European wine groups seek a single EU excise portal for cross-border sales
Wine producers and trade bodies are pressing Brussels to establish a central system for declaring and paying excise duties on direct sales to consumers in other EU countries. They argue that fragmented national procedures and fiscal-representative fees make many small shipments uneconomic, although political resistance and the unanimity required on EU tax matters could delay reform.
National procedures impede direct sales
When a winery sells directly to a private customer in another EU member state, it must comply with the destination country’s excise rules. Producers say their principal concern is not the tax itself but the paperwork and the need to use a separate national procedure for each market, which hinder legal direct sales, wine tourism follow-up orders and e-commerce.1
Under the process described by industry groups, the winery may have to issue a pro forma invoice so that the customer can obtain confirmation from local tax authorities that the excise duty has been secured. The buyer returns that proof before shipment; after delivery, the customer may then need to obtain a release document from the tax administration and send it to the producer. Some destinations also impose charges such as packaging levies.1
A producer can instead appoint a fiscal representative in the destination country, often through a logistics company, but this adds expense. In a February 2024 letter to the French Economy and Agriculture ministries, lawmaker Hubert Ott estimated the additional cost at €4.16 per bottle. Wine groups say such costs and formalities can eliminate the margin on small orders, discouraging wineries from developing cross-border online sales.1
The proposed one-stop shop
The campaign is led in France by the Independent Winegrowers and supported by Cnaoc, the umbrella organization UMVin and the interprofessional body Cniv. At European level, the European Federation of Origin Wines and the Comité Européen des Entreprises Vins (CEEV) also back the proposal.1
Jean-Marie Fabre, national president of the Independent Winegrowers, said his organization has advocated such a mechanism since 2007. The objective is neither to avoid excise duties nor to harmonize national rates, but to create a platform modeled on the EU VAT one-stop shop. A producer could submit the required electronic administrative document, receive a number authorizing shipment and pay the destination-country tax directly.1
Supporters cite the VAT one-stop shop introduced in July 2021 and argue that an excise counterpart is technically feasible. They say some supporting infrastructure already exists, notably the EU Excise Movement and Control System (EMCS) and the administrative networks through which member states exchange data.1
Commercial effects and current workarounds
The industry expects simplification to benefit small and midsize wineries in particular, since they may lack the scale to work through importers in every EU market. It could help estates retain higher-margin consumer sales while export growth is slowing in some non-EU markets. A visitor who purchases wine at a French estate, for example, could more readily order it again after returning to another member state.1
Wine organizations say complex rules can prompt producers either to mail bottles without complete compliance, risking penalties, or to deliver orders to collection points near national borders for customers to retrieve. They describe both approaches as unsatisfactory. The proposed portal would not displace importers, wholesalers or specialist retailers; it would allow direct fulfillment when a particular bottle is unavailable locally or when foreign merchants carry only part of a winery’s range.1
Political obstacles
Industry officials say the initiative has gained support in Brussels and Paris, but some member states fear losing control of excise collection or believe easier cross-border alcohol sales could create public-health concerns. Because EU tax decisions require unanimity among member states, any reform faces a high political threshold.1
Raphaël Fattier, director of Cnaoc, said the main barrier now appears political rather than technical. CEEV secretary general Ignacio Sánchez Recarte said some governments remain unconvinced that the benefits would justify the costs. He nevertheless cited a 2020 study concluding that, after initial implementation expenses, simplification could produce administrative and economic gains for operators and member states.1
A wide range of excise rates
EU rules set the minimum wine excise rate at €0 per hectoliter, allowing each member state to choose its own rate. Nine countries, including Italy, Spain and Portugal, impose no wine excise duty, while seven others exempt still wine but tax sparkling wine. France charges €0.03 per bottle of still wine and €0.08 per bottle of sparkling wine.1
Belgium, the Netherlands, Poland, Slovakia, the Baltic states and Denmark charge approximately €0.30 to €1.80 per bottle. Rates in Sweden and Finland are around €3 per bottle. Ireland charges €3.19 for a bottle of still wine and roughly twice as much for sparkling wine. Producers are not seeking to change these national rates, but to standardize how the applicable tax is declared and paid on direct cross-border sales.1
Possible timetable
Fabre hoped the matter could be resolved by the end of 2026 and a system introduced in early 2027. Fattier offered a more cautious timetable: according to indications from the European Commission, a legislative proposal is being prepared for negotiations beginning in early 2027, with subsequent progress dependent on agreement among member states.1
CEEV expects a longer process and is awaiting the results of a Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union study on excise simplification, expected in November. Given the time required to pass legislation and build the information system, the organization considers implementation beginning in 2029 a positive outcome. For the industry, the issue illustrates a remaining gap in the EU single market: legally sending one bottle to a consumer in another member state can sometimes be harder than exporting a full container overseas.1
Sources
Written by the Dionysus editors from the sources above.
