Choose the experimental features you want to try

This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website

Document 92001E001777

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1777/01 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Threat of trade barrier to drinks industry shipments to Germany.

OJ C 364E, 20.12.2001, p. 204–204 (ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)

European Parliament's website

92001E1777

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1777/01 by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Threat of trade barrier to drinks industry shipments to Germany.

Official Journal 364 E , 20/12/2001 P. 0204 - 0204


WRITTEN QUESTION E-1777/01

by Paul Rübig (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(15 June 2001)

Subject: Threat of trade barrier to drinks industry shipments to Germany

The proposal for a second regulation amending the German packaging regulation provides for the introduction of a compulsory minimum deposit for disposable drinks containers.

Of the products sold, the proportion of disposable drinks containers among imported drinks is much higher than among drinks produced domestically. A deposit on cans and non-returnable bottles therefore constitutes a disadvantage for drinks companies exporting to Germany.

Drinks manufacturers are already extremely concerned that the introduction of a deposit on cans and non-returnable bottles would prompt customers in Germany (particularly marketing chains) to stop stocking their products in disposable containers.

In addition, because of the plans to introduce a deposit system for the German market, drinks suppliers would have to set up separate production and distribution facilities which would result in additional costs and a competitive disadvantage.

The introduction of a compulsory deposit cannot be justified on ecological or environmental grounds as it is not conducive to achieving the desired objective, i.e. promoting the use of refillable containers, and because there are insufficient scientific grounds for considering that the non-returnable containers covered by the regulation are environmentally unsound.

What is the Commission's position on this threat to meddle with the principle of the free movement of goods, which creates a barrier to trade on the European internal market, and which cannot be justified either on the basis of environmental arguments or current Community legislation?

Joint answer to Written Questions E-1774/01, E-1775/01, E-1776/01, E-1777/01 and P-1823/01 given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(26 July 2001)

The draft second amendment to the German regulation on packaging - notification of which was given in connection with Directives 94/62/EC of 20 December 1994 on packaging and packaging waste(1) and 98/34/EC of 22 June 1998 laying down a procedure for the provision of information in the field of technical standards and regulations(2) - was examined by the Commission in the light of the relevant provisions of Community law.

The points mentioned by the honourable Member were also considered by the relevant departments of the Commission.

In view of the fact that at its meeting of 13 July 2001 the Bundesrat accepted a proposal for a resolution put forward jointly by several Länder and did not vote in favour of the draft as notified to the Commission, the issue of the proposed draft's compatibility with Community law no longer arises.

(1) OJ L 365, 31.12.1994.

(2) OJ L 204, 21.7.1998.

Top