Decision of the Court from 28 December, 2015. The Court of Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU)

Decision of the Court from 28 December, 2015.

The Court of Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU)

“По заявлению индивидуального предпринимателя Тарасика К.П. (Республика Казахстан) к Евразийской экономической комиссии об оспаривании бездействия Евразийской экономической комиссии.”

Commentary:

This decision of the court covers very important issue. Complainant blames Eurasian Commission in omission (inaction) of it. He believes that Commission has to regulate custom tariffs and monitor the implementation of International or Union standards within the Eurasian Economic Union member states. The case is that entrepreneur was taxed for 8 million KZT by Kazakhstani Government, as he previously imported vehicles like “Nissan Titan”, “Toyota Tundra”, “Ford-150”. According to his information all these cars are classified as “Truck” and should not be taxed so high. He bases his proposition on Geneva Convention and agreement about Custom Union between Kazakhstan, Belarus and Russia. At the end his clause was rejected and Commission was found acting accordingly to all International laws. The reason is that EaEU member states regulate their custom tariffs separately, meaning that each state decides itself the classification of products and tariffs on it. From this brief description it can be seen that entrepreneur tried to protect his rights and seek for common standards of custom tariffs.

The issue raised above is really important, because the difference of Custom tariffs among EaEU states makes the environment for businessmen and capital flow from the rest of the world difficult. Two crucial things derived from the decision: the protection of entrepreneur rights and the necessity of common custom regulations. It is really positive matter that individual can sue the whole state or even Commission itself and bring them to the court. It helps to businessmen or companies to protect their rights on higher level with the participation of Court which may have influence over member states and EaEU institutions. Even more interesting fact is that in EaEU it is easier for individuals or companies to complain to the court rather than in EU. Individuals, companies, employers and trade unions are considered as “non-privileged” actors to complain to European Court of Justice, meaning that they may meet a lot of limitations in their way and have to go through National Courts before (Eurofound.europa.eu, 2011). This shows that possible protection of rights of businessmen may be preserved well in EaEU, that is to say people may go directly to the Court if they are not okay with the actions or regulations of EaEU Commission. The second point which is also covered in the court case is the difference of Custom regulations and that they are determined by each state separately. It may provide a lot better integration and capital freedom if Custom tariffs will be common for all member states. The move towards it can be seen from the new Custom Code which entered into force on the first of January 2018. This code mainly proposes electronic Custom information system like TARIC in EU and the implementation of “single window” which is exactly common custom regulations and the decline of the separate tariffs of member states (Eurasiancommission.org, 2017). This move has to increase the integration among states and make better conditions for business within the Union.

References:

Eurasiancommission.org. (2017). The EAEU new Customs Code will enter into force on January 1, 2018. [online] Available at: http://www.eurasiancommission.org/en/nae/news/Pages/14_11_17.aspx [Accessed 26 Jan. 2018].

Eurofound.europa.eu. (2011). Complaints to the European Court of Justice | Eurofound. [online] Available at: https://www.eurofound.europa.eu/observatories/eurwork/industrial-relations-dictionary/complaints-to-the-european-court-of-justice [Accessed 26 Jan. 2018].