OpenLobby.EU
Explore

Independent Retail Europe (formerly UGAL - Union of Groups of Independent Retailers of Europe)

Independent Retail Europe represents cooperative groups of independent SME retailers in food and non-food sectors across Europe.

Lobbying Activity

Meeting with Valentina Schaumburger (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Stéphane Séjourné)

20 Nov 2025 · Overview of Single Market most relevant files for retail

Independent Retail Europe urges level playing field in circular economy rules

6 Nov 2025
Topic — New EU Circular Economy Act to harmonize sustainability and recycling requirements across sectors.
Message — The organization requests minimum standards for Extended Producer Responsibility schemes that reduce administrative burdens and ensure fair cost coverage for collection services. They want online marketplaces and foreign operators required to participate in EPR schemes equally with physical retailers. Groups of independent retailers should be allowed to pool reporting rather than each small business reporting individually.1234
Why — This would reduce compliance costs for small retailers and prevent unfair competition from online platforms.567
Impact — Online marketplaces and foreign sellers lose their current advantage of avoiding EPR obligations.89
Read full response

Independent retailers urge EU food labelling harmonisation and supplier practice reforms

14 Oct 2025
Topic — EU proposal to simplify food safety regulations and reduce administrative burdens.
Message — The organization requests EU-wide harmonization of food labelling rules, introduction of digital labelling for non-essential information, and regulatory action against unfair practices by large food suppliers.123
Why — This would reduce relabelling costs and enable easier cross-border sourcing of products.45
Impact — Large branded food suppliers would lose ability to impose territorial constraints and unjustified price increases.6
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe urges simplification of EU digital rules

14 Oct 2025
Topic — Simplifying EU's complex digital, data, cybersecurity and AI regulatory framework.
Message — The organization requests clearer guidance on how different digital laws interact, simplified GDPR compliance requirements for SMEs, and elimination of redundant notification requirements. They want proportionate rules that reduce reporting burdens while maintaining legal certainty.123
Why — This would reduce compliance costs and resource allocation for their 500,000 independent retailers.45
Read full response

Response to Revision of the 'New Legislative Framework'

1 Sept 2025

It is important that a revision of the New Legislative Framework (NLF) reflects market realities and acknowledges the developments in the circular economy and digitalisation, while respecting the roles and corresponding responsibilities of all business operators as laid down in the recently revised EU product acquis from manufacturing to point of sale. We therefore invite the European Commission to consider the aspects outlined in the attached file, namely, the definitions in the NLF should be in line with recently adopted EU product legislation. Legal clarity and coherence are important to reduce fragmentation and inconsistencies within the EUs regulatory framework. Due care should be defined. Moreover, distributors' responsibilities under the NLF should strictly align with those outlined in GPSR, which offers a clear and effective framework. This model for distributors' obligations in the GPSR (and CRA) should be adopted and mirrored in the NLF. For products intended for consumers: instructions and safety information should remain embedded in the product itself in paper format. The data carrier should always be affixed to the product. Given the complexity of supply chains, where goods pass through multiple intermediaries, any ambiguity in the obligation to place the data carrier directly on the product introduces legal uncertainty. Additionally, by affixing the data carrier to the product will allow consumers to access the information after purchase. Preserve the reference to CE marking and maintain its physical presence on products. It enables a quick, at-a-glance verification that a product meets necessary standards, without needing a device, app or internet connection, which empowers consumers to make better-informed purchasing decisions, and facilitates retailers compliance checks. Furthermore, continued availability of spare parts by the manufacturer over an extended period should be supported. Once that period is over, a possibility of 3D printed parts should be facilitated when the manufacturer no longer makes spare parts available. Finally, the role of online marketplaces in cross-border e-commerce has exposed regulatory gaps in EU product legislation that must be comprehensively tackled. Both the GPSR and the PLD have loopholes when platforms intermediate sales from non-EU traders where in practice there is no responsible/liable EU-based economic operator.
Read full response

Response to Omnibus Regulation Aligning product legislation with the digital age

27 Aug 2025

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the European Commissions commitment to simplify rules and reduce the administrative burdens placed on EU businesses. We welcome the measures proposed in the 4th Omnibus simplification package concerning a new definition of small mid-cap companies (SMCs) and the introduction of targeted regulatory exemptions for SMCs (even though, overall, we consider the impact of these measures on the retail sector to be limited). Concerning the part of the Omnibus IV package, which proposes to digitalise mandatory product information, we consider it is an important step to reduce administrative costs, which will also redefine how companies demonstrate compliance and meet product safety requirements. However, we have certain concerns that require to be addressed to make sure the new rules respect the specific role and responsibilities of each economic operator in the supply chain as laid down in the EU acquis, and therefore do not result in massive new burdens for the retail sector.
Read full response

Response to Omnibus Directive Aligning product legislation with the digital age

27 Aug 2025

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the European Commissions commitment to simplify rules and reduce the administrative burdens placed on EU businesses. We welcome the measures proposed in the 4th Omnibus simplification package concerning a new definition of small mid-cap companies (SMCs) and the introduction of targeted regulatory exemptions for SMCs (even though, overall, we consider the impact of these measures on the retail sector to be limited). Concerning the part of the Omnibus IV package, which proposes to digitalise mandatory product information, we consider it is an important step to reduce administrative costs, which will also redefine how companies demonstrate compliance and meet product safety requirements. However, we have certain concerns that require to be addressed to make sure the new rules respect the specific role and responsibilities of each economic operator in the supply chain as laid down in the EU acquis, and therefore do not result in massive new burdens for the retail sector.
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe urges inflation-linked update to SME definition

25 Aug 2025
Topic — An EU initiative to reduce administrative burdens for small mid-cap companies.
Message — The group demands an update to SME financial thresholds to account for cumulative inflation since 2003. They also advocate for more ambitious simplification and broader GDPR record-keeping exemptions for businesses.12
Why — Small family businesses would regain regulatory exemptions lost when inflation pushed them above financial thresholds.3
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe seeks shorter record-keeping for unsold goods

6 Aug 2025
Topic — The consultation defines exemptions for destroying unsold apparel and footwear products.
Message — The association calls for reducing the documentation retention period from ten years to five years. They also request permission to document compliance by product group rather than for every individual product.12
Why — Reducing these requirements would significantly lower administrative costs and simplify compliance for retailers.34
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe seeks central reporting for cooperative groups

25 Jun 2025
Topic — The consultation specifies rules for disclosing information about unsold consumer products being destroyed.
Message — The organization calls for rules allowing cooperative groups and franchises to report data centrally. They claim that requiring individual reports from independent retailers creates a disproportionate administrative burden. This change would ensure a level playing field with integrated retail chains.12
Why — Centralized reporting reduces costs and helps independent retailers coordinate collective waste-reduction solutions.34
Impact — Integrated retail chains lose their current regulatory advantage over cooperative and franchise business models.5
Read full response

Meeting with Mirzha De Manuel (Cabinet of Commissioner Valdis Dombrovskis)

5 Jun 2025 · The Commission's implementation and simplification agenda

Meeting with François Kalfon (Member of the European Parliament)

3 Jun 2025 · Priorités IMCO 2024-2029

Meeting with Maria Velentza (Director Competition) and

22 May 2025 · Exchange of views on EU payment markets

Meeting with Anna Strolenberg (Member of the European Parliament)

8 Apr 2025 · CMO

Meeting with Adnan Dibrani (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

3 Apr 2025 · Regulation on cooperation between enforcement authorities for the UTP Directive

Response to Evaluation of the Geo-blocking Regulation

11 Mar 2025

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the possibility to reply to the Commissions call for evidence on the Geoblocking Regulation (Regulation (EU) 2018/302), which is a fundamental piece of legislation for both consumers and retailers. Overall, we consider that the Geoblocking Regulation strikes the right balance in B2C relations on the retail market. However, the massive use of territorial restrictions by international FMCG suppliers (which cost EU consumers at least 14 billion euros every year) calls for the extension of the Regulation to cover B2B practices. You will find in annex Independent Retail Europe's detailed comments on this call for evidence.
Read full response

Response to Targeted amendment to the CMO and other CAP Regulations strengthening farmers position in the food supply chain

