# Jornal Oficial C 158/2009

| | ISSN 1725-2482
  doi:10.3000/17252482.C_2009.158.por |
| --- | --- |
| Jornal Oficial
  da União Europeia | C 158 |
| | |
| Edição em língua portuguesa | Comunicações e Informações | 52.o ano11 de Julho de 2009 |

ISSN 1725-2482

doi:10.3000/17252482.C_2009.158.por

Jornal Oficial

da União Europeia

C 158

Edição em língua portuguesa

Comunicações e Informações

52.o ano11 de Julho de 2009

---

| Número de informação | Índice | Página |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Comunicações |
| | COMUNICAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES E DOS ÓRGÃOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA |
| | Comissão |
| 2009/C 158/01 | Não oposição a uma concentração notificada (Processo COMP/M.5403 — Lufthansa/BMI) (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Número de informação

Índice

Página

II   Comunicações

COMUNICAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES E DOS ÓRGÃOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA

Comissão

2009/C 158/01

Não oposição a uma concentração notificada (Processo COMP/M.5403 — Lufthansa/BMI) (
  1
  )

1

1

| | IV   Informações |
| --- | --- |
| | INFORMAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES E DOS ÓRGÃOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA |
| | Comissão |
| 2009/C 158/02 | Taxas de câmbio do euro | 2 |
| | INFORMAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DOS ESTADOS-MEMBROS |
| 2009/C 158/03 | Lista anotada dos mercados regulamentados e disposições nacionais de transposição dos requisitos relevantes contidos na MIFID (Directiva 2004/39/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho) | 3 |
| 2009/C 158/04 | Comunicação da Comissão nos termos do artigo 16.o, n.o 4, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1008/2008 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativo a regras comuns de exploração dos serviços aéreos na Comunidade — Obrigações de serviço público no que respeita a serviços aéreos regulares (
  1
  ) | 9 |

IV   Informações

INFORMAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES E DOS ÓRGÃOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA

Comissão

2009/C 158/02

Taxas de câmbio do euro

2

INFORMAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DOS ESTADOS-MEMBROS

2009/C 158/03

Lista anotada dos mercados regulamentados e disposições nacionais de transposição dos requisitos relevantes contidos na MIFID (Directiva 2004/39/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho)

3

2009/C 158/04

Comunicação da Comissão nos termos do artigo 16.o, n.o 4, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1008/2008 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativo a regras comuns de exploração dos serviços aéreos na Comunidade — Obrigações de serviço público no que respeita a serviços aéreos regulares (
  1
  )

o

o

o

1

9

| | V   Avisos |
| --- | --- |
| | PROCEDIMENTOS ADMINISTRATIVOS |
| | Comissão |
| 2009/C 158/05 | Convite à apresentação de propostas — EACEA/11/2009 — Apoio estrutural a organizações de investigação e grupos de reflexão sobre as políticas públicas europeias e a organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu — Programa Europa para os Cidadãos, Acção 2, Medidas 1 e 2 — 2010 | 10 |
| | PROCEDIMENTOS RELATIVOS À EXECUÇÃO DA POLÍTICA DE CONCORRÊNCIA |
| | Comissão |
| 2009/C 158/06 | Auxílio Estatal — Países Baixos — Auxílio Estatal C 10/2009 (ex N 138/2009) — ING — Convite à apresentação de observações nos termos do n.o 2 do artigo 88.o do Tratado CE (
  1
  ) | 13 |
| | OUTROS ACTOS |
| | Comissão |
| 2009/C 158/07 | Publicação de um pedido de registo em conformidade com o n.o 2 do artigo 8.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 509/2006 do Conselho, relativo às especialidades tradicionais garantidas dos produtos agrícolas e dos géneros alimentícios | 24 |

V   Avisos

PROCEDIMENTOS ADMINISTRATIVOS

Comissão

2009/C 158/05

Convite à apresentação de propostas — EACEA/11/2009 — Apoio estrutural a organizações de investigação e grupos de reflexão sobre as políticas públicas europeias e a organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu — Programa Europa para os Cidadãos, Acção 2, Medidas 1 e 2 — 2010

10

PROCEDIMENTOS RELATIVOS À EXECUÇÃO DA POLÍTICA DE CONCORRÊNCIA

Comissão

2009/C 158/06

Auxílio Estatal — Países Baixos — Auxílio Estatal C 10/2009 (ex N 138/2009) — ING — Convite à apresentação de observações nos termos do n.o 2 do artigo 88.o do Tratado CE (
  1
  )

o

o

1

13

OUTROS ACTOS

Comissão

2009/C 158/07

Publicação de um pedido de registo em conformidade com o n.o 2 do artigo 8.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 509/2006 do Conselho, relativo às especialidades tradicionais garantidas dos produtos agrícolas e dos géneros alimentícios

o

o

o

24

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE |

---

(1)   Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE

1

| PT | |
| --- | --- |

PT

---

II Comunicações

COMUNICAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES E DOS ÓRGÃOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA

Comissão

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/1

---

Não oposição a uma concentração notificada

(Processo COMP/M.5403 — Lufthansa/BMI)

(Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE)

2009/C 158/01

Em 14 de Maio de 2009, a Comissão decidiu não se opor à concentração notificada e declará-la compatível com o mercado comum. Esta decisão baseia-se no n.o 1, alínea b), do artigo 6.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 139/2004 do Conselho. O texto integral da decisão apenas está disponível na língua inglês e será tornado público após terem sido suprimidos quaisquer segredos comerciais que possa conter. Poderá ser consultado:

| — | no sítio Web Concorrência da Comissão, na secção consagrada à política da concorrência, (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). Este sítio permite aceder às decisões respeitantes às operações de concentração a partir da denominação da empresa, do número do processo, da data e do sector de actividade, |
| --- | --- |

—

no sítio Web Concorrência da Comissão, na secção consagrada à política da concorrência, (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). Este sítio permite aceder às decisões respeitantes às operações de concentração a partir da denominação da empresa, do número do processo, da data e do sector de actividade,

| — | em formato electrónico, no sítio EUR-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm), que proporciona o acesso em linha ao direito comunitário, através do número do documento 32009M5403. |
| --- | --- |

—

em formato electrónico, no sítio EUR-Lex (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm), que proporciona o acesso em linha ao direito comunitário, através do número do documento 32009M5403.

---

IV Informações

INFORMAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DAS INSTITUIÇÕES E DOS ÓRGÃOS DA UNIÃO EUROPEIA

Comissão

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/2

---

Taxas de câmbio do euro (1)

10 de Julho de 2009

2009/C 158/02

1 euro =

| | Moeda | Taxas de câmbio |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | dólar americano | 1,3901 |
| JPY | iene | 128,21 |
| DKK | coroa dinamarquesa | 7,4466 |
| GBP | libra esterlina | 0,85800 |
| SEK | coroa sueca | 11,0022 |
| CHF | franco suíço | 1,5140 |
| ISK | coroa islandesa | |
| NOK | coroa norueguesa | 9,0840 |
| BGN | lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | coroa checa | 26,030 |
| EEK | coroa estoniana | 15,6466 |
| HUF | forint | 277,50 |
| LTL | litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | lats | 0,6993 |
| PLN | zloti | 4,3740 |
| RON | leu | 4,2160 |
| TRY | lira turca | 2,1636 |
| AUD | dólar australiano | 1,7940 |
| CAD | dólar canadiano | 1,6212 |
| HKD | dólar de Hong Kong | 10,7736 |
| NZD | dólar neozelandês | 2,2250 |
| SGD | dólar de Singapura | 2,0331 |
| KRW | won sul-coreano | 1 786,89 |
| ZAR | rand | 11,4023 |
| CNY | yuan-renminbi chinês | 9,4983 |
| HRK | kuna croata | 7,3315 |
| IDR | rupia indonésia | 14 174,11 |
| MYR | ringgit malaio | 4,9731 |
| PHP | peso filipino | 67,026 |
| RUB | rublo russo | 45,4005 |
| THB | baht tailandês | 47,382 |
| BRL | real brasileiro | 2,8084 |
| MXN | peso mexicano | 19,0303 |
| INR | rupia indiana | 67,8230 |

Moeda

Taxas de câmbio

USD

dólar americano

1,3901

JPY

iene

128,21

DKK

coroa dinamarquesa

7,4466

GBP

libra esterlina

0,85800

SEK

coroa sueca

11,0022

CHF

franco suíço

1,5140

ISK

coroa islandesa

NOK

coroa norueguesa

9,0840

BGN

lev

1,9558

CZK

coroa checa

26,030

EEK

coroa estoniana

15,6466

HUF

forint

277,50

LTL

litas

3,4528

LVL

lats

0,6993

PLN

zloti

4,3740

RON

leu

4,2160

TRY

lira turca

2,1636

AUD

dólar australiano

1,7940

CAD

dólar canadiano

1,6212

HKD

dólar de Hong Kong

10,7736

NZD

dólar neozelandês

2,2250

SGD

dólar de Singapura

2,0331

KRW

won sul-coreano

1 786,89

ZAR

rand

11,4023

CNY

yuan-renminbi chinês

9,4983

HRK

kuna croata

7,3315

IDR

rupia indonésia

14 174,11

MYR

ringgit malaio

4,9731

PHP

peso filipino

67,026

RUB

rublo russo

45,4005

THB

baht tailandês

47,382

BRL

real brasileiro

2,8084

MXN

peso mexicano

19,0303

INR

rupia indiana

67,8230

---

(1)  Fonte: Taxas de câmbio de referência publicadas pelo Banco Central Europeu.

---

INFORMAÇÕES ORIUNDAS DOS ESTADOS-MEMBROS

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/3

---

Lista anotada dos mercados regulamentados e disposições nacionais de transposição dos requisitos relevantes contidos na MIFID (Directiva 2004/39/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho)

2009/C 158/03

O artigo 47.o da Directiva relativa aos mercados de instrumentos financeiros (Directiva 2004/39/CE, JO L 145 de 30.4.2004) autoriza os Estados-Membros a conferirem o estatuto de «mercado regulamentado» aos mercados estabelecidos no seu território e que estejam em conformidade com a sua regulamentação.

O n.o 1, ponto 14, do artigo 4.o da Directiva 2004/39/CE define «mercado regulamentado» como um sistema multilateral, operado e/ou gerido por um operador de mercado, que permite o encontro ou facilita o encontro de múltiplos interesses de compra e venda de instrumentos financeiros manifestados por terceiros — dentro desse sistema e de acordo com as suas regras não discricionárias — por forma a que tal resulte num contrato relativo a instrumentos financeiros admitidos à negociação de acordo com as suas regras e/ou sistemas e que esteja autorizado e funcione de forma regular e em conformidade com o disposto no Título III da Directiva 2004/39/CE.

O artigo 47o da Directiva 2004/39/CE estabelece que os Estados-Membros manterão uma lista actualizada dos mercados regulamentados por si autorizados. Essa informação deverá ser transmitida aos demais Estados-Membros e à Comissão Europeia. Segundo o mesmo artigo (artigo 47o da Directiva 2004/39/CE), a Comissão deverá publicar anualmente no Jornal Oficial da União Europeia a lista dos mercados regulamentados que lhe foram notificados. A presente lista foi elaborada para dar cumprimento a essa obrigação.

A lista que se segue apresenta a designação de cada mercado reconhecido pelas autoridades nacionais competentes como satisfazendo a definição de «mercado regulamentado». Refere, além disso, as entidades responsáveis pelo funcionamento desses mercados e as autoridades competentes responsáveis pela elaboração ou aprovação das normas pelas quais se regem.

Na sequência da diminuição das barreiras à entrada e da especialização em segmentos de negociação, a lista de «mercados regulamentados» está sujeita a uma evolução mais rápida do que ao abrigo da Directiva 93/22/CEE relativa aos serviços de investimento. O artigo 47o da Directiva relativa aos mercados de instrumentos financeiros requer igualmente que a Comissão Europeia publique a lista dos mercados regulamentados no seu sítio web e que a actualize regularmente. Por esse motivo, a Comissão Europeia manterá, para além da publicação anual de uma lista no Jornal Oficial, uma versão actualizada da mesma no seu sítio web oficial [http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/securities/isd/mifid_en.htm]. Essa lista será regularmente actualizada, com base nas informações transmitidas pelas autoridades nacionais. Solicita-se aos Estados-Membros que continuem a notificar à Comissão os eventuais aditamentos ou supressões da lista dos mercados regulamentados, relativamente aos quais constituem o Estado-Membro de origem.

| País | Designação dos mercados regulamentados | Entidade gestora | Autoridade competente para a designação e supervisão do mercado |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Áustria | 1. | Amtlicher Handel (mercado oficial) |

País

Designação dos mercados regulamentados

Entidade gestora

Autoridade competente para a designação e supervisão do mercado

Áustria

1.

Amtlicher Handel (mercado oficial)

| 2. | Geregelter Freiverkehr (mercado semi-oficial) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Geregelter Freiverkehr (mercado semi-oficial)

| 1.-2. | Wiener Börse AG |
| --- | --- |

1.-2.

Wiener Börse AG

| 1.-2. | Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (autoridade para os mercados financeiros) |
| --- | --- |

1.-2.

Finanzmarktaufsichtsbehörde (autoridade para os mercados financeiros)

Bélgica

| 1. | a) | Mercado «Euronext Brussels» |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

a)

Mercado «Euronext Brussels»

| b) | Mercado de instrumentos derivados da «Euronext Brussels» |
| --- | --- |

b)

Mercado de instrumentos derivados da «Euronext Brussels»

| 1. | Euronext Brussels SA/NV |
| --- | --- |

1.

Euronext Brussels SA/NV

| 1. | a) | Designação: Ministro das Finanças sob parecer da Comissão bancária, financeira e de seguros (CBFA)
  Erkenning: Minister van Financiën op advies van de Commissie voor het Bank-, Financie- en Assurantiewezen (CBFA) |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

a)

Designação: Ministro das Finanças sob parecer da Comissão bancária, financeira e de seguros (CBFA)

Erkenning: Minister van Financiën op advies van de Commissie voor het Bank-, Financie- en Assurantiewezen (CBFA)

| b) | Supervisão: CBFA
  Toezicht: CBFA |
| --- | --- |

b)

Supervisão: CBFA

Toezicht: CBFA

| 2. | Mercado regulamentado de balcão das obrigações lineares, dos títulos divisíveis e dos certificados de tesouraria |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado regulamentado de balcão das obrigações lineares, dos títulos divisíveis e dos certificados de tesouraria

| 2. | Fonds des rentes |
| --- | --- |

2.

Fonds des rentes

| 2. | a) | Designação: Legislador (n.o 2 do artigo 144o da Lei de 2.8.2002)
  Erkenning: Regelgever (art. 144, §2 van de wet van 2.8.2002). |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

a)

Designação: Legislador (n.o 2 do artigo 144o da Lei de 2.8.2002)

Erkenning: Regelgever (art. 144, §2 van de wet van 2.8.2002).

| b) | Supervisão: Comité du Fonds des Rentes, por conta da CBFA
  Toezicht: Comité van het Rentenfonds, voor rekening van de CBFA |
| --- | --- |

b)

Supervisão: Comité du Fonds des Rentes, por conta da CBFA

Toezicht: Comité van het Rentenfonds, voor rekening van de CBFA

Bulgária

| 1. | Официален пазар (mercado oficial) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Официален пазар (mercado oficial)

| 2. | Неофициален пазар (mercado paralelo) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Неофициален пазар (mercado paralelo)

Българска Фондова Борса — София АД (Bolsa de Valores búlgara — Sofia JSCo)

Комисия за финансов надзор (Comissão de supervisão financeira)

Chipre

Bolsa de Valores de Chipre

| 1. | Mercado principal |
| --- | --- |

1.

Mercado principal

| 2. | Mercado paralelo |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado paralelo

| 3. | Mercado de produtos alternativos |
| --- | --- |

3.

Mercado de produtos alternativos

| 4. | Mercado de obrigações |
| --- | --- |

4.

Mercado de obrigações

| 5. | Mercado de empresas de investimento |
| --- | --- |

5.

Mercado de empresas de investimento

| 6. | Mercado de grandes projectos |
| --- | --- |

6.

Mercado de grandes projectos

| 7. | Mercado de transporte marítimo de longa distância |
| --- | --- |

7.

Mercado de transporte marítimo de longa distância

| 1.-7. | Bolsa de Valores de Chipre |
| --- | --- |

1.-7.

Bolsa de Valores de Chipre

| 1.-7. | Comissão de Supervisão dos Títulos e da Bolsa de Chipre |
| --- | --- |

1.-7.

Comissão de Supervisão dos Títulos e da Bolsa de Chipre

República Checa

| 1. | Mercado principal (Hlavni Trh) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Mercado principal (Hlavni Trh)

| 2. | Mercado livre (Volný trh) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado livre (Volný trh)

| 3. | Mercado oficial |
| --- | --- |

3.

Mercado oficial

| 4. | Mercado de futuros |
| --- | --- |

4.

Mercado de futuros

| 5. | Mercado a contado |
| --- | --- |

5.

Mercado a contado

| 1.-2. | Bolsa de valores de Praga
  (Burza cenných papírů Praha, a.s.) |
| --- | --- |

1.-2.

Bolsa de valores de Praga

(Burza cenných papírů Praha, a.s.)

| 3. | RM-SYSTÉM, Bolsa de Valores de Praga
  (RM-SYSTÉM , česká burza cenných papírů a.s.) |
| --- | --- |

3.

RM-SYSTÉM, Bolsa de Valores de Praga

(RM-SYSTÉM , česká burza cenných papírů a.s.)

| 4.-5. | Bolsa de produtos energéticos de Praga
  (Energetická burza Praha) |
| --- | --- |

4.-5.

Bolsa de produtos energéticos de Praga

(Energetická burza Praha)

| 1.-5. | Banco Nacional Checo |
| --- | --- |

1.-5.

Banco Nacional Checo

Dinamarca

| 1. | NASDAQ OMX Copenhagen A/S






  — | Mercado de acções |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

NASDAQ OMX Copenhagen A/S

—

Mercado de acções

| — | Mercado de obrigações |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de obrigações

| — | Mercado de instrumentos derivados |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de instrumentos derivados

| 2. | Bolsa de Valores de Copenhaga S.A. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Bolsa de Valores de Copenhaga S.A.

Finanstilsynet (autoridade de supervisão financeira da Dinamarca)

| 2. | Dansk Autoriseret Markedsplads A/S (Danish Authorised Market Place Ltd.—DAMP) (Mercado autorizado = negociação regular em valores admitidos à negociação, mas não cotados numa bolsa de valores) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dansk Autoriseret Markedsplads A/S (Danish Authorised Market Place Ltd.—DAMP) (Mercado autorizado = negociação regular em valores admitidos à negociação, mas não cotados numa bolsa de valores)

| 2. | Mercado autorizado dinamarquês SA (DAMP) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado autorizado dinamarquês SA (DAMP)

Estónia

| 1. | Väärtpaberibörs (Bolsa de valores)






  — | Põhinimekiri (Mercado principal) |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Väärtpaberibörs (Bolsa de valores)

—

Põhinimekiri (Mercado principal)

| — | Võlakirjade nimekiri (Mercado de obrigações) |
| --- | --- |

—

Võlakirjade nimekiri (Mercado de obrigações)

| — | Fondiosakute nimekri (Mercado de fundos de investimento) |
| --- | --- |

—

Fondiosakute nimekri (Mercado de fundos de investimento)

NASDAQ OMX Tallinn AS

(NASDAQ OMX Tallinn Ltd.)

Finantsinspektsioon

(Autoridade estónia de supervisão financeira)

| 2. | Reguleeritud turg
  (Mercado regulamentado)






  — | Lisanimekiri (Mercado secundário) |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Reguleeritud turg

(Mercado regulamentado)

—

Lisanimekiri (Mercado secundário)

Finlândia

Arvopaperipörssi (Bolsa de valores);

| — | Pörssilista (Mercado oficial); |
| --- | --- |

—

Pörssilista (Mercado oficial);

| — | Pre-lista (Pré-cotação); |
| --- | --- |

—

Pre-lista (Pré-cotação);

| — | Muut arvopaperit—lista (Cotação de outros valores mobiliários) |
| --- | --- |

—

Muut arvopaperit—lista (Cotação de outros valores mobiliários)

NASDAQ OMX Helsinki Oy (NASDAQ OMX Helsinki Ltd.)

Designação:

Ministério das Finanças

Supervisão:

| — | Aprovação das regras: Ministério das Finanças |
| --- | --- |

—

Aprovação das regras: Ministério das Finanças

| — | Supervisão do seu cumprimento:
  Finanssivalvonta, autoridade de supervisão financeira da Finlândia |
| --- | --- |

—

Supervisão do seu cumprimento:

Finanssivalvonta, autoridade de supervisão financeira da Finlândia

França

| 1. | Euronext Paris |
| --- | --- |

1.

