----

----

I Information

Council

----

Council Conclusions on the Digitisation and Online Accessibility of Cultural Material, and Digital Preservation

(2006/C 297/01)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Considering that:

1.   WELCOMES

2.   ENDORSES

3.   RECOGNISES

4.   UNDERLINES

5.   TAKES NOTE

6.   INVITES THE MEMBERS STATES

7.   INVITES THE COMMISSION

----

(1)  The Dynamic Action Plan for the EU co-ordination of digitisation of cultural and scientific content.

(2)  Multilingual Inventory of Cultural Heritage in Europe.

----

ANNEX

PRIORITY ACTIONS AND INDICATIVE (1) TIMETABLE

A.   Activities and goals for Member States

B.   Activities and goals for the Commission

----

(1)  The suggested timetable for activities and goals represent targets for Member States and the Commission but does not have a binding character.

----

----

Resolution of the Council and the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States, meeting within the Council, on implementing the common objectives for participation by and information for young people in view of promoting their active European citizenship

(2006/C 297/02)

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GOVERNMENTS OF THE MEMBER STATES, MEETING WITHIN THE COUNCIL

whereas

noting that

EMPHASISE THAT

AGREE THAT

INVITE THE MEMBER STATES TO

NOTE THAT THE COMMISSION INTENDS TO

INVITE THE MEMBER STATES AND THE COMMISSION TO

----

(1)OJ C 168, 13.07.2002, p. 2.

(2)OJ C 295, 5.12.2003, p. 6.

(3)  7619/1/05. Conclusion 37

(4)OJ C 141, 10.06.2005, p. 5.

(5)OJ C 141, 10.06.2005, p. 3.

(6)OJ C 141, 10.06.2005, p. 1.

(7)OJ C 292, 24.11.2005, p. 5.

(8)  11957/06.

(9)  14775/05 and 9393/06.

(10)  Such as ERYICA, EURODESK and EYCA

----

ANNEX

MEASURES TO REINFORCE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMON OBJECTIVES FOR PARTICIPATION BY AND INFORMATION FOR YOUNG PEOPLE

Depending on the circumstances and priorities of each Member State, and without prejudice to the different responsibilities of the national, regional and local authorities within the Member States, the following non-exhaustive list of lines of action may be pursued:

INFORMATION

1.   Access for young people to information services

2.   Quality information

3.   Participation by young people in information activities

PARTICIPATION

1.   Participation by young people in civic life

2.   Greater participation by young people in the system of representative democracy

3.   Support for various forms of learning to participate

----

Commission

----

Euro exchange rates (1)

6 December 2006

(2006/C 297/03)

1 euro= 

----

(1)

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

----

----

Notice regarding the application of anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures in force in the Community following enlargement to include the Republic of Bulgaria and Romania and the possibility of review

(2006/C 297/04)

When enlargement takes place on 1 January 2007, all anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures in force will automatically apply to imports into the enlarged twenty-seven Member State Community. Accordingly, these measures will also apply to imports into the two new Member States (1). On enlargement, there will be a number of pending investigations initiated before 1 January 2007. Should such investigations lead to measures, these will equally apply to imports into the twenty-seven Member State Community.

The Commission gives notice that it is prepared to review anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures pursuant to Article 11 (3) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (2), Article 19 of Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 (3), and Article 23 of Regulation (EC) No 3285/94 (4) where any interested party so requests and submits evidence that the measures would have been significantly different if they were based on information including the new Member States. In this regard, it should be noted that enlargement per se, in the absence of such evidence, is not a sufficient basis for a review to be initiated. Interested parties are invited to visit the DG Trade trade defence enlargement website:

(under http://ec.europa.eu/trade/issues/respectrules/tdi_enlarg/index_en.htm) for further information and for details of a helpdesk facility.

----

(1)  The Republic of Bulgaria and Romania.

(2)  As last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2117/2005 of 21.12.2005, OJ L 340 of 23.12. 2005, p. 17.

(3)  As last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 of 8.3.2004, OJ L 77 of 13.3. 2004, p. 12.

(4)  As last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/2004 of 13.12.2004, OJ L 374 of 22.12. 2004, p. 1.

----

----

NOTICE TO IMPORTERS

Imports into the Community of products from Montenegro

(2006/C 297/05)

By a notice to importers published in Official Journal No C 14 of 20.1.2004, page 2, the Commission informed operators presenting documentary evidence of origin with a view to securing preferential treatment for all products imported from Serbia and Montenegro to take all the necessary precautions, since the release of the goods in question for free circulation may give rise to a customs debt. The notice was based on the existence of doubts that products imported from Serbia and Montenegro under the preferential arrangements were actually and properly subject to the verification of their originating status as required by Community law. The notice did not apply to Kosovo as defined by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999.

