What changed

SPECIAL LEGISLATIVE procedure

PA_Legam

Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council regulation amending Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 as regards the access of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) and the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) to value added tax information at Union level

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

1. Rapporteur: Michalis HADJIPANTELA (EPP / CY)

The proposed amendments aim to strengthen the effectiveness, coherence and operational integration of the Union’s framework for combating cross-border VAT fraud, in line with the broader revision of the Anti-Fraud Architecture announced by the Commission.

2. References: 2025/0348(CNS) / A10-0159/2026 / P10_TA(2026)0213

In this context, this amending proposal should not be understood as a stand-alone or technical adjustment addressing a single deficiency, but rather as a first legislative building block of a more comprehensive and necessary reform of the Union’s anti-fraud framework.

3. Date of adoption of the resolution: 17 June 2026

The amendments therefore seek to address a key structural weakness identified in recent years, namely the fragmentation of information flows between customs, tax authorities and Union bodies, which undermines the timely detection, investigation and prosecution of complex fraud schemes, particularly those combining VAT and customs components.

4. Legal basis: Article 113 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)

To this end, they introduce a mandatory and structured mechanism for the spontaneous transmission of customs-derived data relevant to VAT fraud to Eurofisc, the European Public Prosecutor’s Office and the European Anti-Fraud Office, while ensuring appropriate safeguards for the processing of personal data. They also reinforce the scope and quality of the data available, by extending the set of customs data elements that can be cross-checked with VAT information.

5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON)

The amendments aim to improve coordination at national level between customs and VAT authorities, and to address operational asymmetries linked to the non-participation of certain Member States in the EPPO, while acknowledging that more structural solutions will be required in the context of the broader revision of the Anti-Fraud Architecture.

6. Commission's position: The Commission takes note of the amendments proposed by the European Parliament. The Commission can support the spirit of many of them, insofar as they are consistent with the objectives of its proposal and with the safeguards already reflected in the text agreed by the Council in its General Approach. However, the Commission cannot accept all of the amendments as proposed. Several of the issues raised are already adequately addressed either in the Council’s general approach or in the existing legal frameworks governing EPPO and OLAF. Other elements, such as technical or organisational requirements for access to VAT information, would be more appropriately addressed through implementing acts, operational arrangements or technical specifications.

Beyond data-sharing, the amendments underline the need to move towards a more coherent deterrence framework across the Union, including through further action on the minimum harmonisation of penalties applicable to the most serious VAT and customs-related infringements.

In addition, some amendments go beyond the scope of the proposal. This concerns, in particular, amendments relating to broader anti-fraud architecture considerations, access to additional systems and databases, interoperability between Union systems, additional Union funding, specialised staff, digital tools and broader financial or human resources for EPPO and OLAF. These matters require a separate assessment or should be addressed through the relevant budgetary and programming procedures applicable to the bodies concerned.

Finally, the introduction of a review mechanism is intended to ensure that the effectiveness and coherence of this first set of measures can be assessed in practice, thereby informing and supporting the next steps of a more comprehensive reform of the Union’s anti-fraud architecture.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Budgetary Control submits the following to the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, as the committee responsible:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4 a) The Commission Communication of July 2025 on the revision of the EU Anti-Fraud Architecture identified the fragmentation of information flows between Eurofisc, the EPPO, OLAF, Europol and Eurojust as a systemic structural weakness undermining the effectiveness of the Union’s response to cross-border VAT fraud. This amending Regulation constitutes the legislative implementation of the data-sharing pillar of a revised Anti-Fraud Architecture and shall be read in conjunction with the further measures, as announced in that Communication, including the strengthening of Eurofisc’s operational capacity, the harmonisation of the conditions and liability rules applicable to fiscal representatives appointed by non-EU taxable persons under the IOSS and other import VAT schemes, and the extension of the data governance framework of CESOP to ensure coherence with the customs data access established by this Regulation;

