the merger rules and procedures less burdensome for businesses.

The Commission has reduced the amount of information required for notifying transactions both under the normal and the simplified procedure. Moreover, the simplification package has reduced the in-house work that companies undertake before they notify a merger and could also reduce fees paid to external lawyers by up to one third.

Which other objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

As part of the Simplification Package adopted in 2013, the Commission reviewed: (i) the Notice on simplified procedures and (ii) the merger implementing regulation. The objectives include simplifying and expediting the examination of concentrations that are unlikely to raise competition concerns. This is done by widening the scope of its simplified notification procedure to review unproblematic mergers with a view of focussing the Commission's resources on cases that matter from a competition perspective

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, savings could not be quantified.


State of Play:

It applies with effect from 1 January 2014 –

Evaluation as part of Merger Control Regulation evaluation planned for 2016/2017 

Implementation

Implementation

An increase of 5-10% in the number of cases reviewed under simplified procedure has been noted. No precise monetary figures are available but in 2014 the simplified procedure was applied to 68% of all final Commission decisions in mergers, corresponding to an increase of 8 percentage points in the number of simplified decisions compared to 2013.

In 2015, the simplified procedure was applied to approximately 70% of all final Commission decisions in mergers. DG Competition expects this trend to continue. Up to July 2016 approximately 73% of all final Commission decisions were adopted under the simplified procedure. 

Furthermore, internal analysis points toward the fact that the new rules on simplified cases and the streamlined information requirements for all cases have resulted in reduced pre-notification periods in both simplified and normal procedure cases.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.

Estimations of savings and benefits will be provided in the framework of the evaluation of certain aspects of the merger control Regulation within the limits of data availability.



Merger Control

Overall state of play

White Paper published 2014 (COM(2014)449 final)

Evaluation results expected 2017

Summary

Summary:

Building on some issues identified in the White Paper "Towards more effective EU merger control", the Commission is evaluating the Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings.

The White Paper towards more effective EU merger control proposed two areas for action:

- to close a regulatory gap by allowing the Commission in the future to review at EU level certain acquisitions of non-controlling minority shareholdings that can raise competition concerns, and

- to make the case referral system between Member States and the Commission more effective and business-friendly, as well as to streamline and simplify other procedures.

These proposals are still under review and further research is being conducted in 2016/2017.

Concerning minority shareholdings, a majority of responding private stakeholders (business associations, companies, law firms and lawyers’ associations) in 2014 did not consider that there is a gap of sufficient scope as to call for new regulation at this stage. Regarding the other aspects of the White Paper (referrals and simplifying other procedures), the Commission is considering whether these aspects could best be addressed by a legislative proposal or not.

Estimated savings and benefits

In the first public consultation, stakeholders (in particular law firms and law associations), estimated the time savings related to streamlining referrals and other procedural aspects of merger control mostly at around 1-2 months.

The cost saving were mostly not quantified, however, one law firm estimated them to be 20% - 30% lower than under the current procedure.

Information to be completed.



State of Play:

Evaluation results expected 2017

Evaluation

Scope:

To follow up to the White Paper an evaluation of procedural and jurisdictional aspects of EU merger control related to Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on the control of concentrations between undertakings started in 2016.

The following aspects, only partly covered by the White Paper, will be analysed: (1) the jurisdictional thresholds set out in Article 1 of the Merger Regulation, (2) the procedure for the treatment of certain types of concentrations that generally are not susceptible of raising competition concerns, (3) some aspects of the referral system as set out notably in Articles 4 and 22 of the Merger Regulation, and (4) certain technical aspects of the procedural and investigative framework for the assessment of mergers.

Evaluation Findings:

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Simplified Procedure Notice for State Aid

Overall state of play

Review to be finalised in 2017

Summary

Summary:

Review of the Commission Notice on a Simplified Procedure for the treatment of certain types of State Aid ('Simplified procedure Notice') (2009/C136/03)

The revision of the Simplified Procedure Notice is expected to remove duplications in the regulatory treatment of certain cases. Before the revision of the GBER (General Block Exemption Regulation), the Notice covered a simplified tratment for notifications of straightforward cases. These cases are now largely covered by the GBER, as a result of which notification is no longer required. Also, part of the scope of the Notice is covered by the Implementing Regulation. This regulatory duplication creates confusion for Member States and is expected to be removed.

Estimated savings and benefits

In the period 2009-2016, 82 cases were treated under the Simplified Procedure. In the future, 35 of these cases would no longer need notification due to the GBER revision and 32 would be covered by the simplified treatment existing under the Implementing Regulation (simpler notification form and no need for summary notification publication). The remaining 15 cases would continue to be covered by the simplified procedure under the Code of Best Practice. The reform overall is expected to simplify procedures and avoid different, partially overlapping processes, thus leading to less complexity for Member States and for the Commission.



State of Play:

Planned

Review to be finalised in 2017

Communication

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Review of the Commission Notice on a Simplified Procedure for the treatment of certain types of State Aid ('Simplified procedure Notice') (2009/C136/03)

The objectives are a reduction of the administrative burden for stakeholders, as well as greater legal certainty as regards the applicable State aid procedures. The Commission must however balance the need for simplification for the least distortive cases with closer scrutiny of cases falling outside the GBER.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The Simplified procedure Notice sets out the conditions under which the Commission will usually follow a simplified procedure and adopt short-form decisions declaring certain types of State support measures compatible with the common market, and provides guidance in respect of the procedure itself.

The objective of this review would be to take account of the evolution of State aid law, decision-making practice, and the experience gained in applying the Simplified Procedure.

Estimated savings and benefits

In the period 2009-2016, 82 cases were treated under the Simplified Procedure. In the future, 35 of these cases would no longer need notification due to the GBER revision and 32 would be covered by the simplified treatment existing under the Implementing Regulation (simpler notification form and no need for summary notification publication). The remaining 15 cases would continue to be covered by the simplified procedure under the Code of Best Practice.



General Block Exemption Regulation: extension to ports and airports

Overall state of play

Planned 

first public consultation was conducted in spring 2016

Adoption of Commission Regulation planned for 1st quarter 2017(CWP 2017)

Summary

Summary:

General Block Exemption Regulation: extension to ports and airports (Regulation 651/2014).

This initiative aims to simplify the application of State aid rules, thus reducing administrative burden and costs and speeding up the implementation of projects. It concerns the revision of Commission Regulation 651/2014 introducing exemption provisions for ports and airports in the Commission Regulation declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty.

Estimated savings and benefits

The potential annual regulatory cost-savings that can be achieved by this initiative are estimated at several million Euros for companies and public authorities. The Commission will work with Member States and stakeholders to check whether the potential savings are achieved in practise.



State of Play:

Planned

Under preparation: first public consultation was conducted in spring 2016

Adoption of Commission Regulation planned for 1st quarter 2017

Commission proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Proposal to review the General Block Exemption Regulation (Regulation 651/2014)

This initiative aims to simplify the application of State aid rules, thus reducing administrative burden and costs and speeding up the implementation of projects.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The Commission aims at codifying its existing decision-making practice on airports and ports. This will increase transparency in the handling of cases in these sectors. By adopting straightforward compatibility rules in the GBER, the Commission will give a clear indication of the conditions to be observed in order to provide legal certainty and to be able to implement the measures quickly. In addition, some further clarifications on existing case practice with regard to aid in outermost regions will be provided.

The abolition of the notification requirements and the regulatory codification / clarifications envisaged as part of this initiative should reduce regulatory costs without a significant impact on the amount of State aid granted or on competition in the internal market.

The Commission must however balance the need for simplification for the least distortive cases with closer scrutiny of cases falling outside the GBER.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Commission estimates the potential annual regulatory cost-savings that can be achieved by this initiative at several million Euros for companies and public authorities.

In the first Advisory Committee meeting with Member State experts in spring 2016, participants were strongly encouraged to submit any data or suggestions for methodologies to calculate the annual regulatory cost-savings which would result from the draft Commission proposal. As of August 2016, no Member State nor any other stakeholder has submitted data or suggestions for a methodology to assess the cost savings.

More data will be provided in the legislative memorandum.

Initiatives in the area of Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union

Call for evidence – Financial Services Legislation

Overall state of Play:

Fitness Check ongoing, results expected end 2016

Follow-Up Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Summary

Summary:

On 30 September 2015 the Commission launched a "call for evidence" to gather feedback and gauge the cumulative impact and interaction of all the current EU rules governing the financial sector. Through the consultation , the Commission seeks to identify possible inconsistencies, incoherence and gaps in financial rules, as well as unnecessary regulatory burdens and factors negatively affecting long-term investment and growth.

The Commission plans a Communication on the results and the follow-up to the call for evidence for end 2016.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

In the REFIT Platform opinion on financial reporting the Stakeholder group and some members of the Government group support the need to streamline financial reporting to various supervisory authorities to reduce unnecessary administrative burden on financial institutions. This opinion confirms the evidence gathered by the European Commission as part of it's Call for evidence and reinforces the need for action.

