Review of the EU legislation for 06/12/2024

Here’s a concise review of the key legal acts from the provided text:

1. Carbon Removals Certification Framework

A voluntary EU framework for certifying carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage. It establishes quality criteria, third-party verification processes, and a governance system including a Union registry by 2028. The framework requires accurate quantification of carbon benefits, monitoring mechanisms, and sustainability criteria.

2. Maritime Accident Investigations

Updates to maritime accident investigation rules requiring mandatory investigation of serious casualties, new assessment requirements for small fishing vessels, and enhanced independence for investigation authorities. Includes modernized accident reporting and database requirements.

3. Deforestation Information System

Creates an information system within TRACES platform for managing due diligence statements related to deforestation. Operators can submit and amend statements, with automated risk profiling and 10-year data storage requirements.

4. European Statistics Modernization

Enhances the European Statistical System by enabling crisis response statistics and access to private data. Introduces new data sharing frameworks between statistical authorities and protection measures for confidential data.

5. Environmental Economic Accounts

Adds three new modules to environmental economic accounts: forest accounts, environmental subsidies accounts, and ecosystem accounts. Establishes reporting requirements starting 2023/2024 with specific deadlines for data transmission.

6. Court Decisions

Several significant rulings covering:
– Competition law regarding car warranties
– Customs duties interest and penalties
– Anti-money laundering rules for accountants
– Consumer protection in gold valuation services
– VAT treatment for business cessation
– European payment order procedures

Review of each of legal acts published today:

Regulation (EU) 2024/3012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a Union certification framework for permanent carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products

This Regulation establishes a voluntary Union certification framework for permanent carbon removals, carbon farming and carbon storage in products. It aims to facilitate and encourage high-quality carbon removals and soil emission reductions while ensuring environmental integrity and transparency.The Regulation creates a comprehensive framework with three main components:

• Quality criteria for carbon removal activities including quantification, additionality, storage monitoring and sustainability requirements
• Certification process through independent third-party verification
• Governance system with certification schemes recognized by the European Commission and a Union registry

Key provisions include:

• Detailed rules for quantifying net carbon removal benefits and soil emission reductions in an accurate and conservative manner
• Requirements for activities to be additional and go beyond standard practice
• Monitoring and liability mechanisms to ensure long-term carbon storage
• Minimum sustainability criteria and co-benefits, particularly for biodiversity
• Certification through accredited certification bodies and recognized certification schemes
• Establishment of a Union registry by 2028 to track certified units and avoid double counting
• Regular review and updates of methodologies based on scientific progress

The Regulation aims to support the EU’s climate neutrality objectives under the Paris Agreement while ensuring high environmental integrity standards and avoiding greenwashing. It provides a harmonized framework that can be used by both public and private certification schemes on a voluntary basis.

Directive (EU) 2024/3017 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 amending Directive 2009/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the fundamental principles governing the investigation of accidents in the maritime transport sector and repealing Commission Regulation (EU) No 1286/2011 (Text with EEA relevance)

This Directive amends Directive 2009/18/EC which establishes fundamental principles for investigating accidents in maritime transport. The key aspects include:The Directive updates and modernizes the framework for maritime accident investigations by incorporating recent changes in international maritime law and technological developments. It aims to improve maritime safety and protect the marine environment through better accident investigations.The main structural changes include new definitions aligned with IMO standards, clarified obligations for investigating accidents, enhanced provisions for investigative authorities’ independence and capabilities, and updated requirements for accident reporting and data sharing.Key provisions include:

• Mandatory investigation of very serious marine casualties
• New preliminary assessment requirement for accidents involving fishing vessels under 15 meters
• Enhanced independence and resources for investigation authorities
• Strengthened cooperation framework between member states
• Updated confidentiality and data protection requirements
• New training and operational support mechanisms
• Modernized accident reporting and database requirements

The Directive repeals Commission Regulation 1286/2011 and requires Member States to transpose it into national law by June 27, 2027. It provides detailed technical requirements for investigations while maintaining focus on learning lessons to prevent future accidents rather than determining liability.

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/3084 of 4 December 2024 on the functioning of the information system pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2023/1115 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the making available on the Union market and the export from the Union of certain commodities and products associated with deforestation and forest degradation

This Regulation establishes rules for the functioning of the Information System designed to minimize the EU’s contribution to deforestation through due diligence obligations on operators and traders. The system will facilitate the submission and management of Due Diligence Statements and information exchange between competent authorities regarding commodities and products associated with deforestation.The act consists of 5 chapters covering general provisions, system functioning, responsibilities, data processing/security, and final provisions. It details how operators submit statements, how authorities conduct risk profiling, and how reference numbers are assigned.Key provisions include:

• The Information System will be developed as part of the TRACES platform and maintained by the Commission
• Operators can amend/withdraw statements within 72 hours of submission, with some exceptions
• Automated risk profiling will be conducted on all statements
• Personal data will be stored for 10 years and processed only as necessary for implementation
• Strict data protection and security measures must be followed by all system users
• The system will be available in all EU official languages

Regulation (EU) 2024/3018 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 amending Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 on European statistics (Text with EEA relevance)

This regulation amends Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 on European statistics to modernize and strengthen the European Statistical System (ESS) framework. Here are the key aspects:The regulation introduces new provisions for statistical response to crisis situations, allowing the Commission (Eurostat) to undertake urgent statistical actions when necessary to respond to emergencies. It establishes procedures for Member States to voluntarily participate in such urgent statistical actions with agreed timeframes and quality requirements.The regulation creates a framework for accessing privately held data for statistical purposes. It gives National Statistical Institutes (NSIs) and Eurostat the right to request data from private holders when strictly necessary for European statistics. The regulation sets out procedures for such requests, including compensation mechanisms and enforcement measures including potential fines for non-compliance.Key provisions include:

• New definitions of data-related concepts like ‘data holder’, ‘data source’, and ‘data access’
• Rules for data sharing between statistical authorities and with the European System of Central Banks
• Requirements for protecting confidential data and personal data
• Framework for developing new experimental statistics
• Provisions for NSIs to contribute to national data governance frameworks
• Requirements for evaluation and review of the regulation by 2029

The regulation aims to modernize European statistics by enabling better use of new data sources while ensuring appropriate safeguards for data protection and confidentiality. It provides mechanisms for faster statistical response to crises and promotes data sharing while maintaining statistical quality standards.

Regulation (EU) 2024/3024 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 amending Regulation (EU) No 691/2011 as regards introducing new environmental economic account modules (Text with EEA relevance)

This Regulation amends Regulation (EU) No 691/2011 on European environmental economic accounts by introducing three new environmental economic account modules:1. Forest accounts – to record data on forest resources and economic activity in forestry/logging industry2. Environmental subsidies and similar transfers accounts – to track government payments supporting environmental protection3. Ecosystem accounts – to measure the extent and condition of ecosystems and their services to society/economy

Structure and Main Provisions:

• The Regulation contains 3 articles and adds 3 new detailed annexes (VII-IX) specifying requirements for each new module
• Key changes include:
  • New reporting requirements for forest resources, environmental subsidies, and ecosystem services data
  • Creation of an Environmental Economic Account Statistical Data Portal by end of 2024
  • Updated references from EU-28 to EU-27 and ESA 95 to ESA 2010
  • New provisions for financing implementation through the Single Market Programme

Key Implementation Elements:

• First reference year is 2023/2024 depending on the module
• Annual or triennial reporting requirements with 21-24 month transmission deadlines
• Detailed specifications for data collection, compilation and reporting in physical and monetary units
• 2-year maximum transitional period for implementation
• Commission empowered to adopt delegated acts for methodological guidance and amendments
• Member States can receive financial support for modernization and quality improvement

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/3020 of 29 November 2024 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature

This Commission Implementing Regulation concerns the classification of specific goods, namely pipette tips, in the Combined Nomenclature (CN) of the European Union for customs purposes. The regulation provides clear guidance on how these laboratory items should be classified for customs tariff purposes.The regulation consists of three articles and an annex. Article 1 establishes the classification of the goods as described in the annex, Article 2 provides a three-month transition period for existing binding tariff information, and Article 3 sets the entry into force. The annex contains a detailed description of the goods (pipette tips), their classification code (3926 90 97), and the reasoning behind this classification.Key provisions include:

• The specific classification of polypropylene pipette tips under CN code 3926 90 97 as ‘other articles of plastics’
• The explanation why these items cannot be classified as parts of pipetting apparatus despite being used with such equipment
• The reference to relevant case law (Case C-336/11) supporting the classification decision
• The three-month transition period for existing binding tariff information that doesn’t conform to this regulation

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 5 December 2024.AS „Tallinna Kaubamaja Grupp” and AS „KIA Auto” v Konkurences padome.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Competition – Agreements, decisions and concerted practices – Article 101(1) TFEU – Vertical agreements – Restriction ‘by effect’ – Agreement establishing restrictions in respect of car warranties – Obligation for the competition authority to demonstrate anticompetitive effects – Actual effects and potential effects.Case C-606/23.

