What changed between the adopted text of 13 Mar 2024 and the adopted text of 16 Sept 2026

Removed:(23) The data submitted to the EU Custom Data Hub is to a large extent non-personal data submitted by economic operators of the goods they are trading with. Nevertheless, the data will also include personal data, in particular names of individuals acting for an economic operator or an authority. To ensure that personal data and commercial information are equally protected, it is appropriate that specific access rules, rules for confidentiality and conditions for the use of the EU Customs Data Hub are established by this Regulation. In particular, it should be established which entities may access or process data stored or otherwise available in the EU Customs Data Hub, in addition to the persons, the Commission, the customs authorities and the EU Customs Authority, balancing the needs of these entities with the need ensure that the personal and confidential data collected for customs purposes are used for additional purposes only to the minimum extent necessary.

Removed:(23a) Without prejudice to the data protection rules, especially rules on sensitive customs data and commercially sensitive data, non-personal data should be made available to third parties for specific purposes, subject to appropriate justification and upon request. Economic operators should be given the choice to not allow such disclosure. [Am. 14]

Removed:(24) To ensure that the European Anti-Fraud Office (‘OLAF’) can exercise its investigations powers in relation to fraudulent activities that are affecting the interests of the Union, it is appropriate that it has access to data from the EU Customs Data Hub that is very similar to the access by the Commission. OLAF should therefore be entitled to process the data in accordance with the conditions relating to data protection in the relevant Union legislation, including Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Regulation (EC) No 515/97. To ensure that EPPO can conduct its investigations on customs-related matters, it should be entitled to requesthave access to and process the data in the EU Customs Data Hub. To preserve the functions that are performed in Member States’ national IT systems, the tax authorities of the Member States should either obtain the possibility to process data directly within the EU Customs Data Hub or to extract data from the EU Customs Data Hub and process it through different means. As such, authorities responsible for food safety in accordance with Regulation Regulation (EU) 2017/625 of the European Parliament and of the Council and the authorities responsible for market surveillance in accordance with Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 should be provided with the right services and tools in the EU Customs Data Hub so that they can use the relevant customs data to contribute to enforcing the relevant Union legislation and for cooperating with customs authorities to minimise the risks that non-compliant products enter the Union. It is appropriate that Europol has access upon request to data in the EU Customs Data Hub to be able to perform its tasks as specified in Regulation (EU) 2016/794 of the European Parliament and of the Council. All other Union and national bodies and authorities, including the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex), should have access to non-personal data contained in the EU Customs Data Hub. [Am. 15]

Removed:(24a) Pursuant to Article 24 of Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, the competent customs authorities should without undue delay report to the EPPO any criminal conduct in respect of which it could exercise its competence in accordance with Article 22 and Article 25(2) and (3) of that Regulation. The competent customs authorities should refrain from taking measures which could jeopardize the confidentiality of criminal investigations into the same facts of the competent national judicial or law enforcement authority or the EPPO, when requested to do so by these authorities. [Am. 16]

Removed:(25) The rules and provisions regarding access to EU Customs Data Hub and exchange of information should not affect the Customs Information System (‘CIS’) established by Council Regulation (EC) No 515/97 and reporting obligations under Article 24 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1896 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Border and Coast Guard.

Removed:(26) The Commission should lay down the modalities for access of all these authorities in implementing rules, after assessing the existing safeguards that each authority or category of authorities has in place for ensuring the correct treatment of personal and commercially sensitive data. [Am. 17]

Removed:(27) It is appropriate that the EU Customs Data Hubs stores personal data for a maximum period of 10 years. This period is justified in light of the possibility for customs authorities to notify the customs debt up to 10 years after having received the necessary information about a consignment, as well as to ensure that the Commission, the EU Customs Authority, OLAF, EPPO, customs and authorities other than customs can cross-check the information in the EU Customs Data Hub against the information stored in and exchanged with other systems. Moreover, this period of time should be aligned with the storage period required by other legislation applied by the customs authorities, where such legislation is relevant for customs controls. It is also appropriate that whenever personal data is required for the purposes of judicial and administrative proceedings, investigations and during post-clearance controls, the retention period is suspended to avoid that personal data is erased and cannot be used for those purposes. [Am. 18]

Removed:(28) The protection of personal and other data in the EU Customs Data Hub should also include rules on the restriction of rights of data subjects. It is therefore appropriate that the customs authorities, the Commission or the EU Customs Authority could restrict the right of data subjects where necessary to ensure that enforcement activities, risk analysis and customs controls are not jeopardised. Moreover, such restrictions could also be applied where necessary for the purpose of protecting judicial or administrative proceedings following enforcement activities. The restrictions should be duly justified against the activities and prerogatives of customs and limited to the time necessary to preserve those prerogatives.

