----

(2004/C 65 E/155)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2390/03

by Mogens Camre (UEN) to the Commission

(21 July 2003)

Subject:   Government aid to German workers taking up jobs in Denmark

On 20 March I put a question to the Commission (E-1225/03 (1)) concerning German government aid to workers taking up jobs in other Member States. The Commission promised to investigate whether the German subsidies contravened State aid rules.

The Danish Employment Minister, Claus Hjort Frederiksen, has since put a similar question to his German colleague, the Minister for Economics and Labour, Wolfgang Clement. The German Minister replied that the government subsidy of some DKK 60 an hour was solely intended for unemployed German workers who obtained a job with a German firm.

This, however, is little comfort for the trade unions and small firms in southern Jutland as this arrangement does not preclude the possibility of German firms recruiting long-term unemployed German workers and subsequently sending them to Denmark to carry out work for their German employers in competition with Danish firms. Owing to the German government subsidy, therefore, Danish firms have to pay a relatively higher wage than their German counterparts, which severely distorts competition and can hardly be consistent with EU State aid rules.

Will the Commission, as promised in its answer to question E-1225/03, provide the information it has received from the German authorities on this matter and investigate to what extent it is possible for German firms to send German workers to Denmark to carry out specific jobs subsidised by the German government?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(15 September 2003)

The Commission refers to its former reply to the Honourable Member's Written Question E-1225/03.

As promised in its answer the Commission requested information from the German Authorities to this respect on 8 May 2003. The German Authorities replied on 12 June 2003 that they were unaware of any such aid scheme, but asked for additional information in order to be able to exclude any potential misuse of aid schemes meant for a different purpose. This reply was provided to the Honourable Member by letter of the Director of Directorate G ‘State Aid I’ of the Directorate General for Competition on 8 July 2003. This letter also respectfully asked the Honourable Member to provide the Commission with any additional information that might be at his disposal in order to allow the Commission to further investigate the factual situation.

In this context, the Commission wishes to remind the Honourable Member that a number of employment policy measures do not constitute State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty because they constitute aid to individuals that does not favour certain undertakings or the production of certain goods, or because they do not affect trade between Member States, or because they are general measures to promote employment which do not distort or threaten to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods. Such general measures are therefore unaffected by State aid rules. This is also the case for measures which are deemed not to meet all the criteria of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty and therefore do not fall under the notification requirement of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty by virtue of Commission Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de minimis aid (2).

As regards the additional information given by the Honourable Member in his current written question, the Commission will again request the German Authorities to provide information on the specific measures addressed by the Honourable Member and will assess them under State aid rules, in particular 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 (3). If an infringement were to be found, the Commission will take the necessary measures to bring it to an end.

The Commission would point out to the Honourable Member that any specific information he can supply regarding the precise facts at stake could considerably speed up its investigations.

----

(1)OJ C 58 E, 6.3.2004, p. 51.

(2)OJ L 10, 13.1.2001.

(3)OJ L 337, 13.12.2002 (corrigendum), OJ L 349, 24.12.2002.

----