Euronext Paris

| 2. | MATIF |
| --- | --- |

2.

MATIF

| 3. | MONEP |
| --- | --- |

3.

MONEP

Euronext Paris (1-3)

Proposta da Autorité des marchés financiers (AMF)

Autorização do Ministro da Economia (ver artigo L.421-1 do Código Monetário e Financeiro)

Alemanha

Börsenaufsichtsbehörden der Länder (autoridades de supervisão das bolsas de valores dos Länder) e Bundesanstalt für Finanzdienstleistungsaufsicht (BAFin)

Autoridades dos Estados federados:

| 1. | Börse Berlin (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Börse Berlin (Regulierter Markt)

| 1. | Börse Berlin AG |
| --- | --- |

1.

Börse Berlin AG

| 1. | Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Berlim. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Senatsverwaltung für Wirtschaft und Technologie, Berlim.

| 2. | Düsseldorfer Börse (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Düsseldorfer Börse (Regulierter Markt)

| 2. | Börse Düsseldorf AG |
| --- | --- |

2.

Börse Düsseldorf AG

| 2. | Finanzministerium des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Finanzministerium des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen, Düsseldorf.

| 3. | Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Frankfurter Wertpapierbörse (Regulierter Markt)

| 3. | Deutsche Börse AG |
| --- | --- |

3.

Deutsche Börse AG

| 3 & 4. | Hessisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Landesentwicklung, Wiesbaden. |
| --- | --- |

3 & 4.

Hessisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr und Landesentwicklung, Wiesbaden.

| 4. | Eurex Deutschland |
| --- | --- |

4.

Eurex Deutschland

| 4. | Eurex Frankfurt AG |
| --- | --- |

4.

Eurex Frankfurt AG

| 5. | Hanseatische Wertpapierbörse Hamburg (Regulierter Markt, Startup market). |
| --- | --- |

5.

Hanseatische Wertpapierbörse Hamburg (Regulierter Markt, Startup market).

| 5. | BÖAG Börsen AG |
| --- | --- |

5.

BÖAG Börsen AG

| 5. | Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Behörde für Wirtschaft und Arbeit. |
| --- | --- |

5.

Freie und Hansestadt Hamburg, Behörde für Wirtschaft und Arbeit.

| 6. | Niedersächsische Börse zu Hannover (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

6.

Niedersächsische Börse zu Hannover (Regulierter Markt)

| 6. | BÖAG Börsen AG |
| --- | --- |

6.

BÖAG Börsen AG

| 6. | Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hanôver. |
| --- | --- |

6.

Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hanôver.

| 7. | Börse München (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

7.

Börse München (Regulierter Markt)

| 7. | Bayerische Börse AG |
| --- | --- |

7.

Bayerische Börse AG

| 7. | Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Infrastruktur, Verkehr und Technologie, Munique. |
| --- | --- |

7.

Bayerisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft, Infrastruktur, Verkehr und Technologie, Munique.

| 8. | Baden-Württembergische Wertpapierbörse (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

8.

Baden-Württembergische Wertpapierbörse (Regulierter Markt)

| 8. | Börse-Stuttgart AG |
| --- | --- |

8.

Börse-Stuttgart AG

| 8. | Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg, Estugarda. |
| --- | --- |

8.

Wirtschaftsministerium Baden-Württemberg, Estugarda.

| 9. | Risk Management Exchange Hannover (Regulierter Markt) |
| --- | --- |

9.

Risk Management Exchange Hannover (Regulierter Markt)

| 9. | RMX Hannover |
| --- | --- |

9.

RMX Hannover

| 9. | Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hanôver. |
| --- | --- |

9.

Niedersächsisches Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Arbeit und Verkehr, Hanôver.

| 10. | European Energy Exchange |
| --- | --- |

10.

European Energy Exchange

| 10. | European Energy Exchange AG, Leipzig |
| --- | --- |

10.

European Energy Exchange AG, Leipzig

| 10. | Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Dresden. |
| --- | --- |

10.

Sächsisches Staatsministerium für Wirtschaft und Arbeit, Dresden.

Grécia

| 1. | Bolsa de Valores de Atenas






  — | Mercado de valores mobiliários |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Bolsa de Valores de Atenas

—

Mercado de valores mobiliários

| — | Mercado de instrumentos derivados |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de instrumentos derivados

| 1. | Bolsa de Valores de Atenas |
| --- | --- |

1.

Bolsa de Valores de Atenas

| 1. | Comissão Helénica dos Mercados de Capitais (HCMC) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Comissão Helénica dos Mercados de Capitais (HCMC)

| 2. | Mercado secundário electrónico de valores mobiliários (HDAT—mercado de instrumentos de dívida) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado secundário electrónico de valores mobiliários (HDAT—mercado de instrumentos de dívida)

| 2. | Banco da Grécia |
| --- | --- |

2.

Banco da Grécia

| 2. | Comissão Helénica dos Mercados de Capitais (HCMC) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Comissão Helénica dos Mercados de Capitais (HCMC)

Hungria

Budapesti Értéktőzsde Zrt. (Bolsa de Valores de Budapeste)

| — | Részvényszekció (Mercado de acções) |
| --- | --- |

—

Részvényszekció (Mercado de acções)

| — | Hitelpapír Szekció (Mercado de obrigações) |
| --- | --- |

—

Hitelpapír Szekció (Mercado de obrigações)

| — | Származékos Szekció (Mercado de instrumentos derivados) |
| --- | --- |

—

Származékos Szekció (Mercado de instrumentos derivados)

| — | Áru szekció (Mercado de mercadorias) |
| --- | --- |

—

Áru szekció (Mercado de mercadorias)

Budapesti Értéktőzsde Zrt. (Bolsa de Valores de Budapeste)

Pénzügyi Szervezetek Állami Felügyelete (Autoridade de Supervisão Financeira da Hungria)

Irlanda

Mercado principal da Bolsa de Valores irlandesa

Irish Stock Exchange Ltd

A autoridade de regulamentação dos serviços financeiros da Irlanda («Autoridade de regulamentação financeira») autoriza os «mercados regulamentados» e (com excepção das condições de admissão à negociação) supervisiona o cumprimento dos requisitos da MIFID pelo operador de mercado

Itália

| 1. | Mercado electrónico de acções (MTA) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Mercado electrónico de acções (MTA)

| 2. | Mercado electrónico de obrigações (MOT) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado electrónico de obrigações (MOT)

| 3. | Mercado electrónico de fundos abertos e de ETC (ETF–Plus) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Mercado electrónico de fundos abertos e de ETC (ETF–Plus)

| 4. | Mercado electrónico de instrumentos derivados titularizados (SeDeX) |
| --- | --- |

4.

Mercado electrónico de instrumentos derivados titularizados (SeDeX)

| 5. | Mercado fora de horas (TAH) |
| --- | --- |

5.

Mercado fora de horas (TAH)

| 6. | Mercado italiano de instrumentos derivados para a negociação dos instrumentos financeiros referidos no n.o 2, alíneas f) e i), do artigo 1o da Lei consolidada das finanças (IDEM) |
| --- | --- |

6.

Mercado italiano de instrumentos derivados para a negociação dos instrumentos financeiros referidos no n.o 2, alíneas f) e i), do artigo 1o da Lei consolidada das finanças (IDEM)

| 7. | Mercado grossista de títulos do Tesouro italianos e estrangeiros (MTS) |
| --- | --- |

7.

Mercado grossista de títulos do Tesouro italianos e estrangeiros (MTS)

| 8. | Negociação por grosso de obrigações e títulos não emitidos pelo Tesouro, mas sim por organizações internacionais com participação estatal (MTS Corporate) |
| --- | --- |

8.

Negociação por grosso de obrigações e títulos não emitidos pelo Tesouro, mas sim por organizações internacionais com participação estatal (MTS Corporate)

| 9. | Negociação grossista em linha de títulos do Tesouro (BondVision) |
| --- | --- |

9.

Negociação grossista em linha de títulos do Tesouro (BondVision)

| 10. | Mercado TLX |
| --- | --- |

10.

Mercado TLX

| 1-6 | Borsa Italiana S.p.A. |
| --- | --- |

1-6

Borsa Italiana S.p.A.

| 7-9 | Società per il Mercato dei Titoli di Stato — MTS S.p.A. |
| --- | --- |

7-9

Società per il Mercato dei Titoli di Stato — MTS S.p.A.

| 10. | TLX s.p.a. |
| --- | --- |

10.

TLX s.p.a.

O CONSOB autoriza as empresas que gerem os mercados e aprova os respectivos estatutos e regulamentação

Para os mercados por grosso de títulos do Tesouro, a entidade gestora é autorizada pelo Ministério da Economia e das Finanças, sob parecer do CONSOB e do Banco de Itália

Letónia

NASDAQ OMX Riga:

| — | Mercado principal |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado principal

| — | Mercado de títulos de dívida |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de títulos de dívida

| — | Mercado secundário |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado secundário

| — | Mercado de fundos de investimento |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de fundos de investimento

JSC NASDAQ OMX Riga

Finanšu un kapitāla tirgus komisija (Comissão do mercado financeiro e de capitais)

Lituânia

Nasdaq OMX Vilnius:

| — | Mercado principal da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado principal da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius

| — | Mercado secundário da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado secundário da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius

| — | Mercado de obrigações da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de obrigações da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius

| — | Mercado de fundos de investimento da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de fundos de investimento da Nasdaq OMX de Vilnius

Nasdaq OMX Vilnius

Comissão lituana dos mercados de valores mobiliários

Luxemburgo

Bolsa de Valores do Luxemburgo

Société de la Bourse de Luxembourg S.A.

Commission de surveillance du Secteur Financier (Comissão de supervisão do sector financeiro)

Malta

Bolsa de Valores de Malta

Malta Stock Exchange

Autoridade para os Serviços Financeiros de Malta

Países Baixos

| 1. | a) | Euronext Amsterdam Cash Mercado:






  — | Euronext Amsterdam |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.

a)

Euronext Amsterdam Cash Mercado:

—

Euronext Amsterdam

| b) | Mercado de instrumentos derivados do Euronext Amsterdam Mercado |
| --- | --- |

b)

Mercado de instrumentos derivados do Euronext Amsterdam Mercado

| 1. | NYSE Euronext (International) BV, NYSE Euronext (Holding) BV, Euronext NV, Euronext (Holdings) NV e Euronext Amsterdam NV |
| --- | --- |

1.

NYSE Euronext (International) BV, NYSE Euronext (Holding) BV, Euronext NV, Euronext (Holdings) NV e Euronext Amsterdam NV

| 1.-3. | Licença do Ministro das Finanças sob parecer da autoridade neerlandesa para os mercados financeiros.
  Supervisão pela autoridade neerlandesa para os mercados financeiros e pelo Ministério das Finanças. |
| --- | --- |

1.-3.

Licença do Ministro das Finanças sob parecer da autoridade neerlandesa para os mercados financeiros.

Supervisão pela autoridade neerlandesa para os mercados financeiros e pelo Ministério das Finanças.

| 2. | Endex |
| --- | --- |

2.

Endex

| 2. | ENDEX European Energy Derivatives Exchange N.V. |
| --- | --- |

2.

ENDEX European Energy Derivatives Exchange N.V.

| 3. | MTS Amsterdam |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS Amsterdam

| 3. | MTS Amsterdam N.V. |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS Amsterdam N.V.

Polónia

| 1. | Rynek podstawowy (Mercado principal) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Rynek podstawowy (Mercado principal)

| 2. | Rynek równolegly (Mercado paralelo) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Rynek równolegly (Mercado paralelo)

| 3. | Rynek Papierów Wartosciowych CeTO (regulowany rynek pozagieldowy) (CeTO mercado obrigacionista de balcão regulamentado) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Rynek Papierów Wartosciowych CeTO (regulowany rynek pozagieldowy) (CeTO mercado obrigacionista de balcão regulamentado)

| 1 e 2 – | Gielda Papierów Wartościowych w Warszawie (Bolsa de Valores de Varsóvia) |
| --- | --- |

1 e 2 –

Gielda Papierów Wartościowych w Warszawie (Bolsa de Valores de Varsóvia)

| 3 – | MTS-CeTO S.A. |
| --- | --- |

3 –

MTS-CeTO S.A.

Komisja Nadzoru Finansowego (autoridade de supervisão financeira)

Portugal

| 1. | Eurolist by Euronext Lisbon (mercado de cotação oficial) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Eurolist by Euronext Lisbon (mercado de cotação oficial)

| 2. | Mercado de Futuros e Opções |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado de Futuros e Opções

| 3. | MEDIP—Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública |
| --- | --- |

3.

MEDIP—Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública

| 4. | MIBEL—Mercado Regulamentado de Derivados do MIBEL |
| --- | --- |

4.

MIBEL—Mercado Regulamentado de Derivados do MIBEL

(Mercado de produtos energéticos)

| 1-2. | Euronext Lisbon—Sociedade Gestora de Mercados Regulamentados, S.A. |
| --- | --- |

1-2.

Euronext Lisbon—Sociedade Gestora de Mercados Regulamentados, S.A.

| 3. | MTS Portugal—Sociedade Gestora do Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública, SGMR, S.A. |
| --- | --- |

3.

MTS Portugal—Sociedade Gestora do Mercado Especial de Dívida Pública, SGMR, S.A.

| 4. | OMIP—Operador do Mercado Ibérico de Energia (Pólo Português), Sociedade Gestora de Mercado Regulamentado, S.A. (OMIP) |
| --- | --- |

4.

OMIP—Operador do Mercado Ibérico de Energia (Pólo Português), Sociedade Gestora de Mercado Regulamentado, S.A. (OMIP)

O Ministério das Finanças autoriza os mercados sob proposta da Comissão do Mercado de Valores Mobiliários (CMVM, autoridade responsável pela regulamentação e supervisão dos mercados)

Roménia

| 1. | Piața reglementată (mercado a contado regulamentado—BVB) |
| --- | --- |

1.

Piața reglementată (mercado a contado regulamentado—BVB)

| 2. | Piața reglementată la termen (Mercado regulamentado de instrumentos derivados—BVB) |
| --- | --- |

2.

Piața reglementată la termen (Mercado regulamentado de instrumentos derivados—BVB)

| 3. | Piața reglementată (Mercado regulamentado de instrumentos derivados—BMFMS) |
| --- | --- |

3.

Piața reglementată (Mercado regulamentado de instrumentos derivados—BMFMS)

| 1 e 2. | S.C. Bursa de Valori București S.A. (Bolsa de Valores de Bucareste) S.A.) |
| --- | --- |

1 e 2.

S.C. Bursa de Valori București S.A. (Bolsa de Valores de Bucareste) S.A.)

| 3. | S.C. Bursa Monetar—Financiară și de Mărfuri S.A. Sibiu (Bolsa dos instrumentos monetários, financeiros e sobre mercadorias S.A. Sibiu) |
| --- | --- |

3.

S.C. Bursa Monetar—Financiară și de Mărfuri S.A. Sibiu (Bolsa dos instrumentos monetários, financeiros e sobre mercadorias S.A. Sibiu)

Comisia Națională a Valorilor Mobiliare (Comissăo romena dos mercados de valores mobiliários)

Comisia Națională a Valorilor Mobiliare (Comissão romena dos mercados de valores mobiliários)

República Eslovaca

| 1. | Mercado de valores mobiliários






  — | Mercado principal |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Mercado de valores mobiliários

—

Mercado principal

| — | Mercado paralelo |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado paralelo

| 2. | Mercado livre regulamentado |
| --- | --- |

2.

Mercado livre regulamentado

Bolsa de valores de Bratislava

Banco Nacional da Eslováquia

Eslovénia

Mercado oficial da Bolsa de valores de Liubliana (Borzni trg)

Bolsa de Valores de Liubliana (Ljubljanska borza)

Comissão dos mercados de valores mobiliários

(Agencija za trg vrednostnih papirjev)

Espanha

| A. | Bolsas de Valores (incluem todas um primeiro e um segundo mercado) |
| --- | --- |

A.

Bolsas de Valores (incluem todas um primeiro e um segundo mercado)

CNMV (Comissão Nacional do Mercado de Valores)

Banco de Espanha (responsável pelo mercado da dívida pública)

| 1. | Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona |
| --- | --- |

1.

Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona

| A1. | Sociedad Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A1.

Sociedad Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Barcelona S.A.

| 2. | Bolsa de Valores de Bilbau |
| --- | --- |

2.

Bolsa de Valores de Bilbau

| A2. | Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Bilbao S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A2.

Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Bilbao S.A.

| 3. | Bolsa de Valores de Madrid |
| --- | --- |

3.

Bolsa de Valores de Madrid

| A3. | Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Madrid S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A3.

Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Madrid S.A.

| 4. | Bolsa de Valores de Valência |
| --- | --- |

4.

Bolsa de Valores de Valência

| A4. | Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Valencia. S.A. |
| --- | --- |

A4.

Soc. Rectora de la Bolsa de Valores de Valencia. S.A.

| B. | Mercados oficiais de produtos financeiros derivados |
| --- | --- |

B.

Mercados oficiais de produtos financeiros derivados

| 1. | MEFF Rendimento fixo |
| --- | --- |

1.

MEFF Rendimento fixo

| B1. | Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de RENTA Fija S.A. |
| --- | --- |

B1.

Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de RENTA Fija S.A.

| 2. | MEFF Rendimento variável |
| --- | --- |

2.

MEFF Rendimento variável

| B2. | Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de Renta Variable S.A. |
| --- | --- |

B2.

Soc. Rectora de Productos Financieros Derivados de Renta Variable S.A.

| C. | C. Mercado MFAO de futuros sobre o azeite |
| --- | --- |

C.

C. Mercado MFAO de futuros sobre o azeite

| C. | (MFAO) Sociedad rectora del Mercado de Futuros del Aceite de Oliva, S.A. |
| --- | --- |

C.

(MFAO) Sociedad rectora del Mercado de Futuros del Aceite de Oliva, S.A.

| D. | AIAF Mercado de Rendimento Fixo |
| --- | --- |

D.

AIAF Mercado de Rendimento Fixo

| D. | AIAF Mercado de Renta Fija |
| --- | --- |

D.

AIAF Mercado de Renta Fija

| E. | Mercados de dívida pública por inscrição (en anotaciones) |
| --- | --- |

E.

Mercados de dívida pública por inscrição (en anotaciones)

| E. | Banco de España |
| --- | --- |

E.

Banco de España

Suécia

Nasdaq OMX Stockholm AB

| — | Mercado regulamentado das participações e instrumentos financeiros equivalentes a participações |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado regulamentado das participações e instrumentos financeiros equivalentes a participações

| — | Mercado regulamentado de instrumentos derivados |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado regulamentado de instrumentos derivados

| — | Mercado regulamentado de obrigações e instrumentos financeiros equivalentes a obrigações |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado regulamentado de obrigações e instrumentos financeiros equivalentes a obrigações

OMX Nordic Exchange Stockholm AB

Finansinspektionen (autoridade de supervisão financeira)

Reino Unido

| 1. | EDX |
| --- | --- |

1.

EDX

| 1. | EDX London Limited |
| --- | --- |

1.

EDX London Limited

| 1.-6. | Autoridade dos Serviços Financeiros |
| --- | --- |

1.-6.

Autoridade dos Serviços Financeiros

| 2. | PLUS-Markets Group–PLUS-listed Market |
| --- | --- |

2.

PLUS-Markets Group–PLUS-listed Market

| 2. | PLUS Markets plc |
| --- | --- |

2.

PLUS Markets plc

| 3. | The London International Financial Futures and Options Exchanges (LIFFE) |
| --- | --- |

3.

The London International Financial Futures and Options Exchanges (LIFFE)

| 3. | LIFFE Administration and Management |
| --- | --- |

3.

LIFFE Administration and Management

| 4. | The London Metal Exchange (Bolsa de valores de metais de Londres) |
| --- | --- |

4.

The London Metal Exchange (Bolsa de valores de metais de Londres)

| 4. | The London Metal Exchange Limited |
| --- | --- |

4.

The London Metal Exchange Limited

| 5. | Intercontinental Exchange—ICE Futures Europe |
| --- | --- |

5.

Intercontinental Exchange—ICE Futures Europe

| 5. | ICE Futures Europe |
| --- | --- |

5.

ICE Futures Europe

| 6. | London Stock Exchange—Mercado regulamentado |
| --- | --- |

6.

London Stock Exchange—Mercado regulamentado

| 6. | London Stock Exchange plc |
| --- | --- |

6.

London Stock Exchange plc

Islândia

OMX Nordic Exchange á Íslandi (mercado regulamentado)

OMX Nordic Exchange

Fjármálaeftirlitið (Autoridade de Supervisão Financeira)

Listenstaine

N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

Noruega

| 1. | Bolsa de Valores de Oslo (cotação oficial)






  — | Mercado de acções |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Bolsa de Valores de Oslo (cotação oficial)

—

Mercado de acções

| — | Mercado de instrumentos derivados (financeiros) |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de instrumentos derivados (financeiros)

| — | Mercado de obrigações |
| --- | --- |

—

Mercado de obrigações

| 1. | Oslo Børs ASA |
| --- | --- |

1.

