Lecture Notes
8.11.2021
Lecture 1- Movement of Goods
Art 3(2)TEU→ area without internal frontiers
White Paper on completing the internal market→ 1. Physical Barrier
- Border control between MS
- Because: additional costs for MS
and businesses
- Wealth Creation
2. Technical Barrier
- Different technical standards
from products maintained by MS
- Case law of COJ on mutual
recognition of CJEU
- Ex: Cassis De Dijon Case
3. Fiscal Barrier
- No barriers→ integration
- Union Citizenship 1992
- 1985: Political symbolism by which Comm describes EU unity
- NO: National borders visible to citizens to show EU
EU without Single Market→ loss of wealth
Sovereignty→ MS can check what enters into state
Internal Market Basis
Art 26 TFEU
- Ensuring functioning of internal market
- No internal frontiers
Three Models of Internal Market
HOST COUNTRY HARMONISE HOME COUNTRY
Wealth -Different levels of -Economies of scale +/- regulatory
protection across -Diversity of competition
MS preferences
-Higher production -Rule creation &
cost Changing difficult
Institution MS EU Legi COJ (mutual recog)
Sovereignty -Low level of -Vertical transfer of -Reassignment of
sovereignty loss sovereign powers sovereign powers
-Horizontal
Democracy Under inclusive Democratic Deficit Favoring Capital
, Company/Citizen of Eu over workers
does not have say in
process in other MS
EU Treaties Article 36 TFEU Article 114 TFEU Mutual Recognition
Ex: Cassis de Dijon
1) Host country control
- International market model after WW2
- Host country permits product into its territory
- Own rules apply
- No descrimination
- State where products enter→ justification from free movement of
goods (Art 56 TFEU)
- Sovereignty is maintained
2) Harmonised model
- Resembles market model of a single state
- EU acts as super legislature that sets common rules across all MS
- Article 114 TFEU
3) Home country control
- Resembles a federal market: similar to market of a state Ex: US
- Mutual recognition
- Transfer sovereignty Horizontally
- Rules are chosen by State
Techniques of Economic Integration
Negative Integration: eliminating obstacles & removing discriminatory restrictions
- Producers need to comply with both host state and home state
- Works with litigation
- COJ infringement procedure
- ONLY: some infringement of EU MS
- Requires litigation to eliminate rules (Art 267 & 268 TFEU)
1. Law is only reactive
2. Requires a lot of resources
- As private individual many costs (lawyer)
Positive Integration: Adoption of common rules and standards
- Through Directive and Regulations
Free Movement of Goods
Case 7/68 Commission v Italy→ defined goods
- Good is a product which can be valued in money and forms commercial transaction
- Products lawfully produced
EX: Cannabis does not→ if not legal in another MS then not a good
, - Negative and Positive value
- Also intangible products
Ex: Trash is a good
Electricity→ intangible product
- It constitutes a good
- Transmission of a good
- Good NOT service provided
Customs Union
Art 28(1) TFEU
- EU constitutes a customs union
- Involve prohibition of customs duties in import/exports MS
Internal Dimension→ Abolition of internal Barriers
- Fiscal Rules: Art 30 + 110 TFEU
- Non fiscal rules: Art 34-36 TFEU
External Dimension→ Common external tariff
- Trade policy towards 3rd countries
- Goods from 3 country→ Complies with customs formalities
- It is in free circulation
- Products from US: customs formalities in Rotterdam→
in all MS is okay
- Political aspects→ no EU customs Union
- Customs revenue part of EU’s own resources
- MS authorities→ custom duties
- Revenue of EU→ Common External Custom Tariff
Fiscal Rules: Custom Duties and Charges
Art 30 TFEU→ Customs duties on imports and exports
- Definition of charges having equivalent effect→ Case 2 and 3/69 Diamantarbeiders
- Amount of being charged on the product→ does not matter
- Prohibition
2 Exceptions→ 1. CEE as service by State (Case Commission v Italy)
- Charge Italy imposed to importers
- COJ: Service by State must be of Direct Benefit to
importer
- Benefits general public
2. Inspections required by EU law (Case Commission v Germany)
- Germany imposed duties on veterinary inspections
- EU law: required
Quantitative restrictions→ can be imposed under certain circumstances
Ex: Covid face masks
, Fiscal Rules: Discriminatory taxation
Article 110 TFEU
- No MS impose direct or indirect taxation on imported products
- Prevent MS to circumventing Art 30
- Art 30 TFEU: when product crosses frontier and comes from outside
- Art 110 TFEU: product is inside territory of State
- Requires neutrality of taxation of importer products
- Indirect discrimination→ French car taxation
- Case Humblot
- Def: If National rule taxes all products the same way→
but indirectly discriminates towards foreign products
- Justification: only indirect discrimination
- Objective reasons
- Similarity of products → 1. Characteristics
2. Method of manufacturing
3. Consumer perception
Ex: Wine v Beer
→ if goods not similar 110(2) TFEU
→ if goods ARE similar 110(1) TFEU
Discriminatory Taxation
Art 110(2) TFEU → no MS shall impose on products of MS any internal taxation
- If products are different
Ex: Case Commission v UK
- Different price for wine and beer
- Competitive relations ?