The Commission is planning to carry out a fitness check to review reporting requirements including transaction reporting.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information pending 



State of Play:

Planned for 2017

Fitness Check

Scope:

Following on the call for evidence, the Commission is planning to carry out a fitness check to review reporting requirements including transaction reporting.

This initiative will also address opinions and recommendations by the REFIT Platform.

Evaluation findings:

Not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not yet available.

State of Play:

Planned for 2017 (CWP 2017)

Communication

Which REFIT objective(s) will the Commission pursue?

The Commission plans a Communication on the results and the follow-up to the call for evidence on the cumulative impact of financial legislation for end 2016.

Which other objective(s) will the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.


EMIR - European Market Infrastructure Regulation

State of Play:

Legislative Review Planned for 2017

Summary

Summary and benefits:

The Commission is mandated to review Regulation 648/2012 (EMIR) and present any appropriate legislative proposals.

The outcome of the public consultation on EMIR and the Call for Evidence on financial regulation carried out by DG FISMA in 2015-2016 justifies the need to amend EMIR in some specific areas to eliminate disproportionate costs/burdens to some derivatives counterparties (i.e. small financials, corporates, pension funds) and to simplify rules without putting at risk financial stability.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Planned

Under preparation adoption foreseen Q1 2017

Commission proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The Commission is mandated to review Regulation 648/2012 (EMIR) and present any appropriate legislative proposals. The outcome of the public consultation on EMIR and the Call for Evidence on financial regulation carried out by DG FISMA in 2015-2016 justifies the need to amend EMIR in some specific areas to eliminate disproportionate costs/burdens to some derivatives counterparties (i.e. small financials, corporates, pension funds) and to simplify rules without putting at risk financial stability. The initiative is also related to the ongoing initiative to establish a Capital Markets Union (CMU). Efficient and resilient post-trading systems and collateral markets are essential elements for a well-functioning CMU. Effective and efficient EMIR rules contribute to achieving the objectives of CMU and to the Jobs and Growth agenda in line with the political priorities of the Commission.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available



National discretions in the audit package

State of Play:

Evaluation Planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

Following the call for evidence, it is planned to review national discretions that member states enjoy in the Audit Regulation.

This refers to Capital Requirements Regulation (EU) 575/2013 (CRR) and the Capital Requirements Directive 2013/36/EU ('CRD IV package').

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available



Prudential treatment of investment firms

State of Play:

Evaluation Planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is mandated to review the CRR in accordance with Articles 493(2), 498(2) and 508(2) and (3) of the CRR in order to determine a more appropriate prudential treatment for Investment firms.

An appropriate prudential regime catering for investment firm business models allows for proportionate and calibrated requirements within the Commissions wider CMU and Better regulation agendas.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available



Financial Conglomerates Directive (FICOD)

State of Play:

evaluation planned for Q1 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Financial Conglomerates Directive (FICOD) was adopted in 2002 in response to the need to supervise, on a group-wide basis, financial groups/conglomerates providing services and products in different sectors of the financial markets, most importantly to bank-insurance groups.

FICOD builds on sectorial legislation relating to banking and insurance and provides supervisors with tools to apply supplementary supervision for financial conglomerates, addressing any blind spots in the sectorial legislation and to avoid the circumvention of prudential requirements set-out in sectorial legislation.

Following the financial crisis, FICOD was amended by Directive 2011/89/EU of 16 November 2011 (FICOD 1). This directive was a "quick-fix" aimed at remedying specific crisis related problems but it also contained an obligation for the Commission to carry out a more profound review of FICOD 1, followed by a legislative proposal if necessary. Following this request, the Commission delivered a report in December 2012 identifying a number of aspects of FICOD 1 requiring revision.

A review was put on hold pending the negotiations and subsequent adoption of the sectorial legislation on which FICOD builds – namely banking and insurance. Because the sectorial legislation has been in force for a while, and it has been 3 years since the publication of the Commission report, now is appropriate to evaluate whether FICOD 1 is performing according to its objectives. 

Input of the REFIT Platform:

In the REFIT Platform opinion on FICOD a majority of the members recommended a review of the directive with the Stakeholder group focusing in particular on overlapping requirements in the supervisory procedures for financial conglomerates.

The Commission will pay particular attention to the Platform's concerns during the ongoing evaluation of the Directive, due to be completed early in 2017.

Estimated savings and benefits

expected Q1 2017



Motor insurance directive

Overall state of Play:

Evaluation planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

The EU Motor Insurance Directive 2009/103/EC is intended to facilitate the aftermath of road accidents for EU residents involved in a road accident in a Member State other than that of their residence.

The Directive obliges all motor vehicles in the EU to be covered by compulsory third party insurance (all passengers are covered), throughout the EU

Furthermore, the Directive:

abolishes border checks on insurance, so that vehicles can be driven as easily between EU countries as within one country

prescribes minimum third-party liability insurance cover in EU countries

specifies exempt persons and authorities/bodies responsible for compensation

introduces a mechanism to compensate local victims of accidents caused by vehicles from another EU country

requires the quick settlement of claims arising from accidents occurring outside the victim’s EU country of residence (so-called “visiting victims”)

entitles policy holders to request a statement concerning the claims (or absence of claims) involving their vehicle(s) during (at least) the five years preceding the contract

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available



European Long Term Investment Funds (ELTIF)

State of Play:

Proposal adopted 2013

Legal Act adopted 2015

Summary

Summary:

The European Long-Term Investment Fund, or ELTIF, is a new type of collective investment framework allowing investors to put money into companies and projects that need long-term capital. It is aimed at investment fund managers who want to offer long-term investment opportunities to institutional and private investors across Europe, e.g. in infrastructure projects. To benefit from this cross-border passport the new Funds would have to meet rules designed to protect both investors and the companies and projects they invest in.

Estimated savings and benefits

ELTIF would develop a new market for funds targeting long term assets. This would increase investment into the real economy, and provide an alternative source of capital to bank lending.

ELTIF offers a secure investment environment for investors seeking exposure to long-term assets. Existing national regimes are not always sufficient to offer the kind of protection retail investors need. 



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 26/06/2013

COM(2013)462

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

This regulation will create a harmonised fund for long term investments with a passport. It will enhance cross-border access to long term funding for Europe's real economy. The creation of a European fund with uniform rules and administrative procedures will also simplify the current situation where fragmented and often inconsistent requirements exist in different Member States.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Create a single market for funds focusing on long-term investment strategies, facilitate the access of retail and institutional investors to long-term assets and increase the financing of long-term projects

Estimated savings and benefits

Given that the framework has an elective approach (i.e. fund managers would chose whether or not to set-up ELTIF), estimating the scale of uptake ex ante is difficult. This decision is directly linked to the perceptions of fund managers of the interest from both institutional and retail investors. Ultimately uptake over the longer term will be determined by sustainable demand from investors. This will also reflect the difficulty of estimating macroeconomic developments that impact investor flows between asset classes.

On a general level the following stakeholders would benefit from ELTIF:

   Businesses – would be able to get more capital from a wider range of investors than they could before;

   Fund managers - greater harmonisation would reduce costs for fund managers operating cross-border as this removes differences in treatment between different markets;

   Investors big and small – would be able to put money into a wider range of (long term) assets and would be spreading their risks.

Due to the absence of data, these estimated savings could not be further quantified.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 20 April 2015

: Regulation 2015/760

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

Changes introduced by the co-legislators do not affect the Commission REFIT objectives. They reinforce the approach towards the protection of retail invetsors and enlarge the range of eligible assets for long-term invetsments thereby extending the benefits to be achieved.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the absence of data, estimated savings could not be further quantified.



State of Play:

Application on 8 December 2015

Transposition Deadline N/A

Evaluation Planned for 9 June 2019

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

N/A

Estimated savings and benefits

N/A



Insurance Distribution

State of Play:

Commission proposal July 2012

Legal Act January 2016

Transposition 2018

Summary

Summary:

The Insurance Distribution Directive (IDD) introduces new enhanced rules for the protection of consumers. The Directive regulates the way insurance products are sold. It protects consumers by laying down the information that must be provided before a consumer enters into an insurance contract; it imposes conduct of business and transparency rules on insurance distributors; it clarifies procedures and rules for cross-border business and it contains rules for the supervision and sanctioning of insurance distributors in case they breach the provisions of the Directive.

The rules apply to the sale of all insurance products. However, in order to protect consumers exposed to investment risk, more prescriptive rules apply to those distributors that sell insurance products that have an investment element, such as unit-linked life insurance contracts.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Directive lays down conduct of business rules for insurance distributors, regulates their professional competence and lays down improved rules for cross-border activity. The new rules are expected to provide increased legal certainty to insurance distributors, contributing to improved domestic and/or cross-border operations, potentially driving down their operating costs.

Due to the limited availability of data, these estimated savings could not be further quantified.

The evaluation of the Directive, to be carried out in 2020 is expected to furnish data in particular regarding developments in retail investment product markets.



