1 / 18

Barbara Brandtner Head of Unit, DG COMP H4 Enforcement and Procedural Reform

Learn about the objectives & scope of the modernisation procedural reform in state aid enforcement. Explore the impact of complaint handling improvements & market information tools. Discover the role of Member States in the process.

wdella
Download Presentation

Barbara Brandtner Head of Unit, DG COMP H4 Enforcement and Procedural Reform

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. State Aid ModernisationProcedural Reform Barbara Brandtner Head of Unit, DG COMP H4 Enforcement and Procedural Reform

  2. OBJECTIVES OF THE MODERNISATION PROCEDURAL REFORM SAM COMMUNICATION Focus on most significant cases Support growth-enhancing objectives Simplify treatment of measures with little impact Better-prioritised enforcement Well substantiated decisions Streamlined rules and faster decisions Respect business-relevant timelines

  3. SCOPE OF THE PROCEDURAL REFORM Focus on most significant cases Simplify treatment of measures with little impact Well substantiated decisions Respect business-relevant timelines MARKET INFORMATION TOOLS/SECTOR INQUIRIES COMPLAINTS-HANDLING

  4. HANDLING OF COMPLAINTS

  5. COMPLAINTS CURRENT SHORTCOMINGS Very few requirements to put the Commission under the obligation to investigate complaints Duty of the Commission to investigate all complaints irrespective of their significance • + = - High number of complaints/ Long duration - Insufficient focus on the most significant distortions - Handling of infringement cases COMPARE

  6. ADMISSIBILITY TESTS COMPLAINTS OBJECTIVES NEW FILTERS • Definition of the concept of complaints • COMPULSORY COMPLAINTS FORM • (Form defined in the Implementing Regulation) • Improve the quality of complaints • LEGITIMATEINTEREST TO ACT • (Interested parties within meaning Art. 1(h) PR) • What happens with the information which does not pass the admissibility tests ? • Kept as MARKET INFORMATION • Could be usedforEX-OFFICIO

  7. COMPLAINTS A TRANSPARENT AND FASTER PROCEDURE • Submission of complaints Priority complaints Non-priority complaints Within 2 months : Priority settings Preliminary assessment Decision no aid, compatible aid or opening within 12 months No reply from the complainant Reply from the complainant NEW COMPLAINT DEEMED WITHDRAWN Decision on no aid, compatible aid or opening NEW GROUNDS FOR REJECTION OF COMPLAINTS BY COLLEGE DECISION TO BE EXPLORED

  8. COMPLAINTS IMPACT • Commission will keep exclusive competence to assess State aid • Reduction of the number of complaints Focus on significant distortions of competition • Reduction of workload for the Member States, the third parties and the Commission

  9. MARKET INFORMATION TOOLS(MIT)

  10. MIT WHY DO WE NEED MIT? • Need information from the market to assess: • the design and impact of a measure (e.g. crowding out) • market benchmarks not available to MS (e.g. IRR, risk profiling) • the situation in other MS/projects subsidised or not • Best Practices are not enough • NEED TIMELY, RELIABLE AND FACTUALLY CORRECT INFORMATION FROM THE MARKET

  11. MIT HOW WILL MIT BE USED? FOR WHICH TYPE OF CASES ? Mostly in complex individual cases requiring an in-depth assessment to assess (for instance): • normal market practice (e.g. State aid in guarantees/loans) • market failures and /or incentive effect benchmarking • WHAT KIND OF INFORMATION ? • ONLY readily available information such as : • factual market data and company data (e.g. market shares, profits) • facts-based analysis (e.g. overcapacity, market growth rate)

  12. MIT DESIGN Addressees:Any undertaking, association of undertakings or other Member States Types of requests Sanctions • Incorrect/ misleading answer • No obligation to reply • Simple requests • Incorrect/ misleading/ incomplete answer • Late answer • Commission decisions • Sanctions for undertakings asked to reply • No sanctions for Member States and public authorities given duty of sincere cooperation

  13. MIT MIT AND THE ROLE OF MS • BILATERAL NATURE OF THE PROCEDURE MAINTAINED • MS and the Commission will still be the only parties • No creation of third party ‘rights’ • MEMBER STATES WILL BE DULY INVOLVED • Member States will be informed of the scope and content of the information requests • Member States will have the right to comment on the replies received

  14. MIT MIT AFTER THE OPENING OF THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION MS rights of defence guaranteed Confidentiality ensured Duration reduced Workload limited

  15. SI SECTORAL INFORMATION • Rationale: • Reinforced horizontal information to better understand economic impact of Stateaid • Could be useful in certain sectors such as airlines, railways, ports, risk capital • HOW TO COLLECT SECTORAL INFORMATION ? • Extended use of existingpowers • + • Legal basis for sector inquiries (SI)

  16. SI SECTOR INQUIRIES • Initial market analysis using existing tools • Solid indications of State aid issues in several MS needed before launching a SI • Publicly available information, not the scope of SI • Sector inquiries = proportionate to market distortion • Once a SI is launched, MIT will be used

  17. IMPACT Reduce administrative burden for MS • More transparent, accurate and swift information flows • Share market information available with Member States Better motivated decisions and equality of treatment Reduce duration and free up resources

  18. Thank you for your attention !

More Related