Recital 28

(28) With the increased costs of shipping which the extension of Directive 2003/87/EC to maritime transport activities entails, there is, in the absence of a global market-based measure, a risk of evasion. Evasive port calls to ports outside of the Union and relocation of transhipment activities to ports outside of the Union will not only diminish the environmental benefits of internalising the cost of emissions from maritime transport activities but can also lead to additional emissions due to the extra distance travelled to evade the requirements of Directive 2003/87/EC. It is therefore appropriate to exclude from the definition of ‘port of call’ certain stops at non-Union ports. That exclusion should be targeted at ports in the Union’s vicinity where the risk of evasion is greatest. A limit of 300 nautical miles from a port under the jurisdiction of a Member State constitutes a proportionate response to evasive behaviour, balancing the additional burden and the risk of evasion. Moreover, the exclusion from the definition of ‘port of call’ should only apply to stops by container ships at certain non-Union ports, where the transhipment of containers accounts for most container traffic. For such shipments, the risk of evasion, in the absence of mitigating measures, also consists in port hubs being shifted to ports outside the Union, aggravating the effects of the evasion. To ensure the proportionality of the measure and that it results in equal treatment, account should be taken of measures in third countries that have an effect equivalent to Directive 2003/87/EC.

← Recital 27 · All articles · Recital 29 →

Source: EUR-Lex (Cellar) · retrieved 2026-10-14 · Text as adopted (Official Journal); later amendments are not incorporated in this text.