State of Play:

3 July 2012

Ref COM(2012)360

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The proposal makes it easier for ancillary service providers to implement the sales rules. Some exceptions are provided for SMEs, for example giving them a five-year grace period to provide information to customers on the sale of non-life insurance products.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The main objective of the proposal was to improve consumer protection in the sale of life and non-life insurance products through insurance intermediaries and insurance undertakings. Rules have been introduced to address more effectively the risk of conflicts of interest, including disclosure of remuneration by intermediaries. Sales standards have been strengthened and enhanced requirements have been introduced for the sale of life insurance products with investment elements.

Estimated savings and benefits

Given the data limitations, quantification of costs and benefits was not possible. The evaluation of the Directive, to be carried out in 2020 is expected to furnish data in particular regarding developments in retail investment product markets.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 20/01/2016

Reference Directive 2016/97

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The Insurance Distribution Directive (Directive 2016/97/EU) entered into force on 22 February 2016.

The changes made by the co-legislators provided additional flexibility for ancillary insurance distributors in the form of a de-minimis exception and simplified conduct of business rules. With regard to the other objectives pursued, the amendments resulted in better protection and improved transparency for consumers and the introduction of specific rules for the sale of insurance-based investment product to ensuring a high standard of investor protection.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, savings could not be further quantified.



State of Play:

Date of effect: 22/02/2016

Transposition 23/02/2018

Deadline 23/02/2021

Evaluation Planned for 2020

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

The transposition deadline of the Directive is 23 February 2018. The first Transposition Workshop with Member States representatives on the Directive is expected to take place on 19 October 2016.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information pending

Review of the European Venture Capital (EuVECA) and European Social Entrepreneurship (EuSEF) Fund regulations

State of Play:

COM proposal adopted on 14 July 2016

Cost savings of 32 MEUR over 5 years estimated

Summary

Summary:

The EuVECA and EuSEF Regulations introduced a “European Venture Capital Fund” and a “European Social Entrepreneurship Fund” label respectively for funds supporting young and innovative companies or enterprises with the intention of generating positive social impact. The Regulations enable these funds to be marketed cross-border in order to meet their investment needs.

The proposed modifications will strengthen a channel of financing through EuVECA and EuSEF funds for SMEs, including social businesses, so that they will be less dependent on banking sector constraints, and will thereby reduce the effect of banks declining credit applications.

Estimated savings and benefits

The amended EuVECA and EuSEF Regulations will render the two specialised funds more attractive and, thus, reduce costs, and realise economies of scale. Current estimates suggests around €40,500 of cost savings per year per EuVECA and EuSEF fund marketed in Member States and a total of €32 million in five years in cost savings for all new EuVECA funds for the current Commission proposal. The modified rules will further unblock the flow of capital, leading to increased confidence in cross-border investments and to better functioning of the internal market.



State of Play:

COM proposal adopted on 14 July 2016

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The proposed measures should increase investments into venture capital and social enterprises via EuVECA and EuSEF funds through (i) removing limitations on larger fund managers to manage EuVECA and EuSEF funds and dual registration requirements, (ii) decreasing costs for EuVECA and EuSEF funds, (iii) broadening the range of eligible assets EuVECA funds may invest in.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The review of the EuVECA and EuSEF Regulations is closely linked to the Capital Markets Union (CMU) objectives focusing on facilitating SME financing, diversifying sources of financing and strengthening cross-border capital flows. It is also linked to the first and second pillars of the Investment Plan which concentrate on ensuring additional EU funding to SMEs, equity financial instruments under the Programme for the Competitiveness of Enterprises and SMEs (COSME), as well as under Horizon 2020. The Regulations are consistent with other CMU actions, such as the Commission's Investment plan for Europe, to sponsor a pan-European venture capital fund of funds which would invest in a combination of early, later and expansion stage venture capital funds.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Impact Assessment Report suggests around €40,500 of cost savings per year per EuVECA and EuSEF fund marketed in Member States and a total of €32 million in five years in cost savings for all new EuVECA funds.



Review of the Prospectus Directive

State of Play:

Evaluation and proposal adopted in November 2015

Pending in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

The Commission Proposal for a Regulation on Prospectuses intends to (i) reduce the administrative burden of drawing up of prospectus, both for SMEs and for frequent issuers of securities; (ii) make the prospectus a more relevant disclosure tool for potential investors, especially those investing in SMEs; and (iii) achieve more convergence between the EU prospectus and other EU disclosure rules.

Estimated savings and benefits

Recourse to the new disclosure regime for SMEs is estimated to result in SMEs saving collectively around EUR 45 million per year. About 320 SMEs could benefit from it every year. Additional savings could materialise when the "question and answer" format takes off.

Approximately 700 prospectuses per year could benefit from the alleviated disclosure regime for secondary issuances. This could translate into savings of around EUR 130 million per year.

Increased recourse to the proposed universal registration document for equity and non-equity prospectuses could result in faster prospectus approvals, increasing the number of prospectuses approved every year in less than 10 working days by 150% (equity) and 70% (non-equity).



State of Play:

Evaluation published on 30 Noember 2015 (SWD(2015) 255 final)

Evaluation

Scope:

Directive 2003/71/EC of 4 November 2003 (as amended by the Directive 2010/73/EU) on the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading

Evaluation findings:

The evaluation concluded that the Prospectus Directive can be credited for having facilitated the raising of capital across borders in Europe, thanks to the application of the "single passport" principle which implied that only one set of disclosure documents could be approved by the home country authority and accepted throughout the EU for public offer and/or admission to trading on regulated markets. However, the evaluation showed that the revised Directive has only partially met its objectives of investor protection and market efficiency and that the remedies proposed by the revision at the time were either inappropriate or not bold enough or even absent to address some of the issues noted at the time of the previous revision such as the use of prospectus as a "liability shield". Furthermore, the evaluation identifies unnecessary regulatory burdens that include in particular the cost of preparing a prospectus, which is often considered disproportionate for small issuers, as well as the regulatory burden that the prospectus represents for issuers listed on regulated markets and already subject to ongoing disclosure requirements. Such findings supported the revision of the Directive.

The evaluation also concluded on coherence issues with other EU legislation in the area of Financial services and on shortcomings of the Prospectus directive (the legal clarity of some of its concepts and efficiency in establishing the right balance between market efficiency and investor protection (quality, readability and materiality of disclosures).

The evaluation showed that EU issuers have shunned the proportionate disclosure regimes introduced by Directive 2010/73/EU (which entered into application in July 2012) to a large extent:

-only 94 approved prospectuses were drawn up in 2014 (49 in 2013) under the proportionate disclosure regime for SMEs and Small Caps;

-only 49 approved prospectuses were drawn up in 2014 (48 in 2013) under the proportionate disclosure regime for rights issues.

These figures should be compared with the total number of prospectuses approved in 2013 and 2014 of respectively 4,014 and 3,838.

Estimated savings and benefits

The minimum cost figures for an equity prospectus range from EUR 1 000 to EUR 3 million, with an average of almost EUR 700 000. The maximum amounts range between EUR 10 000 and EUR 4 million, averaging at EUR 1.3 million. Estimates of the costs of a non-equity prospectus are considerably lower with the minimum average of EUR 57 000 and the maximum average at almost EUR 500 000.

State of Play:

30 November 2015

Ref COM(2015)583

Commission proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The reform aimed at making it easier for SMEs to raise capital throughout the EU striking an appropriate balance between investor protection and alleviation of administrative burden.

It aimed at removing barriers to capital market financing stemming from the existing prospectus regime and at lowering the cost of financing on capital markets for issuers and offers.

It established two alleviated prospectus regimes, respectively for SMEs raising capital outside of regulated markets and for issuers already admitted to trading on regulated markets and SME growth markets. It created an EU "shelf registration" mechanism based on a new type of registration document – the universal registration document (URD) – which aims at simplifying capital-raisings by frequent issuers who repeatedly offer securities of all kinds.

This revision is a key measure of the Capital Market Union (CMU) in the adopted Investment Plan.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

The purpose of this Regulation is to harmonise requirements for the drawing up, approval and distribution of the prospectus to be published when securities are offered to the public or admitted to trading on a regulated market situated or operating within a Member State. The initiative should further help to reduce costs of finance and make cross-border access to capital easier for firms.

Estimated savings and benefits

Recourse to the new disclosure regime for SMEs could, according to rough estimates, result in SMEs collectively saving around EUR 45 million per year. Potentially 320 SMEs could benefit from it every year. Additional savings above those indicated above could arise if the "question and answer" format takes off.

Approximately 700 prospectuses per year could benefit from the alleviated disclosure regime for secondary issuances. This could translate into savings of around EUR 130 million per year.

Increased recourse to the proposed universal registration document for equity and non-equity prospectuses could result in faster prospectus approvals, increasing the number of prospectuses approved every year in less than 10 working days by 150% (equity) and 70% (non-equity).