Oslo Børs ASA

Kredittilsynet (Autoridade de Supervisão Financeira da Noruega)

| 2. | Oslo Axess






  — | Mercado de acções |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Oslo Axess

—

Mercado de acções

| 2. | Oslo Børs ASA |
| --- | --- |

2.

Oslo Børs ASA

| 3. | Nord Pool (cotação oficial)






  — | Mercado de instrumentos derivados (mercadorias) |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Nord Pool (cotação oficial)

—

Mercado de instrumentos derivados (mercadorias)

| 3. | Nord Pool ASA |
| --- | --- |

3.

Nord Pool ASA

| 4. | Imarex






  — | Mercado de instrumentos derivados (mercadorias) |
| --- | --- | --- |

4.

Imarex

—

Mercado de instrumentos derivados (mercadorias)

| 4. | Imarex ASA |
| --- | --- |

4.

Imarex ASA

| 5. | Fish Pool






  — | Mercado de instrumentos derivados (mercadorias) |
| --- | --- | --- |

5.

Fish Pool

—

Mercado de instrumentos derivados (mercadorias)

| 5. | Fish Pool ASA |
| --- | --- |

5.

Fish Pool ASA

---

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/9

---

Comunicação da Comissão nos termos do artigo 16.o, n.o 4, do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1008/2008 do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho relativo a regras comuns de exploração dos serviços aéreos na Comunidade

Obrigações de serviço público no que respeita a serviços aéreos regulares

(Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE)

2009/C 158/04

| Estado-Membro | Itália |
| --- | --- |
| Ligação em questão | Bolzano — Roma Fiumicino e vice-versa |
| Data de entrada em vigor das obrigações de serviço público | 1 de Dezembro de 2009 |
| Endereço para obtenção do texto e quaisquer informações e/ou documentação relacionadas com as obrigações de serviço público | E.N.A.C. Ente nazionale dell’aviazione civile
  Direzione centrale regolazione economica





  Direzione trasporto aereo |
| Viale del Castro Pretorio, n. 118 |
| 00185 Roma |
| ITALIA |
| www.enac-italia.it |
| E-mail: trasporto.aereo@enac.gov.it |

Estado-Membro

Itália

Ligação em questão

Bolzano — Roma Fiumicino e vice-versa

Data de entrada em vigor das obrigações de serviço público

1 de Dezembro de 2009

Endereço para obtenção do texto e quaisquer informações e/ou documentação relacionadas com as obrigações de serviço público

E.N.A.C. Ente nazionale dell’aviazione civile

Direzione centrale regolazione economica

Direzione trasporto aereo

Viale del Castro Pretorio, n. 118

00185 Roma

ITALIA

www.enac-italia.it

E-mail: trasporto.aereo@enac.gov.it

---

V Avisos

PROCEDIMENTOS ADMINISTRATIVOS

Comissão

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/10

---

CONVITE À APRESENTAÇÃO DE PROPOSTAS — EACEA/11/2009

Apoio estrutural a organizações de investigação e grupos de reflexão sobre as políticas públicas europeias e a organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu

Programa «Europa para os Cidadãos», Acção 2, Medidas 1 e 2 — 2010

2009/C 158/05

1.   OBJECTIVOS E DESCRIÇÃO

O presente convite à apresentação de propostas EACEA/11/2009 baseia-se na Decisão do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho que institui para o período 2007-2013 o programa «Europa para os Cidadãos» (1) destinado a promover a cidadania europeia activa (adiante designado «Programa»).

O Programa constitui a base jurídica para o presente convite à apresentação de propostas, que diz respeito especificamente à Acção 2, «Sociedade civil activa na Europa», medidas 1 e 2 — «Apoio estrutural a organizações de investigação sobre as políticas públicas europeias (grupos de reflexão) e a organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu».

1.1.   Objectivos gerais do Programa

O Programa visa contribuir para os seguintes objectivos gerais:

| a) | Dar aos cidadãos a oportunidade de interagirem e participarem na construção de uma Europa cada vez mais próxima, democrática e virada para o mundo, unida e enriquecida pela sua diversidade cultural, aprofundando assim a cidadania da União Europeia; |
| --- | --- |

a)

Dar aos cidadãos a oportunidade de interagirem e participarem na construção de uma Europa cada vez mais próxima, democrática e virada para o mundo, unida e enriquecida pela sua diversidade cultural, aprofundando assim a cidadania da União Europeia;

| b) | Forjar um sentido de identidade europeia, baseado em valores, na história e cultura comuns; |
| --- | --- |

b)

Forjar um sentido de identidade europeia, baseado em valores, na história e cultura comuns;

| c) | Promover a adesão dos cidadãos à União; |
| --- | --- |

c)

Promover a adesão dos cidadãos à União;

| d) | Incrementar a compreensão mútua entre os cidadãos europeus, respeitando e promovendo a diversidade cultural e linguística e contribuindo, simultaneamente, para o diálogo intercultural. |
| --- | --- |

d)

Incrementar a compreensão mútua entre os cidadãos europeus, respeitando e promovendo a diversidade cultural e linguística e contribuindo, simultaneamente, para o diálogo intercultural.

1.2.   Objectivos específicos do convite à apresentação de propostas

Os objectivos específicos do presente convite à apresentação de propostas são:

| a) | Fomentar acções, debates e reflexões em matéria de cidadania europeia e democracia, partilha de valores, história e cultura comuns graças às actividades e à cooperação dos «laboratórios de ideias» (grupos de reflexão) e a organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu; |
| --- | --- |

a)

Fomentar acções, debates e reflexões em matéria de cidadania europeia e democracia, partilha de valores, história e cultura comuns graças às actividades e à cooperação dos «laboratórios de ideias» (grupos de reflexão) e a organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu;

| b) | Incentivar a interacção entre os cidadãos e as organizações da sociedade civil, contribuindo para o diálogo intercultural e dando protagonismo tanto à diversidade como à unidade da Europa. |
| --- | --- |

b)

Incentivar a interacção entre os cidadãos e as organizações da sociedade civil, contribuindo para o diálogo intercultural e dando protagonismo tanto à diversidade como à unidade da Europa.

1.3.   Temas prioritários

| — | O futuro da União Europeia e os seus valores fundamentais, |
| --- | --- |

—

O futuro da União Europeia e os seus valores fundamentais,

| — | A cidadania Europeia Activa — participação e democracia, |
| --- | --- |

—

A cidadania Europeia Activa — participação e democracia,

| — | O diálogo intercultural, |
| --- | --- |

—

O diálogo intercultural,

| — | O impacto das políticas da UE na sociedade, |
| --- | --- |

—

O impacto das políticas da UE na sociedade,

| — | O bem-estar dos cidadãos na Europa: emprego, coesão social e desenvolvimento sustentável. |
| --- | --- |

—

O bem-estar dos cidadãos na Europa: emprego, coesão social e desenvolvimento sustentável.

1.4.   Descrição do convite à apresentação de propostas

O presente convite à apresentação de propostas destina-se ao apoio estrutural, na forma de subvenção de funcionamento, a organizações que prosseguem um fim de interesse geral europeu. As subvenções de funcionamento destinam-se a apoiar financeiramente uma parte das despesas de funcionamento necessárias ao bom desenrolar das actividades regulares da organização seleccionada.

Este apoio pode ser atribuído, em função de certos critérios, sob a forma de subvenção anual ou de parceria plurianual. A parceria plurianual é um mecanismo de cooperação estabelecido entre uma organização e a Agência de Execução relativa à Educação, ao Audiovisual e à Cultura (a seguir designada «Agência de Execução») que dá lugar a subvenções específicas. No quadro do presente convite, a parceria poderá ser estabelecida por um período de três anos.

2.   CANDIDATOS ELEGÍVEIS

2.1.   Organizações

Para ser elegível para uma subvenção de funcionamento, uma organização que prossiga um fim de interesse geral europeu deve ser:

| a) | Uma organização sem fins lucrativos, dotada de personalidade jurídica; no caso de uma rede que não disponha de uma estrutura de funcionamento separada, com um estatuto próprio, a candidatura pode ser apresentada pela organização membro encarregada da coordenação da rede; |
| --- | --- |

a)

Uma organização sem fins lucrativos, dotada de personalidade jurídica; no caso de uma rede que não disponha de uma estrutura de funcionamento separada, com um estatuto próprio, a candidatura pode ser apresentada pela organização membro encarregada da coordenação da rede;

| b) | Activa no domínio da cidadania europeia, tal como definido no seu estatuto ou declaração de missão e corresponder a uma das seguintes categorias de organização: | Medida 1:






  A. | Organizações de investigação e grupos de reflexão sobre as políticas públicas europeias («laboratórios de ideias» — grupos de reflexão). |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

b)

Activa no domínio da cidadania europeia, tal como definido no seu estatuto ou declaração de missão e corresponder a uma das seguintes categorias de organização:

Medida 1:

A.

Organizações de investigação e grupos de reflexão sobre as políticas públicas europeias («laboratórios de ideias» — grupos de reflexão).

| | Medida 2:






  B. | Organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu:






  — | Organizações centrais (plataformas) europeias, |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

Medida 2:

B.

Organizações da sociedade civil a nível europeu:

—

Organizações centrais (plataformas) europeias,

| — | Redes europeias, |
| --- | --- |

—

Redes europeias,

| — | Organizações que desenvolvam actividades de grande impacto a nível europeu. |
| --- | --- |

—

Organizações que desenvolvam actividades de grande impacto a nível europeu.

| C. | Organizações da sociedade civil ligadas à Memória Europeia. |
| --- | --- |

C.

Organizações da sociedade civil ligadas à Memória Europeia.

| D. | Plataformas de organizações pan-europeias; |
| --- | --- |

D.

Plataformas de organizações pan-europeias;

| c) | Realizar a maior parte das suas actividades em países elegíveis (cf. ponto 2.2).

  Para uma parceria plurianual, as organizações devem ser legalmente estabelecidas e dotadas de personalidade jurídica há mais de quatro (4) anos (em 15 de Outubro de 2009) num dos países elegíveis e ter, relativamente às categorias abaixo designadas, a seguinte cobertura geográfica:






  — | para uma organização central europeia ou uma rede europeia, ter membros em pelo menos doze (12) países elegíveis, |
| --- | --- | --- |

c)

Realizar a maior parte das suas actividades em países elegíveis (cf. ponto 2.2).

Para uma parceria plurianual, as organizações devem ser legalmente estabelecidas e dotadas de personalidade jurídica há mais de quatro (4) anos (em 15 de Outubro de 2009) num dos países elegíveis e ter, relativamente às categorias abaixo designadas, a seguinte cobertura geográfica:

—

para uma organização central europeia ou uma rede europeia, ter membros em pelo menos doze (12) países elegíveis,

| — | para uma organização que desenvolve actividades de grande impacto a nível europeu, estar activa em pelo menos doze (12) países elegíveis, |
| --- | --- |

—

para uma organização que desenvolve actividades de grande impacto a nível europeu, estar activa em pelo menos doze (12) países elegíveis,

| — | para uma plataforma de organizações pan-europeias, ter um mínimo de seis (6) organizações centrais na qualidade de membros e assegurar, através destas, uma presença nos 27 Estados-Membros. |
| --- | --- |

—

para uma plataforma de organizações pan-europeias, ter um mínimo de seis (6) organizações centrais na qualidade de membros e assegurar, através destas, uma presença nos 27 Estados-Membros.

Para uma subvenção anual, as organizações devem ser legalmente estabelecidas e dotadas de personalidade jurídica há mais de um (1) ano (em 15 de Outubro de 2009) num dos países elegíveis e ter, para as categorias abaixo designadas, a seguinte cobertura geográfica:

| — | para uma organização central europeia ou uma rede europeia, ter membros em pelo menos oito (8) países elegíveis, |
| --- | --- |

—

para uma organização central europeia ou uma rede europeia, ter membros em pelo menos oito (8) países elegíveis,

| — | para uma organização que desenvolve actividades de grande impacto a nível europeu, estar activa em pelo menos oito (8) países elegíveis. |
| --- | --- |

—

para uma organização que desenvolve actividades de grande impacto a nível europeu, estar activa em pelo menos oito (8) países elegíveis.

As plataformas de organizações pan-europeias só podem apresentar uma candidatura no quadro de uma parceria plurianual.

As pessoas singulares e as organizações públicas não são elegíveis para este convite.

2.2.   Países elegíveis

| a) | Os Estados-Membros da União Europeia: Alemanha, Áustria, Bélgica, Bulgária, Chipre, Dinamarca, Eslováquia, Eslovénia, Espanha, Estónia, Finlândia, França, Grécia, Hungria, Irlanda, Itália, Letónia, Lituânia, Luxemburgo, Malta, Países Baixos, Polónia, Portugal, Reino Unido, República Checa, Roménia e Suécia; |
| --- | --- |

a)

Os Estados-Membros da União Europeia: Alemanha, Áustria, Bélgica, Bulgária, Chipre, Dinamarca, Eslováquia, Eslovénia, Espanha, Estónia, Finlândia, França, Grécia, Hungria, Irlanda, Itália, Letónia, Lituânia, Luxemburgo, Malta, Países Baixos, Polónia, Portugal, Reino Unido, República Checa, Roménia e Suécia;

| b) | Croácia; |
| --- | --- |

b)

Croácia;

| c) | Antiga República jugoslava da Macedónia; |
| --- | --- |

c)

Antiga República jugoslava da Macedónia;

| d) | Albânia. |
| --- | --- |

d)

Albânia.

3.   ACÇÕES ELEGÍVEIS

As actividades da organização candidata devem contribuir de forma tangível para o desenvolvimento e consecução dos objectivos específicos e temas prioritários deste convite à apresentação de propostas. Devem cobrir, pelo menos, um objectivo específico e um tema prioritário dos mencionados no ponto 1.

O programa de trabalho da organização candidata para 2010, assim como o programa estratégico de três anos (em caso de parceria plurianual) devem abranger as suas actividades estatutárias, nomeadamente, as conferências, seminários, mesas redondas, acções de representação, comunicação e valorização, para além das suas outras actividades europeias recorrentes.

Período de elegibilidade

Quer se trate de uma subvenção anual ou de uma parceria plurianual, o período de elegibilidade deve corresponder ao exercício orçamental do candidato, conforme figura nas contas certificadas da organização. Se o exercício orçamental do candidato corresponder ao ano civil, o período de elegibilidade decorrerá de 1 de Janeiro 2009 a 31 de Dezembro de 2010.

Para os candidatos cujo exercício orçamental não corresponda ao ano civil, o período de elegibilidade será o período de 12 meses a partir da data inicial do respectivo exercício orçamental em 2010.

4.   CRITÉRIOS DE ATRIBUIÇÃO

As candidaturas conformes aos critérios de elegibilidade e de exclusão serão avaliadas com base nos critérios de atribuição por um comité de avaliação, a fim de determinar as propostas susceptíveis de ser co-financiadas.

Serão aplicados os critérios de atribuição a seguir indicados. Os critérios qualitativos e os quantitativos representam respectivamente 80 % e 20 % da pontuação do processo de avaliação. No caso de uma parceria plurianual, será atribuído o mesmo peso ao programa de trabalho de 12 meses e ao programa estratégico de três anos.

4.1.   Critérios qualitativos (80 %)

Serão avaliados os seguintes elementos:

| a) | Relevância para os objectivos e prioridades do Programa «Europa para os Cidadãos» (30 %); |
| --- | --- |

a)

Relevância para os objectivos e prioridades do Programa «Europa para os Cidadãos» (30 %);

| b) | Adequação, coerência e exaustividade do programa de trabalho (20 %); |
| --- | --- |

b)

Adequação, coerência e exaustividade do programa de trabalho (20 %);

| c) | Impacto do programa de trabalho (10 %); |
| --- | --- |

c)

Impacto do programa de trabalho (10 %);

| d) | Valor acrescentado europeu (10 %); |
| --- | --- |

d)

Valor acrescentado europeu (10 %);

| e) | Visibilidade das actividades e divulgação e exploração dos resultados junto dos cidadãos europeus e outras partes interessadas (10 %). |
| --- | --- |

e)

Visibilidade das actividades e divulgação e exploração dos resultados junto dos cidadãos europeus e outras partes interessadas (10 %).

4.2.   Critérios quantitativos (20 %)

Serão avaliados os seguintes elementos:

| a) | Número de países elegíveis implicados nas actividades do programa de trabalho (10 %); |
| --- | --- |

a)

Número de países elegíveis implicados nas actividades do programa de trabalho (10 %);

| b) | Número de potenciais beneficiários directos (10 %). |
| --- | --- |

b)

Número de potenciais beneficiários directos (10 %).

5.   ORÇAMENTO

O orçamento previsto para co-financiamento de subvenções de funcionamento é de cerca de 8,2 milhões de EUR em 2010. A Agência de Execução pretende financiar cerca de 55 organizações no âmbito do presente convite, mas reserva-se o direito, com base na qualidade das candidaturas, a não utilizar a totalidade dos fundos disponíveis.

A título indicativo, as subvenções de parceria plurianual representarão cerca de 85 % do orçamento disponível e as subvenções anuais cerca de 15 %.

Este apoio será concedido no quadro da rubrica orçamental 15 06 66 do Orçamento Geral da União Europeia.

6.   PRAZO LIMITE PARA A APRESENTAÇÃO DE CANDIDATURAS

O prazo limite para a apresentação das candidaturas será 15 de Outubro de 2009.

A Agência de Execução trabalha actualmente na criação de um sistema que permitirá a apresentação de candidaturas por via electrónica.

No que se refere ao presente convite à apresentação de propostas, os candidatos devem enviar a sua candidatura utilizando o formulário em linha disponível a partir de 15 de Setembro de 2009. Esta versão (anexos incluídos) é considerada a versão principal. Anteriormente a essa data, a Agência de Execução propõe uma versão «pdf» do formulário que permitirá aos candidatos começar a preparar o dossiê de candidatura.

Para além disso, deverá ser enviada uma cópia do dossiê de candidatura em suporte de papel, por correio, para o endereço abaixo indicado:

| Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency |
| --- |
| Unit P7 |
| Call for proposals EACEA/11/2009 |
| Avenue du Bourget 1 (BOUR 01/17) |
| 1140 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

Unit P7

Call for proposals EACEA/11/2009

Avenue du Bourget 1 (BOUR 01/17)

1140 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Apenas serão aceites as candidaturas apresentadas no formulário adequado, devidamente preenchido e datado, assinadas pela pessoa autorizada a assumir compromissos juridicamente vinculativos em nome do organismo candidato.

7.   INFORMAÇÕES COMPLEMENTARES

O texto integral dos documentos de orientação para candidatos, bem como os formulários de candidatura estão disponíveis no seguinte endereço: http://eacea.ec.europa.eu/citizenship/index_en.htm

---

(1)  Decisão n.o 1904/2006/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 12 de Dezembro de 2006 (JO L 378 de 27.12.2006,p. 32), com a última redacção que lhe foi dada pela Decisão n.o 1358/2008/CE do Parlamento Europeu e do Conselho, de 16 de Dezembro de 2008 (JO L 350 de 30.12.2008).

---

PROCEDIMENTOS RELATIVOS À EXECUÇÃO DA POLÍTICA DE CONCORRÊNCIA

Comissão

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/13

---

AUXÍLIO ESTATAL — PAÍSES BAIXOS

Auxílio Estatal C 10/2009 (ex N 138/2009) — ING

Convite à apresentação de observações nos termos do n.o 2 do artigo 88.o do Tratado CE

(Texto relevante para efeitos do EEE)

2009/C 158/06

Por carta de 31 de Março de 2009, publicada na língua que faz fé a seguir ao presente resumo, a Comissão comunicou aos Países Baixos a sua decisão de dar início ao procedimento previsto no n.o 2 do artigo 88.o do Tratado CE relativamente ao auxílio acima mencionado.

As partes interessadas podem apresentar as suas observações sobre a medida em relação à qual a Comissão deu início ao procedimento no prazo de um mês a contar da data de publicação do presente resumo e da carta que o acompanha, enviando-as para o seguinte endereço:

| European Commission |
| --- |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| State aid Greffe |
| Office: SPA3, 6/5 |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |
| Fax +32 22961242 |

European Commission

Directorate-General for Competition

State aid Greffe

Office: SPA3, 6/5

1049 Bruxelles/Brussel

BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Fax +32 22961242

Estas observações serão comunicadas aos Países Baixos. Qualquer interessado que apresente observações pode solicitar por escrito o tratamento confidencial da sua identidade, devendo justificar o pedido.

