Introduction

The nature, the causes, the aims and the historical evolution of the Single European Market, along with an extensive analysis of the possibility of its complete harmonisation and, consequently, the obstacles preventing such a harmonisation, would require a whole book instead of a short essay. Nevertheless, in what follows an effort will be made to point out some key aspects of: a) the nature and the aims of the Single European Market, b) the nature of the Single Market’s harmonisation and its completion, c) the main obstacles preventing such a complete harmonisation and d) an evaluation of the potential of current policies deployed by the EU to succeed in completely harmonising the Single European Market.

 

The Single European Market became reality in 1993 and it was a reality that concerned twelve countries and 345 million people: Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Greece, Spain, Italy, Luxemburg, the Netherlands, Portugal and the United Kingdom.[1] Since then the Single European Market became larger, at 2012 the countries that participated at the Single European Market were twenty-seven (27) and the people who could freely trade within it were 500 million.[2]

 

Without yet fully exploring and analysing the nature and the causes of the Single European Market, we must understand that its basis and its nature is financial freedom and more specifically freedom of commercial transactions within EU. ‘The Single European Market allows people and businesses to move and trade freely across borders within the EU.’[3]

 

Speaking of the ‘Single Market’s harmonisation’ is, in a way, contradiction in terms. If something is defined as ‘single’ means also that it needs no further unification. If, then, the Single Market needs to achieve complete harmonisation, that means that the Single Market is not yet fully ‘single’. From the very beginning then it is apparent that the Single European Market is more a dynamic process and an aspiration than it is an established state of things.[4]

The Single European Market and its harmonisation then describe the never-ending effort of the EU to establish a unified field of commercial transactions within it. As any other dynamic process, the harmonisation of the Single European Market refers to the necessary overcoming of every obstacle that prevents such a harmonisation.

 

To be able to identify the possible obstacles then becomes a vital and crucial part of the whole procedure. To briefly sketch the overall picture, when EU continues to constitute a union of independent countries instead of being a supra-state with many different parties and when the EU citizens are first of all citizens of their national states, the demand and the challenge of the Single European Market will always be at jeopardy. A permanent conflict of jurisdiction blocks every attempt to achieve a complete harmonisation. A permanent will by the State Members of the EU to avoid a possible outmatch of the EU over the countries that constitute it prevents the complete harmonisation of the Single European Market.

 

The Single Market Observatory (SMO) points out five kinds of general barriers to the Single Market’s complete harmonisation: a) physical barriers, b) technical barriers, c) tax barriers, d) natural barriers and e) legislative barriers.[5] What is beyond any doubt is the fact that the Single European Market is still miles away from being considered stable, safe, completed and it is still viewed by the EU citizens and the EU countries in an ambivalent manner.

 

The EU needs to continuously strive after general consensus in regard with its Single European Market project and, most importantly, the EU needs to continuously strive against established centrifugal tendencies within its State Members. The Single European Market has as its most fundamental purpose the demand for an open Europe, the need to sustain a viable system that could enable the EU to acquire a unified and free trade-zone. Although however, that the very concept of the Single European Market is purely of a financial and of a commercial nature, the EU needs to create new social policies that could bring the EU citizens closer to the very idea of the Single European Market, otherwise the dream of the completion of the Single Market will remain only a dream. As Marcel Canoy, Roger Liddle and Peter Smith point out:

 

To drive innovation and productivity in Europe requires a new approach to the Single Market and then use every lever, including competition and trade policies and national reforms to make that a reality. The Single Market of the future will need to be easier to maintain and update, allow for more differentiation within the EU and be simpler to apply. To obtain citizens’ support, a revamped Single Market needs to be completed by effective social policies to deal with the human consequences of rapid economic adjustment. Only under these conditions will it be possible to make a fundamental policy choice in favour of an Open Europe.[6]

 

Mario Monti gave us at 2010 a basic outline of the EU’s future policies in regard with a possible remedy of the problems that the Single European Market has (Monti Report).[7] Mario Monti there recognises the need to update and change the policies regarding the Single European Market and tries to describe the changes which occurred within the very concept of the ‘market’. Because this is the most important obstacle towards the harmonisation of the Single European Market: what at the beginning was simply a field of free commercial transactions within the EU now has become a whole new reality, which includes almost every single financial activity within the EU, from the field of energy to the field of environmental policies and from the field of legislation to the field of social policy.

