OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Association Européenne de Commerce d'Armes Civiles

AECAC

We represent sport and hunting gun and ammunition retailers while we simultaneously work on the future of hunting and civil firearms trading.

Lobbying Activity

Response to Establishment of the Electronic Licensing System for import, export and transit of firearms

15 Aug 2025

The AECAC welcomes the establishment of an electronic authorisation system for the import, export and transit of firearms, their essential components and ammunition, provided that the introduction of this system leads to the digitisation and simplification of processes. The revision of the EU Firearms Regulation resulted in an extension of the deadline, which significantly restricts the competitiveness of European companies in international trade. Implementation should therefore take place promptly, and the deadline of 12 February 2027 is therefore to be welcomed. However, we would like to point out that insufficient testing prior to implementation and rollout will have devastating consequences for security and timelines. If the system is not fully tested before it goes live, this could result in massive disruption to intra-European trade. This must be prevented at all costs in order not to restrict the freedom of action of the commercial enterprises affiliated with us. It is also necessary to check in advance the extent to which training of the parties involved is necessary prior to implementation in order to enable a smooth transition when the connection is launched. At the same time, consideration should be given to the extent to which other systems, such as the Internal Market Information System (IMI) or the Schengen Information System (SIS), can be effectively linked in order to ensure that the introduction of another system does not increase bureaucracy, but rather that the interconnection of systems reduces bureaucracy. The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) reference table (FRT) is to be used as a guideline for the licensing system, which we consider to be extremely problematic. According to statements by Canadian stakeholders, the RCMP uses the FRT as a tool to arbitrarily ban weapons with the tacit consent of the government. We clearly reject such an approach. Furthermore, the system is incompatible with the categories set out in Directive (EU) 2021/555. We advocate that a separate European reference table be developed in cooperation with the stakeholders involved, which must be maintained primarily at European level. For this system, it is important that update intervals and new entries into the system are carried out promptly by all Member States. It must also be clearly defined who is responsible for maintaining the system and within what time frame new entries must be made. Otherwise, there is a risk that economic operators will be disadvantaged if shipments are delayed or even become impossible due to a lack of up-to-date data, as is already the case, for example, with free weapons in Germany due to the inadequate maintenance of the Internal Market Information System (IMI) by the Member States. In some cases, missing entries mean that a movement permit cannot be issued. This must not happen via the ELS, as the system would otherwise impose an economic restriction. The current regulation does not provide for a technical support mechanism for economic operators and national authorities, nor does it adequately regulate the consequences of possible system failures. However, provision should be made to establish an effective support mechanism that can provide rapid and effective assistance in the event of technical disruptions. There is also a need for clear and legally binding rules on the legal and operational consequences of a system failure in the ELS or the connected national systems, including specific procedures to be applied in the event of the system being unavailable or only partially available.
Read full response

Response to Review of rules of export authorisation, and import and transit measures for firearms

2 Jul 2021

Der A.E.C.A.C. bedankt sich bei der Kommission für die Möglichkeit, sich zur ersten Folgenabschätzung zur Verordnung (EU) Nr. 258/2012 äußern zu dürfen. Wir haben folgende Anmerkungen: Anwendungsbereich & Definitionen • Schreckschuss-, Reizstoff- und Signalwaffen, deaktivierte Waffen, sowie akustische Waffen sind per Definition keine Feuerwaffen und dürfen daher auch zukünftig nicht der Feuerwaffenverordnung unterliegen. Die vorgenannten Waffentypen sind bereits in der EU-Richtlinie 2019/69 mit technischen Spezifikationen definiert worden. • Es ist zwingend erforderlich, dass die EU-258/2012-Verordnung ausschließlich für zivile Feuerwaffen angewendet wird. Die eindeutige Abgrenzung zur Rüstungsgütern ist notwendig, um bestehende Wettbewerbsnachteile innerhalb der EU-Staaten aufzuheben. • Die Festlegung von verbindlichen maximalen Verfahrensdauern für Genehmigungen nach der EU-258/2012-Verordnung sehen wir als notwendig an, damit die EU-Staaten gezwungen sind, Entscheidungen innerhalb der Verfahrensdauer herbeizuführen. • DieEU-258/2012-Verordnung umfasst bereits in Anhang I Nummern 13. und 14. Definitionen wesentlicher Teile für Feuerwaffen und Munition. Sollten redaktionelle Anpassungen (Harmonisierung) aufgrund der Novellierung der Richtlinie 91/477/EWG notwendig sein, steht dem nichts entgegen. „, Heterogene Anwendung von Verfahren • Sollten IT-Verfahren zum verbesserten Austausch innerhalb EU-Behörden im Rahmen der EU-258/2012-Verordnung etabliert werden, so ist verbindlich zu regeln, dass die Verfahren zunächst entwickelt, umgesetzt und evaluiert werden müssen, bevor diese in den produktiven Betrieb gehen. Abdriften von legalen Feuerwaffen in den Schwarzmarkt • Schreckschuss-, Reizstoff- und Signalwaffen sind bereits in der technischen Richtlinie 2019/69 beschrieben. Hier ist kein Regelungsbedarf notwendig, sondern wir empfehlen eine EU-weite Weiterbildung der Zoll- und Strafverfolgungsbehörden. Hierbei helfen Information- und Unterrichtsmaterial. • Durch Im- und Exportzertifikate und entsprechende Zolleinfuhrbescheinigungen wird bereits sichergestellt, dass ein Abdriften von legalen Feuerwaffen in den Schwarzmarkt nicht möglich ist. Daher besteht hier kein Handlungsbedarf • Die EU-Mitgliedsstaaten sind durch die Richtlinie 91/477/EWG (i.V.m. EU-2017/853) verpflichtet nationale Waffenregister zu führen, um einen lückenlosen Verlauf von Feuerwaffen zu erbringen. Im Rahmen von internationalen Transaktionen ist ebenfalls geregelt, welche Daten zu welchem Zeitpunkt auf Feuerwaffen dauerhaft anzubringen sind. Somit sind EU-weit zentralisierte Datensysteme nicht notwendig und nicht zielführend. Handelshemmnisse • Für den EU-Handel ist es wichtig, auf internationalen Messen oder Veranstaltungen mit eigenen Feuerwaffen präsent zu sein. Hierzu wäre ein vereinfachtes/kurzfristiges Prüf-/Verfahren sinnvoll, um exportierte Messe-Feuerwaffen vor Ort zu Veräußern. Die Praxis Messe-Ausstellungsstücke am Messeende zu veräußern ist weltweit gängige Praxis, um u.a. Transport- und Logistikkosten zu vermeiden. Vorrangig würde ein Kurzverfahren im B2B-Handel Erleichterung bringen.
Read full response

