Επιστολή-Καταγγελία και επιβολή προστίμου του ΣΕΕΑΕ στην Ευρωπαϊκή Επιτροπή
HELLENIC ASSOCIATION OF AUTOMOBILE MERCHANTS & IMPORTERS
El. Venizelou 248, KALLITHEA 17674, GREECE, Tel.: +302109413028 - Fax: +302109431677
Athens, 28/01/2003
ΕUROPEAN COMMISSION
Secretariat General
200, rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200
B-1049 Brussels
Related issues:
- European Court of Justice. Case C- 375/95 of 23 October 1997: “European Commission v Hellenic Republic”.
- Taxation of motor vehicles - Discrimination. Non-execution by Greece of Court judgment. Case C-393/98 “Gomez Valente’’.
- Special tax on second-hand vehicles. Non-application of Case Law in Greece.
Sirs,
1. The Greek Car Merchants & Importers Association has the honor to address the present complaint to the European Commission and the European Parliament in order to denounce the continuing non-execution by the Greek Government of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Case C-375/95. Despite the fact that more than 5 years have now elapsed since the Court condemned Greece, the European Commission has not yet taken enough action under the Article 228 of the EC Treaty in order to bring Greece again to the Court of Justice for non-compliance with the C-375/95 and propose to the Court a daily fine until Greece fully comply with the judgment.
As you may be aware in Case C-387/97 “Commission v. Hellenic Republic” - Sanctions - Waste management, the Court acting on application by the Commission imposed a daily fine of 20.000 Euros to the Hellenic Republic for non-compliance with the ruling C-45/91 of 7.04.1992.
2. In its Communication COM (2002)725 of 13.12.2002 on better monitoring of the application of Community law, the Commission sets out the conditions for effective management of controls and action against infringements. The Commission is referred to an efficient procedure under which: "the prosecution of suspected infringements of Community legislation is conducted in several steps, intended to dispel any doubts or put an end to the infringement in question". The Court of Justice has established the reciprocal nature of the sincere cooperation imposed by Article 10 on both the Member State and the Community institutions.
In point 3.1 of the Communication “Effective use of the available instruments in accordance with the seriousness of the infringement” the Commission states that it undertakes the responsibility to carry out its tasks concerning the treatment of infringement effectively and impartially.
In its White Paper on European Governance COM(2001)428 the Commission announced that: "it would conduct surveillance and bring proceedings against infringements effectively and fairly by applying priority criteria reflecting the seriousness of the potential or known failure to comply with the legislation".
Point 3.1 of Communication COM(2002)725 ranks, inter alia, the following infringement as serious: “(b) Infringements that undermine the smooth functioning of the Community legal system: …Failure to comply with a judgment given by the Court of Justice against a Member State on an application from the Commission for failure to comply with Community law (Article 228 of the EC Treaty)”
Point 3.1 concludes that:
“…The Commission will apply the priority criteria relating to the seriousness of breaches in order to manage its monitoring work and its action against infringement rapidly and fairly, in an open dialogue with the citizens and with the Member States.
… The application of the priority criteria will be assessed annually, when the report on the monitoring of the application of Community law is discussed”.
3. In his reply of 27.03.2002 to Question P-0351/02 posed by Mr. Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS, Commissioner Mr BOLKESTEIN admitted that the Commission is aware that Greece does not respect the C-375/95 and that the procedure of Article 228 of the EC Treaty was opened. Regarding Case C-393/98 he mentioned that the Commission examines whether a new procedure against Greece on the basis of Article 226 of the EC Treaty should be opened.
To our knowledge, Articles 226 and 228 include three steps before the Court of Justice takes a decision, the duration of which depends on the reciprocal and sincere cooperation between the Member State and the Commission aiming at avoiding a Court decision.
From the reply of Mr. BOLKESTEIN one suspects that Greece has not respected the reciprocal and sincere cooperation with the European Commission in order to find an agreeable way to comply rapidly with the judgments. Greece has instead doubled, since 1.1.2001, the special levy imposed on the imported used cars breaching therefore further the requirements of the Court decision C-375/95.
Mr. BOLKESTEIN replied: ‘‘Mais que, a partir du 1er Janvier 2001, la Grece aurait reintroduit une discrimination fiscale par les biais d' un taux plus eleve de la nouvelle taxe d' immatriculation, au detriment des voitures d' occasion importees par rapport aux voitures d 'occasion qui se trouvent deja sur le marche national et qui ont ete fabriquees selon la meme technologie «antipollution»’’.
