INTERNAL MARKET SCOREBOARD - September 2020 - EEA EFTA STATES - EFTA ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
I
NTERNALMARKET
SCOREBOARD
Sept
ember2020
No.46
EEAEFTASTATES46th Internal Market Scoreboard of the EFTA States
The Internal Market aims at guaranteeing the free movement of goods, capital, services, and people
across the EEA. A functioning internal market stimulates competition and trade for businesses,
improves efficiency, raises quality and helps cut prices for consumers. It also improves living and
working conditions for all citizens and strengthens environmental standards. The purpose of
monitoring the Member States’ timely compliance with EEA law is to ensure the full benefits of the
EEA agreement for all stakeholders.
The coronavirus pandemic presents extraordinary economic and social challenges
for EEA businesses and consumers. ESA is fully aware of the seriousness of the
situation and understands that in these times , due to the coronavirus global crisis,
many countries have prioritised putting in place restrictive measures in order to
confine the pandemia and contain the number of casualties. The 46th Internal
Market Scoreboard of the EFTA States therefore exceptionally provides basic
figures only on the status of non-transposition.
The next Internal Market Scoreboard will be prepared in December 2020 taking
stock of the situation as at the end of November. A second ve rsion of the
December Scoreboard to include figures for the EU Member States as at the end
of December, as a comparison, will also be published in parallel with the
publication of the EU’s Scoreboard.
The transposition deficit indicates how many directives and regulations the EEA States have failed to
communicate as transposed on time. From 2009, the Authority used the interim target of 1% set by the
European Council in 2007 as a benchmark. Now, we are looking towards a benchmark of 0.5%, in line with
the European Commission’s Single Market Act proposed in April 2011.
Main Findings (situation as at 31 May 2020)
On 31 May 2020, 806 directives and 3300 regulations incorporated into the EEA
Agreement were in force.
o The average transposition deficit for directives for the EFTA States increased from
0.7% to 0.9% since the December 2019 Scoreboard.
o The EEA EFTA incompleteness rate relating to directives increased from 1% to 3%
since the December 2019 Scoreboard (21 directives)
o The average transposition deficit for regulations for the EFTA States increased
from 0.9% to 2.2% since the December 2019 Scoreboard.
o The EFTA incompleteness rate relating to regulations increased from 2% to 6%
since the December 2019 Scoreboard (213 regulations)
o The total number of infringement proceedings decreased from 121 to 109 since the
December 2019 Scoreboard.
Page 1The European Commission has taken the decision to publish only one annual Internal Market Scoreboard, taking stock
of the situation as at the end of November each year. The EFTA Surveillance Authority will continue to publish two
Internal Market Scoreboards per year. One will look at the situation in the EFTA Member States as at the end of
November each year (“December Scoreboard”) and the other will look at the situation as at the end of May of each year
(“June Scoreboard”). A second version of the December Scoreboard to include figures for the EU Member States as at
the end of December, as a comparison, will also be published in parallel with the publication of the EU’s Scoreboard.
This Internal Market Scoreboard (No 46), reports on the status of the EFTA Member States only as at 31 May 2020.
Iceland
Transposition deficit directives: 1.2% (last report: 0.6%)
Transposition deficit regulations: 6.4% (last report: 1.5%)
Total infringement cases: 67 (last report: 71)
Directives
• Overdue directives: 10 (last report: 5) including 9 directives in the financial
services sector and 1 directive overdue for 2 years or more.
• Directives outstanding from previous period: 2
• Average delay: 9.7 months (last report: 16.8 months)
Regulations
• Overdue regulations: 211 (last report: 47) including 206 regulations in the
financial services sector.
Infringements
• Pending cases (COM, CON, INC): 17 (last report: 16)
• Incorrect transposition/application: 17 = 25% of all open infringement cases
• Late transposition (directives): 4 = 6% of all open infringement cases
• Late implementation (regulations): 46 = 69% of all open infringement cases
• Problematic sectors (COM, CON, INC): Food and feed safety, animal health
and welfare (4)
• Average case duration: 34.7 months (last report: 34.9 months)
• Compliance with court rulings: 18.7 months (last report: 18.7 months)
Page 2Norway
Transposition deficit directives: 0.6% (last report: 0.3%)
Transposition deficit regulations: 0.2% (last report: 0.5%)
Total infringement cases: 31 (last report: 39)
Directives
• Overdue directives: 5 (last report: 2) of which 1 directive has been overdue for
2 years or more.
• Directives outstanding from previous period: 1
• Average delay: 7.8 months (last report: 14.7 months)
Regulations
• Overdue regulations: 8 (last report: 15) including 5 regulations in the financial
services sector.
Infringements
• Pending cases (COM, CON, INC): 23 (last report: 25)
• Incorrect transposition/application: 23 = 74% of all open infringement cases
• Late transposition (directives): 2 = 6.5% of all open infringement cases
• Late implementation (regulations): 6 = 19.5% of all open infringement cases
• Problematic sectors (COM, CON, INC): Social security (6), Transport (5)
• Average case duration: 44 months (last report: 44.7 months)
• Compliance with court rulings: 34.5 months (last report: 38.3 months)
Page 3Liechtenstein
Transposition deficit Directives: 0.9% (last report: 0.9%)
Total infringement cases: 11 (last report: 11)
Directives
• Overdue directives: 7 (last report: 7) including 5 directives overdue for 2 years
or more in the transport sector.