This judgment concerns the interpretation of Article 101(1) TFEU regarding vertical agreements and restrictions on competition in the context of car warranties. The case involves KIA Auto’s warranty conditions that required car owners to service their vehicles only at authorized dealers using original parts to maintain warranty validity.The judgment clarifies that when assessing whether an agreement restricts competition ‘by effect’, competition authorities do not need to prove actual restrictive effects on competition have occurred. It is sufficient to demonstrate potential restrictive effects that are appreciable, based on analysis of how competition would operate without the agreement.The Court outlines key principles for analyzing competition restrictions by effect:

• The analysis must consider the actual economic and legal context, nature of goods/services, and market structure
• A realistic counterfactual scenario must be established showing how the market would operate without the agreement
• Both actual and potential effects can be considered, as long as they are sufficiently appreciable
• The competition authority must properly define relevant markets and identify appreciable effects

The judgment aligns the interpretation of competition restrictions under Article 101 TFEU with similar principles established for Article 102 TFEU regarding abuse of dominance, confirming that demonstration of potential anticompetitive effects is sufficient in both contexts.

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 December 2024.Network One Distribution SRL v Agenţia Naţională de Administrare Fiscală – Direcţia Generală Regională a Finanţelor Publice Bucureşti and Others.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Customs union – Incurrence and recovery of a customs debt – Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 – Recovery of anti-dumping duties relating to imports from China – Charging of interest on arrears under Regulation No 952/2013 – National legislation providing for the imposition of a late payment penalty in addition to interest on arrears.Case C-506/23.

This judgment concerns the interpretation of Article 114 of the EU Customs Code regarding the charging of interest on arrears and additional penalties for late payment of customs duties. The case arose from a dispute between a Romanian company and tax authorities over anti-dumping duties on bicycle imports from China.The Court analyzed whether EU law allows member states to impose both interest on arrears under EU customs law and additional late payment penalties under national law. The key distinction made is that interest on arrears compensates for delayed payment, while penalties serve as sanctions for non-compliance.The main provisions examined include:

• Article 114 of the Customs Code on charging interest on arrears for late payment of customs duties
• Article 42 giving member states authority to impose penalties for customs law violations
• Articles 4-5 of Regulation 2988/95 on administrative measures versus penalties

The Court concluded that EU law does not preclude national authorities from imposing both:

• Interest on arrears under Article 114 of the Customs Code to compensate for delayed payment
• Additional late payment penalties under national law as sanctions, provided they are proportionate

This creates a dual system where both compensatory interest and punitive penalties can apply simultaneously.

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 5 December 2024.SIA „MISTRAL TRANS” v Valsts ieņēmumu dienests.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Prevention of the use of the financial system for the purposes of money laundering or terrorist financing – Directive (EU) 2015/849 – Scope – Article 2(1)(3)(a) – Obliged entity – Concept of ‘external accountants’ – Accounting services provided, on an ancillary basis, to companies related to the entity providing them.Case C-3/24.

This judgment clarifies the interpretation of the concept of ‘external accountants’ under EU anti-money laundering legislation (Directive 2015/849). The case arose from a dispute between a Latvian transport company and tax authorities regarding a fine for alleged violations of anti-money laundering rules.The Court’s judgment focuses on three main aspects:

• The definition and scope of ‘external accountants’ under Article 2(1)(3)(a) of Directive 2015/849
• The distinction between independent accounting service providers and in-house accountants
• The application of anti-money laundering rules to related companies sharing accounting services

The key provisions of the judgment establish that:

• ‘External accountants’ refers to persons whose professional activity consists in independently providing accounting services to third parties
• The term ‘external’ specifically excludes in-house accountants who don’t provide services to third parties independently
• A company that keeps accounts for its related companies purely for resource pooling purposes does not qualify as an ‘external accountant’

The Court concluded that a legal person keeping accounts of related companies with identical management and ownership, solely to save resources, does not fall within the scope of ‘external accountants’ under the anti-money laundering directive.

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 5 December 2024.Guldbrev AB v Konsumentombudsmannen.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Consumer protection – Unfair commercial practices – Directive 2005/29/EC – Article 2(c), (d) and (i) – Article 3(1) – Scope – Concept of ‘product’ – Combined offer consisting of the valuation and purchase of a good.Case C-379/23.

This judgment concerns the interpretation of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (2005/29/EC) in relation to gold valuation and purchase services.The Court ruled on whether combined services of valuation and purchase of gold from consumers constitute a ‘product’ under EU consumer protection law. The case arose from a dispute between a Swedish company Guldbrev AB and the Swedish Consumer Ombudsman regarding potentially misleading advertising practices.The key provisions interpreted were Article 2(c), (d) and (i) and Article 3(1) of Directive 2005/29/EC which define concepts like ‘product’, ‘commercial practices’ and ‘invitation to purchase’.

