REFIT Platform Opinion Date of Adoption: 27/28 June 2016 REFIT Platform Opinion on the submission by the Danish Business Forum and Businesseurope on the Point of Single Contact The REFIT Platform has considered the issues raised by the Danish Business forum (DBF) and Businesseurope supporting the creation of a complete online business portal for both goods and services. The Stakeholder group recommends that the Commission takes an initiative to establish minimum criteria for the performance of points of single contact. Most members of the Government group recommend that the Commission should introduce common quality criteria for the content, functioning and level of integration of each portal with the Single Digital Gateway, aligned with other relevant initiatives such as the services passport. One single entry point with clear information and coordinated services in each Member State will help businesses and achieve an objective of the Services Directive and Single Market Strategy. Some of the Government group members do not support the introduction of mandatory provisions at EU level. Detailed Opinion Contents 1 Submission XII.5a by the Danish Business Forum (DBF)... 2 2 Submission XII.5b by BUSINESSEUROPE... 2 3 Policy context... 2 4 Opinion of the REFIT Platform... 4 4.1 Considerations of the REFIT Platform Stakeholder group... 4 4.2 Considerations of the REFIT Platform Government group on XII.5a... 6 4.3 Considerations of the REFIT Platform Government group on XII.5b... 7 1
1 Submission XII.5a by the Danish Business Forum (DBF) Challenge Much has been done to make relevant information accessible to businesses that wish to engage in cross-border activity. However, there is still a lot of important information that is not covered by the existing portals, websites, etc. The Points of Single Contact (PSC) Charter has already identified information to be included in the PSCs. The lack of information as well as the limited possibility to communicate online with national authorities is a barrier to cross-border activity. Suggestion A consistent approach should be adopted so that businesses have only one contact point in each Member State if they wish to establish themselves in another country or have problems operating - regardless of sector. The portal should relate to and describe procedures for both establishment and operation (PSC only deals with establishment). The portal should, for example, both contain information on how to establish a shop or a hotel and on how to get the necessary permits to sell food products (in a store or at a hotel). At the same time, permits, certificates, registrations, information about tax and employment and other governmental approvals and reporting obligations could be made here, and the procedures should be fully digitised. Everything should be available in English. The intention is to create a single legal base for contact with authorities and information (one business portal per Member State). Other areas of legislation (the services directive, the VAT directive etc.) could refer to this database instead of establishing separate portals - making it easier and more accessible for businesses. The intention is not to provide advice on specific issues to businesses. 2 Submission XII.5b by BUSINESSEUROPE National governments should transform their existing Points of Single Contact (PSC) into true Online Business Portals for goods and services, offering companies all the information and help the need to operate across borders and on the home market, including the completion of administrative procedures entirely online. 3 Policy context The suggestion refers to the Points of Single Contact (PSCs) established under Directive 2006/123/EC on services in the internal market 1 and to Product Contact Points (PCPs) established under Regulations (EC) No 764/2008 2 and to Product Contact Points for Construction (PCPCs) under Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 3. 1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/txt/pdf/?uri=celex:32006l0123&from=en 2 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/lexuriserv/lexuriserv.do?uri=oj:l:2008:218:0021:0029:en:pdf 3 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/txt/pdf/?uri=celex:32011r0305&from=en 2
The PSCs are online e-government portals that allow service providers to get the information they need and complete administrative procedures online. They have been established in order to facilitate entrepreneurs and business to access information on regulations procedures and deadlines related to the provision of services online and to complete all administrative procedures electronically. The approach proposed here has already partly been pursued by the European Commission through the agreement between the Member States and the Commission on the PSC Charter - voluntary commitments of Member States to improve the functioning of the (PSCs) and extend their scope in order to make them more comprehensive business portals. However, as showed by the last assessment of the PSCs, "The Performance of the Points of Single Contact: An Assessment against the PSC Charter' 4, this approach has not delivered the desired results. Results clearly indicate that the online business portals are still more than 5 years after the deadline - far from delivering what is expected from them. It can be concluded that the PSC Charter which the Commission developed as a framework for implementation has not had its desired effect. Information provided is often basic information on general requirements and sector specific information is insufficient. Information is also still structured according to the logic of the administration and not according to the logic of the business user. Also in terms of the availability of administrative procedures for online completion and the extent to which they can be completed online for general requirements many administrative procedures are available for online completion whereas most specific requirements are not. Access to the PSC by foreign users is poor and there is a need to make the PSCs more user-friendly. Regulation (EC) No 764/2008 ("the Mutual Recognition