 

It becomes apparent then that in order for someone to evaluate the current policies deployed by the EU to remedy the situation, a certain choice has to be made concerning the very meaning of the word ‘market’. Because if someone still believes that the Single European Market wants only to provide the EU with an open European trade-zone then the consequent evaluation of the current EU policies will be severely mutilated.

 

In the following analysis we will concentrate on three basic points: a) a basic description of the historical evolution of the Single European Market, b) a basic description of the main obstacles that the Single European Market has so far confronted and c) a general evaluation of the potential of the current policies which the EU has deployed in order to remedy the problematic character of the harmonisation of the Single European Market.

 

  1.     Single European Market: a description of its historical evolution

 

In a biblical manner: at the beginning were the Treaty of Rome (1957) and the Common Market. To put it as simply as possible: the countries which participated at the Treaty of Rome, which established the European Economic Community (EEC), believed that the EEC could not be actualised without the establishment of a Common Market. This Common Market needed in order to guarantee to the participants the following issues:

1) A free trade area.

2) A customs union.

3) ‘The abolition, as between Member States, of the obstacles to the free movement of persons, services and capital’.

4) The launch of common agricultural and transport policies.

5) ‘The establishment of a system ensuring that competition shall not be distorted in the Common Market’.

6) The coordination of the economic policies of the Member States.[8]

 

During 70’s and early 80’s the completion of the Common Market (otherwise called Internal Market) was delayed by a series of financial crises that made it difficult for the State Members of the EEC to complete the necessary steps towards such a completion. Jacque Delors took over as Commission President in 1985. His main priority was to complete the Internal Market by 1992. For that purpose it was adopted by the EEC the Commission’s White Paper, Completing the Internal Market, on June 1985 (the 1985 White Paper).

A major study on the benefits of completing the Internal Market, the Cecchini Report, was completed in 1988. The Report concluded that if the Internal Market could be completed, then the EC’s gross domestic product (GDP) would gain 5%. This could happen mainly because of the removal of barriers to internal trade and because of the creation of a genuine single market.[9]

 

The Single European Market was formally created by the Single European Act (1993). Since then we had:

1) The 1997 Single Market Action Plan.

2) The 1999 Strategy for Europe’s Internal Market.

3) The 2003 Internal Market Strategy.

4) The 2007 Single Market Review.[10]

 

The main purpose of all these plans and Acts and their common motive were the need for ensuring the best possible conditions for the free trade within EU. It was, and still is, an indisputable belief within EU, that a unified Single European Market which could harmonise within the EU all the State Members’ different trade policies, would increase significantly the profit of the EU’s tradesmen and trade-companies and consequently would benefit the EU’s citizens. Through all these years of trying to establish within the EU the Single European Market, many things have changed but one: the absolute belief that one market is far better than many different.

 

The corner stone of every single EU policy regarding the Single European Market are the ‘Four Freedoms’, namely:

1) The free movement within the EU of goods.

2) The free movement of services.

3) The free movement of persons.

4) The free movement of capitals.

 

These four freedoms were the main driving force behind every single political decision that was made within EEC. The Internal Market thus had to guarantee these freedoms through a series of political, economic and legal changes within the EEC. Nowadays however, the Single European Market accommodates not only the policies that guarantee these four freedoms. The major change in the way the Single European Market is viewed nowadays by everyone, EU citizen or not, is the introduction of EU citizenship by the Maastricht Treaty (formally the Treaty on European Union, TEU) at 1992. Through TEU were introduced the European Community (EC), the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Justice and Home Affairs (JHA). The EU’s supra-national institutions (Commission, European Parliament and the European Court of Justice) acquired more power within EC and the road to a common currency (euro) was open.[11] The treaties of Amsterdam (1997), Nice (2001) and Lisbon (or Reform Treaty, 2007) amended TEU and transformed the EEC into the EU.

 

While then, at the beginning, the main aim of the EEC was to help its members to trade within a free economic union, nowadays the Single European Market has to respond to the needs of a very complex European Union. What started as a basic need to help and facilitate trade within EEC became a whole cluster of different European policies towards the European and supra-national entity we call EU.

 

 

  1.     Single European Market: main obstacles towards harmonisation

 

Staffan Nilsson (president of the European Economic and Social Committee, EESC) epitomises the progress made from 1957 to 2012 within the European Market, from the early days of the Common Market to the present Single Market:

 

The 1957 Treaty establishing the European Economic Community made it possible to abolish customs barriers within the Community. In the 1970s, other trade barriers hampered the completion of the common market. Technical rules, health and safety standards, national regulations on the right to practise certain professions and exchange controls all restricted the free movement of people, goods and capital.