Initiatives in the area of Health and Food Safety

Animal health law

Overall state of Play

Adopted

Commission proposal adopted on 6 May 2013

Legal act adopted on 9 March 2016

Deadline for delegated and implementing acts 21 April 2019

Application on 21 April 2021

Evaluation Planned for April 2026

Summary

Summary:

The Regulation's main benefit is to improve the legal framework, while preserving essential elements of the acquis, which have ensured for decades the safe and smooth functioning of the EU market of live animals and their products (e.g. semen, ova, embryos, food of animal origin etc.) and have contributed to growth and jobs in the livestock sector and in the agri-food industry. It offers a better legal environment to fight known, as well as emerging transmissible animal diseases, reducing the damage they may cause to animal health, to human health and to the environment. These benefits have not been quantified or monetized.

In addition, it also offers possibilities to reduce administrative burdens by allowing the use of new technologies, such as electronic certificates, electonic identification, database interlinks, etc…It also enables to remove some administrative obligations for the operators and the competent authorities, if or where, the health risks involved permit so (i.e. identification and movement of animals, registration and approval procedures).

Estimated savings and benefits

As this Regulation provides for the general framework all possible savings have not been systematically calculated for all measures. The specific objectives will be addressed in delegated and implementing acts which, where relevant, will be accompanied by detailed estimations of savings. For example, the savings concerning the movement of animals for direct slaughter were estimated to be up to EUR 7 mio for bovine animals, EUR 19 mio for pigs and EUR 13 mio for poultry.



State of Play:

Proposed 6 May 2013

COM(2013) 260

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

This Regulation is removing some burdensome administrative procedures, such as compulsory approval by the Commission of national contingency plans for certain animal diseases or surveillance programmes for poultry establishments.

It also reduces administrative burdens by making use of new technological tools and removing unnecessary administrative obligations where the health risks involved permit (identification and movement of animals, registration and approval procedures).

Specific administrative burden reduction which can possibly be laid down in delegated and implementing acts:

removal of the requirement for movement certificates for low-risk movements (e.g. movements for direct slaughter);

reduction of administrative obligations if increased biosecurity and surveillance measures are implemented;

possibilities for Member States to no longer require approval for certain low-risk operators or transporters;

possibilities for certain operators to derogate from registration and record keeping obligations.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Establishing a modern, single framework providing for a consistent animal health policy and proportionate, sound and efficient animal health rules to ensure a safe and smooth functioning of the internal market for live animals and animal products.

Legislative simplification (39 legal acts to be streamlined into one basic act);

Emphasis on prevention in order to improve the animal health status in the Union, to reduce disease-related losses for farmers, other operators and national and Union budgets, and to possibly reduce the use of antimicrobials in animals;

Offering better tools to deal with traditional and emerging transmissible animal diseases, reducing the damage they may cause, including to human health and the environment;

More flexible and risk based measures, including prioritisation of the EU intervention, depending on available resources (e.g. animal disease prioritisation and categorisation)

The Regulation will provide the general framework, the specific objectives will be adressed through subsequent delegated and implementing acts.

Estimated savings and benefits

Possible annual savings achieved by removing the requirement for animal health certificates for the movement of animals for direct slaughter were, according to the Impact Assessment estimated up to EUR 7 mio for bovine animals, EUR 19 mio for pigs and EUR 13 mio for poultry. This data will be updated and complemented by a more comprehensive cost-benefit study.

The Commission has in 2016, in view of preparation of a delegated act, launched a study providing more precise economic analysis of possible benefits that can be achieved by removing the requirement for animal health certificates for animals being moved between Member States for direct slaughter.

The proposal aims at the prevention of potential financial losses caused by outbreaks of diseases which could significantly damage the agriculture and related sectors. From 2000 – 2010 the EU has contributed over EUR 1 billion for emergency measures compensating animal keepers.

State of Play:

Adopted 9 March 2016

Regulation (EU) 2016/429

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

All the main objectives and details of the original proposal have been preserved.

Possibilities and exemptions, enabling to release burdens and costs for registering and record keeping for some small scale and low risk operators, as well as for intra-EU trade certification of certain commodities were in the negotiation, successfully preserved.

Request from EP to introduce compulsory registration of dogs and cats was not retained as such... According to the Regulation, the Commission now has the possibility, but is not obliged to adopt such measure (by delegated act).

A strong request from some Parliamentary groups and stakeholders (NGOs) for the Commission to adopt such a delegated act still persists.

Estimated savings and benefits

The original provisions were fully preserved.



Official controls on the agri-food chain

Overall state of Play

Commission proposal adopted on 6 May 2013

Pending in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

The proposed Regulation aligns existing rules on official controls along the agri-food chain by eliminating regulatory overlaps. It applies the risk based approach to all areas of the food chain and thus broadens the scope of the current rules, introducing an integrated comprehensive system which reduces unnecessary administrative burden caused by duplication of efforts. Hence the proposed new regulation provides the prerequisites for a more targeted, rationalised and efficient response to non-compliances.

Estimated savings and benefits

More efficient controls and higher rates of compliance with agri-food chain requirements are expected to result in savings for competent authorities and for law abiding businesses. The integretion of the system of official controls at borders will generate cost savings as a result of a more efficient use of resources.

Due to the limited availability of data, the savings have not been quantified.






State of Play:

Proposed 6 May 2013 - COM(2013)265

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Better allocation and use of resources collected through fees. The generalisation of risk based official controls across the entire agri-food chain will allow cross sector risk assessments and prioritisations of controls. In addition full transparency on the calculation and use of fees and arrangements on their efficient use will increase the accountability of competent authorities.

Obligation for competent authorities to perform official controls as much as possible in a manner that minimises the burden on enterprises.

Exemption of microenterprises from mandatory official control fees.

Mandatory consultation of operators by competent authorities on the method of calculation of fees.

Creation of a common set of integrated, harmonised and modernised rules and tools for official controls of animals and goods at their entry into the Union.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Create a single framework for all official controls along the entire agri-food chain (1 Regulation replacing 7 Directives, 2 Regulations and 1 Decision) ;

Modernise, harmonise, simplify and clarify the system ;

Strengthen enforcement tools ;

Improve efficiency of controls ;

Tackle food fraud ;

Ensure appropriate resources for control authorities ;

Improve transparency on official controls and their financing.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the estimated savings were not quantified during the impact assessment process. No significant additional costs are expected to be generated by the new act which will produce a range of benefits linked to better enforcement of agri-food law (for example: reduction of fraud, more targeted controls, easier and more efficient enforcement cooperation across borders) .

State of Play:

Pending

In legislative procedure

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

15 June 2016 political agreement by the co-legislators. To be formally adopted, towards the end of the year

REFIT benefits intended by the Commission with its proposal from 2013 have largely been retained,

A more risk-based approach provides for better allocation and use of control resources. Efficiency will improve also by the streamlining of the legislative framework and strengthened provisions on administrative assistance and cooperation across borders. Coordination and cooperation is supported by an integrated computerised information system.

Member States are required to be fully transparent on the calculation of fees collected from operators. Food operators will have to be consulted on the method of calculation. A harmonised set of criteria, on which the calculation of fees should be based, contribute to a level playing field.

Systematic border controls of food containing products of animal origin, and post mortem inspections in slaughter houses, will be performed by appropriately trained professionals not necessarily by official veterinarians. This should contribute to a more efficient use of available resources. .

Estimated savings and benefits



Given data limitations, further quantification has not been possible.

State of Play:

planned for 2018

Official controls on the agri-food chain– Residues in Live Animals and Animal Products – Delegated act

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The political agreement just reached in legislative procedure on the Official Controls Regulation will repeal Directive 96/23/EC and will enable Member States to move from a very prescriptive to a risk-based residue monitoring system also in this area. Member States views on to how achieve a more efficient control system through risk based monitoring and better use of control resources will be fed into the preparation of further implementing legislation to be adopted under the new Official Controls framework.

Preparations will start in 2017 for a new delegated act under the Official Control Regulation expected to be formally adopted in legislative procedure around the end of this year. The delegated act would cover risk based monitoring of residues of veterinary medicines. It is indicated that the delegated act would be unlikely to be adopted by the Commission before mid-2018. There is no outlook for EU action on fees covering inspections or any other aspect of official controls.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

In the REFIT Platform opinion on monitoring residues of veterinary medicines in foodstuffs of animal origin, a majority of the members of the Government group and some members of the Stakeholder group recommend that the Commission adopts general rules for Member States on risk-based sampling. Both groups agree that the recommendation should not be seen as undermining policy objectives.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Plant health



Overall state of Play

- Commission proposal adopted on 6 May 2013

- Pending in legislative procedure

Summary

Summary

The rules on a more proactive regime are expected to lead to better prevention from entry of pests into the EU territory, and to the earlier detection and eradication of pests outbreaks. The qualitative benefits of such a policy will consist in a more sustainable plant production, and protection of EU environment and landscapes.

Estimated savings and benefits

The proposal aims at the prevention of potential financial losses caused by outbreaks of pests which could significantly damage agriculture and other plant related sectors. From past outbreaks we know that these can amount up to EUR 25 billion worldwide.