Removed:(29) Any processing of personal data under this Regulation should be carried out in compliance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) 2016/679, Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 of the European Parliament and of the Council, or Directive (EU) 2016/680 of the European Parliament and of the Council, within their respective scope of application.

Removed:(30) The European Data Protection Supervisor was consulted in accordance with Article 42(1) of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725 and delivered an opinion on [...]11 July 2023. The European Data Protection Supervisor recalls, from his nine recommendations, that the risk criteria to be used to select persons by means of an automated processing, when resulting in individual decisions, should be based on circumstances that are reliable and directly linked to objective factors, not entail a direct or indirect risk of discrimination, such as race, ethnic origin, religion, political orientation, sexual orientation, and not be excessively broad. [Am. 19]

Removed:(30a) In order to establish a common framework for the customs union, it is necessary for the European Union Single Window Environment for Customs (the ‘EU Single Window Environment for Customs’) to be integrated in the Union Customs Code. Therefore, Regulation (EU) 2022/2399 of the European Parliament and of the Council should be repealed and the EU Single Window Environment for Customs is added to this Regulation. [Am. 20]

Removed:(30b) To achieve a fully digital environment and an efficient goods clearance process for all parties involved in international trade, it is necessary to establish common rules for a harmonised and integrated EU Single Window Environment for Customs. That environment should include the EU Customs Data Hub and the Union non-customs systems referred to in Annex Ia of this Regulation. The EU Customs Data Hub should enable the exchange of information with Union non-customs systems in accordance with the Single Window Environment for Customs. The EU Single Window Environment for Customs should be developed taking account of the possibilities for trustworthy identification and authentication offered by Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council and the ‘once-only’ principle, where appropriate, as reiterated in Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the Council. To implement the EU Single Window Environment for Customs, it is necessary to establish, on the basis of the pilot project, a certificates exchange system, namely the electronic European Union Customs Single Window Certificates Exchange System (EU CSW-CERTEX), that interconnects the EU Customs Data Hub and Union non-customs systems managing specific non-customs formalities. It is also necessary to integrate the EU Customs Data Hub into the EU Single Window Environment for Customs, and establish a set of rules on digital administrative cooperation within the EU Single Window Environment for Customs. [Am. 21]

Removed:(30c) The EU Single Window Environment for Customs should be aligned to and made as interoperable as possible with other existing or future customs-related systems, such as the system of centralised clearance under this Regulation. Where relevant, synergies between the European Maritime Single Window environment established by Regulation (EU) 2019/1239 of the European Parliament and of the Council and the EU Single Window Environment for Customs should be sought. [Am. 22]

Removed:(30d) It is necessary for the EU Single Window Environment for Customs to integrate solutions that ensure a high level of cybersecurity in order, as far as possible, to prevent attacks that could disrupt the customs and non-customs systems, harm security of trade or inflict damage on the economy of the Union. The cybersecurity standards should be designed to evolve at the same pace as the regulatory requirements for network information security. In developing, operating and maintaining the EU Single Window Environment for Customs, the Commission and the Member States should follow appropriate guidelines issued by the European Union Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA) regarding cybersecurity. [Am. 23]

Removed:(30e) The exchange of digital information through EU CSW-CERTEX should cover Union non-customs formalities laid down in Union legislation other than customs legislation that customs authorities are entrusted to enforce. Union non-customs formalities comprise all operations which are to be carried out by a natural person, an economic operator or a partner competent authority for the international movement of goods, including the part of the movement between Member States, when required. Those formalities impose different obligations for the import, export or transit of certain goods, and their verification through customs controls is fundamental to the effective functioning of the EU Single Window Environment for Customs. EU CSW-CERTEX should cover digitalised formalities laid down in Union legislation and managed by partner competent authorities in electronic Union non-customs systems, storing the relevant information from all Member States required for goods clearance. It is therefore appropriate to identify the Union non-customs formalities and the respective Union non-customs systems that should be subject to digital cooperation through EU CSW-CERTEX. In particular, the definition of Union non-customs systems should be broad and should encompass the different situations and legal formulations in the Union legal acts that have enabled or will enable the creation and use of those systems. Moreover, it is also appropriate to specify the dates by which the specific Union non-customs system covering a Union non-customs formality and the EU Customs Data Hub should be interconnected to EU CSW-CERTEX. Those dates should reflect the dates established in Union legislation other than customs legislation for the fulfilment of the specific Union non-customs formality, in order to allow compliance through the EU Single Window Environment for Customs. In particular, EU CSW-CERTEX should initially cover sanitary and phytosanitary requirements, rules regulating the import of organic products, environmental requirements in relation to fluorinated greenhouse gases and ozone depleting substances, and formalities related to the import of cultural goods. [Am. 24]