7 Mar 2025

Independent Retail Europe generally views positively measures to strengthen the position of farmers since groups of independent retailers are dependent on a competitive and resilient agricultural sector for a sustainable and resilient food supply chain. That being said, we consider it highly problematic that the European Commission did not carry out a comprehensive impact assessment for the preparation of its proposal. The absence of any ex-ante assessment, and lack of consultation of stakeholders along the chain, leads to a situation where several aspects of the Commission proposal lack clarity or create legal uncertainty and may actually run counter to the goal of strengthening farmers and ensuring the resilience of the food supply chain. Please see our detailed position in annex for further explanations.
Read full response

Response to Cooperation for the enforcement of EU rules on unfair trading practices in the agricultural and food supply chain

7 Mar 2025

Independent Retail Europe takes note of the proposal and concludes after thorough examination that further clarification of certain legal provisions is needed to ensure the Regulation does not risk undermining the European single market. Groups of independent retailers have heavily invested in compliance with the UTP Directive, through the review of thousands of contracts and massive training programmes for their commercial and legal departments. It is therefore in their direct interest that the harmonised rules of the Directive are effectively enforced across Europe, to ensure a level playing field and avoid unfair competition. Nevertheless, the Commission proposal, which was unusually not subject to any impact assessment, raise important issues: - Some provisions risk to undermine the single market and the EU law acquis regulating cross-border contracts if not clarified/amended (articles 5, 6 & 7); - Legitimate grounds for refusing cooperation are missing from article 10; - There is a lack of procedural guarantees as to the information that can be exchanged between competent authorities. A detailed position and explanation about these issues is annexed.
Read full response

Meeting with Veronika Vrecionová (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Feb 2025 · Priorities of SMEs in the new legislative term

Meeting with Ondřej Krutílek (Member of the European Parliament)

5 Feb 2025 · Priorities of SMEs in the new legislative term

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament) and SME Connect

5 Feb 2025 · Event on Better Regulation

Response to Single Market Strategy 2025

31 Jan 2025

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the call for evidence launched by the European Commission, which will feed into its 2025 Single Market Strategy. Preserving the integrity of the Single Market is critical for the proper functioning of retail markets across Europe for at least three reasons: - The single market is an essential component for the resilience of the retail sector and a key condition to ensure products availability for consumers. Legal barriers and commercial practices that undermine the single market put supply chains at risks. - Without a single market, retailers would struggle to keep goods and services affordable to consumers. - A properly functioning internal market is a necessary driver for growth, as small companies would be able to confidently operate cross-border and thus expand their business. In light of these considerations, we call on the Commission to adopt a highly ambitious Single Market Strategy. Please find attached our detailed reply to the call for evidence.
Read full response

Meeting with Nikola Minchev (Member of the European Parliament)

6 Nov 2024 · Meeting

Meeting with Jeannette Baljeu (Member of the European Parliament)

15 Oct 2024 · IMCO priorities

Meeting with Ana Vasconcelos (Member of the European Parliament)

11 Oct 2024 · Green Claims and Waste Framework Directive

Meeting with André Rodrigues (Member of the European Parliament)

7 Oct 2024 · Unfair trading practices

Meeting with Laura Ballarín Cereza (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

7 Oct 2024 · Green Claims Directive, Late Payment regulation and ADR/ODR

Meeting with Roberto Berutti (Cabinet of Commissioner Janusz Wojciechowski) and EuroCommerce and

12 Apr 2024 · Meeting to present the research on food waste management

Meeting with Svenja Hahn (Member of the European Parliament) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

21 Feb 2024 · Stakeholder Roundtable on Late Payment Regulation

Meeting with Nils Torvalds (Member of the European Parliament)

30 Jan 2024 · Waste Framework Directive

Meeting with Róża Thun Und Hohenstein (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Valmet Oyj

22 Jan 2024 · Waste Framework Directive revision

Response to Advanced alternative dispute resolution for consumers

20 Dec 2023

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the European Commission's proposal for a Directive amending the Directive on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes. To ensure that this revision delivers an optimal level of modernisation whilst respecting the nature of ADR entities, and without creating legal uncertainty that would discourage traders from joining ADR schemes, we invite the co-legislators to consider the following aspects: Non-contractual and pre-contractual situations that do not lead to the conclusion of a contract shall not be in the scope of ADR. The extension of the scope to pre-contractual stages and abusive practices outside of the conclusion of a contract would act as a major barrier for businesses to participate in ADR schemes. Furthermore, the proposal shall clarify that ADR cannot be resorted for assessing the unfairness of a practice, but only when a practice has already been explicitly identified as unfair under the black list of the UCPD, by a judgment of a court or a final decision from an enforcement authority. It is up to a court to assess whether or not a practice fulfils the criteria set out in the UCPD or the UCTD to be considered an unfair and/or misleading claim, and not to ADR entities. Overall, our paper reflects and shares our views on the current proposal and highlights key concerns that could be improved to benefit all the stakeholders involved.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the Toy Safety Directive

26 Oct 2023

Independent Retail Europe is the voice of groups of independent retailers, bringing together 23 groups of independent retailers and national associations representing them. Our members provide collectively more than 6.5 million jobs through their 403.900 independent retailers, who manage more than 759.000 physical shops in Europe. We express our appreciation for the recent proposal put forth by the European Commission on Toy Safety Regulation. Please see below some of our key points and concerns that we would like to stress, you can also find attached our position paper which will explain them in more detail: - Legal consistency between distributors obligations under the Toy Safety Regulation (a lex specialis, in view of the vulnerability of children) and the General Product Safety Regulation (GPSR) is an absolute necessity for the highest level of security. Retailers have many different types of products in store. A full harmonisation of these obligations is essential to ensure a high level of compliance amongst distributors, minimise errors and ensure the highest level of security for consumers and children. Article 10 of the Toy Safety Regulation should literally mirror Article 12 of the GPSR. - Article 54 (transition period) should allow distributors to exhaust their stocks of products that were legally marketed. The 12 months transition foreseen for distributors is far too short and constitutes an unseen precedent in EU product legislation that will inevitably lead to mass destruction of unsold toys that were legally made available on the market. - Article 17 (Digital Product Passport) should correspond to a toy model (as per the Commission proposal), and shall not include information on batches/series numbers (as this would otherwise make it impossible for distributors to fulfil the obligation to make the DPP available to consumers in online sales offer, as one toy model can have many different batch numbers). It is essential that any DPP leads to the recognition by manufacturers of their responsibility for the compliance of the toy with essential safety requirements (Article 17 paragraph 4). - Online marketplaces should be considered importers when a toy is sold by non-EU traders via those platforms and there is no EU-based manufacturer or importer. Currently, there is a loophole that allows rogue traders from outside Europe to massively sell in Europe non-compliant products. The DPP is not a silver bullet in this regard, as it can be faked.
Read full response

Response to Adjusting size criteria for inflation in the Accounting Directive to define micro, small and medium-sized enterprises

3 Oct 2023

The ongoing inflation wave, coming on top of years of more moderate inflation, has a profound effect on the (turnover intensive) retail sector. In the absence of any intervention on the current financial thresholds, these have now become highly inappropriate for the many SMEs in the retail sector, with a high number of retailers changing categories by the simple virtue of cumulative inflation, although their relative overall economic and market situation is unchanged. This results in higher reporting obligations despite no positive change in economic circumstances. We welcome the Commissions proposal to increase the thresholds used in the Accounting Directive in light of inflation during the period 2013-2023, and invite the Commission to keep the proposed changes (a 25% increase in the threshold with a rounding-up notably applicable to the lower threshold). This will help to ensure that small and medium sized companies will not be penalised further by the ongoing inflation wave, with additional reporting obligations in a time where they already suffer other negative consequences of inflation (e.g. a squeeze in their net profit margins in order to keep goods affordable for consumers despite the inflation) as well as many other new burdens as a result of the digital and sustainability transition. Given that the ongoing inflation wave is not yet over (even if slowly decelerating), the proposed threshold has already become outdated. Hence, the Commission should not compromise on its draft proposal and should not adjust the thresholds by less than the 25% increase (and rounding-up) foreseen in line with past inflation over the 2013-2023 period. We also encourage the Commission to review the general SME definition used in Recommendation 2003/361, in light of the inflation wave and its negative impact on competitiveness (especially for the definition of micro and small companies, which are often used to delineate legal exemptions, and are therefore critical for the competitiveness of small companies).
Read full response

Meeting with Andrus Ansip (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Unilever and Bitkom e.V.

