Category: Aviation

Source: European Parliament

The European Parliament,

–  having regard to the report of 31 March 2022 by the Wise Persons Group on the Reform of the EU Customs Union entitled ‘Putting More Union in the European Customs: Ten proposals to make the EU Customs Union fit for a Geopolitical Europe’,

–  having regard to its position of 13 March 2024 on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Union Customs Code and the European Union Customs Authority, and repealing Regulation (EU) No 952/2013(1),

–  having regard to the Commission communication of 5 February 2025 entitled ‘A comprehensive EU toolbox for safe and sustainable e-commerce’ (COM(2025(0037),

–  having regard to Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937(2),

–  having regard to Directive (EU) 2024/1760 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 on corporate sustainability due diligence and amending Directive (EU) 2019/1937 and Regulation (EU) 2023/2859(3),

–  having regard to the report of April 2024 by Enrico Letta entitled ‘Much more than a market: Speed, Security, Solidarity – Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’(4),

–  having regard to Rule 55 of its Rules of Procedure,

–  having regard to the opinion of the Committee on International Trade,

–  having regard to the report of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A10-0133/2025),

A.  whereas e-commerce has transformed how consumers purchase and engage with businesses worldwide, unlocking unprecedented opportunities; whereas e-commerce presents significant challenges to the EU’s competitiveness and raises concerns over consumer rights and health and safety, particularly as certain product categories raise urgent concerns regarding their impact on vulnerable consumer groups; whereas it has an environmental impact, particularly through increased waste generation and carbon emissions resulting from transportation and logistics; whereas e-commerce has an impact on retailers’ attractiveness and therefore contributes to the hollowing out of city centres; whereas e-commerce also has social implications, particularly concerning working conditions in the warehousing and delivery sector;

B.  whereas over 75 % of EU consumers shop online; whereas the continued growth of e-commerce enhances consumer access, quality and price competition; whereas e-commerce lowers market entry barriers for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and entrepreneurs, fosters digital inclusion, supports underserved communities, and contributes to innovation, productivity and economic growth across the single market;

C.  whereas, with the surge in e-commerce imports, mainly coming from China, non-compliant sellers evading regulatory costs and undermining law-abiding businesses through means such as counterfeiting, have intensified unfair competition; whereas there is an urgent need to re-establish a level playing field for all businesses, especially SMEs; whereas it is crucial to ensure that enforcement efforts are adequately funded and equipped at both national and EU level, while avoiding excessive delegation of enforcement responsibilities to private actors;

D.  whereas European companies, namely SMEs, must comply with strict regulations and compete on an unlevel playing field with non-EU e-commerce platforms that avoid these obligations; whereas European companies dedicate material and human resources to ensure regulatory compliance, assuming significant administrative and financial burdens;

E.  whereas certain non-EU companies fail to comply with European data protection regulations, which guarantee a high level of privacy for consumers, by engaging in consumer profiling practices using personal data; whereas enhanced enforcement and cooperation is required to ensure consistent privacy protections for all consumers;

F.  whereas Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, in her 2024-2029 political guidelines, referred to the need to tackle challenges with online platforms to ensure that consumers and businesses alike benefit from a level playing field based on effective customs, tax and safety controls and sustainability standards, and tasked several Executive Vice-Presidents and Commissioners with fulfilling that mission;

G.  whereas the process of adapting the EU acquis to the online environment began several years ago, and numerous laws on products, consumer protection and product safety now include provisions to ensure robust safeguards in the digital landscape; whereas, notwithstanding these efforts, critical shortcomings persist in empowering authorities to hold the full supply chain accountable and ensure consumer protection, which need to be urgently addressed;

H.  whereas the Digital Services Act(5) (DSA), the General Product Safety Regulation(6) (GPSR), the Market Surveillance Regulation(7) (MSR) and the Consumer Protection Cooperation Regulation (CPC)(8) contribute to a safer and fair e-commerce environment, if well implemented and enforced; whereas, despite these laws, consumer and other organisations, as well as national authorities, have raised concerns over the large number of unsafe products detected in the EU that fail to comply with EU legislation on product safety and environmental and chemical standards; whereas better funding of and coordination among Member States’ enforcement authorities are essential to address these risks effectively;

I.  whereas e-commerce may significantly impact consumers by providing them with unparalleled convenience, access to diverse products and competitive pricing; whereas e-commerce also exposes consumers to risks such as unsafe products, a lack of transparency and manipulative practices that exploit their vulnerabilities;

J.  whereas the protection of consumers is essential to the functioning of the EU’s internal market, as it ensures trust and fairness in commercial practices, thereby enabling sustainable economic growth and innovation; whereas addressing these concerns is important in promoting transparency, fairness and the responsible development of digital services and e-commerce;

K.  whereas people from more disadvantaged socio-economic backgrounds, including low-income families and children, are more exposed to the risks posed by unsafe products due to their lower prices, aggressive marketing and widespread distribution;

L.  whereas concerns over the suitability of customs procedures under the current Union Customs Code(9) for e-commerce were a significant driver of the Commission’s customs reform package, including the legislative proposals on the revision of the Union Customs Code and establishing an EU Customs Authority (UCC reform), and the removal of the EUR 150 exemption threshold (de minimis) for the payment of customs duties and VAT on imported products;

M.  whereas customs authorities are in need of substantial investments, particularly to ensure a sufficient number of properly trained staff to guarantee the functioning of EU customs systems, which are facing an exponential increase in demand for customs checks; whereas without the necessary investments in staff, digital solutions cannot achieve benefits in terms of efficiency and harmonisation;

N.  whereas advanced screening technologies, such as artificial intelligence and blockchain, could significantly enhance the capacity of customs and market surveillance authorities to flag high-risk shipments and automate compliance checks at scale; whereas investment in such technologies remains fragmented and uneven across Member States; whereas increased EU-level funding, coordination and efforts to ensure interoperability are essential to accelerate their deployment and improve the overall efficiency and effectiveness of enforcement mechanisms;

