Report from the Commission to the Council on the implementation of Council Regulation 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime cabotage (1995-1996) and on the economic and social impact of the liberalization of island cabotage
K*W«#}« à -tr COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 17. 06. 1997 COM(97) 296 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL on the implementation of Council Regulation 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime cabotage (1995-1996) and on the economic and social impact of the liberalisation of island cabotage. 1. INTRODUCTION 2. DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CABOTAGE SECTOR IN THE EUROPEAN UNION (1995-1996) 2. 1 Legislative developments 2. 2 Cabotage volumes (EU15 + other EEA) 2. 2. 1 Liberalised and protected cabotage services by 31 December 1996: 2. 2. 2 Cargo trades (EU-15) 2. 2. 3 Cargo trades in other EEA countries 2. 2. 4 Passenger trades (EU15 +other EEA) 2. 3 Cabotage cargo volumes in South European Member States 2. 3. 1 Liberalised (by 31. 12. 1996) 2. 3. 2 Non liberalised (by 31. 12. 1996) 2. 3. 3 Involvement of foreign flags in liberalised cabotage trades 2. 3. 4 Foreign flag involvement in non-liberalised cabotage trades 2. 4 Foreign flags in cabotage trades of Northern Europe 2. 4. 1 North European Member States - CARGO 2. 4. 2 Northern European Member States - PASSENGERS 2. 4. 3 Iceland and Norway 2. 5 Cabotage 2. 6 Conclusions fleets 3. THE PARTICIPATION OF DIS AND MAR REGISTERED VESSELS IN EU CABOTAGE AND THE QUESTION OF THE EXTENSION OF REGULATION 3577/92 TO THE EEA 3. 1 Introduction 3. 2 Fleet developments 3. 2. 1 DIS and MAR fleets 3. 2. 2 The fleets of Iceland and Norway 3. 3 Cabotage involvement 2 4 4 4 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 10 11 11 11 11 12 12 13 13 13 13 14 14 3. 3. 1 Participation ofDIS and MAR vessels 3. 3. 2 Participation of Icelandic and Norwegian vessels in cabotage 3. 4 Conclusions 4. CREW COST COMPARISONS 4. 1 Calculations (input and outcome) 4. 2 Conclusions 5. LIBERALISATION OF ISLAND CABOTAGE AND ITS ANTICIPATED SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT 5. 1 Legislative provisions 5. 2 Cabotage related employment in South European Member States. 5. 3 The socio-economic impact of cabotage liberalisation until now 5. 3. 1 Southern Member States 5. 3. 2 Northern Member States 5. 4 Extrapolation of trends observed 5. 5 Conclusions ANNEXES. ANNEX 1 ANNEX II ANNEX III ANNEX IV ANNEX V 14 15 15 17 17 18 20 20 20 22 22 23 24 25 27 28 35. 38 39 40 1. INTRODUCTION 1. This is the second report on the implementation of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 3577/92 of 7 December 1992, which entered into force on 1 January 1993. The first report, covering the period 1993-1994, was presented on 6 September 1995. The Regulation provides that every two years the Commission shall present to the Council a report on the implementation of the Regulation and, secondly, that the Commission shall make an in depth examination of the economic and social impact of the liberalisation of island cabotage and submit a report to the Council by the end of 1996. The present report deals with both aspects. 2. The present report analyses the following main issues: Chapter 2 : the effects of the implementation of Regulation 3577/92 for the period 1995-1996 during which one more cabotage sector, namely mainland cruise services was liberalised. This part analyses economic developments in the cabotage sector with reference to the period covered by the previous report. Chapter 3 : the participation of DIS1 and MAR2 vessels in maritime cabotage trades of EU Member States and the question of the extension of Regulation 3577/92 to the EEA. Chapter 4 : manning cost comparisons of the different EU and EFTA registers participating in EU cabotage. Chapter 5 : the economic and social impact of the liberalisation of island cabotage. In order to assess the above, an attempt has been made to extrapolate from the situation in the Northern Member States and in the liberalised sectors of the Sourthern Member States and to assess the cabotage related employment in the different Member States and in the island regions in particular. This Chapter presents in its conclusions a policy option that the Commission believes could be appropriate on crew nationality requirements for certain sectors of the cabotage market (see Article 3 of Regulation 3577/92). 3. This report is presented for information to the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. 2. DEVELOPMENTS IN THE CABOTAGE SECTOR IN THE EUROPEAN UNION (1995- 1996) 2. 1 Legislative developments In most Member States there have been no legislative developments since 1994 either because the Regulation had already been fully implemented by national 1 DIS : Danish International Ship Register 2 MAR : Madeira International Ship Register legislation before (Germany, Portugal, Spain) or because no specific legislation is needed due to the lack of relevance of cabotage (Belgium, Luxemburg), or because Member States follow traditionally an open coast-line policy (United Kingdom, Ireland, Denmark, Netherlands). The Commission infringement procedures against those Member States with conflicting national legislation (Italy, Greece, France). initiated Denmark adopted Law 464 of 12 June 1996 amending the law on the DIS International Register in order to allow DIS cargo vessels (not passenger) access to Danish cabotage trades. It entered into force by order of 1 December 1996. Portugal adopted an amendment allowing MAR vessels to participate in Portuguese mainland cabotage which entered into force as from 1 January 1997. Spain adopted Law 42/1994 increasing the fiscal allowances for ships registered in the Special Canary Islands Register (REC) to 70% of the employers' Social Security contribution, 25% of the seafarers' income tax and 35% of corporate taxation3. Royal Decree 392/1996 of 1 March 1996 allowed ships used in mainland and island cabotage of strategic products to be registered in the REC. As far as the new Member States are concerned : - the Austrian legislation does not mention cabotage since maritime cabotage is geographically impossible in the case of Austria ; - until recently Finland operated a restrictive cabotage regime, only allowing national flag vessels to participate. Since its entry into the EU the law has been adjusted in accordance with Regulation 3577/92 by an amending act 1362/94 of 22 December 1994 to the Restrictive Trade Practices Act. This act has abolished restrictions concerning participation of EU vessels in Finnish cabotage trades. - the cabotage trade in Sweden was reserved for Swedish vessels. However, through bilateral agreements Norwegian and some EU vessels could gain access. Following the entry into the EU the law was amended in accordance with Regulation 3577/92 by Decree of 1 July 1995 amending Decree 235/1974 on authorisation to carry out domestic maritime transport operations using foreign vessels, in the sense of allowing access to EU vessels as provided for by Regulation 3577/92. For the remaining EEA countries: - cabotage legislation does not exist in Iceland, all vessels have free access ; - Norway operates an open coastline policy, but NIS4 vessels may not participate in cabotage, while vessels involved in regular passenger services require a special license. It is understood that these percentages were raised again by Law 13/96 of 30 December 1996. This latter modification, entering into force on 1. 1. 1997, falls outside the scope of this report. NIS : Norwegian International Ship Register Annex I presents an overview of the cabotage legislation in the above mentioned States as regards : waiver systems, crew nationality requirements, vessel ownership requirements and fiscal regimes. 2. 2 Cabotage volumes (EU15 + other EEA) 2. 2. 1 Liberalised and protected cabotage services by 31 December 1996: In the Northern Member States (SWE, FIN, DK, UK, IRL, DE, NL and BEL) all maritime cabotage services are liberalised either because they have a traditionally open coast policy or because of the implementation of Regulation 3577/92. In the Southern Member States (FR, SP, POR, IT and GR) the following cabotage services have been liberalised by 31 December 1996: - domestic mainland transport of non-strategic cargoes carried by vessels larger than 650 GT, on 1 January 1993; and - mainland cruise services, on 1 January 1995. The following services remained protected in the reference period 1995-96 : In mainland trades: - the transport of strategic commodities (oil, oil products and drinking water), which is liberalised as from 1 January 1997. - services by vessels smaller than 650 GT, protected until 1 January 1998 and - regular passenger and ferry services, protected until 1 January 1999. In island trades: - island cabotage in the South European Member States (including Ceuta and Melilla and the French overseas departments) will be liberalised on the 1st of January 1999. - Regular passenger and ferry services, as well as services provided by vessels less than 650 GT in Greece shall be exempted from liberalisation until 1 January 2004. 2. 2. 2 Cargo trades (EU-15) The total volume of cabotage trades in the countries of the former EU-12 has been estimated at 239 mln tonnes in 1995, compared to 226 mln tonnes in 1993. This was 5. 8% higher than the level of 1993. In the new Member States 19. 5 mln tonnes were transported in 1995, nearly 10% more than in 1993 (17. 8 mln tonnes); of this Sweden generated 13. 6 mln tonnes, Finland 5. 9 mln tonnes. The total volume of cabotage cargo trades in the EU in 1995 was therefore 259 mln tonnes. Of this 46% concerned 'mainland' trades, the other part being 'island' trades. Two recent events have had a significant effect on the trade volumes: - due to the establishment of a pipeline between Sicily and the mainland in 1995, the Italian oil transport by coastal vessels is declining; - an increase in the transport of fresh water was responsible for a significant increase in the Spanish cabotage. Table 1 Summary of cabotage cargo trade volumes in EU countries in 1993 and 1995 (mln tonnes) Area North Europe (Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, United Kingdom) South Europe (France, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Spain) Sub-total EU-12 Sweden and Finland Total EU-15 1993 100 126 226 (18) (244) 1995 106. 