RESUMO

PROCEDIMENTO

Em 4 de Março de 2009, as Autoridades neerlandesas notificaram à Comissão a criação de um mecanismo subsidiário de cobertura de activos ilíquidos a favor do ING Support Holding (uma filial directa do grupo ING).

FACTOS

O ING, com sede nos Países Baixos, é uma das maiores instituições financeiras à escala mundial, cifrando-se o total do seu balanço em 1 332 milhares de milhões de EUR. Em Janeiro de 2009, o Estado neerlandês e o ING assinaram um acordo sobre as condições da transferência dos riscos e a devolução de uma parte da carteira norte-americana de títulos cobertos por créditos hipotecários à habitação do ING. Esta última é composta na sua grande maioria por valores mobiliários Alt-A, ascendendo o seu valor a 39 mil milhões de USD (em termos de valor nominal, o que corresponde a 30 mil milhões de EUR).

A medida projectada consiste numa troca de fluxos pecuniários entre o Estado neerlandês e o ING, mediante a qual o ING transfere as receitas correspondentes a 80 % do valor nominal da carteira (juros e reembolsos de capital) contra pagamentos garantidos do Estado relativamente a 72 % (ou seja, 80 % de 90 %) do valor nominal da carteira (apenas capital), complementado por uma comissão de financiamento paga pelo Estado ao ING correspondente a 3,50 %, no que se refere à componente de títulos a taxa fixa da carteira, e à taxa Libor USD a um mês, acrescida de 50 pontos de base, para a componente de títulos a taxa variável da carteira.

O Estado neerlandês desembolsa ao ING uma comissão de gestão adicional de 25 pontos de base por ano sobre o capital em dívida. Em contrapartida desta medida, o ING paga ao Estado neerlandês uma comissão anual de garantia de 55 pontos de base sobre 80 % do valor remanescente da carteira.

APRECIAÇÃO

A Comissão avaliou a operação ao abrigo da Comunicação da Comissão relativa aos activos depreciados. Na fase actual, a Comissão tem dúvidas quanto à avaliação e, nomeadamente, em relação ao método de avaliação para determinar o valor económico real. A Comissão precisa de examinar em maior pormenor as premissas apresentadas pelo Estado neerlandês, nomeadamente no que diz respeito: i) à taxa de desconto adoptada; ii) à evolução prevista dos preços de habitação; iii) ao grau de melhoria do risco de crédito; e iv) outras questões em matéria de avaliação.

Por outro lado, a Comissão tem igualmente dúvidas sobre a existência de uma repartição adequada dos encargos entre o Estado e o ING. A Comissão questiona se o banco suporta efectivamente a diferença entre o valor nominal e o valor económico real da carteira, dadas as dúvidas supramencionadas no que se refere à apreciação da avaliação. A Comissão também manifesta dúvidas quanto ao facto de a troca de fluxos pecuniários acima referida ser efectivamente tão benéfica para o Estado como indicado. Em especial, no que se refere à comissão de gestão da carteira, a Comissão tem algumas dúvidas sobre o seu carácter adequado, uma vez que não se afigura necessária uma importante actividade neste domínio.

Dado cumprir uma série de condições enumeradas na Comunicação sobre os activos depreciados, e atendendo à necessidade de preservar a estabilidade financeira, a Comissão decidiu aprovar a medida por um período de seis meses. Simultaneamente, tendo em conta o que precede, a Comissão decidiu igualmente iniciar o procedimento previsto no n.o 2 do artigo 88.o do Tratado CE para verificar se estão preenchidas as condições da referida Comunicação no que diz respeito à avaliação (incluindo o método utilizado) e à repartição dos encargos inerentes à medida.

TEXTO DA CARTA

«The Commission wishes to inform the Netherlands that, having examined the information supplied by your authorities on the measure referred to above, it has decided to approve the measure temporarily for six months and to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty since the Commission has doubts as to the compatibility of certain aspects of the measure when assessed in the light of the Commission's Communication on the treatment of impaired assets.

I.   PROCEDURE

| (1) | On 26 January 2009 the Dutch authorities informed the Commission of their intention to implement an illiquid assets back-up facility in favour of ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) subject to Commission approval. On 30 January the Commission sent an information request to the Dutch authorities, which was partially answered with the notification. On 4 March the Dutch authorities notified the measure formally with the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

On 26 January 2009 the Dutch authorities informed the Commission of their intention to implement an illiquid assets back-up facility in favour of ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) subject to Commission approval. On 30 January the Commission sent an information request to the Dutch authorities, which was partially answered with the notification. On 4 March the Dutch authorities notified the measure formally with the Commission.

| (2) | The measure notified is the second individual aid announced in favour of ING in the context of this financial crisis. ING has already received an emergency recapitalisation of EUR 10 billion from the Netherlands which the Commission approved on 13 November 2008. (1) Furthermore, ING has access to the Dutch Credit Guarantee scheme where the Dutch State granted a guarantee in the amount of USD 9 billion (of which ING has already used USD 8 billion through bond issuance) and an additional EUR 5 billion of granted guarantees of which ING has already used EUR 4 billion by issuing a bond. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The measure notified is the second individual aid announced in favour of ING in the context of this financial crisis. ING has already received an emergency recapitalisation of EUR 10 billion from the Netherlands which the Commission approved on 13 November 2008. (1) Furthermore, ING has access to the Dutch Credit Guarantee scheme where the Dutch State granted a guarantee in the amount of USD 9 billion (of which ING has already used USD 8 billion through bond issuance) and an additional EUR 5 billion of granted guarantees of which ING has already used EUR 4 billion by issuing a bond.

| (3) | On 17, 23 and 26 March meetings between the Dutch authorities and the Commission services were held. In the meantime a great number of information exchanges via email and phone took place. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

On 17, 23 and 26 March meetings between the Dutch authorities and the Commission services were held. In the meantime a great number of information exchanges via email and phone took place.

| (4) | On 13 March, the Commission asked the Dutch authorities to waive the confidentiality requirements for allowing technical experts from the European Central Bank (ECB) to assist the Commission in the assessment of the ING US Residential Mortgage-Backed Security (RMBS) portfolio affected by the aid measure under the Impaired Assets Communication (IAC). Confirmation was provided on 19 March. Thereafter the Commission forwarded to the ECB designated expert all available information to which the technical experts from the ECB replied. |
| --- | --- |

(4)

On 13 March, the Commission asked the Dutch authorities to waive the confidentiality requirements for allowing technical experts from the European Central Bank (ECB) to assist the Commission in the assessment of the ING US Residential Mortgage-Backed Security (RMBS) portfolio affected by the aid measure under the Impaired Assets Communication (IAC). Confirmation was provided on 19 March. Thereafter the Commission forwarded to the ECB designated expert all available information to which the technical experts from the ECB replied.

II.   DESCRIPTION OF THE FACTS

1.   The beneficiary

| (5) | Based in Amsterdam, ING Group offers banking, insurance and asset management to over 85 million private, corporate and institutional clients in more than 50 countries. With a global workforce of about 130,000 people, ING comprises a broad spectrum of prominent companies that serve their clients under the ING brand. |
| --- | --- |

(5)

Based in Amsterdam, ING Group offers banking, insurance and asset management to over 85 million private, corporate and institutional clients in more than 50 countries. With a global workforce of about 130,000 people, ING comprises a broad spectrum of prominent companies that serve their clients under the ING brand.

| (6) | ING is composed of ING Groep N.V., the mother holding company that controls 100 % of ING Bank N.V. and ING Verzekeringen N.V., two sub-holding companies respectively controlling ING's banking and insurance subsidiaries. |
| --- | --- |

(6)

ING is composed of ING Groep N.V., the mother holding company that controls 100 % of ING Bank N.V. and ING Verzekeringen N.V., two sub-holding companies respectively controlling ING's banking and insurance subsidiaries.

| (7) | ING is the 19th biggest financial institution globally by market value (based on October 2008 values) with a total balance sheet of EUR 1,332 billion at the end of 2008 and total risk weighed assets of EUR 343 billion. In Q4 2008 the group made a total net loss of EUR 3,7 billion and a loss of EUR 0,7 billion for the full year 2008. The Tier-1 capital ratio of ING stands at 9,3 % at the end of 2008. These numbers do not take into account the new measure. |
| --- | --- |

(7)

ING is the 19th biggest financial institution globally by market value (based on October 2008 values) with a total balance sheet of EUR 1,332 billion at the end of 2008 and total risk weighed assets of EUR 343 billion. In Q4 2008 the group made a total net loss of EUR 3,7 billion and a loss of EUR 0,7 billion for the full year 2008. The Tier-1 capital ratio of ING stands at 9,3 % at the end of 2008. These numbers do not take into account the new measure.

2.   The US RMBS portfolio of ING

| (8) | On January 26, 2009 the Dutch State and ING signed a term sheet to transfer the risk and cash flows of a portion of ING’s US based RMBS portfolio (thereafter referred to as “the portfolio”). |
| --- | --- |

(8)

On January 26, 2009 the Dutch State and ING signed a term sheet to transfer the risk and cash flows of a portion of ING’s US based RMBS portfolio (thereafter referred to as “the portfolio”).

| (9) | [...] (2) |
| --- | --- |

(9)

[...] (2)

| (10) | The outstanding balance of the portfolio amounts to USD 38,7 billion (par value, EUR 30 billion) (3), of which most is held by ING Direct (USD 34,1 billion), a US subsidiary of ING. ING Insurance Americas has a portfolio of USD 4,5 billion US mortgage-backed securities divided over several insurance companies. |
| --- | --- |

(10)

The outstanding balance of the portfolio amounts to USD 38,7 billion (par value, EUR 30 billion) (3), of which most is held by ING Direct (USD 34,1 billion), a US subsidiary of ING. ING Insurance Americas has a portfolio of USD 4,5 billion US mortgage-backed securities divided over several insurance companies.

| (11) | About 2/3rds of the portfolio is composed of Alt-A residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS) and about 1/3rd in Prime RMBS. All securities in the portfolio are senior RMBS tranches and were originally rated triple A, according to ING. This implies a high level of loss protection. However, following the recent developments in the US mortgage markets, a significant proportion of these tranches were downgraded by rating agencies. Currently, about 29 % of the securities (weighted by outstanding amounts) carry still a triple A rating, with a negative outlook attached to 6 % of them. Depending on the rating agency used and according to information provided by the Dutch authorities, about 56 % are now rated sub-investment grade. So far the level of credit enhancement provided in the structures has been sufficient and explains why few actual impairments have been accounted for on the portfolio and no actual credit loss has occurred. |
| --- | --- |

(11)

About 2/3rds of the portfolio is composed of Alt-A residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS) and about 1/3rd in Prime RMBS. All securities in the portfolio are senior RMBS tranches and were originally rated triple A, according to ING. This implies a high level of loss protection. However, following the recent developments in the US mortgage markets, a significant proportion of these tranches were downgraded by rating agencies. Currently, about 29 % of the securities (weighted by outstanding amounts) carry still a triple A rating, with a negative outlook attached to 6 % of them. Depending on the rating agency used and according to information provided by the Dutch authorities, about 56 % are now rated sub-investment grade. So far the level of credit enhancement provided in the structures has been sufficient and explains why few actual impairments have been accounted for on the portfolio and no actual credit loss has occurred.

| (12) | The Dutch authorities state that the market for Alt-A loans has dried up and there are few if any buyers and sellers willing to transact at these low levels. |
| --- | --- |

(12)

The Dutch authorities state that the market for Alt-A loans has dried up and there are few if any buyers and sellers willing to transact at these low levels.

| (13) | Although the Alt-A portfolio is not large in terms of ING's total balance sheet, it is significant relative to its equity. This was already noted in the explanation of the events triggering the State recapitalisation measure of ING during 2008, when the Commission noted that the “perceived toxicity of the Alt-A portfolio of ING was a particular cause for concern.” (4) |
| --- | --- |

(13)

Although the Alt-A portfolio is not large in terms of ING's total balance sheet, it is significant relative to its equity. This was already noted in the explanation of the events triggering the State recapitalisation measure of ING during 2008, when the Commission noted that the “perceived toxicity of the Alt-A portfolio of ING was a particular cause for concern.” (4)

| (14) | The underlying mortgages of the portfolio are heavily concentrated in California (almost 39 % of all underlying mortgages) and another combined 5,5 % of mortgages were originated in Arizona and Nevada. A further 7,6 % were originated in Florida. In the portfolio, about 61 % of all mortgages were originated either in 2006 or in 2007. About 30 % of ING's total portfolio is currently made up of so-called Option adjustable rate mortgages (Option ARMS) (5) which are part of the almost 70 % of all mortgages which have adjustable interest rates. The remaining 30 % have fixed interest rates. |
| --- | --- |

(14)

The underlying mortgages of the portfolio are heavily concentrated in California (almost 39 % of all underlying mortgages) and another combined 5,5 % of mortgages were originated in Arizona and Nevada. A further 7,6 % were originated in Florida. In the portfolio, about 61 % of all mortgages were originated either in 2006 or in 2007. About 30 % of ING's total portfolio is currently made up of so-called Option adjustable rate mortgages (Option ARMS) (5) which are part of the almost 70 % of all mortgages which have adjustable interest rates. The remaining 30 % have fixed interest rates.

| (15) | The “fair value” of the portfolio — an available for sale asset — was alleged to be on the 31 December 2008 EUR 18,442 million that is 71,5 % of its book value (EUR 25,809 million). (6) The book value of the portfolio is for the most part based on a mark-to-model with valuation techniques not supported by observable market inputs. Due to this decline in valuation from the original value, the bank had to build a negative revaluation reserve of EUR 7 billion (pre-tax), which is subtracted from shareholder equity under IFRS (7). However, this negative revaluation reserve is not taken into account for regulatory capital calculations due to so-called prudential filters introduced by supervisors for mitigating the effects of fair value changes on regulatory capital. A valuation change in an “available for sales” asset is only reflected through the profits and loss account at the point when an asset against which there has been a negative revaluation reserve is “impaired”. (8) |
| --- | --- |

(15)

The “fair value” of the portfolio — an available for sale asset — was alleged to be on the 31 December 2008 EUR 18,442 million that is 71,5 % of its book value (EUR 25,809 million). (6) The book value of the portfolio is for the most part based on a mark-to-model with valuation techniques not supported by observable market inputs. Due to this decline in valuation from the original value, the bank had to build a negative revaluation reserve of EUR 7 billion (pre-tax), which is subtracted from shareholder equity under IFRS (7). However, this negative revaluation reserve is not taken into account for regulatory capital calculations due to so-called prudential filters introduced by supervisors for mitigating the effects of fair value changes on regulatory capital. A valuation change in an “available for sales” asset is only reflected through the profits and loss account at the point when an asset against which there has been a negative revaluation reserve is “impaired”. (8)

| (16) | The par value of the portfolio is USD 38,7 billion. Due mostly to USD 2,7 billion (EUR 2,1 billion) impairments on the portfolio, the cost basis from an accountant’s point of view under IFRS amounts to USD 36 billion as per 31 December 2008. The agreed base for the measure is 90 percent of the par value of the portfolio. |
| --- | --- |

(16)

The par value of the portfolio is USD 38,7 billion. Due mostly to USD 2,7 billion (EUR 2,1 billion) impairments on the portfolio, the cost basis from an accountant’s point of view under IFRS amounts to USD 36 billion as per 31 December 2008. The agreed base for the measure is 90 percent of the par value of the portfolio.

3.   The measure

| (17) | In order to avoid dealing with the various subsidiaries holding the securities (see above) it is proposed that the legal owners of the securities enter into a participation agreement with ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) to transfer 80 % of the economic risk from that portfolio while retaining legal ownership. ING Support Holding then enters into a so-called illiquid asset back-up facility for transferring this risk and all respective incoming payments (interest and principal repayments) to the Dutch State. |
| --- | --- |

(17)

In order to avoid dealing with the various subsidiaries holding the securities (see above) it is proposed that the legal owners of the securities enter into a participation agreement with ING Support Holding (a direct subsidiary of ING Group) to transfer 80 % of the economic risk from that portfolio while retaining legal ownership. ING Support Holding then enters into a so-called illiquid asset back-up facility for transferring this risk and all respective incoming payments (interest and principal repayments) to the Dutch State.

| (18) | The transaction is constructed as a cash-flow swap in which both the Dutch State and ING agree to exchange different cash flows over the duration of the deal. During the deal, the portfolio will not be actively managed as it mostly be held until maturity, although there might be activity expected due to possible legislative change in the US. |
| --- | --- |

(18)

The transaction is constructed as a cash-flow swap in which both the Dutch State and ING agree to exchange different cash flows over the duration of the deal. During the deal, the portfolio will not be actively managed as it mostly be held until maturity, although there might be activity expected due to possible legislative change in the US.

| (19) | In the transaction 80 % of the incoming payment flows, i.e. repayment and prepayment of principal and interest (thereafter called: portfolio cash flow) from ING's portfolio is swapped against an over-time payment from the Dutch State of the guaranteed amount of USD 28 billion which together with an interest component constitutes the funding fee. This interest component paid by the Dutch State amounts to 350 bp on the outstanding fixed part of the portfolio (amounting to 57 % of the portfolio) and to one month USD Libor + 50 bp on the variable part of the portfolio (amounting to 43 % of the portfolio). |
| --- | --- |

(19)

In the transaction 80 % of the incoming payment flows, i.e. repayment and prepayment of principal and interest (thereafter called: portfolio cash flow) from ING's portfolio is swapped against an over-time payment from the Dutch State of the guaranteed amount of USD 28 billion which together with an interest component constitutes the funding fee. This interest component paid by the Dutch State amounts to 350 bp on the outstanding fixed part of the portfolio (amounting to 57 % of the portfolio) and to one month USD Libor + 50 bp on the variable part of the portfolio (amounting to 43 % of the portfolio).

| (20) | For evaluating the terms of this deal it is necessary to look at the expected net present value of the various cash flows. For arriving at a net present value of the above cash flows it is necessary to apply a discount rate. (9) The transaction foresees a discount rate of 3 % for all cash flows in the swap. This discount rate is applied to all cash flows, regardless of whether they come from the Dutch State, from ING or from the portfolio transiting via ING to the Dutch State. The reason why a 3 % discount rate is used is because the Dutch State estimates its cost of funding in USD to be around 3 % for a maturity of 5-7 years, corresponding to the weighted average life of the portfolio. The Dutch State has provided two supporting opinions on this from its primary dealers. |
| --- | --- |

(20)

For evaluating the terms of this deal it is necessary to look at the expected net present value of the various cash flows. For arriving at a net present value of the above cash flows it is necessary to apply a discount rate. (9) The transaction foresees a discount rate of 3 % for all cash flows in the swap. This discount rate is applied to all cash flows, regardless of whether they come from the Dutch State, from ING or from the portfolio transiting via ING to the Dutch State. The reason why a 3 % discount rate is used is because the Dutch State estimates its cost of funding in USD to be around 3 % for a maturity of 5-7 years, corresponding to the weighted average life of the portfolio. The Dutch State has provided two supporting opinions on this from its primary dealers.