27 Sept 2023 · Green Claims

Meeting with Cyrus Engerer (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

20 Sept 2023 · Green Claims Directive

Meeting with René Repasi (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

28 Aug 2023 · Exchange of Views on the Right to Repair/ Recht auf Reparatur (R2R)

Independent Retail Europe urges 18-month delay for carbon reporting

10 Jul 2023
Topic — The consultation concerns reporting obligations for the EU carbon border adjustment mechanism.
Message — The group demands an eighteen-month preparation period and simpler reporting requirements. They want default values allowed and the removal of geolocation requirements.123
Why — Retailers would avoid high administrative costs and complex supply chain data tracking.45
Impact — European manufacturers face unfair competition if carbon-intensive imports are not strictly monitored.67
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe demands retailer immunity from producer liabilities

7 Jul 2023
Topic — A legislative proposal requiring companies to verify environmental claims using standardized footprint methods.
Message — Retailers should not be liable for any wrongful claim made by producers on products they sell. The proposal must maintain the business case for sustainability and clarify the obligations of traders.123
Why — This would protect retailers from financial penalties and revenue confiscation for errors beyond their control.4
Impact — Producers would carry the full legal and financial burden for incorrect product environmental claims.5
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe demands simpler sustainability reporting for SMEs

6 Jul 2023
Topic — The EU is drafting mandatory standards for companies to report their environmental and social impacts.
Message — The association demands proportional standards that reflect the nature of medium-sized, non-listed cooperative retail groups. They propose anchoring SME protections in the legal text to expand reporting flexibility.123
Why — These exemptions would reduce administrative burdens and protect the competitiveness of medium-sized retailers.45
Impact — Environmental groups and civil society would lose access to detailed sustainability data from regional businesses.6
Read full response

Meeting with René Repasi (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

26 Jun 2023 · Exchange of views on the Product Liability Directive/ Produkthaftungsrichtlinie (PLD) - Staff Level

Response to Promoting sustainability in consumer after-sales

25 May 2023

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the proposal on a Directive for common rules on repair and reuse. Indeed, since consumers are more and more eager to consume in more sustainable ways, retailers see new business opportunities in providing repair services. Independent retailers are aware of their linking role between manufacturers and consumers by giving valuable customer advice. We support a general obligation on manufacturers to repair goods outside of the legal guarantee upon consumer requests. They alone can conceive their products in a way that enables repair. They know their products best and should be responsible for offering a repair possibility. However, such an obligation should be without prejudice to consumers to choose alternative repair services (against remuneration). The EU Commission refrained from introducing new provisions on the legal or commercial legal period, contrary to the considerations made during the consultation period. We highly appreciate this choice. Extending the legal period would most likely increase consumer prices since manufacturers will take account of the additional entrepreneurial risk. Commercial guarantees are a voluntary offer by traders, in addition to the legal guarantee. Retailers who invest in carefully selecting reputable producers should continue to be compensated for the additional effort they make. For a dynamic repair market, market access as well as access to spare parts is crucial. We call upon the co-legislators to be more ambitious in that regard. Unfortunately, the current proposal (and the proposed Regulation on eco-design requirements) fail to address these points satisfactorily. We highly welcome the stand alone legal text regarding common rules on repair. The spirit of these legal provisions should however be reflected in the proposed amendment to the Sales of Goods Directive. Clarifying provisions would be very much appreciated in that regard.
Read full response

Response to Ecodesign for Sustainable Products - Product priorities

12 May 2023

Retailers are directly involved in the sale of products within the scope of the eco-design Regulation and are in close contact with consumers on the one hand and manufacturers on the other hand. We would like to encourage the Commission to be more ambitious regarding some aspects and would like to make the following comments: - The information included in the Digital Product Passport (DPP) must be reduced to the essentials, understandable for consumers and clearly structured. - The DPP should not lead to a de facto obligation to display batch-specific information online. Displaying batch numbers online is technically not possible. We suggest introducing a generic DPP without batch-specific information for the sole purpose of display on online / distance sales offers. Alternatively, the DPP should not contain any batch-specific information. - To ensure the availability of spare parts, professional repairers should be allowed to produce generic spare parts after the date of end of placement of the product on the market. - Provisions on the maximum price of spare parts must be as ambitious as possible. - The registration process for recognised repairers that can access the spare parts and repair instructions needs to be improved to allow for fair competition in the repair market between manufacturers and recognised repairers The lack of spare parts is a general obstacle that impedes the development of an EU wide market of affordable repair services. There should therefore be a general obligation for manufacturers to make spare parts available and accessible. Such a general obligation would best be introduced in a general legal text addressing the repair of all goods. The Directive on common rules promoting the repair of goods that has been proposed on 22 March 2023 is hence the right place to address any general obstacle to a well-functioning repair market that would promote repair in the Union. Reparability requirements address specific product groups and should therefore address issues that are specific to each product group. These acts will not be adopted by the European co-legislators but will be adopted by the EU Commission only. However, the availability of spare parts is a topic of important public interest. The time periods for which spare parts are available should not be adopted behind closed doors. Attached you will find more detail on the above-mentioned points.
Read full response

Meeting with Krzysztof Hetman (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

25 Apr 2023 · Exchange of views on Product Liability Directive (meeting delegated to parliamentary assistant)

Independent Retail Europe Urges Group-Level Packaging Waste Targets

24 Apr 2023
Topic — Revision of EU rules on packaging design, waste prevention, and recycling requirements.
Message — The group requests that reuse targets apply at the group level rather than individual store level. They call for longer transition periods and legal certainty regarding hygiene standards for consumer-provided containers.123
Why — Aggregating targets would preserve the competitiveness of small retailers against large integrated supermarket chains.45
Impact — Consumers could face higher prices and reduced product variety in smaller local shops.67
Read full response

Response to Guidelines on exclusionary abuses of dominance

21 Apr 2023

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the possibility to provide comments as part of the call for evidence for the development of new guidelines on exclusionary abuses by dominant undertakings within the framework of article 102 TFEU.Overall, we welcome the proposed publication of a set of guidelines on the application of article 102 TFEU, as this would strengthen the Single Market and raise legal certainty for all market operators about the behaviours from large/dominant economic operators. You will find attached a brief position pointing out to two set of abusive practices that retailers frequently encounter from dominant undertakings throughout the single market, and which should be covered by the upcoming guidelines. Having these practices covered in the guidelines would strengthen competition on the single market and help to bring higher consumer welfare (especially during the current inflationary context).
Read full response

Meeting with Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and MedTech Europe and

20 Apr 2023 · Product Liability Directive

Meeting with René Repasi (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

20 Apr 2023 · Exchange of views on the Product Liability Directive/ Produkthaftungsrichtlinie (PLD) - Staff Level

Meeting with Pascal Arimont (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

17 Apr 2023 · Revision of the Product Liability Directive

Response to VAT in the Digital Age

4 Apr 2023

Independent Retail Europe is the European trade association that represents groups of (SME) independent retailers in the food and non-food sectors. We bring together 23 groups and associations and their over 417.800 independent retailers, who manage more than 753.500 sales outlets in Europe, with a combined retail turnover of more than 1.320 billion euros and generating a combined wholesale turnover of 513 billion euros. This represents a total employment of more than 6.500.000 persons. Independent Retail Europe welcomes the opportunity to submit comments on the Commissions proposal VAT in the Digital Age. The package proposed will have wide implications on the invoicing systems (and related data infrastructure) of groups of independent retailers and SME retailers. We therefore have several comments on the following aspects of the proposals: 1) We support the extension of the one-stop-shop and of the deemed supplier rule (in cross-border B2B contexts) and the proposal for a single VAT registration system. Clarification of the conditions of application of the reverse charge should be provided. 2) The generalisation of e-invoicing must make possible the continued use of existing EDI standards (e.g. EANCOM® and SAP IDoc). Their mandatory replacement by a new single EU standard would hit hard the retail ecosystem. The two-day deadline for e-invoicing is unrealistic for SMEs and should be replaced by a 30-day deadline. 3) The end of summary invoices create major issues for (cooperative) groups of independent retailers and for SME retailers, as it will lead to increased accountancy costs and administrative burdens. 4) Digital reporting on a transaction per transaction basis would impose disproportionate burdens on SMEs. You will find attached a detailed explanation and position on these aspects and their importance for groups of independent retailers and SME retailers across Europe.
Read full response