Removed:(30f) EU CSW-CERTEX should facilitate information exchange between the EU Customs Data Hub and Union non-customs systems. Accordingly, when an economic operator submits a customs declaration or re-export declaration, which requires Union non-customs formalities to have been fulfilled, it should be possible for customs authorities and partner competent authorities to automatically and effectively exchange and verify the information that is required for the customs clearance process. Improved digital cooperation and coordination between customs authorities and partner competent authorities should lead to more integrated, faster and simpler paperless processes for goods clearance and better enforcement of and compliance with Union non-customs formalities. [Am. 25]

Removed:(30g) The Commission, in collaboration with the Member States, should develop, integrate and operate EU CSW-CERTEX, including the provision of appropriate training on its functioning and implementation to Member States. To provide appropriate, harmonised and standardised single window services at Union level for Union non-customs formalities, the Commission should connect each of the Union non-customs systems with EU CSW-CERTEX. The Commission should be responsible for interconnecting the EU Customs Data Hub with EU CSW-CERTEX, assisted, where necessary, by the EU Customs Authority. [Am. 26]

Removed:(31) A Union-level customs risk management layer is fundamental for ensuring a harmonised application of customs controls in Member States.There is currently a common risk management framework comprising the possibility of identifying common priority controls areas and common risk criteria and standards in the financial risk arena for carrying out customs controls, but it has significant shortcomings. In order to address the lack of harmonised application of customs controls and of harmonised risk management harming the financial and non-financial interests of the Union and of the Member States, it is appropriate to revise the rules to establish a more solid risk management approach addressing both financial and non-financial risks. This includes tackling the structural challenges on the risk management of financial risks identified by the European Court of Auditors. In particular, it is appropriate to describe which activities are comprised in customs risk management, in a cyclical approach. It is also important to identify the roles and responsibilities of the Commission, the EU Customs Authority and the customs authorities of the Member States. It is also essential to provide that the Commission may establish common priority controls areas and common risk criteria and standards, and may identify specific areas in the domain of other legislation applied by the customs authorities that deserve priority for common risk management and controls, without compromising security. This requires close collaboration with competent authorities enforcing other legislation applied by customs, with a specific focus on collaboration with market surveillance authorities. [Am. 27]

Removed:(32) It is therefore appropriate to introduce Union-level risk management activities and provisions to ensure the collection at Union level of comprehensive data relevant for risk management including results and evaluation of all controls. It provides for common risk analysis and the issue of corresponding Union control recommendations to customs authorities. Those control recommendations should be implemented, or reasons provided as to why they were not applied. In line with the principle of 'comply or explain', these control recommendations should be implemented, or compelling reasons provided for not applying them. A framework should be established to give certainty on situations where it is permissible to deviate from these recommendations, for instance, when other pressing priorities prevail. The possibility to issue an instruction that goods destined for the Union may not be loaded or transported should also be provided for. The analysis of Union-level risks and threats should be based on constantly updated Union-level data and should identify the measures and controls to be performed at the border crossing points of entry and exit of the Union territory. In the context of cooperation with law enforcement and security authorities in particular, Union-level risk management should, where possible, contribute to and benefit from strategic analyses and threat assessments conducted at Union level, including those carried out by the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation (Europol) and the European Border and Coast Guard Agency (Frontex) to contribute to the efficient and effective prevention of, and the fight against, crime. Serious or repeated infringement of other legislation applied by customs and detected by customs or other competent authorities should have an impact on the risk profile of importers, exporters or deemed importers. [Am. 28]

Removed:(33) The process of placing goods in a customs procedure needs to be revisited to reflect the new roles and responsibilities of the persons involved in the procedure. Thus, the responsibility for providing the information to the customs authorities is to be assumed by the person responsible for the goods: the importer, the exporter or the holder of the transit procedure, as opposed to the declarant. They should provide or make available the data to customs as soon as this is available and in any case before the release of the goods for a customs procedure, in order to allow the customs authorities to carry out a risk analysis and to take appropriate measures. As the deemed importers in e-commerce have a higher volume of transactions and the obligation to calculate the customs debt at the moment of the sale, as opposed to the moment in which goods are released, it is appropriate to adapt the timing of their reporting obligation. Deemed importers should therefore provide data on their sales of goods to be imported at the latest on the day after the acceptance of the payment. By contrast, in duly justified circumstances, the customs authorities should be able to authorise Trust and Check traders to complete the data on their released goods at a later stage, as these traders constantly share data on their transactions with customs and should be considered reliable. Such circumstances could be the impossibility of determining the final customs value of the goods at the moment of release because it is linked to a futures contract, or the need to obtain the relevant supporting documents without these having an impact on the calculation of the customs debt.

