Post on 04-Jan-2016
QUALITY ASPECTS WHEN MODERNIZING INTRASTAT
Ales CapekEurostat
HISTORY
INTRASTAT was a simplification and was further simplified
…but still perceived burdensome – more than 500 000 EU companies are reporting
Political framework: Lisbon process, Commission Communication on the Reduction of the response burden, simplification and priority setting in the field of Community statistics, Ecofin Councils
INTRASTAT became priority for reduction of statistical response burden
THE SOLUTION
2 main simplification options: single flow and decrease in trade coverage
3 criteria: - potential for burden reduction
- impact on timeliness
- impact on quality Trade coverage as short term solution Single flow to be further studied New Intrastat legislation adopted by the Commission
IMPACT ON QUALITY
How is the commodity structure of trade affected by simplification?
Only approximate comparison of the two options possible
Threshold option: how many commodity codes disappear or their volume of trade is reduced
Single flow: how many commodity codes disappear, new codes are created or the value within remaining codes is affected
RESULTS – THRESHOLD OPTION
Up to trade coverage of 95 % majority of codes lose less than 5 % of initial value
At coverage of 90 % majority of codes strongly affected losing at least 10 % of initial value
Codes losing more than 50 % of initial value less important in terms of trade value
RESULTS – SINGLE FLOW
The impact in terms of values of lost codes, new codes and changed values within remaining codes reaches double digit figures for most Member States
The impact is bigger in general for small Member States The impact is bigger in case of single flow based on
arrivals. In some Member States the impact on trade values reaches tripple digit figures
SURVEY OF THE USERS AND SUPPLIERS OF THE STATISTICS
■ USERS▪ 1885 replies from questionnaire
19 NSIs + Eurostat
+ 100 telephone interviews
with ‘key users’
36 % - companies
17 % - public administration
10 % - business federations
9 % - academic
6 % - EU institution
■ PSIs
▪ 3350 replies from questionnaire
* 14 Member States
39 % - wholesale/retail trade
37 % - manufacturing, construction, mining
• Questionnaires were accessible on a web-server from May 25th - August 8th
• Respondents were invited by Eurostat and/or NSIs to participate in the survey directly by email or by “pop-ups”.
Q3. From the following sources of statistics, please indicate which you use for trade statistics. Please select as many answers as apply
58%
58%
43%
29%
23%
15%
20%
6%
5%
11%
16%
3%
Eurostat database - Comext
Extraction from national statisticaldatabases
Publications from national statisticaloffices (electronic or hard copy)
International Organizations other thanEuropean Commission
Eurostat publications (electronic or hardcopy, predefined tables)
Press and other media
Eurostat database - New Cronos
Private companies (statistics providers)
European Commission services other thanEurostat
Eurostat DVD
Other
Don't know
USERS - SOURCES OF TRADE DATA
Q5. For what purpose or purposes does your organisation
use trade data? Please select as many answers as apply.
50%
48%
34%
18%
17%
2%
7%
For developing business strategies(market research, market
segmentation, pricing)
For macroeconomic analysis
For dissemination of statistics
For academic research
For political decision making
Other
Don't know
USERS - PURPOSES OF TRADE DATA USE
USERS - AREAS AND TRADE FLOWS
Relevance of reported areas
- Individual EU MS 90 %
- EU as a whole 87 %- Euro area 54
%
Relevance of trade flows
- Imports from non EU 86 %- Exports to non EU 83 %- Imports from EU to EU 81 %- Exports from EU to EU 79 %
Q13. Based on your experience, please indicate your overall level of satisfaction with the trade statistics you are currently using.
Very satisfied18%
Not very satisfied
13%
Fairly satisfied67%
Not at all satisfied
1%
Don't know1%
USERS - OVERALL SATISFACTION
USERS - INTEREST IN ADDITIONAL CHARACTERISTICS
Trade acc. to sector of activity of the trader (NACE) 60 % Intragroup trade 51
% Trade acc. to size of trader 52 % Trade acc. to product by activity 53
% Goods for processing 49 %
USERS - ASSESSMENT OF PROPOSED REFORMS
47% 7%
12% 25%
12%
12%
12%36%
43%
11%
8%
9%
14% 28%
25%I ncreasing the
exemptionthreshold
A more aggregatedcommodity
classification
Single-flow system
Will have a NEGATIVE impact on trade statistics you use
Will not impact trade statistics you use
Will have a POSITIVE impact on trade statistics you use
You cannot assess the consequences of the measure
Don't Know
Q18 Companies in the European Union have to report their trade regularly using the INTRASTAT system. Some measures are currently being evaluated with a view to lightening the administrative burden for companies reporting on 'Intra EU trade'. For each of the measures below, please indicate how you assess its potential impact on the trade statistics you use for your work.
Q8. From the following, please indicate which mode you use the most to submit declaration forms?
Don't know \ no answer
1%
Other5%
Other electronic
applications (offline tools)
22%
Paper declaration
6%
Internet Web Form66%
PROVIDERS - MODE OF SUBMISSION OF DATA
PROVIDERS - REPORTING BURDEN
Intrastat forms are easy to fill in 80 % Time spent on filling in and submitting forms is
reasonable 74 %
Q13. For each of the following elements of your reporting to I ntrastat, please
indicate to what extent you find it easy or difficult
89%
65%
57%
25%
31%
34%
28%
35%
53%
5%
5%
5%
8%
15%
21%
7%
70%
75%
65%
40%
45%
58%
86%
20%
9%
15%
6%
10%
6%
15%
Determining the partnercountry
Determination of thevalue
Providing the Nature ofTransaction Codes
The data entry interface
Average across allelements
Respecting thetransmission deadline
Providing the quantitynet mass
Providingsupplementary quantity
unit
Managing different rulesbetween VAT and
I ntrastat
Classifying productsaccording to the
combined Nomenclature
Easy (NET)
Difficult (NET)
Don't know
PROVIDERS - EASE/DIFFICULTY OF VARIOUS REPORTING ELEMENTS
SUMMARY
The quality aspects played important role when deciding about how to simplify Intrastat
Due to the asymmetries in mirror trade flows the impact of the single flow on the quality of data would be more significant compared with the threshold option
The survey of the users and providers of statistical data served as an additional source of information
The survey has shown general satisfaction with statistics on intra-community trade