2 stage test: 1. Competitive Relationship
2. Protective effect of taxation system
- Not substitutable → diff taxation system
- Wine higher tax→ influences consumers
Boundaries Art 30 TFEU and Art 110 TFEU
1. Mutually exclusive
- Either one applies
2. Art 30 TFEU
- Customs duty per se unlawful
- Not justified
3. Art 110 TFEU
- Not per se unlawful
- Can be justified → Ex taxation
Non Fiscal Measures: Quantitative Restrictions and MEE
Art 34 TFEU → Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent
effect shall be prohibited between MS
8.11.2021
Lecture 1- Movement of Goods
Art 3(2)TEU→ area without internal frontiers
White Paper on completing the internal market→ 1. Physical Barrier
- Border control between MS
- Because: additional costs for MS
and businesses
- Wealth Creation
2. Technical Barrier
- Different technical standards
from products maintained by MS
- Case law of COJ on mutual
recognition of CJEU
- Ex: Cassis De Dijon Case
3. Fiscal Barrier
- No barriers→ integration
- Union Citizenship 1992
- 1985: Political symbolism by which Comm describes EU unity
- NO: National borders visible to citizens to show EU
EU without Single Market→ loss of wealth
Sovereignty→ MS can check what enters into state
Internal Market Basis
Art 26 TFEU
- Ensuring functioning of internal market
- No internal frontiers
Three Models of Internal Market
HOST COUNTRY HARMONISE HOME COUNTRY
Wealth -Different levels of -Economies of scale +/- regulatory
protection across -Diversity of competition
MS preferences
-Higher production -Rule creation &
cost Changing difficult
Institution MS EU Legi COJ (mutual recog)
Sovereignty -Low level of -Vertical transfer of -Reassignment of
sovereignty loss sovereign powers sovereign powers
-Horizontal
Democracy Under inclusive Democratic Deficit Favoring Capital
, Company/Citizen of Eu over workers
does not have say in
process in other MS
EU Treaties Article 36 TFEU Article 114 TFEU Mutual Recognition
Ex: Cassis de Dijon
1) Host country control
- International market model after WW2
- Host country permits product into its territory
- Own rules apply
- No descrimination
- State where products enter→ justification from free movement of
goods (Art 56 TFEU)
- Sovereignty is maintained
2) Harmonised model
- Resembles market model of a single state
- EU acts as super legislature that sets common rules across all MS
- Article 114 TFEU
3) Home country control
- Resembles a federal market: similar to market of a state Ex: US
- Mutual recognition
- Transfer sovereignty Horizontally
- Rules are chosen by State
Techniques of Economic Integration
Negative Integration: eliminating obstacles & removing discriminatory restrictions
- Producers need to comply with both host state and home state
- Works with litigation
- COJ infringement procedure
- ONLY: some infringement of EU MS
- Requires litigation to eliminate rules (Art 267 & 268 TFEU)
1. Law is only reactive
2. Requires a lot of resources
- As private individual many costs (lawyer)
Positive Integration: Adoption of common rules and standards
- Through Directive and Regulations
Free Movement of Goods
Case 7/68 Commission v Italy→ defined goods
- Good is a product which can be valued in money and forms commercial transaction
- Products lawfully produced
EX: Cannabis does not→ if not legal in another MS then not a good
, - Negative and Positive value
- Also intangible products
Ex: Trash is a good
Electricity→ intangible product
- It constitutes a good
- Transmission of a good
- Good NOT service provided
Customs Union
Art 28(1) TFEU
- EU constitutes a customs union
- Involve prohibition of customs duties in import/exports MS
Internal Dimension→ Abolition of internal Barriers
- Fiscal Rules: Art 30 + 110 TFEU
- Non fiscal rules: Art 34-36 TFEU
External Dimension→ Common external tariff
- Trade policy towards 3rd countries
- Goods from 3 country→ Complies with customs formalities
- It is in free circulation
- Products from US: customs formalities in Rotterdam→
in all MS is okay
- Political aspects→ no EU customs Union
- Customs revenue part of EU’s own resources
- MS authorities→ custom duties
- Revenue of EU→ Common External Custom Tariff
Fiscal Rules: Custom Duties and Charges
Art 30 TFEU→ Customs duties on imports and exports
- Definition of charges having equivalent effect→ Case 2 and 3/69 Diamantarbeiders
- Amount of being charged on the product→ does not matter
- Prohibition
2 Exceptions→ 1. CEE as service by State (Case Commission v Italy)
- Charge Italy imposed to importers
- COJ: Service by State must be of Direct Benefit to
importer
- Benefits general public
2. Inspections required by EU law (Case Commission v Germany)
- Germany imposed duties on veterinary inspections
- EU law: required
Quantitative restrictions→ can be imposed under certain circumstances
Ex: Covid face masks
, Fiscal Rules: Discriminatory taxation
Article 110 TFEU
- No MS impose direct or indirect taxation on imported products
- Prevent MS to circumventing Art 30
- Art 30 TFEU: when product crosses frontier and comes from outside
- Art 110 TFEU: product is inside territory of State
- Requires neutrality of taxation of importer products
- Indirect discrimination→ French car taxation
- Case Humblot
- Def: If National rule taxes all products the same way→
but indirectly discriminates towards foreign products
- Justification: only indirect discrimination
- Objective reasons
- Similarity of products → 1. Characteristics
2. Method of manufacturing
3. Consumer perception
Ex: Wine v Beer
→ if goods not similar 110(2) TFEU
→ if goods ARE similar 110(1) TFEU
Discriminatory Taxation
Art 110(2) TFEU → no MS shall impose on products of MS any internal taxation
- If products are different
Ex: Case Commission v UK
- Different price for wine and beer
- Competitive relations ?
2 stage test: 1. Competitive Relationship
2. Protective effect of taxation system
- Not substitutable → diff taxation system
- Wine higher tax→ influences consumers
Boundaries Art 30 TFEU and Art 110 TFEU
1. Mutually exclusive
- Either one applies
2. Art 30 TFEU
- Customs duty per se unlawful
- Not justified
3. Art 110 TFEU
- Not per se unlawful
- Can be justified → Ex taxation
Non Fiscal Measures: Quantitative Restrictions and MEE
Art 34 TFEU → Quantitative restrictions on imports and all measures having equivalent
effect shall be prohibited between MS