Regulation") provides in its Article 9(1) for Product Contact Points (PCP) to be set up in each Member State. PCP provide economic operators or a competent authorities of another Member State with the following information: The technical rules applicable to a specific type of product in the territory in which those Product Contact Points are established and information as to whether that type of product is subject to a requirement for prior authorisation under the laws of their Member State, together with information concerning the principle of mutual recognition and the application of this Regulation in the territory of that Member State; The contact details of the competent authorities within that Member State by means of which they may be contacted directly, including the particulars of the authorities responsible for supervising the implementation of the technical rules in question in the territory of that Member State; and The remedies generally available in the territory of that Member State in the event of a dispute between the competent authorities and an economic operator. Product Contact Points respond free of charge and within 15 working days of receiving the information requests contemplated by the Mutual Recognition Regulation. They are encouraged to provide their services in several languages and to provide personalised advice 4 http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/the-performance-of-the-points-of-single-contact-pbet0215504/ 3
to users. A similar mechanism exists under the Construction Products Regulation (CPR) No 305/2011. Under it, EU countries have to inform on their rules and regulations for construction products through the specific national contact points (PCPC). In both cases there exists lack of administrative cooperation among PCPs, which takes the form of unduly long delays in replying to requests for information or even of a lack of reaction from the counterpart in another Member State. Three quarters of PCPs report unduly long delays for replies, while two thirds reported the lack of reaction from their counterpart in another Member State. Due to the lack of specific obligations as regards the information to be provided, the quality of the information provided online varies greatly, with just one third of both kinds of CP having any webpages at all. Readability, user-friendliness, sheer usefulness and reliability of the offered contact details also vary greatly. Current situation The Your Europe Business portal gives clear, jargon-free, multilingual information on the applicable EU rules for doing business in another EU Member State. Furthermore, it links to existing national business portals, including PSCs, when it comes to national implementation rules and procedures to follow. Possible other actions are currently being discussed in the framework of the Internal Market Strategy and covered by a Single Digital Gateway concept (which was also announced by the Digital Single Market). The Single Digital Gateway aims to align EU and national content to be able to easily establish links between the two levels and to allow business (but also citizens) to access both levels seamlessly. 4 Opinion of the REFIT Platform 4.1 Considerations of the REFIT Platform Stakeholder group Background comments: o Companies clearly indicate they want the Points of Single Contact (PSCs), or in a more developed form: online business portals. They need these portals to provide information and assistance, which saves time, costs and makes their life easier. Ultimately this will facilitate free movement in the single market, creating new jobs and growth. o PSCs in a number of Member States are not yet living up to their full potential. While most PSCs have improved somewhat over the last 5 years, we still see that in most cases, not all basic information for setting-up a business in another Member State or operating abroad is available through the PSCs. 4
o Often, important information (outside the scope of the 2006 Services Directive) on for example labour law, taxation issues, VAT rules and social security is still missing or is simply not detailed enough. o The greatest benefit that PSCs can offer is the possibility to complete administrative procedures entirely online through the PSCs. It saves both time and costs for companies as well as for public authorities. o Yet, on most PSC portals only a limited number of procedures are available for online completion and only for certain service sectors. If certain key procedures are still offline, entrepreneurs still need to travel often to another country. o Furthermore, foreign companies report that language barriers (some PSCs only have Google translate, which is often not precise enough), lack of interoperability of e- signatures and impossibility to register as a foreign company (need for national number) to use certain PSC services are the main obstacles for satisfactorily using a PSC of another Member State. o The level of commitment from national governments to promote and further improve their PSCs differs substantially. Often, insufficient resources are allocated to the PSCs. Therefore, it is not easy for PSC managers and the responsible team to improve. Member States regularly show political commitment and dedication in Council Conclusions but this is often not translated into concrete action and improvement. o The PSC Charter agreed in 2013 to be better able to measure PSC performance using quantitative indicators is positive, but the additional performance criteria falling outside the scope of the Services Directive (which sets the basic PSC requirements) remain entirely voluntary. o Despite the fact that PSCs can be a cornerstone of national e-governance policies and further modernisation of public administration, we see that most countries have had a policy to only comply with the basic requirements laid down by the Services Directive. These basic requirements are insufficient to meet business needs. o Many countries did not take an ambitious approach, which is a pity especially seeing the potential of these online business portals for attracting investment, facilitating cross-border service