O.  whereas digital tools, such as artificial intelligence and the internet of things, can help track non-compliant products, but must respect consumer privacy and must not lead to the general monitoring of users;

P.  whereas the Commission communication of 5 February 2025 on a comprehensive EU toolbox for safe and sustainable e-commerce, highlights that the volume of e-commerce goods bought by EU consumers on non-EU online platforms is expected to continue growing rapidly, benefiting from the current customs duty exemption for low-value consignments (up to EUR 150);

The surge in non-compliant goods in e-commerce

1.  Highlights the increasingly high number of purchases being made by EU consumers on non-EU online platforms in business-to-consumer environments and in emerging manufacturer-to-consumer and direct-to-consumer environments; emphasises, as described in the Letta report on the future of the single market(10), that the circulation of harmful products in the single market is escalating and that EU consumers are wasting EUR 19,3 billion per year buying dangerous products that can lead to injuries and that are detrimental to our economies;

2.  Notes that 4,6 billion e-commerce items under the EUR 150 exemption threshold were imported into the EU in 2024, 91 % of which originated from China, amounting to up to 12 million small e-commerce items per day and amounting to almost twice the number recorded in 2023 (2,4 billion) and more than triple the number in 2022 (1,4 billion); notes that this surge has exacerbated compliance challenges, especially in product safety, and that market surveillance authorities and independent investigations have reported alarming non-compliance rates;

3.  Stresses that most unsafe and illegal products are shipped to the EU in large volumes of individual, and often small, parcels sold to EU consumers via online platforms from non-EU countries, in particular China; stresses that such products are difficult to control, in particular for customs authorities at the entry points, which are mostly located at major ports and logistical airports for e-commerce; emphasises that this makes it almost impossible to stop such products from entering the EU and makes it increasingly difficult for market surveillance authorities to detect and remove such products from the internal market and for consumer authorities to do so once the products reach EU consumers;

4.  Stresses that the rapid growth of e-commerce has significant environmental implications due to issues such as a rise in packaging waste, the larger carbon footprint from low-quality and short life cycle products and their shipment, and problems with waste management and non-recyclable materials; underlines, in this respect, the need to ensure compliance with environmental legislation and to encourage sustainable ways of consuming;

5.  Stresses that some non-EU online marketplaces are facing allegations regarding the use of forced labour; underlines, in this respect, that Regulation (EU) 2024/3015 prohibits products made with forced labour from entering the EU market, and that it must be effectively enforced after its application, including for online sales;

6.  Notes that, on 1 December 2025, Regulation (EU) 2023/2411(11) on the protection of geographical indications for craft and industrial products will come into force; notes that, if not accompanied by adequate promotion and protection, especially with respect to the markets of non-EU countries, geographical indications risk remaining ineffective; calls, therefore, on the Commission, together with the customs authorities of the Member States, to strengthen checks aimed at intercepting products that violate the rules on geographical indications;

7.  Is concerned that the prevailing business model of certain major non-EU online platforms is based on the rapid, large-scale production and distribution of fast fashion and ultra-fast fashion products, prioritising speed and low cost over sustainability, safety and quality; regrets that many such products do not comply with EU legislation, yet non-compliant sellers frequently evade meaningful enforcement or sanctions; stresses that such practices constitute a form of social and environmental dumping, resulting in a persistent and unfair competitive advantage for these non-EU platforms, exerting disproportionate pressure on European undertakings, in particular SMEs and micro-enterprises; emphasises that this hampers the development of the EU’s textile and clothing sector;

E-commerce crossroads: navigating compliance challenges

8.  Recognises that the EU has established a robust compliance framework, which also applies to products sold online, but that greater efforts are still needed for the full enforcement of the compliance framework; underlines, in this respect, the importance of the DSA, the DMA, the MSR, the GPSR, consumer protection rules and various product and environmental laws; emphasises that market surveillance authorities face challenges in applying these frameworks to online platforms as evidenced by the Commission’s recently published evaluation report on the implementation of Article 4 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 and, in particular, in cases where large quantities of a product are sold in small consignments; considers that the thorough implementation of the DSA and other regulatory acquis is necessary to combat unsafe, non-compliant and counterfeit products;

9.  Stresses the need to implement the existing compliance framework and evaluate these measures when considering new legislation, including new obligations for online marketplaces;

10.  Notes that conducting physical tests is particularly impractical for small parcels sent directly to the final consumer and that customs authorities will therefore continue to rely primarily on checking the documentation, rather than inspecting the products themselves;

11.  Highlights the significant enforcement gaps caused by the limited resources and insufficient level of digitalisation of customs and market surveillance authorities, the lack of human resources and harmonised and interoperable technological tools across Member States, and the insufficient data sharing and overall lack of cooperation and coordination between customs authorities, platforms and market surveillance entities; acknowledges that physical inspections are unavoidably and inherently limited given the volume of e-commerce parcels entering the EU;

12.  Considers that mystery shopping exercises by market surveillance authorities, as put forward in the Commission communication on e-commerce, are an important tool to verify compliance for products sold through online platforms; stresses, however, that if sellers are based outside the EU or are not traceable and if fake addresses are used for responsible persons, there is no liable legal entity and it is impossible for market surveillance authorities to take enforcement actions;

13.  Considers that EU manufacturers and retailers, particularly SMEs, face unfair competition due to non-EU platforms enabling non-EU manufacturers and their non-compliant products to easily enter the EU market, bypassing applicable regulations and standards; highlights that, while EU manufacturers must comply with strict safety, environmental and quality rules, many low-value products sold through these platforms evade customs and market surveillance checks due to the way they are shipped to the EU; raises concerns that some of these platforms and non-EU traders deliberately exploit this loophole, allowing non-compliant imports to enter the EU single market unchecked, putting European manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers at a disadvantage, weakening their competitiveness and hindering their ability to innovate, which could lead to the closure of many micro-enterprises and small enterprises;

14.  Stresses that EU manufacturers are de facto subject to significantly stricter market surveillance compared to non-EU manufactures that reach EU consumers via e-commerce platforms; deeply regrets the loss of market share and jobs caused by the influx of cheaper products that do not comply with European standards, particularly on safety and quality, as well as other illegal products, shipped from non-EU countries, directly affecting EU SMEs and the strength of EU companies and their capacity to invest and maintain profitability;

15.  Highlights the difference between online platforms acting as intermediaries and those acting as importers; notes, in particular, that the EU e-commerce platforms that act as importers face compliance costs that increase their retail prices up to 40 %, which has an impact on final consumers; underlines that EU-based importers face stricter obligations and higher costs, while intermediary platforms allow non-EU sellers to ship directly to EU consumers without ensuring compliance;

16.  Recognises that e-commerce platforms are subject to various obligations under the DSA and the GPSR and may be held liable under the Product Liability Directive(12) (PLD) in specific circumstances; recalls, in this respect, that online platforms are liable if they do not respect their specific obligations as intermediaries; believes, however, that consumer redress must be ensured in all cases; underlines, in this respect, that where the manufacturer is established outside the EU and no importer, authorised representative, or fulfilment service provider can be identified, online marketplaces should provide adequate and proportionate remedies to consumers where they fail to comply with the DSA, particularly with Articles 30 and 31 or with Article 22 of the GPSR;

17.  Emphasises that online marketplaces are requested to trace their traders (‘know your business customer’) under the DSA, which should discourage traders from selling unsafe or counterfeit goods, and are obliged to comply with the ‘compliance by design’ rules to increase overall traceability; highlights the lack of accountability of online platforms in case of untraceable sellers or sellers based outside the jurisdiction of the EU; notes the considerable level of non-compliance with the ‘know your business customer’ principle and the rise in new selling practices via social media platforms, where this obligation is not effectively applied, allowing non-EU sellers to offer non-compliant goods to EU users directly; stresses, therefore, the need for online platforms to make best efforts to ensure full traceability of sellers and products, preventing listings from appearing without verified product compliance details;

18.  Highlights the fact that the information of a responsible economic operator in the EU under the GPSR, acting on behalf of a non-EU trader or platform, is often wrong or missing; notes that even when this information is available, the responsible person in the EU may not be accountable, particularly when the responsible person is an authorised representative; is concerned that market surveillance authorities report significant difficulties in contacting these non-EU traders and enforcing EU law, and that even when contact is established, enforcing penalties against them is often unfeasible;

19.  Considers that creating a database of the responsible persons in the EU to enable real-time cross-checking for verification, along with establishing an accreditation procedure for them, could enhance transparency and reinforce accountability throughout the e-commerce import supply chain;

20.  Supports research and enforcement actions by consumer organisations and the opening of investigations initiated by consumer authorities in the EU, as part of the CPC network, as well as under the DSA, against non-EU online platforms for potential violations of EU product safety and consumer laws; expresses concern over the slow progress of these investigations and calls for their swift conclusion; underlines the need for enforcement to be a deterrent that includes adequate sanctions to ensure compliance; underlines, in this respect, that particular attention is necessary at national and EU level to address recurrent non-compliance that may have been identified in previous controls of similar products, including via the application of interim measures; stresses that the enforcement and effectiveness of commitments received from online platforms should be closely monitored;

21.  Urges the Commission and CPC authorities to initiate a structured enforcement dialogue with consumer representatives, traders and other stakeholders to identify systemic infringements requiring stronger enforcement;

22.  Notes the complexity for EU authorities to enforce EU laws when the economic operators are established outside the EU; highlights the need for enhanced international cooperation agreements, particularly with major e-commerce exporters;

Strong enforcement policies to combat non-compliant e-commerce products

Urgent need for short-term measures

23.  Urges the Member States to increase funding and resources for market surveillance, customs, consumer protection and digital services authorities so that they can better address the challenges posed by unsafe and illicit products; asks the Commission to support stronger cooperation, information sharing and data exchange between competent authorities, including market surveillance and customs authorities, and stresses that cooperation across different sectors should be improved; urges the Member States to ensure effective coordination among different market surveillance authorities in their territories, and to strengthen the powers of the single liaison offices; highlights that the Member States and the EU have the responsibility to ensure that market surveillance and customs authorities are properly resourced, trained and equipped to have the capacity to fulfil their mission, including proper investigative powers;

24.  Calls on market surveillance authorities to invest more resources in joint or coordinated activities with other Member States or relevant authorities and, in particular, to increase the number and the frequency of coordinated enforcement actions such as sweeps, mystery-shopping exercises and peer-reviews; urges relevant authorities to actively participate in these activities and the Commission to make full use of its coordination powers;

25.  Welcomes the Commission’s intention to coordinate the control of customs and market surveillance authorities under priority control areas focused on products from non-EU countries that pose significant safety hazards and a risk of non-compliance; emphasises that this initiative should generate valuable risk profile data, which could be used in further enforcement activities and penalties to non-compliant actors; calls on the Commission to strengthen cooperation within the EU Product Compliance Network and to increase EU funding for customs cooperation under the customs programme and for market surveillance operations under the single market programme; stresses that the lack of adequate resources has hindered the effective deployment of tools, such as the widespread use of mystery shopping activities by market surveillance authorities or the use of trusted flaggers under the DSA; points out to the Commission that, in addition to existing testing facilities for toys and radio equipment, more testing facilities for e-commerce goods are urgently needed, such as for batteries, textiles, cosmetics, electrical appliances and other products; asks the Member States to deploy sufficient resources to guarantee an increased capacity of testing facilities and to increase investments in equipment for the detection of unsafe and illegal goods;

26.  Emphasises that for data and security reasons, Member States should restrict high-risk vendors from operating in their critical infrastructure and border security systems, including for the procurement of security screening and cargo scanning equipment used at airports and ports;

