(1)

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 732/2008, in particular Articles 9 and 10(6) thereof, the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (hereinafter referred to as ‘Sri Lanka’) is a beneficiary country of the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance granted within the European Union’s scheme of generalised tariff preferences.

(2)

Commission Decision 2008/938/EC (2), which includes Sri Lanka in the list of countries beneficiary of the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance for the period from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2011, noted that Sri Lanka’s fulfillment of the qualifying criteria for the arrangement relating to the three human rights conventions was the subject of an investigation initiated under Council Regulation (EC) No 980/2005 of 27 June 2005 applying a scheme of generalised tariff preferences (3).

(3)

Reports, statements and information of the United Nations as well as other publicly available reports and information from other relevant sources, including non-governmental organisations, available to the European Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Commission’) indicated that the national legislation of Sri Lanka incorporating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, was not being effectively implemented. The three conventions mentioned are listed as core human rights conventions respectively in points 1, 5 and 6 of Annex III, Part A, to Regulation (EC) No 732/2008.

(4)

Article 15(2) of Regulation (EC) No 732/2008 provides for the temporary withdrawal of the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance granted pursuant to that Regulation, in particular if the national legislation incorporating the conventions referred to in Annex III to that Regulation, which have been ratified in fulfilment of the requirements of Article 8(1) and (2) of that Regulation, is not effectively implemented.

(5)

By Commission Decision 2008/803/EC (4), an investigation was initiated in order to establish ‘whether the national legislation of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka incorporating the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Convention on the Rights of the Child is effectively implemented’.

(6)

Throughout the course of the investigation the Commission provided Sri Lanka with every opportunity to cooperate in the investigation, including by providing Sri Lanka with the opportunity to comment on the comprehensive findings of experts entrusted by the Commission to provide an independent legal assessment of the matters under the investigation. Despite the fact that Sri Lanka decided not to cooperate with, or participate in, the investigation, the Commission maintained regular contact with Sri Lanka outside the framework of the investigation so as to enable Sri Lanka to bring to the Commission’s attention any information relevant to the investigation. The information received in this context from Sri Lanka has been taken by the Commission fully into account and has contributed to inform its assessment.

(7)

On 19 October 2009, the Commission approved a report containing its findings (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Report’). The Report concludes that the national legislation of Sri Lanka incorporating international human rights conventions, specifically the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the Convention on the Rights of the Child, is not effectively implemented.

(8)

Sri Lanka was provided with the Report containing the findings of the investigation and reminded that those findings constituted the basis on which the Commission intended to decide whether to recommend the temporary withdrawal of the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance. Sri Lanka was also granted a period within which it could make representations on this matter or specifically in relation to the Report.

(9)

Sri Lanka provided the Commission with a number of observations in respect of the subject-matter of the Report and conduct of the investigation. These observations covered also facts and findings on which Sri Lanka was given the opportunity to comment during the investigation but did not do so. The Commission nevertheless considered Sri Lanka’s observations carefully and in particular those relevant in the context of a decision on temporary withdrawal. The Commission’s assessment, of which Sri Lanka was informed, led to the conclusion that none of Sri Lanka’s arguments would substantively alter the findings of the investigation.

(10)

The Commission has submitted the Report on the findings of the investigation to the Generalised Preferences Committee on 17 November 2009, in accordance with Article 19(1) of Regulation (EC) No 732/2008.

(11)

In the light of the foregoing, the special incentive arrangement for sustainable development and good governance should be withdrawn temporarily for all products originating in Sri Lanka, until it is decided that the reasons justifying the temporary withdrawal no longer prevail.

(12)

This Regulation should enter into force 6 months after its adoption, unless the Council decides before then, upon a proposal from the Commission, that the reasons justifying it no longer prevail,

(1)

By letter registered with the Secretariat-General of the Commission on 9 September 2009, Lithuania requested authorisation to continue to apply a measure derogating from the provisions of Directive 2006/112/EC governing the person liable for the payment of value added tax (VAT) to the tax authorities.