Main provisions:

• The Court confirmed that when a trader provides a valuation service for goods before purchasing them from a consumer, and makes the purchase conditional on accepting the valuation price, this combined service constitutes a ‘product’ under the Directive
• Any promotional practices directly connected with such combined services fall within the scope of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive
• The Court emphasized the Directive’s broad scope and its objective of ensuring high consumer protection, noting that consumers are typically in a weaker position regarding information and experience compared to traders

Key interpretative points:

• The definition of ‘commercial practice’ should be interpreted broadly
• Combined offers linking different services into a single offer can constitute commercial practices under the Directive
• Due to the indissociable link between valuation service and purchase, they form together a ‘product’ subject to consumer protection rules

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 5 December 2024.Modexel – Consultores e Serviços SA v Autoridade Tributária e Assuntos Fiscais da Região Autónoma da Madeira.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Common system of value added tax (VAT) – Directive 2006/112/EC – First paragraph of Article 183 – Rules governing the exercise of the right of deduction – Carrying forward excess VAT – Concept of ‘following period’ – Refund of excess VAT – Cessation of economic activity.Case C-680/23.

This judgment concerns the interpretation of Article 183 of the VAT Directive regarding the treatment of excess VAT when a business ceases its activities and later resumes them. The Court analyzed whether excess VAT declared at the time of cessation can be carried forward when the business restarts operations.The judgment has three main structural elements: interpretation of the concept of ‘following period’ in Article 183, analysis of the status of taxable person after cessation of activities, and examination of Member States’ discretion in establishing VAT refund procedures.Key provisions of the judgment include:

• When a business ceases activities, it loses its status as a taxable person and there is no ‘following period’ to carry forward excess VAT
• Member States can require businesses that cease operations to claim VAT refunds within a certain period (e.g. 12 months) rather than allowing carry-forward when activities resume
• Such national rules are valid if they respect the principles of equivalence and effectiveness and allow taxpayers to recover excess VAT within a reasonable timeframe
• Allowing indefinite carry-forward after cessation could enable abuse and would violate legal certainty principles

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 5 December 2024.Bulgarfrukt – Fruchthandels GmbH v Oranzherii Gimel II EOOD.Reference for a preliminary ruling – Judicial cooperation in civil matters – European order for payment procedure – Regulation (EC) No 1896/2006 – European order for payment declared enforceable – Service of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters – Regulation (EC) No 1393/2007 – Invalid service ascertained during enforcement – National legislation providing for a legal remedy enabling the defendant to apply for the annulment of a European order for payment – Legal consequences – Obligation of the court seised to annul the European order for payment.Case C-389/23.

This judgment concerns the interpretation of EU regulations regarding European order for payment procedures and service of documents between EU member states. Key points:1. The case deals with whether EU law precludes national legislation requiring courts to annul European payment orders that were not properly served to defendants according to minimum standards.2. The Court analyzed the relationship between Regulation 1896/2006 (European payment order procedure) and Regulation 1393/2007 (service of documents), particularly regarding:- Minimum standards for serving payment orders- Rights of defendants to oppose payment orders- Remedies available when service is improper- Balance between procedural efficiency and rights of defense3. The Court ruled that EU law does not preclude national legislation requiring courts to annul European payment orders that were not properly served according to minimum standards, because:- Improper service affects the validity of enforcement procedures- National law governs remedies when service issues are discovered after enforcement declaration- Annulment is consistent with protecting defendants’ rights- Claimants can pursue claims through other proceduresThe judgment clarifies important procedural safeguards regarding service requirements while preserving member states’ ability to provide remedies through national law when those requirements are not met.

EFTA Surveillance Authority – Decision No 143/24/COL of 25 September 2024 to open a formal investigation into the alleged unlawful State aid to Bane NOR – Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 1(2) of Part I of Protocol 3 to the Agreement between the EFTA States on the Establishment of a Surveillance Authority and a Court of Justice concerning the abovementioned measure

This is a decision by the EFTA Surveillance Authority (ESA) to open a formal investigation into potential unlawful State aid provided to Bane NOR, the Norwegian railway infrastructure operator, and its contractual partners.The investigation focuses on two key measures: 1) Alleged aid to Bane NOR through using state financing of its public railway mission to cross-subsidize its commercial fiber network operations, and 2) Alleged aid to Bane NOR’s contractual partners through better-than-market conditions in construction, operation and capacity swap agreements.The decision’s structure includes detailed sections on the procedural background, description of the measures under investigation, preliminary assessment of whether they constitute State aid under Article 61(1) of the EEA Agreement, and analysis of their potential compatibility with EEA rules.The main provisions include:

• Analysis of whether Bane NOR’s commercial fiber network activities constitute economic activities separate from its public railway infrastructure mission
• Assessment of whether the measures involve State resources and are imputable to the Norwegian State
• Evaluation of whether the arrangements confer undue economic advantages on Bane NOR and its partners
• Analysis of the selectivity of the measures and their effects on competition and trade
• Preliminary conclusion that ESA cannot exclude that the measures constitute unlawful State aid

The decision invites the Norwegian authorities and interested parties to submit comments within specified deadlines. The investigation will examine whether the measures qualify as State aid and if so, whether they can be considered compatible with EEA rules.