In June 1985, the European Commission…published a White Paper seeking to abolish…all physical, technical and tax-related barriers to free movement within the Community…After 20 years of existence, the Single Market is still a work in progress.[12]

 

In what follows it will be given a summary of all the obstacles to the Single Market’s harmonisation that EESC is able to recognise and to register.

 

2.1. Obstacles to cross-border activities

 

-Problems within Single European Transport Area.

-Problems in Trans-European networks.

-Problems in Single European Railway Area.

-Obstacles in the circulation of judgments.

-Problems in the recovery of cross border debts.

-Obstacles to faster cross-border insolvency proceedings.

-Double taxation.

-Double non-taxation.

-Problems in cross-border relief.

-Financial havens.

 

It is more than obvious that the Single European Market has not yet succeeded in eliminating problems that occur because of the existence of borders within the countries-members of the EU. From transportation through borders to free circulation of judicial decisions, the harmonisation of the Single European Market remains problematic and dubious.[13]

 

2.2 Obstacles affecting SMEs

 

-Problems in the implementation of the Small Business Act (SBA).

-Obstacles in the European Private Company (SPE).

-Difficulties of SME in setting up branches in some EEA countries.

-Obstacles for SMEs accessing to public procurement.

-Difficulty to respond to public tenders in other MS within the prescribed period due to translation problem.

-Stringent and disproportionate pre-qualification requirements for SMEs in other Member States (MS).

-Complex bureaucratic requirements for contract below the thresholds.

-Barriers to e-procurement.

-Complaints about short delays between publication date and tender date.

-Obstacles to a simpler and more standardised e-invoicing.

-Problems regarding VAT and rules on electronic invoicing.

-Late payment in commercial actions.

-Fragmentation of EU consumer legislation.

 

What must be pointed out in regard with the obstacles concerning the SMEs operation is the denial from the State Members of the EU to facilitate a unified and harmonised field of economic activities which could help SME to grow and to prosper within the Single European Market. A representative example of the above stated fact is the fragmentation of EU consumer legislation. AS EESC’s analysis states in regard with this specific problem:

 

The current patchwork of laws with an EU wide-set of rights for the consumers create a complex and unpredictable environment for businesses and lead to a reluctance of traders, in particular SMEs, to consider selling cross-border.[14]

 

 

2.3. Obstacles regarding free movements of goods

 

-No Single Market for maritime transport.

-Multi-modal transport.

-Problems with railway interoperability.

-Problems with ensuring a high level of railway safety and equal conditions for all railway undertakings.

-Variation in aircraft noise limits.

-Personal importation of vehicles hindered due to obstacles created by dealers/manufacturers.

-Motor vehicle registration problems.

-Problems regarding an efficient customs union.

-Different testing requirements in the Member States.

-Lack of harmonisation and standardisation (interoperability) of military products.

-Necessity of an export licence for intra-EU transfers of military equipment.

-Problems with food safety.

-Medicine safety: risk of counterfeit medicines.

-Falsified medicines.

-Problems regarding information to patients on medical products.

-Lack of transparency and harmonisation in medicinal pricing and funding.

-Problems with cross-border shopping.

-Problems concerning price comparison websites and products test.

-Lack of warranty in cross-border sales.

-Necessity to establish a Single Market for green products: Ecolabel.

-Large differences in VAT rates and declaration from across EU.

-Cross-border VAT fraud.

-Different rates of excise duties on fuels used in the production process.

– Wide variations in taxation on biofuels in adjacent Member States.

-Monopolies of electricity and gas supply and distribution.

-Differences in treatment of public and private energy-suppliers vis-à-vis competition from third countries.[15]

 

An interesting point to make regarding the freedom of goods is that problems regarding the harmonisation of the Single European Market can result in serious problems regarding public health. For example food safety:

 

The Regulation 97/258, set up a new instrument to ensure the free movement of safe food products. However, the passing of time have highlighted a number of aspects that need to be improved in order to ensure a high level of public health protection and the free movement of goods and to establish efficient authorisation mechanisms that help businesses to innovate. Moreover, there have been some misinterpretations about the definition of novel food and about the scope of the Regulations.[16]

 

Problems with the harmonisation then of the Single European Market and the lack of its completion can give birth not only to commercial and financial problems but also can result to the endangerment of public health. In fact, the completion of the harmonisation of the Single Market is more a social necessity for EU then it is a commercial one. The way Single Market is currently evolving and its social aspects point out the importance of the social security that a complete and harmonised Single Market could guarantee for EU citizens.