provision and creating growth. o Although it would require additional efforts and investment, national governments need to realise the high return on investment of a better used PSC portal, or: online business portal. A well-functioning business portal can be a focal point for attracting investment and promoting establishment in your country. It will lead to growth and job creation. o In the above context, the Single Digital Gateway initiative proposed in the Commission s October 2015 Single Market Strategy is to be welcomed. o The Single Digital Gateway proposal intends to extend and integrate European and national portals to create a user friendly information system for business. This includes providing assistance, problem-solving services and electronic procedures for businesses wanting to scale up and sell products or provide services cross-border. It will build on and improve existing tools and services such as the Points of Single Contact, Product Contact Points, the Your Europe portal and SOLVIT, at both European and national level. 5
Recommendations: o The Member States should transform their existing Points of Single Contact into true online business portals for goods AND services (!).They should offer companies all the information and assistance they need to operate across borders and on the home market in multiple languages, including the possibility to complete procedures entirely online. Additional languages should be offered in English and / or the language(s) of neighbouring countries. o The (minimum) performance criteria laid down in the 2013 PSC Charter should become mandatory. o The revision / review of the Points of Single Contact needs to be seen in the context of the Single Digital Gateway proposal. o National governments must further develop the still underused Internal Market Information (IMI) system. Public authorities should make better use of IMI to alleviate administrative burden on business, by checking information through this network directly with other Member States if needed, saving both time and costs. Conclusion: The Commission should propose a Regulation to create a true online business portal for both goods and services to complement the text of the 2006 Services Directive and clearly indicate which minimum criteria for performance must apply to the PSCs. As the PSCs touch directly upon enterprises, the single market and are digital, any proposal should be prepared jointly by DG GROW and DG CONNECT. The proposal should build on existing national e-government policies and contain the core elements of the in 2013 agreed PSC Charter. In particular it is key to focus on business needs, further administrative simplification (share best practices between countries), incorporating and fully exploiting digital tools. 4.2 Considerations of the REFIT Platform Government group on XII.5a To achieve an actual simplification for businesses, it is crucial that the underlying services of each national portal are efficient and that information is tailored to the specific needs of foreign businesses. This includes guidance on typical cross border life cycle events, such as applying for a European professional card and the forthcoming services passport, e.g. through concrete step by step guides. Moreover, it includes the possibility of additional personal guidance which in practice is often requested by businesses. To ensure user-friendliness in practice, content should be based on findings of concrete user journeys and user feedback, taking into account that businesses do often not distinguish between governmental areas of responsibility. Based on the experience of businesses, the current range of different portals makes it too time consuming and difficult to search for information and complete necessary procedures. Therefore, one single entry point with clear information and coordinated services in each Member State will help businesses save time and other resources. As part of its announced governance framework for the Single Digital Gateway, the Commission should introduce common quality criteria for the content, functioning and level 6
of integration of each portal with the Single Digital Gateway. This would streamline approaches across Member States and clarify to businesses what can be expected when using the portals. Common criteria would also help carry out regular evaluation and improve functionalities. Due to national differences in organisation and resources, it should however still be up to each Member State to organise internal working procedures. Technical and organisational assistance and a mechanism for exchange of best practice should be put at the disposal of Member States by the Commission to support national efforts. The modalities of the Single Digital Gateway are still to be determined by the Commission and should be coordinated with all relevant DGs to ensure simplification. One Member State signals the importance for the SPC to build on open data and not acts excluding to other simplification solutions/portals etc. Going forward, it is important with cooperation and exchange with DG CNECT. 4.3 Considerations of the REFIT Platform Government group on XII.5b The submission by BusinessEurope is key for Europe and businesses in Europe: o PSC is a foundation building block for achieving the aspirations of the Services Directive, Single Market, and can, with the Digital Single Market contribute to ongoing simplification of administrative burdens particularly on SMEs at EU- and Member State-level; o Although service users acknowledge progress in PSC, implementation at an EU-level has been rather slow, with overall only average performance levels, whilst cross-border information and online services remain rather underperforming and hence, performance needs to be addressed at the EU-level; o There exists the opportunity to address synergies and overlaps with other contact points for businesses, e.g., in the Mutual Recognition Regulation, Construction Products Regulation and SOLVIT (which was not mentioned in the submission but which is also reported under the Single Market Scoreboard); At a strategic level, the submission raises key strategic considerations for PSCs. o On the one hand, should PSCs expand their scope of services to incorporate other points of contact in Member States emanating from other regulations affecting businesses and/or other new services? o On the other hand, how can PSCs be developed into high-performing ones and address the performance gaps and needs of their users? Recommendations to the Commission: At a governance level, to, amongst others: accelerate the implementation of PSCs; sustain the performance reporting and mystery shopping on PSCs; shift PSCs from the current compliance perspective to a competitiveness focus; ensure further alignment between various EU-level strategies, initiatives and where possible, so as to support further PSCs in alignment 7