State of Play:

Proposed 6 May 2013

COM(2013)267

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Simplification and harmonisation of plant passports and other types of certification; plant passport and official certification labels to be included in one document

Joint registration of professional operators dealing with all types of plants / plant reproductive material

Joint certification schemes for plant reproductive material and plants subject to plant health provisions

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Codification and simplification of procedures

Seven Council Directives are replaced by a single Regulation

Better protection against new plant pests while streamlining rules

Harmonisation, simplification and modernisation of plant passport system: number of entries will be cut by more than half, plant passport unique may now be replaced by hologram or chip from the operator, operator responsibility for traceability of lots has been introduced

Possibility of including the plant passport in the official label issued for plant reproductive material in accordance with provisions set out in the existing Directives on seeds and other propagating material (Seeds and Propagating Material Directives).

Estimated savings and benefits

The proposal reflected the conclusions of the Impact Assessment, which selected the option of increased costs for a proactive regime with a view to achieve increased savings from the prevention of devastating pest outbreaks. Therefore a cost increase of up to EUR 50 mio for the EU (at the level of MS, operators and EU budget) would avoid financial losses which could amount up to EUR 25 billion per outbreak.

State of Play:

Pending in legislative procedure

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

First reading completed. Adoption/entry into force is expected early 2017

The European Parliament and the Council introduced stricter rules on imports of plants/plant products from non-EU countries..

Those rules are expected to restrict imports of entire plants, fruits, vegetables, cut flowers etc entailing additional costs for importers and traders of those goods. On the other hand, EU producers will profit from the reduction of the phytosanitary risk caused by the import of those goods and the increased share of their goods in the EU market. Neither the Council nor the EP provided for a precise quantification of those costs and benefits. The Commission will submit a report with a cost-benefits analysis of the new import rules within 5 years after the entry into force of that Regulation.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Council and EP accepted the basic logic of the Regulation which implies higher expenditures for proactive actions (e.g. surveys, prioritisation of pests, contigency plans, expanded certification) to achieve higher gains through the prevention of devastating outbreaks of pests. Due to the limited availability of data, the estimated savings have not been updated to reflect the agreed final text.



Clinical Trials

Overall state of Play

Commission proposal adopted on 17 July 2012

Legal act adopted on 16 April 2014

Application starts from October 2018

Summary

Summary

The general policy objective of Clinical Trial Regulation is to strengthen knowledge and promote innovation in clinical research to ensure that the EU remains an attractive place for clinical research thereby increasing the competitiveness of the EU, while protecting the safety and wellbeing of subjects. The Regulation will facilitate multinational trials with less administrative and bureaucratic hurdles and provide for the involvement of subjects in the procedure for the assessment of a clinical trial application.

Estimated savings and benefits

During the Impact Assessment process in 2012 savings were estimated as follows: an annual reduction in administrative burden of EUR 267 mio and an annual reduction in compliance costs of EUR 540 mio.



State of Play:

Proposed 17 July 2012

COM(2012) 369 final

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Facilitating the work of all actors, especially SMEs, by creating a unique set of rules applicable across Europe.

Reduction of administrative burden through the creation of a one-stop shop (submit a single set of documents via a single portal) for the authorisation of clinical trials.

Improving transparency and legal certainty of the authorisation process through clear rules and binding deadlines

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

Ensure that Europe remains an attractive place for clinical research by providing a single set of harmonised rules. The agreed proposal provides for:

streamlined application procedures via a single entry point,

single authorisation procedure for all clinical trials,

improved conditions for conducting multinational clinical trials,

strengthened rules on the protection of patients and informed consent;

more transparency on the conduct and results of the clinical trial,

possibilities for the Commission to conduct controls in Member States and third countries to ensure the rules are being properly supervised and enforced

Estimated savings and benefits

During the Impact Assessment process in 2012 savings were estimated as follows: an annual reduction in administrative burden of EUR 267 mio and an annual reduction in compliance costs of EUR 540 mio

State of Play:

Adopted 16 April 2014 - Regulation (EU) 536/2014

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

All REFIT objectives have been achieved. Only the timelines for the authorisation of clinical trials have been extended compared to the initial proposal following the amendments introduced by Council which may have a small impact on the reduction of cost (positive or negative). However such a possible impact has not been assessed.

Estimated savings and benefits

Due to the limited availability of data, the estimated savings have not been updated to reflect the agreed final text.



State of Play:

IT tool which is pre-requisite for application is under development by EMA

Application starts from October 2018. A transition period will apply (Directive + Regulation) up to September 2021 for all provisions

Reporting obligation 2023

Evaluation Planned for Oct 2026

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

No data available yet.

Establishment of baseline to be used in later evaluation planned for 2017

This encompasses collection and monitoring of data relating to the following indicators :

Clinical trials per year, by phase and by sponsor status;

Number of Member States involved per clinical trial per year;

Number of subjects in clinical trials in the EU per year;

Number of medicinal products authorised by the European Commission per year;

Pharmaceutical R&D expenditure in Europe, USA and Japan (depending on figures given by EFPIA (European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations).

Estimated savings and benefits

No data available yet



Zootechnical legislation

Overall state of Play

Commission proposal adopted on 11 February 2014

Legal act adopted on 8 June 2016

Application on 1 November 2018, Article 65 from 19 July 2016

Transposition Deadline 1 November 2018

Summary

Summary:

This Regulation provides a single legal framework for the rules applicable to the breeding, trade and entry into the Union of breeding animals (bovine, porcine, ovine, caprine and equine species) and their germinal products. It incorporates the updated acquis and creates the legal base for official zootechnical controls and activities. The purpose of the Regulation is also to promote cross-border activities of breed societies, focus the scope on the breeding of livestock, clarify a number of technical issues and protect genetic diversity.

The format of a Regulation was chosen to ensure harmonised application of the measures and to prevent trade problems previously encountered due to national transposition.

Estimated savings and benefits

Given data limitations, further quantification has not been possible.



State of Play:

Proposed 11 February 2014

 COM(2014)5 

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The proposed Regulation intends to clarify and simplify the current legislation. Simplification aspects include:

recognition and listing of breed societies and breeding operations in Member States and third countries,

approval of breeding programmes,

conditions for entering purebred breeding animals in breeding books, and their classification according to merits, and for the registration of hybrid breeding pigs in registers,

rules on performance testing and genetic evaluation,

content of zootechnical certificates for breeding animals and their semen, ova and embryos.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

to consolidate existing rules for the promotion of free trade in breeding animals and their germinal products, and to update those rules to technical advances and established practices;

to promote cross-border activities of breed societies providing their services under fair competition conditions;

to align these rules with the requirements of the Lisbon Treaty;

to simplify the legislative framework in a single Regulation replacing 8 species-specific Directives, which are largely identical but in parts confuse with different language and terminology;

to establish rules on official controls and activities following the principles of the Regulation on offical controls

Estimated savings and benefits

not applicable (codification)



State of Play:

Adopted 8 June 2016

Regulation (EU) 2016/1012

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

In general, Council's and Parliament's positions supported the main REFIT objectives of the proposal. 

Only the few following amendments proposed by the Council and agreed by the European Parliament and by the Commission have a minor impact on REFIT objectives.

Additional reasons for the authorities to refuse the approval of a breeding programme of a new breed society, or the extension of the geographical area of activity of a breeding programme into another Member State, if this would jeopardise the breeding programme carried out on that breed by an existing breed society in general, or as regards the characteristics of the breed, or the overall objectives of that breeding programme; 

Removal of the proposed empowerment to adopt delegated acts on the zootechnical rules affecting breeding animals of species other than bovine, porcine, ovine, caprine and equine species;

Removal of the provisions on dispute settlement between breeders and breed societies and delegated the settling of such disputes to breed societies and Member States on the basis of subsidiarity;

Introduction of definitions of “breed” and “breeding programme”;

Simplification of the proposed provisions on official controls.

However all the main objectives and a large part of the details of the original proposal have been preserved.

Estimated savings and benefits

not applicable (codification)



State of Play:

Application on 1 November 2018, Article 65 from 19 July 2016

Transposition Deadline 1 November 2018

Evaluation

Based on the experience with implementation, an evaluation is considered 5 years after application

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Not applicable yet.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not applicable yet



Veterinary medicines



Overall state of Play

Commission proposal adopted on 10 September 2014

In legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

The implementation of the following measures should significantly reduce the administrative burdens on the industry and bring savings for the competent national authorities:

measures to simplify the requirements regarding packaging and labelling;

variations procedures;

pharmacovigilance;

simplification of the mutual recognition procedure;

changes to the "cascade" system;

harmonisation of "legacy" products (products that are already on the market in the EU).

Extending the period of data protection for veterinary medicines should stimulate innovation and consequently improve the availability of novel veterinary medicines, including antimicrobials and medicines for limited markets.

It is also expected that overall these measures would free resources from the pharmaceutical industry for re-investment in new product development, therefore indirectly having a positive effect on the availability of novel medicines for companion and farmed animals.

