CALL FOR EVIDENCE FOR AN EVALUATION / FITNESS CHECK
This document aims to inform the public and stakeholders about the Commission’s work, so they can provide feedback and participate effectively in consultation activities. We ask these groups to provide views on the Commission’s understanding of the problem and possible solutions and to share any relevant information that they may have.
Title of the evaluation	Evaluation of the legislation on customs enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR)
Lead DG – responsible unit	DG TAXUD - Unit A4 - Protection of citizens and enforcement of IPR
Indicative timetable (planned start date and completion date)	End of evaluation planned in Q4-2026
Additional information	Counterfeit, piracy and other IPR violations (europa.eu) Defend your rights (europa.eu)

A. Political context, purpose and scope of the evaluation
Political context
The Commission’s ‘Europe 2020’ communication underlined the importance of strengthening knowledge and innovation and promoting a more competitive economy as drivers of smart and sustainable growth. Intellectual property rights (IPR) are fundamental to these key priorities. The European Union is committed to safeguarding these rights on its territory for the benefit of its citizens and businesses. EU customs authorities have a role to play in protecting IPR as they are empowered to stop fake and counterfeit goods from non-EU countries at the external border and thus prevent their entry into the EU. The ‘Mapping Global Trade in Fakes 2025’ study 1 , which was conducted jointly by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), estimates the value of fakes imported into the EU in 2021 at EUR 99 billion. This corresponds to 4.7% of all imports from the rest of the world into the EU. In parallel, the EUIPO/TAXUD annual reports on customs detentions show that detentions at the EU external border have stabilised or slightly decreased in recent years (see Intellectual Property Rights - Facts and figures (europa.eu)). New trends in global trade and supply chains, recent technological developments and changes in consumer demand - especially after the COVID-19 pandemic - have contributed to the current exponential increase in e-commerce. According to Customs Surveillance data, imports of low-value e‑commerce goods by consumers in the EU have more than quadrupled in the last four years 2 , from 1.4 billion in 2022 to 2.4 billion in 2023, 4.6 billion in 2024 and 5.8 billion in 2025 3 . At the same time, customs authorities are faced with increasingly limited resources and an expanding range of tasks to cover. In 2022 the European Court of Auditors flagged some customs enforcement issues in its Special report 06/2022: EU intellectual property rights - Protection not fully waterproof (europa.eu). They included: -different practices (and costs) in the EU in the destruction of counterfeit goods; -the acceptance by customs authorities of intervention thresholds, below which they do not take action, following a request by the right holder; -the restricted definition of small consignments; -differences in reporting practices by Member States on infringements. Constant monitoring of the implementation of Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 concerning customs enforcement of IPR has helped identify several other potential issues, such as: -the fact that not all Member States make full use of the measures under Regulation (EU) No 608/2013, such as the small consignment procedure; -a low percentage of requests from right holders for customs authorities to act result in detentions; -not all IPR are enforced to the same extent; -right holders find that there are operational differences in implementing the rules, which Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 does not address in detail (such as handling residue after goods suspected of infringing an IPR are destroyed, and the ownership of that residue). In this light, DG TAXUD launched a full evaluation of the customs enforcement of intellectual property rights (Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013). The evaluation assesses whether the Regulation has met its objectives, including the efficiency gains expected, and whether the Regulation and the related information technology framework are still fit for purpose, given the economic, technological and social changes that have taken place since it entered into application in 2014.