5 133. 0 239. 5 19. 5 259. 0 2. 2. 3 Cargo trades in other EEA countries In two EEA countries - Iceland and Norway - around 39 mln tonnes of cabotage cargoes were transported in 1995 ; of this Iceland accounted for only 0. 4 mln tonnes. As is the case in the UK, oil transport from the continental shelf accounts for a large part of Norway's cabotage volume. Annex II contains a detailed overview of cabotage. developments in the Member States and in Iceland and Norway. 2. 2. 4 Passenger trades (EU 15 + other EEA) The most important passenger trades are presented in table 2. Table 2 Cabotage Passenger trades in EU and EEA countries, 1995 (million passengers) Country Liberalised Belgium Denmark Finland Germany Netherlands Sweden United Kingdom other EEA Iceland Norway f fowsaiigfere g B B f t S f f l B M » ^ ^ ^^ 21. 5 4. 0 5. 5 3. 3 1. 1 40. 6 0. 3 47. 2 Protected Italy Portugal Spain France Greece a) a) 1994 figures. 38. 0 0. 4 7. 1 1. 3 36 In nearly all cases the passenger movements relate to 'island' traffic. The liberalisation of mainland cruise passenger traffic on 1 January 1995 has had no impact because there are no mainland operations of cruise vessels taking place in South Europe. Domestic cruise passenger traffic only occurs within the Greek archipelago. 2. 3 Cabotage cargo volumes in South European Member States The North European Member States have already fully liberalised their trades. The ongoing liberalisation will thus affect cabotage trades of Southern European Member States. " Apart from the liberalisation of 3 mln tonnes of protected mainland cargoes in Spain in February 1994, following the expiry of the safeguard measures under Art. 5 of the Regulation, no new cargoes were liberalised during the period 1995-1996. 2. 3. 1 Liberalised (by 31. 12. 1996) The cabotage trades in the South European Member States liberalised in the reference period involved non-strategic mainland cargoes, carried by vessels exceeding 650 GT. This segment totalled 18 mln tonnes in 1995. This represents 13,5% of the total cargo volume in Southern cabotage. The following table presents the updated actual figures for 1993 and estimates for 1995. The total of liberalised trade includes an approximate 3 to 4 mln tonnes of cargoes that are transported on "own account". This concerns mainly transport by vessels owned by cement producers in Spain and Greece and transport of iron and steel products by the producers in Italy. Table 3 Liberalised cargo trades by market segment and country, 1993 and 1995 (mln tonnes) category bulk cargo general cargo chem/gas Total France Greece Italy Portugal Spain Total 1993 1995 1993 1995 1. 1 1. 9 5. 1 0. 1 3. 7a) 11. 9 1. 3 2. 0 5. 6 3. 5 12. 4 0. 2 2. 1 0. 3 2. 6 0. 1 2. 8 0. 2 3. 1 1993 0. 5 0. 6 0. 1 0. 8 2,0 1995 1993 1995 0. 6 0. 1 0. 8 0. 2 0. 8h) 2. 5 1. 6 2. 1 7. 8 0. 2 4. 8 1. 9 2. 2 9. 2 0. 2 4. 5 16 5 18. 0 a) the total refers to the volume that theoretically would have been effected if the liberalisation had already been in effect during 1993. Due to the safeguard measures that were in force until February 1994, the cabotage volume that was liberalised in reality amounted to some 0. 5/0. 8 mln tonnes only. b) estimate. 2. 3. 2 Non liberalised (by 31. 12. 1996) The non-liberalised cargoes in Southern Europe (i. e. mainland transport of non-strategic cargoes by vessels <650 GT and all strategic and island cargoes), amounted to 115 mln tonnes in 1995 divided as per Table 4. Table 4 Non-liberalised trades in Southern Europe by market segment (mln tonnes) category carried by vessels < 650 GT strategic mainland trades (oil & water)* strategic island trades (oil & water) bulk cargoes - island general cargoes - islands Total non-liberalised trades revised actual 1993 estimated 1995 3. 0 28. 1 33. 1 23. 4 21. 7 109. 3 3. 5 26. 5 37. 9 22. 5 24. 5 114. 9 a) bulk liquids, excluding non strategic sections (chemicals, gases, edible oils, etc. ). 2. 3. 3 Involvement of foreign flags in liberalised cabotage trades Cargo trades - general Of the 18 mln tonnes of liberalised Southern European trades, 3 mln tonnes or 17% was carried by non-national vessels, from other EU or non-EU registers. Compared to the corresponding figure for 1993 (12%), this points at a growing market share for non-national flags. However, compared to the total amount of maritime cabotage trade in Southern European Member States (133 mln t. ), the market share of non-national flags remained small with 2. 3% (compared to 1. 6% in 1993). A further breakdown of the volume of 3 mln tonnes carried by foreign flags is presented in table 5. Table 5 Flag involvement in liberalised South European cargo trades (1995 - mln tonnes) Country Total Cabotage Trade EU flag non EU flag total foreign flag France Greece Italy Portugal Spain Total involvement involvement involvement 8. 9 18. 4 58. 9 6. 0 40. 5 0. 210 0. 005 0. 095 nil 1. 420 0. 430 nil 0. 170(a) nil 0. 720 0. 640 0. 005 0. 265 nil 2. 090 132. 7 1. 730 1. 320 3. 050 (a) the division between liberalised and non-liberalised is unknown. It is assumed that most of the transport under foreign flag relates to liberalised trades. It appears that only 1. 73 mln tonnes were carried by EU vessels on the basis of Regulation 3577/92, whilst 1. 32 mln tonnes were carried through waivers by non-EU vessels. Hence, it has to be concluded that the impact of the liberalisation under Regulation 3577/92 during the period of review has been very modest : only 10% of the liberalised cargo volume (18 mln t. ), or 1,3% of the relevant market (1. 73 mln tonnes on a total of 133 mln tonnes) was actually carried by ships registered in other Member States. A comparison by Member State between 1993 and 1995 shows no significant changes,-because national market shares remained close to 100%, except for Spain. In 1995, 82% of the mainland trade was carried by Spanish flag vessels, compared to 89% in 1993. However, the difference is mainly caused by reflagging of Spanish owned cabotage vessels to the Madeira register. The flagshares in mainland cabotage are now as follows : Spanish = 82%, MAR = 7. 5%, EU flags = 3. 5%, non-EU flags through waivers = 7%. 2. 3. 4 Foreign flag involvement in non-liberalised cabotage trades The non liberalised cargoes (114. 9 mln tonnes in 1995) were in principle still exclusively reserved for the national flags. However, in 1995 an estimated 6. 6 mln tonnes (6%) of these protected cargoes were transported by non- national vessels through waivers in cases where national flag vessels were not available. Waivers were predominantly issued by three countries: France (0. 6 mln tonnes), Spain (1. 3 mln tonnes) and Portugal (4. 7 mln tonnes). Compared to 1993, the volume of traffic carried under waivers increased by 10%. Table 6 Flag involvement in non liberalised South European trades (1995, mln tonnes) country France Greece Italy (a) Portugal Spain total (a) see footnote table 5. EU flag (incl. second registers) involvement 0,370 nil nil 4,700 600 5,670 non EU flag total foreign flag involvement 0,260 involvement 0,630 nil nil nil 0,700 0,960 nil nil 4,700 1,300 6,630 Compared to the previous report, the utilisation of waivers went up in France and Spain, although the total volume remained modest. In Greece and Italy, waivers are rarely granted ; volumes remained negligible. As set out in the previous report, all cabotage transport of oil products in Portugal (4,7 mln tonnes) is carried out by Portuguese owned vessels operating under the Madeira register through waivers. N. B. As announced in the previous report, the Commission has examined whether the derogations accorded by Article 6 of Regulation 3577/92 remain justified considering that Member States' provisions on waivers for access to non- liberalised trades do not include a preference system in favour of EU flags (of all Member States only Germany applies the principle of Community preference, see Law on Coastal Navigation of 26 July 1957 modified on 15 10 July 1994). However, taking into account that the volumes carried under waivers are limited, whilst a substantial proportion of the carriers concerned have an economic link with the Community, there appears to be no economic necessity for a specific initiative in this field at present. 2. 4 Foreign flags in cabotage trades of Northern Europe 2. 4. 1 North European Member States - CARGO The cabotage in all North European Member States is fully open to all other EU flag vessels. In some Member States non-EU vessels require waivers (D, SW, FIN), unless they have been granted access on the basis of bilateral agreements. In the other Northern Member States third country vessels can participate on the same basis as EU vessels. The degree of foreign participation differs considerably from country to country. For Denmark and Sweden statistical data are not available, while for Austria, Luxembourg, Belgium and the Netherlands this issue has no relevance, cargo cabotage being marginal or non-existant. The situation in the other countries is illustrated in table 7. Table 7 Flag division in the cabotage trades in North European Member states ( 1995) Country Finland Germany Ireland United Kingdom a) estimate. total volume (mln tonnes) national share (%) EU flag share (%) non EU flag share (%) 5. 9 7. 6 0. 7 77. 5 88 67 4 40 12 15 15 nil 18 16«> 45 Z. 4. 2 Northern European Member States - PASSENGERS The quasi totality of passenger cabotage in Northern Member States is island cabotage. According to the information available within the Commission services, 100% of these operations is carried out by vessels flying the national flag. 2. 4. 3 Iceland and Norway There is no foreign participation in Iceland. The Norwegian flag accounts for 83% of Norwegian cabotage. It is not known how the remaining 17% is divided between EU and non-EU registered ships. For passenger traffic, the same applies as for the Northern European Member States : 100% national flag. 11 2. 