(2)

In accordance with Article 395(2) of Directive 2006/112/EC, the Commission informed the other Member States of the request made by Lithuania in a letter dated 27 October 2009. By letter dated 29 October 2009, the Commission notified Lithuania that it had all the information that it considered necessary to consider the request.

(3)

The purpose of the measure is to continue to make the recipient liable for the VAT due on the supply of goods and services in the case of insolvency procedures or restructuring procedures subject to judicial oversight and of timber transactions.

(4)

Taxable persons under insolvency procedures or restructuring procedures subject to judicial oversight are often prevented, as a result of financial difficulties, from paying to the tax authorities VAT invoiced on their supplies of goods and services. The recipient, in so far as it is a taxable person with a right of deduction, can none the less deduct the VAT even though it has not been paid by the supplier to the tax authorities.

(5)

Because of the nature of the market and the business involved, Lithuania has encountered problems in the timber market which is dominated by small companies, often resellers and intermediaries which the tax authorities have found difficult to control. The most common form of evasion involves the invoicing of supplies followed by the disappearance of the business without having paid any tax, leaving the customer in receipt of a valid invoice for tax deduction.

(6)

By designating the recipient, in so far as it is a taxable person, as the person liable for the VAT in the abovementioned cases, the derogation removes the difficulties of collection of the VAT without affecting the amount of tax due. This has the effect, on the one hand, of simplifying the work of the tax authorities for collecting the tax and, on the other, of preventing certain types of tax evasion or avoidance. In this respect, the measure derogates from Article 193 of Directive 2006/112/EC which stipulates that the taxable person supplying goods or services is normally liable for the payment of the tax.

(7)

The measure has previously been authorised by Council Decision 2006/388/EC (2) under the then applicable Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes – Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment (3).

(8)

The legal and factual situation which justified the current application of the derogating measure in question has not changed and continues to exist. Lithuania should therefore be authorised to apply the measure during a further limited period.

(9)

The derogation will not adversely affect the Union’s own resources accruing from VAT,

(a)

supplies of goods and services by a taxable person while under an insolvency procedure or a restructuring procedure subject to judicial oversight;

(b)

supplies of timber.

(1)

By letter dated 6 October 2009, the Finnish Government requested authorisation, for the year 2010, to grant farmers aid for certain quantities of varieties of seeds and cereal seed produced solely in Finland because of its specific climatic conditions.

(2)

Finland requests authorisation to grant aid per hectare for certain areas under Gramineae (grass) and Leguminosae (legumes) seeds species as listed in Annex XIII to Council Regulation (EC) No 73/2009 of 19 January 2009 establishing common rules for direct support schemes for farmers under the common agricultural policy and establishing certain support schemes for farmers, amending Regulations (EC) No 1290/2005, (EC) No 247/2006, (EC) No 378/2007 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 (2), with the exception of Phleum pratense L. (Timothy), and for certain areas under cereal seed.

(3)

The proposed aid has to meet the requirements laid down in Article 182(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007. It concerns seeds and cereal seed varieties for cultivation in Finland which are adapted to the weather conditions in that country and are not grown in other Member States. The Commission authorisation should be limited to the varieties included in the list of Finnish varieties which are produced solely in Finland.

(4)

Provision should be made for the Commission to be informed of the measures taken by Finland to comply with the limits laid down in this Decision.

(5)

The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for the Common Organisation of Agricultural Markets,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 32(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the seventh EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

(2)

The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the seventh EDF during the financial year 2008 has been satisfactory,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 33(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the eighth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

(2)

The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the eighth EDF during the financial year 2008 has been satisfactory,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 32(3) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the ninth EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

(2)

The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the ninth EDF during the financial year 2008 has been satisfactory,

(1)

Pursuant to Article 11(8) of the Internal Agreement, the discharge for the financial management of the 10th EDF is to be given to the Commission by the European Parliament on the recommendation of the Council.

(2)

The overall implementation by the Commission of the operations of the 10th EDF during the financial year 2008 has been satisfactory,