Purpose and scope
Under Regulation (EU) No 608/2013, customs authorities can under certain circumstances detain goods at the EU external border, if the goods are suspected of infringing an IPR, and destroy them without first having to wait for a court decision. The aim of the Regulation was to improve IPR enforcement at the border, particularly in light of the increase in the number of goods infringing IPR that are entering the internal market as a result of the growth of e-commerce. Specifically, the Regulation aimed to meet several needs, including: -strengthening and further harmonising IPR protection by EU customs authorities by setting out simplified procedural rules for detaining goods suspected of infringing IPR; -providing training for customs officers to help reduce the administrative burden and costs involved in handling small consignments; -centralising data on customs actions in a central database while ensuring interoperability between national systems (where existing) and the central database, enabling Member States to share applications for action (AFAs) with other Member States and the Commission and to share statistical information on detentions with the European Commission; -fostering a coordinated approach to data collection and data sharing between stakeholders, including timely responsiveness on the part of right holders when customs authorities propose the destruction of goods infringing IPR, and an appropriate distribution of costs. It is therefore important to evaluate to what extent the current Regulation is: -effective: to what extent have the current rules in the Regulation helped and supported customs authorities in stopping goods suspected of infringing an IPR at the EU external border? -efficient: to what extent are the current rules in the Regulation cost-effective in achieving the desired results? -relevant: are the Regulation’s scope and objectives still relevant? -coherence with other EU policies: are there any issues of policy coherence with other EU measures? -creating EU added value: could the objectives of the Regulation have been achieved at national level or is EU-level intervention on customs IPR enforcement necessary?
B. Better regulation
Consultation strategy
DG TAXUD commissioned an external study (performed in 2025) to assist with the evaluation. The external contractor consulted extensively by collecting targeted feedback from stakeholders, including EU institutions, bodies and agencies, customs authorities in the 27 EU Member States, right holders and business associations. It carried out 56 in-depth interviews and received 86 responses to a targeted online consultation. In parallel, the study team organised six focus groups to gather more detailed insights for developing case studies. A final online validation workshop was held with 30 stakeholders from all main groups, including business associations and right holders. The call for evidence will last for a period of four weeks and will be available in all EU languages. It will be accessible via the Commission’s ‘Have your say’ portal.
Why are we consulting?
The aim of the consultation is to be able to assess the current enforcement of IPR at the external border by customs authorities. This assessment will feed into the Commission’s evaluation of the current Regulation, in particular its efficiency, effectiveness and relevance. We need to determine whether its legislative and IT frameworks are still fit for purpose. The call for evidence aims to obtain the views and opinions of all parties interested in or affected by the Regulation and not yet consulted by the external contractor during the study underpinning the evaluation. The call for evidence will provide material to assess stakeholders’ satisfaction with the Regulation. The Commission would like to hear stakeholders’ views on a number of issues. 1.The Regulation extended the scope of IPRs protected. Nevertheless, this has not led to a substantial increase in the share of detentions (other than those related to trade marks) since the Regulation entered into application. What are the possible reasons for this? 2.Has the Regulation been successful in reducing the administrative burden linked with enforcement of IPR for customs authorities and right holders, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)? Could you quantify the costs and benefits you have encountered due to the Regulation? 3.To what extent have the measures to digitalise AFAs and create trader portals to submit electronic AFAs improved IPR customs enforcement? 4.To what extent does the Regulation contain mechanisms that are effective in reducing the burden of procedures to prevent IPR infringements in e-commerce?
Target audience
The external contractor commissioned with conducting the study underpinning the evaluation has already contacted the stakeholders most heavily involved in implementing the Regulation, in particular customs authorities, right holders and business associations. The target audience for this consultation is primarily those stakeholders that are less involved in the everyday implementation of the Regulation, such as academics, right holders who do not actively seek customs enforcement (in particular SMEs) and intermediaries.
Data collection and methodology
The evaluation will draw on the external study referred to above. The study covers the period between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2023 and is based on desk research, a literature review, targeted consultations, in-depth interviews, focus groups and a validation workshop. When possible, the evaluation will be complemented by data that has become available more recently. It will also draw on the EUIPO/TAXUD annual reports on customs detentions of goods infringing IPR at the EU border and in the internal market. As part of the feedback on this call for evidence, we encourage stakeholders to provide us with (references to) data on costs and benefits and to help us gauge both the current burden and the potential for simplification. This will contribute to an assessment of the costs and benefits of implementing the Regulation and will help us to determine whether it needs to be revised.