In his question, Mr. PAPAYANNAKIS had informed the Commission that the introduction on 1.1.2001 of this higher tax resulted in the reduction of the imported used cars to just 3% (of the total volume of imported cars in Greece) in comparison to 31% which was the previous year and that around five hundred used cars dealers in Greece were driven out of business.
4. Our Association is prepared to address a petition to the Petition Committee of the European Parliament and write a letter to the European Ombudsman with a request to carry out an inquiry for establishing whether an effective and impartial response on behalf of the Commission services to monitor the implementation by Greece of the judgment in case C-375/95 has indeed been used.
The European Parliament and the European Ombudsman should examine whether there has been a maladministration by the Commission in its treatment of the Court ruling C-375/95 and whether the Commission has breached the rules contained in the Communication COM(2002)725. In this context we would like, if accessible, to receive copies of the documents or information on the steps of Article 228 of the EC Treaty used by the European Commission vis-a-vis Greece since 23.10.1997. We would like to know also the arguments of the Greek authorities that led the Commission to slow down the complete execution of Article 228. We also seek similar information with regard to Case C-393/98.
With regard to the European Ombudsman, allow us to refer to the critical remarks made against the European Commission for maladministration in the context of the complaint 995/98/OV - Metro of Thessalonica. Amongst others, the Mediator although confirmed the Commission's discretionary power in relation to treatment of infringements, he however stressed that this power cannot be exercised arbitrarily. Article 288, paragraph 2 of the EC Treaty provides that “in the case of non-contractual liability, the Community shall, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of Member States, make good any damage caused by its institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties”.
The Greek authorities by infringing continuously the European Court of Justice decisions and the provisions of Community legislation such as Article 90 without the competent Commission services having taken adequate corrective action as required by the rules of the Communication COM(2002)725, have taken the opportunity to receive illegally significant financial amounts on the detriment of the citizens including citizens of other Member States having a car in Greece. Our Association is attaching hereby a report, which presents the economic data of the illegally received amounts and submits it to the European Commission and the European Parliament.
5. Regarding possible announcements and promises by the Greek Government for changes which will reduce the fiscal charges on motor cars, we inform the Commission that in the Report on the reform of me Greek fiscal system presented in March 2002, in chapter 3, point 6 it is mentioned "…our country overcharges the acquisition of cars, while it charges relatively less for their detention and even less for their use... ...has examined carefully the proposal of the working group for transferring of a large part of the charging from the acquisition to the detention and the circulation of the car, it considers however that the existing system should be maintained".
One concludes that the Greek authorities have no intention to lower the excessive taxation burdening the sale of cars in Greece. Last month the Greek Parliament approved the State budget for 2003 does not provide for the reduction of taxes on imported used cars in 2003.
6. Taking into account all the above elements, we ask the European Commission to engage immediately the third stage of Article 228 of the EC Treaty in order to bring the Hellenic Republic before the Court of Justice with a proposed daily fine for non-compliance with judgment C-375/95 and accelerate the procedure of Article 226 of the EC Treaty in order to bring the Hellenic Republic to the Court of Justice for non -adaptation of its national law to the requirements of judgment C-393/98.
In the framework of the execution of Articles 226 and 228 of the EC Treaty, the Commission sets normally a deadline of two months for Member States to respond to letters of formal notice and reasoned opinion.
We would greatly appreciate it if you could send us the information requested and indicate the time period within which Greece could be brought, as a matter of priority, to the Court of Justice by the Commission with an application for a daily fine for non-compliance with judgment C-375/95.
We expect to receive an answer within 15 working days from the reception of the present letter in accordance with the Code of Good Conduct of the Commission Services in their relations with the public.
The present letter is sent also to Honorable Members of the European Parliament.
Yours sincerely
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD THE SECRETARY GENERAL
LOUCAS VASILIAS KONSTANTINOS KIRATSOS
Copy: Mr. O' Sullivan D. __________________ Secretary General of the EC.
Mr. Petite M. ______ Director General of the Legal Service of the EC.