(a)   Valuation: methodology, scenarios and discount rate

| (21) | The Dutch State commissioned Dynamic Credit Partners to analyse the portfolio of ING for determining the real economic value of the portfolio. The overall approach consists in projecting the probability of default and loss severities on a tranche per tranche basis for the whole portfolio in order to calculate the expected losses. |
| --- | --- |

(21)

The Dutch State commissioned Dynamic Credit Partners to analyse the portfolio of ING for determining the real economic value of the portfolio. The overall approach consists in projecting the probability of default and loss severities on a tranche per tranche basis for the whole portfolio in order to calculate the expected losses.

| (22) | Dynamic Credit performed a bottom up evaluation of the underlying mortgages in each securitization deal (from which ING bought a tranche) and was able to calculate the expected losses it estimated would arise on the underlying mortgage loans. Such calculations were based on — inter alia — factors such as the original ratio between the value of the house and the principal (loan to value), the type of loan, the type of lender, the location at postcode level and the estimated change in house prices at postcode level since the loan was granted. |
| --- | --- |

(22)

Dynamic Credit performed a bottom up evaluation of the underlying mortgages in each securitization deal (from which ING bought a tranche) and was able to calculate the expected losses it estimated would arise on the underlying mortgage loans. Such calculations were based on — inter alia — factors such as the original ratio between the value of the house and the principal (loan to value), the type of loan, the type of lender, the location at postcode level and the estimated change in house prices at postcode level since the loan was granted.

| (23) | As a second step, the so-called cash waterfall is considered, as for a given securitization deal, there are various tranches each with different levels of seniority (or “credit cushion”) and credit enhancement. In practice, this means that any incoming cash flow shortfalls are first to be taken by more subordinated tranches, while more senior tranches are still being serviced by remaining cash flows and reserves built-up during times when there had not been defaults. The Dutch authorities claim that ING's portfolio has only very secure senior tranches. |
| --- | --- |

(23)

As a second step, the so-called cash waterfall is considered, as for a given securitization deal, there are various tranches each with different levels of seniority (or “credit cushion”) and credit enhancement. In practice, this means that any incoming cash flow shortfalls are first to be taken by more subordinated tranches, while more senior tranches are still being serviced by remaining cash flows and reserves built-up during times when there had not been defaults. The Dutch authorities claim that ING's portfolio has only very secure senior tranches.

| (24) | Two scenarios are projected: a scenario deemed more likely by the Dutch State, the base case, and a less likely stress case scenario. According to the Dutch authorities, key assumptions in the base case are house price declines of about 35 % nationwide peak to trough (2006 to 2009) and up to 65 % in hardest hit areas such as California and a US unemployment rate of 8 % in 2009. An annual decline in US GDP is assumed by 6 % in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 3 % in the first quarter of 2009. The stress case scenario assumes US home price declines of 45 % peak-to-trough and a 70-75 % peak-to-trough decline in the most vulnerable areas and an increase of the US unemployment rate to 9,5 % in 2009. Both scenarios assume a voluntary prepayment rate of 5 % over the lifetime of the mortgages figure when compared with the pre-crisis period. The Dutch State points out that this is a prudent assumption. Both scenarios are then translated into different total expected losses on the portfolio. |
| --- | --- |

(24)

Two scenarios are projected: a scenario deemed more likely by the Dutch State, the base case, and a less likely stress case scenario. According to the Dutch authorities, key assumptions in the base case are house price declines of about 35 % nationwide peak to trough (2006 to 2009) and up to 65 % in hardest hit areas such as California and a US unemployment rate of 8 % in 2009. An annual decline in US GDP is assumed by 6 % in the fourth quarter of 2008 and 3 % in the first quarter of 2009. The stress case scenario assumes US home price declines of 45 % peak-to-trough and a 70-75 % peak-to-trough decline in the most vulnerable areas and an increase of the US unemployment rate to 9,5 % in 2009. Both scenarios assume a voluntary prepayment rate of 5 % over the lifetime of the mortgages figure when compared with the pre-crisis period. The Dutch State points out that this is a prudent assumption. Both scenarios are then translated into different total expected losses on the portfolio.

| (25) | After having determined the expected net cash flows (net of expected losses), they are discounted at a discount rate of 3 % for arriving at a net present value. Alternatively, this corresponds to a discount rate of 4,19 % if gross cash flows (assuming no losses) were considered, under a base case valuation. Based on these calculations the Dutch authorities arrive at a valuation of 97 % of par in the base case scenario. In the stress case scenario, the value of the portfolio would be 89 % of par. |
| --- | --- |

(25)

After having determined the expected net cash flows (net of expected losses), they are discounted at a discount rate of 3 % for arriving at a net present value. Alternatively, this corresponds to a discount rate of 4,19 % if gross cash flows (assuming no losses) were considered, under a base case valuation. Based on these calculations the Dutch authorities arrive at a valuation of 97 % of par in the base case scenario. In the stress case scenario, the value of the portfolio would be 89 % of par.

(b)   Effect on ING's capital ratio

| (26) | The replacement of the risky portfolio by a secure government receivable reduces the capital required to be held against the risky asset by the bank. In regulatory terms, the Dutch authorities state that this results in a capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion, (10) deriving from a reduction of 13 billion risk weighted asset (RWA) based on 31 December 2008. This capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion can be used for additional lending. |
| --- | --- |

(26)

The replacement of the risky portfolio by a secure government receivable reduces the capital required to be held against the risky asset by the bank. In regulatory terms, the Dutch authorities state that this results in a capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion, (10) deriving from a reduction of 13 billion risk weighted asset (RWA) based on 31 December 2008. This capital relief of EUR 1,26 billion can be used for additional lending.

| (27) | According to the Dutch authorities from an accounting point of view the IFRS equity capital relief is EUR 5,6 billion — 80 % of pre-tax of the total equity capital relief of EUR 7 billion — which translates into approximately EUR 5 billion post tax. This is caused by the release of the negative revaluation reserve that in turn resulted from a sharp deterioration in market prices of RMBS over the last two years. However, this EUR 5 billion cannot be used for additional lending without reducing the regulatory ratios. |
| --- | --- |

(27)

According to the Dutch authorities from an accounting point of view the IFRS equity capital relief is EUR 5,6 billion — 80 % of pre-tax of the total equity capital relief of EUR 7 billion — which translates into approximately EUR 5 billion post tax. This is caused by the release of the negative revaluation reserve that in turn resulted from a sharp deterioration in market prices of RMBS over the last two years. However, this EUR 5 billion cannot be used for additional lending without reducing the regulatory ratios.

(c)   Additional fees

| (28) | In addition ING will pay a guarantee fee to the State amounting to 55 bp p.a. on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The guarantee fee will decline in line with the declining amounts outstanding on the portfolio, the declining RWA relief and the declining risk for the State. As an illustrative example in the first five years the expected guarantee fee will be: USD 170 million, (2009), USD 146 million (2010), USD 127 million (2011), USD 109 million (2012), USD 94 million (2013). |
| --- | --- |

(28)

In addition ING will pay a guarantee fee to the State amounting to 55 bp p.a. on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The guarantee fee will decline in line with the declining amounts outstanding on the portfolio, the declining RWA relief and the declining risk for the State. As an illustrative example in the first five years the expected guarantee fee will be: USD 170 million, (2009), USD 146 million (2010), USD 127 million (2011), USD 109 million (2012), USD 94 million (2013).

| (29) | Furthermore, the State has to pay to ING a management fee amounting to 0,25 bp p.a. of the outstanding portfolio, expected to amount in the first five years, for instance, to USD 77 million, USD 66 million, USD 58 million, USD 50 million, USD 43 million. |
| --- | --- |

(29)

Furthermore, the State has to pay to ING a management fee amounting to 0,25 bp p.a. of the outstanding portfolio, expected to amount in the first five years, for instance, to USD 77 million, USD 66 million, USD 58 million, USD 50 million, USD 43 million.

(d)   Remuneration of the measure

| (30) | Given the above description of the measure the expected discounted cash flows are in the following table. This would imply according to the Dutch authorities that the state would make a gain in both scenarios. |
| --- | --- |

(30)

Given the above description of the measure the expected discounted cash flows are in the following table. This would imply according to the Dutch authorities that the state would make a gain in both scenarios.

Table 1: Projected net present value flows (11), in million USD

| | Base case | Stress case |
| --- | --- | --- |
| P & I payments to State (12) | 30,376 | 27,728 |
| Guarantee fee to State | 1,011 | 1,011 |
| (Guaranteed value to ING) (12) | (28,844) | (28,844) |
| Expected gain (loss) to state | 2,867 | 219 |

Base case

Stress case

P & I payments to State (12)

30,376

27,728

Guarantee fee to State

1,011

1,011

(Guaranteed value to ING) (12)

(28,844)

(28,844)

Expected gain (loss) to state

2,867

219

| (31) | The Dutch authorities state, however, that the management fee is an integral part of the deal and this has to be taken into account when looking at remuneration. Table 2 recalculates therefore the calculations with the management fee included. Based on this calculation, the remuneration for the State amounts to slightly more than USD 2 billion in the base case, but the remuneration is negative in the stress case. |
| --- | --- |

(31)

The Dutch authorities state, however, that the management fee is an integral part of the deal and this has to be taken into account when looking at remuneration. Table 2 recalculates therefore the calculations with the management fee included. Based on this calculation, the remuneration for the State amounts to slightly more than USD 2 billion in the base case, but the remuneration is negative in the stress case.

Table 2: Projected net present value flows (14), in million USD

| | Base case | Stress case |
| --- | --- | --- |
| P & I payments to State (15) | 30,376 | 27,728 |
| Guarantee fee to State | 1,011 | 1,011 |
| (Guaranteed value to ING) (16) | (28,844) | (28,844) |
| (Management fee to ING) | (460) | (460) |
| Expected gain (loss) to state | 2,083 | (564) |

Base case

Stress case

P & I payments to State (15)

30,376

27,728

Guarantee fee to State

1,011

1,011

(Guaranteed value to ING) (16)

(28,844)

(28,844)

(Management fee to ING)

(460)

(460)

Expected gain (loss) to state

2,083

(564)

(e)   Duration and end of the measure

| (32) | The agreement between the State and ING provides for an exit mechanism whereby the State and ING will meet every year to discuss whether the entire facility should be terminated. If both parties wish to terminate the facility the value will be determined using an exit mechanism commonly used in major financial transactions: |
| --- | --- |

(32)

The agreement between the State and ING provides for an exit mechanism whereby the State and ING will meet every year to discuss whether the entire facility should be terminated. If both parties wish to terminate the facility the value will be determined using an exit mechanism commonly used in major financial transactions:

| (33) | Each party will appoint an independent advisor to evaluate the outstanding portfolio. If there is little difference between these valuations the average of the two will be used as the basis for the transaction. If the valuations differ widely, the parties will jointly appoint a third independent advisor. The value will then be established as the average of the value as calculated by the third advisor and the value of whichever of the earlier valuations is closest to the third advisor's estimates. |
| --- | --- |

(33)

Each party will appoint an independent advisor to evaluate the outstanding portfolio. If there is little difference between these valuations the average of the two will be used as the basis for the transaction. If the valuations differ widely, the parties will jointly appoint a third independent advisor. The value will then be established as the average of the value as calculated by the third advisor and the value of whichever of the earlier valuations is closest to the third advisor's estimates.

| (34) | As an exit mechanism the State is entitled to compel ING to sell the underlying securities once they are being traded on the market again at the price which ING paid when it purchased them. |
| --- | --- |

(34)

As an exit mechanism the State is entitled to compel ING to sell the underlying securities once they are being traded on the market again at the price which ING paid when it purchased them.

| (35) | If neither the exit mechanism nor the exit incentives lead to the portfolio being run down, or the State being bought out entirely, the facility can in theory remain in operation until the last mortgage has been repaid. This could mean that there will be cash flows between the State and ING resulting from this transaction up until 2047. However, the estimated cash flows are such that majority of the portfolio will be redeemed within a few years (the weighed average life of this portfolio is about 6 years). |
| --- | --- |

(35)

If neither the exit mechanism nor the exit incentives lead to the portfolio being run down, or the State being bought out entirely, the facility can in theory remain in operation until the last mortgage has been repaid. This could mean that there will be cash flows between the State and ING resulting from this transaction up until 2047. However, the estimated cash flows are such that majority of the portfolio will be redeemed within a few years (the weighed average life of this portfolio is about 6 years).

III.   THE POSITION OF THE NETHERLANDS

| (36) | The Dutch authorities informed the Commission on 17 March that in case the Alt-A Transaction does not close before 31 March 2009 and the risk transfer would not be effected, they would have serious concerns that this would result in a [...] financial markets and the Dutch economy. A delay in closing would mean that the Alt-A Transaction would not have the intended positive effects on revaluation reserves, IFRS equity and capital adequacy ratios. In view of the volatility of the financial markets this might lead to substantial increase in uncertainty about the position of ING. Another issue that could increase the uncertainty about the position of ING is the accounting notion [...] (17) [...]. Both issues, i.e. a delay in closing or a significant change [...], could, in the view of the authorities, have a material adverse effect on the stability of ING and hence the [...] financial markets and economy. This is confirmed in a letter by the supervisory authority. |
| --- | --- |

(36)

The Dutch authorities informed the Commission on 17 March that in case the Alt-A Transaction does not close before 31 March 2009 and the risk transfer would not be effected, they would have serious concerns that this would result in a [...] financial markets and the Dutch economy. A delay in closing would mean that the Alt-A Transaction would not have the intended positive effects on revaluation reserves, IFRS equity and capital adequacy ratios. In view of the volatility of the financial markets this might lead to substantial increase in uncertainty about the position of ING. Another issue that could increase the uncertainty about the position of ING is the accounting notion [...] (17) [...]. Both issues, i.e. a delay in closing or a significant change [...], could, in the view of the authorities, have a material adverse effect on the stability of ING and hence the [...] financial markets and economy. This is confirmed in a letter by the supervisory authority.

| (37) | In addition, they note that, without Commission approval, ING's [...] with all the possible consequences this might have for confidence in the banking sector in general and ING in particular, but also for the Dutch and European economy in these times of uncertainty and recession. The Dutch authorities point to the Commission decision on the recapitalisation N 528/2008, where the Commission had already recognised the importance of ING for the Dutch economy. |
| --- | --- |

(37)

In addition, they note that, without Commission approval, ING's [...] with all the possible consequences this might have for confidence in the banking sector in general and ING in particular, but also for the Dutch and European economy in these times of uncertainty and recession. The Dutch authorities point to the Commission decision on the recapitalisation N 528/2008, where the Commission had already recognised the importance of ING for the Dutch economy.

| (38) | The Dutch authorities underline that ING is a sound financial institution with sufficient liquidity and solvency, but it is suffering from exceptional conditions worldwide. ING would therefore certainly not qualify as a firm in difficulties, as defined in the Community guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty. |
| --- | --- |

(38)

The Dutch authorities underline that ING is a sound financial institution with sufficient liquidity and solvency, but it is suffering from exceptional conditions worldwide. ING would therefore certainly not qualify as a firm in difficulties, as defined in the Community guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty.

| (39) | The Dutch authorities acknowledge that the measure constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC, which is compatible with the Treaty pursuant to Article 87(3)(b) EC, for remedying a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State. In particular, the measure has been specially designed for the current exceptional circumstances in which, because of their illiquidity, certain assets have to be written down more than their economic value would warrant, for satisfying accounting requirements. They note that the measure was appropriate at such time for tackling the specific problems and at the same time is the least far-reaching and least risky way for the State to assist ING. |
| --- | --- |

(39)

The Dutch authorities acknowledge that the measure constitutes state aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC, which is compatible with the Treaty pursuant to Article 87(3)(b) EC, for remedying a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State. In particular, the measure has been specially designed for the current exceptional circumstances in which, because of their illiquidity, certain assets have to be written down more than their economic value would warrant, for satisfying accounting requirements. They note that the measure was appropriate at such time for tackling the specific problems and at the same time is the least far-reaching and least risky way for the State to assist ING.

| (40) | The Dutch authorities confirmed that they have reviewed whether there has been a full prior transparency by ING having disclosed all impairments and there were no indications to believe that this was not the case. In addition, the Dutch authorities note that the valuation of the portfolio is performed by independent experts under an appropriate methodology. The Dutch authorities are of the view that the valuation of ING’s portfolio was particularly complex as there was no active markets for these assets. The Dutch authorities have instructed Dynamic Credit who have undertaken an alternative valuation which they considered the best approximation of the true value of the portfolio. The valuation has been affirmed by the Dutch supervisory authority. |
| --- | --- |

(40)

The Dutch authorities confirmed that they have reviewed whether there has been a full prior transparency by ING having disclosed all impairments and there were no indications to believe that this was not the case. In addition, the Dutch authorities note that the valuation of the portfolio is performed by independent experts under an appropriate methodology. The Dutch authorities are of the view that the valuation of ING’s portfolio was particularly complex as there was no active markets for these assets. The Dutch authorities have instructed Dynamic Credit who have undertaken an alternative valuation which they considered the best approximation of the true value of the portfolio. The valuation has been affirmed by the Dutch supervisory authority.

| (41) | The authorities state that the total package provides an adequate remuneration for the risk taken over by the state. The authorities point to the more likely base case scenario which shows an overall gain for the Dutch State. The Dutch authorities state that the management fee is part of the overall remuneration package. The total package was considered appropriate at such time. There is also adequate burden sharing, due to the first loss already borne by the bank, and a future loss split in the relationship of 80 % for the State and 20 % for the bank. |
| --- | --- |

(41)

The authorities state that the total package provides an adequate remuneration for the risk taken over by the state. The authorities point to the more likely base case scenario which shows an overall gain for the Dutch State. The Dutch authorities state that the management fee is part of the overall remuneration package. The total package was considered appropriate at such time. There is also adequate burden sharing, due to the first loss already borne by the bank, and a future loss split in the relationship of 80 % for the State and 20 % for the bank.

| (42) | As regards to the management of the assets, the authorities explain that ING remains partly responsible for the portfolio, giving it the perfect incentive to continue to manage the portfolio as efficiently as possible. They underline with reference to point 46 IAC that the Securities are held solely by ING Support Holding and not by ING Groep and that for the duration of this agreement the State, ING Support Holding and ING Groep will establish an operating committee to discuss recent developments, market outlook, data and pricing in respect of the Securities. |
| --- | --- |

(42)

As regards to the management of the assets, the authorities explain that ING remains partly responsible for the portfolio, giving it the perfect incentive to continue to manage the portfolio as efficiently as possible. They underline with reference to point 46 IAC that the Securities are held solely by ING Support Holding and not by ING Groep and that for the duration of this agreement the State, ING Support Holding and ING Groep will establish an operating committee to discuss recent developments, market outlook, data and pricing in respect of the Securities.

| (43) | The Dutch authorities state that it would be admissible to use a single discount rate for all cash flows involved. The Dutch authorities state that a higher discount rate for cash flows from ING or for cash flows transiting from ING to the State, due to their higher perceived riskiness, would over-adjust for the flow's riskiness. They explain that the credit risk in the portfolio is more than offset by the positive net present value for the State under the swap transaction. |
| --- | --- |

(43)

The Dutch authorities state that it would be admissible to use a single discount rate for all cash flows involved. The Dutch authorities state that a higher discount rate for cash flows from ING or for cash flows transiting from ING to the State, due to their higher perceived riskiness, would over-adjust for the flow's riskiness. They explain that the credit risk in the portfolio is more than offset by the positive net present value for the State under the swap transaction.

| (44) | The Dutch government provides the following commitments: |
| --- | --- |

(44)

The Dutch government provides the following commitments:

| — | Presentation of a viability review in line with conditions set out in the IAC |
| --- | --- |

—

Presentation of a viability review in line with conditions set out in the IAC

| — | Presentation of a restructuring plan in line with conditions set out in the IAC |
| --- | --- |

—

Presentation of a restructuring plan in line with conditions set out in the IAC

| — | The Dutch State is willing to change the provisions of valuation and burden sharing by means of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration, without compensating ING via changes in the other cash flows ( i.e. the funding fee, the Alt A cash flows and management fee) if the Commission comes to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with EC State aid rules on impaired assets. |
| --- | --- |

—

The Dutch State is willing to change the provisions of valuation and burden sharing by means of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration, without compensating ING via changes in the other cash flows ( i.e. the funding fee, the Alt A cash flows and management fee) if the Commission comes to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with EC State aid rules on impaired assets.

IV.   CONSULTATION OF THE TECHNICAL EXPERTS FROM THE EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK

| (45) | As explained in point 4, the Commission has been consulting the technical experts from the ECB for assistance in assessing the valuation of the portfolio. The experts of the ECB reviewed the provided documents and concluded that they did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING. |
| --- | --- |

(45)

As explained in point 4, the Commission has been consulting the technical experts from the ECB for assistance in assessing the valuation of the portfolio. The experts of the ECB reviewed the provided documents and concluded that they did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING.

V.   ASSESSMENT OF THE AID

1.   Existence of aid

| (46) | The Commission first assesses whether the measures constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 87 (1) EC. According to this provision state aid is any aid granted by a Member State or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition, by favouring certain undertakings, in so far as it affects trade between Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(46)

The Commission first assesses whether the measures constitute state aid within the meaning of Article 87 (1) EC. According to this provision state aid is any aid granted by a Member State or through state resources in any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition, by favouring certain undertakings, in so far as it affects trade between Member States.

| (47) | The Commission finds that the measure reduces the amount of capital ING has to hold against these assets. Given that the market value of the portfolio is less than the price paid it is evident that no market operator would provide such a facility under similar conditions. |
| --- | --- |

(47)

The Commission finds that the measure reduces the amount of capital ING has to hold against these assets. Given that the market value of the portfolio is less than the price paid it is evident that no market operator would provide such a facility under similar conditions.

| (48) | As the measure is favouring only ING it is selective and leads to a distortion of competition and affects intra-Community trade because the banking sector operates internationally. Thus, the Commission concludes that the measure constitutes state aid. |
| --- | --- |

(48)

As the measure is favouring only ING it is selective and leads to a distortion of competition and affects intra-Community trade because the banking sector operates internationally. Thus, the Commission concludes that the measure constitutes state aid.

| (49) | The IAC states that the aid amount corresponds to the difference between the transfer value of the assets (based on their real economic value) and the market price. To this end the assets should be valued on the basis of their current market value, whenever possible. Given that the market for the assets in the portfolio has mostly dried up, as claimed by the Dutch authorities, this implies that there is no market price in the absence of a market as defined by the IAC. Therefore the calculated aid amount as regards the portfolio is the full net present value of all the sums provided to ING by the Dutch government. |
| --- | --- |

(49)

The IAC states that the aid amount corresponds to the difference between the transfer value of the assets (based on their real economic value) and the market price. To this end the assets should be valued on the basis of their current market value, whenever possible. Given that the market for the assets in the portfolio has mostly dried up, as claimed by the Dutch authorities, this implies that there is no market price in the absence of a market as defined by the IAC. Therefore the calculated aid amount as regards the portfolio is the full net present value of all the sums provided to ING by the Dutch government.