5 Cabotage fleets Annex III contains data relating to the cabotage or "coastal" fleets of the Member States. Comparative data are provided for 1994 and 1996. Ships registered in DIS, MAR, Norway or Iceland are not included ; they are referred to in Chapter 3 of this report. In the Southern Member States, dedicated cabotage fleets can be identified on the basis of specific licences, etc. However, in the Northern Member States this is not possible, as explained in the previous report. Therefore the "coastal" fleet consisting of vessels below 6,000 GT (10,000 DWT) has been chosen as the yardstick. Between 1. 7. 1994 and 1. 7. 1996 the coastal fleet of the Northern Member States (except Austria, Finland and Sweden) decreased by 14% from 1,490 to 1,200 ships, but increased slightly in capacity measured in GT (+3%). In the Southern Member States the number of vessels did not change significantly (1191 units in 1996) but the capacity in GT increased by 44% due to the bringing into service of new big ferries in Greece, Italy and Spain. The small Portuguese cabotage fleet declined further due to continued reflagging to Madeira. 2. 6 Conclusions In the reference period 1995-1996, not many changes took place compared to the situation described in the first cabotage report. The liberalised segment of the market in Southern Europe remained restricted to mainland cargo cabotage with vessels over 650 GT, which represents 18 mln tonnes of a total Southern cabotage market of 133 mln tonnes. The only new market segment being liberalised in the reference period concerns the so-called mainland cruises. However, this is a theoretical step without practical consequences since all cruise programmes include at least one island destination. Island cabotage and mainland passenger operations will not be liberalised until 1 January 19995. The participation of non-national EU carriers in the liberalised segment of the Southern cabotage market remained modest : almost 10% of this market segment of 18 mln tonnes was carried by non-national EU vessels on the basis of Regulation 3577/92 in 1995. Non-EU carriage through waivers was more substantial : 7. 9 mln tonnes, of which 1. 3 mln tonnes in the liberalised market segment and 6. 6 mln tonnes of non liberalised trades. The outlook for the next period 1997-1998 is that, due to the liberalisation of strategic mainland trades (26. 5 mln tonnes) as from 1. 1. 1997, a more substantial step will be made on the way towards liberalisation of the Community's maritime cabotage market. Island cabotage in Greece, as far as regular passenger and ferry services and services provided by vessels below 650 Gt are concerned, shall only be liberalised by 1. 1. 2004. 12 3. T HE PARTICIPATION OF DIS AND MAR REGISTERED VESSELS IN EU CABOTAGE AND THE QUESTION OF THE EXTENSION OF REGULATION 3577/92 TO THE EEA. 3. 1 Introduction The two questions referred to above were discussed in the Council of December 1995, following the presentation of the first cabotage report. On both issues, several delegations expressed concern that vessels registered in DIS, MAR, Norway or Iceland may have considerable cost advantages over the vessels of other national registers of EU Member States and therefore were reluctant to grant cabotage rights to these vessels in the same manner as to other EU vessels. Decisions were postponed until after the presentation of the second cabotage report. In this chapter the two questions are examined in more detail by analysing in particular : the evolution of the relevant fleets since 1994 and the cabotage involvement at present. The comparative crew costs for all relevant registers are examined in Chapter 4. The temporary derogation provided for in Article 1. 2 of Regulation 3577/92 suspending the application of the provision of Article 1. 1 requiring that ships fulfill all conditions for carrying out cabotage in the Member State of registration, expired on 31 December 1996. The derogation applied to the vessels of the DIS and MAR registers. In anticipation of the expiry, the Danish authorities have lifted6 the ban on the participation of DIS cargo vessels in Danish cabotage. The Portuguese law has also been amended to allow MAR registered vessels to participate in Portuguese mainland cabotage as from 1 January 1997. This means that DIS cargo7 vessels can continue to participate without restrictions in EU cabotage, whilst MAR vessels have access to mainland cabotage. Vessels registered in Norway or Iceland will have no access to EU cabotage as long as no decision is made on the extension of the cabotage Regulation to the EEA. In addition, it should be noted that NIS vessels are not allowed to participate in Norwegian national cabotage. Therefore, even if Regulation 3577/92 were extended to the EEA, NIS vessels would still have no cabotage rights. On various occasions the Norwegian authorities have stated that it is not their intention to modify the present NIS legislation in the near future. In this case, Icelandic and NOR registered vessels would gain access to provide maritime cabotage services. The NOR register is situated among the more expensive registers compared to EU standards,. 3. 2 Fleet developments 3. 2. 1 DIS and MAR fleets Annex IV describes the composition of the DIS and MAR fleets. The main developments are the following : 6 Law 464 of 12 June 1996 which entered into force on 1 December by order 1003 of 29 November 1996. 7 The situation for vessels carrying passengers has not been changed. Vessels carrying both cargo and passengers, such as Ro-Ro ferries, are considered as passenger vessels. 13 The number of ships registered in DIS showed a slight decrease from 1994 to 1996 (from 478 to 448 ships ; -6%). However, total tonnage went up from 6. 7 to 7. 6 mln tonnes DWT (+13%) due to an increase in the tanker sector. The tonnage of other ship types remained more or less unchanged. The fleet is relatively young : 70% of the vessels is under 10 years. The MAR fleet is still relatively small, although the number of ships increased from 35 in 1994 to 59 in 1996. However, DWT capacity decreased by 27% (from 1. 46 mln DWT to 1. 07 mln DWT) due to the fact that a number of large tankers flagged out. Of the 59 ships 19 are Portuguese owned and 34 are Spanish owned (compared to 9 in 1994). 3. 2. 2 The fleets of Iceland and Norway The Icelandic fleet, comprising 17 vessels is largely involved in domestic trades, only a few vessels operate internationally. There were no fleet changes between 1994 and 1996. The National Norwegian Register (NOR) covers 772 vessels of mainly small size, but also some 60 larger tankers for the offshore oil trades. Most vessels operate nationally. The average ship size stands at 2,700 GT only. Since mid 1994 this fleet has hardly changed. The NIS fleet has an entirely different structure and consists mainly of large bulk vessels ; 287 tankers, 116 bulk carriers and 155 general cargo vessels. The average ship size here is 28,000 GT. Since 1994, about 80 vessels (mainly bulk) left the register. Other ship types include container vessels (6), reefers (13), ro-ro cargo (72), ro-ro passenger ferries (5) and passenger vessels (16). The total number of vessels at 1. 1. 1996 was 670 with 18,799,000 GT. 3. 3 Cabotage involvement 3. 3. 1 Participation of DIS and MAR vessels In the previous report it was estimated that of the total DIS fleet, at most 50 units were employed regularly in EU cabotage outside Denmark, mainly in Germany and the U. K. It* was further estimated that 1 to 2% of the turnover of the DIS fleet was earned from cabotage activities, while only one quarter of this percentage stemmed from activities in Southern Europe, such as incidental transport of chemicals, gases and container feeder services. 14 The pattern found in 1996 is basically the same as descr. ed abo e, although DIS involvement showed an increase in Spain, where participation in the mainland container feeder trade went up from 0. 094 mln tonnes in 1994 to 0. 175 mln tonnes in 1996. The increase is due to the replacement of previously chartered non-EU tonnage by DIS vessels operating mainly in "international" feeder trades carrying cargoes on domestic routes on a through bill of lading. MAR vessels participate in Portuguese cabotage (4. 7 mln tonnes of oil products through waivers) and Spanish cabotage (1. 6 mln tonnes). The MAR vessels operating in Spain are Spanish owned and have recently been flagged out from the Spanish register (see chapter 2, paragraph 2. 3. 3). In the case of Portugal, the MAR vessels are all Portuguese owned and employ Portuguese crew. There are no reports of significant MAR involvement in other cabotage trades. 3. 3. 2 Participation of Icelandic and Norwegian vessels in cabotage Although precise figures are not available, it is commonly known that NIS vessels are strongly represented in the British mainland oil trades and in shuttling oil cargoes from the British offshore fields to the mainland. According to the reports received by the Commission, Norwegian vessels do not play an important role in any of the other cabotage markets of Member States. It is reported that Norwegian vessels carried 0,5% of total Spanish cabotage volumes in 1995 (compared to 0,6% in 1994 and 0,4% in 1993) on the basis of waivers. In addition, the French authorities granted 5 single trip waivers to NIS vessels in 1995 for the carriage of liquid gases and chemicals. No other reports of Norwegian cabotage involvement have been received, neither were any Icelandic vessels identified in EU cabotage. 3. 4 Conclusions -a- In the reference period 1995-1996 DIS and MAR vessels had the same cabotage rights as other EU vessels on the basis of Art. 1. 2 of Regulation 3577/92, which provision expired on 31. 12. 1996. Following the amendments of relevant Danish and Portuguese laws, DIS cargo vessels will continue to have such rights, whilst MAR vessels have access to mainland cabotage. As NIS and Icelandic vessels were not covered by Regulation 3577/92 in the reference period, participation in cabotage was only possible through waivers. -b- From the data presented in paragraph 3. 