27.  Highlights the fact that, under the GPSR, online marketplaces are obliged to establish a single point of contact, register with the Safety Gate Portal and indicate the information concerning their single contact point on the portal; asks the Commission to effectively enforce this and other obligations of online marketplaces and to support the Member States’ market surveillance authorities in implementing the GPSR and the MSR; notes that the GPSR introduced direct data exchanges between enforcement authorities and e-commerce platforms; believes, however, that in order for the system to work effectively, a direct link with customs authorities should be provided;

28.  Notes that the current system is more reactive than preventive, as authorities intervene only after dangerous products have already been sold to consumers, rather than preventing their distribution; recalls that, under the GPSR, online marketplace providers are encouraged to check products against the Safety Gate Portal before listing them on their interfaces; underlines that random sampling testing can only be efficient if it is conducted regularly;

29.  Emphasises that the swift implementation of the Digital Product Passport (DPP) for several critical products sold online is essential to strengthen the enforcement of existing legislation; urges the Commission to present the necessary secondary legislation on the DPP as soon as possible, in particular for textiles, toys, cosmetics, electronics and other products with high non-compliance rates and associated risks; calls on the Commission to continuously assess the requirements, technical design and operation of the DPP under the Ecodesign for Sustainable Products Regulation(13) (ESPR) as a priority; calls on the Commission to support businesses, in particular micro-enterprises and SMEs, in the implementation of the DPP;

30.  Proposes a mandatory DPP with early compliance verification for all products imported via e-commerce, including detailed quality and compliance data, to be integrated directly into the EU customs data hub, allowing authorities to pre-screen information on products before they are placed on the single market;

31.  Urges the Member States to make substantial efforts to increase customs controls and improve risk analysis, as the detection and removal of non-compliant goods can reduce the harm to EU consumers and protect the economic interests of EU businesses; underlines that the introduction in the customs risk analysis of a presumption of non-compliance for goods identical to those already found non-compliant could facilitate controls by customs authorities and improve cost efficiency; stresses the importance of reinforcing customs centres so they are better equipped to handle the large volume of small parcels that are difficult to control using traditional methods, including advanced screening technologies to identify suspicious packages at entry points; asks for more rigorous compliance checks, as well as random checks by the authorities on high-tonnage transport; urges the Member States, furthermore, to significantly increase the level of digitalisation of import procedures in customs authorities in order to implement existing legislation and accelerate customs procedures, especially in view of the high numbers of parcels;

32.  Underlines that businesses, particularly SMEs, urgently require clear guidelines from the Commission for the effective implementation of the GPSR, including clarification on its interplay with overlapping legislation, such as the DSA, the MSR, the PLD, and sector-specific laws on toys, cosmetics and detergents; calls on the Commission to issue these guidelines before the end of the first half of 2025 to facilitate businesses’ compliance; considers that the evaluation report on the interaction of the DSA with other legal acts, which is due on 17 November 2025, should take into account different legislation, in particular on product compliance, the obligations of online marketplaces, enforcement rules and possible future improvements on simplification and implementation; calls on the Commission to assess all possible further actions, including the evaluation of sectoral legislation, which is necessary to ensure legal predictability and that no legal loopholes or enforcement gaps are left when it comes to direct imports from non-EU countries via online marketplaces;

33.  Calls on the relevant national authorities to make full use of the existing and recently adopted enforcement toolbox, especially in relation to provisions on e-commerce set out in the MSR, GPSR and DSA, such as takedown orders, prohibition, restriction on the making available of a product on the market or its removal, recalls and sanctions as measures to counter the rise of illegal and non-compliant imports from non-EU countries;

34.  Underlines that regulatory enforcement measures taken against non-compliant actors should not put disproportionate burdens on compliant actors or cause unintentional harm to the second-hand market;

35.  Stresses the need to ensure the protection of intellectual property rights in the light of the increase in non-European counterfeit goods on e-commerce platforms; notes that these practices harm the competitiveness of European companies and pose risks to innovation and the incentives for research and development; calls for stronger measures against the sale of counterfeit goods online; urges the Commission to issue clear guidelines on trusted flaggers and stresses that rights holders should be recognised as eligible trusted flaggers when they meet the criteria outlined in Article 22 of the DSA;

36.  Points out that the Member States should make better use of the available sets of penalties and sanctions against economic operators, as well as other available tools including interim measures, in order to create a deterrent effect to dissuade economic operators from infringing upon the applicable legislation;

37.  Urges the Commission to take effective measures, including legislative measures where legal loopholes are clearly identified, without delay to ensure legal certainty and a level playing field for European companies, placing particular emphasis on SMEs;

The need for regulatory reforms

38.  Calls for the removal of barriers to enforcing consumer rights, such as legal warranty claims and the right to return items; calls on the Commission to review the CPC Regulation without delay as this will be fundamental for a more effective cross-border enforcement of EU consumer law and the fight against unsafe products; asks the Commission, in this context, to provide for clear measures to further strengthen enforcement powers over non-EU traders and platforms and ensure better coordination of EU and national actions and the exchange of information among authorities, as well as with authorities in non-EU countries; highlights that the structure of the European Competition Network could be used as an example to follow for enforcement and information exchange in the case of suspected violations impacting multiple Member States, especially to combat non-compliant products effectively; stresses the importance of granting the Commission direct powers to investigate and sanction certain high impact breaches of consumer law, thus ensuring more effective, simultaneous and uniform enforcement and sanctions under EU consumer law;

39.  Notes that the CPC Regulation already empowers enforcement authorities to act against non-compliant traders and even gives the possibility for Member States to impose penalties and interim measures such as restricting access to the website; acknowledges, however, that the limitation is that this action must be taken on a country-by-country basis rather than at EU level, with each country applying its own penalties, making the consequences of violations uneven;