Removed:(34) To simplify the customs process for the entry of goods into the customs territory of the Union while ensuring that there is a single person responsible for those goods, different actors in the supply chain should provide their part of the relevant information on the goods concerned and link it to a specific consignment. Goods should enter only if there is an importer established in the Union that takes the responsibility for those goods. The importer should provide information on the goods to customs and the customs procedure to which they should be placed, at the earliest possible stage, if possible before the goods physically arrive. A service provider or customs agent should be able to provide the information on the importer’s name and behalf, but the importer remains responsible for ensuring compliance of the goods with the financial and non-financial risks. The carriers effectively bringing the goods should also provide some information on the goods before loading or arrival (‘advance cargo information’) and should link their information to the importer’s information where this has been previously submitted, without necessarily having access to all the data that the importer has provided. In addition, to cater for the more complex supply chains and transport networks, other persons may be required to complete the information on the goods to be brought to the customs territory of the Union. The importer, the carrier or any other person submitting information to customs should be obliged to amend it where they know that the information is no longer correct but before the customs authorities have detected irregularities that they would like to control.

Removed:(35) The customs authorities responsible for the place of first entry of the goods should carry out a risk analysis of the available information on those goods and be entitled to take a wide range of mitigation measures if they detect a risk, including requesting controls before loading or upon arrival of the goods to the customs territory of the Union, by another customs authority or by other authorities. The carrier is generally in the best position to know when the goods have arrived so they should notify customs of such arrival, using where applicable the European Maritime Single Window Environment pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2019/1239. However, to cater for the more complex supply chains and transport networks, other persons may be required to notify the arrival of the goods to the customs authorities for their risk analysis. In order to ensure that the customs authorities have advance cargo information on all goods brought to the customs territory of the Union, the carrier should be prevented from unloading goods for which there is no information, unless the customs authorities have requested the carrier to present the goods or there is an emergency situation requiring the unloading of the goods. By contrast, to smoothen the process of entry of goods for which the customs authorities have the appropriate advance cargo information, the carrier should not be required to present the goods to customs in all cases but only where the customs authorities so request or where other legislation applied by the customs authorities so requires. [Am. 29]

Removed:(36) The non-Union goods that are brought to the customs territory of the Union should be considered to be in temporary storage from the moment the carrier notifies their arrival until their placement under a customs procedure unless they are already placed in transit. To ensure appropriate customs supervision, this situation should be limited in time. It should not last more than 10 days, except in exceptional cases. If the importer needs to store the goods for a longer period, the goods should be in a customs warehouse, where the goods can be stored without time limit. The existing authorisations for temporary storage locations should therefore be converted into customs warehouse authorisations if the relevant requirements are met.

Removed:(37) It is necessary to maintain the rules that determine whether the goods are Union or non-Union goods and whether the status of Union goods can be presumed or needs to be proven, particularly where the goods temporarily leave the customs territory of the Union.

Removed:(38) Once the customs authorities have the information necessary for the relevant procedure, based on risk analysis, they should decide whether to perform further controls on the goods, to release them, to refuse or suspend their release or to let the time pass so the goods are considered released. The customs authorities should do so in cooperation with other authorities, where necessary. Accordingly, the customs authorities should refuse the release of the goods where they have evidence that the goods do not comply with applicable legal requirements. Where the customs authorities need to consult other authorities to determine whether or not the goods comply, they should suspend the release at least until the consultation takes place. In these cases, the customs authorities’ subsequent decision on the goods should depend on the other authorities’ reply. To avoid blocking both traders and authorities in the cases in which concluding on compliance requires some time, the customs authorities should have the possibility to release the goods on the condition that the trader continues informing about the location of the goods for a maximum of 15 days. Finally, in order to provide legal certainty to the traders that have provided the information on time without obliging the customs authorities to react to every consignment, the goods that have not been selected for a control after a reasonable period of timeas soon as possible and at the latest within 30 calendar days should be considered released. The Commission should be entitled to define this period of time in delegated rules, adapting it, where necessary, to the type of traffic or type of border crossing points. [Am. 30]

Removed:(39) To the extent that Trust and Check traders provide customs full access to their systems, records and operations and are considered reliable, they should be able to release their goods under the supervision of the customs authorities but without waiting for their intervention. Accordingly, Trust and Check traders should be able to release goods for any entry procedure at receipt at final destination of the goods or for any exit procedure at the place of delivery of the goods. As the Trust and Check traders are considered transparent, the arrival and/or the delivery should be properly recorded in the EU Customs Data Hub. These operators should be obliged to inform the customs authorities where a problem arises so that those authorities can take a final decision on the release. Where the internal controls systems of the Trust and Check traders are robust enough, the customs authorities should be able, in cooperation with other authorities, to authorise the traders to perform certain checks on their own. However, the customs authorities should retain the possibility to control the goods at any time. Trust and Check status should not be given to persons with repeated or serious infringements to other Union legislation applied by customs authorities. [Am. 31]

Removed:(40) It is appropriate to provide measures to regulate the transition from a system based on customs declarations to a system based on the provision of information to the central EU Customs Data Hub. Operators should have the possibility to lodge customs declarations to declare their intention to place goods under customs procedure during the transition period. However, as soon as the capabilities of the EU Customs Data Hub are available, operators should also be given the possibility to provide or make available information to the customs authorities through the EU Customs Data Hub, and the customs authorities should no longer authorise any operator to apply for simplifications in relation to the customs declaration. At the end of the transition period, all the authorisations should cease to be valid, as customs declarations will no longer exist.