Council Regulation (EC) 1946/2005 of 14 November 2005 amending Regulation (EC) No 2007/2000 introducing exceptional trade measures for countries and territories participating in or linked to the European Union's Stabilisation and Association process, introduced, as of 1.1.2006, three separate origins in relation to the autonomous trade measures in line with the three separate customs territories: ‘Serbia’ origin, ‘Montenegro’ origin and ‘Kosovo’ origin. This distinction remains valid following the decision on the independence of Montenegro last May.

The main findings of the monitoring mission conducted by the Commission's services in Serbia and in Montenegro indicate that in Serbia the necessary elements are in place for the customs administration to properly manage and control the preferential arrangements when exporting the products to the Community as well as to other Balkan countries. In relation to Montenegro, however, some improvements are still needed concerning the legal aspects and the practice when performing controls on origin.

The conditions for a proper functioning of the preferential arrangements having thus been restored in the case of Serbia, the notice to importers concerning imports into the Community of products from Serbia and Montenegro shall be withdrawn with regard to Serbia but maintained with regard to imports into the Community of all products from Montenegro. The notice does not apply to Kosovo as defined by the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1244 of 10 June 1999.

Therefore, Community operators presenting documentary evidence of origin with a view to securing preferential treatment for all products imported from Montenegro are advised to take all the necessary precautions, since the release of the goods in question for free circulation may give rise to a customs debt.

This notice replaces the one published in Official Journal No C 14 of 20.1.2004, page 2.

----

----

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/06)

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/

----

----

STATE AID — FRANCE

State aid No C 47/2006 (ex N 648/2005) — Tax credit for the creation of video games

Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/07)

By means of the letter dated 22.11.2006 and reproduced in the authentic language on the pages following this summary, the Commission notified France of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty concerning the above-mentioned aid.

Interested parties may submit their comments on the measures in respect of which the Commission is initiating the procedure within one month of the date of publication of this summary and the following letter, to:

These comments will be communicated to France. Confidential treatment of the identity of the interested party submitting the comments may be requested in writing, stating the reasons for the request.

TEXT OF SUMMARY

1.   DESCRIPTION OF THE SCHEME

The French authorities notified the Commission of the planned tax credit for the creation of video games on 20 December 2005.

The firms eligible for the tax credit are studios developing video games, whether independent or subsidiaries of publishers. To be eligible, PC, console, mobile and online video games, educational and edutainment software, and, under certain conditions, cultural CD-ROMs must meet a number of criteria.

The first is that games must not contain pornographic or extremely violent sequences. Eligible video games must also meet one of two cultural criteria:

There is also a European cultural criterion: whether a game is European and therefore eligible for the tax credit is determined by a system of points, which are broken down by categories and awarded according to whether the job is held by an EU national. The points system is applied regardless of where the expenditure is incurred.

Eligible expenditure will include the relevant personnel costs (wages and social security), approved depreciation of assets other than buildings directly assigned to the creation of video games and other operating expenditure, which is calculated at a flat-rate 75 % of personnel expenditure.

The tax credit rate is applied to that expenditure base. The rate is 20 % of eligible expenditure. Where the amount of the tax credit for a tax year exceeds the amount of tax due, the difference is refunded to the firm. The forecast annual budget for this scheme is between EUR 30 million and EUR 60 million. The scheme is planned to run until 31 December 2008.

2.   ASSESSMENT OF THE SCHEME

This tax credit offers a selective advantage in the form of a tax reduction, which is therefore financed through state resources, to certain firms operating in the sector of the production of video games. There is trade between Member States in this sector. Accordingly, the scheme notified constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty.

The Commission first has to make sure the scheme contains no clause incompatible with the EC Treaty in an area other than state aid. It seems that only depreciation and personnel costs borne by the firm receiving the tax credit can be taken into account in the eligible costs: it is not clear whether and, if so, how account is taken of the costs of subcontractors, which may be located in other Member States. The Commission cannot therefore conclude that the measure introduces no discrimination based on the location at which costs are incurred. Nor is it clear whether EU companies' permanent establishments in France, whatever their legal status, are eligible for the tax credit.

As regards compatibility with the Community rules on state aid, the French authorities consider the derogation referred to in Article 87(3)(d) of the EC Treaty to apply to the scheme notified. To be compatible on the basis of that provision, an aid scheme must be aimed at promoting culture in a manner that is proportionate and necessary.