40.  Notes that enforcement in the Member States is fragmented, which leads to inefficiencies; calls for better coordination of enforcement and compliance oversight effective information exchange between Member States and for a more uniform application of the EU acquis; calls on the Commission to assess the MSR, particularly the need for an EU Market Surveillance Authority that would ensure consistency and provide operational support to the activities conducted by the relevant national market surveillance authorities and foster cooperation with the new EU Customs Authority (EUCA), as well as the implementation of Article 4 of the MSR, defining the responsible economic operators in the EU for product compliance; stresses that, to date, the designated responsible economic operator often lacks the capacity to provide redress or compensation to consumers, in particular when being an authorised representative;

41.  Supports the Commission’s ambition to swiftly advance the upcoming interinstitutional negotiations with Parliament and the Council on the UCC reform and the two proposals for Council acts on removing the exemption threshold on customs duties for goods valued under EUR 150; urges, therefore, the Member States to accelerate the negotiation procedure in the Council, recognising the urgency of the customs reform for EU competitiveness and the protection of EU consumers; underlines, however, that removing the threshold is a necessary step but not a stand-alone solution, as customs authorities will still only be able to inspect a limited percentage of parcels; stresses that immediate removal of the customs duty exemption is necessary for high-risk imports from product and consumer safety perspectives; emphasises the need for the customs reform to ensure coherence across regulatory frameworks, particularly avoiding duplication or conflicts with the DSA, and highlights the essential role customs authorities play in detecting non-compliant and unsafe products;

42.  Stresses that the UCC reform will provide the necessary tools for customs authorities to better supervise and control the goods entering the EU, help to strengthen the single market and customs union, improve the detection of unsafe and illicit products, and contribute to a level playing field among economic operators; welcomes, in this respect, the proposal under the UCC Regulation to establish the cooperation mechanism with market surveillance authorities that will improve the effectiveness of product controls; emphasises the importance of enhancing customs infrastructure and staffing to manage e-commerce effectively; highlights the need for simplified compliance processes tailored specifically to SMEs; calls on the Member States to introduce automated, forward-looking customs clearing systems, for instance by obliging platforms to enrol and clear customs automatically at the point of sales;

43.  Is concerned that some non-EU traders are circumventing EU customs checks by clearing goods by customs at the point of origin; stresses that those non-EU trading companies often prefer to pay penalties rather than open packages upon arrival at EU customs, aiming to unload shipments and depart immediately; is deeply concerned that customs authorities find that many packages are either undeclared or incorrectly declared and are sometimes fraudulently labelled; highlights that the UCC reform should also address these aspects;

44.  Takes note of the concern expressed by the ECC network regarding the drop-shipping business model, which raises challenges in consumer protection, product safety and regulatory compliance; regrets that consumers often face misleading practices, difficulties in returning products, and unexpected import duties, while a significant share of drop-shipped products fail to comply with EU safety standards; stresses that drop-shipping complicates enforcement due to untraceable businesses and cross-border complexities, while VAT and data protection compliance remain key concerns; notes that when combined with influencer marketing, drop-shipping may exacerbate transparency issues, reputational risks and inconsistent outcomes; calls on the Commission to assess how to address drop-shipping-related issues;

45.  Highlights the fact that the concept of a ‘deemed importer’ aims to ensure a level playing field for both EU and non-EU online platforms; notes that, in the context of an online sale from outside the EU, this measure would relieve customers of non-EU online platforms from being considered importers, as they are under the current UCC, while a non-EU platform or trader would instead be considered the ‘deemed importer’; believes that ‘deemed importer’ responsibilities should be clearly defined and consistent with the provisions of the DSA; emphasises that platforms being responsible for ensuring that VAT and customs duties are collected at the point of sale, rather than upon entry into the EU, will reduce fraud and tax evasion;

46.  Expresses concern about the optional nature of the Import One-Stop Shop (IOSS) scheme for all online operators, which deviates from the original objectives of the VAT in the digital age (ViDA) initiative; underlines the necessity of additional actions to strengthen the system’s robustness and curb potential misuse; urges the Commission to engage closely with stakeholders to establish safeguards for the IOSS against fraudulent practices; recommends that such safeguards be both comprehensive and streamlined to effectively deter fraud while avoiding excessive administrative burdens; stresses the necessity of extending the IOSS applicability to goods beyond the customs duty exemption threshold of EUR 150 to prevent undervaluation and ensure fair competition;

47.  Calls for the establishment of a new EUCA in 2026 to provide expert support to the Member States’ customs authorities; underlines that the EUCA should in its coordination role also map testing and control capabilities of customs and market surveillance authorities in and across the Member States and be mandated to execute unannounced inspections to detect possible unsafe or non-compliant products and issue sanctions in case of non-compliance; notes that the new EU customs data hub will allow for enhanced cooperation between the EUCA and customs and other authorities through data exchange and the interoperability of national IT systems, and thus facilitate coordinated controls and the detection of non-compliant products; considers that it is essential to fully integrate the functionalities of the Customs Single Window into the EU customs data hub; notes in the context of the proposed EUCA, the importance of regularly consulting representatives of various stakeholders to provide early warning to the EUCA;

48.  Stresses that, given the urgency, the entry into force of different obligations planned in the UCC revision should be accelerated, such as the establishment of the EU customs data hub; calls on the Commission to immediately start the preparatory work necessary for the establishment of the EU customs data hub, so as to speed up the preparation of its e-commerce functions in 2026;

49.  Urges the Commission to carry out an impact assessment regarding the idea of e-commerce items being shipped to the EU in bulk and, in turn, the establishment of warehouses in the EU by non-EU traders for such goods before they are put into parcels for delivery to customers; recognises that such shipments of e-commerce items in bulk and their storage in warehouses in the EU might increase the oversight of customs and market surveillance authorities and improve their controls and detection of non-compliant goods compared to single parcel shipments; calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider all possible options to incentivise such practices, including a simplified status for trust and check traders and cost-benefit assessments for incentive schemes; further notes that bulk shipping may not be feasible for all non-EU traders, particularly those operating consumer-to-consumer (C2C) or second-hand models; emphasises that this approach should strike a balance between the compliance advantages and the practical requirements of e-commerce operators, ensuring that it avoids creating logistical bottlenecks or placing an undue burden on varying business models;