2.   Compatibility of the financial support measures

| (50) | The Netherlands intends to provide impaired asset relief in favour of ING. Given the present circumstances in the financial market, the Commission considers that this measure may be examined directly under the Treaty rules and in particular under Article 87(3)(b) EC. |
| --- | --- |

(50)

The Netherlands intends to provide impaired asset relief in favour of ING. Given the present circumstances in the financial market, the Commission considers that this measure may be examined directly under the Treaty rules and in particular under Article 87(3)(b) EC.

| (51) | Article 87(3)(b) EC empowers the Commission to declare aid compatible with the common market if it is intended “to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State”. The Commission would point out that the Court of First Instance has expressly stated that Article 87(3)(b) EC is to be applied restrictively so that the aid may not benefit only one firm or one sector of the economy, but must serve to remedy a disturbance in the whole economy of a Member State. (18) |
| --- | --- |

(51)

Article 87(3)(b) EC empowers the Commission to declare aid compatible with the common market if it is intended “to remedy a serious disturbance in the economy of a Member State”. The Commission would point out that the Court of First Instance has expressly stated that Article 87(3)(b) EC is to be applied restrictively so that the aid may not benefit only one firm or one sector of the economy, but must serve to remedy a disturbance in the whole economy of a Member State. (18)

| (52) | The Commission considers that market conditions deteriorated all over the world in the last quarter of 2008 and certain assets classes are no longer frequently traded. This is problematic for financial institutions because accounting provisions (IFRS accounting standards) might require them to write down these illiquid assets (on the basis of their fair value) to a greater extent than is warranted by their economic value. The uncertainty in the market about the scale of the write-downs, the market value of these assets and the high leverage ratios have also had an impact on the financial institutions′ overall risk perceptions. The present measure is designed to address these problems. Therefore it finds that the scheme aims at remedying a serious disturbance in the Dutch economy. |
| --- | --- |

(52)

The Commission considers that market conditions deteriorated all over the world in the last quarter of 2008 and certain assets classes are no longer frequently traded. This is problematic for financial institutions because accounting provisions (IFRS accounting standards) might require them to write down these illiquid assets (on the basis of their fair value) to a greater extent than is warranted by their economic value. The uncertainty in the market about the scale of the write-downs, the market value of these assets and the high leverage ratios have also had an impact on the financial institutions′ overall risk perceptions. The present measure is designed to address these problems. Therefore it finds that the scheme aims at remedying a serious disturbance in the Dutch economy.

| (53) | The Commission has provided guidance on the treatment of asset relief measures by Member States under Article 87(3)(b) EC through the IAC. Impaired assets correspond to categories of assets on which banks are likely to incur losses (e.g. US sub-prime mortgage backed securities, Alt-A loans). The IAC complements and refines the Banking Communication (19) where the Commission set out the principles governing the application of the State aid rules to any support measure for banks in the context of the global financial crisis. The IAC sets out principles that must be followed by any asset relief measure. It should be noted that the Commission emphasises that a common European approach is needed to deal with the treatment of impaired assets, to make sure that foreseeable losses are disclosed, valued and accompanied by an adequate level in terms of burden sharing and remuneration. |
| --- | --- |

(53)

The Commission has provided guidance on the treatment of asset relief measures by Member States under Article 87(3)(b) EC through the IAC. Impaired assets correspond to categories of assets on which banks are likely to incur losses (e.g. US sub-prime mortgage backed securities, Alt-A loans). The IAC complements and refines the Banking Communication (19) where the Commission set out the principles governing the application of the State aid rules to any support measure for banks in the context of the global financial crisis. The IAC sets out principles that must be followed by any asset relief measure. It should be noted that the Commission emphasises that a common European approach is needed to deal with the treatment of impaired assets, to make sure that foreseeable losses are disclosed, valued and accompanied by an adequate level in terms of burden sharing and remuneration.

| (54) | The IAC leaves the methods and design for impaired asset relief measures to the Member Sates, but defines impaired asset relief as all measures whereby a bank is dispensed from the need for severe downward value adjustments of certain asset classes. This is also the case for the present measure. Therefore the present measure must fulfil the conditions for the compatibility of asset relieve as spelled out in the IAC. (20) |
| --- | --- |

(54)

The IAC leaves the methods and design for impaired asset relief measures to the Member Sates, but defines impaired asset relief as all measures whereby a bank is dispensed from the need for severe downward value adjustments of certain asset classes. This is also the case for the present measure. Therefore the present measure must fulfil the conditions for the compatibility of asset relieve as spelled out in the IAC. (20)

(a)   Eligibility of assets

| (55) | As regards the eligibility of the assets, the IAC indicates in section 5.4 that asset relief requires a clear identification of impaired assets (21) and that certain limits apply in relation to eligibility to ensure compatibility. US mortgage backed securities (i.e. RMBS) are mentioned as prime examples of impaired assets which can be included in relief operations without doubts as to their eligibility. The Commission notes in this respect that all assets in the portfolio are related to US RMBS. The impaired assets are therefore sufficiently identified and do not raise issues of eligibility. |
| --- | --- |

(55)

As regards the eligibility of the assets, the IAC indicates in section 5.4 that asset relief requires a clear identification of impaired assets (21) and that certain limits apply in relation to eligibility to ensure compatibility. US mortgage backed securities (i.e. RMBS) are mentioned as prime examples of impaired assets which can be included in relief operations without doubts as to their eligibility. The Commission notes in this respect that all assets in the portfolio are related to US RMBS. The impaired assets are therefore sufficiently identified and do not raise issues of eligibility.

(b)   Transparency and disclosure

| (56) | As regards transparency and disclosure the Commission notes that the IAC demands in section 5.1 full ex-ante transparency and disclosure of impairments by eligible banks on the assets which will be covered by the relief measures, based on adequate valuation, certified by recognised independent experts and validated by the relevant supervisory authority. In other word the IAC requires that disclosure and valuation should take place prior to government intervention. Moreover, transparency needs to be based on appropriate valuation certified by an independent expert and validated by a letter of the head of the supervisory authority. |
| --- | --- |

(56)

As regards transparency and disclosure the Commission notes that the IAC demands in section 5.1 full ex-ante transparency and disclosure of impairments by eligible banks on the assets which will be covered by the relief measures, based on adequate valuation, certified by recognised independent experts and validated by the relevant supervisory authority. In other word the IAC requires that disclosure and valuation should take place prior to government intervention. Moreover, transparency needs to be based on appropriate valuation certified by an independent expert and validated by a letter of the head of the supervisory authority.

| (57) | The Commission notes first that the Dutch authorities have engaged an independent expert. Second, as indicated above in point 42 the Dutch authorities have pursuant to point 20 IAC produced the necessary documents from the supervisory authorities. |
| --- | --- |

(57)

The Commission notes first that the Dutch authorities have engaged an independent expert. Second, as indicated above in point 42 the Dutch authorities have pursuant to point 20 IAC produced the necessary documents from the supervisory authorities.

| (58) | Finally, the Commission notes that the requirements concerning transparency and disclosure concerning the asset portfolio covered by the relief measure are met in principle, with the exception of the issue of proper valuation dealt with separately below. Full disclosure on the entirety of impaired assets on ING's balance sheet has not however been provided in the context of the notified measure and will have to be provided in the viability review. At this stage the provisions for transparency and disclosure are thus sufficiently complied with. |
| --- | --- |

(58)

Finally, the Commission notes that the requirements concerning transparency and disclosure concerning the asset portfolio covered by the relief measure are met in principle, with the exception of the issue of proper valuation dealt with separately below. Full disclosure on the entirety of impaired assets on ING's balance sheet has not however been provided in the context of the notified measure and will have to be provided in the viability review. At this stage the provisions for transparency and disclosure are thus sufficiently complied with.

(c)   Management of assets

| (59) | As regards the management of assets, the IAC in section 5.6 stipulates the necessity of ensuring a clear functional and organisational separation between the beneficiary bank and its assets, notably as to their management, staff and clientele. The Communication states in that respect that this should allow the bank to focus on the restoration of viability and to prevent possible conflicts of interest. |
| --- | --- |

(59)

As regards the management of assets, the IAC in section 5.6 stipulates the necessity of ensuring a clear functional and organisational separation between the beneficiary bank and its assets, notably as to their management, staff and clientele. The Communication states in that respect that this should allow the bank to focus on the restoration of viability and to prevent possible conflicts of interest.

| (60) | In that respect, the Commission notes that 80 % of the portfolio will be derecognised by ING. However ING remains the legal owner of all the assets. In order to achieve a functional and organisational separation, ING has appointed a special committee to deal with the portfolio as indicated above in point 42. In view of this arrangement the asset management is thus in line with the IAC. |
| --- | --- |

(60)

In that respect, the Commission notes that 80 % of the portfolio will be derecognised by ING. However ING remains the legal owner of all the assets. In order to achieve a functional and organisational separation, ING has appointed a special committee to deal with the portfolio as indicated above in point 42. In view of this arrangement the asset management is thus in line with the IAC.

(d)   Valuation

| (61) | The IAC notes in section 5.5 that a correct and consistent approach to valuation is of key importance to prevent undue distortions of competition. The valuation of impaired assets should follow a general methodology established at the Community level, which should be closely co-ordinated ex-ante by the Commission and Member States. |
| --- | --- |

(61)

The IAC notes in section 5.5 that a correct and consistent approach to valuation is of key importance to prevent undue distortions of competition. The valuation of impaired assets should follow a general methodology established at the Community level, which should be closely co-ordinated ex-ante by the Commission and Member States.

| (62) | The Commission has to carefully scrutinize the valuation and in particular the underlying general methodology in order to ensure a consistent approach at Community level. In this respect its assessment should build on the expertise of existing bodies organised at EU level in order to ensure the consistency of valuation methodologies. For that purpose the Commission has called on the technical assistance provided by the experts from the ECB. The Commission notes that the technical experts from the ECB consider more information is needed. |
| --- | --- |

(62)

The Commission has to carefully scrutinize the valuation and in particular the underlying general methodology in order to ensure a consistent approach at Community level. In this respect its assessment should build on the expertise of existing bodies organised at EU level in order to ensure the consistency of valuation methodologies. For that purpose the Commission has called on the technical assistance provided by the experts from the ECB. The Commission notes that the technical experts from the ECB consider more information is needed.

| (63) | Valuation implies the determination first of the market value and second of the real economic value, the latter being defined in point 40 of the IAC as the long-term economic value on the basis of underlying cash flows and broader time horizons. The main aim of valuation is to establish the real economic value, given that this value represents the benchmark level in that a transfer of impaired assets and at this value indicates compatibility of aid ensuring the relief effect by exceeding current market value but keeping the aid amount to the minimum necessary. |
| --- | --- |

(63)

Valuation implies the determination first of the market value and second of the real economic value, the latter being defined in point 40 of the IAC as the long-term economic value on the basis of underlying cash flows and broader time horizons. The main aim of valuation is to establish the real economic value, given that this value represents the benchmark level in that a transfer of impaired assets and at this value indicates compatibility of aid ensuring the relief effect by exceeding current market value but keeping the aid amount to the minimum necessary.

| (64) | The Commission notes that, based on an independent expert i.e. Dynamic Credit, the Dutch State has established a real economic value of 97 cents on the dollar under the base case which is above the value at which the portfolio has been transferred at (90 percent of the par). |
| --- | --- |

(64)

The Commission notes that, based on an independent expert i.e. Dynamic Credit, the Dutch State has established a real economic value of 97 cents on the dollar under the base case which is above the value at which the portfolio has been transferred at (90 percent of the par).

| (65) | Although the Commission does not question the qualification of the independent expert and its general approach it has some doubts on the conclusion reached on the establishment of this real economic value, given that it did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING (see confirmation by the technical experts from the ECB above in point (45)) and because the valuation is based on a number of assumptions as regards to which the Commission has significant doubts, in particular but not exclusively as regards (i) the choice of the discount rate, (ii) house price assumptions, (iii) the levels of credit enhancement, and (iv) other valuation issues. |
| --- | --- |

(65)

Although the Commission does not question the qualification of the independent expert and its general approach it has some doubts on the conclusion reached on the establishment of this real economic value, given that it did not have all the information needed to properly assess the valuation of the impaired assets portfolio of ING (see confirmation by the technical experts from the ECB above in point (45)) and because the valuation is based on a number of assumptions as regards to which the Commission has significant doubts, in particular but not exclusively as regards (i) the choice of the discount rate, (ii) house price assumptions, (iii) the levels of credit enhancement, and (iv) other valuation issues.

| (66) | The Commission is first concerned about the use of a 4,19 % discount rate to discount all the cash flows of the portfolio, which suggests a spread premium above the USD Dutch government risk-free rate of 119 bp only.






  — | Given the recent developments in the market and higher loss expectations and the significant drop in credit quality of these tranches as translated by the rating downgrades from triple A to an average of BBB/BB, the spread premium and the discount rate to be used should be significantly higher. |
| --- | --- | --- |

(66)

The Commission is first concerned about the use of a 4,19 % discount rate to discount all the cash flows of the portfolio, which suggests a spread premium above the USD Dutch government risk-free rate of 119 bp only.

—

Given the recent developments in the market and higher loss expectations and the significant drop in credit quality of these tranches as translated by the rating downgrades from triple A to an average of BBB/BB, the spread premium and the discount rate to be used should be significantly higher.

| — | The 4,19 % rate does not capture the downside risk (unexpected losses) of deviating from the base case expected losses, as the Dutch State itself accepted a certain degree of probability of seeing the stress scenario materialising. |
| --- | --- |

—

The 4,19 % rate does not capture the downside risk (unexpected losses) of deviating from the base case expected losses, as the Dutch State itself accepted a certain degree of probability of seeing the stress scenario materialising.

| (67) | The Commission considers at this stage that it can not dispel its doubts that the approach taken by the independent expert appears to lead to an overvaluation of the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State. |
| --- | --- |

(67)

The Commission considers at this stage that it can not dispel its doubts that the approach taken by the independent expert appears to lead to an overvaluation of the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State.

| (68) | In addition, the Commission questions whether the house price assumptions applied in the valuations are prudent enough. In particular, it notes that, based on the documents received, the house prices are assumed to decrease only in 2009, then to remain stable in 2010, and then from 2010 onwards to increase by 5,8 % each year. The doubts on this point are highly relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio given the important role played by house prices in the model for the calculation of the real economic value. |
| --- | --- |

(68)

In addition, the Commission questions whether the house price assumptions applied in the valuations are prudent enough. In particular, it notes that, based on the documents received, the house prices are assumed to decrease only in 2009, then to remain stable in 2010, and then from 2010 onwards to increase by 5,8 % each year. The doubts on this point are highly relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio given the important role played by house prices in the model for the calculation of the real economic value.

| (69) | The Commission is also in doubt about the stated levels of subordination/credit enhancement. The levels described for the ING portfolio are significantly higher for both Alt-A and Option ARMs tranches than average levels calculated by assessments from other experts in the context of other cases as well as available subordination/credit enhancement figures for respective typical securities from various asset classes all related to the US housing market from the rating agency Moody’s. To this concern the Dutch State told the Commission that ING had only bought super senior AAA tranches, in structures with higher levels of subordination than other AAA tranches. However, when looking at another report provided by the Dutch authorities to the Commission (commissioned by ING), only 28,1 % of the tranches were qualified as “super senior”, with the remaining being “senior” and “senior support”. The Commission notes that this is relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio as a lower level of subordination/credit enhancement would reduce the protection against losses if payments are not made. Also, the doubts of the Commission are deriving from the fact that a large part of the portfolio is based on mortgages originated during 2006 and 2007, vintages which have so far proven to be most vulnerable to default. |
| --- | --- |

(69)

The Commission is also in doubt about the stated levels of subordination/credit enhancement. The levels described for the ING portfolio are significantly higher for both Alt-A and Option ARMs tranches than average levels calculated by assessments from other experts in the context of other cases as well as available subordination/credit enhancement figures for respective typical securities from various asset classes all related to the US housing market from the rating agency Moody’s. To this concern the Dutch State told the Commission that ING had only bought super senior AAA tranches, in structures with higher levels of subordination than other AAA tranches. However, when looking at another report provided by the Dutch authorities to the Commission (commissioned by ING), only 28,1 % of the tranches were qualified as “super senior”, with the remaining being “senior” and “senior support”. The Commission notes that this is relevant for assessing the real economic value of the portfolio as a lower level of subordination/credit enhancement would reduce the protection against losses if payments are not made. Also, the doubts of the Commission are deriving from the fact that a large part of the portfolio is based on mortgages originated during 2006 and 2007, vintages which have so far proven to be most vulnerable to default.

| (70) | Further doubts as to the appropriateness of valuation cannot be excluded at this stage in view of the fact that the Commission has not yet received full information both on the valuation methodology and on its application to the individual assets covered. A fully-fledged assessment of the Commission can only be carried out once the Commission is in possession of this information. |
| --- | --- |

(70)

Further doubts as to the appropriateness of valuation cannot be excluded at this stage in view of the fact that the Commission has not yet received full information both on the valuation methodology and on its application to the individual assets covered. A fully-fledged assessment of the Commission can only be carried out once the Commission is in possession of this information.

| (71) | In sum, the Commission has doubts as to the valuation methodology and cannot exclude that the real economic value is lower than that calculated by the independent expert of the Dutch State and intends to assess this in-depth. |
| --- | --- |

(71)

In sum, the Commission has doubts as to the valuation methodology and cannot exclude that the real economic value is lower than that calculated by the independent expert of the Dutch State and intends to assess this in-depth.