Meeting with René Repasi (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and SMEunited aisbl and Affordable Medicines Europe

20 Mar 2023 · Binnenmarktnotfallinstrument/ Single Market Emergency Instrument (SMEI) - Staff Level

Meeting with Maria-Manuel Leitão-Marques (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur)

13 Mar 2023 · DMFSD

Meeting with Axel Voss (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and BUSINESSEUROPE and

8 Mar 2023 · Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence

Meeting with Henna Virkkunen (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and American Chamber of Commerce to the European Union

27 Feb 2023 · EU Cyber Resilience Act

Meeting with Nicola Danti (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur) and Bureau Européen des Unions de Consommateurs and

27 Feb 2023 · Stakeholder consultation on the Cyber Resilience Act

Meeting with Delara Burkhardt (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Reusable Packaging Europe

14 Feb 2023 · Packaging waste

Independent Retail Europe urges alignment of cybersecurity with safety laws

17 Jan 2023
Topic — New EU regulation setting cybersecurity requirements for manufacturers and vendors of digital products.
Message — The group requests that distributor obligations align with existing EU product safety laws to provide legal certainty. They argue retailers should not be responsible for technical vulnerabilities they lack the expertise to identify. Finally, they want to close loopholes for non-EU products sold through online marketplaces.123
Why — This provides legal certainty and removes obligations that retailers are technically incapable of fulfilling.4
Impact — Non-EU traders and online marketplaces would face new responsibilities for non-compliant digital products.5
Read full response

Response to Advanced alternative dispute resolution for consumers

21 Dec 2022

Our members generally support the alternative dispute resolution mechanism (ADR) as well as online dispute resolution (ODR). It is a service that some of our members offer to their respective members and customers. After the Regulation entered into force in 2016, our members additionally intensified internal procedures for customer complaint handling, to solve conflicts rapidly and to prevent them from escalating. ADR/ODR is highly appreciated by consumers for solving complaints against businesses. However, a considerable number of complaints have also been filed by businesses against consumers. ADR brings benefits to both, businesses and consumers. When it comes to the collective handling of complaints, our members do not trust that ADR entities are capable or have the necessary resources to handle collective disputes. This is a matter of lack of financial resources. Mediation activities for individual disputes are at the cost of businesses and already present difficulties in terms of cost/benefit. Regarding the possibility of class action, our members believe that only registered collective entities should be able to raise collective complaints. Regarding the online dispute resolution platform (ODR), our members question the profitability of national as well as European platforms. Both are often criticised for handling too few complaints. However, the number of complaints and the number of disputes does not depend on the platforms as such. According to our members, consumers are very likely lacking awareness of these tools even though they are mentioned in the pre-contractual information. We suggest communication campaigns for consumers and for professionals to better inform about the opportunities of ODR/ADR. Subsidies could be allocated to the national ODR platforms in order to allow them to communicate more with consumers. In some Member States there is no public funding for ODR available. The platforms are most often put in place by businesses and face financial difficulties, since they are not profitable. However, the sectoral and multisector mediation platforms are well organized and continuously improve their processes every year. It is therefore essential to ensure legal continuity for these new players to thrive. Our members suggest to make public funding available for these platforms in order to support their valuable work. Moreover, a low number of complaints is not only the result of the consumer's lack of knowledge of mediation mechanisms, but also of the fact that disputes are resolved out of court thanks to the significant development of customer complaint handling services. This development is a positive consequence of the introduction of the right to refer to a consumer mediator in 2016. It would be appropriate to subsidize independent studies through a call for expressions of interest in order to understand the multiple causes of the low number of complaint files and its evolution.
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe demands marketplace liability and repair exemptions

9 Dec 2022
Topic — The European Commission is updating product liability rules for the digital age.
Message — They propose a residual liability for marketplaces regarding non-EU sellers. They also argue simple repair services should remain out of scope.12
Why — This would create fair competition and protect small businesses from legal risks.34
Impact — Online marketplaces would face new legal responsibilities for products sold by foreign merchants.5
Read full response

Response to Targeted revision of the EU system of tobacco traceability

1 Dec 2022

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the amendments to the tobacco traceability system. Our retailers wish to sell exclusively high quality products that comply with the EU tobacco product and consumer safety legislation. Retailers are the central connector between manufacturers and consumers and therefore key to the success of the traceability system. The tobacco traceability system seeks to ensure that the Commission and the Member States receive the data they need for the traceability system to function properly. The changes in the draft implementing act and its annex appear to solve gaps in and problems with the track and trace information system, some of which were reported by Independent Retail Europe to the European Commission. The current traceability system is designed in a way that does not tolerate human error. However, human beings, who sort, pack and transport the products, also handle the products in the warehouses. Human beings make mistakes, doubly scanning an item or scanning the wrong item. The system should be designed in a way that if operators can prove that there has been a handling mistake in their logistic chain, the mistake can be corrected in the system to avoid products being blocked in warehouses or destroyed. We make additional proposals in this direction.
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe urges efficient enforcement of forced labour ban

30 Nov 2022
Topic — This consultation addresses a proposal to ban products made using forced labour from the EU market.
Message — The group wants investigations to target central organizations rather than individual small retailers. They also request longer response times and the ability to donate seized goods.123
Why — Targeting central organizations would reduce administrative costs and burdens for individual retailers.45
Impact — Delayed customs enforcement may permit products made with forced labour to enter circulation.6
Read full response

Meeting with Biljana Borzan (Member of the European Parliament, Rapporteur)

13 Oct 2022 · Empowering consumers for the green transition

Meeting with Karen Melchior (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and Telefonica, S.A.

7 Oct 2022 · Data Act

Independent Retail Europe urges tougher repair rules for mobile devices

26 Sept 2022
Topic — The consultation addresses ecodesign rules for making mobile devices more durable and repairable.
Message — The group wants professional repairers to produce generic spare parts using 3D printing. They call for price caps and longer software update periods.12
Why — Retailers would benefit from a more competitive and open repair market.3
Impact — Large manufacturers lose their monopoly over the repair and spare parts market.4
Read full response

Response to Sustainable Products Initiative

22 Jun 2022

Independent Retail Europe members believe that the new process to determine ecodesign requirements truly has the potential to change the way products will be consumed in future and that retail will play a pivotal role in this transition to greener products. Retailers’ in-store advisors and experts provide an essential added value to consumers, as they: 1. supply consumers with important information on the products, allowing them to make informed choices; 2. create the all-important link to manufacturers to identify problems and remediate to them as efficiently as possible; 3. provide additional services linked to the products, such as extended warranties and insurances; 4. supply innovative services such as repair services - including the printing of spare parts through 3D printing technologies - as well as renting services, the supply of second hand and refurbished products, etc. There is room for improvement of the proposal for an Ecodesign Regulation for it to be more efficient and thereby better achieve its objectives. First of all, the Regulation should recognise the added value of retailers in the transition to more sustainable consumption patterns and ensure that through the delegated acts the role of retailers is systematically integrated in the design phase, to anticipate their role in repair, refurbishment, or reuse. This will require manufacturers to share more information with retailers (for example for repair and the availability/provision of spare parts). Secondly, the role of each actor in the supply chain should be clear and where possible in line with the EU acquis with regard to operators’ responsibilities. Information requirements to the customer should remain the responsibility of manufacturers, who know their products best and can assess what is required for their safe and sustainable use. Retailers can only advise customers based on complete and accurate information provided by the manufacturer on the products. Finally, the right representation (labelling) of these information requirements will play a major role in nudging consumers towards opting for greener products and solutions: They will need to be transparent and concise, so as to give the customer the necessary information about the environmental performance of the product at first glance. More detailed suggestions for the improvement of the proposal are contained in the position paper attached
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe: Current consumer laws are fit for purpose

14 Jun 2022
Topic — Evaluation of EU consumer protection laws regarding digital practices like dark patterns and personalization.
Message — The association claims current laws already effectively regulate digital practices for omnichannel retailers. They maintain that online consumers face no different risks than those shopping offline.12
Why — Retailers avoid redundant regulatory burdens and the costs of implementing new compliance systems.34
Impact — Consumer groups may see manipulative digital practices continue without more specific, updated legal bans.5
Read full response