50.  Acknowledges that the Commission has released a non-paper outlining the introduction of a non-discriminatory handling fee on e-commerce items, to be charged by customs authorities for goods sold in distance sales with the aim of covering the increased supervisory costs of custom authorities, namely the checking of the data, carrying out risk analysis, performing documentary and physical controls and specifically the financing of the EUCA and the data hub; insists that Member States should avoid unilateral fees to avoid a fragmentation of the customs union; underlines that the proposal suggests a flat EUR 2 rate per item delivered directly to the customer or a smaller 50 cent fee for Trust and Check Traders operating a business model of a customs warehouse for distance sales within the EU; calls on the Commission to conduct a proper evaluation of whether the proposed amount complies with World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and whether it is sufficient and proportionate to reach the objectives; insists that this handling fee not be incurred by the consumer;

51.  Notes the enormous waste management and product destruction cost arising from the huge amount of non-compliant and unsafe products imported via non-EU country e-commerce; underlines that a large share of these products is non-recyclable, environmentally harmful or non-compliant with applicable chemicals legislation, further driving up environmental costs for public authorities; calls therefore on the Commission to evaluate the necessary measures to mitigate the environmental impact of non-EU countries’ e-commerce activities including the feasibility of a waste management fee on all products sold via non-EU countries’ online marketplaces to ensure that environmental costs are not supported by EU taxpayers;

52.  Stresses that inconsistent penalties and different enforcement strategies for non-compliance in different Member States lead to ‘border shopping’ or ‘customs shopping’; supports the minimum harmonisation of infringements and non-criminal sanctions for non-compliance across the Member States and through the EUCA as this would avoid creating weak entry points in the EU customs territory; stresses that this should entail a common framework for minimum harmonisation to close existing loopholes and thus tackle e-commerce challenges; underlines that Member States can impose additional sanctions tailored to national contexts;

53.  Notes that the Commission is scrutinising certain non-EU online marketplaces for employing manipulative practices, including dark patterns, addictive design features, deceptive influencer marketing, and the dissemination of fake or misleading online reviews; recognises that, according to the Digital Fairness Fitness Check report, unfair commercial practices cost consumers nearly EUR 8 billion annually, and that the use of unfair techniques to pressure consumers, especially vulnerable ones and children, into impulse purchases leads to overconsumption and overspending; calls on the Commission to address these issues in the upcoming Digital Fairness Act, unless they are already covered by existing legislation, with a view to effectively tackling unfair practices and closing existing legal loopholes, while staying consistent with existing legal frameworks and avoiding unnecessary regulatory burdens;

54.  Emphasises the need to ensure that any new initiatives proposed by the Commission in the area of customs enforcement or compliance do not result in additional administrative burdens for European businesses, particularly SMEs;

55.  Stresses the importance of the role of the European Public Prosecutor’s Office (EPPO) in the field of cross-border investigations of customs offences, which notably include fraud, for example the illicit undervaluing of the price of products in order to avoid paying the import taxes; emphasises that the large-scale circumvention of customs duties, including fraudulent e-commerce declarations and undervaluation, as well as the avoidance of controls and ‘forum shopping,’ must be effectively combated through criminal law investigations conducted by the EPPO, with the support of customs authorities; stresses that the EPPO’s robust legal framework for cross-border investigations should be leveraged to dismantle the criminal networks behind such operations;

Additional enforcement actions

56.  Calls on the Commission and the national competent authorities to strongly enforce the DSA with regard to the responsibility of online marketplaces, in particular their obligations in terms of recommender systems, interface design, right to information, the compliance by design rules to increase the overall traceability, and their ‘know your business customer’ obligation; highlights that compliance with these obligations should dissuade non-compliant traders from offering their products in the EU through marketplaces or shopping services of social media falling in this category, and calls on the Commission to provide practical support in tracing traders that do not abide by EU rules; stresses the need for a DSA-based network of trusted flaggers for illegal products and e-commerce to ensure that platforms fulfil their obligations effectively;

57.  Stresses that the enhancement of cooperation and coordination with national competent authorities is crucial; asks for more cooperation among all relevant authorities, such as Member State authorities, customs authorities, and consumer protection authorities, and for stronger coordination among all established expert groups; stresses that, under the DSA, the investigative actions against non-compliant online marketplaces need to yield results and lead to deterrent sanctions in order to prevent the offer of non-compliant products; emphasises the importance of these investigations in addressing systemic risks, compliance failures, illegal content dissemination, addictive design features, dark patterns and the use of influencers for manipulative advertising;

58.  Calls on enforcement authorities to strengthen monitoring and enforcement actions targeting new sales channels; recommends that competent authorities be equipped with adequate resources, technological tools, and cross-border cooperation mechanisms to effectively identify and take action against non-compliant traders operating via social media and other emerging platforms;

59.  Suggests that online marketplace sellers must provide a reshipping address and contact point within the EU to allow consumers to easily return non-compliant goods without undue costs and to allow authorities to inspect goods; believes that online marketplaces should be responsible for checking this and should be held accountable for enforcement;

60.  Calls for an urgent in-depth evaluation of the effectiveness of the provision of the ‘responsible person for products placed on the Union market’, particularly those of non-EU traders, building on the results of the evaluation report on Article 4 of the MSR; calls on the Commission to consider among its future actions the introduction of a mandatory requirement for non-EU traders to appoint a responsible person in the EU with increased legal and financial liability;

61.  Notes that postal and other delivery services are undergoing significant transformations due to the rapid growth of e-commerce; raises concerns that the Universal Postal Union’s terminal dues system in practice does not apply to e-commerce flows; notes that, as a result, Chinese e-commerce businesses, due to shipment volumes, enter into commercial agreements directly with the EU postal operators for exceptionally attractive delivery rates that are lower than those for goods manufactured within the EU, leading to deeper fragmentation of the single market for postal services; urges the Commission to evaluate the impact of e-commerce on postal services and the internal market, and to consider how postal services can contribute to strengthening the single market and benefiting consumers, and to the overall competitiveness of the EU;

