Generalised scheme of tariff preferences

The European Parliament’s committee made numerous detailed changes to the GSP proposal, aiming to strengthen how the EU monitors and enforces the scheme’s conditions. Countries receiving tariff preferences must now not only ratify key international conventions (e.g. human rights, labour standards, environmental protection) but also implement concrete, time-bound plans of action showing how they will meet these obligations. The EU will conduct regular assessments every two or three years, including on-the-ground missions with stakeholder consultations, to check progress. Monitoring will also be informed by civil society, trade unions, and other stakeholders through an advisory body and the Single Entry Point complaint mechanism, with safeguards to protect complainant confidentiality. The Commission’s reports must also consider how imports under the GSP+ affect EU producers. If serious issues arise, temporary withdrawal of preferences is possible but must be managed carefully, with clear benchmarks and possibilities for partial or phased suspension. The amendments additionally introduce precise definitions around violations and strengthen the link to EU policies on sustainable development and human rights due diligence. These changes enhance transparency, accountability, and link development to enforceable commitments.

The European Parliament’s committee position on the GSP regulation is more detailed and stringent than the original Commission proposal. It expands the regulatory framework to more explicitly require beneficiary countries to adopt and implement detailed, time-bound plans of action linked to ratification and effective enforcement of international conventions. The amendments augment monitoring protocols to be more transparent, consultative, and inclusive of civil society and diverse stakeholders. They also formalize use of the Single Entry Point complaint mechanism and emphasize socio-economic and human rights due diligence considerations. In effect, the Parliament’s position enhances conditionality, auditability, enforcement mechanisms, and links with broader EU development and trade policies, reflecting stronger governance and sustainabil

The amendments raise compliance and monitoring expectations for beneficiary countries, which could increase administrative and operational burdens in these countries as they develop and report on detailed implementation plans and interact with an expanded monitoring framework including civil society inputs and on-site missions. For EU businesses, especially importers, these changes may enhance predictability and transparency about tariff preferences but could also mean stricter scrutiny and potential suspension risks for certain countries or sectors. The reinforced consideration of the economic impact on EU producers in reports signals a more balanced approach that may shield sensitive EU industries from import shocks. The expanded and more transparent use of the SEP complaints channel could lead to increased cases affecting trade flows and reputational risks. Overall, EU companies benefiting from tariff preferences through GSP countries can expect a more stable and enforceable system, potentially reducing risks linked to sudden preference withdrawals but may face impacts from gradations tied to implementation benchmarks. Businesses in beneficiary countries might encounter increase