{
  "url": "https://openlegislation.uk/eu-decision-2006-400/annex/division-2/division-2.5",
  "json_url": "https://openlegislation.uk/eu-decision-2006-400/annex/division-2/division-2.5.json",
  "legislation": "eudn/2006/400",
  "legislation_title": "Commission Decision of 20 January 2006 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Decision 2004/904/EC as regards procedures for making financial corrections in the context of actions co-financed by the European Refugee Fund (notified under document number C(2006) 51/2) (Only the Czech, Dutch, English, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Swedish, Latvian, Lithuanian, Polish, Portuguese, Slovakian, Slovenian and Spanish texts are authentic) (2006/400/EC)",
  "legislation_url": "https://openlegislation.uk/eu-decision-2006-400",
  "path": "annex/division/2/division/2.5",
  "kind": "division",
  "number": "2.5",
  "heading": "Basis of assessment",
  "text": "Whenever the situation in other Member States is known, the Commission should perform (there should be) a comparison between them to ensure equal treatment in the assessment of the rates of correction.\nThe rate of correction should be applied to that part of the expenditure placed at risk. When the deficiency results from a failure by the Member State to adopt an appropriate control system, then the correction should be applied to the entire expenditure for which that control system was required. When there is reason to suppose that the deficiency is limited to that of a particular authority's or region's application of the control system adopted by the Member State, the correction should be limited to the expenditure controlled by that authority or region. When the deficiency relates for example to verification of the criteria for eligibility for a higher rate of aid, then the correction should be based on the difference between the higher and lower rate of aid.\nThe correction should normally concern the expenditure of the measure over the period being examined, for example one financial year. However, when the irregularity results from systemic deficiencies, which are evidently long-standing and affecting several years' expenditure, then the correction should concern all the expenditure declared by the Member State while the system deficiency obtained until the month in which it was remedied.\nWhen several deficiencies are found in the same system, the flat rates of correction are not cumulated, the most serious deficiency being taken as an indication of the risks presented by the control system as a whole. They are applied to the expenditure remaining after deduction of the amounts refused for individual files. In the case of the Member State's non-application of penalties prescribed by Community law, the financial correction should be the amount of the penalties not applied, together with 2 % of the remaining claims, as the non-application of penalties increases the risk that irregular claims will be submitted.",
  "extent": "E+W+S+N.I.",
  "status": null,
  "version": "current",
  "annotations": [
    {
      "type": "footnote",
      "label": "f1",
      "text": "See also section 2.3 (2 % correction)."
    }
  ],
  "outstanding_effects": [],
  "provenance": {
    "source": "legislation.gov.uk",
    "source_url": "https://www.legislation.gov.uk/eudn/2006/400/annex/division/2/division/2.5",
    "retrieved_at": "2026-11-01T15:17:34.772628+00:00"
  },
  "licence": "Open Government Licence v3.0",
  "licence_url": "https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/",
  "attribution": "Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0. Source: legislation.gov.uk, The National Archives."
}