Another evaluation cycle is on-going (legal obligation, Article 2 of Regulation (EU) 2019/1155 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 amending Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code).

Scope:

Evaluation of the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 810/2009 of the European Parliament and Council establishing a Community Code on Visas (Visa Code)

Evaluation findings:

2014 evaluation preceding the 2018 Commission proposal: The overarching objective of the Visa Code was to ensure that the common visa policy would become truly common and applied in the same manner by all Member States in all locations, by means of one set of legal provisions and one set of operational instructions. Additionally, the common rules should contribute to facilitating legitimate travel, particularly for frequent and regular travellers, and for tackling irregular immigration.

The 2014 evaluation found that generally, compared to the situation before its adoption, the Visa Code clarified and simplified the legal framework for the common visa policy. The Code has to a considerable extent modernised and standardised visa procedures and, if correctly implemented, allows addressing certain problems highlighted in the evaluation. However, the implementation of the legal provisions has not been optimal. This can largely be explained by the fact that most elements of flexibility are formulated as options (‘may’-clauses) rather than mandatory rules.

The provisions of the Visa Code that aimed to preserve the security of external orders have proved to be consistent and effective. But the provisions intended to offer procedural facilitations to bona fide frequent travellers, and which could also ease the administrative burden for Member States’ consulates, have not had the expected impact. The result was unsatisfactory, not just for legitimate travellers, but also for the Member States and the EU as a whole, in terms of missed economic benefits. Another finding is that the Visa Code applying universally and its provisions apply to all persons who are nationals of countries subject to the visa requirement, it would be necessary to adapt certain provisions to match local circumstances.

Estimated savings and benefits

2014 evaluation preceding the 2018 Commission proposal: Although the data supplied by Member States have been useful to assess the implementation of certain elements of the Visa Code, the lack of disaggregation made it difficult to assess the impact of certain provisions. On the other hand, the evaluation was to a large extent based on a qualitative assessment and there was no quantification of the savings and benefits introduced by the Visa Code. The evaluation, carried out before the new guidelines on better regulation adopted by the Commission in 2015, did not include this in its design.

Which objective(s) does the Commission pursue?

The proposed updates aimed at faster and more flexible procedures, define harmonised rules for multiple entry visas to better prevent "visa shopping" and to reduce costs and save time for Member States and frequent travellers, allow for short-term visas at external borders to facilitate short-term tourism, and provide additional resources to reinforce security.

New elements have been added that were advanced in the Commission's September 2017 Communication on the Delivery of the European Agenda on Migration 5 and in its consultations. These included the need for sufficient financial resources to support Member States' visa processing, clear rules on the issuing of multiple entry visas with a long period of validity and the leverage role that visa policy can exert in the EU's readmission policy.

Estimated savings and benefits

The 2018 Commission proposal aimed to ensure that travellers will benefit from easier, more flexible, and faster procedures through:

• Better advance planning: Travellers to be able to submit their visa applications up to six months ahead of the planned trip, instead of the current three months.

• Electronic application forms: Applicants to have the possibility to fill in and sign the application form electronically.

• Quicker decisions: Commission proposed to reduce the deadline for taking decisions on visa applications from 15 to 10 days.

The Commission also proposed the possibility to introduce temporary schemes for the issuance of single-entry visas directly at the external land or sea borders. The Commission proposed this under strict conditions in order to minimise any potential irregular migration or security risks. Such schemes would have contributed to promoting short-term tourism and would have benefitted the EU’s economy (see Legal act section for further details).

Regular travellers with positive visa histories no longer had to apply for a new visa every time they travel to the EU. They would benefit from multiple-entry visas allowing for repeated visits to the EU. Issuing more multiple-entry visas intended to lead to time and cost savings for both travellers and consulates and increasing the competitiveness of the EU travel and tourism industry by facilitating spontaneous travel to the EU. Travellers’ fulfilment of entry conditions was to be verified thoroughly and repeatedly in all cases. Generally, the security of the visa procedure was to be reinforced.

The moderate increase in the cost of applying for a Schengen visa aimed to ensure that Member States:

• have sufficient financial resources to maintain their consular coverage worldwide;

• upgrade their IT equipment and software and provide faster and user friendly procedures for visa applicants;

• improve their capacity to detect potential security and irregular migration risks during the visa application procedures, including by reinforcing consular staff to speed up the application process.

The rules were also to better address challenges linked to irregular migration. The European Union has engaged with countries of origin to improve cooperation on return and readmission but EU Member States are still experiencing difficulties in returning irregular migrants.

Once the visa rules were in place, stricter conditions could have been established for processing visa applications for certain categories of nationals from countries who do not cooperate satisfactorily on return and readmission. These included conditions on processing time, visa fees, the issuance of multiple-entry visas or the supporting documents required. A more restrictive application of the visa rules would not call into question the right to submit an application for a visa or to be granted a visa.

Given the lack of available data, there was no comprehensive quantification and monetisation of the benefits to be brought by the new proposal. Firstly, many benefits could not be monetised, notably those related to the increase of security. Secondly, there was little quantitiative evidence available on costs and benefits for visa applicants/holders and no statistics on the costs of visa processing or on budgetary resources available to Member States' foreign ministries / visa authorities for this purpose. Thirdly, few Member States have shared their estimates of the costs of visa processing, but calculation modes varied. As a result evidence remained fragmentary. Finally, there was no data available to quantify the benefits in revenue from increased tourism and travel due to more multi-entry visas with long validity issued. The additional annual revenue in visa fees for Member States was however estimated to be EUR 205 million.

Outcome of Legislative Procedure

The revised Visa Code entered into force in August 2019 and became applicable from 2 February 2020.

Estimated savings and benefits

The new rules on the issuance of multiple entry visas with a long validity are expected to produce savings for both the Member States/consulates and visa applicants as illustrated by the consultations in the preparation of the Commission proposal. However, due to the absence of data, the savings cannot not be quantified further. The increase of the visa fee from EUR 60 to 80 will contribute to increasing Member States capacity to cope with the ever increasing number of visa applications.

The results of the ongoing evaluation in 2021 are not yet avaialable.