3, it follows that the participation of DIS, Norwegian and Icelandic vessels in EU cabotage in Southern Member States has been marginal until now. The case of MAR is different in the sense that a number of traditional cabotage operators established in Portugal and Spain have reflagged vessels to MAR in an attempt to reduce their operating costs, while their vessels continue to operate in their traditional markets. -c- Already in 1994, the Commission proposed to the Council the extension of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 3577/92 applying the principle of freedom to 15 provide services to maritime transport within Member States as part of the "interim package". In 1995, when the first cabotage report was presented to the Council, the Commission expressed the view that Regulation 3577/92 had to be extended to the EEA. Consequently, in 1996, the Commission transmitted a proposal to the Council to extend Regulation 3577/92 to the EEA. The European Parliament endorsed this position. Furthermore, the observed market developments since then have given no reason for concern on economic grounds. Therefore, the Commission confirms its position regarding the EEA relevance of Regulation 3577/92 and the resulting obligation of the Community to grant the right to carry out maritime cabotage to the EFTA/EEA States. 16 CREW COST COMPARISONS 4. 1 Calculations (input and outcome) Crew costs are an important element in the competition between carriers operating under different flags (although there are many other factors involved, see paragraph 4. 2). Therefore, the Commission has asked a specialised consultant to estimate the comparative crew costs for three shiptypes which are considered to be representative for cabotage operations : a 1500 GT / 3000 DWT and a 3300 GT / 6000 DWT dry bulk cargo vessels and a 9000 GT/15000 DWT product tanker. Manning costs are predominantly determined by the following factors : crew composition, nationality requirements and the different salary levels for such seafarers and, thirdly, specific national rules regarding income tax and social contributions of seafarers. Generally, there is a difference between South European cabotage manning requirements and Northern European requirements in the sense that (a) the number of seafarers on board is above the average found in the North and (b) nationality requirements tend to be more strict (in some cases the rules require 100% EU or national crew). On the other hand, the so-called second registers (presented in bold in table 12) hardly impose any nationality requirements : normally only the captain has to be a national of the flag State. *o As regards market access rights, it should be recalled that DIS-cargo vessels and ISR-vessels (Germany) have the same cabotage rights as ships in first registers. MAR vessels had such rights until 31. 12. 1996 and since then they have access to mainland cabotage only. In Spain, REC vessels have free access to those market segments that have been liberalised8 under Regulation 3577/92. NIS vessels have no cabotage rishts. *&* The outcome of the crew cost calculations is presented in tables 5. 1, 5. 2 and 5. 3 of Annex 5. A comprehensive overview of the results is summarized in the following table. The figures relate to the average crew number and nationality situation as has been found to be typical for the fleets of the different countries. The estimate shown in this table represents the net manning costs to the shipowner, i. e. gross manning costs minus tax benefits or other labour related State aids which applied in the various countries in January 1996. REC vessels also have access to strategic cargo in island cabotage in Spain, provided that until 1. 1. 1999, 100% of the crew consists of EU nationals and that the captain and his first officer are Spanish nationals. 17 Tabic 12 Comparative crew costs by shiptypc and register (average liU = 100) I)) - Situation January !996. general cargo general cargo Product tanker 1,500 GT 3,300 GT 9,000 GT DIS minimum (Denmark) c) Madeira (Portugal) NIS (Norway) Netherlands ISU (Germany) Portugal a) REC (Spain) a) Italy Iceland DIS - Danish crew (Denmark) c) Germany United Kingdom Greece a) Ireland Denmark Spain a) Norway Finland TAAF (France) Luxembourg Sweden Belgium France 35 45 53 55 56 74 77 78 n. a. 83 86 92 92 95 105 107 107 114 133 140 158 180 236 50 40 45 46 65 72 76 78 80 115 78 89 97 93 147 105 107 128 129 123 141 160 236 43 50 67 56 86 79 78 107 75 107 103 78 100 80 137 100 139 no 104 115 133 150 202 a) Consultants' estimate based on shipowners data. b) Ranking according to estimated costs for a 1,500 GT vessel. c) "DIS minimum" stands for Danish captain and entirely foreign crew paid on the basis of a collective bargaining agreement concluded with foreign seaman's unions. "DIS-Danish crew" stands for Danish captain and either Danish crew or mixed crew paid according to Danish standards. Sources: Tecnecon/MERC/ISF. 4. 2 Conclusions From the above table, the following tentative conclusions can be drawn for cabotage cargo vessels : - crew costs are lowest in the second registers : DIS-minimum, MAR and NIS, but crew costs under the Dutch national register are in the same range ; - crew costs under ISR, Portuguese national register and REC are also clearly below average ; - slightly below average are : Italy, Iceland, DIS-Danish, Germany, the UK, Greece and Ireland ; - the other registers are average or above, among which the registers of France, Belgium and Sweden show the highest manning costs. These tentative conclusions should be interpreted with great caution taking into account the following considerations : 18 -a- The crew costs under different registers are strongly influenced by specific fiscal arrangements which are changed by national authorities from time to time. At present, the Commission is examining several new labour cost related State aid schemes for 1997 (France, Sweden, REC). Germany has recently revised the support measures for shipowners and temporarily reduced the overall budget for this programme. Norway has also modified labour cost related arrangements for seafarers : these new measures are currently being examined by the EFTA Surveillance Authority. In some other Member States, discussions on such measures are underway between the government and the social partners. Consequently, the competitivity ranking of table 12 is likely to change considerably in the near future. To illustrate the point, the high ranking of the Dutch register in table 12 is due to the fact that in January 1996 a new scheme came into force by which a zero rate was introduced for income tax and social contributions of Dutch seafarers on board Dutch flag vessels. At the same time, investment premiums were abolished. If, for 1995 the same calculations had been made, then the crew costs ranking of this register would have been around EU average. -b- Crew costs form only a small percentage of the total costs of a cargo vessel9. Fixed costs, of which capital costs are the main component, normally account for more than half of the overall costs. The other so-called operational costs broadly include fuel, expenditures for surveys, repairs and maintenance and manning costs. As a general rule, fuel costs account for 45-50% of the operational costs, surveys, maintenance and repairs for 10 to 15%, and manning costs for the balance. Certain of these cost components can be assumed to be the same in all Member States (e. g. fuel is tax free in all M. S. ), however, other cost elements may differ considerably. For instance, capital costs are influenced by investment premiums (granted in a number of Member States) or by interest Tate subsidies, or by accelerated depreciation schemes or by other fiscal facilities concerning tax free reserves, profit and loss compensations, etc. In conclusion, table 12 should not be understood as being the yardstick for the overall competitive position of different registers. It merely compares the manning costs at January 1996, knowing that the picture changes regularly in function of the variables set out above. 9 Passenger operations are more labour intensive, hence, crew costs play a greater role. 19 5. LIBERALISATION OF ISLAND CABOTAGE AND ITS ANTICIPATED SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPACT. 5. 1 Legislative provisions Article 6. 2 of Regulation 3577/92 provides that island cabotage in the Southern Member States10 shall be temporarily exempted from the implementation of the Regulation until 1 January 1999. Article 6. 3 provides that this derogation should be extended for Greece until 1 January 2004 for regular passenger services, ferry services and services provided by vessels less than 650 GT. On manning nationality requirements for vessels engaged in island cabotage (valid for both Southern and Northern Europe), Article 3. 2 of the Regulation provides that all matters relating to manning shall be the responsibility of the State in which the vessel is performing a maritime transport (host State). However, Article 3. 3 states that, as from 1. 1. 1999, manning of cargo vessels over 650 GT engaged in so-called consecutive island cabotage11 shall be governed by flag State conditions. Article 3. 4 further provides that (a) the Commission shall make an in-depth examination of the economic and social impact of the liberalisation of island cabotage and shall submit a report to the Council before 1 January 1997, and (b) that this latter report should serve as a basis for a proposal to be submitted to the Council which may include adjustments to the manning nationality provisions laid down in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Article 3 and that the definitive system shall be approved by the Council before 1 January 1999. The present chapter summarizes the findings of the aforementioned examination of the possible socio-economic impact of the forthcoming liberalisation of island cabotage. A proposal on manning nationality provisions will be submitted shortly after the present report has been discussed in the Council framework. 5. 2 Cabotage related employment in South European Member States From the study carried out on behalf of the Commission, it appears that the issue of liberalisation of island cabotage is still a very sensitive one in Southern Europe. In particular, if it was decided to modify the current nationality manning requirements from host State to flag State, the Unions of seafarers fear there would be an important loss of local employment. It should also be stressed that the unemployment rate in certain island regions is very high compared to the national average of the countries concerned. Hence, it would be very difficult for any seafarers resident in the islands made redundant to find alternative employment there. For example, Sicily and Sardinia are island regions with an unemployment rate substantially above average. However, there are also islands with a relatively low unemployment rate : 10 11 that means : island cabotage in the Mediterranean and with regard to Canary, Azores and Madeira archipelagoes, Ceuta and Mellila, the French islands along the Atlantic coast and the French overseas departments (Guadeloupe, Martinique, Guyane, Reunion). that means : the island cabotage voyage concerned follows or precedes a voyage to or from another State. 20 the Balearics, Crete and Madeira. In the other island regions, the employment situation is not very different from the mainland. The total number of jobs directly related to South European cabotage is summarized in the following table : Table of Estimated total number of jobs associated with South European cabotage activities (1995) category sea shore total island total island total trades 3,350 4,094 14,430 12. 200 18,450 17. 500 523 500 1,747 2,500 2,050 88 France Greece Italy Portugal Spain Total 6,300 4,540 1,240 1,090 7,540 5,630 43,797 38. 090 7,625 5,480 51,422 43,570 Total island trades 4,820 trades 1,457 5,841 900 16,930 13,100 1,950 20,500 19,450 7,780° 70 611 570 island residents 1,820 5,860 128 1,602 17,190 These figures include all cabotage sectors : cargo (liquid bulk, dry bulk, containers etc. ), regular passenger/ferry services and cruise activities. Cabin crew and catering personnel on board passenger vessels are counted as seafarers and are included in the above figures, which refer to all island regions as specified in footnote 10. From these figures, it follows that island cabotage is indeed an important source of employment in the regions concerned. With some 38. 090 seafarers in island cabotage and some 5. 480 directly related shore staff, the island sectors count for 43. 570 jobs. 12 Although by virtue of Art. 6 of Regulation 3577/92 island cabotage with the French DOM's is temporarily exempted (until 1. 1. 1999) from its application, French national legislation only reserves to the French flag cabotage trades between ports of one and the same overseas department and between ports in Guadeloupe, Guyane and Maritinique. As a result, cabotage related employment is limited to a small number of local seafarers (+/- 100) and shore staff (+/- 20), which figures are included here. 21 The great majority (70%) of seafarers jobs in island traffic is found in the labour intensive passenger trades (see below) : regular passenger/ferry services : 22. 200 seaferers = 58. 4% island cruise services : 4. 400 seafarers = 11. 6% } 70% island cargo trades : 11. 400 seafarers = 30% __ total of 38. 000 seafarers = 100% + + 5. 3 The socio-economic impact of cabotage liberalisation until now 5. 3. 1 Southern Member States to estimate what the likely socio-economic In order impact of the forthcoming liberalisation of island cabotage in Southern Europe will be, it has been examined what conclusions can be drawn from : -a- -b- the partial liberalisation of mainland cabotage in Southern Europe up to now and the completed liberalisation of both mainland and island cabotage in Northern Europe (see 5. 3. 2). As regards point -a-, the analysis presented in chapter 2 has shown that the impact of the liberalisation has been very limited : of the 18 mln tonnes of cargo being liberalised under Regulation 3577/9^ only 1. 73 mln tonnes (10%) were carried by ships from other Member States. There are no indications that this modest participation of foreign EU carriers has had a significant impact on the position of seafarers in Southern Member States. Another development, with perhaps a greater bearing on the position of EU seafarers, was the participation of foreign registered vessels (both EU and non-EU) in non-liberalised trades on the basis of waivers granted by national authorities for a total volume of 6. 6 mln tonnes. As stated before, it has been observed that national carriers tend to cut costs (notably in Portugal and Spain) by reflagging cabotage vessels to a second register and to use these. same vessels on the basis of waivers in cabotage trades. However, the trend to cut costs by re-flagging is a general one, observed in all sectors of Community shipping, independent of the cabotage Regulation. If any conclusion can be drawn from the above situation, it appears to be that the socio-economic impact of the cabotage Regulation is less pronounced than initially expected or feared by certain parties. However, this is only a preliminary conclusion since it should be borne in mind that the liberalisation of cabotage in Southern Europe has only just begun : 18 mln tonnes have been liberalised out of a total cabotage cargo volume of 133 mln tonnes. More significant volumes of strategic mainland cabotage are now being 22 liberalised as from 1 January 1997 whilst the liberalisation in passenger trades will not start until 1. 1. 1999. 5. 3. 2 Northern Member States Some Northern Member States apply traditionally an open coast line policy (UK, Ireland, Denmark, Netherlands, Belgium). Hence, cabotage has been completely free and open to worldwide competition for many decades. In other Member States cabotage was liberalised with the entry into force of Regulation 3577/92 (Germany) or at the moment of accession to the Community for Sweden and Finland respectively. The U. K. , with a substantial cabotage market and a completely liberal policy, is an interesting case to see to what extent national carriers can be substituted by foreign carriers in the long run. It appears that the situation differs for the following market segments : liquid bulk, dry cargo and passenger services. In liquid bulk, UK registered ships hold a market share of only 30%; in dry bulk, the share is around 50%, whilst passenger cabotage services are entirely carried out under the national flag. The UK tanker cabotage market is a special case. The substantial oil transport from the continental shelf in the North Sea has attracted international tanker operators (NIS, Finland, others). The average loading capacity of tankers used in this trade is also much higher than of tankers in conventional cabotage trades. It should also be borne in mind that in the bulk sector and in particular in Northern Europe, many EU established shipowners have chosen to re-flag their vessels to non-EU registers (for fiscal and other reasons falling outside the scope of the cabotage Regulation). This may lead to a situation where the number of vessels required to serve the national cabotage market is no longer available under the national flag. In the other Northern Member States, passenger island cabotage is 100% carried out by nationally owned, crewed and registered vessels. Cabotage passenger trades are important in Denihark and to a lesser extent also in Germany, Finland and the Netherlands (see table 2). As regards cargo cabotage, the situation varies by Member State. In Germany, national carriers operating under the national flag held in 1995 (see table 7) 67% of the market (liquid bulk and dry cargo combined), 15% was carried under other EU flags and 18% by third country registers through waivers. For Denmark and Sweden, no precise figures are available, but experts suggest that the global patterns should be roughly similar to those found in the UK and Germany respectively. In Finland, national carriers have 88% of the market, 12% is carried by other EU flags. 23 5. 4 Extrapolation of trends observed To what extent can the experiences gained with free cabotage in Northern Europe be used to forecast future developments in Southern Europe? Obviously, the differences between the relevant markets have to be taken into account. From the preceding section it appears that domestic regular passenger services tend to remain in the hands of carriers established in the State concerned, operating ships registered in that State and crewed by nationals of that State, even if the market is open and free for many years. The most likely explanation for this phenomenon in Northern Europe is that it is not financially attractive for a newcomer to set up a regular passenger service to Nordic islands in parallel to the existing service of the traditional carrier. In the Northern Member States such services are normally carried out on a purely commercial basis, which implies modest profit margins in an open low-growth market. It is also worth noting that cabotage passenger operators hardly make use of the possibilities under the laws of Northern Member States to engage foreign non-EU staff on board their domestic ferries. Language considerations may partly explain this preference for national seamen. The market for regular passenger services to and from islands in Southern Europe is different in the sense that the seasonal fluctuations in demand (summer peak) are much more pronounced. Island services can be very profitable in the summer. Hence, it is not to be excluded that newcomers would find it commercially attractive to set up new regular passenger services in parallel to those offered by the traditional carriers. Although, such an evolution would be compatible with the principle of freedom to provide services, it also implies that the issue of harmonisation of competition conditions merits special attention. The concern of seafarers Unions and ferry operators in Southern Europe with increased competition from outside should be seen against the background of other fundamental changes taking place in their economic environment, such as moves towards privatisation of presently State-owned ferry companies serving island regions in Italy and Spain, pressure from certain governments to re-examine the provisions on public service obligations in favour of a new approach based on public tender, the introduction of fast ferries, etc. These developments should in any event force operators to become more market oriented and competitive, a process which can already be observed. When being asked to express their views on the forthcoming liberalisation of the cabotage market and the possible