Poland: Rescue aid for Zaklady Chemiczne Police S.A.
On 15 December 2009, the Polish authorities notified rescue aid in the form of a loan of PLN 150.000.000 (EUR 37.500.000) in favor of Zaklady Chemiczne Police S.A.
It is a company specialized in the manufacture of basic chemicals, fertilizers, nitrogen compounds and synthetic rubber in primary forms for domestic market as well as for export.
the European Commission found the measure constitutes state aid and gave the following assessment:
"The loan in favor of Police 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 a selective advantage since it will provide Police with access to credit that would not be available to the company on the same terms in the market, given Police's financial results. Furthermore, as there is trade between the Member States in the products that the company produces, the measure may improve the competitive position of the beneficiary in relation to its competitors and consequently distorts or threatens to distort the competition and is also liable to affect trade between the Member States". (par. 10 f the letter from the EC to Poland - Brussels, 26.05.2010 C (2010) 3213)
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:
|Is there anything in the public record to suggest that evidence of the effectiveness of the proposed measure was considered during official deliberations?||Yes|
|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 of inception: 1 Jun 2010
Duration: 5 months
GTA Evaluation: Red
the letter from the EC to Poland - Brussels, 26.05.2010 C (2010) 3213 - http://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=...
WTO report on G20 Trade Measures (May to October 2010). http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news10_e/igo_04nov10_e.htm