Or. en

Amendment 2

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4 b) The significant disparities in the levels of administrative sanctions applied by Member States in respect of VAT fraud on imports, which create conditions enabling operators to exploit the jurisdiction with the lowest penalties, need to be tackled1a. While the access to VAT data granted to the EPPO and OLAF by this Regulation enhances detection and prosecution capacity, it does not in itself constitute a sufficient deterrent to mitigate such divergence across the Union, which contributes to border shopping. In this context, and in line with the Commission’s commitment to revise the Anti-Fraud Architecture as part of the measures included in the post-2027 MFF, the possibility of further action to address these disparities may be considered, such as a legislative proposal based on the appropriate legal basis, aimed at achieving a minimum level of harmonisation or consistency of administrative penalties applicable to the most serious VAT and related-customs infringements, taking into account the need to effectively protect the Union’s financial interests;

_________________

1a ECA Special Report 8/2025 https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/publications?ref=SR-2025-08.

Or. en

Amendment 3

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 4 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(4 c) In order to ensure that the enforcement capacity created by this regulation extends effectively to all Member States, to avoid persistent asymmetries within the single market and in the Union’s anti-fraud landscape, and as part of the Commission’s commitment to revise the Anti-Fraud Architecture, the present proposal requires Member States not participating in the EPPO -established by Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939- to designate a competent national authority responsible for fulfilling equivalent functions for the purpose of cross-border VAT fraud cooperation with Eurofisc and OLAF;

Or. en

Amendment 4

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 6 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(6 a) The information stored by customs authorities in relation to import procedures under which VAT obligations are deferred or exempt is intrinsically VAT-related information for the purposes of Article 113 TFEU. Extending the scope of Article 17(1)(f) of Regulation (EU) No 904/2010 to cover all import procedures involving VAT exemptions or deferrals, including under the Import One-Stop Shop scheme established by Directive 2006/112/EC, and adding the declared customs value and country of origin as mandatory data elements, is necessary to enable competent authorities, including the EPPO and OLAF, to cross-reference import declarations with VAT declarations and detect discrepancies indicative of fraud. Such extension is without prejudice to the substantive customs rules governing those import procedures, which remain subject to Regulation (EU) No 952/2013;

Or. en

Amendment 5

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 a) While Article 13 of this Regulation already requires the competent VAT authorities of the Member States to exchange spontaneously information likely to be useful for combating VAT fraud, that obligation applies to VAT authorities and does not extend to the competent customs authorities of the Member States, which are not VAT competent authorities within the meaning of this Regulation. Furthermore, neither the existing Article 13 mechanism nor the Eurofisc network provides for the direct spontaneous communication of customs-derived fraud intelligence to the EPPO and OLAF. VAT fraud schemes linked to import procedures, are characterised by systematic discrepancies between the information declared to customs authorities at the point of importation and the VAT declarations subsequently filed in the Member State of destination. It is acknowledged that customs authorities are often the first to detect such anomalies through their risk management analysis. In order to close this gap and to ensure that upstream customs intelligence identified by customs authorities is transmitted without delay to the bodies responsible for investigating and prosecuting cross-border VAT fraud, and given that the effective exercise of the access rights provided for in Articles 49a and 49b of this Regulation depends on EPPO and OLAF being informed of the existence of potential fraud cases, it is necessary to require competent customs authorities to transmit spontaneously this information . Such transmission should be made to Eurofisc, the EPPO and OLAF whenever the data referred to in Article 17(1)(f) indicate patterns consistent with VAT fraud. This measure is crucial for the effective protection of the Union’s financial interests and is consistent with the Commission’s commitment to revise the overall Anti-Fraud Architecture as essential component of the post-2027 MFF package. Strengthening coordination at the national level between customs and VAT authorities notably through National Anti-Fraud Strategies has been repeatedly called for in the last years by the European Parliament in its resolutions on the Protection of the Union’s Financial Interests. Such spontaneous transmission mechanism operates exclusively within the VAT administrative cooperation framework of this Regulation and is without prejudice to the substantive customs procedures established under Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 and related data governance rules;