switch from host State to flag State manning conditions, it became clear that this latter point is the main source of concern amongst South European seafarers, in particular in relation to the labour intensive passenger services. It would be considered unfair if North European carriers were allowed to set up regular passenger services in Southern Europe making partial use of cheap third country labour, as is allowed to some. extent under their flag State manning provisions. As regards island cargo trades, the situation is less sensitive. First of all, because crew costs play a lesser role in cargo trades and only 30% of all seamen employed in Southern island cabotage work in the cargo sector (see page 20). Secondly, some 40% of these jobs are found on board very small vessels with a loading capacity of less than 650 GT, which hardly exist in fleets of Northern Member States. The 24 possible application of flag State conditions would therefore not be likely to have a significant impact on this sector. In island cargo cabotage, with bigger vessels, Northern carriers could offer competition. However, considering that Regulation 3577/92 provides for long transition periods allowing the parties concerned sufficient time to prepare for the opening of the market, further considering that there is no legal obligation to open the cabotage market to non-EU carriers (as has been done in certain Northern Member States), and taking into account the experience gained with the liberalisation of mainland cargo cabotage, there is no reason to assume unsustainable socio economic consequences as a result of the liberalisation of island cargo cabotage. 5. 5 Conclusions The host State manning conditions as set out in Article 3 of Regulation 3577/92 are to be regarded as a temporary derogation to the normal flag State regime. As regards maritime cabotage cargo services, the analysis presented in the previous chapters of this report has not revealed compelling arguments to justify a long lasting derogation from the usual flag State manning conditions. Cargo cabotage services are often carried out by ships which participate alternatively in international and domestic traffic. The manning conditions for this type of cabotage can therefore not deviate substantially from the accepted practice in international trades. The Commission therefore takes the view that as of a certain date (to be decided) flag State manning conditions should apply to the entire EU-market for maritime cargo cabotage. As regards regular passenger/ferry services in island cabotage, the special character of the market and the potential socio-economic implications of the forthcoming liberalisation, in combination with the envisaged switch from host-State to flag-State manning conditions, would justify the adoption of certain special provisions to counteract a possible disruption of the competition conditions. The Commission believes that this objective can be achieved by the introduction of a regime whereby flag State manning conditions shall in principle apply to all cabotage passenger services but the host State may be allowed to require that, in the case of regular passenger cabotage services, its rules concerning the proportion of EU nationals in the crew shall apply (which would require an amendment of Article 3 of Regulation 3577/92). In addition, from the safety aspect it should be recalled that Member States may require, in accordance with Council Directive 94/58/EC of 22 November 1994 on the minimum level of training for seafarers (O. J. N° L 319 p. 28), that a certain percentage of the crew members and in particular those nominated on muster lists to assist passengers in emergency situations, must have communication skills that are sufficient for that purpose and which may consist, inter, alia, in speaking the language or languages appropriate to the principal nationalities of passengers carried on a particular route. This approach will allow the internal market to work on the basis of Community social standards wherever this is possible. 25 It is the Commission's intention to submit to the Council a legislative proposal amending Article 3 of Regulation 3577/92 along the lines set out above, in the near future. 26 ANNEXES 27 Table A. 1 Overview of cabotage provisions for EU Member States ANNEX 1 Country Basic principle on cabotage Austria No maritime cabotage Belgium Not restricted Comment Waiver system Crew nationality requirements Vessel ownership requirements Fiscal regime 1st Register 2nd Register 1st Register 2nd Register not applicable not applicable None, negotiated on ship by ship basis. not applicable should Captain be Belgian citizen, waivers given in case of non availability. not applicable Vessel owned/managed by EU citizen/company domiciled in Austria owned by Vessel citizen/ Belgian/EU company domiciled in Belgium/EU or non EU national represented by Belgium/EU citizen with office in/managed from Belgium Vessel owned by Danish or or EU companies and managed from Denmark. persons not applicable not applicable applicable None shipping for None specifically seafarers for DIS Register: see 1st register Seafarers on board DIS vessels are tax exempted and paid net wages. Denmark Not restricted: Decree 658/94 allows all foreign vessels to participate. Previous restrictions for DIS cargo vessels have been abolished as of 1 December 1996. not applicable Captain Danish. must be DIS Register: • Captain to be Danish national. • Third country natio nals can be employed on wage conditions. local Source : Merc TecnEcon •2% Country Basic principle on cabotage Finland Restricted: Cabotage governed by Section 4 of Restrictive Trades Practices Act. Foreign vessels generally prohibited from entering domestic coastal trades. France Restricted: des 'Code Art. 257 Douanes'(11/5/77): only French flag vessels can participate between metropolitan ports. Art. 258 extends this to voyages between ports in one dom and ports of Guadeloupe, Guyane and Martinique. Source : Merc TecnEcon Comment Waiver system Crew nationality requirements Vessel ownership requirements Fiscal regime 1st Register 2nd Register 1st Register 2nd Register amending Act issued on An (1362/94) 1. 1. 95: - abolished restrictions concerning cabotage for EU vessels. • Permits granted for maximum of 1 year to foreign vessels trading between Aland and mainland. - 3 awarded in 1993. No in awarded permits 1995/6. • Special foreign permits be obtained from MOTC for in mainland cabotage if no suitable Finnish ship available. ships - 10 permits given in '95, 5 in 96 (mainly Eastern Europe flags). • Waivers can be granted for single or consecutive to non-EU voyage(s) vessels liberalised trades and EU-vessels in non-liberalised trades in case "identified of demand" (art 257). in - Registration governed by Marine Registration Act (512/1993). - List of Merchant Vessels in International Trade (Act No. 1707/1991). - >60% vessel owned by citizens/ Finnish companies. - Ownership requirements same as 1st register. - Vessels must be less than Tax rebates and partial refund of social security costs paid by the owner are available for ships listed the on International Register. 20 years old. - Registration not permitted for passenger/ car ferries or vessels engaged in cabotage. only TAAF register: similar as 1st register. to allow - Amendment to Shipping Act (167/1939) of 1. 10- foreign. 94 in ships Finnish if owned/ controlled by Finnish or EEA entities. registered register - - Vessel must belong 100% to a physical person national of EU/ to a EEA or 50% company its registered office in EU, and its operation carried out from France. having - partial refunding to corporate local authorities, tax paid • partial refunding social for in security operations international trades. costs Finnish citizens retained labour on contracts. collective • Master must be Finnish national. - May recruit foreign crew members certain on conditions by way of the derogation labour usual collective agreements. from the - Half crew may of members consist domiciled in the EEA. - Finnish crews are largely used in practice. - 1st Register: master and French first mate citizens, - other crew citizens of the EU or EEA. Taaf (Kerguelen) Register: -35% of crew should. be French nationals, incl. captain and 1st engineer. 29 Source : Merc TecnEcon Country Basic principle on cabotage Comment Waiver system Crew nationality requirements Vessel ownership requirements Fiscal regime 1st Register 2nd Register 1st Register 2nd Register Germany Restricted to EU reg istered owned or vessels: Regulated in Art. 5: para 2, 3 'Gesetz ilber die Kûstenschiffahrt' (Law on coastal shipping). Paragraph 2. 1 sub 3 (which came in effect on 23 July 1994) brought Art 5. in line with CR 3577/92. Para 2. 2 & 3 of Art. 5 define: -conditions for granting of waivers to non-EU flag vessels; - these conditions may be waived of in reciprocity. case Greece Restricted: Regulated in legislative for decree passenger cargo transport. in principle only Greek vessels are allowed 187/73 and Près. Decree 215794 partly harmonised Greek law in accordance with CR 3577/92: Waivers can be granted: - Art. 166 of Nautical Law regulates 187/73 waivers. - allows involvement of oth. EU vessels in non- strategic by trades vessels >650 GT. - During 1995/6 only 4 waivers were granted, for specialised vessels. Ireland Not restricted not applicable - According to the para 1 Schiffs- of the besatzungsordnung: Master German national. should be a - Vessels on Basically same, but: ISR list, (operating >half year international) may employ foreigners. - No further stipulations. - Vessels >half year in cabotage cannot enter ISR list and may only employ if nationals not available. foreigners ISR same as 1st register. >50% ownership/control by German or EU nationals with representative domiciled in Germany. (Art. 1 and Flaggen- 2 rechtsgesetz). of - ships operating solely in cabotage: no tax relief on and no subsidies. income - profit ships from operating internationally taxed at maximum 28. 