The Commission accepts that certain video games might constitute cultural products within the meaning of Article 87(3)(d) of the EC Treaty. This will depend on their content and therefore on the selection criteria used by the French authorities.

The first cultural criterion proposed by the French authorities is that games should adapt an existing work from Europe's cultural heritage. However, some of the video games provided by the French authorities as examples suggest that the criterion could be applied very broadly, which would not therefore offer all the necessary guarantees that the video games selected do actually adapt an existing work from Europe's cultural heritage. The concept of ‘Europe's cultural heritage’ therefore needs to be defined.

Video games are also eligible on the strength of the quality and originality of the concept and their contribution to expressing Europe's cultural diversity and creativity in the field of video games. This second cultural criterion also lends itself to a broad interpretation, which could, for example, include simulation or sports games with a questionable cultural content. The criterion of the quality and originality of the concept could, moreover, be used to select video games that are good fun rather than actually cultural.

At this stage the Commission therefore doubts that the scheme notified permits the selection solely of video games of a cultural nature and therefore serves to promote culture within the meaning of Article 87(3)(d) of the EC Treaty.

Assuming that promoting the production of video games under this aid scheme is a cultural objective within the meaning of Article 87(3)(d), it is necessary to check that the scheme's design fulfils that objective, and in particular that the instrument is appropriate, offers a sufficient incentive and is proportionate. At this stage the Commission's view is that the French authorities have not provided enough information to show that the scheme offers sufficient incentives. As for proportionality, the Commission observes that the tax credit amounts to 20 % of expenditure, which is reasonable as long as eligible costs are properly defined and only production costs actually incurred are taken into account.

However, ‘other operating expenditure’ (excluding personnel costs and depreciation) is calculated at a flat-rate 75 % of personnel expenditure. The Commission doubts that this calculation of ‘other operating expenditure’ enables the costs actually incurred by the eligible enterprises when creating video games to be determined and is therefore compatible with the Community rules on state aid.

Lastly, to be compatible, the overall benefits of the aid scheme must outweigh the resulting distortion of competition and effect on trade. By reducing the production costs of firms in this sector established in France, this tax credit is likely to strengthen their position in relation to European competitors, especially in the United Kingdom and Germany. The French authorities have provided no detailed information concerning the scheme's impact on intra-Community trade.

For all the above reasons, the Commission doubts at this stage that the scheme is compatible with the common market on the basis of Article 87(3)(d) of the EC Treaty. The Commission also doubts the scheme's compatibility on the basis of other provisions of the Treaty or secondary law.

In accordance with Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, any unlawful aid may be recovered from its beneficiary.

TEXT OF LETTER

‘Par la présente, la Commission a l'honneur d'informer la France qu'après avoir examiné les informations fournies par vos autorités sur la réforme citée en objet, elle a décidé d'ouvrir la procédure prévue à l'article 88, paragraphe 2, du traité CE.

1.   PROCÉDURE

2.   DESCRIPTION DE LA MESURE

2.1.   Contexte de la mesure

2.2.   Modalités de la mesure

a)   Entreprises et jeux vidéo éligibles

b)   Dépenses éligibles

c)   Mécanisme d'application du crédit d'impôt

3.   ÉVALUATION DE LA MESURE

3.1.   Qualification des mesures

3.2.   Compatibilité des mesures

3.2.1.   Position des autorités françaises

3.2.2.   Position de la Commission

1)   Existence d'un objectif culturel

2)   Est-ce que la mesure est conçue de façon à remplir cet objectif culturel?

3)   Est-ce que les distorsions de concurrence et les effets sur le commerce sont limités, de telle manière que le bilan global de l'aide est positif?

Conclusion

4.   CONCLUSION

Compte tenu des considérations qui précèdent, la Commission a des doutes à ce stade que la mesure en cause soit compatible avec le marché commun. Par conséquent, conformément à l'article 6 du règlement (CE) no 659/1999 du Conseil du 22 mars 1999 portant modalités d'application de l'article 93 du traité CE, la Commission invite la France, dans le cadre de la procédure prévue à l'article 88, paragraphe 2, du traité CE, à présenter ses observations et à fournir toute information utile pour l'évaluation des mesures dans un délai d'un mois à compter de la date de réception de la présente.

La Commission rappelle à la France l'effet suspensif de l'article 88, paragraphe 3, du traité CE et se réfère à l'article 14 du règlement (CE) no 659/1999 du Conseil qui prévoit que toute aide illégale pourra faire l'objet d'une récupération auprès de son bénéficiaire.