Estimated savings and benefits

The Impact Assessment shows that the main savings will originate from the activities with the highest administrative burden i.e. packaging and labelling; authorisations, renewals and variations to existing marketing authorisations and pharmacovigilance reporting. The existing administrative burden of EUR 537 mio should be substantially reduced. The IA shows that the total estimated savings would amount to at least EUR 145 mio a year.



State of Play:

Proposed 10 September 2014

COM(2014) 558 final 

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

This proposal:

reduces red tape for placing and maintaining on the market of veterinary medicines,

facilitates internet retail of veterinary medicines across the Union,

SMEs benefit from:

the overall simplification measures and in particular from the harmonisation of clinical trials for veterinary medicines,

the introduction of national helpdesks to advice on authorisation issues.

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The revision of the legislative framework on veterinary medicines aims at:

reducing administrative burdens to business,

providing better rewards for innovative products,

improving the functioning of the internal market and increasing the availability of veterinary medicines for animals,

respond to the problem of antimicrobial resistance by allowing to restrict or refuse marketing authorisations and reserve certain critical antimicrobials for use in human medicine only.

Estimated savings and benefits

The value of the existing annual administrative burden in million Euros by activity (baseline: 2009) is the following: Packaging and labelling (184); New Marketing authorisation (MA) (91); Variations (134); Renewing a MA (70) and Pharmacovigilance (59).

The new provisions should reduce significantly these amounts: A risk-based pharmacovigilance system would allow a reduction of administrative burdens of around EUR 47 mio per year. The deletion of the requirement for renewal would allow an economy of EUR 68 mio per year and the review of the procedures for variations an economy of EUR 11 mio per year.



Medicated feed

Overall state of Play

Commission proposal adopted on 10 September 2014

In legislative procedure

Summary

Summary:

The modernisation of the outdated Directive for production and use of medicated feed will remove barriers due to different national manufacturing rules. It will reduce administrative burden and compliance costs for the industries, allow the use of medicated feed in EU livestock farming at more competitive prices and open up an important innovation potential in novel medicated feed (pet food)

Estimated savings and benefits

If Commission Proposal would be adopted:, this would result in cost savings in medicated feed production of EUR 12 mio.

The gross margin increase due to better market access and innovation wold reach EUR 30 mio(short term, conservative estimate, midterm far beyond). The new proposal would also incur a reduction of ressources/admin burden (not quantified) for industry directly and midterm for competent authorities.



State of Play:

Adopted 10 September 2014

COM (2014) 556

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

This proposal will:

Make medicated feed available to farmers and pet owners at a competitive price

Harmonise manufacturing standards;

Reduce production costs due to the possibility for anticipated production of medicated feed (before the concrete prescription is available)

Remove national barriers for innovative, "novel" medicated feed.

SMEs will benefit from:

More legal clarity on residues of veterinary medicines in feed

Less administrative burden to cope with different national standards for manufacturing medicated feed

Market potentials in new applications such as medicated pet food

Which other objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The smooth functioning of a competitive and innovative internal market for medicated feed;

a high level of protection of animal and public health.

Estimated savings and benefits

The costs and economic benefits are not evenly distributed over EU as the status quo is diverging: In those parts with currently few rules for manufacturing of medicated feed, an increase in production costs of roughly EUR 20 mio can be expected. In the rest of the EU expected cost savings will be over EUR 30 mio.

The expected benefit of the innovation potential is in the short term in the order of EUR 30 mio but can reach mid term several hundred million EURO.



Food information

Overall state of Play

Under preparation 

Summary

Summary:

The initiative concerns the Commission assistance for implementation and application of food information rules set out in Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 such as e.g. guidance document, questions and answers on the application of the Regulation or specific databases.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not applicable as the initiative relates to the Commission assistance to the implementation and application of food labelling rules.





State of Play:

Under preparation

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

National measures on allergen/intolerance labelling have been adopted in 20 Member States.

Commission assistance to implementation and application of food labelling rules

Questions and answers document by Commission on the application of the Regulation to be available by end of 2016

Guidance document by Commission relating to the provisions on allergens and the quantitative ingredients declaration to be available by end of 2016

Database by Commission on EU and national requirements on food labelling to be available by end of 2017

Estimated savings and benefits

Not applicable as the initiative relates to the Commission assistance to the implementation and application of food labelling rules.



Nutrition and Health Claims made on Food

Overall state of Play
Evaluation results expected 2018

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is evaluating Regulation (EC) 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods with regards to nutrient profiles and health claims made on plants and their preparations

The evaluation will contain an assessment of

i) whether the provisions in Regulation (EC) No1924/2006 related to nutrient profiles and health claims on plants and their preparations are still fit for purpose; and of

ii) the general framework for the plants and their preparations used in food.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Pesticides

Overall state of Play

Evaluation ongoing and planned to be finalised in Q4 2018 / Q1 2019

Summary

Summary:

The Commisison is carying out an evaluation of legislation on Pesticides covering Maximum Residue limit setting and placing on the market of plant protection products.

The evaluation covers Regulation (EC) No 1107/2009 and Regulation (EC) No 396/2005 from their application until mid-2016. It covers amongst others the approval and authorisation procedure for pesticides and the provisions for setting maximum residue limits for pesticides.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available



General food law

Overall state of Play

Fitness check Ongoing and expected to be finalised Q2 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Commission is carrying out a FitnessCheck of the General Food Law.

The Fitness Check of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 - the general food law – covers an assessment of the implementation and functioning of the basic principles set out therein such as traceability, responsibilities, the crisis management system as well as the rapid alert system and the European Food Safety Authority.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Feed additive legislation

State of Play:

Planned 2017

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the Feed additive Regulation (EC) No 1831/2003

Evaluation findings:

Information not yet available

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available



Food contact materials

State of Play:

Planned

Implementation follow-up

Scope:

Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 on materials and articles intended to come into contact with food

Implementation at EU-level of the legislation on food contact material will be further strengthened, in order to ensure a well-functioning internal market while ensuring a high level of protection from health risks.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

In its opinion on materials and articles intended to come into contact with food, the majority of members recommend that the Commission issues a common European requirement for a declaration of compliance for all types of food contact materials.

The Commission will examine how the recommendations of the Platform could be addressed in the context of its implementation follow-up of EU food contact materials legislation and it plans to follow up on the opinion on veterinary medicinal residues in foodstuffs through a new delegated act planned for adoption before the entry into application of the new Official Control Regulation which is foreseen for adoption in legislative procedure later this year.

Evaluation findings:

Not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Not yet available.

Initiatives in the area of Internal Market, Industry, Entrepreneurship and SMEs

Mutual Recognition for goods

Overall state of play:

Planned for adoption in 2017 (CWP 2017)

Summary

Summary

The Commission carries out an evaluation of the application of the mutual recognition principle in the field of goods and the Mutual Recognition Regulation (EC) No 764/2008) and is planning a proposal in the framework of its work programme for 2017.In 2017, the Commission will act to strengthen the single market in goods, notably by facilitating the mutual recognition and addressing the increasing amount of non-compliant products on the EU market through REFIT revisions of the relevant legislation. This will allow entrepreneurs to offer their products more easily across borders while offering incentives to boost regulatory compliance and restoring the level playing field to the benefit of businesses and citizens.

The emerging findings of the evaluation of mutual recognition of goods suggest that the functioning of the principle is not optimal. Therefore, the Commission considers a follow-up initiative to achieve a fairer and deeper single market for goods through more and better mutual recognition. Issues of consideration in his context include legal certainty for businesses and national authorities when using the mutual recognition principle; communication and cooperation among users and the role of Product Contact Points and the risk for businesses to see market access denied.

Mutual recognition is key for a proper functioning of the single market for goods through the elimination of technical obstacles to a genuine free movement. The principle of mutual recognition itself is embedded in Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and its further elaboration resulted from established case law.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



State of Play:

Ongoing, to be finalised 2017

Evaluation

Scope:

Evaluation of the application of the principle of mutual recognition in goods in the non-harmonised area and of the Mutual Recognition Regulation (EC) No 764/2008)

Findings:

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.

State of Play:

Planned 2017

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Revision of the Mutual Recognition Regulation, to achieve a fairer and deeper single market for goods through more and better mutual recognition. Issues of consideration in his context include legal certainty for businesses and national authorities when using the mutual recognition principle; communication and cooperation among users and the role of Product Contact Points and the risk for businesses to see market access denied.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Information not yet available.

Estimated savings and benefits

Information not yet available.



Public procurement

Overall state of Play

Adopted

Commission proposals adopted on 20 Dec 2011

Legal act adopted on 26 February 2014

Application on 17 April 2014

Transposition deadline: 18 April 2016

Evaluation Planned for April 2019

Summary

Summary:

The Commission proposed in December 2011 to simplify public procurement procedures, Parliament and Council supported these objectives, the proposals became effective on 17 April 2014. The initiative delivers a modern and effective set of procurement rules including the creation of a European Single Procurement Document which is a standardised self-declaration that greatly facilitates participation in procurement procedures.