(e)   Burden sharing

| (72) | As regards burden sharing, the IAC states in section 5.2 the general principle that banks ought to bear the losses associated with impaired assets to the maximum extent. That implies first that the bank should bear the difference between the nominal value and the real economic value of the impaired assets. In fact the Dutch authorities submit that the transaction has the effect that ING will transfer the portfolio at 90 % of par. |
| --- | --- |

(72)

As regards burden sharing, the IAC states in section 5.2 the general principle that banks ought to bear the losses associated with impaired assets to the maximum extent. That implies first that the bank should bear the difference between the nominal value and the real economic value of the impaired assets. In fact the Dutch authorities submit that the transaction has the effect that ING will transfer the portfolio at 90 % of par.

| (73) | However, given that the Commission has doubts as regards the correct valuation of the assets prior to government intervention of the State for the relief measure, there are also doubts as regards the necessary degree of burden sharing included in this measure. In other words should the real economic value be lower than assessed by the Dutch authorities, the theoretical losses absorbed by the beneficiary would be insufficient. |
| --- | --- |

(73)

However, given that the Commission has doubts as regards the correct valuation of the assets prior to government intervention of the State for the relief measure, there are also doubts as regards the necessary degree of burden sharing included in this measure. In other words should the real economic value be lower than assessed by the Dutch authorities, the theoretical losses absorbed by the beneficiary would be insufficient.

| (74) | In that regard, the Commission does not see that the beneficiary is making up for additional possible losses if the real economic value would be lower than currently reported with the envisaged 80/20 division of the portfolio as this is a division pari passu and not a first loss attribution to the beneficiary. In other words, if the real economic value would be 80 instead of 90, the beneficiary would only take the first 10 % of losses from 100 to 90 while for the second part between 90 and 80 he would only take 2 % out of 10 while 8 would remain with the State; proper burden sharing would however require that the beneficiary takes all the losses until the real economic value, i.e. the full 20 %. |
| --- | --- |

(74)

In that regard, the Commission does not see that the beneficiary is making up for additional possible losses if the real economic value would be lower than currently reported with the envisaged 80/20 division of the portfolio as this is a division pari passu and not a first loss attribution to the beneficiary. In other words, if the real economic value would be 80 instead of 90, the beneficiary would only take the first 10 % of losses from 100 to 90 while for the second part between 90 and 80 he would only take 2 % out of 10 while 8 would remain with the State; proper burden sharing would however require that the beneficiary takes all the losses until the real economic value, i.e. the full 20 %.

| (75) | Furthermore regarding the cash flow swap and its funding fee, the Commission doubts whether the respective assumptions as regards the net present value are acceptable. This concerns first the funding fee set at 3,5 % although the Dutch State’s own funding costs in USD are only an estimated 3 %. The Commission also doubts second whether the applied discount rate is appropriate. This is so because the applied discount rate is the same regardless whether cash flows are risky (coming from ING to the State) or are not risky (from the Dutch State to ING). In the view of the Commission, this approach attaches to a more uncertain dollar in the future the same value as to a certain dollar. It therefore leads to an overvaluation of the expected proceeds from the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State. |
| --- | --- |

(75)

Furthermore regarding the cash flow swap and its funding fee, the Commission doubts whether the respective assumptions as regards the net present value are acceptable. This concerns first the funding fee set at 3,5 % although the Dutch State’s own funding costs in USD are only an estimated 3 %. The Commission also doubts second whether the applied discount rate is appropriate. This is so because the applied discount rate is the same regardless whether cash flows are risky (coming from ING to the State) or are not risky (from the Dutch State to ING). In the view of the Commission, this approach attaches to a more uncertain dollar in the future the same value as to a certain dollar. It therefore leads to an overvaluation of the expected proceeds from the portfolio and to an overestimation of the benefit to the Dutch State.

| (76) | In addition, the Commission has also doubt that the cash flow swap adequately compensates for the risk stemming from the difference between the base case of the real economic value and the stress test. This follows from the clear language in Annex 4 IAC that the “pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the state that adequately takes account of the risk of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the real economic value”. Therefore the Commission also requires an additional ex ante coverage of the difference between the real economic value in the base case and the stress case scenario. This is particular the case where the tail risk is significant. In this context the Commission recalls that according to Annex 4 of the IAC the valuation process should be based on rigorous stress-testing against a scenario of protracted global recession and reiterates its doubts on the valuation as set out above. |
| --- | --- |

(76)

In addition, the Commission has also doubt that the cash flow swap adequately compensates for the risk stemming from the difference between the base case of the real economic value and the stress test. This follows from the clear language in Annex 4 IAC that the “pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the state that adequately takes account of the risk of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the real economic value”. Therefore the Commission also requires an additional ex ante coverage of the difference between the real economic value in the base case and the stress case scenario. This is particular the case where the tail risk is significant. In this context the Commission recalls that according to Annex 4 of the IAC the valuation process should be based on rigorous stress-testing against a scenario of protracted global recession and reiterates its doubts on the valuation as set out above.

| (77) | Finally, the Commission has doubts about the appropriateness of the management fee charged by ING. It notes that such a fee is not contemplated by the IAC. The Commission acknowledges however the view of the Dutch authorities that the fee is essentially cost based but stresses that so far it has not obtained full information regarding the actual cost for ING to perform such services, such as costs and staff employed, cost for IT infrastructure, etc. The Commission observes moreover that the scope of work to be performed by ING is not clear given that an active management of an amortising portfolio appears unnecessary and because ING remains the legal owner of the entire portfolio and the economic owner of 20 %. To summarise, the Commission notes that if the fee is indeed covering the costs of ING, it would appear to the Commission that such a fee can be accepted on the condition of an adequate overall burden-sharing. |
| --- | --- |

(77)

Finally, the Commission has doubts about the appropriateness of the management fee charged by ING. It notes that such a fee is not contemplated by the IAC. The Commission acknowledges however the view of the Dutch authorities that the fee is essentially cost based but stresses that so far it has not obtained full information regarding the actual cost for ING to perform such services, such as costs and staff employed, cost for IT infrastructure, etc. The Commission observes moreover that the scope of work to be performed by ING is not clear given that an active management of an amortising portfolio appears unnecessary and because ING remains the legal owner of the entire portfolio and the economic owner of 20 %. To summarise, the Commission notes that if the fee is indeed covering the costs of ING, it would appear to the Commission that such a fee can be accepted on the condition of an adequate overall burden-sharing.

| (78) | In sum, the Commission reserves its final view on the issue of burden sharing until it has come to a conclusion on valuation and recalls that shortcomings in the valuation leading to an inadequate burden-sharing can be counterbalanced by higher remuneration. (22) |
| --- | --- |

(78)

In sum, the Commission reserves its final view on the issue of burden sharing until it has come to a conclusion on valuation and recalls that shortcomings in the valuation leading to an inadequate burden-sharing can be counterbalanced by higher remuneration. (22)

(f)   Guarantee fee

| (79) | Another element of a proper burden sharing is pursuant to point 21 IAC remuneration. It shall, as noted in Annex 4, ensure that “any pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the State that adequately takes account of the risks of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the “real economic value””. |
| --- | --- |

(79)

Another element of a proper burden sharing is pursuant to point 21 IAC remuneration. It shall, as noted in Annex 4, ensure that “any pricing of asset relief must include remuneration for the State that adequately takes account of the risks of future losses exceeding those that are projected in the determination of the “real economic value””.

| (80) | In order to assess the guarantee fee charged by the Dutch authorities it must be recalled that pursuant to the IAC the remuneration should be ‘inspired’ by the remuneration that would have been required for recapitalisation measures to the extent of the capital effect of the proposed asset relief. In principle such remuneration should amount to at least 10 %, in line with the first ING decision of November 2008. (23) |
| --- | --- |

(80)

In order to assess the guarantee fee charged by the Dutch authorities it must be recalled that pursuant to the IAC the remuneration should be ‘inspired’ by the remuneration that would have been required for recapitalisation measures to the extent of the capital effect of the proposed asset relief. In principle such remuneration should amount to at least 10 %, in line with the first ING decision of November 2008. (23)

| (81) | Therefore, the adequate capital effect of the measure needs to be identified. This effect comprises the regulatory capital that was freed due to the transaction (around EUR 1,26 billion = 8 % (24) of 13 billion RWA). A 10 % yield on EUR 1,26 billion would amount to 55 bp on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The current guarantee fee appears to reflect this calculation. Therefore the Commission finds the guarantee fee compatible at this stage. |
| --- | --- |

(81)

Therefore, the adequate capital effect of the measure needs to be identified. This effect comprises the regulatory capital that was freed due to the transaction (around EUR 1,26 billion = 8 % (24) of 13 billion RWA). A 10 % yield on EUR 1,26 billion would amount to 55 bp on the outstanding value of the portfolio. The current guarantee fee appears to reflect this calculation. Therefore the Commission finds the guarantee fee compatible at this stage.

(g)   Viability review and restructuring plan

| (82) | As regards the need for an assessment of the banks balance sheet and activities the IAC states that an application for aid by an individual bank should be followed by a full review of that bank's activities and balance sheet, with a view of assessing the bank's capital adequacy and its prospects for future viability (viability review). The Commission considers it therefore necessary that such a viability review is performed. It notes positively a commitment in that respect. |
| --- | --- |

(82)

As regards the need for an assessment of the banks balance sheet and activities the IAC states that an application for aid by an individual bank should be followed by a full review of that bank's activities and balance sheet, with a view of assessing the bank's capital adequacy and its prospects for future viability (viability review). The Commission considers it therefore necessary that such a viability review is performed. It notes positively a commitment in that respect.

| (83) | Furthermore, the Commission notes that the Dutch authorities commit to present a Restructuring plan complying with the conditions set out in the IAC. Such a plan is in any event required under the first recapitalisation decision and is due by 12 May 2009. The Commission notes that this plan will also cover the present measure and be made on the basis of the IAC. Therefore, the Commission’s assessment of the restructuring plan will assess all aid measures granted to ING including the present one. The Dutch authorities have provided the necessary commitment in this respect. |
| --- | --- |

(83)

Furthermore, the Commission notes that the Dutch authorities commit to present a Restructuring plan complying with the conditions set out in the IAC. Such a plan is in any event required under the first recapitalisation decision and is due by 12 May 2009. The Commission notes that this plan will also cover the present measure and be made on the basis of the IAC. Therefore, the Commission’s assessment of the restructuring plan will assess all aid measures granted to ING including the present one. The Dutch authorities have provided the necessary commitment in this respect.

(h)   Conclusion

| (84) | The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC but cannot at present conclude that it complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing. |
| --- | --- |

(84)

The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC but cannot at present conclude that it complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing.

3.   Temporary authorisation of the measure for six months

| (85) | The Commission observes that if the transaction is not booked in the first quarter 2009 altering the level of valuation and remuneration would have as a likely consequence for ING [...] an additional loss of [...] in the 2008 annual result. This is due to the [...] accounting rules [...] (see above point 36). The Commission takes into consideration, as confirmed by the supervisory authority that the announcement effect would seriously threaten ING's reputation and thus financial stability. |
| --- | --- |

(85)

The Commission observes that if the transaction is not booked in the first quarter 2009 altering the level of valuation and remuneration would have as a likely consequence for ING [...] an additional loss of [...] in the 2008 annual result. This is due to the [...] accounting rules [...] (see above point 36). The Commission takes into consideration, as confirmed by the supervisory authority that the announcement effect would seriously threaten ING's reputation and thus financial stability.

| (86) | In view of the fact that the measure complies with the criteria for eligibility of assets, asset management arrangements, transparency and disclosure and the guarantee fee, the Commission can consider approving the asset relief measure as a temporary measure for six months. (25) The Commission considers that any approval should in any event be limited to six months on the basis of Annex 5 of the IAC. |
| --- | --- |

(86)

In view of the fact that the measure complies with the criteria for eligibility of assets, asset management arrangements, transparency and disclosure and the guarantee fee, the Commission can consider approving the asset relief measure as a temporary measure for six months. (25) The Commission considers that any approval should in any event be limited to six months on the basis of Annex 5 of the IAC.

| (87) | But according to Annex 5 this would normally require that all the conditions for compatibility as set out above are met. In the present case, the Commission finds that at this stage the conditions of the IAC on valuation and burden sharing are not fulfilled, and an in-depth investigation is needed. |
| --- | --- |

(87)

But according to Annex 5 this would normally require that all the conditions for compatibility as set out above are met. In the present case, the Commission finds that at this stage the conditions of the IAC on valuation and burden sharing are not fulfilled, and an in-depth investigation is needed.

| (88) | However, the Commission notes that the specific circumstances of this case require a decision before the end of the first quarter of 2009, in order to avoid that legal uncertainty about the operation obliges important losses to be incurred on the Alt-A portfolio, and that it is not possible to complete the assessment of the portfolio valuation in the necessary time frame. The Commission further notes that financial stability may be at risk, would ING have to [...]. Finally, it can not be excluded that the valuation of the portfolio will be confirmed after a detailed assessment, even though doubts are present at this stage. |
| --- | --- |

(88)

However, the Commission notes that the specific circumstances of this case require a decision before the end of the first quarter of 2009, in order to avoid that legal uncertainty about the operation obliges important losses to be incurred on the Alt-A portfolio, and that it is not possible to complete the assessment of the portfolio valuation in the necessary time frame. The Commission further notes that financial stability may be at risk, would ING have to [...]. Finally, it can not be excluded that the valuation of the portfolio will be confirmed after a detailed assessment, even though doubts are present at this stage.

| (89) | The Commission accepts the cash flow swap arrangement between the State and ING and its affiliates and will not request changes regarding the transfer of risk from ING to the state and the State's payment obligations in the context of the cash flow swap. This does not preclude the Commission from requesting changes in its final decision to the burden sharing of the measure by way of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration without compensating ING for it, if such change results from the Commission coming to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with the EC State aid rules on impaired assets. |
| --- | --- |

(89)

The Commission accepts the cash flow swap arrangement between the State and ING and its affiliates and will not request changes regarding the transfer of risk from ING to the state and the State's payment obligations in the context of the cash flow swap. This does not preclude the Commission from requesting changes in its final decision to the burden sharing of the measure by way of claw back, increase of the Guarantee fee under the illiquid assets back-up facilities or any other form of remuneration without compensating ING for it, if such change results from the Commission coming to the conclusion that the valuation at 26 January 2009 of the portfolio underlying the illiquid assets back-up facilities or its burden sharing proves to be materially in contradiction with the EC State aid rules on impaired assets.

V.   CONCLUSION

| (90) | The measure in favour of ING constitutes State aid. The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC and in view of the serious threat to financial stability approves the measure for six months. At the same time, the Commission doubts at this stage that the measure complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing and opens a detailed investigation. |
| --- | --- |

(90)

The measure in favour of ING constitutes State aid. The Commission finds that the measure complies with the conditions on eligibility of assets, asset management arrangement, transparency and disclosure and a guarantee fee as stipulated in the IAC and in view of the serious threat to financial stability approves the measure for six months. At the same time, the Commission doubts at this stage that the measure complies with the conditions relating to valuation and burden sharing and opens a detailed investigation.

VI.   DECISION

As it complies with a number of conditions of the IAC, and with due considerations for need to preserve financial stability, the Commission has decided to approve the measure for six months. In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission has also decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88 (2) of the EC Treaty to verify the conditions of the IAC regarding valuation (including the valuation methodology) and burden sharing of the measure.

The Commission requires the Netherlands to provide in addition to all documents already received, information and data needed for the assessment of the compatibility of the aid, and in particular as regards the individual tranches of the portfolio, an updated schedule of all cash flows on a monthly basis, the justification of the discount rate used to value the portfolio, a certified letter from the consultant on valuation on a stand alone basis and a written methodology report.

The Netherlands are requested to forward a copy of this letter to the potential recipient of the aid immediately.

The Commission informs the Netherlands that it will inform interested parties by publishing this letter and a meaningful summary of it in the Official Journal of the European Communities. It will also inform interested parties in the EFTA countries which are signatories to the EEA Agreement, by publishing a notice in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Communities, and will inform the EFTA Surveillance Authority by sending a copy of this letter. All such interested parties will be invited to submit their comments within one month of the date of such publication.»

---

(1)  State aid N 528/2008 — The Netherlands Aid to ING Groep N.V., 13 November 2008.

1

(2)  Confidential information.

2

(3)  Exchange rate about EUR/USD 1,3 assumed at the time of the deal announcement in January.

3

(4)  Commission Decision of 13.11.2008 in case State aid N 528/2008 — Aid to ING, point 8.

4

(5)  Where the borrower has the option to repay a very low amount in the first few years and these payments reset at a higher level thereafter.

5

(6)  At the time of purchase, Banks have to put their assets in four different baskets, with different consequences for accounting, the trading book, the available for sale category, the loans & receivables and hold-to-maturity. Following a legal change last October, it became easier to reclassify assets into the hold-to-maturity category.

6

(7)  IFRS accounting rules require to value assets booked in “available for sale” at fair value (i.e. profits and losses are directly affecting equity capital). For “fair valued”: banks can chose three categories based on the availability of valuation input data: “marked to market”, “marked to models with observable inputs” and “market to model with unobservable inputs”.

7

(8)  Under both IFRS and US GAAP a debt security is considered impaired if, based on currently available evidence, there is a reasonable expectation that not all due interest and principal will be recovered.

8

(9)  This is because a dollar today has not the same value as a dollar paid in the future.

9

(10)  This relates to 26 January 2009 as risk weights of the portfolio fluctuate.

10

(11)  3 % discount rate;

11

(12)  Principal and Interest payments (including pre-payments);

12

(13)  net present value of flows from the state to ING.

13

(14)  3 % discount rate;

14

(15)  Principal and Interest payments (including pre-payments);

15

(16)  net present value of flows from the state to ING.

16

(17)  [...]

17

(18)  See in principle Joined Cases T-132/96 and T-143/96 Freistaat Sachsen and Volkswagen AG v Commission [1999] ECR II-3663, paragraph 167. Confirmed in the Commission’s decisions in Case C 47/1996 Crédit Lyonnais (OJ L 221, 8.8.1998, p. 28, point 10.1), Case C 28/2002 Bankgesellschaft Berlin (OJ L 116, 4.5.2005, p. 1, paragraphs 153 et seq.) and Case C 50/2006 BAWAG, not yet published, paragraph 166. See Commission decision of 5 December 2007 in Case NN 70/2007 Northern Rock (OJ C 43, 16.2.2008, p. 1), Commission decision of 30 April 2008 in Case NN 25/2008 Rescue aid for WestLB (OJ C 189, 26.7.2008, p. 3), and Commission decision of 4 June 2008 in Case C 9/2008 Sachsen LB, not yet published.

18

Freistaat Sachsen and Volkswagen AG

Commission

Crédit Lyonnais

Bankgesellschaft Berlin

et seq

BAWAG

Northern Rock

Rescue aid for WestLB

Sachsen LB

(19)  Commission Communication on The application of State aid rules to measures taken in relation to financial institutions in the context of the current global financial crisis, OJ C 270 of 25.10.2008, p. 8.

19

(20)  For a first application: Cf Commission Decision of 13 March 2009 in case C 9/09 Dexia, not yet published.

20

Dexia

(21)  To be categorized in baskets in line with Annex 3 of the IAC.

21

(22)  Footnote 15 of the IAC.

22

(23)  IAC, Footnote 11.

23

(24)  8 % is equal to the minimum own capital requirements.

24

(25)  The Commission has taken similar decisions. For instance in Commission Decision of 13 March 2009 in case C 9/09 point 77, Dexia, not yet published, where it approved only some elements of compatibility. Similarly in Decision of 24.4.2007 in case NN 15/2006 (C13/2007), New Interline, OJ 2007 C 120/12, the Commission approved a rescue aid for six months and opened on the same rescuer aid thereafter.

25

Dexia

New Interline

---

OUTROS ACTOS

Comissão

| 11.7.2009 | PT | Jornal Oficial da União Europeia | C 158/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.7.2009

PT

Jornal Oficial da União Europeia

C 158/24

---

Publicação de um pedido de registo em conformidade com o n.o 2 do artigo 8.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 509/2006 do Conselho, relativo às especialidades tradicionais garantidas dos produtos agrícolas e dos géneros alimentícios

2009/C 158/07

A presente publicação confere um direito de oposição ao pedido nos termos do artigo 9.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 509/2006 do Conselho. As declarações de oposição devem dar entrada na Comissão no prazo de seis meses a contar da data da presente publicação.

PEDIDO DE REGISTO DE ESPECIALIDADE TRADICIONAL GARANTIDA (ETG)

REGULAMENTO (CE) N.o 509/2006 DO CONSELHO

«KIEŁBASA JAŁOWCOWA»

CE N.o: PL-TSG-007-0047-05.12.2006

1.   Nome e endereço do agrupamento requerente:

Nome: Związek „Polskie Mięso”

Endereço:

| ul. Chałubińskiego 8 |
| --- |
| 00-613 Warszawa |
| POLSKA/POLAND |

ul. Chałubińskiego 8

00-613 Warszawa

POLSKA/POLAND

Telefone +48 228302657

Fax +48 228301648

E-mail: info@polskie-mieso.pl

2.   Estado-Membro ou país terceiro:

Polónia

3.   Descrição do produto:

3.1.   Denominação a registar [artigo 2.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1216/2007]:

«Kiełbasa jałowcowa»

3.2.   Indicar se a denominação:

 é específica em si mesma

Image

A designação «kiełbasa jałowcowa» exprime o carácter específico do produto, o qual se prende sobretudo com os seus sabor e aroma excepcionais. Estas características reflectem a utilização, no processo de produção, de bagas de zimbro, finamente picadas imediatamente antes de serem adicionadas à carne, e de ramos de zimbro no processo de fumagem.

3.3.   Indicar se se pretende a reserva da denominação ao abrigo do n.o 2 do artigo 13.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 509/2006:

 Registo com reserva da denominação

Image

3.4.   Tipo de produto:

| Classe 1.2 — | Produtos à base de carne (aquecidos, salgados, fumados, etc.) |
| --- | --- |

Classe 1.2 —

Produtos à base de carne (aquecidos, salgados, fumados, etc.)

3.5.   Descrição do produto agrícola ou género alimentício a que se aplica a denominação do ponto 3.1 [n.o 1 do artigo 3.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1216/2007]:

O «kiełbasa jałowcowa» é um enchido de aspecto uniformemente enrugado com a forma de uma coroa. Possui uma forma característica espiralada, sem pregas longitudinais externas. A coroa de enchido existe em dois tamanhos:

| — | Pequena, em invólucro natural, com mais de 32 mm de diâmetro e peso aproximado de 0,5 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Pequena, em invólucro natural, com mais de 32 mm de diâmetro e peso aproximado de 0,5 kg;

| — | Grande, em invólucro proteico de 36 mm de diâmetro e peso aproximado de 0,8 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Grande, em invólucro proteico de 36 mm de diâmetro e peso aproximado de 0,8 kg.

O «kiełbasa jałowcowa» tem cor castanha escura uniformemente distribuída por toda a superfície, típica do enchido muito fumado.

A sua consistência e impressão ao tacto é seca, macia, uniformemente rugosa, de invólucro perfeitamente aderente ao recheio.

O sabor e a maciez característicos do produto resultam da selecção da matéria-prima, dos condimentos (em especial, o zimbro) e da fumagem natural, a qual faz parte integrante do processo de produção.

Composição química:

| — | Teor proteico — igual ou superior a 15,0 %; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor proteico — igual ou superior a 15,0 %;

| — | Teor de água — igual ou inferior a 60,0 %; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de água — igual ou inferior a 60,0 %;

| — | Teor de gordura — igual ou inferior a 35,0 %; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de gordura — igual ou inferior a 35,0 %;

| — | Teor de sal — igual ou inferior a 3,5 %; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de sal — igual ou inferior a 3,5 %;

| — | Teor de nitritos (III) e nitratos (V), expresso em percentagem de NaNO2 — igual ou inferior a 0,0125 %. |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de nitritos (III) e nitratos (V), expresso em percentagem de NaNO2 — igual ou inferior a 0,0125 %.