Response to Empowering the consumer for the green transition

25 May 2022

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the proposal for a Directive empowering consumers for the green transition through better protection against unfair practices and better information (COM(2022)143 final). We fully support the proposed obligation for a certification scheme for any environmental claim and the provisions on the sustainability information tool. The trader or retailer can however not provide information to consumers about products, if the product manufacturer does not communicate those beforehand. Retailers are themselves misled by product manufacturers in case where a product bears inaccurate environmental claims. We would therefore appreciate a provision explicitly asserting the retailers’ right to obtain full compensation from product manufacturers in cases where consumers have been subject to an unfair commercial practice directly resulting from inaccurate information on environmental claims provided by product manufacturers. Main issues covered by the attached position: 1) Proposed amendments to the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive 2005/29/EC a. Retailers are dependent on the information provided by the manufacturer i. Reliable Environmental Claims and a useful Sustainability Information Tool ii. Misleading Practices (Annex I) b. Need to better define pictorial and graphic claims, especially in the context of generic claims c. Customer advice is a retailer’s main service i.e. Retailers always need to have the right to present their customers new product designs. d. Need for sufficiently long transition periods 2) Proposed amendment to the Consumer Rights Directive 2011/83/EU a. Retailers are in a difficult position between consumers and producers, therefore the producer should always be directly liable to the consumer in the case of a repair during the legal guarantee.
Read full response

Independent Retail Europe demands narrower scope for sustainability rules

23 May 2022
Topic — EU consultation on corporate accountability for environmental and human rights impacts.
Message — They want the scope limited to direct supply chains rather than broader value chains. They also demand that rules governing directors' duties and executive pay be removed. Finally, they request a longer implementation period to help companies adapt.123
Why — Narrower rules would lower compliance costs and protect their existing business models.4
Impact — Consumer groups lose out as higher administrative costs could lead to price hikes.5
Read full response

Response to Minimum level of taxation for large multinational groups

24 Mar 2022

Please find attached Independent Retail Europe's comments on the Proposal for a Council Directive on ensuring a global minimum level of taxation for multinational groups in the Union. Independent Retail Europe is the voice of groups of independent retailers, bringing together 23 groups of independent retailers and national associations representing them. Our members provide collectively more than 6.6 million jobs through their 403.900 independent retailers and 759.000 sales outlets across in Europe, with a combined retail turnover of more than 1,314 billion euros.
Read full response

Response to Application of EU health and environmental standards to imported agricultural and agri-food products

16 Mar 2022

In the light of the ongoing discussion on higher animal welfare /environmental / production method standards within the EU, retailers would like to raise the following points for reflection. Reflections regarding a possible market split between EU and non-EU products in case increasing EU standards are not applied to imported agricultural goods: Stricter animal welfare/environmental/ production standards within the European Union will come with additional costs and the risk of a market split between EU products vs. non-EU products, or even within the EU if they are not implemented in a fully harmonised manner across the EU and beyond. Retailers will find it difficult to ignore consumer demand for cheaper foreign animal products should international trade agreements lead to increased availability of these products from third countries. Since stricter rules on animal welfare, environmental standards and production methods will inevitably come with costs, all policy options to be proposed by the Commission should be assessed in light of their impact on retail prices but also consumer behaviour in shops. Here, the Commission should rely more on studies on willingness to pay surcharges for enhanced animal welfare/environmental/ production standards and less on pure consumer surveys as the latter are usually not reliable. We note a large discrepancy between the verbally expressed willingness of consumers to pay extra and the buying behaviour we observe. Information on animal welfare standards for example, appears to have little impact on consumers’ buying decisions, which are still largely determined by price. Reflections on a possible overall price increase if EU standards are applied to imported agricultural goods: Rising standards within the Union or beyond will lead to increasing production costs and to higher prices. The costs for enhanced animal welfare/environmental/ production standards should be shared equally along the supply chain. Consumers will have to pay their fair share. Reflections on implementation and enforcement in case EU standards are applied to imported agricultural goods: Consistent implementation and enforcement of animal welfare/environmental/production standards throughout the Union and beyond are key to avoid market fragmentation within the EU and to ensure a level playing field between EU and non-EU products. Currently, even national divergences in the enforcement and implementation of EU Directives are considered very burdensome for our members. Our members deplore a lack of uniform enforcement and would consider enhanced controls beneficial for the sector. We invite the EU Commission to further reflect on the feasibility of controls of imported agricultural goods as well as the costs and the administrative burden of such controls.
Read full response

Meeting with Petar Vitanov (Member of the European Parliament, Shadow rapporteur) and European Digital Rights and Fair Trials Europe

2 Mar 2022 · AI Act

Response to Revision of the Toy Safety Directive

2 Nov 2021

Independent Retail Europe considers Directive 2009/48/EC on the safety of toys (Toy Safety Directive / TSD) generally useful and welcomes the clear obligations for distributors. This enables retailers – and especially SMEs – to apply the regulation more efficiently and with legal certainty. We do however have concerns about two particular aspects of the Toy Safety Directive: The lack of clarity as regards ‘isolated cases’ as well as the legal coherence regarding the obligations of distributors with the product safety acquis currently under revision. So-called ‘isolated cases’ refer to particular situations where only one single product or a very limited number of products is un-safe. In such a situation, a distributor is unable to determine with certainty whether a problem with a product is unique to that one product or caused by an inappropriate usage of the product by the consumer, or if the whole production line of the product is faulty. Unclear rules on isolated cases can cause conflicts in the supply chain: The manufacturer may then seek damages from the distributor who made an unnecessary notification to the relevant competent authority, thereby also harming the retailer and souring the business relationship. Diverging reporting obligations within the EU Product Safety legislation will lead to confusion among economic operators and high implementation costs. This will be particularly burdensome for SMEs. In the light of the ongoing revisions of several legal texts of the product safety acquis, the concept of isolated cases and provisions thereon like the new Article 19 in the proposed GPSR should be embedded consistently in all product safety legislation. To ensure a high level of legal certainty for retailers, we would welcome the revised Toy Safety Directive to include a provision on isolated cases directly in the legal text. The proposed Article 19 of the GPSR ensures that there always is a notification, guaranteeing a high level of safety on the EU Single Market whilst safeguarding the business relationship as the notification is always at the initiative of the manufacturer.
Read full response

Response to Food waste reduction targets

29 Oct 2021

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the ambition of the Commission to reduce food waste. With 20% of all food produced in the EU ending up as waste and 88 million tons of food waste generated annually, we fully recognise the need to continue the effort to reduce food waste. Retailers have developed or engaged in numerous initiatives to reduce their actively generated food waste to a minimum. We believe that the reduction of food waste at consumer level should be the responsibility of the whole chain. Please find our full position, attached.
Read full response

Response to Sustainable food system – setting up an EU framework

26 Oct 2021

Independent Retail Europe supports the general ambition of the EU Commission, expressed in the Farm-to-Fork strategy, to put our food systems on a sustainable path, and agree that this can also bring new opportunities for operators in the food value chain. Our food retailers already make important voluntary efforts to further sustainability, and are making significant progress in this respect. They are adopting environmentally, socially and economically sustainable production as well as distribution measures and means, enable consumers to improve their diets, and work with local economic actors, such as farmers and entrepreneurs, to ensure everyone has access to sufficient, safe, nutritious and sustainable food. With regard to the European Commission’s recently published Inception Impact Assessment (IIA) on a Proposal for a Regulation on a Sustainable Food System Framework Initiative, we do have some general concerns with the Commission’s approach, on which we elaborate in the position paper attached.
Read full response

Response to Animal welfare labelling for food

23 Aug 2021

Independent Retail Europe is the voice of groups of independent retailers in the food and non-food sectors at EU level. We represent 24 groups and their 386.602 independent retailers, who manage more than 753.000 sales outlets, with a combined retail turnover of more than 944 billion euros and generating a combined wholesale turnover of 297 billion euros. This represents a total employment of more than 6.603.270 persons. Our members are groups of SME retailers that usually operate under one brand name while maintaining their independence as individual businesses. We consider that the policy options proposed by the Commission should be assessed in light of the international context and their impact on retail prices needs to be taken into consideration, as well as consumer behaviour in shops. You will find attached our detailed comments on the EU Roadmap on the revision of EU animal welfare legislation.
Read full response