• Directives outstanding from previous period: 7
• Average delay: 58.5 months (last report: 52.5 months)
Infringements
• Pending cases (COM, CON, INC): 7 (last report: 7)
• Incorrect transposition/application: 7 = 63.5% of all open infringement cases
• Late transposition (directives): 4 = 36.5% of all open infringement cases
• Problematic sectors (COM, CON, INC): Services – other (2)
• Average case duration: 40.9 months (last report: 35 months)
• Compliance with court rulings: 0 months (last report: 0 months)
Page 4Infringement Proceedings1
The Authority opens infringement proceedings when it is of the view that an EFTA
State has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EEA Agreement. When interpreting
the statistics on infringement procedures below it should be noted that only the EFTA
Court can declare that a breach of EEA law has occurred.
Infringement cases can be divided into two categories. The first category relates to cases
concerning lack of conformity with, or incorrect application of, EEA provisions, opened
either on the basis of complaints or on the Authority’s own initiative. These cases concern,
for example, situations in which the Authority, after having acknowledged transposition of a
directive by an EFTA State, concludes at a later stage that the national legislation is not in
full conformity with the requirements of the relevant directive or that the EFTA State is not
complying with the Internal Market rules, i.e. the free movement principles, in some other
way. When EEA rules are not correctly implemented or applied in practice, citizens and
businesses can be deprived of their rights.
The second category of cases relates to late transposition, in other words directives and
regulations only partially transposed or not transposed at all into the national legislation of
the EFTA States within the time limits. Infringement cases in this category (non-transposition
cases) are generally clear-cut and, therefore, seldom the subject of legally complicated
disputes between the Authority and the EFTA State concerned.
Total number of infringement proceedings
As at 1 June 2020, the Authority was pursuing a total of 109 infringement cases against
the EFTA States in the internal market field.
Of the 109 pending infringement cases, 47 concerned the incorrect implementation or
application of Internal Market rules, whereas 10 cases concerned the late transposition
of directives and the remaining 52 cases concerned the late transposition of
regulations.
1
If the Authority considers that an EFTA State has failed to correctly implement and apply legislation under the EEA Agreement,
it may initiate formal infringement proceedings pursuant to Article 31 of the Agreement on the Establishment of a Surveillance
Authority and a Court of Justice. Such infringement proceedings correspond to those initiated by the European Commission under
Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU (TFEU).
Page 5Pending infringement proceedings due to lack of conformity with or
incorrect application of Internal Market rules on 1 June 2020 divided by
sector
Figure 1: Pending infringement proceedings as at 1 June 2020
Page 6Breakdown per sector
The fields of food and feed, animal health and welfare, establishment and social
security accounted for the highest number of infringement proceedings concerning the
lack of conformity with or incorrect application of Internal Market rules. Together these
sectors accounted for 38.4% of the infringement proceedings (Figure 1).
Compliance with Court judgments
Court rulings establishing a breach of EEA law require that the State concerned takes
immediate action to ensure compliance as soon as possible. Internal circumstances
or practical difficulties cannot justify non-compliance with obligations and time-limits
arising from EEA law.
Looking back over the cases that have been closed in the last five years (Figure 2),
the average time taken by the EFTA States to comply with an EFTA Court ruling in
cases concerning lack of conformity with or incorrect application of Internal Market
rules was 17.7 months.
EFTA State Case Duration in
months
Norway Complaint against Norway concerning the temporary import 61
of foreign-registered rental cars
Norway Conformity assessment of national measures implementing 55
Directive 2005/60/EC (Third Anti-Money Laundering
Directive) in Norway
Norway Incorrect Implementation of Directive on ambient air quality & 54
Complaint regarding ambient air quality
Iceland Conformity assessment of national measures implementing 50
Directive 2002/92/EC (insurance mediation)
Norway Ownership restrictions in Financial Services Infrastructure 35
Institutions
Iceland CoA Directive 2000/30/EC on the technical roadside 3
inspection of the roadworthiness of commercial vehicles
circulating in the Community
Iceland Checks on transport of dangerous goods by road under 3
Directive 95/50/EC
Norway Complaint concerning licensing under the Building and 2
Planning Act - provision of services and recognition of
qualifications
Norway Right to parental leave 0
Figure 2: Cases concerning lack of conformity with or incorrect application of Internal Market
rules referred to the EFTA Court and subsequently closed in the last five years
Duration in months between the judgment of the EFTA Court and the resolution of the case
Page 7For those cases where the EFTA States still have to comply with an EFTA Court
judgment at the cut-off date of the Scoreboard of 31 May 2020, the average time that
had lapsed since the court judgment was 40 months (see Figure 3 for details of these
cases).
EFTA State Case Duration
in
months
Liechtenstein Establishment of an Austrian trained 'Dentist' 61
Liechtenstein Liechtenstein Trade Act and the Services Directive 48
Norway Incorrect implementation of Directive 2000/59 on port 45
reception facilities
Iceland Complaint against Iceland concerning imports of raw meat & 30
Own initiative case concerning requirements imposed by
Iceland on imports of egg and dairy products
Norway Complaint against Norway concerning the construction of an 26
underground parking and the award of a concession for its
operation
Figure 3: Ongoing cases concerning lack of conformity with or incorrect application of Internal Market
rules referred to the EFTA Court which on 1 June 2020 remained unresolved
Duration in months since the judgment of the EFTA Court
Page 8EFTASur v
eil
lanceAut
hor
it
y
RueBell
iard35
B-1040Brussels @ef
tasur
v
Belgi
um
/
eft
asur
v
Tel
.+3222861811
ef
www. v
asur
t .nt
i /
eft
asur
vYou can also read