Or. en

Amendment 6

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 b) The effectiveness of the spontaneous transmission mechanism provided for in Article 13a of this Regulation depends on adequate coordination at national level between the competent customs authorities and the competent VAT authorities of the Member States. Those bodies are in many Member States separate administrative entities with distinct supervisory chains and information systems. Member States should therefore ensure that their competent customs and VAT authorities establish regular coordination mechanisms, including through the Eurofisc framework, to facilitate the identification of discrepancies indicative of VAT fraud and the timely transmission of relevant customs data to Eurofisc, the EPPO and OLAF. Such coordination is a procedural and organisational measure and does not entail additional information technology obligations for national authorities;

Or. en

Amendment 7

Proposal for a regulation

Recital 8 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(8 c) Not all Member States participate in the EPPO established by Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939; in Member States that do not participate in the EPPO, the spontaneous transmission of customs data pursuant to Article 13a of this Regulation cannot be directed to the EPPO. In those Member States, the competent customs authorities shall, for the purposes of that Article, transmit the relevant information to Eurofisc working field coordinators and to OLAF within its mandate; the structural remedy to overcome this gap is addressed in Recital (4c) which provides for the designation of equivalent competent authorities in non-participating Member States;

Or. en

Amendment 8

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(-1) In Article 17(1), point (f) is replaced by the following:

(f) the information collated by customs authorities of the Member States relating to all importations of goods in respect of which a VAT exemption, deferral or special accounting scheme is claimed at importation, including under Article 143(1)(d) of Directive 2006/112/EC (Customs Procedure 42/63), under the Import One-Stop Shop scheme established by Articles 369l to 369x of that Directive, and any other import procedure under which the obligation to account for VAT is deferred to the Member State of destination, limited to the following data elements:

(i) the import declaration identifier;

(ii) the VAT identification number of the importer or, where applicable, the IOSS identification number declared to customs;

(iii) the VAT identification number of the customer in the Member State of destination, where available;

(iv) the declared customs value of the goods;

(v) the declared country of origin of the goods; and

(vi) the customs procedure code, including in cases where the goods are subject to a simplified import procedure under Article 166 of Regulation (EU) No 952/2013’;

Or. en

Amendment 9

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2 a) Article 13a — Spontaneous transmission of customs data indicating VAT fraud

1 The competent authorities of the Member States shall spontaneously communicate to the Eurofisc working field coordinators referred to in Article 36(1), and, within their respective mandates, to the EPPO and OLAF, any information stored pursuant to Article 17(1)(f) that indicates patterns consistent with VAT fraud, in particular:

(a) systematic discrepancies between the declared destination Member State in an import declaration and the Member State in which VAT was subsequently declared or paid;

(b) systematic discrepancies between the consignee identified in an import declaration under the IOSS scheme and the taxable person that declared the corresponding VAT in the Member State of destination;

(c) declared customs values that diverge significantly from market value where that divergence is consistent with undervaluation for VAT purposes; and

(d) any other indicator specified by the Commission’s implementing act as a customs-based VAT fraud risk indicator.

2 The communication referred to in paragraph 1 shall be made without delay and shall include, at minimum, the data elements listed in Article 17(1)(f) for the importation or series of importations concerned;

3 Member States shall ensure that their competent customs authorities and competent VAT authorities coordinate on the identification of discrepancies referred to in paragraph 1, including through the Eurofisc framework;

4 The Commission shall, by implementing acts adopted in accordance with Article 58(2), specify the technical formats and procedures for the communications referred to in this Article;

5 In Member States not participating in the EPPO pursuant to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1939, the communications referred to in paragraph 1 shall be directed to Eurofisc working field coordinators and to OLAF within its mandate, and not to the EPPO;

Or. en

Amendment 10

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) From 1 September 2026, the information referred to in Article 17(1), points (e) and (f), of this Regulation;