2% instead of normal 47%. Près. Decree demands: 12/92 not applicable - 100% of crew consists of EU Greek/other nationals. Article 5 of Law 187/93 states: >50% of owner ship by Greek nationals or legal entities. not applicable - Officers pay 8% income tax, - Ratings totally are exempted from income tax. not applicable - Officers to be Irish, UK, other EU or Common wealth citizens. - Ratings: Irish, UK, or other EU citizens. Vessels owned by Irish citizens/Corporate body citizens/corporate or reciprocating body of states by Government. recognised to More than 50% property Italian belonging citizens/compa-nies, as in Art. 143 regulated della Codice Navigazione. not applicable - 10% Corporate profit tax - 15% straight line depreciation - No standard seafarers. reduction tax on for not applicable • 8. 86% détaxation of social benefit charges plus -Until 30/11/1996: 10. 6% allowance on social benefit charges. Italy Restricted Regulated della Chapter Code). in: 'Codice Navigazione' (Shipping III in principle, restricted to Italian vessels of Merchant of Min. Marine Circular 1992: - allows other EU vessels in liberalised cabotage sections. Waivers may be granted on case by case basis special through authorization the Ministry. by • Master and chief officer not applicable to be Italian, - other crew members Italian or EU citizens recognised (certificates by Italian law). 30 Country Basic principle on cabotage Comment Waiver system Crew nationality requirements Vessel ownership requirements Fiscal regime 1st Register 2nd Register 1st Register 2nd Register Luxem burg Nether lands No maritime cabotage not applicable Not restricted not applicable not applicable not applicable register Independent mainly used by Belgian owners. Captain EU licence citizen, * by recognised Crew Luxemburg. according STWC standards. Captain Dutch national, other crew according to STCW standards, certi ficates recognised by Dutch authorities. Madeira register: - Captain + 50% crew EU or Portuguese nationals Decree Law 368/93 incorporates CR 3577/92: - liberalised trades are to other EU open vessels. Portugal in Decree Restricted Regulated Law 368 /93 restricted to Portuguese vessels Source : Merc TecnEcon Art. 3. 1 of D. L. 368/93 allows for authorization Minister use of other vessels case of in demand. 100% Portuguese or EU nationals. 31 not applicable - none specifically for seafarers >50% by Owned nationals of EU or commercial companies with registered office in EU, if significant part of management is handled from Luxembourg not applicable - Exemption Social Security payment / income tax lower tax brackets for seafarers, - Choice between corporate or tonnage tax. Madeira register: (branch) office - Madeira in Decree Law 293/91 Art. 30 D: - taxation on 30% of the profit the transport activity only. from part 2/3 vessel must belong to Dutch national persons or legal entities with EU nationality. Substantial of (operational) management be Dutch/ organised from in Holland, regulated Law of Commerce Art. 311. to Decree Law 414/86 states: national - Portuguese controlling >50% capital/management of vessel. in Portuguese territory. Office - definition 414/86 is in line with Community law. Country Basic principle on cabotage Comment Waiver system Crew nationality requirements Vessel ownership requirements Fiscal regime Spain • C. R. 3 577/92 was temporarily suspended until February ^4 for some industrial main land cargoes. Restricted Regulated in Law 27/1992 on State Ports and Merchant Marine. Decree 392/96 allows REC participation vessels certain in trades. Sweden Restricted Closed vessels. to foreign - Trades been have liberalised to EU vessels in accordance with CR 3577/92 since 1. 8. 95. -Art. 81 of Law 27/1992 regulates possibility for waivers. - During 1995 326 waivers were issued. 1st Register 2nd Register 1st Register 2nd Register Captain and 1st officer Spanish nationals, other crew EU nationals. Canary Island Register (REC): - captain & 1st officer Spanish nationals, - other crew 50% EU possible for non EU nationals, waiver crew. Any Spanish company, or EU company with representative appointed in Spain. REC All companies may use the register, provided that a legal representative is appointed in the Canary Islands. - If involved liberalised crew to nationals. in non- trades all EU be the - Exemptions are granted National by Maritime Administration in cases suitable where no is Swedish/EU vessel available. None. All crew retained collective wage on agreements regardless of nationality. not applicable Law (1994) 19/49 allows fiscal allowances for REC register vessels Spanish and ships registered operating liner trades to Canaries: for - 70% reduction employer social security contribution - 25% deduction in calculation base income tax seafarers, - 35% reduction Corporate Tax Tax regime revised end •93. - Shipowners receive full rebate of tax paid on seafarers' income plus additional cash sum of SEK 29,000 per full for time employee social cost contributions. not applicable • Governed by maritime Act (1891:35). More than 50% should be owned Swedish by citizens or corporations. - Government reserves right to permit foreign ships flying Swedish flag. Vessel >50% owned by British/commonwealth/ EU citizen or bodies corporate incorporated inUK/EU. not applicable Only for Shipowners; - depreciation allowance, • profit tax, • credit facilities United Kingdom Not restricted not applicable - For. ship- 'strategic' types: master British national. not applicable Source : Merc TecnEcon accordance standards. - Other ships in STCW 32 Source : Merc TecnEcon Country Basic principle on cabotage Comment Waiver system Crew nationality requirements Vessel ownership requirements Fiscal regime 1st Register 2nd/Register 1st Register 2nd Register Other EEA counties Iceland Not restricted Open coastline. unlimited Practically scope foreign for merchant ships to trade between Icelandic ports. not applicable Norway Not restricted - Open coastline. NIS vessels in principle but excluded, permission is given for cargo vessels if certain. requirements fulfilled. are Under the scope of the Public Transportation Act 1976, all operators deploying vessels on scheduled coastal passenger services are required to obtain a licence from the MOTC (also applicable to NOR vessels). NIS vessels can enter some cabotage cargo trades. Such vessels are entered on a list of the Maritime Directorate. The current list contains 16 vessels, mostly highly specialised gas tankers. not applicable - Since EEA, all EEA eligible are citizens crew. -Under Act 26/1987 Employment Rights of Foreigners, all non EEA crew must obtain work from Miaof permit Social Affairs for entering in employment on board. - None, except master NIS register: must be Norwegian. - All crew retained on collective wage agree ments. - General requirement for master. Norwegian exemptions However for other nationalities are readily available. 33 - Governed by Registration of ships 115/1985, Act previously limited registration to Icelandic nationals and residents. - Amending Act 62/1992 of gives registration to citizens/corporations of EEA countries. right Ordinary (NOR) the - Norwegian Register governed Maritime Transportation Act. by - Open by only to Norwegian citizens/ residents or unlimited partnership where at least 60% of ownership is Norwegian citizens or the owner is company a where 60 percent of the capital and operating powers are in Norwegian hands. limited at least not applicable by - NIS register put into the operation Norwegian Ship International Register Act of 12. 6. 1987. - Ownership company as for requirements If nationality NOR. conditions are not met, registration also open to limited or partnership with head office in Norway, or shipowning partnership with Norway based managing owner, or owner with appointed representative accept authorised writs on behalf of the owner. to - Seafarers obtain following tax privileges: - income tax deduction US $ 10,4 x 1. 49 for each sea day. - shipowners do not receive for any rebates/refunds social cost contributions. - All crew members serving onboard NOR or NIS to vessels are entitled deduction tax special limited to 30% from their gross income, but not more than NKr 70,000 pa. Limited to seafarers working for a minimum sailing period. - Tax rebate system from 1994 providing refunds to shipowners of tax paid on seafarers' wages. Rebates only available for crew members resident/liable for taxation in Norway. Restricted to NOR vessels except where entire crew fulfil vessels NIS residence/liability requirements. Note: Two of the (former) EEA countries had bilateral and reciprocal cabotage agreements with other EEA and/or EU countries; Sweden: with Norway, incl. NIS and some of the EU Member States, Norway: with Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, UK and Portugal. Source: MERC/TecnEcon 34 ANNEX II Table A. 2 Overview of cabotage developments by EU Member State (mln tonnes) Category DRY BULK LIQUID BULK GEN. CARGO TOTAL TOTAL EU Member mainl. islands mainl. islands mainl. islands mainl. islands Belgium 1984 NA 1992 x NA - 1993 1994 1995 Den- 1987e> 3. 9 3. 0 NA NA 0. 05 0. 05 0. 05 0. 5 NA NA - 2. 6 m a rk 1992e) 5. 25 2. 05 0. 55 2. 65 4. 25 1. 9 0. 45 2. 5 1993e> 1994<=) 1995e) Finland 1992 4. 2 4. 1 0. 6 1. 85 1. 8 0. 55 1993 0. 55 0. 45 0. 5 0. 6 4. 1 4. 1 2. 75 3. 2 0. 05 0. 05 1994 1995e) France") 1984 1992 1993 1994 1995») W. Germ. 1987 0. 7 0. 8 2. 4 1. 6 1. 6 2. 0 1. 9 0. 5 -unified 1992 1. 45 G e r m a ny 1993 0. 95 1994 1995 Greece 1984 1992 1993 0. 7 0. 8 3. 0 3. 7 3. 7 0. 45 4. 75 0. 05 0. 5 0. 3 0. 3 0. 2 0. 2 0. 2 - 3. 55 4. 1 4. 1 4. 45 0. 05 7. 2 6. 8 6. 5 5. 7 5. 5 1. 5 7. 35 6. 05 5. 8 6. 15 6. 5 6. 0 6. 0 0. 3 0. 3 0. 3 0. 45 0. 4 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 9 2. 0 2. 0 xz - - - 0. 05 0. 05 0. 05 0. 6 0. 4 0. 4 NA NA 0. 05 0. 05 0. 05 4. 4 5. 8 4. 7 4. 7 4. 7 4. 7 4. 65 5. 45 - 14. 2 12. 9 13. 9 14. 1 14. 5 0. 7 0. 6 0. 6 5. 25 0. 65 9. 6 8. 4 8. 1 7. 7 7A 2. 0 8. 85 7. 05 1. 8 1. 5 1. 4 1. 5 1. 5 0. 6 0. 6 - 8. 6 8. 2 9. 5 95 9. 5e) 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 1. 2 0. 9 0. 9 0. 85 0. 9 0. 5 0. 5 NA NA 0. 05 0. 05 0. 05 18. 6 18. 7 18. 6 18. 8 19. 2 5. 4 5. 25 6. 05 5. 9 11. 4 9. 9 9. 5 9. 2 8. 9 2. 0 9. 45 7. 65 7. 1 7. 6 0. 05 0. 45 6. 55 0. 55 0. 5 2. 0 2. 4 7. 0 0. 6 10. 1 6. 45 16. 55 10. 1 2. 4 10. 1 8. 5 8. 5 18. 6 18. 6 Category DRY BULK LIQUID BULK GEN. CARGO TOTAL TOTAL EU Member 1994 1995») Ireland 1984 4. 1 0. 05 1992 0. 15 0. 