PROCEDURE. (1) Following pre-notification contacts (1), on 13 August 2020, Portugal notified to the Commission its plans to grant rescue aid in favour of XXXX. Portugal amended and completed the notification on 14 August 2020.
PROCEDURE further discussed during a meeting between the Latvian authorities and the Commission services held on 6 May 2010.
PROCEDURE. (1) By decision of 18 December 2008 the European Commis sion approved in case N 615/08 emergency State aid from Germany to BayernLB in form of a risk shield of EUR 4,8 billion and a capital injection of EUR 10 billion on the basis of Article 107(3)(b) TFEU for a period of six months or until the submission of a credible and substantiated restruc turing plan for the bank (1). a výhledově vysoké náklady na financování vzhledem k ukončení platnosti záruk spolkové země Korutany a ukončení finanční podpory ze strany původního vlastníka
(1) Commission Decision of 18 December 2008 in case N 615/08
(2) In the same month, BayernLB's subsidiary Hypo Group Alpe Adria (HGAA) received EUR 700 million from BayernLB following large write-downs and losses. In addi tion, HGAA received EUR 900 million in Tier 1 Partizipa tionskapital (1) from the Republic of Austria on the basis of the Austrian emergency bank support scheme (2).
(3) On 29 April 2009, Germany notified a restructuring plan for BayernLB (including HGAA) to the Commission. At the same date Austria provided a viability plan for HGAA.
(4) In its decision of 12 May 2009 in case N 254/09 (3) the Commission opened the formal investigation procedure, raising doubts about the compatibility of the restructuring aid to BayernLB with the internal market, in particular whether the restructuring plan was apt to restore the viabi lity of BayernLB (“the opening decision”). In the same decision, the Commission questioned whether HGAA was fundamentally sound and it expressed doubts regar ding the compatibility with Article 87(3)(b) of the EC Treaty, now Article 107(3)(b) TFEU, of the aid granted to HGAA by Austria.
(5) Austria notified additional aid measures on 18 December 2009, including a temporary asset guarantee under the Austrian scheme, a capital injection and a provision of liquidity, see below point 19.
(6) In its decision of 23 December 2009 in cases C 16/09 and N 698/09 (4) (“the rescue decision”) the Commission extended the procedure in relation to the following measures in favour of HGAA which it at the same time found temporarily compatible with the internal market on the basis of Article 107(3)(b) TFEU until the submission of a credible restructuring plan and its assessment by the Commission, but at most for a period of six months: a temporary guarantee of EUR 100 million, a recapitalisation of EUR 200 million by Land Carinthia, a further recapitalisation for a maximum amount of EUR 350 million and the liq...
PROCEDURE. (1) By decision of 2 June 2010 (4), the Commission temporarily authorised a recapitalisation of Educational Building Society (hereinafter “EBS”) as emergency aid subject to the condition that Irish authorities would submit an in-depth restructuring plan for EBS before 30 June 2010.
(2) On 31 May 2010, the Irish authorities submitted a restructuring plan for EBS.
(3) The Commission requested further information regarding the restructuring plan on 21 June and 9 July 2010. The Irish authorities responded on 9, 13 and 14 July, 26 August and 2 September 2010.
(4) The Commission services met with the Irish authorities and EBS on 31 August 2010.
PROCEDURE. (1) By letter dated 15 april 2010 Den Norske Forleggerforening, the Norwegian Publishers association (‘NPa’), sent a complaint alleging that illegal State aid has been granted to the Nasjonal digital læringsarena (‘NDLa’). The letter was received and registered by the authority on 16 april 2010 (Event No 553723). Following a telephone conference on 15 July 2011 the complainant provided additional information by email on the same day (Event No 608593).
PROCEDURE. (1) On 13 July 2009, the Commission approved aid for the financing of the planning phase of the Fehmarn Belt Fixed Link project (‘Fehmarn Belt’) (3).
