Short Reads

European Commission issues new rules for State aid to ports, airports, culture and the outermost regions

European Commission issues new rules for State aid to ports, airports

European Commission issues new rules for State aid to ports, airports, culture and the outermost regions

01.06.2017 NL law

On 17 May 2017, the European Commission amended the General Block Exemption Regulation (GBER) in order to enable more public investment in ports, airports, culture and the outermost regions. These amendments aim to stimulate job creation and growth while preserving competition.

Public investments qualify as State aid if state resources are used to give an undertaking or a certain group of undertakings preferential economic treatment with a result that the competition is or may be distorted and that the investment is likely to affect the trade between Member States. As a rule, Member States can only implement State aid after approval from the Commission. Therefore, Member States must notify the Commission of intended State aid. The GBER exempts certain public investments which qualify as State aid from the notification requirements.

The scope of the GBER has now been extended by the Commission regarding the following public investments. Member States can:

  • invest in regional airports handling up to up to 3 million passengers per year. According to the Commission, this will facilitate public investment in more than 420 airports across the EU. These airports are responsible for 13% of air traffic. In addition, Member States can cover operating costs of small airports handling up to 200,000 passengers per year.
  • make public investments of up to EUR 150 million in sea ports and up to EUR 50 million in inland ports.
  • support culture projects and multi-purpose sports arenas with higher amounts of State aid. The Member States can now invest EUR 150 million in culture projects (instead of EUR 100 million) and EUR 75 million per undertaking per year (instead of EUR 50 million). They can also invest EUR 30 million or the total costs exceeding EUR 100 million per project regarding multi-purpose sports arenas (instead of EUR 15 million or the total costs exceeding EUR 50 million per project).
  • compensate companies more for the additional costs they face when operating in the EU's outermost regions taking account of the specific challenges these companies are facing.

With these new changes, the Commission is taking an additional step towards reaching the goal of the Juncker Commission to apply the State aid rules in an effective and efficient way by focusing on State aid that leads to significant distortions of competition.

This article was published in the Competition Law Newsletter of June 2017. Other articles in this newsletter:

  1. European Commission accepts Amazon's commitments in e-book probe
  2. Recent enforcement action emphasizes the importance of compliance with procedural EU merger rules
  3. European Commission publishes final report on e-commerce sector inquiry 
  4. District Court of Amsterdam rules on the validity of the assignments and prescription of CDC's claims for damage in sodium chlorate cartel
  5. Belgian Competition Authority fines undertakings for bid-rigging in railway tender

Team

Related news

06.05.2021 EU law
Abuse of economic dependence: lessons drawn from the first judgments

Short Reads - On 22 August 2020, the ban on abuse of economic dependence was implemented in Belgium (Article IV.2/1 of the Code of Economic Law). Now that almost a year has passed and the first judgments have been rendered, we assess what first lessons can be drawn from these judgments. The rulings show that the ban is regularly relied upon in court and has lowered the hurdle for plaintiffs to make their case.

Read more

01.04.2021 NL law
Slovak Telekom: ECJ on essentials of the ‘essential facilities’ doctrine

Short Reads - Only dominant companies with a “genuinely tight grip” on the market can be forced to grant rivals access to their infrastructure. According to the ECJ’s rulings in Slovak Telekom and Deutsche Telekom, it is only in this scenario that the question of indispensability of the access for rivals comes into play. In the assessment of practices other than access refusal, indispensability may be indicative of a potential abuse of a dominant position, but is not a required condition.

Read more

01.04.2021 NL law
Pay-for-delay saga ends with nothing new; but pharma quest continues

Short Reads - On 25 March 2021, the ECJ ended the Lundbeck pay-for-delay saga by dismissing the appeals from Lundbeck and five generic manufacturers against a European Commission ‘pay-for-delay’ decision. Following its recent Paroxetine judgment, the ECJ found that Lundbeck’s process patents did not preclude generic companies being viewed as potential competitors, particularly since the patents did not represent an insurmountable barrier to entry. In addition, the patent settlement agreements constituted infringements "by object".

Read more