Response to Revision of Non-Financial Reporting Directive

13 Jul 2021

Independent Retail Europe is the voice of groups of independent retailers in the food as well as non-food sectors at EU level. We generally support the EU’s ambition for companies to include sustainability into their strategies. However, it is important that the new obligations under the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) do not translate into burdensome obligations that only benefit the audit and assurances sector nor should they unnecessarily burden the audit sector. We are particularly concerned about: - the Commission’s intention to lower the thresholds in terms of the size of the companies that have to report on non-financial aspects of their business; - the fact that the business model of groups of independent retailers is not taken into consideration, which in practice would lead to a discrimination of and an excessive burden on independent retailers without any additional value; - the degree of detail in which companies have to report and the burden that this will entail for the whole of the supply chain, SMEs included. Detailed reporting would particularly constitute a heavy burden for our members in the food supply chain, which tends to be complex and where retailers typically deal with tens of thousands of products and thousands of – frequently changing – suppliers, which are often SMEs; - the increase of burdens for auditors and, consequently, costs for companies of the audit and assurance processes, as often only large auditors already have, or are able to develop the capacities to conduct audits on non-financial reporting obligations. This will likely drive up the costs of reporting. You will find our complete position on the CSRD proposal in the attachment.
Read full response

Response to Setting of nutrient profiles

3 Feb 2021

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the publication of the Commission’s inception impact assessment on the revision of the Food Information to Consumers Regulation (1169/2011), as it allows stakeholders to voice their preliminary views on possible new rules on Front-of-Pack nutrition labelling, origin labelling and date marking. As the trade association representing the interests of groups of independent retailers, many of our members are retailers active in the grocery sector and are therefore directly concerned by these important issues. You will find in attachment our views on the main aspects and policy options mentioned in the inception impact assessment for a possible revision of the FIC Regulation.
Read full response

Response to Contingency plan for ensuring food supply and food security

13 Jan 2021

When the first complications in the functioning of the food supply chain appeared at the onset of the corona crisis, we raised the need for an EU contingency plan for the food sector for crisis periods; we therefore very much welcome this initiative. Such a contingency plan should focus on maintaining/restoring food supply chain efficiency, building on good practices and lessons learned from the corona crisis and other crises. It should seek to eliminate obstacles and allow for swift and flexible solutions between supply chain operators. It should not create additional obligations for operators in the food chain or duplications of already existing risk management obligations with regard to personnel and processes. On the contrary, it should help mitigate these risks, for instance, in case of a pandemic, by ensuring that all food supply chain operators get priority access to the necessary protective equipment for their staff and vaccinations. Since such a plan concerns different types of crises, all economic actors in the supply chain and all relevant DGs, for instance DG GROW, responsible for all the economic actors in the middle of the food supply chain, as well as national experts with expertise on the whole or different aspects of the food supply chain and crisis management, and all interested EU trade associations of food supply chain operators should be actively involved in its design and in the permanent forum.
Read full response

Meeting with Werner Stengg (Cabinet of Executive Vice-President Margrethe Vestager)

2 Dec 2020 · Digital Markets Act

Response to Revision of the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation

20 Nov 2020

Independent Retail Europe is glad to provide feedback on the Commission’s review of the Vertical Block Exemption Regulation (VBER) and the Vertical Guidelines. Please find attached our detailed comments which cover various issues mentioned in the Commission's Inception Impact Assessment, as well as a few others that should also be tackled by a revision of the VBER and Vertical Guidelines. Independent Retail Europe is the European association that acts as an umbrella organisation for the main groups of independent retailers in the food and non-food sectors. Our members are groups of independent retailers, associations representing them as well as wider service organizations built to support independent retailers. Independent Retail Europe represents 24 groups and their 380.980 independent retailers, who manage more than 757.000 sales outlets, with a combined retail turnover of more than 971 billion euros and generating a combined wholesale turnover of 291 billion euros. This represents a total employment of more than 6.486.000 persons.
Read full response

Response to Sustainable Products Initiative

7 Oct 2020

We welcome the Commission’s efforts to create incentives for more a sustainable Single Market. We are confident that a solution can be found that achieves greater sustainability without damaging the interests of consumers or businesses. In this context, we appreciate in particular the attention given to SMEs in the Inception Impact Assessment to the Initiative. Adapting to new legislation, especially on short notice, is more challenging for SMEs which have limited capacities to make rapid changes to their portfolio. In our attached position paper, we comment on the stated objectives of the Initiative in detail. Please note that, in addition to these comments, we responded to the public consultation on the New Consumer Agenda, as well as the surveys by ICF on consumer empowerment, and by Civic Consulting on the General Product Safety Directive. I. Internalising Product-related Externalities II. Addressing Sustainability Aspects in EU Legislation III. Addressing the Lack of Reliable Information on Sustainability Summary - Responsibility and liability for the durability of products should remain with the suppliers who make the product design choices. - In a market economy, manufacturers must remain free to determine the durability of their products and to choose whether or not to communicate on this. - Retailers can only inform consumers about the relation between quality, durability and price, when manufacturers provide them with this information. - We are opposed to maximum timeframes for repairs. - The process of establishing reliable sustainability criteria for a potential expansion in scope of the Ecodesign Directive should be pursued with the greatest care. It should take the concerns of stakeholders about the high complexity of products into account. - New requirements for consumer information about sustainability should be based on reliable criteria and should avoid confusion for consumers as well as disproportionate burdens for manufacturers and retailers. We are convinced that Europe can chart a path towards a more sustainable Single Market that takes these concerns into account. Independent Retail Europe will be actively engaged in the upcoming discussions to that end.
Read full response

Response to Empowering the consumer for the green transition

6 Aug 2020

Independent Retail Europe stresses the importance for EU consumer policy being consistent. Please note that we will respond in more detail to the open public consultation of the New Consumer Agenda (deadline: 6 October) as well as the survey currently undertaken by ICF on this subject of consumer empowerment. We will therefore concentrate on some general comments on this Roadmap on the Inception Impact Assessment. It goes without saying that in today’s fast-changing environments, business as usual (as Option 0 is described) is not sufficient. However, a re-invention of the wheel (Option 2) would also not be advisable as the expected disruptions to the market and well-functioning legal frameworks would outweigh any potential benefits. We would therefore be most in favour of a variation of Option 1 although this should be done with caution and at the right pace. It should especially be noted that: - Products are inherently very different which makes a one-size-fits all approach impossible. The different types of failures require more or less complex repairs. Certain repairs can and should only be undertaken by experts for reasons of complexity, product safety et al. - It is imperative that existing and newly revised EU legislation, such as the Directives on contract rules for sales of physical goods (2019/771) and digital content (2019/770) as well as the Implementing Regulations to Directive 2009/125/EC on Eco-design, is first transposed into national law, enforced properly and applies for a few years, before the introduction of additional legislation makes sense. - Whilst consumer rights are and should continue to be a priority, they should not hinder the Internal Market. Divergences in Member States in consumer protection make it difficult for businesses, especially SMEs, to operate cross border.
Read full response

Response to Hygiene rules on allergens, food redistribution and food safety culture