Par la présente, la Commission avise la France qu'elle informera les intéressés par la publication de la présente lettre et d'un résumé de celle-ci au Journal officiel de l'Union européenne. Elle informera également les intéressés dans les pays de l'AELE signataires de l'accord EEE par la publication d'une communication dans le supplément EEE du Journal officiel, ainsi que l'autorité de surveillance de l'AELE en leur envoyant une copie de la présente.’

----

(1)  Matra v. Commission (Aff. C-225/91), Rec. 1993, I -3203.

(2)  Voir par exemple décision de la Commission du 16 mai 2006 dans le cas no N45/2006 crédit d'impôt en faveur de la production phonographique.

(3)JO C 45 du 17.2.1996, p. 5.

----

----

STATE AID — SWEDEN

State aid No C 46/2006 (ex N 347/2006) — Relief from CO2 tax on fuels consumed in installations covered by the EU Emission Trading Scheme

Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/08)

By means of the letter dated 8.11.2006 reproduced in the authentic language on the pages following this summary, the Commission notified the Sweden of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty concerning the above-mentioned aid.

Interested parties may submit their comments on the aid measure in respect of which the Commission is initiating the procedure within one month of the date of publication of this summary and the following letter, to:

These comments will be communicated to Sweden. Confidential treatment of the identity of the interested party submitting the comments may be requested in writing, stating the reasons for the request.

SUMMARY

1.   DESCRIPTION

Community minimum taxation levels are set out for the consumption of energy products and electricity in the energy taxation directive (2003/96/EC). In Sweden, two taxes are counted towards the minimum taxation levels of the directive: an energy tax and a carbon dioxide tax. Different national tax levels are applied, one higher for households and service- and district heating sectors (100 % energy tax and 100 % carbon dioxide tax) and one lower for fuel used in the manufacturing process in industrial activities and fuel used for heat production in combined heat and power plants (0 energy tax and 21 % carbon dioxide tax). A further tax reduction is granted to manufacturing companies in the energy-intensive industry if the value of the fossil fuel they use in the production exceeds 0,8 % of the sales value of the goods produced. The tax reductions for fuel used by the manufacturing industry and for fuel used in combined heat and power plants have previously been subject to State aid approvals. In accordance with the Community Emission trading directive 2003/87/EC, the EU Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) entered into force on 1 January 2005. The Emission trading directive covers certain energy activities and certain industrial production, and obliges operators of installations covered by the EU ETS (ETS installations) to surrender allowances for their greenhouse gas emissions. The allowances are either allocated to the operator for free at the beginning of each trading period or bought by the operator in auction and/or on the market. In the first trading period that started in January 2005 and lasts until December 2007, Sweden chose to allocate all the emission allowances for free.

The notified measure consists in tax reliefs for fuel used in ETS installations. Different types of ETS installations in the manufacturing sector and the energy sector are proposed to benefit from the following different levels of tax relief:

The notified measure would lead to a situation where fuels in the first of the three abovementioned categories would not be subject to any energy tax within the meaning of the Energy taxation directive. The level of taxation on fuels used for heat production in non ultra efficient CHP plants and on fuels used in district heating plants would however respect the minimum taxation levels set out in the Energy taxation directive.

The objective of the notified measure is to avoid the double regulation that, in the opinion of the Swedish authorities, has occurred due to the introduction of the EU ETS. Sweden thus wishes to contribute to a cost effective climate policy for the EU as a whole. The overall principle of Swedish climate policy is to regulate the reduction of CO2 emissions from ETS installations only through the EU ETS, and to progressively abolish the CO2 tax. The notified measure constitutes the first step of this abolishment, and the remaining CO2 tax exemption on fuel consumed in ETS installations will be put in place gradually, when the State budget so allows. Beneficiaries of the scheme are the enterprises, of any size and in any region, that have activities in ETS installations. The estimated number of beneficiaries is 101-500. The budget foreseen is SEK 358 million (ca. EUR 38 million) annually and SEK 2258 million (ca. EUR 239 million) overall. The duration of the notified scheme is from 1 January 2007 until 31 December 2011.

2.   PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT AND THE COMMISSION'S DOUBTS

2.1   Presence of aid under Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty

The notified tax relief constitutes an economic advantage to the beneficiaries, which relieves them of costs normally borne from their operating budgets. Since it seems doubtful in the light of the definition of the ‘nature and general scheme of the system’ (1) that the tax reduction would be justified on this basis, and as the relevant criteria in Article 87(1) seem to be fulfilled, the Commission at this stage considers that the measure must be qualified as State aid.