Every year, over 250 000 public authorities in the EU spend around 14% of GDP on the purchase of services, works and supplies.

To create a level playing field for all businesses across Europe, EU law sets out minimum harmonised public procurement rules. These rules organise the way public authorities and certain public utility operators purchase goods, works and services. They are transposed into national legislation and apply to tenders whose monetary value exceeds a certain amount. For tenders of lower value, national rules apply. Nevertheless, these national rules also have to respect the general principles of EU law.

Estimated savings and benefits

The new Directives make public procurement in Europe more efficient, with smarter rules and more electronic procedures. Authorities that have already made the transition to eProcurement report savings between 5 and 20%. With EU Member States spending yearly more than €1.9 trillion for procurement each 5% saved could return almost €100 billion to the public purse.

Given the complexity of the market and the regulation, the Commission did not estimate the overall savings of its proposal. However, savings stemming from specific policy options and various individual provisions were estimated and can be found in the impact assessment.

Building on the results of the Administrative Burden Reduction Programme (ABR), the follow-up study ABR+ estimated, for the provision related to only the winning bidder providing the original documents of eligilbility, a decrease in administrative burden ranging between 29% and 58% in 5 Member States (CY, DE, PT, SK, NL).

In its upcoming evaluation in 2019 the Commission will verify the economic effects of the Directives on the internal market, in particular in terms of factors such as the cross border award of contracts and transaction costs, resulting from the application of the thresholds.



State of Play:

Proposed by the Commission on 20 Dec 2011

COM(2011)0896, COM(2011)0895 and COM(2011)0897

Commission Proposals

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Simplification of procedures and reduction of administrative burden via:

Specific measures for SMEs: Bidders for public tenders can provide self-declarations, rather than original documents or certificates, showing that they meet eligibility criteria. Only the winning bidder would be asked to provide the original documents.

Breaking tenders down into smaller lots is encouraged.

Reduction of the limitation of maximum turnover requirements to a maximum twice the contract value.

Greater use of e-procurement is encouraged.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Simplification of procedures and greater flexibility to make public procurement more efficient and more strategic, respecting the principles of transparency and competition to the benefit of both public purchasers and economic operators. Introduction of a stable legal framework for concessions, offering legal security for economic operators and contracting authorities. Creation of a level playing field for concessions across Europe. Introduction of transparency and equal treatment of economic operators bidding for concessions.

Estimated savings and benefits

Given the complexity of the market and the regulation, the Commission did not estimate the overall savings of its proposal. However, savings stemming from specific policy options and various invidiual provisions were estimated and can be found in the impact assessment.

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 26 February 2014

Directive 2014/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement

Directive 2014/25/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors

Directive 2014/23/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The Council did not accept the 'European Passport Procurement' that Commission had been proposing as an instrument for the simplification of documentation requirements. Member States found that such an additional document would create new administrative burden and would be at odds with new technological developments towards online databases making documents directly available to contracting authorities.

The European Single Procurement Document (ESPD) was introduced instead as an alternative means of achieving the same objectives of simplification of documentary requirements.

Estimated savings and benefits

No update of the estimated savings was performed following the changes in legislative procedure.



State of Play:

Application on 17 April 2014

Transposition deadline: 18 April 2016

Evaluation Planned for April 2019

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Current state of implementation: 17 Member States still need to implement at least one Directive in full; in 3 further Member States, measures have been adopted but have either not entered into force yet or have entered into force since April 2016.

Estimated savings and benefits

In its upcoming evaluation in 2019 the Commission will verify the economic effects of the Directives on the internal market, in particular in terms of factors such as the cross border award of contracts and transaction costs, resulting from the application of the thresholds.

In relation with the specific measure linked to the winning bidders to provide the original documents of eligibility: the follow-up in the ABRPlus exercise covered the provisions described in COM(2011)896 of the requirement that only the winning bidder needs to provide the original documents of eligibility (such provisions are now incorporated in the new Directives).

- Twelve Member States already implemented the relevant provisions between 2007 and 2014 even though MS only need to transpose the directive by April 2016 (DE, IE, ES, CY, LV, LT, MT, NL, AT, PT, RO, SK).

- For 2 Member States the degree of implementation is unclear while 10 Member States have not yet implemented the provision (EL, SE).

- One Member States indicated that they include additional requirements when implementing the provision that can lead to an increase in administrative burden (CZ).

In 5 Member States cost reductions were estimated to range between 29% and 58% (CY, DE, PT, SK, NL), while the initial estimation by the Commission predicted savings of administrative burden of 50%.



Standard Procurement Document

Overall state of Play

Legal act adopted on 5 January 2016

Evaluation Planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

Commission Implementing Regulation on the European Standard Procurement Document (introduced by the new Public Procurement Directives.

The Commission introduced a European Single Procurement Document as a standardised self-declaration to facilitate participation in procurement procedures.

Estimated savings and benefits

No solid data available therefore the savings could not be quantified. According to information from Finland, the use of ESPD may save between 2 to 3 hours per business participating a public procurement procedure. An evaluation is planned for 2017 which will assess the extent of the savings realised.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 5 January 2016

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/7

Commission Implementing Regulation

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Commission Implementing Regulation on the European Standard Procurement Document (introduced by the new Public Procurement Directives.

Reduction of the administrative burden related to the tendering procedure: all businesses will be able to self-declare electronically that they meet the necessary regulatory criteria or commercial capability requirements through a standardized form, and only the winning company will need to submit all the documentation proving that it qualifies for the contract. This will not only improve cross-border participation but also national procedures where no alternative solution was in place.

A free, web-based system was developed for Member States and businesses. The system which is hosted by the Commission but also made available as open source, is already reused in the federal service provided in Netherlands. Other countries like Slovenia also plan to reuse the code.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Follow-up of the new legislative framework on public procurement - simplification of the administrative formalities of the tender procedure

Estimated savings and benefits

There was no impact assessment made for this proposal, as the ESPD was introduced during the trialogue in the public procurement directives therefore there is no quantification of the estimated savings.



State of Play:

Application or Transposition

Evaluation Planned for 2017

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Use of the ESPD is linked to the implementation of the Public Procurement Directives. Currently 17 Member States still need to implement at least one Directive in full; in 3 further Member States, measures have been adopted but have either not entered into force yet or have entered into force since less than 1½ month.

Estimated savings and benefits

Use of the ESPD linked to the implementation of the Directives; consequently, no quantification possible at the current state of implementation (see above).

According to information from Finland, the use of ESPD may save between 2 to 3 hours per business participating a public procurement procedure.

An evaluation is planned for 2017 which will assess the extent of the savings realised.



Standard forms for public procurement

Overall state of Play

Legal act adopted on 11 November 2015

Update Planned for 2017

Summary

Summary:

Commission Implementing Regulation – update to the standard forms for public procurement (introduced by the new Public Procurement Directives).

The standard forms will facilitate the publication of notices linked to public procurement and contribute to improve the quality of the notices.

Estimated savings and benefits

No specific quantification has been carried out as this act as it implements the rules described in the Directives governing public procurement. A further update of the forms is planned for 2017 Since 1800 notices are published daily by Tenders Electronic Daily, even minor increases in savings per notice are likely to have non-trivial impacts.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 11 November 2015

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2015/1986

Commission Implementing Regulation

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Commission Implementing Regulation – update to the standard forms for public procurement (introduced by the new Public Procurement Directives).

Reducing administrative burden.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Better competition through better access to information by economic operators, and ensuring non-discrimination thanks to higher transparency.

Estimated savings and benefits

No quantification has been carried out, as it is implementing the rules described in the Directives governing public procurement. A further update of the forms is planned for 2017. Since 1800 notices are published daily by Tenders Electronic Daily, even minor increases in savings per notice are likely to have non-trivial impacts.



State of Play:

Application on Transposition

Update Planned for 2017

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

Use of the new standard forms linked to the implementation of the Directives; current state of implementation: 17 Member States still need to implement at least one Directive in full; in 3 further Member States, measures have been adopted but have either not entered into force yet or have entered into force since early 2016.

Estimated savings and benefits

Use of the new standard forms linked to the implementation of the Directives; consequently, no quantification possible at the current state of implementation (see above).



Late Payments Directive

Overall state of Play

COM proposal adopted on 8 April 2009

Legal act adopted 16 February 2011

Application on 16 March 2013

Evaluation finalized 26 August 2016

Summary

Summary:

The Late Payment Directive (Directive 2011/7/EU) is a recast of Directive 2000/35/EU which has been repealed. It improves the effectiveness and the efficiency of remedies for late payment through:

the establishment of maximum payment periods both in B2B and in transactions where the debtor is a public administration;

a straightforward entitlement to interests and compensation for late payment,

the definition of unfair commercial practices.

These provisions are also expected to reduce administrative burdens for claiming payments (especially in cross border transactions), improve cash-flow, and reduce the risk of bankruptcy for individual companies.

