Marianne Clayton, Maria Segura

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 22 (2023), Ausgabe 2, Seite 220 - 224

Benjamin Linke

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 22 (2023), Ausgabe 2, Seite 212 - 214

Eszter Hargita, Filip Puzder, Péter Staviczky

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 22 (2023), Ausgabe 3, Seite 242 - 266

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) was introduced in the US in August 2022, aiming to promote investments into clean energy production. The IRA provides huge amount of aid, which can have a draining effect of green investments vital for the green transition of the European economy. In response, the Commission adopted Temporary Crisis and Transition Framework (TCTF) in March 2023. As well as explaining the historical context and content of these subsidy-rules, this article makes an attempt to compare the subsidies available under the IRA and the TCTF, considering the maximum aid amount available under the regional aid guidelines. Keywords: Inflation Reduction Act; IRA; subsidy competition; incentive effect; operating aid; battery manufacturing; tax credit

Lars Mörmel

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 22 (2023), Ausgabe 3, Seite 267 - 275

Narrow-scoped special charges imposed by Member States on certain undertakings can have an effect that is as distorting on competition as tax exemptions. However, the wording of Article 107(1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) does not allow for a direct application of State aid rules in these cases; neither is it possible to treat special charges as a form of far-reaching tax exemption for unaffected undertakings. Despite its practical significance, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has failed so far to address the issue appropriately. This article critically examines the relevant case-law and calls for a methodological re-orientation. In the absence of other legal instruments to deal with the problem and in light of the potential for Member States to circumvent State aid rules through special charges, Article 107(1) TFEU should, in extension of its literal scope of application, be applied to special charges by way of analogy. This would lead to more legal clarity and certainty for both lawmakers and affected undertakings. Keywords: special charges; asymmetrical taxes; negative State aid; analogous application

Theodoros G. Iliopoulos

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 22 (2023), Ausgabe 2, Seite 188 - 192

On 8 November 2022, the Court of Justice (appellate body) published its judgment in Joined Cases C‑885/19 P and C‑898/19 P that dealt with the tax ruling that Luxembourg had granted to the group Fiat Chrysler Finance Europe. The judgment annulled the Commission’s 2015 decision that found that the granting of this tax ruling constitutes illegal State aid and required Luxembourg to recover the incompatible and unlawful aid. With this judgment, the concept of ‘selectivity’ in State aid, at least with regards to tax measures, is delineated, and it is revealed to be narrower than it seemed. The arm’s length principle does not form part of State aid law, unless national law gives a concrete expression to it, and the Commission can only rely upon the principle of non-discrimination to assess the national rules that establish and determine the application of the arm’s length principle. This is the judicial epilogue of the Fiat case and of the saga of the tax rulings – unless the exact delineation of the powers of the Commission opens a new chapter in the future.

Marianne Clayton, Maria Segura, Gaétan Roelants du Vivier

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 21 (2022), Ausgabe 2, Seite 207 - 209

Andreas Bartosch

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 21 (2022), Ausgabe 1, Seite 65 - 71

The Spanish Goodwill saga which has covered more than a decade of fluctuating litigation before the EU Courts has certainly made many of the different shades of the notion of material selectivity visible, some of which it moulded, some of which it re-affirmed. In this it will certainly go down in State aid history as a remarkable piece of jurisprudence. What it has not managed, glady so, is to end the magical mystery material selectivity surrounds itself with. And the latter is very much a blessing to our future debates and discussions.Keywords: Spanish Goodwill; material selectivity; taxMilestones Preview: this article is based on a chapter in the upcoming second edition of the book 'Milestones in State Aid Case Law' (Lexxion 2022).

Benedikt Freund, Moritz Seiler

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 21 (2022), Ausgabe 3, Seite 302 - 309

In its decision of 14 February 2019, the General Court declared that the Commission had wrongly classified the Belgian ‘excess profit exemption system’ as an aid scheme according to Article 1(d) of Regulation 2015/1589. Allowing the Commission’s appeal, the Court of Justice found that the concept of an aid scheme according to Article 1(d) of Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 also encompassed a consistent administrative practice of a Member State tax authority. As a result, even where a Member State’s tax legislation itself is in compliance with State aid rules, the Commission is now in a position to establish the existence of an aid scheme, rather than having to prosecute every case individually, if a Member State tax authority has issued a significant number of (advance) tax rulings that deviate from its compliant legislation. After a series of mixed results in tax-related State aid cases, Magnetrol represents an important win for the Commission. We anticipate that its impact will be most pronounced in Member States where a single central authority is in charge of issuing tax rulings and tax collection (centralised model of tax administration).

Benjamin Linke

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 21 (2022), Ausgabe 3, Seite 328 - 331

Jacob Kornbeck

European State Aid Law Quarterly, Jahrgang 20 (2021), Ausgabe 1, Seite 120 - 138

Five judgments handed down by the General Court (GC), in 2019-20, and by the Court of Justice, in 2021, have clarified aspects of three Commission State aid decisions regarding Spanish professional football clubs, through preferential tax rates applicable to non-profit organisations (Real Madrid, FC Barcelona, Athletic Bilbao, Atletico Osasuna) and land transactions between municipal and regional authorities and private entities (Real Madrid) and financial guarantees offered by public authorities to private entities (Hércules CF, Valencia CF, Elche CF). Not only questions of substance were clarified but also procedural ones. Two GC rulings were appealed to the Court. The specificity of sport (Article 165 TFEU) does not appear to have been instrumental in shaping any of the judgments annotated.