2.2   Compatibility of the aid with the common market

The Commission doubts that the exemptions proposed by the Swedish authorities can be approved on the basis of the Environmental Aid Guidelines. Point 51.1(b) is not applicable, since the tax paid by the firms under the proposed scheme would be below the minimum levels of the Energy Tax Directive. Neither do the requirements of point 51.1(a) seem to be fulfilled, since the undertakings benefiting from the aid would not enter into voluntary commitments or agreements.

The Commission furthermore doubts that the proposed exemptions could be approved based on Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty with reference to the alleged need to eliminate the double regulation. The Commission has at this stage doubts concerning what impact the existence of a double regulation could have on its analysis, and whether it could justify an exemption from the CO2 tax under State aid rules. In particular, the Commission has the following concerns:

The Commission furthermore has to assess to which extent the double regulation distorts competition and whether this alleged distortion is to the detriment of Swedish companies in particular, as the Swedish authorities seem to claim. The Commission needs to explore further the possibility that companies may incur a higher cost than the CO2 tax for their pollution in cases where they have to buy allowances and at the same time pay the CO2 tax for the same emissions. On the other hand, in a situation where the allowances have been allocated for free, and there is no tax on the emissions, the ‘polluter-pays’ principle might not be followed. When assessing the overall financial burden on participating companies compared to that of companies not participating in the EU ETS, it must be taken into account that the Member States fix the amount of total emission quotas and had to allocate at least 95 % of the allowances to the companies for free in the first trading period.

The Commission underlines that the objective of the EU ETS is precisely to limit CO2 emissions by creating for the participating companies an economic incentive to reduce emissions stemming from the stringency of the overall emission cap. In order to assess whether there might be a potential distortion of competition due to concomitant CO2 taxation, the Commission would need to analyse in detail the financial implications of the application of the EU ETS in Sweden. In this context, the Commission would moreover need further information on mechanisms that might be envisaged by the Swedish authorities to establish the existence and determine, at the level of each individual company, the amount of a possible extra burden on top of the CO2 tax, and ensure that only companies that actually suffer, at least partially from such burden, are relived from it through the notified tax exemptions.

The Commission furthermore has to assess whether the proposed tax reduction is compatible with Article 17 of the Energy Tax Directive, and therefore asks Sweden to complete the information already provided.

TEXT OF LETTER

‘Kommissionen önskar underrätta Sverige om att den, efter att ha granskat uppgifter som tillhandahållits av Era myndigheter om det ovannämnda stödet, har beslutat inleda det förfarande som anges i artikel 88.2 i EG-fördraget.

1.   FÖRFARANDE

2   DETALJERAD BESKRIVNING AV ÅTGÄRDEN

2.1   Bakgrund till den anmälda stödordningen

2.2   Den anmälda stödordningen

2.3   Syftet med den anmälda stödordningen

2.4   Rättslig grund

2.5   Stödmottagare

2.6   Budget och varaktighet

3.   PRELIMINÄR BEDÖMNING

3.1   Förekomst av statligt stöd enligt artikel 87.1 i EG-fördraget

3.2   Stödets förenlighet med den gemensamma marknaden

3.2.1   Tillämpliga bestämmelser i miljöstödsriktlinjerna

3.2.2   Tillämpliga bestämmelser i energiskattedirektivet

3.2.3   Argument som anförts av de svenska myndigheterna

3.2.4   Kommissionens tvivel

Förenlighet med miljöstödsriktlinjerna

Förenlighet med den gemensamma marknaden enligt artikel 87.3 c i EG-fördraget på grundval av en ekonomisk bedömning av det påstådda behovet av att avskaffa dubbla styrmedel

Bedömning av stödordningen mot bakgrund av energiskattedirektivet

3.3   Slutsats

4.   BESLUT

Kommissionen underrättar härmed Sverige om att den efter att ha undersökt den information som de svenska myndigheterna lämnat i ärendet har beslutat att inleda ett formellt granskningsförfarande enligt artikel 88.2 i EG-fördraget.

Av ovan anförda skäl uppmanar kommissionen, i enlighet med det förfarande som anges i artikel 88.2 i EG-fördraget, Sverige att inom en månad för mottagandet av denna skrivelse inkomma med synpunkter och tillhandahålla alla upplysningar som kan bidra till bedömningen av stödet. Kommissionen uppmanar Era myndigheter att omedelbart översända en kopia av denna skrivelse till den potentiella stödmottagaren.

Kommissionen påminner Sverige om att artikel 88.3 i EG-fördraget har uppskjutande verkan och hänvisar till artikel 14 i rådets förordning (EG) nr 659/1999, som föreskriver att allt olagligt stöd kan återkrävas från mottagaren.

