This document is an excerpt from the EUR-Lex website
Document 92002E002641
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2641/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU sanctions damaging EU businesses.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2641/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU sanctions damaging EU businesses.
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2641/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU sanctions damaging EU businesses.
UL C 280E, 21.11.2003, p. 11–11
(ES, DA, DE, EL, EN, FR, IT, NL, PT, FI, SV)
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2641/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission. EU sanctions damaging EU businesses.
Official Journal 280 E , 21/11/2003 P. 0011 - 0011
WRITTEN QUESTION E-2641/02 by Daniel Hannan (PPE-DE) to the Commission (20 September 2002) Subject: EU sanctions damaging EU businesses In my constituency there is a company which imports apples from America outside the English season. These are now subject to 100 % import duty. The result is that the company fears for its own viability and for the futures of its 70 employees. This seems wholly unjust, as well as illogical. EU business interests, EU jobs and EU consumer choice are being damaged by these sanctions. Will the Commission reconsider this question and remove apples from the list of sanctioned goods? Answer given by Mr Lamy on behalf of the Commission (8 October 2002) The Honourable Member is misinformed. Apples are not currently subject to 100 per cent import duty. In response to the protectionist and World Trade Organisation (WTO) incompatible American steel safeguards, the Commission acted to preserve all the Community's rights under the WTO agreements. This included putting forward the proposal that was adopted by the Council on 13 June 2002(1). The purpose of this Regulation was to encourage the United States not to apply additional tariffs to steel products of interest to European exporters and to withdraw its safeguard measure as soon as it is condemned by the WTO. Failing to act in this way to limit the damage the American measures will cause to the European steel industry would indeed have threatened Union business interests and Union jobs. The Regulation has two annexes. Annex II lists products originating in the United States on which additional duties ranging from 8 to 30 % would be imposed unless the United States withdraws its safeguard measures when they are condemned by the WTO (sometime next year). Annex I lists of products on which a 100 % additional duty could be imposed before that date. However, the effective application of this additional duty would require a new Council Decision, as specified in Article 3 of the Regulation. This issue will be considered at the Council's September 2002 session. As a result, although red apples are indeed listed in Annex I, no additional duty has yet been imposed on these or any other products. Finally, to take account of the exclusion of some steel products from the American safeguard measures, the Commission will re-examine all the products included on the lists before any additional duties are levied on imports from the United States. (1) Regulation (EC) No 1031/2002 of 13 June 2002 establishing additional customs duties on imports of certain products originating in the United States of America OJ L 157, 15.6.2002.