Ukraine has over 80% of the Union Customs Code transposed into its legislation, the European Commission’s Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union (DG TAXUD) said in a statement on Wednesday 22 February. For some experts, this is a further step towards Ukraine’s accession to the EU.
“It’s a good thing, because it’s part of the acquis communautaire”, commented the economist Nicolas Véron, a member of the European think tank Bruegel, contacted by EUROPE.
“The introduction of the customs system is a big step forward, especially for trade”, said Karel Lannoo, director general of the independent European think tank Centre for European Policy Studies, which specialises in financial issues.
“We know that the problem for Ukraine, when the war is over, will be to control its customs, because there are problems of corruption at all levels”, he continued. “It’s important that it is quickly integrated into the European system”, he insisted, recalling that this process started 10 years ago, despite the reluctance of some Member States, such as France, Germany and the Netherlands.
Furthermore, “customs plays a central role regarding the implementation of trade-related sanctions”, Lina Papamichalopoulou, head of unit at DG TAXUD, said in the statement. “It is at the front line in enforcing sanctions at the external borders of the EU and is in a unique position to control goods entering or leaving the EU”, she added.
On the taxation side, a tax sub-group was set up within the EU’s ‘Freeze and Seize’ Task Force, thanks to DG TAXUD, which wanted to ensure that sanctioned Russians and Belarussians were fully and properly scrutinised from a tax perspective, given the potential for evasion and abuse.
For Mr Lannoo, the asset freeze was less effective than measures targeting strategic sectors. “The oligarchs have been able to move their assets, but they are known to the authorities and are being followed by financial intelligence units”, he said.
This analysis was corroborated by Mr Véron, but in his view does not prevent progress on the issue of beneficial ownership, as sanctions have been circumvented and the EU also has to deal with the phenomenon of money laundering (see EUROPE 13114/6).
“The Court of Justice has resolved the dilemma between the need for transparency and the need for privacy”, he said. “There will undoubtedly be an evolution [in relation to] European jurisprudence to find the right balance “, he concluded. (Original version in French by Anne Damiani)