Kommissionen meddelar Sverige att den kommer att underrätta alla berörda parter genom att offentliggöra denna skrivelse och en sammanfattning av den i Europeiska unionens officiella tidning. Kommissionen kommer även att underrätta berörda parter i de Eftaländer som är avtalsslutande parter i EES-avtalet genom att offentliggöra ett tillkännagivande i EES-supplementet till Europeiska unionens officiella tidning, samt Eftas övervakningsmyndighet genom att skicka en kopia av denna skrivelse. De berörda parterna kommer att uppmanas att inkomma med synpunkter inom en månad från dagen för offentliggörandet.’

----

(1)  Established by the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice, confirmed e.g. in the judgement in Case C-88/03 Portuguese Republic v Commission (judgement of 6 September 2006), and adopted by the Commission in its Notice of 10 December 1998 on the application of the State aid rules to measures relating to direct business taxation, OJ C 384, of 10.12.1998, p. 3

(2)EUT L 283, 31.10.2003, s. 51.

(3)EUT L 275, 25.10.2003, s. 32.

(4)  Under den andra perioden inom EU:s system för utsläppshandel, som inleds 2008, kommer medlemsstaterna att åläggas att dela ut minst 90 % av utsläppsrätterna avgiftsfritt.

(5)  Detta innefattar en årlig ökning med 2 % på grund av inflationen.

(6)  Senast bekräftad genom EG-domstolens dom i mål C-88/03, Portugal mot kommissionen (dom av den 6 september 2006).

(7)EGT C 384, 16.2.1998, s. 3.

(8)EGT C 37, 3.2.2001, s. 3.

----

----

STATE AID — GREECE

State aid No C 44/2006 (ex N 614/2005) — Regional aid to the textile, clothing and leather sector in Greece

Invitation to submit comments pursuant to Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/09)

By means of the letter dated 24.10.2006 reproduced in the authentic language on the pages following this summary, the Commission notified Greece of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty concerning the above-mentioned measure.

Interested parties may submit their comments on the measure in respect of which the Commission is initiating the procedure within one month of the date of publication of this summary and the following letter, to:

These comments will be communicated to Greece. Confidential treatment of the identity of the interested party submitting the comments may be requested in writing, stating the reasons for the request.

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF THE MEASURE

On December 2005, Greece notified the above mentioned aid scheme indented to help the Greek textile and clothing industry, who is facing a crisis following the progressive abolition of quotas and the total liberalisation of imports since 2005.

Greece qualifies in its entirety for regional aid under Article 87(3)(a) EC until 31.12.2006. The aid will take the form of direct grants. Part of the notified aid will be granted to initial investment projects. Part of the notified aid measures constitutes operating aid. This is true, in particular, for the support provided for the dismantling and relocation of existing equipment, for acquisition of software related to the quality control of the manufacturing process, for the creation of data bases, as well as for networking, advertising campaigns and marketing.

Parts of the notified measure fall under several block exemption regulations, in particular the SME BER, the training BER and the R&D for SMEs BER. Beneficiaries will only be SMEs according to the EC definition. The scheme will respect the current regional aid map for Greece for 2000-2006 and the aid ceilings in force. It will expire on 31.12.2006. The total budget will amount to some EUR 150 million.

ASSESSMENT

The Commission considers that the aid scheme constitutes state aid. It involves state resources, it affords an advantage to the beneficiaries, it is selective and has an effect on trade.

The Commission has examined the scheme in the light of Article 87 of the EC Treaty, and in particular, on the basis of the ‘Commission Guidelines on national regional aid’ (RAG), the SME and the Employment exemption Regulations.

The Commission notes that part of the notified aid measures constitute operating aid, since they aim at reducing a firm's current expenses. In view of the lack of sufficient justification of the specific handicaps that the aid measure intends to address, the Commission needs more information in order to assess the compatibility of the operating aid with the common market.

The scheme is targeted at a particular sector of the Greek economy, i.e. textile, clothing and leather. The Commission is of the opinion that aid confined to one area of activity may have a major impact on competition in the relevant market, and its effects on regional development are likely to be too limited.

The Commission has doubts whether such an aid scheme confined to one sector of the economy forms an integral part of a regional development strategy. Greece did not explain why the existing comprehensive horizontal aid regime may not be sufficient to trigger a process of regional development. Moreover, there is strong competition in the textile, clothing and leather industry and extensive trade between Member States. Thus, the approval of such a scheme in Greece would seriously threaten to distort competition.

In view of the above, the Commission, after a first preliminary assessment of the measure, has doubts whether, and if yes to which extent, the scheme can be considered compatible with the common market. The Commission wishes to collect information from interested parties.