 

2.4. Obstacles concerning free movements of services

 

-Problems regarding services in the Single Market, in particular problems regarding the free circulation of services.

-Problems with postal services.

-High price for intra-EU delivery.

-Obstacles to net neutrality.

-Barriers to online retailing, barriers to the Single Market on the internet.

-Obstacles to community patent.

-Problems concerning EU copyright law.

-Problems concerning EU framework for orphan works.

-Problems with e-signature.

-Limited access to financial services.

-Problems with the consumer credit due to existing deficiencies in the implementing national legislation.

-Obstacles to the integration of retail banking services.

-Problems regarding collective actions system and Community consumer law.

– Problems with the health services within Single European Market.

-Cross-border health-care reimbursement issues.

-High tariffs for internet surfing via a mobile connection (roaming).

-Fragmentation in the gambling sector.[17]

 

To intensify our previous point about the social dangers of the lack of harmonisation of the Single European Market:

 

As cross-border healthcare is more and more common several are the challenges the EU has to face:

-Providing clear rules and reliable information regarding access and reimbursement;

-Meeting patients’ expectations of the highest quality healthcare;

-Ensuring that EU countries work closer together in the interest of the patients;

         -Clearing up years of legal uncertainty.[18]

 

2.5. Problems with the free movements of citizens

 

-Problems regarding automatic recognition of qualifications.

-Obstacles towards posting of workers.

-Problems with removing tax obstacles to cross-border work.

-Problems with the social security status of the persons who move from one State Member to another.

-Problems with the portability of complementary pensions and health insurance rights.

-Problems with the difference in the working time in different State Members.

-Problems with the temporary agency workers.

-Language barriers.

-Problems regarding an integrated railway booking website.[19]

 

The free movements of citizens along with the free movements of capital are the most advanced freedoms within the EU and the Single Market. This can be the result of a long and continuous effort on behalf of the EU to establish a basic and safe environment for the financial growth among EU citizens and to build a culture of a truly unified European Union through the harmonisation of the Single Market.

 

2.6. Problems concerning the free movements of capital

 

-Absence of a single currency.

-Problems with the Single European Payment Area (SEPA).

-Fragmentation of government bond markets.

-Problems with the retail financial services.

-Problems concerning mortgage credits.

-Problems with the legislation to regulate financial services, such as clearing and settlement.

-Discrepancies in the taxes levied on insurance policies.

-Motor insurance: differences in compensation levels and limitation periods for cross-border victims.

-Problems with insurance guarantee schemes.[20]

 

Denmark and the United Kingdom have not yet adopted euro as their currency. At the same time Sweden along with the majority of the newest EU members have yet to meet the conditions for adopting the single currency. Here then we can see the two biggest obstacles towards a complete harmonisation of the Single European Market, namely: on the one hand the denial and the suspiciousness of some EU State Members towards a possible unification of the Single Market and on the other the inability of the newest EU State Members to succeed in securing the right conditions for them to participate as equal members within EU and the Single European Market.

 

  1. Evaluation of the current EU policies towards a harmonisation of the Single Market

 

The Single Market project aims to create a unified operational field which could help the EU citizens and the enterprises that operate within EU to function at the best economic conditions possible. At the same time the Single Market’s purpose is to bring closer the State Members through a series of political, financial and legal decisions. The main problems which remain so far unsolved refer mainly to: a) the continuous resistance on behalf of the State Members towards a supra-national political entity within which every State Member will have to find ways to smoothly co-operate with the other State Members; b) the new social and economic environment of the EU; what started as an economic loose union of few countries became nowadays a demand for a supra-national and fully unified EU with almost all the European countries participating in it; and c) the fact that we cannot any more view the Single European Market as purely a financial market; the Single Market project has to take under serious consideration all the new social parameters that have totally changed the European horizon; new technologies like internet and mobile phones and new demands like the need for speed and accuracy in all kinds of transportation have changed completely and definitely the European landscape.

