(European Economy. Supplement B. Business and Consumer Survey Results. October 2006.
Second EU survey on workers’ remittances from the EU to third countries
[200 KB] (pdf file 200 kb)
The second report summarises Member States' replies to a questionnaire on workers’ remittances from the EU to third countries sent in May 2005. Compared to the first survey, the second one extended the scope by requesting a geographical breakdown of flows channelled to Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean, Latin America and the Caribbean. It shows that remittances from the EU to third countries increased from €6.2 billion in 2000 to almost €9 billion in 2004. This was mainly driven by flows to developing countries which increased from €4.3 billion in 2000 to €6.6 billion in 2004. A few major corridors were identified, notably from Germany and France to the Mediterranean region, from Spain to Latin America and from Germany to Eastern Europe. However, these results might not entirely reflect actual remittance flows due to problems of underreporting and misreporting.
First EU survey on workers’ remittances from the EU to third countries
[160 KB] (pdf file 160 kb)
The report provides a summary of replies given by Member States and Acceding Countries to a questionnaire on workers’ remittances from the EU to third countries sent in February 2004. This first survey asked for basic information about the importance of workers’ remittances from the EU to third countries, in particular about the amounts involved, the country of destination, the main transfer channels, the transfer costs and regulatory conditions. In addition, information was requested about how remittances to non-EU countries are recorded in the balance of payments statistics and about initiatives already undertaken to facilitate remittances to third countries.
The report shows the amounts of remittances in 2003 of which a large part went to developing countries. There is a wide range of transfer channels with associated costs varying considerably between Member States and for different transfer channels. A number of caveats apply to the data, in particular a probable underestimation due to unaccounted remittances going through informal channels or being insufficiently recorded.