Removed:(41) Article 29 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) requires that products coming from third countries are to be considered in free circulation if the import formalities have been complied with and customs duties or charges having equivalent effect have been levied. However, the release for free circulation should not be understood as a proof of compliance with other legislation applied by the customs authorities when the latter imposes specific requirements for goods to be sold or consumed in the internal market.

Removed:(42) The process of taking goods outside the customs territory of the Union should be streamlined and simplified, in line with the entry process. Thus, it is appropriate to require that there a person established in the Union should be responsible for the goods, that is the exporter. The exporter should provide or make available to customs the relevant information prior to taking the goods out of the Union, indicating whether these are Union or non-Union goods to be exported, and adapting the information necessary. In order to simplify the process and avoid potential loopholes, the concept of export should include the exit of non-Union goods, thereby encompassing also the concept of ‘re-export’, which was previously regulated as a separate concept.

Removed:(43) To ensure that there is proper risk management of the goods taken out of the customs territory of the Union, the customs office responsible of export should be required to carry out a risk analysis of the information on the goods and to take or request the appropriate measures before the goods exit. Those measures should include requesting controls to be carried out by the customs office responsible for the place of dispatch of the goods and the customs office of exit and, if necessary, by other authorities, in addition to the measures provided under the release for a customs procedure, which are also applicable where the goods are to be placed under export.

Removed:(44) To ensure that the duty-suspensive procedures are also transparent, it is appropriate to streamline the requirements provisions for the authorisations for special procedures. In particular, for the sake of clarity and legal certainty, the conditions for determining whether an opinion at Union level is necessary to assess if granting an authorisation could adversely affect the interests of Union producers, the so-called examination of the economic conditions, should be codified rather than being regulated in delegated rules. Moreover, as the effect on the Union producers’ interests may depend on the quantity of goods that are placed under the special procedure, the EU Customs Authority should be entitled to propose a certain threshold under which it is estimated that there is no negative effect on the Union producers’ interests.

Removed:(45) Article 9 of the Revised Convention for the Navigation of the Rhine refers to an Annex (Rhine Manifest) that facilitated the movement of goods on the Rhine river and its associated tributaries by considering them as a customs transit procedure across national frontiers of five Member States. According to information from customs administrations, the Rhine Manifest is not used in practice anymore as a customs transit procedure in the states bordering the Rhine. Instead, goods on the Rhine and its tributaries are now transported using the Union transit procedure established by the Code, through the New Computerised Transit System (NCTS). It is therefore appropriate to remove the reference to the Rhine Manifest from the cases where a movement of goods is considered as external transit or as Union transit.

Removed:(46) In order to increase transparency about the person responsible for complying with the obligations of the Union transit procedure and with the content and risks related to the consignment, it is appropriate to require that the holder of the transit procedure disclose at least information regarding the importer or the exporter motivating the movement, the means of transport, and the identification of the goods placed under that procedure. Such information would enable the customs authorities to supervise more effectively the Union transit procedure concerned and to carry out a risk analysis. The Union transit procedure should be compulsory unless goods are put under another customs regime immediately upon entry into or exit out of the customs territory of the Union. In the case that the importer or the exporter is not yet known, the holder of the goods should be considered as being the importer or the exporter of the goods and should be liable for the payment of customs duties and other taxes and charges. The Union transit procedure should be replaced by customs supervision if goods are imported or exported by a Trust and Check trader.

Removed:(47) An amendment to Annex 6 to the Customs Convention on the International Transport of Goods under Cover of TIR Carnets (‘TIR Convention’) that entered into force on 1 June 2021 modified the Explanatory Note 0.49 in order to grant to economic operators meeting certain requirements the possibility to become an ‘authorised consignor’, mirroring the existing facilitations granted to the economic operators recognised as an ‘authorised consignee’. It is therefore necessary to include the new possibility established by the TIR Convention in order to align the Union customs legislation with that international agreement.