Mr. Vanden Abeele ___________________ Director General - TAXUD
Για να δείτε το πρωτότυπο έγγραφο, πατήστε εδώ
El. Venizelou 248, KALLITHEA 17674, GREECE, Tel.: +302109413028 - Fax: +302109431677
Athens, 28/01/2003
ΕUROPEAN COMMISSION
Secretariat General
200, rue de la Loi/Wetstraat 200
B-1049 Brussels
Related issues:
- European Court of Justice. Case C- 375/95 of 23 October 1997: “European Commission v Hellenic Republic”.
- Taxation of motor vehicles - Discrimination. Non-execution by Greece of Court judgment. Case C-393/98 “Gomez Valente’’.
- Special tax on second-hand vehicles. Non-application of Case Law in Greece.
Sirs,
1. The Greek Car Merchants & Importers Association has the honor to address the present complaint to the European Commission and the European Parliament in order to denounce the continuing non-execution by the Greek Government of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Case C-375/95. Despite the fact that more than 5 years have now elapsed since the Court condemned Greece, the European Commission has not yet taken enough action under the Article 228 of the EC Treaty in order to bring Greece again to the Court of Justice for non-compliance with the C-375/95 and propose to the Court a daily fine until Greece fully comply with the judgment.
As you may be aware in Case C-387/97 “Commission v. Hellenic Republic” - Sanctions - Waste management, the Court acting on application by the Commission imposed a daily fine of 20.000 Euros to the Hellenic Republic for non-compliance with the ruling C-45/91 of 7.04.1992.
2. In its Communication COM (2002)725 of 13.12.2002 on better monitoring of the application of Community law, the Commission sets out the conditions for effective management of controls and action against infringements. The Commission is referred to an efficient procedure under which: "the prosecution of suspected infringements of Community legislation is conducted in several steps, intended to dispel any doubts or put an end to the infringement in question". The Court of Justice has established the reciprocal nature of the sincere cooperation imposed by Article 10 on both the Member State and the Community institutions.
In point 3.1 of the Communication “Effective use of the available instruments in accordance with the seriousness of the infringement” the Commission states that it undertakes the responsibility to carry out its tasks concerning the treatment of infringement effectively and impartially.
In its White Paper on European Governance COM(2001)428 the Commission announced that: "it would conduct surveillance and bring proceedings against infringements effectively and fairly by applying priority criteria reflecting the seriousness of the potential or known failure to comply with the legislation".
Point 3.1 of Communication COM(2002)725 ranks, inter alia, the following infringement as serious: “(b) Infringements that undermine the smooth functioning of the Community legal system: …Failure to comply with a judgment given by the Court of Justice against a Member State on an application from the Commission for failure to comply with Community law (Article 228 of the EC Treaty)”
Point 3.1 concludes that:
“…The Commission will apply the priority criteria relating to the seriousness of breaches in order to manage its monitoring work and its action against infringement rapidly and fairly, in an open dialogue with the citizens and with the Member States.
… The application of the priority criteria will be assessed annually, when the report on the monitoring of the application of Community law is discussed”.
3. In his reply of 27.03.2002 to Question P-0351/02 posed by Mr. Mihail PAPAYANNAKIS, Commissioner Mr BOLKESTEIN admitted that the Commission is aware that Greece does not respect the C-375/95 and that the procedure of Article 228 of the EC Treaty was opened. Regarding Case C-393/98 he mentioned that the Commission examines whether a new procedure against Greece on the basis of Article 226 of the EC Treaty should be opened.
To our knowledge, Articles 226 and 228 include three steps before the Court of Justice takes a decision, the duration of which depends on the reciprocal and sincere cooperation between the Member State and the Commission aiming at avoiding a Court decision.
From the reply of Mr. BOLKESTEIN one suspects that Greece has not respected the reciprocal and sincere cooperation with the European Commission in order to find an agreeable way to comply rapidly with the judgments. Greece has instead doubled, since 1.1.2001, the special levy imposed on the imported used cars breaching therefore further the requirements of the Court decision C-375/95.
Mr. BOLKESTEIN replied: ‘‘Mais que, a partir du 1er Janvier 2001, la Grece aurait reintroduit une discrimination fiscale par les biais d' un taux plus eleve de la nouvelle taxe d' immatriculation, au detriment des voitures d' occasion importees par rapport aux voitures d 'occasion qui se trouvent deja sur le marche national et qui ont ete fabriquees selon la meme technologie «antipollution»’’.
