Commission Decision of 5 January 2011 terminating the examination procedure concerning the measures imposed by Brazil affecting the import of textile products (2011/2/EU)
Grade B
mapped from publisher markup. A grade says how a document's structure was obtained, not how reliable the law is.
Address https://gelex.eu/eli/EU/decision/2011/2@2011-01-05/en
THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,
Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,
Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 3286/94 of 22 December 1994 laying down Community procedures in the field of the common commercial policy in order to ensure the exercise of the Community’s rights under international trade rules, in particular those established under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation and in particular Article 11(1) thereof,
Whereas: PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
(1) On 12 January 1998 Febeltex, (Fédération Belge du Textile) lodged a complaint pursuant to Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94.
(2) The complainant alleged that European Community sales of textile products in Brazil were hindered by a number of obstacles to trade within the meaning of Article 2(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94, including a non-automatic import licensing system and the way this system is developed through, notably, compulsory import payment terms and minimum import prices.
(3) The Commission decided, after consultation of the Advisory Committee established by Regulation (EC) No 3286/94, that there was sufficient evidence to justify initiating an examination procedure for the purpose of considering the legal and factual issues involved. Consequently, an examination procedure was initiated on 27 February 1998.
THE FINDINGS OF THE EXAMINATION PROCEDURE
(4) The final report on the investigation procedure was circulated to EU Member States at the 9 November 1998 meeting of the Advisory Committee.
(5) The report concluded that the Brazilian non-automatic import licensing system, as applied with a minimum price requirement, appeared to be in breach of:
(5)
(a) Articles 1, 3 and 5 of the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing Procedures, as: (a) it was not neutral in application; (b) it was not administered in a fair and equitable manner; (c) it did not implement any WTO compatible restrictions and therefore was not limited in scope and duration to a measure it implemented; and (d) it had additional trade-restrictive and distortive effects on imports. In addition, the list of products submitted to non-automatic licensing was not published and the applications for licenses for imports under the minimum price were left without official reply for several months;
(b) Articles X.1 and X.3 of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994, as the non-automatic import licensing system was not published and was not administered in a uniform, impartial and reasonable manner;
(c) Article XI.1 of GATT (1994) as the minimum price system was a restriction other than duties, taxes or other charges made effective through import licenses on the importation of any product of the territory of any other contracting party, without any WTO compatible justification.
DEVELOPMENTS AFTER THE INVESTIGATION
(6) On 17 March 1999, the Commission decided to initiate a WTO Dispute Settlement procedure. WTO consultations were held on 19 November 1999. On this occasion, while denying all allegations relative to minimum pricing practices both at import licensing or customs valuation levels, Brazil admitted that it did not comply with several of its WTO obligations concerning notification in relation with its import licensing system.
(7) Following these consultations, the Brazilian import licensing and customs valuation systems underwent significant changes and the Community industry’s access to the Brazilian market for textile products improved. However there were still several aspects of the Brazilian import licensing and customs valuation systems that needed to be modified in order to ensure Brazil’s full compliance with its obligations under the relevant WTO Agreements.
(8) The Commission therefore decided, by Decision 2001/429/EC, to suspend the abovementioned examination procedure for a period of 6 months, while monitoring the effect of the changes in the Brazilian system.
(9) During the first quarter of 2002, several contacts with the Brazilian authorities took place with the aim of finding a mutually acceptable solution. The European Community and Brazil signed a Memorandum of Understanding on arrangements in the area of market access for textiles and clothing products on 6 November 2002, under which both parties agreed to refrain from applying non-tariff barriers. In addition the Memorandum of Understanding addressed also the problem concerning customs valuation.
(10) In the more than 7 years since the signature of the Memorandum of Understanding, the Commission has not been notified of any particular problems or new obstacles related to market access in Brazil for textile products.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
(11) In view of the above analysis, it is considered that the examination procedure has led to a satisfactory situation with regard to the obstacles identified in the complaint lodged by Febeltex. The examination procedure should therefore be terminated in accordance with Article 11(1) of Regulation (EC) No 3286/94.
(12) The Advisory Committee has been consulted on the measures provided for in this Decision,
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:
Article 1
The examination procedure concerning the measures imposed by Brazil affecting the import of textile products is hereby terminated.
Article 2
This Decision shall enter into force on the 20th day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.