Consequently, the Commission has decided to initiate the formal investigation procedure according to Articles 6 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, to verify the compatibility of the State aid measure with the common market.

TEXT OF LETTER

‘Η Επιτροπή επιθυμεί να ενημερώσει την Ελλάδα ότι, αφού εξέτασε τις πληροφορίες που έχει στη διάθεσή της και που υποβλήθηκαν από τις αρχές της χώρας σας σχετικά με το προαναφερόμενο μέτρο, αποφάσισε να κινήσει την επίσημη διαδικασία που προβλέπεται στο άρθρο 88 παράγραφος 2 της Συνθήκης ΕΚ.

1.   ΔΙΑΔΙΚΑΣΙΑ

2.   ΠΕΡΙΓΡΑΦΗ ΤΟΥ ΜΕΤΡΟΥ ΕΝΙΣΧΥΣΗΣ

Στόχος του καθεστώτος

Νομική βάση του καθεστώτος

Μορφές της ενίσχυσης

Επιλέξιμα σχέδια και δαπάνες

Αποδέκτες

Ένταση των ενισχύσεων

Άλλοι όροι

Διάρκεια και προϋπολογισμός του καθεστώτος

Σώρευση ενισχύσεων

3.   ΑΞΙΟΛΟΓΗΣΗ

Νομιμότητα

Χαρακτήρας του καθεστώτος ως κρατικής ενίσχυσης

Συμβιβάσιμο του μέτρου ενίσχυσης

4.   ΑΠΟΦΑΣΗ

----

(1)  Οι κωδικοί NACE: ΔB.17.00 — Παραγωγή κλωστοϋφαντουργικών ινών, ΔB.18.00 — Κατασκευή ειδών ενδυμασίας· κατεργασία και βαφή γουναρικών· ΔΓ.19.00 — Κατεργασία και δέρψη δέρματος· κατασκευή ειδών ταξιδίου (αποσκευών), τσαντών, ειδών σελοποιίας, ειδών σαγματοποιίας και υποδημάτων, 743, 748.9.

(2)  ΦΕΚ 168/A/1994.

(3)  ΦΕΚ 114/A/1995.

(4)  ΦΕΚ 92/A/1997.

(5)  A/30736, A.Π. Φ6410/Α/705.

(6)  Κανονισμός (EΚ) αριθ. 364/2004 της 25ης Φεβρουαρίου 2004 για την τροποποίηση του κανονισμού (EΚ) αριθ. 70/2001 όσον αφορά την επέκταση του πεδίου εφαρμογής του ώστε να συμπεριλαμβάνει τις ενισχύσεις για έρευνα και ανάπτυξη, ΕΕ L 63 της 28.2.2004, σ. 22.

(7)  Α/34500, Α.Π. Φ6410/Α/5286.

(8)ΕΕ C 244 της 1.10.2004, σ. 2.

(9)  A/30736, A.Π. Φ6410/Α/705.

(10)  Ο ελληνικός χάρτης περιφερειακών ενισχύσεων για την περίοδο 2000-2006 εγκρίθηκε από την Επιτροπή με την επιστολή N469/1999 SG(2000) D/100661 της 21.1.2000 όπως τροποποιήθηκε με την απόφαση της Επιτροπής N349/02 της 17.2.2002.

(11)  Α/34500, Α.Π. Φ6410/Α/5286.

(12)ΕΕ C 74 της 10.3.1998, σ. 9.

(13)  Κανονισμός (EΚ) αριθ. 70/2001 της Επιτροπής, της 12ης Ιανουαρίου 2001, σχετικά με την εφαρμογή των άρθρων 87 και 88 της συνθήκης ΕΚ στις κρατικές ενισχύσεις προς μικρές και μεσαίες επιχειρήσεις, ΕΕ L 10 της 13.1.2001, σ. 33.

(14)  Κανονισμός (EΚ) αριθ. 2204/2002 της Επιτροπής, της 12ης Δεκεμβρίου 2002, σχετικά με την εφαρμογή των άρθρων 87 και 88 της συνθήκης ΕΚ στις κρατικές ενισχύσεις στην απασχόληση, ΕΕ L 337 της 13.12.2002, σ. 3.

(15)  Βλ. επίσης τμήμα 2 των ΚΕΠΧ.

----

----

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/10)

----

(1)   With the exception of the shipbuilding sector and of other sectors subject to special rules in regulations and directives governing all state aid within the sector.

----

----

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/11)

----

(1)  This scheme will be adapted according to the rules applicable after review of Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4504 — SFR/TELE 2 France)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/12)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

----

----

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case COMP/M.4501 — HAL/Egeria/NB)

Candidate case for simplified procedure

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/13)

----

(1)OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

(2)OJ C 56, 5.3.2005, p. 32.

