ARBEJDSDOKUMENT FRA KOMMISSIONENS TJENESTEGRENE RESUMÉ AF RAPPORTEN OM KONSEKVENSANALYSEN Ledsagedokument til Forslag til EUROPA-PARLAMENTETS OG RÅDETS DIREKTIV om kørekort, om ændring af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv (EU) 2022/2561 og Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets forordning (EU) 2018/1724 og om ophævelse af Europa-Parlamentets og Rådets direktiv 2006/126/EF og Kommissionens forordning (EU) nr. 383/2012 og Forslag til EUROPA-PARLAMENTETS OG RÅDETS DIREKTIV om virkningerne på EU-plan af visse frakendelser af førerretten

EN EN
EUROPEAN
COMMISSION
Brussels, 1.3.2023
SWD(2023) 129 final
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT
Accompanying the documents
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE
COUNCIL
on driving licences, amending Directive (EU) 2022/2561 of the European Parliament and
of the Council, Regulation (EU) 2018/1724 of the European Parliament and of the
Council and repealing Directive 2006/126/EC of the European Parliament and of the
Council and Commission Regulation (EU) No 383/2012
and
Proposal for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE
COUNCIL
on the Union-wide effect of certain driving disqualifications
{COM(2023) 127 final} - {SEC(2023) 350 final} - {SWD(2023) 128 final}
Offentligt
KOM (2023) 0127 - SWD-dokument
Europaudvalget 2023
1
Executive Summary Sheet
Impact assessment on a proposal for a revision of Directive on driving licences and a legislative
proposal for a Directive on the Union wide effect of certain driving disqualifications, which was planned
as an integral part of the DL Directive but due to legal considerations has been separated and is presented
as an integral, separate legislative proposal for a new directive.
A. Need for action
What is the problem and why is it a problem at EU level?
The ex-post evaluation of Directive (EU) 2006/126, concluded in 2022 (SWD(2022)17 final), found that
the Directive is not fully effective in achieving its objectives.
The implementation of the Directive has led to an improvement of road safety, thus contributing to the
ambitious EU targets (Vision Zero and Valletta Declaration). However, more efforts are needed to meet
these targets.
As regards the free movement of citizens in the EU, the Directive was considered to have had a positive
impact, but certain provisions still result in administrative burden or obstacles to the free movement of
persons in specific cases. Finally, the evaluation also identified digitalisation as an area for possible further
simplification.
What should be achieved?
The general objectives are to improve road safety and facilitate the free movement of persons.
For road safety, this should be brought about through the improvement of drivers’ skills and knowledge, a
change in the behaviour of drivers and reducing the number of physically or mentally unfit drivers on
Union roads. At the same time, unnecessary barriers to free movement resulting from administrative
procedures should be removed.
What is the value added of action at the EU level (subsidiarity)?
Without EU intervention, cooperation on driving licences between Member States would be ensured by
means of bi- or multilateral agreements which would result in higher complexity of the licencing system
and a higher administrative burden for the licence holders. Moreover, the conditions to obtain a driving
licence would vary, resulting in an unequal treatment of EU citizens and less effectiveness in terms of road
safety.
B. Solutions
What are the various options to achieve the objectives? Is there a preferred option or not? If not,
why?
The retained policy measures have been grouped in three policy options (PO-A, PO-B and PO-C).
PO-A is the update of the Directive considering lessons learnt and integrating societal, technological and
scientific evolutions. It does not change the scope of the Directive and it contains measures which are also
in PO-B and PO-C.
PO-B includes additional efforts to meet the EU targets on road safety targeting all drivers (including
novice drivers) in the domains of skills and knowledge, medical fitness, and dangerous behaviour. It also
removes some barriers on free movement faced by holders of foreign licences and applicants.
Finally, PO-C mainly reinforces the road safety measures introduced by PO-B regarding medical fitness
and dangerous behaviour. It also extends the scope of the Directive to new vehicles such as tractors.
PO-B was selected as the preferred policy option because it is more effective in reaching the policy
objectives than PO-A and PO-C. PO-B has the highest net benefits, and is more efficient than PO-C, also
due to much lower adjustment costs for citizens. PO-B is also legally easier to implement than PO-C
2
regarding Member States rules and procedures.