Estimated savings and benefits

The recent evaluation of the Directive showed that each day of reduction in payment delays results in savings of €158 million in costs for financing to EU businesses have been estimated Thanks to the Directive the average payment period in business transactions in the EU has dropped by more than 10 days since 2013.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 8 April 2009 - COM(2009)126

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

The initial proposal aimed at providing creditors with instruments that enabled them to fully and effectively exercise their rights when paid late, and by confronting public administrations with measures that would effectively eliminate late payment practices. These objectives were to be achieved through:

the introduction of an entitlement to the recovery of administrative costs and compensation for internal costs incurred due to late payment

In the case of public administrations, the proposal aimed at shortening payment periods through the harmonisation of periods for payment by public authorities to businesses and at reinforcing disincentives to late payment by a flat compensation rate from the first day of the delay amounting to 5% of the invoiced amount in addition to the interest for late payment and the compensation for recovery costs

Finally, the proposal also abolished the possibility to exclude claims for interest of less than €5.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Proposal for recast of Directive 2000/35/EC on combating late payment in commercial transactions.

The Directive aimed at improving the cash flow of European business, especially SMEs, which is particularly important in times of economic downturn. It also aims at facilitating the smooth functioning of the internal market via the elimination of related barriers to cross-border commercial transactions

Estimated savings and benefits

The impact estimated that by harmonising the period of payments by public authorities to businesses (PA2B), the additional liquidity for business would amount to almost € 180 billion

State of Play:

Adopted by the Legislator on 16 February 2011 - Directive 2011/7/EU

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The EP, supported by the Council, introduced a possibility for Member States to extend the time limit of payments by public authorities to businesses up to a maximum of 60 calendar days for any public authority which carries out economic activities of an industrial or commercial nature or public entities providing healthcare.

The compensation fee was eventually set as a flat sum of at least €40 (or equivalent) , instead of the scale of fees (varying according to the invoice amount), as in the initial proposal

Capping of payment terms for B2B contracts at 60 days (provided that this is expressly agreed and it is not grossly unfair for the creditor) was introduced by the EP and confirmed by the Council.

Estimated savings and benefits

No changes to estimated savings in legislative procedure.



State of Play:

Application on 16 March 2013

Transposition Deadline  March 2016

Evaluation published on 26 August 2016

Implementation

Implementation reported by MemberStates

The last national implementing measure was communicated to the Commission in August 2014. As of May 2016, the Directive is fully and correctly transposed in all the MS.

Some Member States have either maintained or brought forward provisions that are more favourable to the creditor than the Directive, for example:

In B2B trasactions, some MS have set up, by law or by court decisions, maximum payment terms

In PA2B transactions , some MS have not made use of the option to extend payment terms for certain public sectors (i.e. healthcare) to up to 60 days

In some MS, the stautory interest rate is increased of more than 8% percentage points (from the reference rate)

Some Member States have introduced additional support measures, either voluntary or compulsory, to support the objectives of the Directive, such as: prompt payment codes, electronic invoicing, mandatory reporting of average payment periods, penalties/fines

Evaluation Findings

An evaluation was published on 26 August 2016 - SWD(2016)278.

The main conclusions of the Report are:

The Directive has raised awareness about the issue of late payment, which currently features high in national poliical agendas.

The Directive has proven to be effective, as it has contributed to the reduction of the average EU payment periods, both in B2B and P2A transactions. However, the average term of 30 days is still not respected across the EU, and more efforts need to be done by the MS.

The Directive has proven to be efficient, with very limited regulatory costs for business and public authorities.

The Directive is coherent with other EU policies, as it has concurred to create a more favourable environment where business can grow and become competitive

There is general consensus that the Directive has generated significant added value. Payment practices have been streamlined across the EU, removing uncertainty, thus creating the right conditions for more corss-border transactions.

On the basis of this background the Report concludes that there is no evidence justifying a revision of the Directive for the time being: it should be maintained in its current form to allow all its effects to bear fruits.

The Report has also identified some areas for improvement:

In the B2B area, where the Directive has maintained a certain flexibility to protect the freedom of contracts, it is necessary to frame more clearly certain key concepts and limit unfair commercial practices. The evaluation has revealed infact that in B2B transactions creditors are more reluctant to exercise their rights, mostly out of fear of damaging their business relationships. This is often the case for SME who do not have the bargaining power to withstand or expose unfair commercial practices.

Encourage the development in the MS of initiatives that support the objectives of the Directive (transparency, mediation, incentives for timely payment – e.g. naming/shaming)

Setting up systems to monitor, and report performance and progress such as average payment periods, based on a common methodology with guidance and support form the Commission

Identify and exchange best practices, with the support of the Commission

Estimated savings and benefits

According to the Commission’s Report on the implementation of the Directive, it is too early to state whether the Directive has had the expected impacts on businesses liquidity. In fact, in view of the current economic context, it is difficult to isolate the effects that can be attributed solely to the Directive. On this point, the Commission’s Report concluded that more time is needed to allow the Directive to bear fruit.

Nevertheless, the following aspects can be certainly ascribed to the Directive:

Thanks to the Directive the average payment period in business transactions in the EU has dropped by more than 10 days since 2013.

Costs associated with applying correctly the Directive are more relevant for businesses than for PA, who have a more steady stream of liquidity. Business who were paying previously late, should now pay, in average, in 60 days. The cash transfer resulting form shorter payments terms amounts to larger sums of money to be released. However this is quickly offset by the expected benefits, as these same businesses will also be paid within shorter delays. For each day of reduction in payment delays, €158 million are saved by EU businesses in finance costs. 



Construction Products Regulation

Overall state of Play

Proposal 23 May 2008

Legal Act adopted 9 March 2011

Application 1 July 2013

Implementation Report July 2016

Fitness check Ongoing, to be finalised end 2017

Summary

Summary:

The Construction Products Regulation (Regulation (EU) 305/2011) aims at consolidating the Single Market for construction products, by means of simplifying the existing previous framework and creating a common system for the marketing of construction products to be used in a uniform manner by economic operators and Member State authorities, and thus enhancing the efficiency of the system compared with the previous Directive.

Benefits of the technical tools of the Regulation

-the Declaration of Performance delivers information on the performance of a product

-the Assessment and Verification of Constancy of Performance is a system defining how products are assessed and how the constancy of the assessment results is controlled

-clearer roles for Notified Bodies and Technical Assessment Bodies.

This is expected to increase the competitiveness of the European construction sector as a whole and facilitate the drive towards a level playing field also for the smallest enterprises.

The recent implementation report concluded that, as the CPR has been implemented for a relatively short period only, not all the objectives the CPR was aiming at have been achieved yet. Most of the challenges reported relate to implementation difficulties and delayed adaptation by stakeholders. It is not possible for the time being to draw definite conclusions on the performance of the legislation. The Commission considers that further work is considered to improve implementation, particularly at national level.

Input of the REFIT Platform:

Opinion on the Construction Products Regulation (CPR), recommended that the Commission gives priority consideration to the problems of overlapping and repetitive requirements and the need for clear and full European standards covering all requirements for construction products in the ongoing Fitness Check of the Construction sector.

The Commission is conducting a Fitness check of the construction products sector, with a particular focus on identifying any overlapping and repetitive requirements imposed by EU regulation. In its recent report on the implementation of the Regulation, the Commission has, also in accordance with the Platform opinion, called for further dialogue with stakeholders on the role of European standards.

Estimated savings and benefits

The net annual benefits of the Commission proposal were expected to range between +145 to +555 million euros at the time of the proposal put forward by the Commission. Studies are ongoing to assess the magnitude of real savings over the implementation period.



State of Play:

Adopted by the Commission on 23 May 2008 – COM(2008)311

Commission Proposal

Which REFIT objective(s) did the Commission pursue?

Building on the experience gained through the application of Construction Products Directive, the Regulation includes a number of measures aimed at clarifying the system and simplifying the procedures for assessment and verification of the performance of products.

Simplification measures included:

micro-enterprises can choose simpler ways of showing that any one-off construction product put on the market meets applicable product performance requirements.

Specific simplified measures are foreseen for dealing with individual and non-series products.

The procedures for obtaining a European Technical Assessment (ETA) are simplified and clarified.

European standardisation bodies and Technical Assessment Bodies are encouraged to replace testing in the harmonised technical specifications by other less onerous methods.

These measures were expected to significantly reduce the administrative cost of placing construction products on the European market without decreasing the levels of safety for construction works.

Which other objectives did the Commission pursue?

Facilitate the circulation and use of construction products on the Single market.

Estimated savings and benefits

The net annual benefits were estimated in the impact Assessment to range between +145 to + 555 million euros for the preferred option.

State of Play:

Adopted on 9 March 2011

Regulation (EU) 305/2011

Legal Act

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The simplification objective intended by the proposal was realized in the adopted act. A simplified regime for micro-enterprises through the use of simplified assessment methods has been established, albeit with additional administrative requirements which have reduced its value for micro-enterprises.

Estimated savings and benefits</