Esta composição química garante a qualidade tradicional do produto. O rendimento do produto acabado relativamente à carne utilizada como matéria-prima é de 75 % (+/-3 %).

3.6.   Descrição do método de produção do produto agrícola ou género alimentício a que se aplica a denominação do ponto 3.1 [n.o 2 do artigo 3.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1216/2007 da Comissão]:

Ingredientes

| | Carne (100 kg de matéria-prima):






  — | Carne de porco de categoria I, com teor de gordura não superior a 15 % — 20 kg; |
| --- | --- | --- |

Carne (100 kg de matéria-prima):

—

Carne de porco de categoria I, com teor de gordura não superior a 15 % — 20 kg;

| — | Carne de porco de categoria IIA, com teor de gordura não superior a 20 % — 50 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Carne de porco de categoria IIA, com teor de gordura não superior a 20 % — 50 kg;

| — | Carne de porco de categoria III, com teor de gordura não superior a 25 % — 20 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Carne de porco de categoria III, com teor de gordura não superior a 25 % — 20 kg;

| — | Gordura fresca — 10 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Gordura fresca — 10 kg.

A carne de porco de categoria IIA ou III pode ser substituída por carne de vaca, até 50 %.

| | Condimentos (por 100 kg de carne):






  — | Pimenta natural — 0,17 kg; |
| --- | --- | --- |

Condimentos (por 100 kg de carne):

—

Pimenta natural — 0,17 kg;

| — | Zimbro — 0,12 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

Zimbro — 0,12 kg;

| — | Açúcar— 0,20 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Açúcar— 0,20 kg.

| | Outros aditivos:






  — | Mistura de agentes de cura [à base de mistura de sal de mesa (NaCl) e nitrito de sódio (NaNO2)] — cerca de 2 kg. |
| --- | --- | --- |

Outros aditivos:

—

Mistura de agentes de cura [à base de mistura de sal de mesa (NaCl) e nitrito de sódio (NaNO2)] — cerca de 2 kg.

Alimentação no contexto da produção de carne de porco destinada ao fabrico de «kiełbasa jałowcowa»

Por alimentação deve entender-se engorda. Pretende-se produzir porcos de 120 kg de peso máximo, caracterizados por teor de gordura intramuscular mais elevado (mais de 3 %).

| — | A engorda processa-se em animais adultos, submetendo-os a uma dieta que permite alcançar o teor de gordura intramuscular desejado. As raças de engorda não são portadoras do gene RN; o gene RYR 1T está presente em 20 % da população; |
| --- | --- |

—

A engorda processa-se em animais adultos, submetendo-os a uma dieta que permite alcançar o teor de gordura intramuscular desejado. As raças de engorda não são portadoras do gene RN; o gene RYR 1T está presente em 20 % da população;

| — | A engorda processa-se em três fases — fase I, até cerca de 60 kg; fase II, até cerca de 90 kg; fase III, até 120 kg; |
| --- | --- |

—

A engorda processa-se em três fases — fase I, até cerca de 60 kg; fase II, até cerca de 90 kg; fase III, até 120 kg;

| — | A engorda de animais até 90 kg processa-se com recurso a dois tipos de misturas de rações. As misturas (rações) contêm: |
| --- | --- |

—

A engorda de animais até 90 kg processa-se com recurso a dois tipos de misturas de rações. As misturas (rações) contêm:

| — | componentes energéticos: cereais triturados — trigo, cevada, centeio, aveia, triticale ou milho; o milho e as variedades de aveia do tipo Avena nuda triturados constituem, no máximo, 30 % das misturas; |
| --- | --- |

—

componentes energéticos: cereais triturados — trigo, cevada, centeio, aveia, triticale ou milho; o milho e as variedades de aveia do tipo Avena nuda triturados constituem, no máximo, 30 % das misturas;

| — | componentes proteicos: tremoço, fava miúda e ervilha triturados, sêmeas de soja e de colza, bagaço de colza, leveduras forrageiras ou forragens secas; |
| --- | --- |

—

componentes proteicos: tremoço, fava miúda e ervilha triturados, sêmeas de soja e de colza, bagaço de colza, leveduras forrageiras ou forragens secas;

| — | As misturas de rações para animais de peso compreendido entre 90 e 120 kg contêm: |
| --- | --- |

—

As misturas de rações para animais de peso compreendido entre 90 e 120 kg contêm:

| — | componentes energéticos: trigo, cevada, centeio e triticale triturados. São proibidos o milho e a aveia do tipo Avena nuda triturados; |
| --- | --- |

—

componentes energéticos: trigo, cevada, centeio e triticale triturados. São proibidos o milho e a aveia do tipo Avena nuda triturados;

| — | componentes proteicos: leguminosas (tremoço, fava miúda e ervilha) trituradas, sêmeas de soja, bagaço de colza, sêmeas de colza e forragens secas; |
| --- | --- |

—

componentes proteicos: leguminosas (tremoço, fava miúda e ervilha) trituradas, sêmeas de soja, bagaço de colza, sêmeas de colza e forragens secas;

| — | Durante o ciclo de engorda são proibidos: óleos vegetais e rações de origem animal (por exemplo, leite em pó, pó de leite seco, farinha de peixe); |
| --- | --- |

—

Durante o ciclo de engorda são proibidos: óleos vegetais e rações de origem animal (por exemplo, leite em pó, pó de leite seco, farinha de peixe);

| — | Teor de energia metabólica em todas as fases de engorda: 12-13 MJ de ME/kg de mistura. O teor proteico das misturas deve rondar 16-18 % na primeira fase de engorda, 15-16 % na segunda fase e cerca de 14 % na fase final; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de energia metabólica em todas as fases de engorda: 12-13 MJ de ME/kg de mistura. O teor proteico das misturas deve rondar 16-18 % na primeira fase de engorda, 15-16 % na segunda fase e cerca de 14 % na fase final;

| — | As rações para engorda só podem basear-se em misturas nutritivas ou em misturas nutritivas e alimentos como, por exemplo, batata e forragens verdes. |
| --- | --- |

—

As rações para engorda só podem basear-se em misturas nutritivas ou em misturas nutritivas e alimentos como, por exemplo, batata e forragens verdes.

Etapas da produção do «kiełbasa jałowcowa»

| Etapa 1 | Corta-se a carne em pedaços. Deve zelar-se por que os pedaços tenham dimensões uniformes (cerca de 5 cm de diâmetro). |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 1

Corta-se a carne em pedaços. Deve zelar-se por que os pedaços tenham dimensões uniformes (cerca de 5 cm de diâmetro).

| Etapa 2 | 48 horas de sorça tradicional (método seco), utilizando a mistura de agentes de cura. |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 2

48 horas de sorça tradicional (método seco), utilizando a mistura de agentes de cura.

| Etapa 3 | Transformação mecânica: Corta-se a carne em pedaços de diferentes dimensões consoante a categoria: categoria I, cerca de 20 mm, categoria IIA, cerca de 8 mm e categoria III, cerca de 3 mm, após o que se pica juntamente com 5 kg de gelo. |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 3

Transformação mecânica: Corta-se a carne em pedaços de diferentes dimensões consoante a categoria: categoria I, cerca de 20 mm, categoria IIA, cerca de 8 mm e categoria III, cerca de 3 mm, após o que se pica juntamente com 5 kg de gelo.

| Etapa 4 | Misturam-se os diferentes tipos de carne com os condimentos: pimenta natural, açúcar e zimbro, o qual é moído antes de adicionado no misturador. |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 4

Misturam-se os diferentes tipos de carne com os condimentos: pimenta natural, açúcar e zimbro, o qual é moído antes de adicionado no misturador.

| Etapa 5 | Enche-se tripa de porco com mais de 32 mm de diâmetro ou invólucro proteico de 36 mm de diâmetro, torce-se no comprimento devido e moldam-se as coroas. Podem utilizar-se dois tipos de invólucros:






  — | As coroas mais pequenas são feitas com tripa de porco e pesam 0,5 kg; |
| --- | --- | --- |

Etapa 5

Enche-se tripa de porco com mais de 32 mm de diâmetro ou invólucro proteico de 36 mm de diâmetro, torce-se no comprimento devido e moldam-se as coroas. Podem utilizar-se dois tipos de invólucros:

—

As coroas mais pequenas são feitas com tripa de porco e pesam 0,5 kg;

| — | Para as coroas maiores utiliza-se invólucro proteico; pesam 0,8 kg. |
| --- | --- |

—

Para as coroas maiores utiliza-se invólucro proteico; pesam 0,8 kg.

| Etapa 6 | Duas horas de sorça a temperatura não superior a 30 °C. Secagem preliminar da superfície e consolidação dos ingredientes dentro da tripa. |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 6

Duas horas de sorça a temperatura não superior a 30 °C. Secagem preliminar da superfície e consolidação dos ingredientes dentro da tripa.

| Etapa 7 | Secagem da superfície e fumagem tradicional com fumo quente (cerca de 120 minutos), seguida de cozedura até obtenção da temperatura interior mínima de 70 °C. |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 7

Secagem da superfície e fumagem tradicional com fumo quente (cerca de 120 minutos), seguida de cozedura até obtenção da temperatura interior mínima de 70 °C.

| Etapa 8 | Arrefecimento durante 24 horas. |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 8

Arrefecimento durante 24 horas.

| Etapa 9 | Fumagem a frio com aparas de bétula e ramos de zimbro (durante cerca de 120 minutos), seguida de secagem à temperatura de 14-18 °C durante 3-5 dias até obtenção de um rendimento de 75 % (+/-3 %). |
| --- | --- |

Etapa 9

Fumagem a frio com aparas de bétula e ramos de zimbro (durante cerca de 120 minutos), seguida de secagem à temperatura de 14-18 °C durante 3-5 dias até obtenção de um rendimento de 75 % (+/-3 %).

3.7.   Especificidade do produto agrícola ou do género alimentício [n.o 3 do artigo 3.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1216/2007 da Comissão]:

O carácter específico do «kiełbasa jałowcowa» decorre de diversos atributos típicos do produto:

| — | A carne utilizada é tenra e suculenta, com propriedades específicas; |
| --- | --- |

—

A carne utilizada é tenra e suculenta, com propriedades específicas;

| — | Possui aroma e sabor excepcionais; |
| --- | --- |

—

Possui aroma e sabor excepcionais;

| — | Possui forma homogénea característica. |
| --- | --- |

—

Possui forma homogénea característica.

Carne tenra, suculenta e com propriedades específicas

A carne de porco de animais cevados, de cerca de 120 kg de peso, com os traços genéticos descritos em 3.6, constitui o ingrediente essencial do «kiełbasa jałowcowa», influenciando a natureza específica do enchido. A observância destas disposições providencia um teor de gordura intramuscular superior a 3 %, atribuindo à carne as propriedades organolépticas e tecnológicas essenciais à produção do «kiełbasa jałowcowa». A utilização desta matéria-prima e o respeito do método de produção tradicional, em especial as etapas de corte, cura e fumagem da carne, conferem ao «kiełbasa jałowcowa» a sua textura excepcionalmente tenra e suculenta.

Aroma e sabor excepcionais

O carácter específico do «kiełbasa jałowcowa» deve-se essencialmente aos seus sabor e aroma únicos, resultantes da utilização de bagas de zimbro no processo de produção. A moagem das bagas de zimbro imediatamente antes de iniciar o processo de produção aumenta o sabor característico do enchido, contribuindo para o seu carácter específico, e a utilização de madeira de zimbro no processo de fumagem acentua o sabor e o aroma excepcionais.

Forma homogénea característica

O «kiełbasa jałowcowa» distingue-se do restante enchido pela forma que possui. É comercializado apenas em duas formas muito semelhantes, tornando-o facilmente identificável aos olhos do consumidor. O «kiełbasa jałowcowa» é um enchido de aspecto uniformemente enrugado com a forma de uma coroa. Possui uma forma característica espiralada, sem pregas longitudinais externas.

3.8.   Carácter tradicional do produto agrícola ou do género alimentício [n.o 4 do artigo 3.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1216/2007]:

Matéria-prima tradicional

| 1. | Zimbro:
  A Wielka Encyklopedia Powszechna Ilustrowana (grande enciclopédia universal ilustrada), de 1903, faz referência a uma das propriedades deste arbusto, muito comum na Polónia há séculos: o seu aroma agradável quando queimado. A enciclopédia refere igualmente que se podem utilizar os ramos, aparas e bagas de zimbro no processo de fumagem para conferir à carne sabor e aroma deliciosos. Há documentos da segunda metade do século XIX que revelam que o zimbro já era utilizado como condimento ou ingrediente em pratos e produtos de carne. A Encyklopedyja Powszechna, publicada em Varsóvia em 1863, indica que as bagas possuem sabor acentuado e agridoce e perfume agradável, sendo largamente utilizadas como condimento. O método de produção de enchido com utilização de bagas de zimbro e fumagem com ele aromatizada estabeleceu-se na Polónia em finais da década de 1940 [como atesta o artigo «Gospodarka Mięsna», publicação da indústria de carne (1954, n.o 3), intitulado «Regulacja asortymentów wędlin na zaopatrzenie rynku»]. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Zimbro:

A Wielka Encyklopedia Powszechna Ilustrowana (grande enciclopédia universal ilustrada), de 1903, faz referência a uma das propriedades deste arbusto, muito comum na Polónia há séculos: o seu aroma agradável quando queimado. A enciclopédia refere igualmente que se podem utilizar os ramos, aparas e bagas de zimbro no processo de fumagem para conferir à carne sabor e aroma deliciosos. Há documentos da segunda metade do século XIX que revelam que o zimbro já era utilizado como condimento ou ingrediente em pratos e produtos de carne. A Encyklopedyja Powszechna, publicada em Varsóvia em 1863, indica que as bagas possuem sabor acentuado e agridoce e perfume agradável, sendo largamente utilizadas como condimento. O método de produção de enchido com utilização de bagas de zimbro e fumagem com ele aromatizada estabeleceu-se na Polónia em finais da década de 1940 [como atesta o artigo «Gospodarka Mięsna», publicação da indústria de carne (1954, n.o 3), intitulado «Regulacja asortymentów wędlin na zaopatrzenie rynku»].

| 2. | Carne de porco:
  A carne dos porcos criados para a produção de «kiełbasa jałowcowa» tem de possuir um teor de gordura intramuscular superior a 3 %; é este marmoreado que permite obter um produto tenro, suculento e de excelente sabor. A utilização desta carne influencia decisivamente a qualidade do produto final e o seu carácter específico e perpetua o método tradicional de produção. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Carne de porco:

A carne dos porcos criados para a produção de «kiełbasa jałowcowa» tem de possuir um teor de gordura intramuscular superior a 3 %; é este marmoreado que permite obter um produto tenro, suculento e de excelente sabor. A utilização desta carne influencia decisivamente a qualidade do produto final e o seu carácter específico e perpetua o método tradicional de produção.

Método tradicional de obtenção e composição

A fumagem é um modo de conservação da carne, que se obtinha, na sua forma mais generalizada, queimando zimbro. Este processo está registado em antigos manuscritos polacos, de que são exemplo as notas de um empregado anónimo de uma propriedade rural, de 1780, relativas a receitas de carne (AGAD Varsóvia, «Zbiór z Muzeum Narodowego», ref. 1249). O poeta nacional polaco Adam Mickiewicz refere a popularidade da fumagem da carne com zimbro na descrição do pequeno-almoço de uma casa rural no seu poema épico «Pan Tadeusz», de 1834: «fatias de língua e de presunto — muito saborosas, caseiras, fumadas com zimbro queimado na chaminé.».

A tradição de condimentar e fumar a carne com zimbro cultivou-se em variantes locais e regionais, declinadas não só com diferentes tecnologias, mas também, por vezes, diferentes tipos de carne. Tal como W. Łęg refere no seu texto «Z doświadczeń przy produkcji wędlin», Gospodarka Mięsna (1953, n.o 6), efectuaram-se experiências de preparação de «kiełbasa jałowcowa» à base de caça (lebre ou javali com adição de porco). Embora o sabor do enchido pudesse variar, a receita era essencialmente a mesma (mistura de carne e gordura e fumagem com zimbro) em todo o lado. As notas de um especialista da indústria de carne em deslocação pela região de Kurpie, num artigo sobre especialidades regionais de carne transformada publicado no Gospodarka Mięsna (1950, n.os 7-8), referem o seguinte no que respeita ao «kiełbasa jałowcowa»: «Enchido de Myszyniec, região de Kurpie, fumado com zimbro e temperado com as respectivas bagas. Sabor e aroma seco característico excelente.».

Após 1945, segundo as disposições do planeamento central, decidiu-se montar uma indústria de carnes baseada em grandes unidades de transformação. A normalização de produtos tecnológicos com base em receitas tradicionais foi introduzida para melhorar a qualidade e o sabor. O «kiełbasa jałowcowa» é um produto cuja designação surge em normas de comercialização de produtos alimentares em 1947 e 1948. Em 1954 foi criada uma norma harmonizada para o «kiełbasa jałowcowa»; posteriormente, veio a tornar-se a norma Wydawnictwo Przemysłu Lekkiego i Spożywczego, Warszawa 1964, na qual assenta o presente pedido.

As normas referidas foram elaboradas para garantir a máxima qualidade do «kiełbasa jałowcowa». Embora a norma na base do presente pedido tenha deixado de ser obrigatória, continua a representar os mais elevados níveis de produção do «kiełbasa jałowcowa».

3.9.   Exigências mínimas e procedimentos de controlo da especificidade [artigo 4.o do Regulamento (CE) n.o 1216/2007]:

No que respeita ao carácter específico do «kiełbasa jałowcowa», impõem-se as seguintes vistorias específicas:

| 1. | Qualidade das matérias-primas utilizadas na produção (carne de porco, condimentos), incluindo:






  — | Qualidade tecnológica da carne; |
| --- | --- | --- |

1.

Qualidade das matérias-primas utilizadas na produção (carne de porco, condimentos), incluindo:

—

Qualidade tecnológica da carne;

| — | Tipo de engorda; |
| --- | --- |

—

Tipo de engorda;

| — | Tempo de cura; |
| --- | --- |

—

Tempo de cura;

| — | Condimentos utilizados na produção do «kiełbasa jałowcowa» e respectivas proporções. |
| --- | --- |

—

Condimentos utilizados na produção do «kiełbasa jałowcowa» e respectivas proporções.

| 2. | Processo de fumagem do «kiełbasa jałowcowa»
  Aspectos a vistoriar:






  — | Manutenção da temperatura necessária para a fumagem tradicional com fumo quente, bem como da temperatura de aquecimento; |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Processo de fumagem do «kiełbasa jałowcowa»

Aspectos a vistoriar:

—

Manutenção da temperatura necessária para a fumagem tradicional com fumo quente, bem como da temperatura de aquecimento;

| — | Manutenção da duração e da temperatura de repetição da fumagem com fumo frio; |
| --- | --- |

—

Manutenção da duração e da temperatura de repetição da fumagem com fumo frio;

| — | Utilização de madeira de bétula e ramos de zimbro para a fumagem a frio. |
| --- | --- |

—

Utilização de madeira de bétula e ramos de zimbro para a fumagem a frio.

| 3. | Qualidade do produto final:






  — | Teor proteico; |
| --- | --- | --- |

3.

Qualidade do produto final:

—

Teor proteico;

| — | Teor de água; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de água;

| — | Teor de gordura; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de gordura;

| — | Teor de cloreto de sódio; |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de cloreto de sódio;

| — | Teor de nitritos (III) e nitratos (V); |
| --- | --- |

—

Teor de nitritos (III) e nitratos (V);

| — | Sabor e aroma. |
| --- | --- |

—

Sabor e aroma.

| 4. | Forma do produto |
| --- | --- |

4.

Forma do produto

Intensidade das inspecções

De dois em dois meses efectuam-se vistorias sobre as etapas acima mencionadas. Se as etapas se processarem correctamente, a frequência das inspecções pode ser reduzida para duas vezes por ano.

Se se verificarem irregularidades, a frequência tem de ser aumentada (de dois em dois meses). Outras etapas não mencionadas podem ser inspeccionadas semestralmente.

4.   Estrutura de controlo:

4.1.   Nome e endereço:

Nome: Główny Inspektorat Jakości Handlowej Artykułów Rolno-Spożywczych

Endereço:

| ul. Wspólna 30 |
| --- |
| 00-930 Warsaw |
| POLSKA/POLAND |

ul. Wspólna 30

00-930 Warsaw

POLSKA/POLAND

Telefone +48 226232901

Fax +48 226232099

E-mail: —

Image Pública  Privada

4.2.   Tarefas específicas da estrutura de controlo:

A estrutura de controlo é responsável pela totalidade do caderno de especificações.

---