----

----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4242 — Thermo Electron/Fisher Scientific)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/14)

On 9 November 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----

----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4271 — Daikin/OYL)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/15)

On 2 October 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----

----

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.4428 — AXA/Gerflor)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2006/C 297/16)

On 15 November 2006, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

----

EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AREA

EFTA Surveillance Authority

----

Information communicated by the EFTA States regarding State aid granted under the Act referred to in point 1 f of Annex XV of the EEA Agreement (Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises)

(2006/C 297/17)

----

EFTA Court

----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 3 May 2006

in Case E-3/05

EFTA Surveillance Authority v The Kingdom of Norway

(Failure of a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — free movement of workers — social security for migrant workers with family members residing in an EEA State other than the State of employment — regional residence requirement for family benefits — Article 73 of Regulation EEC 1408/71 — Article 7(2) of Regulation EEC 1612/68 — discrimination — justification on grounds of promoting sustainable settlement)

(2006/C 297/18)

In Case E-3/05, EFTA Surveillance Authority v the Kingdom of Norway –APPLICATION for a declaration that the Kingdom of Norway has failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 73 of the Act referred to at point 1 of Annex VI to the EEA Agreement (Council Regulation EEC No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto; alternatively by maintaining the same requirement, failed to fulfil its obligations pursuant to Article 7(2) of the Act referred to at Point 2 of Annex V (Council Regulation EEC No 1612/68 of 15 October 1968 on freedom of movement for workers within the Community), as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto, the Court, composed of: Carl Baudenbacher, President, Henrik Bull and Thorgeir Örlygsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 3 May 2006, the operative part of which is as follows:

----

----

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 29 June 2006

in Joined Cases E-5/05, E-6/05, E-7/05, E-8/05 and E-9/05

EFTA Surveillance Authority v the Principality of Liechtenstein

(Failure by a Contracting Party to fulfil its obligations — Commission Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 on competition in the markets for electronic communications networks and services — Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electronic communications networks and associated facilities (Access Directive) — Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications networks and services (Authorisation Directive) — Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) — Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services (Universal Service Directive))

(2006/C 297/19)

In Joined Cases E-5/05, E-6/05, E-7/05, E-8/05 and E-9/05, EFTA Surveillance Authority v the Principality of Liechtenstein — APPLICATIONS for a declaration that, by failing to adopt, within the time-limit prescribed, or to notify the EFTA Surveillance Authority of the adoption of, the measures necessary to implement the Acts referred to at respectively point 13a of Annex XIV and points 5cj, 5ck, 5cl and 5cm of Annex XI to the EEA Agreement, i.e. Commission Directive 2002/77/EC of 16 September 2002 and Directives 2002/19/EC, 2002/20/EC, 2002/21/EC and 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002, as adapted to the EEA Agreement by Protocol 1 thereto and the sectoral adaptations contained in Annex XIV and XI to that Agreement, the Principality of Liechtenstein has failed to fulfil its obligations under those Acts and under Article 7 of the EEA Agreement, the Court, composed of: Carl Baudenbacher, President, Thorgeir Örlygsson and Henrik Bull (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 29 June 2006, the operative part of which is as follows:

----

Corrigenda

----

Corrigendum to State aid N. 625/06 — Italy

(Official Journal of the European Union C 291 of 30 November 2006)

(2006/C 297/20)

On page 16, in the second line, ‘Reference number of aid’:

for:

‘N. 625/06’,

read:

‘N 625/06’.

----

----

Corrigendum to State aid N. 51/06 — Italy

(Official Journal of the European Union C 291 of 30 November 2006)

(2006/C 297/21)

On page 17, in the second line, ‘Reference number of aid’:

for:

‘N. 51/06’,

read:

‘NN 51/06’.

----

----

UK-Cardiff: operation of scheduled air service

Corrigendum to the invitation to tender issued by the United Kingdom under Article 4(1)(d) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 in respect of the operation of a scheduled air service between Cardiff and RAF Valley, Anglesey.

(‘Official Journal of the European Union’ C 248 of 14.10.2006)

(‘Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union’ No S 197 of 14.10.2006, open procedure, 208709-2006)

(2006/C 297/22)

Head of Procurement, Procurement Branch 6, RNR Division, Room 2-045, National Assembly for Wales, Cathays Park, Cardiff CF10 3NQ, United Kingdom.

for:

9.   Deadline for submission of bids: One month after the date of publication of this notice.

read:

9.   Deadline for submission of bids: 

----