Transposition of law
This last year the Member States had to transpose 66 new directives, which represents a large increase in their workload compared with the preparation of Scoreboard 2016 (47 directives). This situation has caused great difficulties, which are reflected in the results for most of the Member States. In general, since the transposition deficit has risen, the average delay has decreased because the significant number of recent directives counted heavily in the calculation of the delay for overdue directives.
Transposition deficit: 2% (last report: 1.1%) – Increase of a score that was already in the red zone 1 year ago and worst result ever, although not among the 10 worst increases. Romania has a transposition deficit of 27% for the directives that had to be transposed in 2016 (until 30 November) and 67% for the 9 directives with a transposition date within the 3 months before the cut-off date for calculation. This shows that Romania has great difficulties in monitoring the timely transposition of the directives. In addition, its average delay (see below) is well above the EU average.
EU average = 1.5%; Proposed target (in Single Market Act) = 0.5%
Overdue directives: 20 (last report: 12) including 5 on financial services, 4 on social policy and 3 in the environmental sector. One directive on settlement finality in payment and securities settlement systems is more than 2 years overdue.
Average delay: 7.1 months (last report: 8.5 months) – Sharp decrease but Romania is in a group of 12 Member States that are above the EU average. Most of Romania's outstanding directives (18/20) have been due for less than 12 months but it does have 1 long overdue directive (because it is still not fully notified) that increases the average delay.
EU average = 6.7 months
Compliance deficit: 0.4% (last report: 0.4%) – Stable deficit, better than both the EU average and the 0.5% proposed target (like 7 other Member States).
EU average = 0.7%; Proposed target (in Single Market Act) = 0.5%
Pending cases: 18 (2 new cases and 7 cases closed; last report: 23 pending cases) – Further reduction in the number of single market-related cases (-36% since November 2014).
(EU average = 24 cases)
Problematic sectors: Environment (7 cases = 39% of all pending cases), of which waste management (4)
Average case duration: 33.9 months for the 17 cases not yet sent to the Court (last report: 26.5 months) – Further increase. Although Romania has solved 6 cases (one of which has been ongoing for 6.5 years), the remaining cases are getting older and pushing up the average duration (one third are more than 3 years old).
(EU average = 36.9 months)
Compliance with court rulings: no case at this stage of the procedure (last report: same)
(EU average = 22.4 months)
Romania's average response time currently exceeds the 70-day benchmark in EU Pilot by less than two weeks.
Internal Market Information System
Performance – Romania continues to perform well.
- Romania has further improved its performance for 4 of 5 indicators despite the very high volume of incoming requests.
- Satisfaction with efforts made is stable on a high level.
- Speed in answering requests has improved further but remains below the EU average.
National provider: ANOFM (National Employment Agency Romania)
EURES advisers (nationally): 42
Performance: could be improved by a higher quality of information related to job vacancy transfer.
National equivalent? None
National portal in RO, EN, FR: https://edirect.e-guvernare.ro
Record for this period
- active participation in Editorial Board work
- responsive to some requests for information for the website
- promotional activities and back-linking from national websites to Your Europe
- ensure stable representation on the Editorial Board
- attend the Board meetings twice a year
- provide information, when requested, on the country applies single market rules
- raise awareness about Your Europe within national administration and among potential end users
- link national websites to Your Europe
Make an effort to:
- provide all missing information on how the country applies single market rules
Overall, Romania’s performance in 2016 was unsatisfactory. For further information and the methodology applied, please see the section on Public procurement performance.
For easier analysis, EU countries are divided into 3 groups on the basis of absolute GDP per capita and EU accession date (method used in EU postal sector study (2010–13) :
Western – Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Sweden and UK
Southern – Cyprus, Greece, Italy, Malta, Portugal and Spain
Eastern – Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia.
Prices in purchasing power parity (PPP)
Domestic prices 2012–15 (in PPP): PPP prices in Romania decreased to 0.68 PPPs in 2015.
Cross-border price developments 2012–15 (in PPP): Prices ranging from 1.03 to 1.95 PPPs.
Transit time performance D+1:
Quality of service was much lower than the national target (85%) for the reported years. The transit time performance was 34% in 2013 and 24.3% in 2015. No figures are communicated for 2012 and 2014.
Romanian performance target = 85%
For some countries, the reference figures for the previous period may differ slightly from the last Scoreboard, due to subsequent updates that they provided.
Trade in goods and services
Romania’s Trade integration in the single market for goods is above the EU average, while trade integration for services is just below the EU average. In 2014, both indicators slightly increased.
Trade in goods and services
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI)
In 2015, Romania's share of EU FDI inflows decreased, the share of outflows increased slightly. The shares of FDI stock remained unchanged.
||Share of EU FDI Flows
||Share of EU FDI Stocks
|% FDI 2015