Explanatory Memorandum to COM(2018)625 - Opening and management of autonomous Union tariff quotas for certain fishery products for the period 2019-2020

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

dossier COM(2018)625 - Opening and management of autonomous Union tariff quotas for certain fishery products for the period 2019-2020.
source COM(2018)625 EN
date 14-09-2018


1. CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL

• Reasons for and objectives of the proposal

The EU relies on imports to supply certain fishery products. Indeed, in the last 21 years it has become increasingly dependent on imports to meet demand of fishery products. At present, the EU’s fisheries and aquaculture production covers only 46 % of its needs. The autonomous trade measures for fishery and aquaculture products are designed mainly to enable the EU fish processing industry to import non-EU countries’ raw materials for further processing at reduced rates or duty-free. To guarantee a level playing field for EU producers, the sensitivity of individual fishery products on the EU market should also be taken into consideration.

• Consistency with existing policy provisions in the policy area

This initiative is in line with and pursues the EU’s policy over the past 18 years of securing an adequate supply of fishery products for its processing industry.

• Consistency with other Union policies

Not applicable

2. LEGAL BASIS, SUBSIDIARITY AND PROPORTIONALITY

• Legal basis

The legal basis for this proposal is Article 31 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

• Subsidiarity (for non-exclusive competence)

The European Union has sole responsibility for Common Customs Tariff duties. The subsidiarity principle therefore does not apply to this proposal.

• Proportionality

The policy choice is proportionate because for each product only a limited quantity is authorised, bearing in mind the utilisation rate, the need for a level playing field between EU and non-EU producers, value added and other trade preferences.

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle because the customs union is a common policy and should therefore be implemented through a Regulation adopted by the Council.

• Choice of the instrument

Not applicable.

3. RESULTS OF EX-POST EVALUATIONS, STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATIONS AND IMPACT ASSESSMENTS

• Ex-post evaluations/fitness checks of existing legislation

Not applicable.

• Stakeholder consultations

Consultations with EU producers, EU processors and national competent authorities from the Member States were carried out from January to March 2018 via a questionnaire from the Commission. The Commission also presented the process on 24 January to the Market Advisory Council, where all stakeholders (industry and NGOs) are represented. None of the stakeholders opposed maintaining autonomous tariff quotas (ATQs) for fishery products.

As usual, EU producers proposed a minimalist approach (lower quantities and fewer products), while the EU processing industry proposed a maximalist approach (higher quantities and more products). The nine Member States which expressed their views followed the advice of their respective industries. The Commission proposal is balanced, based on a factual and objective analysis of data and information collected. It guarantees sufficient competitive supply for the EU processing industry, while taking into account the interests of EU fish producers.

• Collection and use of expertise

An external consultant (EUMOFA) was commissioned to evaluate the value added of each product subject to the ATQs. This work builds on an in-depth study from 2015, which confirmed the relevance, consistency and efficiency of the ATQs. Eurostat and QUOTA data were used for each of the proposed quotas.


• Impact assessment

No impact assessment has been performed. The proposal takes up the current legal act that expires at the end of 2018. There is therefore no need for an impact assessment. However, a thorough consultation has taken place with EU stakeholders before the proposal moves to the Council working party for debate, ahead of its adoption by the Council.

• Regulatory fitness and simplification

Not applicable.

• Fundamental rights

Not applicable.

4. BUDGETARY IMPLICATIONS

The proposal does not have a budgetary impact for the Commission.

5. OTHER ELEMENTS

• Implementation plans and monitoring, evaluation and reporting arrangements

Not applicable.

• Explanatory documents (for directives)

Not applicable.

• Detailed explanation of the specific provisions of the proposal

Not applicable.