In his question, Mr. PAPAYANNAKIS had informed the Commission that the introduction on 1.1.2001 of this higher tax resulted in the reduction of the imported used cars to just 3% (of the total volume of imported cars in Greece) in comparison to 31% which was the previous year and that around five hundred used cars dealers in Greece were driven out of business.
4. Our Association is prepared to address a petition to the Petition Committee of the European Parliament and write a letter to the European Ombudsman with a request to carry out an inquiry for establishing whether an effective and impartial response on behalf of the Commission services to monitor the implementation by Greece of the judgment in case C-375/95 has indeed been used.
The European Parliament and the European Ombudsman should examine whether there has been a maladministration by the Commission in its treatment of the Court ruling C-375/95 and whether the Commission has breached the rules contained in the Communication COM(2002)725. In this context we would like, if accessible, to receive copies of the documents or information on the steps of Article 228 of the EC Treaty used by the European Commission vis-a-vis Greece since 23.10.1997. We would like to know also the arguments of the Greek authorities that led the Commission to slow down the complete execution of Article 228. We also seek similar information with regard to Case C-393/98.
With regard to the European Ombudsman, allow us to refer to the critical remarks made against the European Commission for maladministration in the context of the complaint 995/98/OV - Metro of Thessalonica. Amongst others, the Mediator although confirmed the Commission's discretionary power in relation to treatment of infringements, he however stressed that this power cannot be exercised arbitrarily. Article 288, paragraph 2 of the EC Treaty provides that “in the case of non-contractual liability, the Community shall, in accordance with the general principles common to the laws of Member States, make good any damage caused by its institutions or by its servants in the performance of their duties”.
The Greek authorities by infringing continuously the European Court of Justice decisions and the provisions of Community legislation such as Article 90 without the competent Commission services having taken adequate corrective action as required by the rules of the Communication COM(2002)725, have taken the opportunity to receive illegally significant financial amounts on the detriment of the citizens including citizens of other Member States having a car in Greece. Our Association is attaching hereby a report, which presents the economic data of the illegally received amounts and submits it to the European Commission and the European Parliament.
5. Regarding possible announcements and promises by the Greek Government for changes which will reduce the fiscal charges on motor cars, we inform the Commission that in the Report on the reform of me Greek fiscal system presented in March 2002, in chapter 3, point 6 it is mentioned "…our country overcharges the acquisition of cars, while it charges relatively less for their detention and even less for their use... ...has examined carefully the proposal of the working group for transferring of a large part of the charging from the acquisition to the detention and the circulation of the car, it considers however that the existing system should be maintained".
One concludes that the Greek authorities have no intention to lower the excessive taxation burdening the sale of cars in Greece. Last month the Greek Parliament approved the State budget for 2003 does not provide for the reduction of taxes on imported used cars in 2003.
6. Taking into account all the above elements, we ask the European Commission to engage immediately the third stage of Article 228 of the EC Treaty in order to bring the Hellenic Republic before the Court of Justice with a proposed daily fine for non-compliance with judgment C-375/95 and accelerate the procedure of Article 226 of the EC Treaty in order to bring the Hellenic Republic to the Court of Justice for non -adaptation of its national law to the requirements of judgment C-393/98.
In the framework of the execution of Articles 226 and 228 of the EC Treaty, the Commission sets normally a deadline of two months for Member States to respond to letters of formal notice and reasoned opinion.
We would greatly appreciate it if you could send us the information requested and indicate the time period within which Greece could be brought, as a matter of priority, to the Court of Justice by the Commission with an application for a daily fine for non-compliance with judgment C-375/95.
We expect to receive an answer within 15 working days from the reception of the present letter in accordance with the Code of Good Conduct of the Commission Services in their relations with the public.
The present letter is sent also to Honorable Members of the European Parliament.
Yours sincerely
THE PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD THE SECRETARY GENERAL
LOUCAS VASILIAS KONSTANTINOS KIRATSOS
Copy: Mr. O' Sullivan D. __________________ Secretary General of the EC.
Mr. Petite M. ______ Director General of the Legal Service of the EC.
Mr. Vanden Abeele ___________________ Director General - TAXUD
Για να δείτε το πρωτότυπο έγγραφο, πατήστε εδώ