56 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities
9.8.71 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoL179/37
COMMISSION DECISION
of23July1971
ontaxexemptionsundertheGermanLawof28December1968,asextendedon23De­
cember1970,relatingtotheimpositionofataxonthecarriageofgoodsbyroad
(OnlytheGermantextisauthentic;
(71/295/EEC)
til31December1971,withouttheCommissionhav­
ingbeen-informedinsufficienttimetosubmitits
commentsinaccordancewithArticle93(3)ofthe
Treaty;THECOMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN
COMMUNITIES ,
HavingregardtotheTreatyestablishingtheEuro­
peanEconomicCommunity,andinparticularthefirst
subparagraph ofparagraph2andparagraph3ofAr­
ticle93thereof;
Havingregardtothewrittenandoralobservations
putforwardbythepartiesconcerned;II
I
Whereasinitsrecommendation of31January19681
relatinginparticulartothetaxsystemgoverningthe
carriageofgoodsbyroad,theCommissionhasal­
readydrawntheattentionoftheGermanGovernment
tothefactthatcertainformsoftaxexemptionand
abatementsprovidedforbythedraftlawcommuni­
catedtoitinaccordancewithArticle1oftheCoun­
cilDecisionof21March1962,mightprovetobe
incompatiblewiththecommonmarketwithinthe
meaningofArticle92oftheEECTreaty;
WhereastheLawof28December19682includespro­
visionfor:
(a)taxexemptionsinrespectofGermanseaports
(§3(7));
(b)taxabatementsinrespectofregionsotherthan
WestBerlinandtheZonenrandgebiet asdefined
byGermanlaw(§5(1)and6(2)and(3));
(c)taxreliefinrespectofcertaininter-workslong­WhereasunderArticle92(1)aidgrantedbyaMem­
berStateorthroughStateresourcesinanyform
whatsoeveraffectingtradebetweenMemberStates,
whichdistortsorthreatenstodistortcompetitionby
favouringcertainundertakingsortheproductionof
certaingoods,isincompatiblewiththecommonmar­
ket;whereastheconceptofaidextendsnotonlyto
actualfinancialpaymentssuchassubsidies,butalso
tomeasuresinvariousformswhichreducethefinan­
cialobligationsnormallybornebyanundertaking
andwhichthus,withoutbeingsubsidiesinthestrict
senseoftheterm,resemblethemandhaveidentical
effects;
(a)whereastheexemptionsinrespectofGerman
seaportsarelikelytoaffecttradeanddistort
competitionbetweenserviceundertakings at
GermanseaportsandthoseatotherCommunity
portsontheonehand,and,ontheother,asre­
gardsintra-Community provisionofservicesbe­
tweencarriersservingrespectivelyGermanports
andotherCommunityports;
(b)whereasthetaxexemptionsandabatementsap­
plyingtoregionsotherthanWestBerlinandthe
Zonenrandgebiet arealsolikelytobringabout
equivalentreductionsinthecostpricesofunder­
takingsoperatinginthoseregions;theyarethere­
forelikelytodistortcompetitionandaffecttrade
betweenMemberStates;
(c)whereasthetaxreliefinrespectofinter-works
long-distancetraffichasthesameeffectsasre^
gardstheundertakingsreceivingit;
WhereastheexceptionsprovidedforbytheLawin
question,whichareinthenatureofaidwithinthe
meaningofArticle92(1),haveanobjectivewhichisWhereas,byaLawof23December19703.,theLaw
of28December1968,applicationofwhichwasini­
tiallylimitedto31December1970,wasextendedun­
OTNoL35,8.2.1968,p.14.
'GesetzüberdieBesteuerungdesStrassengüterverkehrs '
of28December1968(Bundesgesetzblatt I,p.1461,
paragraph6.1).
BundesblattI,p.1869

OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 57
(c)Whereasthetaxreliefinrespectofinter-works
long-distance trafficbyundertakings which
wouldbeplacedindifficultyifthetaxwere
leviedinfull,cannotfallwithinanyofthedero­
gationsprovidedforinArticle92(3),sinceits
scope,beinggeneral,goesbeyondthelimited
regionalorsectionalfieldofapplicationofthose
derogations,
HASADOPTEDTHISDECISION :
Article1diametricallyopposedtothatoftransportcoordina­
tion,sincethechangeoverfromroadtransporttorail
transport-whichisthemainobjectiveoftheLaw-
istherebylimited;whereastheseexceptionscannot
thereforefindjustificationunderArticle77;
Whereas,furthermore,theseexceptionsarenotcov­
eredbyanyofthederogationsprovidedforinpara­
graphs2and3ofArticle92,evenifsuchderogations
couldbyappliedtothiscase;
(a)whereasthetaxexemptionsinrespectofGer­
manseaportsbenefittheserviceundertakingsat
Germanseaportstothedetrimentofthoseat
otherCommunityports,andarethereforesuch
asmightaltertradingconditionsinamanner
contrarytothecommoninterest;
(b)whereasthetaxexemptionsandabatementsap­
plyingtoregionsotherthanWestBerlinandthe
Zonenrandgebeit asdefinedbyGermanlawcan­
notbeconsideredaslikelytopromotethedevel­
opmentofthoseregions;whereas,furthermore,
thefactthat,thoseregionsdifferfromthose
selectedbytheGermanGovernmentforthe
grantingofregionalinvestmentaidshowsthat
theexemptionsandabatementsinquestiondo
nothavesuchanobjective;whereastherefore
theprovisionsofArticle92(3)(a)and(c)in
respectofregionaldevelopmentcannotapplyto
thiscase;
Whereas,however,evenhadsuchanobjectivebeen
inview,thattypeofsupportconstitutesoperational
aidtoundertakingswhichmayleadthemintoerrors
ofsitingordiscouragethemmakingadjustmentne­
cessaryinthelongterm;whereas,consequently ,such
aidcannotinanycaseberegardedasbeingcom­
patiblewiththecommonmarket;TheFederalRepublicofGermanyshallforthwith
takethemeasuresnecessarytoabolish:
(a)theexemptionsinrespectofGermanseaports
(§3(7)ofthelawof28December1968,as
extendedon23December1970,relatingtothe
impositionofataxonthecarriageofgoodsby
road);
(b)thetaxexemptionsandabatementsinrespectof
regionsotherthanWestBerlinandtheZonen­
randgebiet(§5(1)and§6(2)and(3)ofthe
Law);
(c)thetaxreliefinrespectofinter-workslong­
distancetraffic(§7oftheLaw).
Article2
ThisDecisionisaddressedtotheFederalRepublic
ofGermany.
DoneatBrussels,23July1971.
FortheCommission
ThePresident
FrancoM.MALFATTI