Done at Brussels, 5 January 2011. For the Commission The President José Manuel Barroso
Versions
Cited by
- Council Decision (EU) 2015/771 of 7 May 2015 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Joint Committee established under the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons, as regards the amendment of Annex III (Mutual recognition of professional qualifications) to that Agreement Decision · Grade B
Annex III (Mutual recognition of professional qualifications) to the Agreement was replaced by Decision No 2/2011 of the EU-Swiss Joint Committee and should be updated to take into account new legal acts of the European Union and Switzerland since that date,
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2017 concerning measures to safeguard the security of gas supply and repealing Regulation (EU) No 994/2010, as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2021/15/MC-EnC of 30 November 2021 and as adapted by Ministerial Council Decision 2022/.../MC-EnC of ..., and Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 July 2009 on conditions for access to the natural gas transmission networks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1775/2005 as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Coun
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
dispatched only where required to keep the system in operation under secure and reliable conditions in accordance with Article 13 of Directive 2009/73/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2011/02/MC-EnC and with Articles 8 and 9 of Commission Regulation (EU) No 312/2014 as adapted and adopted by Permanent High-Level Group Decision 2019/01/PHLG-EnC;
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
underground gas storage facility means a storage facility as defined in Article 2, point (9), of Directive 2009/73/EC as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2011/02/MC-EnC, that is used for the stocking of natural gas, including balancing stock, and that is connected to a transmission or distribution system, excluding above-ground spherical or linepack storage.;
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
The Contracting Parties shall take all necessary measures, including providing for financial incentives or compensation to market participants, to meet the filling targets set pursuant to Article 6a. When ensuring that the filling targets are met, the Contracting Parties shall prioritise, where possible, market-based measures. To the extent that any of the measures provided for in this Article are duties and powers of the national regulatory authority pursuant to Article 41 of Directive 2009/73/EC as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2011/02/MC-EnC, the national regulatory au
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
an overview of the time needed for the certification procedure set out in Article 3a of Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2011/02/MC-EnC;
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
Contracting Parties shall ensure that each storage system operator, including any storage system operator controlled by a transmission system operator, is certified in accordance with the procedure laid down in this Article, either by the national regulatory authority or by another competent authority designated by the Contracting Party concerned pursuant to Article 3(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 of the European Parliament and of the Council, as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2021/15/MC-EnC (in either case, certifying authority). This Article also applies to storage sys
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
If the certifying authority concludes that a person who directly or indirectly controls, or exercises any right over, the storage system operator within the meaning of Article 9 of Directive 2009/73/EC as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2011/02/MC-EnC could endanger the security of energy supply or the essential security interests of the Energy Community or of any Contracting Party, the certifying authority shall refuse the certification. Alternatively, the certifying authority may issue a certification decision subject to conditions to ensure the sufficient mitigation of t
- Council Decision (EU) 2022/1842 of 20 September 2022 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Ministerial Council of the Energy Community with regard to the incorporation of Regulation (EU) 2022/1032 of the European Parliament and of the Council on gas storage into the Energy Community acquis Decision · Grade B
Regulation (EC) No 715/2009 on conditions for access to the natural gas transmission networks and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1775/2005, as adapted and adopted by Ministerial Council Decision 2011/02/MC-EnC of 6 October 2011 and as adapted by Permanent High-Level Group Decision No 2018/01/PHLG-EnC of 12 January 2018, shall be adapted as follows:
- Council Decision (EU) 2026/1557 of 29 June 2026 on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union within the Trade Committee established by the Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Republic of Korea, of the other part, on a revised list of arbitrators in accordance with Article 14.18 thereof and on a revised list of experts in accordance with Article 13.15 thereof Decision · Grade B
Pursuant to Article 14.18 of the Agreement, the Trade Committee, established pursuant to Article 15.1 of the Agreement, is to establish a list of 15 individuals who are willing and able to serve as arbitrators (the list of arbitrators). By means of Decision No 2/2011 of 23 December 2011, the Trade Committee established the list of arbitrators.
- Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) 7 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
During the proceedings before the Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie, Interpretative Decision No 2/2011 of the Central Tax Commission was published in Monitorul Oficial al României No 278 of 20 April 2011 (Interpretative Decision No 2/2011). That decision was adopted by the Central Tax Commission in the exercise of its role in ensuring uniform application of the tax legislation. That decision confirms the tax authorities’ approach for determining the taxable amount for VAT purposes. It is worded as follows: ... [I]n in the case of the taxable supply of structures and land, the relevant [VAT]
- Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) 7 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
The tax authorities rely on Interpretative Decision No 2/2011, which confirms the approach adopted by those authorities for calculating the applicable VAT.
- Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) 7 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
The latter court has some doubts as to the well-foundedness of Interpretative Decision No 2/2011 as regards the concept of consideration obtained and the scope of Articles 73 and 78 of the VAT Directive when the parties to a sale have made no agreement in regard to VAT. The Înalta Curte de Casaţie şi Justiţie accordingly decided to stay the proceedings and to refer the following question to the Court of Justice for a preliminary ruling: If a vendor has been reclassified as a taxable person for VAT purposes and the consideration for (price of) the supply of the immovable property has been deter
- Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) 7 November 2013 Judgment · Grade B
Should the result of that line of inquiry be that such recovery is not possible, the conclusion must be that the VAT Directive precludes a rule such as that laid down in Interpretative Decision No 2/2011.