with egovernment development, developments in the Single Digital Gateway, services passport, etc. At an operational level, to, amongst others: consider the integration of online information related to other contact points such as those falling under the Mutual Recognition Regulation, Construction Products Regulations and SOLVIT with that of the PSC; facilitate integration of information on online portals. Additional comments received by members of the Government group include: The point of single contact established by the Services Directive should provide all necessary information to companies and allow them to accomplish all procedures and formalities necessary for the access and use of their online activities. The point of single contact should be available for all authorization procedures, declarations, notifications and other formalities. Member States would appreciate more information on the relationship between such an improved PSC and the Single Digital Gateway currently being developed. Furthermore, without functioning e-idas legislation in practice, it is difficult to proceed to highperforming PSCs. In other words, no pressure put on Member States to improve their PSCs will have the ultimate effect unless e-idas functions effectively. The Commission should likewise specify its desires when it comes to the outputs of the PSCs in terms of what more specifically the PSCs should be able to do for their clients. This would be of benefit for the user as well. Any expansion of information to entrepreneurs and companies is considered positively, however, any consideration of this type must be supported by an "impact assessment" in order to know the cost for States and the advantages for trade and industry. The Points of Single Contact Charter on cross-border activity relating to businesses envisages an advance digitized portal system offering information on a country basis for each Member State. In addition the PSC has to handle and disseminate much important information for starting a business from abroad. The recommendations of the Business Europe are supported especially with: Extending the scope of the Points of Single Contact and turning them into comprehensive business portals could contribute to simplification, savings for public administrations and more a coherent approach in providing information and e-services to businesses. In particular, a Member State highlighted the opportunity to address synergies and potential overlaps with other contact points for businesses. Therefore, at a strategic level and within the Internal Market Strategy (adopted in October 2015), we recall the Services passport measure (2.3 Making the market without borders for services a practical reality) is recalled. In that sense, it should be considered to what extent the PSC can contribute to the services passport and vice-versa. The Commission has announced, in the Internal Market Strategy, a proposal for a Services Passport to deepen and improve the Single Market for services, through a harmonised notification form and an electronic document repository to increase certainty and reduce barriers for service providers who want to access other EU markets. The passport should allow businesses to solve practical problems they face and therefore Member States should 8
collaborate to facilitate mutual recognition of regulatory requirements, so that businesses do not have to follow different sets of rules, all aiming at a similar outcome. So, administrative procedures and requirements for service providers should be streamlined and simplified so that there is no need for duplicative documentation. The services passport system should meet the needs of users, e.g. by helping them prove their credentials and licences. It will need to be fit for the digital age, providing all of the tools that businesses need via a single digital channel that is integrated with other platforms, including the Single Digital Gateway. Each Member State would nominate a national competent authority, linked to existing structures wherever possible, in order to avoid unnecessary administrative costs or burdens on national authorities. Such existing structure has not yet been defined. Another Member State welcomed any improvement of the information provided to the industrial sector, especially to SME s. Nevertheless, implementation of ambitious objectives in relation to the PSCs should be done carefully, making compatible the improvement of the information and the transformation of the PSCs to real one-stop shops, taking into account the budget constraints and the increases in expenditure that this implies. For this reason, this Member State can support a "soft" review through the implementation of guidelines or of suggestions for improvements of the PSCs. But this Member State does not support new regulation setting additional obligations for the PSCs, unless it is based on a previous impact assessment accompanying the regulation. A Member State underlines that the conclusions reached for XII.5b are more problematic than those for XII.5a, because the services point of contact could integrate the other contact points (in particular about products). This would interfere in a problematic way with questions of administrative organization (budget, human resources) in Member States. The Commission plans to present the preparatory work for an Internal Market Gateway at the end of 2016. 9