92001E2720

WRITTEN QUESTION P-2720/01

by Niels Busk (ELDR) to the Commission

(26 September 2001)

Subject: Production levy in France

According to the Journal Officiel de la République Française of 24 December 1995, Interbev (the national meat office), in addition to the fixed production levy on animals for slaughter, is also imposing a levy of 0 084 FFR on imported beef (French beef being covered by the production levy at the slaughterhouse).

Does the Commission consider it to be compatible with Community law for beef produced in other EU countries to be subject to an extra production levy not levied on nationally produced meat, when a levy has already been charged in the country of origin?

Does the Commission consider it to be compatible with the GATT agreement for beef from non-Community countries to be subject to a production levy over and above the internationally determined import duties, etc.?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(6 November 2001)

The Commission is aware of the French legislation cited by the Honourable Member. It has contacted the French authorities in this connection to obtain details of the planned levy. Since a parafiscal charge apparently intended to finance the inter-branch organisation Interbev is involved, the matter is currently being considered in the light of the agricultural rules on State aid. The Commission's standing practice is to regard a charge that is also levied on products imported from other Member States as having an effect equivalent to a customs duty or as being discriminatory in accordance with the case law of the Court of Justice.

Since the matter is currently under examination, the Commission cannot express an opinion at this stage as to the exact nature of the charge or any effects it might have on competition or indeed on intra- and extra-Community trade. The Commission will inform the Honourable Member of its conclusions in due course.

As regards the levying of a charge on products from non-member countries, the Commission does not have sufficient grounds to believe that the measures are in conflict with the Community's commitments under the GATT/WTO rules, and in particular under Articles II and III of GATT 1994.