(2) Following a prenotification phase, by letter dated 22 December 2014, the Danish authorities notified to the Commission pursuant to Article 108(3) of the Treaty the financing model of the Fehmarn Belt. On 13 February 2015, the Commission services sent a request for information to Denmark, which replied on 24 and 27 February, as well as 11 March 2015. The Commission services sent another request for information on 25 March 2015 and Denmark replied on 8 April 2015. On 13 April 2015 and 8 May 2015 the Commission services sent additional requests for information to Denmark. The latter submitted additional information on 19 and 27 May 2015, as well as on 8 July 2015.
(3) On 5 June 2014, 5 September 2014, 26 November 2014, 19 January 2015, and 22 April 2015, the Commission received five complaints (4) alleging that Denmark had granted unlawful and incompatible State aid for the planning, construction and operation of the Fehmarn Belt in favour of Femern A/S and A/S Femern Landanlæg (5). Non-confidential versions of the complaints were received on 23 July 2014, 22 December 2014, 18 February 2015 and 30 April 2015 respectively. The Commission services sent requests for information to Denmark on 25 July 2014, 19 September 2014, 8 January 2015, 13 February 2015, 2 and 25 March 2015, 13 April 2015 and 8 May 2015. Denmark submitted additional information on 3 September 2014, 16 October 2014, 20, 24 and 27 February 2015, 11 March 2015, 8 and 21 April 2015. The Commis- sion received additional information from the complainants on 25 September 2014, 4 February 2015, 22 May 2015 and 13 July 2015.
(4) On 23 July 2015, the Commission decided not to raise objections to the measures granted by Denmark to A/S Femern Lan- danlaeg and Femern A/S (‘Construction Decision’) (6). The operative part of that decision is divided in two parts. In the first part, the Commission concluded that the measures granted to A/S Femern Landanlæg for the planning, construction and operation of the road and rail hinterland connections in Denmark do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU. In the second part, the Commission concluded that, even if the measures granted to Femern A/S for the plan- ning, construction and operation of the Fixed Link did constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU, they are c...
PROCEDURE. (1) On 14 October 2019, the Commission adopted a decision (hereinafter ‘the Opening Decision’) (1) to initiate the formal investigation procedure in relation to a regional investment aid measure (hereinafter ‘the measure’ or ‘the notified measure’) in favour of Samsung SDI Magyarország Zrt (hereinafter ‘Samsung SDI’ or ‘the beneficiary’).
PROCEDURE. (1) On 16 October 2013, the Commission initiated a formal investigation procedure to verify whether the passive interest and royalty income tax exemption (2) in Gibraltar’s Income Tax Act 2010 (‘ITA 2010’) selectively favours certain companies, in breach of Union State aid rules (the decision taken to initiate that procedure is referred to in this Decision as ‘the First Opening Decision’).
PROCEDURE. (1) On 19 September 2011, the authority received a complaint, dated 13 September 2011 (Event No 608967), concerning the alleged subsidising by the Icelandic State and the City of Reykjavík (‘the City’) of conference services and restaurant/catering services in the Harpa Concert Hall and Conference Centre (‘Harpa’) (3).
(2) By letter dated 14 October 2011, the authority requested additional information from the Icelandic authorities (Event No 609736). By a letter dated 30 November 2011 (Event No 617042), the Icelandic authorities replied to the request and provided the authority with the relevant information.
PROCEDURE. (1) On 2 October 2008, the Commission approved emergency rescue aid for Hypo Real Estate (HRE) amounting to EUR 35 billion, registered under Case number N 44/08.
(2) On 1 April 2009 Germany notified a restructuring plan for HRE, registered under Case number N 196/09. The plan discloses the assumption that Germany will overall inject EUR 10 billion capital into HRE.
(3) Germany notified by letter dated 17 April 2009 a capital injection of EUR 60 million, having acquired on 30 March 2009 20 million new shares at their nominal value. By this letter, Germany also notified a prolongation of guar antees amounting to EUR 52 billion provided by the “Special Fund Financial Market Stabilisation” (SoFFin). These measures were registered under Case number N 196/09.
(4) On 7 May 2009, the Commission initiated a formal investigation procedure (1).
(5) On