5 Aug 2020

Independent Retail Europe represents groups of independent retailers. These groups are usually organised as business cooperatives, i.e. the retailers are operating under one brand name while maintaining their independence as individual businesses. Members of a group can assist each other, engage in joint purchases of goods and services to achieve economies of scale and steer the management of the group in a cooperative manner. This way, individual retail entrepreneurs are able to grow their businesses and compete with large integrated chains on the market. The consumer is the ultimate beneficiary as this widens consumer choice, leading to lower prices. What is more, small independent retailers are characterised by their “local touch” and can directly respond to the specific needs of their consumers, e.g. by integrating regional products into their range. We welcome the draft legislation to clarify EU rules on food safety, allergies & food waste. However, we would like to make two points that regard the phrasing of the new section on “food safety culture”. The new Chapter XIa in Annex II asks “management and all employees” of food business operators to commit to an appropriate “food safety culture” which includes a clear distribution of responsibilities, continuous controls, appropriate training and supervision etc. While we find this commitment laudable, we consider this rather soft term to be somewhat ambiguous, and propose to make a reference to the fact that this commitment is linked to the proper implementation of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points (HAACP) requirements. Putting in place a culture of food safety is more important than ever in the time of COVID-19, but it should be based in concrete measures such as ensuring that appropriate resources are spent on the cleaning and the preparation of stores during regular working hours. Furthermore, the text states that “the implementation of the food safety culture shall take account of the nature and size of the food business”. We consider that this wording may be interpreted as allowing for a less ambitious level of food safety commitment for smaller food businesses. We, therefore, suggest rephrasing the wording to clarify that this sentence is mirroring the flexibility built in the HACCP framework for smaller food business operators (so that the measures to implement this commitment can be tailored to the size of the operator or to the nature of its activities), but that it does not mean that the commitment to food safety culture can be lower. The commitment to food safety should be the same for all operators – from hypermarkets to farmers’ markets. → rephrase the passage on the “food safety culture” and include a link to the HAACP; adjust the wording regarding small food businesses to clarify that the measures to implement the food safety culture – but not their commitment → can be tailored to the size and nature of the activities of an operator.
Read full response

Response to New competition tool

30 Jun 2020

Independent Retail Europe is the voice of groups of independent retailers in the food as well as nonfood sectors at EU level. In light of our active involvement in the European Commission’s activities on the review of EU Competition law, we would like to raise some procedural and general concerns related to the New Competition Tool which we call on the Commission to consider in its impact assessment. Please see attached our detailed comments.
Read full response

Response to Initiative prohibiting and permitting under scrutiny certain hydroxyanthracene derivatives in food supplements

21 Apr 2020

Independent Retail Europe is the voice of groups of independent retailers in the food as well as non-food sectors at EU level. We welcome that the European Commission is consistently prioritising the health and well-being of consumers in all of its actions. The retail sector is its powerful ally in this pursuit. Building on our fruitful cooperation, we would like to point out some concerns that we have over the recent proposal of the Commission Regulation Amending Annex III to Regulation (EC) No 1925/2006 as Regards Botanical Species Containing Hydroxyanthracene Derivatives (HAD). We understand that the proposal has been drafted to prohibit the intentional addition of botanical species containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives (HADs) for the purpose of their physiological and/or nutritional effects in food supplements and foodstuffs. However, the draft Regulation in its current wording creates considerable legal uncertainty for economic actors. While Article 1 (1.) bans all “extracts from the leaf of Aloe species containing hydroxyanthracene derivatives”, it is not clear which products are exactly included in the scope. Indeed, the draft Regulation could be interpreted in such a way that all products containing Aloe will be banned. Considering that this potentially concerns a very large range of products (including food products and certain beverages such as juices, alcoholic spirits), the repercussions for the retail sector would be immense. Distributors therefore need to know exactly which products fall under the ban. This is especially the case for the small independent retailers we represent. SME distributors have limited resources to assess themselves which products in their portfolio might be affected. To ensure a smooth transition and full compliance from the start, distributors would not only have to re-evaluate their product range on display, but also to immediately stop ordering them from their suppliers. Supplier-retailer contracts may be agreed months before the products appear on the shelves. Clarification is hence essential to avoid waste of both compliant and non-compliant products, and the resulting financial loss. Especially considering the narrow timeframe, our sector would therefore urgently need clarifications on the products that would fall under the new rule. This would enable all distributors, particularly SMEs, to apply the regulation more efficiently and in a legally certain way.
Read full response

Meeting with Thierry Breton (Commissioner) and

21 Apr 2020 · economic impact of COVID-19 on the retail sector

Response to Farm to Fork Strategy

13 Mar 2020

Please see our comments in the attached document.
Read full response

Response to Enhancing Market transparency in the agri-food chain

18 Jun 2019

Please see attached document.
Read full response

Meeting with Eduard Hulicius (Cabinet of Commissioner Věra Jourová)

9 Apr 2018 · New deal for consumers – dual quality

Meeting with Nele Eichhorn (Cabinet of Vice-President Cecilia Malmström)

22 Mar 2018 · unfair trading practices, relations with third countries

Meeting with Gints Freimanis (Cabinet of Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis)

22 Feb 2018 · Exchange of views on CCTB/CCCTB proposal and Digital taxation

Response to Reducing marine litter: action on single use plastics and fishing gear

12 Jan 2018

Comments by Independent Retail Europe Independent Retail Europe welcomes the idea to reduce waste and marine litter which is why our members have already many respective measures in place. We have only few comments on the current inception impact assessment (IA) but we will respond in more detail to the public consultation (Deadline 12 February). Single-Use Plastics To use the three categories named in the IA: The diversity of SUPs justifies a differentiated approach, which could follow these categories: (1) Items already captured in separate collection schemes (mainly packaging: such as drink bottles). => The IA suggests stricter implementation of existing legislation. Independent Retail Europe agrees that there should always be a focus on proper enforcement of existing rules rather than generating new ones. => However, the principle of proportionality should be followed. Deposit return schemes have had – at best – mixed successes in different member states. These types of measures should therefore not per se be encouraged on EU level but should be judged on a case-by-case basis. => Additionally, the size of store should be considered. Small retailers should not be required to have rubbish collection and sorting stations on their shop floor. This would impose a disproportionate burden on them. (2) Items which could be replaced by more sustainable alternatives (e.g. take-away food containers, disposable cups, possibly caps and lids, cotton buds, cutlery, straws and stirrers). => The idea to shift to re-useable cups is interesting. However, Member States would need to invest in extensive public campaigns in order to achieve a behavioural change by consumers. For example: One of our members tried to sell fresh milk in re-usable glass bottles but the consumers rarely returned the bottles. => We support the idea of encouraging producers to produce eco-friendly alternatives but only through positive incentives, not through sanctions. (3) Items for which there are no readily available alternatives (non-packaging: cigarette butts, sanitary applications, etc.). => Independent Retail Europe supports the idea of publicly funded awareness campaigns to reduce littering of these items. => However, the suggested legislative actions are tricky for these items. With reference to the examples in the IA: - Applying the EPR principle would go too far since the waste producer has no way of controlling what consumers do with their waste and consumers are unlikely to collect and return e.g. their cigarette butts to the store. Used sanitary applications are likely to develop unpleasant smells when kept for too long. - Targeted labelling could be considered. However, this would have to be carefully examined because experience has shown that the multitude of different labels already tends to overwhelm consumers. This has the effect of consumers not properly noticing any labels or product descriptions anymore. In addition, any labelling can only be complementary to public awareness campaigns mentioned above. Finally, Independent Retail Europe supports that the IA suggests taking voluntary commitments, awareness raising campaigns as well as research into alternative products and materials into consideration. Indeed, this in addition to proper enforcement of existing rules should be the primary focus instead of additional legislative measures.
Read full response

Meeting with Carl-Christian Buhr (Cabinet of Commissioner Mariya Gabriel)

27 Nov 2017 · Digital / Agricultural

Meeting with Marco Valletta (Cabinet of Commissioner Vytenis Andriukaitis)

16 Nov 2017 · Food waste, Food chain initiative

Response to Implementing act under Article 15(11) of the Tobacco Products Directive 2014/40/EU

29 Sept 2017

Please find herewith our comments on the draft secondary legislation relating to the establishment and operation of the systems of traceability and security features for tobacco products, as provided for under Articles 15 and 16 of Directive 2014/40/EU. Please note that we are on these points in agreement with other organisations representing retailers in Brussels. Independent Retail Europe welcomes the EU’s intention to tackle the illicit tobacco trade in the Tobacco Products Directive 2014/40/EU (TPD II). Illicit tobacco poses a significant threat to Member States’ public health objectives and also undermines the legitimate tobacco retail trade. However, Independent Retail Europe is of the opinion that the track and trace (T&T) system to be established has to be efficient as well as universally applicable and workable. It should also be introduced with the smallest possible impact on legitimate sellers like groups of independent retailers. Unnecessary and disproportionate burdens at wholesale as well as retail level should be avoided. Independent Retail Europe therefore supports a good number of elements of the current draft secondary legislation on tobacco traceability where these definitely go into this direction. With certain other issues we have serious concerns though that they will not achieve the intended purpose of having a workable and efficient traceability system or impact on illicit trade. The draft regulations, in their current form, offer a regulatory framework that would place numerous requirements on legitimate retailers, resulting in disproportionate costs. There are also other elements in the regulation where further clarity is required.
Read full response

