Poland: Rescue Aid to FLT Krasnik SA
Description
On 16 March 2010 Poland notified a rescue aid to Fabryka Łożysk Tocznych Kraśnik SA. It is a company manufacturing bearings and gear boxes. FLT Krasnik is a large enterprise as it employs 2300 workers. The company is part of a larger business group.
The Polish authorities have notified to the Commission a rescue aid in a form of a PLN 12.5 million loan (c. EUR 3.2 million). This loan is to be granted to the company by a public entity, The Industrial Development Agency (Agencja Rozwoju Przemysłu S.A., hereinafter: "ARP"), in one installment upon being approved by the Commission.
The Commission concluded that the measure contains state aid and gave the following assessment:
"The loan in favor of FLT Krasnik is provided by ARP, which is a public entity over which the State exercises control and, therefore, the loan is granted from State resources and is imputable to the State. The loan constitutes an advantage since it will provide the company with access to credit that, being in a difficult situation, it would not have been able to obtain otherwise. The loan is granted to FLT Krasnik alone; the advantage is therefore also selective. Furthermore, as there is trade between the Member States in bearing and gear boxes which the company manufactures, the measure is apt to improve the competitive position of the beneficiary in relation to its competitors in Poland and the EU, and it consequently, distorts or threatens to distort the competition and affects trade between the Member States." (par. 7 of the official letter from the EU to Poland - Brussels, 2.6.2010 C (2010) 3573).
The Commission has decided, on the basis of Article 107 (3)(c) TFEU, to consider that the State aid consisting of a loan of PLN 12.5 million to FLT Krasnik is compatible with the internal market.
A state measure in the GTA database is assessed solely in terms of the extent to which its implementation affects the extent of discrimination against foreign commercial interests. On this metric, the state aid proposed here is discriminatory.
Any Evidence-Based Deliberation:
| Question | Result |
|---|---|
| Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations? | |
| Is there any evidence that alternatives to the proposed measure were considered? | |
| Is there anything in the public record that suggests that empirical evidence informed the comparison across the alternatives available to government? | |
| Was such evidence identified? | |
| Is such evidence publicly available? | |
| Did the official decision-maker in question provide an explanation as to why a chosen measure was favoured over alternatives? | |
| Is there any evidence to suggest that potentially affected trading partners were consulted before the measures were taken? | |
| Is there any evidence that safeguards have been put in place to ensure that implementation of the initiative is transparent and non-discriminatory? | |
| Did the government state its intention to review the measure within one year of implementation? |
Date Discovered:
Implemented: Yes
Date of inception: 1 Jun 2010
Duration: 6 months
GTA Evaluation: Red
Source:
the official letter from the EU to Poland - Brussels, 2.6.2010 C (2010) 3573 - http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=...
Government Response:
- 406 reads