Removed:(48) Applying the standard rules for duty calculation in e-commerce transactions would, in many cases, result in a disproportionate administrative burden both for the customs administrations and economic operators in particular in respect of the collection of revenues. In the interest of developing a robust and effective fiscal and customs treatment for goods imported from third countries via e-commerce transactions (‘distance sales of imported goods’), Union legislation is to be amended in order to remove the threshold under which goods of negligible value not exceeding EUR 150 per consignment are exempted from customs duties at import in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No 1186/2009, and to introduce a simplified tariff treatment for distance sales of imported goods from third countries in accordance with Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (Combined Nomenclature). In light of these proposed amendments, Certain rules of the Code on tariff classification, origin and customs value should be amended to provide for the simplifications applicable on a voluntary basis by the deemed importer when determining the customs duty in a business-to-consumer transaction qualifying as distance sales for VAT purposes. The simplifications should consist in the possibility to calculate the customs duty due by applying one of the new bucket tariffs in the Combined Nomenclature to a value calculated in a simpler way. Under the simplified rules for business-to-consumer e-commerce transactions, the net purchase price without VAT but including the total transport costs until the final destination of the product should be considered as the customs value and no origin should be required. However, if the deemed importer wishes to benefit from preferential tariff rates by proving the originating status of the goods, that person can do so by applying the standard procedures. [Am. 32]

Removed:(49) Currently, customs debts are collected by the Member State where the customs declaration is lodged. It is the choice of the trader whether to do this in the country of first entry, or to use a transit procedure and pay duties in another Member State. In 2025, this system is due to change with the roll-out of a centralised clearance IT system, which will allow Authorised Economic Operators to lodge the customs declaration in the Member State where they are established. In view of this development, it is appropriate to amend the rules defining the place where the customs debt occurs so that the import duties are paid to the Member State where the importer is established because this is the place where the customs authority can have the most complete knowledge about the records, operations and commercial behaviours of economic operators, in particular where those economic operators are granted the status of Trust and Check traders. However, it is appropriate that the customs debt of operators that are not Trust and Check traders is incurred at the place where the goods are physically located, at least until the supervision model is evaluated.

Removed:(50) In the case of e-commerce transactions, it is essential to ensure that a customs debt is paid correctly by the online intermediaries, such as internet platforms, that manage the online sale of goods to private consumers. It is therefore appropriate to clarify that the deemed importer is the person responsible for the customs debt, which would be incurred at the moment the buyer pays the e-commerce operator, in most cases, an internet platform. To simplify the burden related to such obligation, the deemed importer may be authorised to determine the import duty due and to pay its customs debts periodically, and the customs authorities should be able to have a single entry in the accounts for the purposes of the Union budget.

Removed:(51) It is appropriate to enhance the mechanism aimed at supervising more efficiently the implementation of the restrictive measures on the flow of goods that can be adopted by the Council in accordance with Article 215 TFEU. In such a case, the EU Customs Authority should provide support to the Commission and Member States to ensure that those measures are not circumvented. Customs authorities should ensure that they take all the necessary steps to comply with the measures and should inform the Commission and the EU Customs Authority accordingly.

Removed:(52) A crisis management mechanism should be put in place to address potential crises in the customs union. The lack of such a mechanism at Union level was highlighted in the Customs Action Plan. A mechanism should therefore be established that involves the EU Customs Authority as a pivotal actor in preparing, coordinating and monitoring the implementation of the practical measures and arrangements that the Commission decides to put in place when a crisis occurs. The EU Customs Authority should maintain the crisis response readiness on a permanent basis during the whole duration of the crisis. The EU Customs Authority should report back to the Commission, the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of the practical measures and arrangements. [Am. 33]

Removed:(53) The existing governance framework of the customs union lacks a clear operational management structure and does not reflect the evolution of customs since its creation in 1968. Under Regulation (EU) No 952/2013, the activities related to the management of risks in trade flows, such as implementation and decisions on controls on the ground, are the responsibility of national customs authorities. The intensity of external border traffic of goods is not equal across the Union. Despite the cooperation between national customs administrations that has existed since the creation of the customs union and that has led to the exchange of best practices, expertise, and the development of common guidelines, it has not resulted in the development of a harmonised approach and operational framework. Currently, divergent practices exist in Member States that weaken the customs union. There is no central risk analysis capacity, no common view on risk prioritisation, limited coordinated customs action and controls, and no cooperation framework of various authorities serving the singleinternal market. A central operational Union layer to pool expertise, resources and take decisions together should address such weaknesses in areas such as data management, risk management and training to make the customs union ‘act as one’. Therefore, it is appropriate that an EU Customs Authority is established. The creation of this new Authority is crucial to ensure the efficient and adequate functioning of the customs union, to centrally coordinate customs action and support the customs authorities’ activities. [Am. 34]

Removed:(54) The EU Customs Authority should be governed and operated on the basis of the principles of the Joint Statement and common approach of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on decentralised agencies of 19 July 2012.

Removed:(55) Criteria to be taken into account in order to contribute to the decision making process for choosing the EU Customs Authority seat should be the assurance that Authority can be set up on site upon the entry into force of this Regulation, the accessibility of the location and the existence of adequate education facilities for the children of staff members as well as appropriate access to the labour market, social security and medical care for both children and spouses of staff members. In view of the cooperative nature of most of the EU Customs Authority activities, and in particular the close connection that will exist between the IT systems that the Commission will maintain during the transitional period, while the EU Customs authority will build and operate the EU Customs Data Hub, it should be in a place that allows such close cooperation with the Commission, the authorities of the Union regions most relevant for international trade, and relevant Union and international bodies (for example the World Customs Organisation for facilitating practical cross fertilisation on specific subjects). Considering these criteria, the EU Customs Authority should be located at […].