Response to Technical specifications for the marking of firearms and their essential components

26 Nov 2018

AECAC is the European gun and ammunition trading and retailing federation. Our organisation is formed by most national related associations. Currently the members of our federation are the following national trading associations: Austria: Verband Österreicher Büchsenmacher (Bundesinnung der Metalltechniker); Belgium: Wapenunie - Union Armes; Cyprus: Cyprus Gundealers Association; Denmark: Danske Vabenhandlerere; Finland: Asekauppiaiden Liitto ry ; France: Chambre Syndicale Nationale des Armuriers ; Germany: VDB - Verband Deutscher Büchsenmacher und Waffenfachhändler; Greece: Pan-Hellenic Association of Handcraft men & Professionals of Hunting Items; Ireland: Irish Gun Dealers and Shooters Association; Italy: ASSOARMIERI-Associazione Commercianti Armi-Munizioni Caccia Pesca Sport; Luxemburg. Association Luxembourgeoise des Armuriers et Négociants d'Armes ; The Netherlands: Nederlandse Vereniging voor de Wapenhandel; Spain: ACACE - Asociación de Comerciantes de Armería sus Complementos y Explosivos; Sweden: Sveriges Vapenhandlareforening. Since its foundation, AECAC has actively participated in all the procedures of the European Union policies in which firearms trading is involved. AECAC is currently the main representative at a European level of the gun and ammunition retailers. AECAC possition: Procedure. The proposed text exceeds the powers granted by the Firearms Directive, by giving new or more extended interpretations. Wording of Recital 1 of the Draft (“firearms and their essential components, whether part of a firearm or placed separately on the market”), defers form the wording of Art. 4.1 of the Firearms Directive (“any such firearm, or any essential component”) and pretends to give binding nature to the Directive article. Proportionality. AECAC is challenging the proportionality of requiring a “unique marking” on each essential part of a firearms. Firearms Directive only requires the “unique marking” only in one essential part and for the others essential parts requires a simplified system. Requiring the “unique marking” on all essential parts exceeds the mandate of the Directive and does not seem proportional at all. Technical question. The minimum size of 1.6 mm for the marking, would be too big in some cases (f.i. marks on a revolver drum, below the ejector rood, as some manufacturers do). We propose to reduce the minimum size to 1 mm. Convention for the reciprocal recognition of proof marks on small arms of 1 July 1969 (CIP). Article 4 of the Firearms Directive, provides the possibility for Member States to apply the provisions of the Convention for the reciprocal recognition of proof marks on small arms of 1 July 1969 (CIP) (“For the purposes of paragraph 1 and this paragraph, Member States may choose to apply the provisions of the Convention for the Reciprocal Recognition of Proof Marks on Small Arms of 1 July 1969”). Such alternative should be mentioned in the Implementing act. Regulatory effectiveness. Considering that still very few Member States have implemented the required system of electronic registers due to the practical difficulties to fulfil such a duty, it does not seem very realistic to require now the new requirements. Impact for Small and Medium Enterprises. The implementing act shall introduce simplified procedures for SME. Fact is that many companies which deal in Europe with sport and hunting guns and ammunition are Small and Medium Enterprises. The proposed text would result in significant burdens for all EU firearm retailers and specially handcraft men. European SMEs, whom already operate in a challenging and highly competitive environment, would suffer more heavily the consequences of such legal frame.
Read full response