What are different stakeholders' views? Who supports which option?
There is widespread support across stakeholders as regards the need for further action at EU level to
improve road safety.
Public authorities generally favour an improvement of the effectiveness of the Directive and its extension
to matters related to novice drivers. They also often highlight the legal challenges to overcome regarding
the introduction of measures addressing the dangerous behaviour of drivers.
The private sector, and more generally road users, are generally calling for simplification.
C. Impacts of the preferred option
What are the benefits of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?
Under PO-B, positive societal effects are expected in terms of impacts on road safety and on the free
movement of persons.
1,153 lives are estimated to be saved and 11,020 serious injuries avoided over 2025-2050, relative to the
baseline, that in monetary terms amounts to around EUR 7.1 billion, expressed as the reduction in the
external costs of accidents.
In addition, the measures are expected to remove unjustified or unnecessary obstacles to obtain, have
recognised or renew driving rights. Most notably for residents in the European Union and holders of
foreign driving licences obtained in another Member State than their country of citizenship, drivers of
alternatively fuelled vans and campervans, persons suffering from diabetes mellitus and professional
drivers.
Finally, positive effects are expected for the public administrations (EUR 4.8 billion cost savings), the
private sector (EUR 1.5 billion cost savings) and citizens (EUR 6.6 billion cost savings) relative to the
baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period, notably thanks to the proposed
simplifications.
What are the costs of the preferred option (if any, otherwise of main ones)?
The changes to the procedures for determining the medical fitness to drive are expected to result in
adjustment costs for citizens aged 50 years old or less of EUR 716.2 to 1159.1 million relative to the
baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period.
For the private sector, adjustment costs for general practitioners are estimated at EUR 57.7 million relative
to the baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period, for (online) training courses.
Adjustment costs for the European Commission are estimated at EUR 0.7 to 1.1 million relative to the
baseline, while those for Member States administrations at EUR 63.2 million. In addition, enforcement
costs of EUR 26.3 million are expected for Member States administrations, relative to the baseline,
expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period, for the cross-border enforcement of driving
disqualifications.
3
What are the impacts on SMEs and competitiveness?
The impacts on SMEs are expected to be positive.
Road transport operators, mainly SMEs, are expected to benefit from the relaxation of rules. The hassle
costs savings and the administrative costs savings are estimated, respectively, at EUR 600 and 900 million
relative to the baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period.
The preferred policy option is expected to lead to 4,515 additional (online) training courses for general
practitioners in 2030 and 5,057 in 2050, relative to the baseline. The resulting adjustment costs for general
practitioners are estimated at EUR 57.7 million relative to the baseline, expressed as present value over the
2025-2050 period.
Finally, other SMEs to be affected by the initiative will be the driving schools due to further
harmonisation of the different categories of driving licences and updated rules for zero-emissions vehicles.
Will there be significant impacts on national budgets and administrations?
The preferred policy option is expected to result in adjustment costs for the Commission for an amount
between EUR 0.7 to 1.1 million relative to the baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050
period, for the establishment of an information platform on physical and mental fitness to drive and the
development of an (online) training programme for general practitioners.
Adjustment costs for Member State administrations are estimated at EUR 48.9 million relative to the
baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period, for the mobile driving licences and the
update of driving tests. Additional EUR 14.3 million one-off adjustment costs are expected for the mobile
driving licences and the improvement of RESPER for the purpose of enforcement. Finally, enforcement
costs of EUR 26.3 million, relative to the baseline, expressed as present value over the 2025-2050 period,
are expected for the cross-border enforcement of driving disqualifications.
Will there be other significant impacts?
The introduction of the EU mobile driving licence is expected to result in positive environmental impacts,
estimated at approximatively 130 tons of plastic (polycarbonate) saved annually.
The updated definition of vehicles for category B and the new rules related to automatic gear transmission
are expected to facilitate the transition to zero-emissions vehicles.
Finally, the increased harmonisation and the mutual recognition of driving disqualifications should make
the treatment of EU residents more equal regarding driving licences.
Proportionality
The preferred policy option does not go beyond what is needed to achieve the objectives and address the
identified problems.
D. Follow up
When will the policy be reviewed?
No review is planned at this stage.