62.  Welcomes the approval of the ViDA reforms, which represent a significant step towards modernising VAT collection in the e-commerce sector; emphasises the importance of the Single VAT ID for online marketplaces and for European manufacturers, enabling them to compete on a level playing field by simplifying VAT compliance across the Member States; highlights that this measure can also facilitate in-bulk importation and the warehousing of goods within the EU, reducing reliance on fragmented cross-border shipments and ensuring that value-added services, such as fulfilment and logistics, take place within the single market; stresses that these reforms will enhance tax compliance, reduce administrative burdens, and improve enforcement while supporting fair competition and strengthening EU supply chains; calls on the Commission and the Member States to ensure the effective implementation of these measures to maximise their benefits for European businesses and consumers;

63.  Calls on the Commission to consider measures aimed at reducing the unnecessary regulatory and administrative compliance burden for EU manufacturers, in particular for SMEs, in order to level the playing field and enable them to better compete with global competitors operating under more efficient compliance standards;

64.  Calls on the Commission to enhance international cooperation with other like-minded countries to exchange best practices, identify common challenges and risks and develop joint actions on e-commerce;

65.  Welcomes, in this regard, the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce; notes that the agreement will benefit consumers and businesses by facilitating cross-border electronic transactions, reducing barriers to digital trade and promoting innovation in e-commerce; underlines, however, that the agreement is only a foundation and encourages the Commission to pursue ambitious trade agreements in negotiations with partners to ensure binding provisions on e-commerce;

Increased use of IT tools

66.  Welcomes the fact that the Commission is preparing a project to streamline existing databases, including the Information and Communication System on Market Surveillance, the EU Safety Gate and the Customs Risk Management System, into a common interoperable system gathering all information on the safety of products, counterfeit product tracking and notifications of accidents and to ensure interoperability with the DPP and the future EU customs data hub; calls on the Commission to publish information regarding the implementation timeline and the resource requirements of this initiative;

67.  Supports the Commission’s aim to provide market surveillance authorities with the e-Surveillance WebCrawler tool to flag reappearing dangerous products; asks the Commission to make available another web crawler for detecting new listings as soon as possible, in order to flag non-compliant products before they reach consumers;

68.  Supports the responsible use of artificial intelligence, blockchain and the internet of things for scanning and analysing product listings on e-commerce platforms, automating customs and market surveillance inspections and risk identification and integrating product compliance databases for real-time checks between market surveillance and customs authorities, in line with EU and national laws; notes, however, that the high implementation costs of these technologies remain a barrier; underlines that the full uptake of these technologies will make handling more efficient, especially for low-value goods, and that the high volume of parcels containing many different items faces limited inspection capabilities;

69.  Demands that the Commission and the Member States exchange best practices and find incentives to provide the necessary funding and support for national authorities in order to increase the responsible use of technological solutions; suggests that artificial intelligence, blockchain and the internet of things could be used to scan and analyse product listings on e-commerce platforms, automate inspections and risk profiling, and integrate product compliance databases for real-time checks by several authorities;

70.  Underlines that Member States should reinforce customs checks in particular with low-value shipments by implementing risk-based assessment systems and digital tracking to prevent non-compliant products from bypassing customs controls; calls on the Member States to increase the level of automated processes, such as automated scans of labels when processing parcels at customs;

71.  Recognises that some online marketplaces also use a number of IT tools to detect and remove unsafe and illicit products that are found on their platforms; highlights, however, the fact that online marketplaces need to further invest in and increase their use of these IT tools to effectively avoid the offer and sale of unsafe and illicit products; calls on the Commission to further incentivise the use of IT tools by online marketplaces in this regard, while ensuring full compliance with Article 8 of the DSA, which provides that there is no general obligation to monitor the information that providers of intermediary services transmit or store;

72.  Suggests that, without prejudice to the principle enshrined in the DSA that providers of intermediary services online should not be subject to a monitoring obligation with respect to obligations of general nature, online intermediaries engaged in the sale, promotion or distribution of products within the EU market should consider on their own the use of risk-based digital monitoring systems to identify and prevent the presence of illegal content (presentation, description or offering for sale of illegal or dangerous products); stresses the importance of implementing swift response mechanisms to ensure the permanent removal of specific illegal content as soon as providers of intermediary services online have actual knowledge of such illegal content being presented on their interfaces, as well as the necessity for hosting service providers to take all necessary measures to prevent the reappearance of the same or equivalent illegal content on their platform;

Improvement of consumer awareness and information

73.  Emphasises that EU consumers and European SMEs engaged in importing activities often lack sufficient information on the possible dangers of potentially unsafe products and the harm they can cause; stresses that consumers are increasingly targeted by traders who, despite their legal obligations, often do not inform consumers that their products are made and shipped from outside of the EU; acknowledges that there is demand among EU consumers for cheaper products, which are purchased on non-EU online marketplaces due to their much lower production costs and uncompetitive conditions for EU businesses and online platforms; stresses that online marketplaces may use manipulative design techniques (dark patterns) to influence purchasing decisions; warns against the risks associated with compulsive purchasing behaviours, financial difficulties and the accumulation of unnecessary goods; calls on the Commission and the Member States to organise information and awareness-raising campaigns on the purchase of unsafe products online and their possible health, privacy, environmental and competitiveness consequences, with a special focus on vulnerable consumers and at peak consumption times;

74.  Recommends fostering second-hand consumption as a sustainable approach to addressing EU consumers’ need for affordable goods; stresses the importance of promoting and incentivising the reuse of second-hand products as an important driver for unlocking the potential of the circular economy;