(b) From 1 September 2026, the information referred to in Article 17(1), points (e) and (f), of this Regulation, including any additional data elements stored pursuant to Article 17(1)(f) as amended;

Or. en

Amendment 11

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 a. Where the EPPO receives personal data pursuant to a spontaneous transmission by customs authorities under Article 13a, the following rules shall apply:

(a) the data may be processed solely for the purpose of assessing whether to open, or for the conduct of, an investigation within the EPPO’s mandate under Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939;

(b) where the EPPO determines within 90 days of receipt that the data is not relevant to any investigation within its mandate, it shall delete the data and notify the transmitting authority;

(c) where an investigation is opened on the basis of the transmitted data, the transmitting customs authority shall be notified and may communicate its assessment to the EPPO and to the EDPS if it considers that processing exceeds what is necessary;

(d) the applicable data protection rules shall be those of Chapter VIII of Regulation (EU) 2017/1939.’

Or. en

Amendment 12

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(b) From 1 September 2026, the information referred to in Article 17(1), points (e) and (f), of this Regulation;

(b) From 1 September 2026, the information referred to in Article 17(1), points (e) and (f), of this Regulation, including any additional data elements stored pursuant to Article 17(1)(f) as amended;

Or. en

Amendment 13

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 a. Where OLAF receives personal data pursuant to a spontaneous transmission by customs authorities under Article 13a, the following rules shall apply:

(a) the data may be processed solely for the purpose of assessing whether to open, or for the conduct of, an investigation within OLAF’s mandate under Article 1(1) of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013;

(b) where OLAF determines within 60 days of receipt that the data is not relevant to any investigation within its mandate, it shall delete the data and notify the transmitting authority;

(c) where an investigation is opened on the basis of the transmitted data, the transmitting customs authority shall be notified and may communicate its assessment to OLAF and to the EDPS if it considers that processing exceeds what is necessary;

(d) the applicable data protection rules shall be those of Regulation (EU) 2018/1725; OLAF shall apply the internal authorisation requirements under Article 5 of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 883/2013 to access granted pursuant to this paragraph.’

Or. en

Amendment 14

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 b (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 b. After Article 2, the following Article 2a is inserted:

Article 2a — Follow-up proposal on minimum harmonisation of penalties.

By 18 months after the entry into force of this Regulation and consistently with the objectives of the revision of the Anti-Fraud Architecture as complementary set of measures included in the post-2027 MFF package and for enhancing the protection of the Union’s financial interests, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament and to the Council a legislative proposal for the minimum harmonisation of administrative penalties applicable to the most serious infringements in the field of value added tax and related customs duties, in particular as regards Missing Trader Intra-Community fraud and the abuse of simplified import procedures under Customs Procedure 42 and the Import One-Stop Shop. The proposal shall be without without prejudice to the substantive customs procedures established under Regulation (EU) No 952/2013;

Or. en

Amendment 15

Proposal for a regulation

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5

Regulation (EU) No 904/2010

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 5 c (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5 c. In Article 59 of Regulation (EU) No 904/2010, paragraph 1 is replaced by the following:

‘The Commission shall, every three years starting from [entry into force of this Regulation], and on the basis of reports provided by EPPO, OLAF and Eurofisc, submit a report to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of this Regulation. The report shall assess in particular:

(a) The operational effectiveness of direct EPPO and OLAF access to VIES, the SURVEILLANCE system and CESOP, including average time-to-access, number of investigations materially advanced, and outcomes of prosecutions or administrative actions;

(b) The coherence of the access and transmission framework with other instruments adopted as part of the revised Anti-Fraud Architecture, including measures relating to Eurofisc capacity, CESOP governance, fiscal representative harmonisation and penalty convergence;

(c) The functioning and timeliness of the spontaneous transmission mechanism under Article 13a, including national coordination arrangements between customs and VAT authorities; and

(d) The enforcement outcomes achieved in Member States not participating in the EPPO and whether equivalent mechanisms have been established pursuant to the Anti-Fraud Architecture revision.’

Or. en