 

As Canoy, Liddle and Smith point out:

 

The reason for the Single Market’s unfulfilled potential is the fundamental changes in the context in which the Single Market operates compared with when it was first conceived. The Single Market was conceived in terms of an economy based around mass manufacturing of standardised products benefiting from large economies of scale in production rather than a knowledge and service based one with much greater product differentiation. Enlargement has changed the nature of the Single Market. The market itself will no longer be ‘single’ bur more diverse, culturally, linguistically, in levels of development and administrative capacity. The nature of competition puts a premium on innovation, adaptability and speed to market. The scope of the game has changed from national to European to global. This changes the focus of the Single Market Programme from removing internal borders to showing how the European dimension can be used to compete with the rest of the world.[21]

 

In addition then to the changes in technology and in the nature of the European products, we have a whole new dimension, i.e. we have a Single Market which has to compete with the rest of the world economies and markets. The very concept then of the harmonisation of the Single Market has changed dramatically. The aims of the Single Market are no longer exist only within EU, on the contrary, the Single Market of 2013 and of the next decades has to engage in a deepest and tighter relation with the rest of the world. In a way, the Single European Market has to become a world market, otherwise the Single Market project will fail.

 

EU’s response to the new challenges came with the Single Market Act (SMA). In what follows, a summary of the specific policies deployed by the EU to adapt with the new era will be given.[22]

 

The Single Market Act adopted in 2011 aims to meet the challenges of globalisation and technological change by enhancing Europe’s competiveness and putting businesses and citizens at the heart of the single market. Twelve new initiatives are designed to promote growth, create jobs, and restore confidence in tandem with the EU’s 2020 strategy for growth.[23]

 

 

The EU has recognised as the main problems the need for globalisation and the adaption of new technologies along with the necessity of creating a stronger and closer co-operation of the State Members. The twelve new initiatives which constitute the main effort on behalf of the EU to remedy the problems within the Single European Market are:

 

1) Create a single market for venture capital.

2) Modernise and facilitate the system for recognizing professional qualifications.

3) Establish a unitary patent system.

4) Introduce Alternative Dispute Resolution.

5) Increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the European standardisation system.

6) Reinforce EU infrastructure.

7) Facilitate the cross-border use of electronic identification, authentication, and signatures.

8) Establish a European framework for the development of ethical investment funds.

9) Restructure the way energy products are taxed.

10) Ensure social cohesion in the single market.

11) Simplify accounting requirements for companies to ease the administrative burden.

12) Make public procurement more efficient, flexible, and user-friendly.[24]

 

It is apparent that the EU is on the right track towards a better Single Market in terms of adaption to new technologies and the needs for a closer co-operation between the State Members. What we must further notice and salute are the sixth and the tenth initiatives. The reinforcement of the EU infrastructure is the sine qua non ground for any further development of the EU and the Single European Market. As for the need to ensure social cohesion in the Single Market is the absolutely necessary step for EU if we want to continue having a European Union in the future.

 

The current economic crisis in the south of the Europe pointed out in the most dramatic way the problems regarding the social cohesion in Europe. This problem is by far the most dangerous problem regarding the very survival of the EU. What is comforting is that EU seems to recognise that the Single European Market is not only about the money. If we cannot have a stable social climate within Europe, we will not be able to succeed in harmonising the Single Market.

 

As an epilogue we would like to refer to the need to escape legal and financial solutions/decisions and to proceed to more practical approaches. As the European Commission admits:

Twenty years ago, the main ways to solve problems were the adoption of new legislation or infringement procedures. Today’s approach is more ambitious: the Single Market should not only be a legal construct – it should work in practice for its customers. For this to happen, the European Commission and the EU Member States need to work together at all stages of the governance cycle. The different elements within this cycle are each essential to the Single Market existing in reality as well as in law. After new legislation is adopted, its implementation and application is monitored…For those opportunities to be transformed into reality, public authorities need to be connected with each other across borders so that they can work together.[25]

 

Ultimately, no matter what EU will try to do, it is wholly in the hands of the State Members to actualise it through their active and practical co-operation with each-other and with the EU.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

 

  1. Canoy, Marcel, Liddle, Roger and Smith, Peter, The Single Market: Yesterday and Tomorrow, Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA), European Commission, 2012.

 

  1. EFTA BULLETIN, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA AND THE SINGLE MARKET, 20 YEARS ON, edited by Tore Gronningsaeter, Brussels, KHinze Ltd, 2012.

 

  1. EUFocus, The EU’s Single Market at 20, published by the Delegation of the European Union to the United States, Washington, DC, 2012.

 

  1. Monti, Marios, A NEW STRATEGY FOR THE SINGLE MARKET, Report to the President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, 2010.