3 0. 1 0. 05 4. 85 5. 4 5. 1 4. 9 5. 6 0. 3 0. 4 0. 4 0. 4 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 Italy 1993 1994 1995 1984 1992 1993 1994 1995e) Nether- 1984e) lands 1992 1993 1994 1995») Portugal 1984 1992 1993 1994 1995 Spain 1984 8. 15 mainl. 4. 0 islands 4. 4 mainl. 5. 0 islands 1. 7 mainl. 035 islands 3. 1 mainl. 9. 35 islands 9. 2 4. 5 - 8. 35 4. 8 0. 45 0. 55 0. 55 0. 6 0. 65 7. 5 1. 5 0. 3 3. 2 - - - 9. 2 - 9. 2 0. 5 0. 7 0. 85 0. 7 0. 7 21. 4 4. 0 6. 9 16. 35 36. 65 10. 8 6. 65 23. 15 5. 85 11. 65 17. 9 45. 6 17. 6 3. 75 23. 9 17. 2 4. 4 25. 75 16. 55 4. 65 22. 8 2. 1 2. 0 2. 8 1. 0 1. 45 1. 25 0. 9 0. 7 0. 5 0. 5 0. 5 0. 5 0. 3 0. 9 - - 3. 0 5. 0 4. 3 4. 3 4. 3 16. 2 0. 2 0. 4 0. 4 0. 4 0. 4 5. 5 - - 2. 45 7. 4 6. 9 6. 5 0. 15 0. 2 0. 2 0. 2 0. 2 0. 4 0. 8 0. 8 1. 0 1. 0 5. 1 10. 95 48. 9 11. 3 49. 85 13. 05 45. 85 1. 15 1. 65 1. 45 1. 1 0. 9 1. 1 1. 7 1. 7 1. 9 1. 7 0. 3 0. 4 0. 4 0. 4 3. 1 5. 1 4. 4 43 43 26. 8 11. 5 1992 4. 9 1. 2 11. 65 6. 65 0. 3 9. 8 16. 85 17. 65 1993 4. 25 0. 95 9. 5 6. 4 035 10. 15 14. 1 17. 5 1994 4. 65 0. 85 8. 15 8. 45 0. 25 11. 05 13. 05 20. 35 1995 Sweden 1992 4. 05 3. 55 1993 3. 55 1994 3. 55 1995e» United 1984 4. 1 4. 7 0. 95 1. 85 1. 7 1. 4 1. 7 - 9. 65 6. 9 7. 15 7. 15 7. 55 32. 5 12. 85 0. 2 12. 8 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 0. 1 8. 8 0. 1 0. 1 0. 45 0. 15 30. 0 - - 36 13. 9 10. 45 10. 7 10. 7 11. 65 37. 2 26. 6 2. 05 1. 9 1. 95 1. 95 38. 8 18. 55 18. 4 0. 5 0. 7 0. 85 0. 7 0. 7 53. 0 63. 5 59. 85 61. 15 58. 9 1. 15 1. 95 1. 85 1. 5 13 4. 2 6. 8 6. 1 6. 2 6. 0 38. 3 34. 5 31. 6 33. 4 40. 5 12. 5 12. 6 12. 65 13. 6 76. 0 Category DRY BULK LIQUID BULK GEN. CARGO TOTAL TOTAL EU Member Kingdom 1992 (incl. 1993 offshore) 1994 1995«) mainl. 8. 5 islands 2. 0 mainl. 26. 1 islands 29. 7 mainl. islands 9. 0 mainl. 34. 6 islands 40. 7 7. 4 8. 6 7. 5 2. 0 4. 6 3. 5 28. 9 23. 8 9. 5 363 353 34. 7 23. 2 10. 2 43. 3 38. 0 EU-12 84/87 27. 65 17. 6 75. 35 42. 0 17. 0 60. 9 75 49. 5 28. 0 7. 05 33. 15 110. 05 111. 65 75. 3 71. 6 813 77. 5 221. 7 1992 31. 35 22. 4 70. 65 64. 95 6. 6 43. 45 108. 6 130. 8 239. 4 1993 28. 05 28. 5 66. 05 59. 4 2. 9 41. 35 97. 0 129. 25 226. 25 EU-15 1994 33. 8 32. 35 81. 1 633 2. 65 43. 45 117. 55 139. 1 256. 65 1995 33. 4 30. 7 90. 35 58. 45 3. 35 423 127. 1 131. 45 258. 55 OTHER EEA Iceland 1993 0. 05 1994») 0. 05 - 1995») Norway 1993 1994») 1995») 0. 05 8. 0b> 8. 0 8. 0 0. 3 0. 3 0. 3 • 0. 05 0. 05 0. 05 NA NA NA 4. 55b> 22. 0 1. 25W 4. 5 4. 5 27. 0 25. 0 1. 2 1. 2 0. 4 0. 4 0. 4 NA NA NA - NA NA NA - NA NA NA 0. 4 0. 4 0. 4 35. 8 40. 7 38. 7 a) Consultants estimate. b) Mainland and island trade together. c) Includes estimated data, on trade volume, trades area or commodity allocation. d) Only European cabotage. e) Provisional figures for major ports with total cargo volumes >2 mln tonnes only. 37 ANNEX III North European coastal fleet") according to register per 1/7/1994 and 1/7/1996. country Number 1000 GT Tonnage* 1000 DWT remarks 1994 1996 1994 1996 1994 1996 Belgium") Denmark Germany Ireland Netherlands Un. Kingdomc) 23 129 551 54 237 493 17 127 373 49 248 470 78 199 650 95 450 66 213 550 98 480 1,585 1,734 37 92 36 88 13 cargo and 4 large passenger/ferries 70 cargo vessels & 57 ferries 1,040 866 incl. 266 small coasters - 577,000 DWT 130 602 972 134 incl. 38 small coasters - 100,000 DWT 680 incl. 175 small coasters - 400,000 DWT 956 inc. 116 RoRo, 188 coasters, 32 pass. Total EU-12 1,487 1,284 3,057 3,141 2,873 2,760 Austria Finland Sweden Total EU-15 29 323 280 1,916 60 140 180 100 all small dry cargo vessels 100 incl. 190 small pass. vsl, agr. 27,000 GT 150 all extremely small vessels 3,521 3,110 a) Vessels < 6,000 GT and all ferries. b) Total fleet. c) UK owned trading fleet. d) contains various estimates. South European cabotage fleet per 1/7/1994 and 1/7/1996 country number 1000 GT Tonnage') 1000 DWT remarks 1994 1996 1994 1996 1994 1996 France") Greece Italy Portugal Spain Total 86 498 372 22 210 90 515 362 15 209 539 510 1,249 1,900 672 63 575 1,036 120 900 713 440 569 83 784 731 incl. 18 large RoRo+27 mainland coasters 563 incl. 15 cruise+200 ferries+250 coasters 619 incl. 140 ferries/hydrof. and 109 tankers 75 868 1 small passenger+14 dry cargo vessels incl. 25 tankers+54 larger ferries 1,188 1,191 3,098 4,466 2,589 2,856 total South European cabotage fleets a) Contains various estimates. b) Excluding some smaller local ferries. z* ANNEX IV Tables 4. 1 and 4. 2 present overviews of the respective fleets. Table 4. 1 Fleet developments of DIS register ( 1992-1996) Ship type number Tonnage 1000GRT/GT 1000 DWT 1992 1994 1996 1992 1994 1996 1992 1994 1996 237 86 100 6 44 228 215 918 889 950 1,555 1,491 1,511 98 99 7 46 93 90 6 44 1,990 2,093 2,177 2,217 2,360 2,483 2,160 1,567 1,979 3,965 2,740 3,500 84 56 122 66 136 75 16 65 20 75 17 73 473 478 448 5,208 4,737 5,318 7,818 6,686 7,584 Trampers Liners Tankers Pass. /ferries Other Total Table 4. 2 The fleet of the MAR register ( 1994-1996) Shipowners Portuguese Non Portuguese Type of Vessel Shipowners Shipowners Total 1996 Total 1994 N° DWT Crew N° DWT Crew 27 89. 1 230 General Cargo Containers Dry Bulk Liquid Bulk LPG Passenger RoRo Total 1996 Total 1994 4 2 2 7 2 2 12. *4 6. 2 27. 8 33 20 25 545. 1 110 9. 6 0. 9 24 43 19 602. 0 24 739. 5 255 324 N° 31 2 9 9 4 3 DWT Crew N° DWT Crew 101. 5 263 6. 2 113. 7 832. 2 18. 6 1. 0 1. 6 20 102 145 45 47 11 9 3 3 29. 2 10. 9 34. 1 85 33 38 16 1,377. 9 284 2 2 9. 6 2. 7 24 85 7 2 2 1 1 85. 9 287. 1 9. 0 0. 1 1. 6 77 35 21 4 11 * 1 40 472. 8 378 59 1,074. 8 633 11 724. 9 35 1,463. 4 549 23 ANNEX V Table 3. 3 COMPARATIVE NET MANNING COSTS: GENERAL CARGO VESSEL 1,500 GT Register Crew Complement (number/nationality) Total Crew Back up factor(l) Total Manning Cost (US$ '000/year) Index Officers Ratings Officers/ Ratings 6E + 0F 6E + 0F 12 1. 6/1. 6 France* Belgium* Sweden* France LuxernDourg* Finland* Spain * Norway (NOR)* Denmark* Iceland Ireland* Greece 5E + 0F 4E + 0F 4E + 0F 4E + 2F 5E + 0F 5E + 0F 5E + 0F 4E + 0F 3E + 0F 5E + 0F 5E + 0F 1E + 5F 4E + 0F 6E + 0F 6E + 0F 3E + 0F 3E + 0F 5E + 0F 4E + 0F 4E + 0F 5E + 0F 7E + 0F United Kingdom* 4E + 0F 4E-K)F Germany* 3E + 0F 3E + 0F DIS (Danish crew) 3E + 0F 3E + 0F Italy* 5E + 0F 4E+0F Spain (Canary) Portugal Germany (ISR) Norway (NIS)* Netherlands * Portugal (MAR) 5E + 0F 3E + 0F 2E+1F 3E + 0F 3E+2F 4E+0F 0E + 3F 0E + 4F 3E-+0F 2E+2F DIS (minimum) 1E + 2F 0E + 4F 9 9 12 9 11 11 7 6 10 8 12 8 6 6 9 11 9 6 7 6 9 7 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 6/1. 6 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 8/1. 4 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 2/1. 2 1. 5/1. 5 1. 8/1. 8 1. 8/1. 4 1. 6/1. 6 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 7/1. 2 1. 5/1. 5 1. 8/1. 4 (Ave =100) 1,594 1,214 1,068 895 941 768 724 720 707 645 642 620 •618 580 560 525 516 501 379 355 368 303 239 237 180 159 133 140 114 108 107 105 96 95 92 92 86 83 78 77 74 56 53 55 45 35 AYfraft; (a) Applies to national seafarers only 673 100 E: F: *: EU/EEA nationals Foreign Based on ISF data Source: MERC/TecnEcon 4"> Table 3. 4 COMPARATIVE MANNING COSTS: GENERAL CARGO VESSEL 3,300 GT Crew Complement (number/nationality) Total Crew Back up factor00 Total Manning Cost (US$ '000/year) Index Officers Ratings Officers/ Ratings (Ave =100) Register France* Belgium* Denmark* Sweden* France melen) 7E + 0F 6E + 0F 9E + OF 4E + 0F 6E + 0F 4E + 0F 5E + 0F 5E + 0F 4E + 3F 3E + 6F 7E + 0F 9E + 0F Luxembourg* 6E + 0F 4E + 0F DIS (Danish crew) 6E + 0F 4E + 0F Norway (NOR)* 5E + 0F 4E + 0F Spain * Greece Ireland* 6E + 0F 8E + 0F 6E + 0F 7E + OF 5E + 0F 5E + 0F United Kingdom* 5E + 0F 5E-K)F Iceland Italy* Germany* Spain (Canary) 6E + 0F 5E + 0F 6E + 0F 7E + 0F 3E + IF 2E + 4F Portugal 5E + 0F 8E+0F Germany (ISR) 3E+1F DIS (minimum) 2E + 4F 2E + 4F 0E + 5F Netherlands * 5E + 0F 0E+3F Norway (NIS)* 2E + 2F 0E + 4F Portugal (MAR) 3E+2F 2E+4F A v p r aw (a) E: F: *. applies to national seafarers only EEA nationals Foreign low cost bases on ISF data Source: MERC/TecnEcon 2,041 1,385 1,267 1,220 1,114 1,107 1,062 991 925 909 840 802 772 691 670 671 656 621 559 432 398 385 348 236 160 147 141 129 128 123 115 107 105 97 93 89 80 78 78 76 72 65 50 46 45 40 864 100 16 10 10 10 16 16 10 10 9 14 13 10 10 11 13 10 14 13 10 11 8 8 11 1. 8/1. 8 1. 5/1. 5 1. 8/1. 4 2. 0/2. 0 1. 8/1. 8 2. 0/2. 0 1. 5/1. 5 1. 8/1. 4 2. 0/2. 0 1. 5/1. 5 1. 2/1. 2 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 6/1. 6 1. 8/1. 8 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 8/1. 4 1. 7/1. 2 2. 0/2. 0 1. 5/1. 5 fc Table 3. 5 COMPARATIVE MANNING COSTS: PRODUCTS TANKER 9,000 GT Register Crew Complement (number/nationality) Total Crew Back up factor(a) Total Manning Cost(US$ '000/year) Index Officers Ratings Officers/ Ratings Ave =100 France* Belgium* 7E + 0F 11E + 0F 7E + 0F 5E + 0F Norway (NOR)* 7E + 0F 8E + 0F Denmark* Sweden* 7E + 0F 5E + 0F 6E + 0F 6E + 0F Luxembourg* 7E + 0F 5E+0F Finland* 7E + 0F 11E + 0F DIS (Danish crew) 7E + 0F France Greece Spain * Italy* 4E + 3F 4E + 3F 7E + 0F 7E + OF 7E + 0F Germany (ISR) 4E + 3F Ireland* Portugal Spain (Canary) 4E + 0F 7E + 0F 5E + 0F 3E + 8F 3E+10F 13E + 0F 10E + 0F 13E-K)F 3E+10F 8E + 0F 11E4ÛF United Kingdom* 4E + 0F 8E-KJF Iceland 7E + 0F 7E + 0F Norway (NIS) 4E + 3F 0E + 8F Netherlands* 7E + 0F 0E + 8F Portugal (MAR) 4E+3F 5E+6F DIS (minimum) 2E + 5F 0E + 6F 18 12 15 12 12 12 18 12 18 20 20 17 20 20 12 18 17 12 14 15 15 18 13 1. 8/1. 8 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 8/1. 4 2. 0/2. 0 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 8/1. 4 1. 8/1. 8 1. 8/1. 8 1. 2/1. 2 1. 5/1. 5 1. 6/1. 6 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 1. 5/1. 5 2. 0/2. 0 1. 7/1. 2 1. 5/1. 5 1. 8/1. 4 2,223 1,646 1,531 1,503 1,464 1,267 1,213 1,178 1,144 1,129 1,100 1,094 1,180 941 878 864 861 854 821 739 617 546 476 202 150 139 137 133 115 110 107 104 103 100 100 107 86 80 79 78 78 75 67 56 50 43 Average 1. 099 100 (a) E: F: * : Applies to national seafarers only EEA nationals Foreign low cost based on ISF data Source: MERC/TecnEcon « ISSN 0254-1475 COM(97) 296 final DOCUMENTS EN 07 13 Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-288-EN-C ISBN 92-78-21421-3 Office for Official Publications of the European Communities L-2985 Luxembourg