Removed:(55a) Member States and the Commission have the responsibility to ensure that customs authorities are properly resourced, trained, and equipped to have the capacity to fulfil their mission, including proper investigative powers. [Am. 35]

Removed:(55b) Customs are in need of serious investments, especially in view of a sufficient number of properly trained staff in order to guarantee the functioning of Union’s customs systems which are facing an exponential increase in demands; whereas without the necessary investments into staff, digital solutions cannot achieve their full potential. Therefore, investments into digital systems should guarantee sufficient funding for staff and their training in order to require the necessary skills for state-of-the-art equipment, technology for big data analytics, detection and controls and thus, to guarantee that customs controls are conducted uniformly across the Union. [Am. 36]

Removed:(56) The Member States and, the Commission and the European Parliament should be represented on a Management Board, in order to ensure the effective functioning of the EU Customs Authority. The composition of the Management Board, including the selection of its Chairperson and Deputy-Chairperson, should respect the principles of gender balance, experience and qualification. Given the Union’s exclusive competence on the customs union, and the close link between customs and other policy fields, it is appropriate that its chairperson is elected from among those Commission representatives. In view of the effective and efficient functioning of the EU Customs Authority, the Management Board should, in particular, adopt a Single Programming Document including annual and multiannual programming, carry out its functions relating to the Authority’s budget, adopt the financial rules applicable to the Authority, appoint an Executive Director, and establish procedures for taking decisions relating to the operational tasks of the Authority by the Executive Director. The Management Board should be assisted by an Executive Board and a consultative body representing consumer organisations, business associations and other relevant non-state actors. [Am. 37]

Removed:(56a) The EU Customs Authority should establish the Customs Advisory Board, which should assist its Executive Board. It should be tasked to provide advice on the implementation of technical actions and decisions, including risk management and priority areas of control, on implementation and standardisation issues, including harmonisation activities or the need for the adaptation of the rules, provide advice on the customs dimensions of other legislation applied by customs, and provide advice in the context of any other activities of the Authority. The Customs Advisory Board should endeavour to a balanced stakeholder representation between commercial and non-commercial interest and, within the category of commercial interests, with regard to SMEs and other undertakings. [Am. 38]

Removed:(57) To guarantee its effective functioning, the EU Customs Authority should be granted an autonomous budget, with revenue coming from the general budget of the Union and any voluntary financial contribution from the Member States. In exceptional and duly justified circumstances, the EU Customs Authority should also be in the position to receive additional revenues through contribution agreements or grant agreements, and charges for publications and any other service provided by the EU Customs Authority.

Removed:(58) To fulfil their mission, customs authorities cooperate closely and regularly with market surveillance authorities, sanitary and phytosanitary control authorities, law-enforcement bodies, border management authorities, environmental protection bodies, experts on cultural goods, and many other authorities in charge of sectoral policies. Considering the evolution of the singleinternal market and the evolving role of customs, the increase in prohibitions and restrictions and e-commerce, it is necessary to structure and reinforce this cooperation at national, Union and international level. Instead of a cooperation focused on individual consignments or specific events along the supply chain, a structured cooperation framework between customs authorities and other authorities responsible for relevant policy areas should be established. Such cooperation framework should include the following aspects: the development of legislation and of policy needs in a specific area, the exchange and analysis of information, the building of overall cooperation strategy in the form of joint supervision strategies and, finally, cooperation on operational implementation, monitoring and controls. The Commission should also facilitate the application of part of the other legislation applied by the customs authorities by drawing a list of Union legislation imposing requirements on goods subject to customs controls aimed at protecting public interests such as human, animal or plants health and life, the consumers and the environment. [Am. 39]

Removed:(59) In order to increase clarity and make the cooperation framework between customs and other partner authorities more efficient, a list of services offered by customs authorities should define clearly the possible role of customs in the application of other relevant policies at the borders of the Union. In addition, the application of the cooperation framework should be monitored by the EU Customs Authority. The EU Customs Authority should work closely and cooperate with the Commission, OLAF, other relevant Union agencies and bodies, such as Europol, the EPPO and Frontex as well as specialised agencies and networks in the respective policy fields, such as the EU Product Compliance Network. [Am. 40]

Removed:(60) In an increasingly connected world, customs diplomacy and international cooperation are important aspects in the work of customs authorities around the world. International cooperation should envisage the possibility of exchange of customs data, on the basis of international agreements or autonomous legislation of the Union, through appropriate and secure means of communication, subject to the respect of confidential information and the protection of personal data, such as through the EU Customs Data Hub. That legal framework should not infringe upon the competence of Member States regarding bilateral or multilateral engagements with third countries on national tasks. [Am. 41]

