On Friday 17 May, at the Ecofin Council (see other news), the European Finance Ministers will try to reach political agreement ('general approach') on three texts relating to excise duties applicable in the EU (see EUROPE 12124/12), including the Directive on the harmonization of the structures of excise duties on alcohol (see EUROPE 12211/15).
One of the last major issues to be addressed regarding the Directive concerns the setting of the annual quantitative limit in order to benefit from an exemption from excise duties or to apply reduced rates for ethyl alcohol distilled from fruit by private individuals for their private use.
Last week, the Romanian Presidency of the Council of the EU proposed a threshold of maximum 70 litres per year, except for Hungary and Romania, which would be entitled to apply a threshold of 100 litres per year (see EUROPE 12252/2).
The new compromise text, dated 15 May, now provides for a maximum limit of 50 litres per year, while retaining the proposed special regime for both countries.
According to a European source, there are still divisions between northern countries, particularly Germany, which supports this 50-litre threshold and other countries, such as Austria, which would prefer a 70-litre threshold. It also remains to be determined whether the special exemption scheme for Hungary and Romania is acceptable to all.
On the same text, another question - which the Romanian Presidency hoped to have settled before Ecofin - remains open, namely the possibility of applying an alternative method to fix excise duty on wine, other fermented beverages and intermediate products: fix the excise duty on all products by reference to the number of hectoliter/degrees of actual alcoholic strength by volume of finished product (see EUROPE 12211/15).
This possibility, supported by countries such as Estonia and Sweden, still does not have consensus. In order to reach a compromise, the Presidency suggested excluding wine and intermediate products from the scope of the provision. To further facilitate agreement, the Commission has also indicated that it will make a statement annexed to the minutes of the meeting, indicating its intention to analyse the impact of this alternative method in the context of the first revision of the Directive.
While agreement on the Regulation on administrative cooperation on the content of electronic register should not be a problem, there is no consensus on the rules applicable to the acquisition and transport from one Member State to another by private individuals of excise goods in the Directive on general arrangements for excise duty.
It is still the provision that proposes to strengthen control powers by reversing the burden of proof and placing the burden of proof on the consumer rather than on the customs officer to prove that there would be no abuse in the use of excise products, which is controversial.
There is still a division between France, on the one hand, which strongly defends this provision, and Belgium and Luxembourg on the other, which are not in favour of it and would have instead liked to have had undertaken an impact assessment on this provision, which was not included in the Commission's initial proposal. For our source, again, the solution could be a statement by the Commission specifying how the provision should be read.
Discussions between Member States' ambassadors to the EU (Coreper) on Wednesday 15 May did not make much progress, so the Presidency concluded the meeting by considering that informal discussions should continue by Friday on these three open points.
The subject was also added to the agenda of the Ministers' in camera breakfast in order to settle the final issues and reach agreement during the public deliberation.
According to a diplomatic source, the Romanian Presidency remains confident that agreement on all three texts is possible. For another source, there could also be agreement only on the Regulation on administrative cooperation as regards the content of the electronic register and the Directive on the general arrangements for excise duty. (Original version in French by Marion Fontana)