 

  1. Single Market Observatory (SMO), Findings, Obstacles to the European Single Market, Status: July 2012A, European Economic and Social Committee, published by ‘Visits and Publications’, Brussels, 2012.

 

  1. THE MAASTRICHT TREATY, Maastricht, 1992.

 

  1. 20 Years of the European Single Market, Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Office, Belgium, 2012.

 

 

INTERNET RESOURCES

 

  1. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/3_2_1_en.htm , accessed at 30/04/2013, European Parliament Fact Sheets.
  2. http://europa.eu/abc/12lessons/lesson_6/index_en.htm , accessed at 30/04/2013, EUROPA, The Single Market, accessed at 30/04/2013.
  3. http://www.ecb.int/press/key/date/2013/html/sp130319.en.html , Opening remarks at the conference ‘Post-trade harmonisation and the integration of financial markets: a joint effort’, Speech by Mario Draghi, President of the ECB,

Frankfurt am Main, 19 March 2013, accessed at 30/04/2013.

  1. http://www.ecb.int/press/key/date/2013/html/sp130319_1.en.html , Closing remarks at the ECB/EU Commission conference on “Post-trade harmonisation and financial integration in Europe”, Speech by Yves Mersch, Member of the Executive Board of the ECB,

Frankfurt am Main, 19 March 2013, accessed at 30/04/2013.

  1. http://www.civitas.org.uk/eufacts/FSECON/EC1.htm , CIVITS, EU FACTS, The Single Market, accessed at 30/04/2013.
  2. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/factsheets/3_1_0_en.htm ,
European Parliament Fact Sheets, Principles and general completion of the internal market, accessed at 30/04/2013.

 

14.  http://circa.europa.eu/irc/opoce/fact_sheets/info/data/market/principles/article_7187_en.htm , European Parliament, Principles and general completion of the internal market, accessed at 30/04/2013.

              

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[1] 20 Years of the European Single Market, (Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Office, Belgium 2012), p.7.

[2] Ibid, p. 7.

[3] Ibid, p. 7.

[4] See for example: EFTA BULLETIN, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA AND THE SINGLE MARKET 20 YEARS ON, edited by Tore Gronningsaeter, (Brussels, KHinze Ltd 2012).

[5] Obstacles to the European Single Market, Findings of the Single Market Observatory (SMO), Status: July 2012A, European Economic and Social Committee, (published by ‘Visits and Publications’ Brussels 2012) pp. 5-6.

[6] Marcel Canoy, Roger Liddle and Peter Smith, The Single Market: Yesterday and Tomorrow, Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA), European Commission, 2012, p. 44.

[7] Mario Monti, A NEW STRATEGY FOR THE SIGLE MARKET, At the Service of Europe’s Economy and Society, Report to the President of the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso, 9 May 2010.

[8] EFTA BULLETIN, THE EYROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA AND THE SINGLE MARKET, 20 YEARS ON, ‘From the Common Market to the Single Market Act’, edited by Tore Gronningsaeter, (Brussels, KHinze Ltd 2012), p. 6.

[9] Ibid, p. 7.

[10] Ibid, p. 8.

[11] THE MAASTRICHT TREATY, Provisions Amending the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community with a view to establishing the European Community,  Maastricht, 7 February 1992

[12] European, Economic and Social Committee (EESC), Obstacles to the European Single Market, Findings of the Single Market Observatory (SMO), Status: July 2012A, (published by ‘Visits and Publications’ Unit, European Union 2012), p. 3. Our analysis of the current obstacles towards a harmonisation of the Single Market will be mainly based on this EESC’s analysis.

[13] Ibid, pp. 10-11.

[14] Ibid, p. 13.

[15] Ibid, pp. 14-18.

[16] Ibid, p. 15.

[17] Ibid, pp. 19-22.

[18] Ibid, p. 22.

[19] Ibid, pp. 23-25.

[20] Ibid, pp. 26-27.

[21] Marcel Cannoy, Roger Liddle and Peter Smith, The Single Market: Yesterday and Tomorrow, Bureau of European Policy Advisers (BEPA) European Commission, p.2.

[22] This summary will be based on the analysis of the EUFocus: EUFocus, The EU’s Single Market at 20 A Catalyst for Jobs and Growth,( published by the Delegation of the European Union to the United States, Washington, DC July 2012).

[23] Ibid, p. 2.

[24] Ibid, p. 2.

[25] European Commission, 20 YEARS of the European Single Market, Together for new growth, Main achievements, (Luxemburg Publications Office of the European Union 2012), p. 45.