Response to Targeted revision of EU consumer law directives

28 Jul 2017

Independent Retail Europe welcomes the Commission’s review of the consumer acquis. For both consumers and businesses, the rules need to be simple, understandable, straightforward and strictly proportional to the consumer protection objectives to be achieved. If businesses struggle to interpret the rules, or find them difficult to apply in modern contexts i.e multi-channel environment, they will reduce their commercial activities, leading to less consumer choice and less consumer convenience. To maintain a level-playing field, a channel-neutral approach and harmonised rules for online and offline sales is needed. Please find below our comments on selected issues: Consumers’ rights to remedies for harm caused by unfair commercial practices The assessment of this issue must take into account the cost implications for distributors, who might receive remedy claims for harm caused by the unfair commercial practice of a manufacturer. In doing so, the establishment of a principle of direct producer responsibility must be examined, in order to reduce administrative burdens on distributors. Penalties for lack of compliance with consumer law A principle of excusable error should be examined if high (such as turnover based) penalties are introduced. This is because consumer law is very broad, extremely complex and interpreted differently across the EU. This can lead to honest mistakes from traders acting in good faith who have accidentally breached EU consumer law. Platforms We support this initiative’s aim to analyse to what extent introducing further transparency obligations for platforms is likely to reduce consumer detriment. We also believe that it is important to examine potential costs for platforms. Consumer information at advertising and pre-contractual stage We welcome the inception IA recognising the unnecessary administrative burdens due to information requirements to consumers at both the advertising and the pre-contractual stage. The duplication of these requirements together with the ones of other pieces of legislation, such as in the E-Commerce Directive, product safety legislation, etc. creates a variety of rules on consumer information leading to legal uncertainty and administrative burdens for retailers as well as information overload to consumers. Art. 4 of the Consumer Rights Directive (CRD) allows Member States to adopt additional pre-contractual information requirements. This leads to retailers having to deal with numerous in-store information requirements, even though there is no clear link to actual purchasing decisions. If the CRD continues to allow Member States to adopt additional requirements, it should be clarified that such additions are subject to strict proportionality with regard to the interests to be protected. Any requirements geared to control purposes with no added value to consumers should be considered contrary to the Directive. Additionally, burdens for retailers could be further reduced by cutting overlapping information requirements in the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, the CRD etc. and by updating the rules on means of distance communication. Right of withdrawal We welcome the inception IA recognising the disproportionate burdens caused for traders through the right of withdrawal. The right can cause financial problems for retailers as they have to reimburse consumers before receiving the goods. Certain returned products that could potentially have been used (e.g. books, clothing) are difficult to sell again as new products. In such cases, retailers should have the possibility of limiting the right of withdrawal. At the very least, partial reimbursement should be admissible if the retailer can provide proof that a returned product has been used. The Commission should examine the possibility of legislative improvements in this area in order to prevent withdrawal rights being exercised for ill-intended purposes.
Read full response

Response to Revision of the EU SME Definition

5 Jul 2017

Revision of the EU SME Definition – Comments Independent Retail Europe Independent Retail Europe welcomes the Better Regulation approach of the current Commission. However, when it comes to the SME definition it has to be carefully examined whether a considerable change proves sensible. The 2003 definition has been accepted and widely used throughout the EU and is a very important tool to determine whether companies fall within the scope of certain legislation. Please find some comments on the inception impact assessment (IA) below: 1) Financial thresholds Independent Retail Europe welcomes the Commission’s considerations to revise the financial thresholds due the combined effects of inflation and surge in productivity. However, the possible new threshold will have to be closely analysed in the course of the impact assessment including in the public consultation. Likewise for the theoretical situation – described in the inception IA – where certain SMEs would be discouraged to scale-up by fear of losing the support that the SME status provides. Thriving SMEs should be supported and encouraged to continue to grow. These situations being very rare, the importance in the context of a new SME definition has to be examined. To stimulate job creation, an increase in staff headcount could be useful, particularly for micro enterprises. 2) Legal certainty Legal certainty is crucial in order to ensure a smooth process for economic operators. To increase legal certainty, the inception IA raises the possibility to exclude certain types groups of SMEs from a being granted SME status in the new definition. To our understanding, this is directed at companies that artificially create group structures but essentially remain one entity. This should therefore not concern the groups of independent retailers that our organisation represents. However, Independent Retail Europe regards it as essential that it is explicitly recognised that retailers associated to groups of independent retailers would not fall under such exclusion. Indeed, an important way in which independent SME retail entrepreneurs can reach their full potential, whilst remaining independent entrepreneurs, is by becoming a member of a group of independent retailers. This inclusive business model allows independent retailers to mutually assist each other, and achieve economies of scale at wholesale level, by using their group network. The retailers are the main shareholders in the group and oversee the strategy of the group, whilst developing their own local strategy as independent entrepreneurs. The end result is sustainable SMEs and SME competitiveness. Small retail entrepreneurs can retain their independence and successfully compete with large integrated chains in their localities across different formats – offline as well as online. Groups take many different forms: from associative buying groups to more complex participative structures. They can operate regionally, nationally and internationally. The group is a superb business asset in both the food and non-food sectors across sectors as diverse as textiles, pharmaceuticals and electronics. The group structure benefits competition by ensuring a diverse, more competitive market, high levels of customer service and innovative added-value services for businesses. The consumer is the ultimate beneficiary as this leads to more consumer choice and lower consumer prices, in line with consumers’ expectations. Retailers that are members of a group of independent retailers should not lose their SME status as a result of a revised definition as at retail level they are independent legal entities, which means that each retailer individually needs to comply with his legal obligations. As a consequence, this should also continue to give them any rights corresponding to their SME status. Group membership just supports them in reaching their full potential in a highly competitive omnichannel retail market.
Read full response

Meeting with Elisabetta Siracusa (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan)

22 May 2017 · the supply chain initiative, as well as unfair trading practices

Meeting with Filomena Chirico (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen)

9 Mar 2017 · Current business practices in the retail sector

Meeting with Paulina Dejmek Hack (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

1 Mar 2017 · Unfair trading practices

Meeting with Paulina Dejmek Hack (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

25 Aug 2016 · competition related e-commerce developments and competition in the food supply chain

Meeting with Christiane Canenbley (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan)

24 Aug 2016 · Supply Chain Initiative

Meeting with Rolf Carsten Bermig (Cabinet of Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska)

15 Jan 2016 · Supply Chain Initiative

Meeting with Juho Romakkaniemi (Cabinet of Vice-President Jyrki Katainen)

24 Nov 2015 · Single Market Strategy

Meeting with Paulina Dejmek Hack (Cabinet of President Jean-Claude Juncker)

20 Nov 2015 · Issues of interest for the European Retail sector

Meeting with Carl-Christian Buhr (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan)

22 Oct 2015 · Latest development on food chain policy after President Juncker's SoU

Meeting with Jan Ceyssens (Cabinet of Vice-President Valdis Dombrovskis)

25 Sept 2015 · corporate taxation (CCCTB), country-by-country reporting (CBCR) and value added tax (VAT)

Meeting with Jasmin Battista (Cabinet of Vice-President Andrus Ansip), Kamila Kloc (Cabinet of Vice-President Andrus Ansip)

7 Jul 2015 · Platforms & geo-blocking

Meeting with Michelle Sutton (Cabinet of First Vice-President Frans Timmermans)

4 Jun 2015 · Better Regulation

Meeting with Maria Elena Scoppio (Cabinet of Commissioner Pierre Moscovici)

28 Apr 2015 · Eu plans on tax transparency and corporate taxation, reverse charge on VAT

Meeting with Markus Schulte (Digital Economy)

17 Mar 2015 · Digital Single Market

Meeting with Carl-Christian Buhr (Cabinet of Commissioner Phil Hogan)

25 Feb 2015 · Presentation by IRE of its organisation and members. Presentation of its work in and views about the Supply Chain Initiative and its future

Meeting with Agnieszka Drzewoska (Cabinet of Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska), Kaius Kristian Hedberg (Cabinet of Commissioner Elżbieta Bieńkowska)

18 Feb 2015 · Introductory meeting