Removed:(61) Despite the fact that customs legislation is harmonised through the Code, Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 only included the obligation for Member States to provide for penalties for failure to comply with the customs legislation and required such penalties to be effective, proportionate and dissuasive. Member States have, therefore, the choice of customs penalties, which vary greatly across Member States and are subject to evolution over time. A common framework establishing a minimum core of customs infringements and of non-criminal sanctions should be laid down. Non-compliance with importer, exporter and deemed importer obligations could be included in the list of customs infringements. Such framework is necessary to address the lack of uniform application and the significant divergences between Member States in the application of sanctions against breaches of customs legislation that can lead to a distortion of competition, loopholes and ‘customs shopping’. The framework should be composed of a common list of acts or omissions that should constitute customs infringements in all Member States. In determining the sanction applicable, customs authorities should define if these acts or omissions are committed intentionally or by obvious negligence. Sanctions and liabilities imposed on economic operators should be proportionate to their role in the transaction process, ensuring fairness and clarity in their application. The Commission, Member States and the EU Customs Authority should regularly exchange best practices on audit and sanctions, in order to improve coherence in the application of sanctions. [Am. 42]

Removed:(62) It is necessary to establish common provisions for extenuating or mitigating factors, as well as for aggravating circumstances, with regard to the customs infringements. The limitation period for initiating the customs infringement proceedings should be established in accordance with national law and should be between 5 and 10 years, so as to provide for a common rule based on the time limitation for the notification of customs debt. The competent jurisdiction should be the one where the infringement was committed. Cooperation between Member States is necessary in cases where the customs infringement has been committed in more than one Member State; in such cases the Member State that first initiates the proceedings should cooperate with the other customs authorities concerned by the same customs infringement.

Removed:(63) It is necessary to establish a minimum common core of customs infringements by defining them, based on the obligations laid down in this Regulation and to identical obligations provided for in other parts of the customs legislation.

Removed:(64) It is also necessary to establish a common minimum core of non-criminal sanctions providing for minimum amounts of pecuniary charges, the possibility of revocation, suspension or amendment of customs authorisations, including for Authorised Economic Operators and Trust and Check traders, as well as the confiscation of the goods. The minimum amounts of pecuniary charges should depend on whether the customs infringement has been committed intentionally or not and whether or not it has an impact on the amount of customs duties and other charges and on prohibitions or restrictions. This minimum common core of non-criminal sanctions should apply without prejudice to the national legal order of Member States, which can instead provide for criminal sanctions. Member States, the Commission and the EU Customs Authority should collaborate to gradually increase the coherence of non-criminal sanctions and their application across the Union. [Am. 43]

Removed:(65) The performance of the customs union should be evaluated at least on an annual basis to allow the Commission, with the help of the Member States, to take the appropriate policy orientations and that evaluation report should be published. The collection of information from customs authorities should be formalised and deepened, as more comprehensive reporting would improve benchmarking and could help to homogenise practices and assess the impact of customs policy decisions. It is, therefore, appropriate to introduce a legal framework for the evaluation of the performance of the customs union. To allow sufficient granularity of analysis, the performance measurement should be done not only at national level but also at border crossing point level. The EU Customs Authority should support the Commission in the evaluation process by gathering and analysing the data in the EU Customs Data Hub and identifying how customs activities and operations support the achievement of the strategic objectives and priorities of the customs union and contribute to the mission of customs authorities. In particular, the EU Customs Authority should identify key trends, strengths, weaknesses, gaps, and potential risks, and provide recommendations for improvement to the Commission. In the context of cooperation with law enforcement and security authorities in particular, the EU Customs Authority should also participate, from the operational perspective, in strategic analyses and threat assessments conducted at Union level, including those carried out by Europol and Frontex. [Am. 44]

Removed:(66) In accordance with the principle of proportionality, it is necessary and appropriate, for the achievement of the basic objectives of enabling the customs union to function effectively and implementing the common commercial policy, to lay down the rules and procedures applicable to goods brought into or taken out of the customs territory of the Union. This Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary to achieve the objectives pursued, in accordance with Article 5(4) of the Treaty on European Union.

Removed:(67) In order to supplement or amend certain non-essential elements of this Regulation, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 TFEU should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the following:

Removed:– in relation to the special fiscal territories, more detailed provisions of customs legislation to address particular circumstances pertaining to the trade in Union goods involving only one Member State;

Removed:– in relation to customs decisions, the conditions, time limits, exceptions, modalities for monitoring, suspension, annulment and revocation relating to the application, issuance and management of such decisions, including those relating to binding information;

Removed:– the minimum data requirements and specific cases for the registration of economic operators with the customs authorities responsible for the place where they are established;