75.  Asks the Commission and the Member States to strictly enforce the ecodesign requirements for textiles and other products under the ESPR, as well as the provisions of the Directive on Empowering Consumers for the Green Transition(14) in order to make sure that consumers are better informed about sustainability aspects, such as environmental impacts, energy use, reparability and durability of products purchased on online marketplaces;

76.  Considers that consumer authorities, organisations, industry associations and chambers of commerce should be encouraged to conduct large, coordinated awareness-raising campaigns on consumer rights, potential risks, including the possibilities for collective redress, and redress mechanisms when purchasing online, in particular on non-EU online platforms; stresses the need to also raise awareness about the environmental, health and social impacts of unsustainable business practices and to alert consumers about the role of new advertising techniques, such as influencers and digital opinion leaders, in shaping perceptions of product safety and reliability; calls on the Commission to take a coordinating role as mentioned in the Commission communication of 5 February 2025 on e-commerce and to explore possibilities to finance cross-border information campaigns developed in cooperation with researchers, civil society and other relevant stakeholders;

Trade and development considerations

77.  Calls on the Commission to implement its level of ambition in agreements with international partners at the multilateral level, as unsafe products constitute not only a European, but also a global challenge; reiterates that, as set out in Parliament’s position on the UCC revision, the EUCA should establish working arrangements with the authorities of non-EU countries and international organisations; stresses that such arrangements should enable the EUCA to exchange information, including best practices, with non-EU authorities and international organisations, and to carry out joint activities; supports continued engagement in the UN Trade and Development working group on consumer product safety, which plays a crucial role in developing best practices for cross-border enforcement;

78.  Calls on the Commission to step up cooperation with international partners, within forums such as the WTO, the World Customs Organization (WCO) and the G7, to counterbalance China’s influence and ensure reciprocity and rules-based trade; calls on the Commission to explicitly incorporate robust and enforceable obligations addressing forced labour when reviewing and renegotiating current trade and investment agreements; underscores the need for stronger EU-China cooperation mechanisms and transparent certification requirements to ensure compliance;

79.  Highlights the need to consider service and product safety and regulatory compliance provisions when negotiating future EU trade agreements; stresses the importance of specific regulatory dialogues and cooperation through administrative arrangements, improved customs enforcement cooperation, the traceability of shipments to the highest standards and enhanced data-sharing arrangements between customs authorities to effectively tackle non-compliant imports;

80.  Urges the Commission to be proactive and swiftly deploy targeted trade defence instruments, including anti-subsidy investigations, to address the adverse impacts on European businesses; emphasises that such actions must be coordinated closely with key international partners, to ensure effective global enforcement and reciprocal market fairness;

81.  Encourages the Commission to enhance diplomatic efforts and cooperation within international forums, particularly the WTO, the WCO and the G7, to counterbalance China’s strategic expansion into digital governance frameworks, including its Digital Silk Road initiative; stresses the need for open, more transparent and responsible digital trade rules in international standard-setting bodies to prevent internet fragmentation and mitigate the risks posed by restrictive digital governance models;

82.  Welcomes the WTO Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce as a vital step towards global digital trade rules; stresses, however, its current limitations, especially regarding customs transparency; urges the Commission to advocate stronger binding provisions to ensure its effective implementation and integration into the WTO legal framework, and to ensure enhanced global compliance standards;

83.  Emphasises the need for international capacity-building initiatives to support the sustainable and compliant participation of developing countries in digital trade; calls on the Commission to collaborate closely with international organisations, especially the WTO, to enhance regulatory frameworks and technical assistance for e-commerce in developing countries;

o
o   o

84.  Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.

(1) OJ C, C/2025/1035, 27.2.2025, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2025/1035/oj. (2) OJ L, 2024/3015, 12.12.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/3015/oj. (3) OJ L, 2024/1760, 5.7.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/1760/oj. (4) Letta, E., ‘Much more than a market: Speed, Security, Solidarity – Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’, April 2024, https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/ny3j24sm/much-more-than-a-market-report-by-enrico-letta.pdf. (5) Regulation (EU) 2022/2065 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 October 2022 on a Single Market For Digital Services and amending Directive 2000/31/EC (Digital Services Act) (OJ L 277, 27.10.2022, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2022/2065/oj). (6) Regulation (EU) 2023/988 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 May 2023 on general product safety, amending Regulation (EU) No 1025/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Directive (EU) 2020/1828 of the European Parliament and the Council, and repealing Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Directive 87/357/EEC (OJ L 135, 23.5.2023, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/988/oj). (7) Regulation (EU) 2019/1020 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on market surveillance and compliance of products and amending Directive 2004/42/EC and Regulations (EC) No 765/2008 and (EU) No 305/2011 (OJ L 169, 25.6.2019, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2019/1020/oj). (8) Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws and repealing Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 (OJ L 345, 27.12.2017, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2017/2394/oj). (9) Regulation (EU) No 952/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 9 October 2013 laying down the Union Customs Code (OJ L 269, 10.10.2013, p. 1, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2013/952/oj). (10) Letta, E., ‘Much more than a market: Speed, Security, Solidarity – Empowering the Single Market to deliver a sustainable future and prosperity for all EU Citizens’, April 2024. (11) Regulation (EU) 2023/2411 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 October 2023 on the protection of geographical indications for craft and industrial products and amending Regulations (EU) 2017/1001 and (EU) 2019/1753 (OJ L, 2023/2411, 27.10.2023, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2023/2411/oj). (12) Directive (EU) 2024/2853 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on liability for defective products and repealing Council Directive 85/374/EEC (OJ L, 2024/2853, 18.11.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/2853/oj). (13) Regulation (EU) 2024/1781 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for sustainable products, amending Directive (EU) 2020/1828 and Regulation (EU) 2023/1542 and repealing Directive 2009/125/EC (OJ L, 2024/1781, 28.6.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1781/oj). (14) Directive (EU) 2024/825 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 28 February 2024 amending Directives 2005/29/EC and 2011/83/EU as regards empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and through better information (OJ L, 2024/825, 6.3.2024, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2024/825/oj).