09.10.2024 - NordAN has recently submitted two contributions to the EU's TRIS notification system regarding proposed amendments to alcohol legislation in Sweden and Latvia, highlighting critical concerns. At the heart of these contributions is our concern over Sweden's amendment, which we believe hinders existing alcohol policies aimed at protecting public health, and our support for Latvia's amendments intended to strengthen alcohol policy and improve public health.
Sweden: concerns over proposed amendments to alcohol act
In our response to Sweden's draft amendments to the Alcohol Act, notified under TRIS 2024/0388/SE, we addressed several serious issues, including potential conflicts with EU principles and the functioning of Sweden's alcohol monopoly. The proposed amendment allowing on-farm sales of alcoholic beverages introduces an additional retail channel that risks weakening the integrity of Systembolaget, the Swedish state-run alcohol monopoly. Systembolaget serves as a cornerstone of Sweden's public health strategy by controlling the sale of alcohol, thereby limiting consumption and mitigating the associated harms. Expanding alcohol availability through on-farm sales undermines this core public health measure.
From the perspective of EU law, such amendments pose a potential conflict with Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Article 34 prohibits measures that restrict trade between Member States, unless such measures can be justified on specific grounds, such as public health. The proposed restriction allowing on-farm sales only for Swedish producers may discriminate against alcohol producers from other EU Member States, thus creating an unjustified barrier to intra-EU trade. Although Article 36 permits exceptions for the protection of public health, such measures must be necessary and proportionate. By expanding alcohol availability in a way that makes it more accessible, this proposal contradicts the principle of reducing alcohol-related harm—a core public health objective.
Furthermore, the amendments could potentially conflict with Article 37 TFEU, which requires state monopolies to operate in a non-discriminatory manner. If Systembolaget's effectiveness is compromised by introducing competing points of sale, this could lead to challenges regarding the monopoly's compliance with EU law, thereby undermining Sweden's long-standing efforts to manage alcohol-related harm through a regulated monopoly system. Any changes that weaken Systembolaget’s exclusive rights risk opening the door to further deregulation, which would be difficult to reverse and could lead to significant public health consequences.
Additionally, we raised concerns about potential conflicts with EU state aid rules as outlined in Articles 107-109 TFEU. The proposed privilege allowing on-farm sales provides certain producers with an economic advantage that could be considered selective aid. Such advantages might distort competition, as they are not available under normal market conditions to all producers, potentially creating unfair barriers for producers from other Member States.
Latvia: supporting amendments to strengthen alcohol policy
In our contribution to Latvia's proposed amendments to the Handling of Alcoholic Beverages Law, we focused on supporting the Latvian government's efforts to introduce mandatory labelling and other restrictions to address high levels of alcohol consumption. Industry representatives argued that these labelling requirements, such as ingredient listings and health warnings, could conflict with existing EU regulations, particularly Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, which exempts alcoholic beverages from mandatory ingredient and nutrition labelling. However, we underscored that under Article 36 TFEU, Member States have the right to implement measures necessary to protect public health, provided they are proportionate and do not constitute a means of arbitrary discrimination.
Latvia's alarming rates of alcohol consumption justify immediate action, rather than waiting for EU-wide harmonization. The proposed on-pack labelling requirements are not only proportionate but necessary, as they provide all consumers, including those without access to digital platforms, with critical health information at the point of purchase. Precedents set by other EU countries, such as France and Ireland, demonstrate that national labelling requirements are both permissible and practicable within the EU framework. These countries have successfully implemented measures to ensure that consumers receive adequate information about the risks associated with alcohol consumption, which aligns with Latvia's proposed approach.
Another point of contention raised by the industry was that the labelling requirements and other proposed restrictions could create barriers to trade within the EU's single market, leading to increased costs and logistical challenges, particularly for smaller producers. However, we argued that the public health benefits of these measures far outweigh the potential trade impacts. The restrictions are designed to be proportionate and non-discriminatory, applying to all alcoholic beverages regardless of origin. Furthermore, a three-year transition period has been proposed to allow producers ample time to adjust to the new labelling processes, thereby mitigating potential disruptions.
Our contributions to both Sweden and Latvia's proposed amendments reflect NordAN's firm stance on prioritizing public health within the context of EU regulations. While recognizing the importance of adhering to EU principles regarding the free movement of goods, services, and competition, we also emphasize that Member States must retain the flexibility to implement national measures that address their unique public health challenges. By maintaining strict control over alcohol availability and ensuring that consumers are well-informed about the risks associated with alcohol consumption, both Sweden and Latvia can protect public health while remaining compliant with EU obligations.
NordAN remains committed to advocating for evidence-based policies that prioritize the well-being of citizens over commercial interests. We believe that the proposed amendments in both countries require careful reconsideration to ensure that public health objectives are not compromised in favor of deregulation or industry convenience. As always, our goal is to work collaboratively with national governments and EU institutions to ensure that alcohol policies align with public health imperatives while respecting EU law.
Read further: