COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 26.07.1995 
COM(95) 365 final 
FOURTH SURVEY FROM THE COMMISSION 
on State aid in the European Union in the manufacturing and 
certain other sectors 

CONTENTS 
INTRODUCTION 
Background 1 Ou 
Conceptual remarks 3 
German State Aid to the former GDR 4 
PART I - AID TO THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR 
Volume and trends of aid to manufacturing 7 
- Community totals 7 
- Comparisons between Member States 9 
Aid to shipbuilding 14 
Types of aid 17 
Objectives of aid 20 
PART II - OVERALL NATIONAL AID IN THE MEMBER STATES 
Aid to other sectors than industry 28 
- Aid to agriculture 28 
- Aid to fisheries 32 
- Aid to transport (railways and inland waterways) • • • • 34 
- Aid to coal mining 36 
Volume of overall aid in the Union 38 
- Budgetary impact of aids 42 
CONCLUSION 45 
ANNEXES 
Annex I: Technical annex 48 
Annex II: Statistical annex .63 
Annex II!: Community Funds .80 
i 

INTRODUCTION 
Background 
It was during 1985, the year which saw the publication of the Commission White Paper 
on completing the internal market, that the need for an effective method for the 
systematic quantification of state aid for the purposes of competition policy was fully 
perceived. As early as the end of 1985, the Commission instructed its departments 
to compile and publish a fact-based analytical survey of the granting of state aid in the 
various Member States of the Community. 
With such a survey in mind, a system was established to record aid in manufacturing 
and certain other sectors, to carry out a quantitative analysis of the volume, trends, 
forms and objectives of such aid and to publish the results, this last taking the form 
of the publication in 1989 of the First Survey (1981-86). 
Since the First Survey concluded that transparency in the field of state aid had to be 
increased, it was decided that updating should be carried out, and this was done in 
the Second and Third Surveys, covering the periods 1987-88 and 1989-90. 
This Fourth Survey follows the lines of the previous surveys, updating the series with 
the data for 1991 and 1992. Those years were marked by events having particular 
significance for the Commission's duty to provide information for the public/as 
witnessed by the present Survey. 
The first of these events was the approaching establishment of the single market 
and the accompanying, indispensable structural changes, particularly in the 
industries now exposed to the full blast of competition. These changes were 
certainly liable to tempt governments to resort to state aid, especially in view of 
the unfavourable economic conditions prevailing at the time. 
1 a 
Nevertheless, the Fourth Survey shows that, as a result of the Commission's 
vigilant and more stringent approach, aid has not increased. 
Second, the Community was enlarged by the incorporation of the new German 
Lander. This major development, which entailed substantial disruption for the 
German economy, required an increase in aid granted in Germany but also a 
fundamental redirection of aid within the country, involving a considerable 
solidarity effort on the part of the existing Lander. 
Third, the Community concluded the first Europe Agreements with the countries 
of central and eastern Europe. With regard to the monitoring of aid, all these 
agreements contain stringent rules whose application calls for increased 
transparency; the surveys on state aid are one of the principal means of 
achieving that transparency. 
The environment in which the priorities for the European Community's competition 
policy must be set out is growing increasingly complex, requiring ever greater 
information for the monitoring of state aid. 
The Commission will therefore redouble its efforts to increase transparency, convinced 
as it is that this will help to develop a European market which will strengthen the 
cohesion of its Member States and remain open to trade with the rest of the world. 
Conceptual remarks 
5. This Fourth Survey on State Aid covers the period 1990-1992. It updates the 
Third Survey published in 1992 which covered the period 1988-1990 for the years 
1991 and 1992. Included in the Survey are the twelve Member States' national 
aid given to the sectors: manufacturing, agriculture, fisheries, coal and transport, 
of which the latter comprises railways and inland waterways. The reasons for 
these limitations together with general explanations of the methodology used are 
given in the technical annex (annex I). The statistical annex (annex II) contains 
basic statistical data on aid to industry and on overall aid. An overview of 
Community Funds is given in annex III. 
6. When comparing the different Member States, the analysis of the aid figures 
concentrates on the annual averages over the three years period 1990-1992. 
Where appropriate, the figures for the period 1988-1990 are given by way of 
comparison. 
As was already the case in the preceding surveys, the periods compared overlap 
by one year. For comparisons between Member States, the use of moving three 
year averages is the only way of arriving at conclusions supported by statistically 
sufficient reliable figures. This is because for some of the figures amounts are at 
present only known over longer than one year periods. In such cases, the annual 
amounts have to be arbitrarily assigned to individual years. Secondly, the 
amounts for the last year reported on (1992) are to a not negligible extent 
provisional and - as it was already the case for the last year of the period 
reviewed by the preceding Survey (1990) - will certainly be modified by the 
Member States during the next verification of data for subsequent years. The 
resulting weak viability of annual figures - particularly when broken down for 
Member States - is statistically straightened out by using overlapping three year 
averages. 
In order to make the averages for the previous period comparable with those of 
1990-1992, the absolute figures 1988-1990, unless otherwise indicated, are 
expressed at 1991 prices(1). Throughout the Survey, therefore, figures are in real 
terms.(2) 
7. The figures for 1991 and 1992 were drawn up by Commission departments in 
cooperation with the Member States concerned. Together with the already 
existing figures for 1988-1990 they were verified by the Member States arid, if 
necessary, modified. This procedure ensures that a relatively high degree of 
reliance can be placed on the data. 
As concerns the figures for Greece, the Commission, when establishing the 
figures for preceding reports, used, as a reference, a study on Greek state aid 
and spending undertaken by a consultant. This study then served as a basis for 
the Commission departments' estimates and extrapolations. The figures have 
now, for the most part, been verified by the Greek authorities. Since the figures 
are still essentially estimates, the results for Greece should still be treated with 
caution. 
German state aid to the new Lander 
8. The unification of the Federal Republic of Germany has been of particular 
importance for Community state aid policy. Two German States having totally 
different economic systems have been merged: on the one hand, a decentralized 
market economy based essentially on private enterprise and, on the other hand, 
a centrally planned economy under State control. 
(1) For this reason, and because of the - in some cases considerable - modifications by the 
Member States of the 1990 figures mentioned above, figures for 1988-1990 are not the 
same as those published in the Third Survey. 
(2) Figures for aid to manufacturing at current exchange rates are given in the statistical annex 
(annex II). 
The integration of the centrally planned East German economy into the internal 
market has been facilitated by certain aid measures which are presented in Table 
A3 in annex II. During 1990 to 1992 aid to manufacturing in favour of the new 
Lander has attained an yearly average volume of almost 4,850 million ECU or 
40.5% of the whole volume of aid to manufacturing in Germany. The granting of 
aid to the new Lander has been partly compensated by a sharp decrease in aid 
to Germany in its borders before reunification which has fallen from 8,500 million 
ECU for the period 1988 to 1990 to less than 7,200 million ECU for 1990 to 1992. 
In the context of privatizing the former state owned companies, aid is also granted 
via the Treuhandanstalt (THA), the State holding company set up to administer, 
adapt and privatize former East German public undertakings. As laid down in the 
Commission's decisions of 1991 and 1992 on the interventions of the THA, some 
of these interventions can constitute aid. This will usually be the case where the 
THA issues guarantees for loans granted by the banking sector at market rate to 
its generally poor ranking undertakings. Equally, the THA itself borrows at market 
rate and then awards loans to its undertakings at the same rate. 
Due to the method used for the assessment of aid elements in guarantees (see 
annex I) the aid element in guarantees only appears in the Survey once the 
guarantees have to be honoured. Similarly, an aid in loans at market rate only 
appears if and when those loans are waived and therefore transformed into 
grants. In the case of the THA, the Commission is of the opinion that this method 
undervalues the aid element in the guarantees and loans awarded by the THA in 
the period covered by the Fourth Survey. The risk that the buyer of companies 
held by the THA will not take over the whole of the loans awarded or guaranteed 
by the THA is very real and increases over the years. If the buyer submitted the 
highest bid, further to an open and unconditional call for tender, the price -
including the waiving of loans - cannot be said to involve any aid. As a result, any 
aid elements in the guarantees and loans provided by the THA before the 
privatisation of such companies would never appear in the report. An exception 
to the method referred to above is therefore called for in the case of the THA. 
This is also warranted by the fact that the sale of companies to others than the 
highest bidder does involve aid, which can however only be quantified after a 
thorough analysis of each sales contract. With a total of 11 043 companies sold 
by 31.12.1992, the Commission does not have the resources to carry out such 
an analysis. Only for companies above the notification thresholds decided by the 
Commission in December 1992 has such an analysis been made; for those cases 
the aid element in the sale is known and will appear in the Fifth Survey. 
In the period covered by the present Survey the THA issued guarantees totalling 
ECU 12 931 million and awarded loans amounting to a total of ECU 7 131 million. 
Based on its experience with THA-cases, the Commission is of the opinion that 
20% of these amounts can be regarded as aid, which are included in the Survey. 
In addition, grants totalling ECU 3 370 million in order to finance social plans need 
to be included in their totality. 
6 
PART I - AID TO THE MANUFACTURING SECTOR 
Volume and trend of aid to manufacturing 
9. In the Community, aid to manufacturing accounts for the bulk of the aid covered 
by this Survey; in fact, during the period 1990-1992 40% of overall aid went to the 
manufacturing sector. The analysis of aid to this sector of the economy occupies, 
therefore, the centre of this Survey. 
Community Totals 
10. Table 1 shows the annual amounts of aid to industry in the Community in the 
years 1988 to 1992. 
Table 1 
State aid to the manufacturing sector in the Community 1988-1992 
Annual values in constant prices (1991). 
in mio ECU 
EUR 12 1988 
43955 1989 
33583 1990 
44181 1991 
35734 1992 
34140 
Although the figures have to be interpreted very cautiously(3), they allow the 
conclusion that globally the volume of aid in the Community shows a downward 
tendency over the last two years under review. 
(3) the somewhat erratic character of the annual figures - which remains even if some untypical 
aid amounts awarded in 1990 are eliminated - reflects clearly a certain arbitrariness in the 
attribution of the aid amounts for the different years. 
7 
With the exception of 1990, where a relative peak can be explained by some 
untypical aid awards in two Member States(4), the volume aid in real terms is 
steadily declining. 
11. Absolute values, even if aggregated at Community level, are of only limited use 
for reflecting trends in national aid policies over time. Therefore, table 2 shows aid 
to industry as a percentage of value added, per person employed in this sector 
and in percent of intra-Community exports of manufactured goods.(5) 
Table 2 
State aid to the manufacturing sector in the Community 
Annual values 1988 to 1992 
EUR 12 
in per cent of 
value added 
In ECU* per 
person employed 
in per cent of intra-
Community Export** 1988 
4.1 
1497 
22.8 1989 
3.2 
1133 
15.9 1990 
4.2 
1475 
20.9 1991 
3.5 
1215 
17.3 1992 
3.4 
1210 
16.9 
at constant 1991 prices 
intra-Community exports of industrial products 
(4) 
(5) some major sectoral restructuring was supported in Italy and Spain. 
Since a small but not exactly quantifiable part of the aid amounts has to be attributed to the 
service sector (trade, repair, consultancy), the figures shown may be slightly overestimated. 
8 
Aid levels relative to value added show - with the exception of 1990 - a tendency 
to decline over the period under review. This is particularly apparent in 1991 and 
1992. 
The amount of aid per person employed in industry decreases over the five year 
period in real terms from ECU 1497 to ECU 1210. The globally declining tendency 
is only temporarily interrupted in 1990, where a relative peak can be noticed. Aid 
relative to the value of intra-Communitv exports of manufactured goods - this ratio 
can be seen as a good indicator for the potential distortion of competition in the 
Community - also shows a longer term downward trend. 
12. From table 1 and 2 it can be seen that the absolute aid amounts and the three 
indicators used to mirror the tendency of aid to industry on Community level - aid 
relative to value added, per person employed and in relation to export - all 
coincide: the aid level in industry is declining. Thus the concern expressed in the 
last Survey about a possible upward trend starting in 1990 is not confirmed. 
Comparisons between Member States 
13. Table 3 compares the average aid levels in industry for the different Member 
States(6) being divided into the old and the new Lander for the period 1990-
1992(7) expressed in per cent of gross value added and aid amounts per person 
employed in this sector. In addition, real term absolute amounts are given for 
information. 
(6) 
(7) Germany has been divided into the old and new Lander in order to show clearly the different 
development in the two German areas. 
As explained in point 6 above, detailed breakdowns by Member States can only be 
compared reliably if moving three year-averages are used. 
Table 3 
State aid to the manufacturing sector 
Annual averages 1990-1992 and 1988-1990 
Belgium 
Denmark 
former Germany** 
new Lander 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
EUR 12 in per cent of value added 
1988-1990 
5.0 
2.3 
2.6 
16.9 
3.7 
3.7 
3.9 
7.8 
3.4 
3.2 
7.3 
1.9 
3.8 1990-1992 
4.3 
2.0 
2.1 
n.a. 
12.3 
1.7 
3.0 
2.9 
8.9 
4.1 
2.6 
5.2 
1.5 
3.7 in ECU per person employed 
1988-1990 
1743.6 
684.8 
1098.9 
2419.9 
1079.0 
1449.1 
1821.3 
2425.1 
1369.4 
1266.0 
910.5 
756.1 
1372.1 1990-1992 
1526.5 
637.6 
978.8 
4385.3 
1578.4 
493.2 
1138.1 
1410.5 
2610.5 
1572.6 
978.3 
625.4 
525.1 
1293.1 in mio ECU* 
1988-1990 
1280.1 
365.0 
8487.9 
1764.4 
2901.7 
6423.7 
389.4 
12161.5 
51.0 
1177.3 
735.9 
4067.4 
40703.5 1990-1992 
1119.3 
335.6 
7133.9 
4848.7 
1032.1 
1349.2 
5043.7 
307.4 
12526.0 
57.7 
928.7 
479.2 
2660.6 
37822.1 
1988-1990 averages in 1991 prices 
in its borders before October 1990 
10 
The aid levels show significant differences between the individual Member States. 
Figure I gives an overview of the situation when aid levels are expressed as aid to 
industry relative to value added. 
Figure I 
State Aid to the Manufacturing Sector 
as percentage of value added (averages 1988-1990 and 1990-1992) 
EUR 12 
• 1988-1990 n 1990-1992 
Greece continues to exhibit by far the highest level of all Member States. 
However, as noted above, the still considerable uncertainty attached to the 
figures for Greece does not yet allow any further detailed comment. 
11 
Therefore, setting Greece apart, the highest aid levels are to be found in Italy and 
Portugal. These countries rank high above Community average with Italy even 
increasing its position compared with the preceding period whereas Portugal 
reducing largely its exposed position. 
Belgium and Luxembourg are slightly above Community average, and France, 
Ireland and the Netherlands slightly below. 
The lowest aid to industry is given, in declining order, in West Germany, 
Denmark, Spain and the United Kingdom. In all these countries aid is far below 
the Community average and declining, compared to the previous period. The 
sharp decline of aid in Spain is the result of considerable reductions in steel and 
shipbuilding aid. Due to lack of statistics aid in per cent of value added for 
reunified Germany and for the new Lander could not be calculated. 
14. The situation described in terms of aid related to value added is more or less 
confirmed if aid per person employed is looked at. Here, the new German Lander 
taken separately lie far above all Member States followed by Italy. Greece, 
Luxembourg, Belgium and Ireland are above the Community average. The very 
high figure for the new German Lander is due both to important assistance 
granted by the Treuhand and to a sharp decline in the number of employees. 
France, the former West-Germany and the Netherlands are considerably below 
the Community average and the group of low aid givers now comprises, in 
descending order, Denmark, Portugal, the United Kingdom and Spain. 
15. As a general conclusion on the differences in aid trends between Member States, 
it can be established that despite an overall reduction of aid to industry at 
Community level - in absolute terms and in terms of aid related to value added 
and per person employed - which is a result of reductions in the majority of 
Member States, significant differences between the individual countries remain. 
12 
A comparison of the four big economies (excluding the new German Lander for 
which aid in per cent of value added could not be calculated) shows that in Italy 
aid as a percentage of value added is nearly six times as high as in the United 
Kingdom, more than four times as high as in former West-Germany and nearly 
three times as high as in France. When aid is expressed in terms of ECU per 
person employed, the new German Lander rank first, followed by far by Italy. 
A direct comparison between these four Member States and the four countries 
which are in the process of catching up - Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal -
reveals that the relative importance of industrial support is rising in the more 
central Member States. As a matter of fact, in the four big economies (excluding 
the new German Lander), aid expressed as a percentage of value added only 
declined from 4.0 to 3.3 per cent during the two periods under review, whereas 
in the peripheral economies the same indicator falls much more sharply from 6.0 
to 2.9 per cent. 
Furthermore, a look at the absolute amounts of aid shown in table 3 shows that 
the volume of aid to these four countries is decreasing from 15 to 8 per cent of 
total aid spending in the Community whilst the expenditure of Italy, former West 
Germany, France and the United Kingdom which accounted for 82 per cent of the 
annual average of aid to industry in the Community during the period 1988-1990, 
has only dropped to 72.3 per cent for the period 1990-1992. 
The only slight decrease in industrial support in the four largest Member States 
is insufficient to improve economic convergence within the Community. However, 
such a conclusion would only be partially justified as industry, in addition to 
national state aid, benefits also from Community interventions via the Regional 
and the Social Funds (see Annex II, Table A4). 
13 
Aid to shipbuilding 
16. In shipbuilding, which is a sub-sector of industry, aid is covered during the two 
periods under review by the Sixth and Seventh Shipbuilding Directive(8). In this 
context, it should be mentioned that the other sub-sector covered by a strict 
discipline, steel, is not singled out any more, as it was in the First Survey, 
because aid has virtually been phased out since 1986. After this date, the steel 
sector can only obtain R&D and environment aid and aid to cover social cost of 
closures. Only for the new Member States Spain and Portugal a transitional 
period had been allowed until the end of 1988 resp. 1990. 
(8) OJ L 69 of 12.3.1987 and OJ L 380 of 31.12.1990 
14 
Table 4 
Aid to shipbuilding 1990-1992 and 1988-1990 in per cent of value added in this sector* 
in per cent 
1988-1990 1990-1992 
Belgium 16 11 
Denmark 33 31 
Germany 26 18 
Greece 12 1 
Spain 35 19 
France 52 11 
Ireland 
Italy 72 17 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 23 10 
Portugal 98 69 
United Kingdom 16 4 
EUR 12 34 15 
Since value added figures were not always available for recent years, estimates had to be made. 
The figures shown should, therefore, only be regarded as best estimations. 
Table 4 shows aid relative to gross value added in the shipbuilding sector. It has 
to be stressed that the figures contained in this table do not reflect the aid 
intensities for which the Commission sets ceilings when implementing the 
shipbuilding directive. These latter aid intensities are much lower since they are 
linked to contract prices of ships and not to the sector's value added. 
15 
Aid levels are generally high but particularly so in Portugal with more than four 
times the Community average. Spain, Germany and Italy are relatively near the 
average, whereas Belgium, France, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and 
Greece can be considered as the, relatively speaking, least aid givers as a 
percentage of value added in this sector. 
Community average of aid to shipbuilding has strongly declined from 33.8 per 
cent of value added for 1988-1990 to 14,6 per cent for 1990-1992. Aid intensity 
has decreased in all Member States without exception. However, the largest 
reductions have taken place in France, Italy, the United Kingdom and Portugal, 
even if aid still remains relatively high in the latter. 
16 
Types of aid 
17. Table 5 gives an overview of the various forms of aid used in the Member States. 
Table 5 
State aid to the Manufacturing Sector 1990-1992 
Breakdown according to type of aid 
in per cent 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United 
Kingdom 
EUR 12 TYPE OF AID 
Group A 
Grants 
50 
83 
46 
55 
79 
31 
67 
48 
82 
80 
75 
89 
51 Tax 
reductions 
30 
4 
37 
19 
0 
28 
24 
44 
5 
15 
9 
6 
33 Group B 
Equity 
participations 
1 
0 
0 
0 
2 
5 
5 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3 Group C 
Soft 
loans 
9 
4 
8 
13 
16 
9 
0 
3 
13 
1 
6 
1 
6 Tax 
deferrals 
0 
0 
1 
0 
0 
3 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
3 
1 Group D 
Guarantees 
9 
8 
8 
13 
3 
25 
3 
0 
0 
5 
10 
1 
7 TOTAL 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
Grants and definitive tax reductions, which have been classified in this Survey as 
group A forms of intervention, are by far the most frequently used form of aid in 
the Community. Within this group, direct grants are more often employed than tax 
breaks. This can be explained by the fact that the former type of aid is more 
17 
flexible than the latter. Since the introduction of grants is in general less "costly" 
in terms of parliamentary procedures than the introduction of changes to tax laws, 
governments have a preference to employ the former type of aid. 
18. Aid in the form of state equity participation, classified under group B, represents 
only 3 per cent of all aid to manufacturing granted in the European Union; the 
figure for this type of aid is relatively low as during the period 1990 to 1992 very 
few financial transfers to public undertakings including an aid element took place. 
19. Forms of aid classified in group C. i.e. loans at reduced interest rates and tax 
deferrals, are an important form of aid in Spain, Greece and Luxembourg. 
Member States generally avoid this form of aid because it puts a heavy burden 
on the budget. The figures for soft loans represent only the aid element; the gross 
budgetary resources necessary for these aids are much higher. This explains the 
low share in industry aid of this aid form in the Community. Member States prefer 
to reduce the cost of loans by granting interest subsidies. 
Tax deferrals, mainly accelerated depreciation and the constitution of tax free 
reserves, is the form which is the least used in the Community. Only the United 
Kingdom, France and Germany grant support in this form. 
20. Guarantees, group D, continue to be mainly used to support exports with medium 
and long-term credit periods, to help in rescue and restructuring operations and 
to foster the development of small and medium enterprises. Although its share in 
industrial aid is the third smallest on average, it is a significant part of aid in 
France, Greece and Portugal. The calculation of the aid element of guarantees 
is particularly difficult and, therefore, they are, together with the equity 
participation, a very non-transparent form of state aid. In this as in previous 
surveys, no attempt has been made to calculate the aid element ex ante but 
instead current expenditure on claims under past guarantees has been taken. As 
noted above, this practice has been departed from in the case of Treuhand 
operations. 
18 
Figure II 
State Aid to the Manufacturing Sector 
Distribution by tax expenditure and budgetary expenditure 1990-1992 
100 
90 h 
60 
70 
60 h 
50 
40 
30 
20 
10 U 
B OK D GR E F IRL I L NL P UK 
m Budget Expenditure r j Tax Expenditure EUR 12 
21. Figure II gives a breakdown of industrial aid according to the mode of financing. 
Budgetary expenditure, which is composed of grants, soft loans, equity 
participation and guarantees, is the preferred way of financing aid in the European 
Union. This holds particularly for Spain, where all aid is financed through the 
budget, Denmark, Portugal, Luxembourg and the United Kingdom. By contrast, 
tax expenditure, i.e. tax rebates and tax deferrals, is used to a large extent in 
Germany and Italy. 
19 
Objectives of aid 
22. Aid to industry is also classified according to the (broad) purposes for which it is 
given and the sector to which it is directed, as follows: 
Horizontal objectives(9) 
- Research and Development 
- Environment 
- Small and medium enterprises 
- Trade/export 
- Energy conservation 
- Other objectives 
Particular sectors(10) 
- Shipbuilding 
- Other sectors 
Regional objectives 
- Regions falling under Article 92(3)c 
- Regions falling under Article 92(3)a 
- (Only for Germany) Berlin and Zonenrand aids. 
The classification of aid is in many cases somewhat arbitrary because it is 
necessary to decide which of the objectives declared by a Member State is to be 
considered as the primary objective. In some Member States, aid for research 
and development is administered through sector specific programmes, in others 
aid to particular sectors is limited to small and medium enterprises, etc. 
Furthermore, primary objectives cannot give a true picture of the final 
beneficiaries : A very large part of regional aid is in fact paid to small and medium 
(9) 
•Training and employment measures are excluded. See annex I, point 14. 
This category contains industry-specific schemes and individual aid awards scrutinized 
by the Commission. 
20 
enterprises, aid for research and development goes to particular sectors, and so 
on. 
Consequently, conclusions about changes from one objective to another over 
time, notably, conclusions about differences in objectives between Member States 
can only be drawn with extreme caution. The following table 6 gives, therefore, 
the detailed breakdown of aid to industry according to objectives during the period 
1990-1992, and table 7 indicates the changes over time for the three main 
objectives pursued by the Member States. 
23. It can be seen from the percentages contained in table 6 that 50% of industrial 
aid in the Union is spent on regional objectives. Amongst these aids more than 
eight out of every ten ECUs are going to areas where the living conditions are 
particularly low, the so-called Article 92(3)a regions01). However, this category 
contains the large amount of Berlin and Zonenrand aid in Germany. If this special 
category is taken out, the aid to 92(3)a regions is reduced to 66 per cent of 
regional aid or 33 per cent of total industry aid. 
24. Aid granted for horizontal objectives is ranked second. Amongst these, support 
for research and development(12), trade/export and small and medium enterprises 
is given priority. Although it is undeniable that aids for such horizontal objectives 
are in most cases in the Community interest, they present, nevertheless, the 
drawback that their impact on competition is often difficult to assess because little 
or no information is available about their sectoral and regional repercussions. 
Notably in their extreme form as general investment schemes, which still accounts 
for two per cent of industry aid in the Community, where the objectives are so 
poorly defined no general judgement can be made and the Commission is bound 
to examine all major cases of application. With regard to the completion of the 
Internal Market, the existence of such general schemes is, therefore, more and 
more difficult to justify. 
(ID 
A list of these regions is given in annex I, point 9.2. 
(12) 
For the reasons explained in annex I, point 11.1, the R&D figures contained in table 
6 are certainly underestimated. 
21 
25. One eighth of industrial aid in the Community is spent on particular sectors. 
Whereas aid levels were particularly high in the steel sector during the period 
1981 to 1986, they have now virtually been phased out under the current steel aid 
code. Only in Italy for closures and in Portugal where steel aid was allowed until 
1990 is aid still flowing in this sector. 
26. The situation in each Member State as regards the overall composition of aid to 
manufacturing is as follows : 
In Belgium, horizontal aids form the bulk of spending (82 per cent of total) 
which is far above the average in the European Union. They are mainly 
directed towards SMEs, trade/export, R&D and general investment. Some of 
the spending going to "other objectives" are the capital injections made by 
regional investment bodies. Further work is necessary to reclassify it into a 
more specific category. Sector specific aids (2 per cent) are very low whilst 
regional aids (16 per cent ) are relatively high for a geographically compact 
Member State without any 92(3)a regions. 
- . In Denmark, a greater proportion of the aids are horizontal (68 per cent) and 
are composed essentially of R&D aids and aids for environment and the 
economization of energy. The sector specific aids (30%) are mostly aids to 
shipbuilding. Regional policy (2 per cent of a very low overall total) is not 
significant. 
In Germany, horizontal aids account for 21 per cent, which is low compared 
to the average in the European Union. Two thirds of these aids are spent on 
research and for SMEs. Sector specific aid (8 per cent) is also low. The most 
important item is regional aids (72 per cent), the overwhelming part of which 
consists of 92(3)a aid for the New Lander (including aid granted via the 
Treuhandanstalt). 
Greece - the figures are considered too unreliable for detailed comments. 
22 
In Spain, 50 per cent of the aid is spent for horizontal objectives, mainly for 
research and development and for SMEs. Sector specific aids represent 34 
per cent of total aid to manufacturing. With 16 per cent regional aid is very 
low. 
In France, 71 per cent of industry aid has horizontal objectives. Outstanding 
items are trade/export, R&D and SMEs. An important volume of aid is 
directed to specific sectors (18 per cent), although in certain cases to R&D 
in particular sectors or in the form of parafiscal levies(13). Regional policy (11 
per cent) is not very significant. 
In Ireland, two items form the bulk of spending : regional aids (69 per cent) 
and export sales relief (20 per cent). 
In Italy, horizontal aids (30 per cent) are mainly given to SMEs and trade and 
export. The most important aid category is regional aid (62 per cent). Almost 
all regional aid goes into the 92(3)a regions of the Mezzogiorno. Because of 
the relatively large overall volume of aid in Italy, this is, in absolute terms, the 
biggest volume of aid devoted to this objective in the Community. Sectoral 
aids (8 per cent) are less important in Italy. 
In Luxembourg, the most important item is regional aid (66 per cent), 
followed by aid to SMEs (16 per cent) and aid to R & D (12 per cent). 
(13) 
Parafiscal levies are taxes specific to a sector which are used to finance certain operations 
in that sector. 
23 
Table 6 
State aid to the manufacturing sector 1990-1992 
Breakdown of aid according to sector and function 
in per cent 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
Horizontal Objectives 
Research and Development 
Environment 
S.M.E. 
Trade/Export 
Economisationof Energy 
General Investment 
Other Objectives 
ParticularSectors 
Shipbulding 
Other Sectors 
Regional Objectives 
Regions under 92(3)c 
Regions under 92(3)a 
Berlin/Zonenrand 
TOTAL B 
82 
13 
0 
26 
16 
7 
12 
7 
2 
1 
1 
16 
16 
0 
100 DK 
68 
31 
15 
1 
8 
11 
0 
2 
30 
24 
6 
2 
2 
0 
100 D 
21 
9 
1 
4 
1 
2 
0 
4 
8 
2 
6 
72 
5 
36 
31 
100 GR 
64 
1 
0 
12 
15 
0 
3 
32 
6 
0 
6 
30 
0 
30 
100 E 
50 
17 
3 
10 
1 
2 
6 
10 
34 
12 
22 
16 
3 
14 
100 F 
71 
27 
0 
11 
30 
1 
1 
0 
18 
1 
.16 
11 
7 
5 
100 IRL 
31 
4 
0 
7 
20 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
69 
0 
69 
100 I 
30 
3 
0 
9 
9 
3 
2 
5 
8 
1 
7 
62 
4 
58 
100 L 
34 
12 
0 
16 
0 
0 
5 
0 
0 
0 
0 
66 
66 
0 
100 NL 
72 
26 
5 
20 
2 
14 
3 
2 
10 
4 
6 
18 
18 
0 
100 P 
34 
3 
0 
1 
0 
1 
18 
10 
55 
37 
19 
11 
0 
11 
100 UK 
45 
7 
1 
15 
15 
0 
6 
0 
25 
2 
23 
30 
20 
10 
100 EUR 12 
38 
10 
1 
9 
9 
2 
2 
4 
12 
2 
9 
50 
6 
43 
100 
24 
Table 7 
State aid to the manufacturing sector 1990-1992 
and 1998-1990 
Breakdown to main objectives 
in per cent 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
EUR 12 Horizontal Objectives 
1988-1990 
77 
61 
26 
71 
26 
66 
49 
30 
39 
76 
14 
42 
40 1990-1992 
82 
68 
21 
64 
50 
71 
31 
30 
34 
72 
34 
45 
38 Particular Sectors 
1988-1990 
3 
36 
10 
4 
69 
25 
0 
15 
0 
11 
81 
28 
21 1990-1992 
2 
30 
8 
6 
34 
18 
0 
8 
0 
10 
55 
25 
12 Regional Objectives 
1988-1990 
21 
3 
64 
25 
5 
9 
51 
55 
60 
. 14 
5 
30 
39 1990-1992 
16 
2 
72 
30 
16 
11 
69 
62 
66 
18 
11 
30 
50 
25 
In the Netherlands, horizontal aids (72 per cent) are by far the 
biggest item and considerably bigger than the average in the 
European Union. Within horizontal aids, R&D, SMEs and 
economization of energy absorbs almost all aids. Aid to particular 
sectors represent 10 per cent of total aid to manufacturing. Regional 
aids (18 per cent) are relatively important for a geographically 
compact Member State without any 92(3)a regions. 
In Portugal, most of the aids are spent for sector specific 
interventions (55 per cent). Their part in industry aid is more than 
four times higher than on average in the Union. They go essentially, 
to shipbuilding and tourism related industries. Aid for horizontal 
objectives (34 per cent) is almost exclusively absorbed by general 
investment and "other objectives". The latter ones are mostly 
cofinanced by the Commission and are more akin to the regional 
aids given in 92(3)a regions because the whole territory of Portugal, 
like in Ireland and Greece, is considered by the Commission as 
constituting a 92(3)a region. 
In the United Kingdom, horizontal aids (45 per cent) form the biggest 
group of support of which aids to trade/export and SMEs are the 
main items. Sectoral aid totals 25 per cent of total aid to 
manufacturing. Regional aids (30 per cent) are for the most part 
spent in Article 92(3)c regions. This category is in fact the biggest 
single item of industrial aid in the United Kingdom. The rest of the 
regional aid is spent in Northern Ireland which is a 92(3)a region. 
27. As regards the development over time of the distribution of industrial aid 
amongst the different main objectives, it can be seen from table 7 that at 
the level of the European Union aid for horizontal objectives has been 
slightly reduced and, regional aid has been significantly increased at the 
expense of sector specific interventions. 
26 
The increase in regional aid is to be attributed to the increase in 92(3)a aid. 
The shift from sectoral interventions to horizontal objectives has, under 
competition aspects, also to be interpreted in a positive way. Of course, aid 
schemes under both categories can be employed for more or less hidden 
and unwanted purposes of industrial policy (support of single companies as 
national champions or protection of whole branches which are allegedly of 
vital national interest) and have, in such cases, particularly disastrous 
effects on competition. However, horizontal aids given to all sectors of the 
economy are, with the exception of the above mentioned general 
investment aids, less suitable for the distortive protection of branches than 
sector specific interventions. 
27 
PART II - OVERALL NATIONAL AID IN THE MEMBER STATES 
Aid to other sectors than industry 
28. The following gives an overview of state aid granted outside the 
manufacturing sector, i.e. in agriculture, fisheries, transport and coal 
mining. The totality of such aid awarded in these five sectors constitutes, 
on the basis of the available data, the overall national aid to the relevant 
sectors of the economies of the Member States. 
Aid to agriculture 
29. In sectors such as agriculture where a highly-developed Community policy 
is in operation, the limits for granting state aid are, to a greater extent, 
determined by this common policy. Thus, although Articles 92-94 of the 
EEC Treaty apply in principle to agriculture as to other sectors of the 
economy, Article 42 specifies that the extent to which these articles apply 
to agriculture should be decided by the Council. Hence the Council has 
limited Member States' freedom to grant state aid in certain areas of policy: 
(i) - Support of markets in most agricultural products (Council 
Regulations governing the common market organisations). 
Aid, using exclusively Community (i.e. EAGGF) resources, is payable 
only on the basis of Council rules which provide inter alia for a 
common system of intervention buying and export refunds and, 
further to the reform decisions of May 1992, compensatory aid in the 
various sectors for price reductions in conjunction with compulsory 
set-aside. 
28 
(ii) Support for certain socio-structural measures at farm level. (Council 
Regulation (EEC) No. 797/85, now codified as Council Regulation 
(EEC) No. 2328/91). 
Aid, cofinanced by the Community, is payable exclusively on the 
basis of Council rules in the case of aid for specified areas of socio-
structural policy, including for productive investments on the holding. 
Table 8 relates total state aid (including the national contribution to the 
socio-structural measures under (ii) above) in respect of products listed in 
Annex II of the EEC Treaty -plant and livestock production and primary, 
processing activities -to gross value added of agricultural production at the 
level of the holding. It will be noted that in this table national aid taken into 
account applies to a broader spectrum of activities than the base retained 
for gross valued added. 
29 
Table 8 
National aid in respect of products listed in Annex ii of the EEC Treaty as a percentage of 
gross value added of agricultural production in 1990-92 and 1988-90. 
per cent 
1988-1990 1990-1992 
Belgium 9.3 9.2 
Denmark 7.6 5.8 
France 16.2 16.2 
Germany* 21.8 26.5 
Greece 1.0 0.0 
Spain 1.3 1.5 
Ireland 4.5 4.9 
Italy 13.4 14.1 
Luxembourg 15.5 18.5 
Netherlands 4.7 4.3 
Portugal 14.3 13.4 
United Kingdom 8.0 7.5 
EUR 12 11.3 11.8 
German agriculture aid figures include aid in the form of VAT concessions (VAT plus per 
hectare aid) awarded in compensation for price reductions flowing from agri-monetary 
changes. Of the total shown, some 10% points of gross value added are accounted for 
by this aid, thus bringing the figures for Germany in this table very close to the Community 
averages. 
This table should be read in conjunction with point 29 (above) and point 111.10.2 of the 
technical annex. 
30 
It may be noted that the concept of total national aid encompasses 
individual categories of aid which may present differing levels of relevance 
in competition policy terms. Therefore, it may be argued that aid., for 
measures such as productive investment and publicity, is more likely 
potentially to have an effect upon trade than aid which is destined simply 
to compensate operators for services rendered, for example, access to the 
countryside and aid to offset the financial burden of natural disasters. A 
broadly similar argument might apply to aid financed by certain parafiscal 
taxes where, though such aid from a legal viewpoint is considered as state 
aid, the economic burden falls exclusively upon the beneficiaries 
themselves. 
Further, it should be noted that the data in Table 8 does not provide any 
indication of the total level of support granted to agriculture in the 
Community or to any particular Member State. Only a limited part of this 
total is accounted for by the data in the table. The annual publication by the 
Commission entitled "The Agricultural Situation in the Community" provides 
data inter alia on Community aid for agriculture. 
Thus it may be concluded that caution must be exercised in drawing 
conclusions concerning the possible impact on trade from the data in Table 
8, or indeed from any data relating to global volumes of aid in agriculture, 
a fortiori where, as in the present case, it has been necessary to have 
considerable recourse to extrapolations (see Annex I, Section III for details). 
31 
Aid to fisheries 
30. In the fisheries sector, national aids closely follows the development of and 
the limits imposed by the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) thereby 
contributing to the realization of common objectives. Any conclusion to be 
drawn from the quantification of national aids has, therefore, not only to 
take account of their impact on competition but also of their impact on 
attaining a common aim. 
The aids in the fisheries sector are quantified in the following tables 9 and 
10, which show the majority of Community intervention and national aids in 
favour of the Community's fishing fleet, the commercialization and first-
stage processing of the products. 
32 
Table 9 
Aid to fisheries in per cent of gross value added* in this sector, calculated on the basis of 
quantities landed and average prices 1990-1992 and 1988-1990 
per cent 
1988-1990 1990-1992 
Belgium 1.7 1.5 
Denmark 3.2 2.9 
France 3.8 4.3 
Germany 11.7 10.8 
Greece 0.6 0.3 
Spain 3.3 3.3 
Ireland 10.9 11.1 
Italy 7.5 8.6 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 0.6 0.6 
Portugal 1.2 1.7 
United Kingdom 3.6 2.9 
EUR 12 5.5 5.5 
Value added figures used exclude transformation industry and the on-shore production. 
33 
Table 10 
Community interventions in the fisheries sector in the framework of the common 
organisation of the market and structural policy 1988-1992. 
mb ECU 
Guarantee 
Orientation 1988 
46.9 
100.4 1989 
24.0 
169.9 1990 
23.6 
65.9 1991 
26.2 
125.5 1992 
32.1 
178.8 
Aid to transport (railways and inland waterways) 
31. Table 11 shows aid to railways and inland waterways as a percentage of 
value added in these sectors. Whilst most aid is given to compensate for the 
imposition of social obligations or inherited liabilities on railways (Regulations 
1191/69 and 1192/69) aid in percent of value added remains extremely high, 
although on the whole aid levels have continued to decrease. Aid is 
particularly high in Luxembourg and Belgium, while relatively little aid is 
granted in Greece, Portugal and the Netherlands. However, these figures 
should be interpreted with caution, mainly because value added figures were 
not always available . The question of a more transparent preparation of the 
figures is evaluated in the Commission's rolling Work Programme for the 
forthcoming years. 
34 
Table 11 
State aid to transport (Railways and Inland waterways) in percent of gross value added in 
railways ** 1990-1992 and 1988-1990 
per cent 
1988-1990 1990-1992 
Total aid Reg. 1191/2-69 Total aid Reg. 1191/2-69 
Belgium 
Denmark 
France 
Germany 
Greece 
Ireland* 
Italy 
Luxembourg*** 
Netherlands* 
Portugal 
Spain 
United Kingdom 54.9 
14.8 
25.9 
28.7 
6.3 
14.8 
39.5 
160.0 
5.7 
8.4 
25.7 
10.3 40.9 
10.2 
15.6 
17.9 
0.2 
8.1 
13.2 
103.4 
5.3 
6.1 
3.8 
6.6 50.4 
15.9 
25.7 
22.3 
3.8 
13.5 
34.6 
167.4 
5.7 
5.9 
23.5 
9.7 38.9 
10.2 
15.6 
16.3 
0.1 
7.3 
11.3 
111.1 
5.3 
4.3 
3.6 
6.9 
EUR 12 24.1 12.2 21.4 11.4 
Aid figures expressed as percentage of value added in whole transport sector as no separate 
figures are available for railways. 
Gross value added was not available for all years. Lacking data were estimated. 
A very considerable part of the expenditure under Regulation 1192/69 in this Member State 
is for retirement. 
35 
Aid to coal mining 
32. Table 12 gives the aid to coal mining divided into aid not going to current 
production and aid paid for current production. The latter is expressedin ECU 
per person employed in the industry and as the share of the total aid to the 
sector. Whilst the general trend in the coal producing Member States is for an 
increase in the amount of aid per person employed compared to the previous 
period, the United Kingdom halted all aid to current production during the 
period 1990 to 1992 and Belgium saw the level of aid to current production 
decline as the last colliery closed in the summer of 1992. Of the remaining 
Member States, levels of aid remained particularly high in Germany and 
Spain. 
Table 12 
Aid to the coal industry 
in ECU 
Belgium 
Germany 
Spain 
France 
Portugal 
United 
Kingdom** Yearly average of aid 
not destined to current 
production** 
88-90* 
981665 
4152525 
751203 
2685675 
0 
1308396 90-92 
791100 
451499 
939033 
2880266 
0 
43429 Yearly average 
of aid destined to current production 
88-90* 
per 
employee 
32440 
34767 
13061 
8261 
5095 
30103 in % of 
total 
14 
54 
42 
7 
100 
67 90-92 
per 
employee 
26571 
36883 
14721 
8646 
6535 
0 in % of 
total 
7 
50 
37 
6 
100 
0 
in 1991 prices 
in ECU ' 000 
figure for 1988-1990 includes a financial measure of 5089.5 milion ECU reflecting the decline 
in the underlying value of British Coal's fixed assets, aid to cover compensation for hearing 
loss and supplies of concessionary coal to mineworkers. Excluding this financial measure, aid 
per employee would have been 8035 ECU. 
36 
The share of aid going to current production has declined significantly from 
46% of the total aid for the period 1988 to 1990 to 37% during the period 1990 
to 1992. This is a natural result of the ongoing programme of restructuring and 
rationalization of the Community coal industry, a process which will continue 
into the foreseeable future. 
Of the aid not going to current production, the majority is to cover the social 
and redundancy costs resulting from the contraction of the industry. The 
average number of employees in the sector stood at 215,356 in 1992, 
compared with 270,068 in 1990, with the most important reductions occurring 
in Belgium, France and the United Kingdom. 
In the case of Germany and Spain, a coal reference price system has been 
in operation which keeps domestic prices net of subsidies considerably above 
world market prices. Although such a measure has an effect equivalent to an 
aid, it cannot be reflected by the usual indicators which are shown in table 12. 
Therefore, the figures should be taken as an overview and not an accurate 
indicator of the protection afforded by aid. 
33. For both railways and coal the observed aid amounts are high. Whilst there 
may be only limited competition between coal industries, the impact of these 
aids on the wider markets in transport and energy cannot be ignored. As these 
markets become integrated with the completion of the common market, 
competition is becoming increasingly important. The declared will of the 
Community to open up the transport and the energy markets render a strict 
aid control policy by the Commission in these sectors more and more 
37 
important. The Survey will, in future, have to contain data on forms of 
transport other than railways and inland waterways and forms of energy other 
than coal in order to provide a basis for the full assessment of the impact of 
aids in these sectors. For energy, this assessment will take account of the 
Commission's document "Completion of the Internal Market in Energy"; in the 
transport sector, however, the assessment of distortions of inter-modal 
competition is made more difficult by the question of imputing infrastructure, 
environmental and policing costs. 
Volume of overall aid in the Community 
34. The volume of state aid in the Community, given in the sectors covered by this 
survey, amounts on average over the period 1990-1992 to nearly 93,800 
million ECU. 
As can be seen from table 13, this constitutes a decrease of aid expenditure 
when compared with the previous period. 
Table 13 
Overall national aid 1990-92 and 1988-90 
mio ECU 
1988-1990 1990-1992 
Overall national aid 102471 93802 
38 
For a meaningful comparison between Member States, total aid expenditure 
is shown in the following table 14 as a percentage of gross domestic product, 
per person employed, relative to total government expenditure. 
35. If aid is expressed relative to GDP, the highest aid levels are to be found in 
Luxembourg, Italy, Belgium, Germany and Greece. Setting Greece aside 
because of the unreliable aid figures for that country and taking into account 
that the high aid value in Luxembourg is a result of the extremely large 
financial support for railways in this Member State, the figures show that aid 
levels are highest in Italy, Belgium, and Germany. These countries are all 
situated above Community average. The fact that Germany, which belongs to 
the Member States with low aid levels in industry, now ranks so much higher, 
is due to the important support of the German coal mining sector. As a matter 
of fact, nearly every third ECU spent on overall aid in this country is absorbed 
by the mining sector. 
With the exception of Italy and Luxembourg, all these countries have reduced 
their aid levels compared to the previous period. 
Equally reduced have been the aids in Ireland, France and Spain, which form 
a group of Member States where aid levels are below, but still relatively close 
to the Community average. The least aid is given, in descending order, in 
Denmark, the Netherlands and finally the United Kingdom, where the overall 
aid level is less than one third of the Community average. 
36. In terms of aid per person employed, the situation within the Community 
described above undergoes some slight modifications. The group of Member 
39 
States with indicated high aid levels, to which invariably belong Luxembourg, 
Italy, Belgium and Germany, is now joined by France. The least aid is 
awarded in Denmark, the Netherlands, Greece, the United Kingdom and, at 
the bottom, Portugal. 
37. If aid levels are expressed in aid as a proportion of public expenditure, the 
situation in the different Member States described so far is more or less 
confirmed. Countries with high aid levels relative to GDP like Luxembourg, 
Italy, Germany, Belgium and Greece have also to carry a relatively high 
budgetary burden and low aid countries like the Netherlands, Denmark and 
the United Kingdom devote only a small share of their expenditures to these 
interventions. 
40 
Table 14 
Overall State Aid in the Member States 1990-1992 and 1988-1990 in per cent of GDP per 
person employed and relative to government expenditure 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
EUR 12 in per cent of GDP 
1988-1990 
2.8 
1.1 
2.5 
3.1 
1.8 
2.1 
1.9 
2.8 
3.9 
1.1 
2.0 
1.2 
2.1 1990-1992 
2.3 
1.0 
2.4 
2.2 
1.3 
1.8 
1.5 
2.8 
3.9 
0.9 
1.4 
0.6 
1.9 in ECU per person 
employed 
1988-1990 
1107 
414 
1031 
551 
544 
870 
593 
1177 
1456 
391 
255 
398 
777 1990-1992 
966 
399 
1090 
335 
420 
801 
502 
1165 
1513 
338 
178 
189 
704 in per cent of total 
Government 
Expenditure 
1988-1990 
5.4 
1.9 
5.0 
6.2 
4.3 
4.1 
4.4 
5.5 
7.7 
2.0 
4.5 
3.2 
4.4 1990-1992 
4.5 . 
1.7 
4.8 
4.2 
2.9 
3.6 
3.6 
5.1 
7.8 
1.7 
3.0 
1.5 
3.8 
1988-1990 averages in 1991 prices 
41 
Budgetary impact of aids 
38. Furthermore, it is interesting to note that countries with high overall aid levels 
like Italy and Belgium(14) not only have to carry a high burden in terms of public 
expenditure but also appear amongst the Member States with the largest 
budget deficits. This is further aggravated by the fact that these countries 
suffer from large public debts. 
In Italy, the financing of state aid is equivalent to around 28 per cent of the 
very high budget deficit amounting nearly to 10 per cent of GDP in 1990-92. 
Compared to the preceding period, there has only been a marginal decrease 
in the budget deficit and no change in the share of the deficit necessary for 
financing the aid. In Belgium, where the budget deficit is close to seven per 
cent in 1990-92, the financing of the overall aid amount still accounts for 
almost one third of the deficit. 
(14) 
v ' Luxembourg and Greece were left aside for the reasons already mentioned. 
42 
Table 15 
Overall State Aid in the Member States 1990-92 and 1988-90 broken down into main sectors 
Agriculture and 
Fisheries Manufacturing Transport Coal TOTAL 
1988-1990 1990-1992 1988-1990 1990-1992 1988-1990 1990-1992 1988/90/92 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United 
Kingdom 6 
25 
11 
4 
4 
23 
20 
16 
7 
16 
26 
8 7 
19 
11 
0 
5 
24 
23 
16 
7 
16 
30 
14 31 
33 
41 
83 
43 
34 
60 
48 
19 
49 
62 
39 31 
32 
39 
86 
25 
29 
54 
50 
20 
43 
57 
54 35 
42 
17 
13 
34 
28 
20 
36 
74 
35 
11 
16 38 
49 
20 
14 
42 
31 
22 
34 
74 
41 
12 
31 28 
0 
31 
0 
19 
15 
0 
0 
0 
0 
0 
38 24 
0 
29 
0 
28 
17 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
1 100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
100 
EUR 12 14 15 42 41 26 29 18 15 100 
39. An overview of the aid expenditure in the four main sectors - agriculture and 
fisheries, manufacturing, transport and coal - is given in table 15 and 
diagram III. 
The figures show high level of aid in the transport sector in Luxembourg and 
large amounts of aid in the mining sector in Germany, Spain and Belgium. 
43 
Whereas the relative importance of aid to manufacturing increased in the 
United Kingdom, Greece, Italy and Luxembourg, opposite trends can be 
observed at Community level and in the other Member States with the 
exception of Belgium, where the relative importance of aid to manufacturing 
remained constant. 
Figure III 
Overall State Aid in the Member States broken down to main sectors 
Averages 1988 - 1990 and 1990 - 1992 
100 
" 50 \-
DK 
m Manufacturing i ii j 
UK E 12 
Agriculture/Fisheries • Transport Coal 
44 
CONCLUSIONS 
With this Fourth Survey containing the biennial updating for the years 1991 and 1992 
of information on state aid in the Union, the Commission is continuing to discharge 
its duty to provide information to the public. The survey has been modelled on the 
preceding surveys (analysis of the volumes of, and trends in, national aid, broken 
down in terms of the different forms and objectives involved), thus making 
comparison overtime, although limited, possible. This approach again confirms the 
Commission's concern to maximize the transparency of its work, not least for its own 
purposes, since it thereby acquires a statistical frame of reference for monitoring its 
aid policy with a view to abolishing aid detrimental to the free interplay of competition 
within the Union or running counter to the rules applicable to trade between the 
countries of the European Economic Area or of the GATT. 
In general, the Commission has reason to be pleased with the results of the Fourth 
Survey for they indicate that, despite an economic situation which caused difficulties 
for businesses, state aid for enterprises has fallen slightly. According to information 
available to the Commission, there has been a decrease in aid to industry since 
1990. Nevertheless, there is no doubt that aid granted by Member States to their 
industries is still too high for the Commission's objectives to be attained. 
Throughout 1991 and 1992 the Commission continued to implement its competition 
policy very stringently, relying on an array of increasingly sophisticated legal tools 
to abolish, as a matter of priority, aid particularly harmful to freedom of trade between 
45 
countries but also aid liable to widen disparities between central regions and remoter, 
less prosperous regions. 
As for the objective of abolishing particularly harmful aid, it should be noted that 
sectoral aid has decreased markedly while regional aid has increased. Between 
1990 and 1992 the amount of regional aid was equivalent to half that of aid for 
manufacturing. 
Nevertheless, with regard to the reduction of disparities between central and remoter 
regions, the point should be made that, although aid has decreased in both 
categories of region, the decrease has been more marked in the latter than in the 
former, this being at variance with the objective of cohesion. These disparities were, 
however, partially offset by assistance under the Structural Funds. Despite this, the 
Commission, while maintaining its general policy of strictness regarding state aid, 
must continue to concentrate on securing a greater reduction in aid in central regions. 
The aggregate level of national aid to the economy in the period 1990-92 is slightly 
below that for the period 1988-1990. 
The overall results shown in this Fourth Survey have, of course, been largely 
influenced by the economic climate of recent years. In spite of this, the Commission 
has managed to reinforce its monitoring policy, securing qualitative improvements in 
the aid category breakdown. It must press ahead with its efforts to reduce the 
volume of aid, something which can be achieved only via changes in Member States' 
economic structures and is bound to lead in the longer term to an increase in trade 
46 
within the Union but also with third countries and thus to a general increase in 
economic prosperity for all members of the Union. 
47 

ANNEX I 
TECHNICAL ANNEX 
The purpose of this annex is to outline the methodologies and sources used in 
order to produce this Survey on State Aid, notably with regard to : 
Scope of the study 
Fields excluded 
II. Categories, forms and objectives of aid 
III. Type of data, sources and methods of assessing the aid element 
IV. Specific problems 
Research and Development (R & D) 
Transport in Luxembourg 
Tourism; Agri-foodstuff 
Training and unemployment 
48 
Scope of the Study 
Fields excluded 
This Technical Annex explains the methodological background and the 
statistical techniques used. It is an update of the technical annex used for 
the preceding Survey. 
The Survey focuses on State aid to enterprises falling within the scope of 
Article 92 and 93 EEC Treaty. Accordingly, general measures (which, if 
they distort competition, would be dealt with under Article 101 of the EEC 
Treaty) are not included in the figures. 
2. The following measures or areas are not dealt with : 
2.1. Aid whose recipients are not actual enterprises 
Aid to households 
Aid to the handicapped 
Aid for infrastructure (ports, airports, roads, etc.) 
Aid for university institutes 
Aid for public vocational training centres 
Aid to developing countries05 
2.2. General measures and other measures 
Differences between the various tax systems and general social, 
security systems in Member States (depreciation, social security 
deficit, etc.) 
Quotas, public procurement, market restrictions, technical standards 
Specific tax schemes (cooperatives, owner enterprises, self-
employed, etc.)(2) 
General reduction in VAT (for example, foodstuffs in the United 
Kingdom, certain products in the French overseas Departments/35 
(1) 
(2) 
(3) Aid for exports outside the Community have been included in the study since their 
harmonization under Article 112 does not exclude the application of Articles 92 and 93 of 
the EC Treaty. 
However, a lower-than-the-standard rate of corporation tax for small businesses constitutes 
an aid and has been included (eg. Germany). 
Specific reductions such as the reduction of VAT for all products manufactured in Berlin 
have been included. In contrast, all goods (regardless of origin) sold in the DOM pay a 
lower rate of VAT. This has not been included as an aid. 
49 
2.3. Aid granted by supranational and multinational organizations 
Community aid (ERDF, EAGGF, etc.) 
Aid to the European Space Agency 
2.4. Individual types of aid 
Defence (see point 11.2 of this annex) 
Aid to energy, except coal (see points 10.2 and 11) and aid for 
energy saving and alternative (renewable) energy 
Aid to transport, except railways and inland waterways (see point 
10.2) 
Training and unemployment measures (see point 14) 
Press and media 
Banks and credit institutions (e.g. reserves, schemes for mortgage-
lending companies) 
Buildings and public works 
Public utilities : gas, water, electricity, post, telecommunications : 
(tariff structure and financing) 
Aid for cultural and leisure activities 
50 
II. Categories, forms and objectives of aid 
Categories of aid 
All aid represents a cost or a loss of revenue to the public authorities and 
a benefit to recipients. However, the "aid element", ie. the ultimate financial 
benefit contained in the nominal amount transferred, depends to a large 
extent on the form in which the aid is provided. Aid should therefore be 
subdivided in accordance with the form in which it is provided. Four 
categories have been identified for this purpose. Each category is 
represented by a letter : A, B, C, or D followed by the number 1 or 2, 
meaning respectively budgetary aid (ie. aid provided through the central 
government budget) or tax relief (ie. aid granted via the tax system), plus 
an A if the aid element is known; for example, C1A means that what is' 
being referred to is the aid element (A) of a soft loan (C1). 
4. Group A (A1 + A2) 
4.1. The first category (A) concerns aid which is transferred in full to the 
recipient. In other words, the aid element is equal to the capital value of 
the aid. This first category has been subdivided into two groups depending 
on whether the aid was granted through the budget (A1) or through the tax 
or social security system (A2). 
4.2. List of aid coming under categories A1 and A2 
Grants 
Interest subsidies received directly by the recipient 
General research and development schemes (see point 11) 
Tax credits and other tax measures, where the benefit is not 
dependent on having a tax liability (ie. If the tax credit exceeds the 
tax due, the excess amount is repaid) 
tax allowances, exemptions and rate reliefs where the benefit is 
dependent on having a tax liability 
Reduction in social security contributions 
5. Group B1 
5.1. It is necessary to determine whether a financial transfer by the public 
authorities in the form of equity participation is an aid to the recipient or a 
matter of the public sector engaging in a commercial activity and operating 
51 
like a private investor under normal market conditions. Consequently, 
although equity participations, in their various forms, could have been 
included in the first category, they have been grouped together under a 
separate category (B1). An estimate of the aid element contained in such 
equity participations is set out in category B1A. 
5.2. List of aid coming under category B1 
Equity participation in whatever form (including debt conversion) 
6. Group C (C1 + C2) 
6.1. The third category (C) covers transfers in which the aid element is the 
interest saved by the recipient during the period for which the capital 
transferred is at his disposal. The financial transfer takes the form of a soft 
loan (C1) or tax deferral (C2). The aid elements in this category are much 
lower than the capital values of the aid. 
6.2. List of aid coming under categories C1 or C2 
Soft loans (new loans granted) whether from public or private 
sources. (The transfer of interest subsidies is categorized under A1 ) 
Participatory loans from public or private sources 
Advances repayable in the event of success 
Deferred tax provisions (reserves, free or accelerated depreciation, 
etc) 
7. Group D1 
7.1. The last category (D1) covers guarantees, expressed in nominal amounts. 
The aid elements are normally much lower than the nominal amounts, since 
they correspond to the benefit which the recipient receives free of charge 
or at lower than market rate if a premium is paid to cover the risk. However, 
if losses are incurred under the guarantee scheme, the total loss, net of any 
premiums paid, is included under D1A, since it can be considered as a 
definitive transfer to the recipient. The nominal amounts of these 
guarantees are shown under D1 to give an indication of the contingent 
liability. 
7.2. List of aid coming under category D1 
Amounts covered under guarantee schemes (D1) 
Losses arising from guarantee schemes, net of premiums paid (D1 A) 
8. For information on the calculation of the aid element contained in the 
different forms of assistance, see point 10.6. 
52 
9. Objectives of aid 
9.1. The aid schemes have been broken down into 19 headings according to 
their sectorial or functional objectives : 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2. Industry/Services 
2.1. (Horizontal objectives) 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. Small and Medium Enterprises 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.7. Combat unemployment )see point 14 of 
2.1.8. Training Aid )this annex 
2.1.9. Other objectives 
2. Industry/Services 
2.2. (particular sectors) 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transport 
2.2.4.1. Coal (Current Production) 
2.2.4.2. Coal (Other Aid) 
2.2.5. Other Sectors 
3. Regional aid 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)a 
3.2. Other regions 
The heading "other sectors" covers rescue operations and major individual 
cases. The subheading 3.1. : "Regional aid in regions eligible under Article 
92(3)(a)" contains for Germany "Berlin/Article 92(2)c-aid" and the regional 
aids for the new Bundeslander. 
In the coal sector, a distinction is made depending on whether or not aid is 
linked to current production (such a link is made by the Commission in its 
annual communication to the Council on the financial aids in this sector). 
53 
9.2. List of regions within the meaning of Article 92(3ïïa) (4) 
Member State 
Greece 
Ireland 
Portugal 
France 
Italy 
Spain 
United Kingdom 
Germany Regions 
) 
)the whole of the 
Jcountry 
Overseas departments 
Mezzogiorno 
Extremadura 
Andalusia 
Castile-La Mancha 
Galicia 
Castile-Leon 
Murcia 
Canary Islands 
Teruel 
Ceuta-Melilla 
Northern Ireland 
New Bundeslânder 
(4) OJ EC no. C 212 of 12.08.1988, pages 2 to 10 and subsequent changes. 
54 
I. Type of data, sources and methods of 
assessing the aid element 
10. As general rule, the figures have been expressed in terms of actual 
expenditure (or actual revenue losses in the case of tax expenditure).(5) 
Where this was not possible, budget appropriations or the amounts 
provided for in planning programmes were used after consultation with the 
Member States concerned. Where figures of this type were not available, 
the Commission's departments made estimates where this seemed 
reasonable, on the basis of information provided by the Member States. 
Where figures were not available, the Commission's departments have 
extrapolated previous figures. 
10.1. All the figures have been compiled in national currency and have been 
converted into ECUs at the annual average rate provided by the Statistical 
Office of the European Communities. 
As concerns the indicators used, the figures on gross domestic product 
(GDP) are extracted from Eurostat and are GDP at market prices and 
current exchange rate. The figures on gross value added used in the 
various ratios are extracted from Eurostat and are gross value added at 
current market prices and at current exchange rates by branch (agricultural, 
forestry and fishery products, manufactured products). Intra - CE 
exportations of industrial products are also extracted from Eurostat and 
comprise the products categorized under no. 6 and 8 of the CTCI, revision 
3. Civilian employment is retained to calculate the various ratios by person 
employed. Certain tax concessions remain incalculable. When no other 
information was provided by the Member State to calculate the aid element, 
one third of the gross intervention has been taken as a proxy of the aid 
element. These proxies were only made in a few cases and have no 
significant impact on the results. 
10.2. The Commission's departments have provided the figures for their 
respective sectors in accordance with the following outlines. Not all the 
figures have been counter-checked by the Member States nor have they 
been checked against their budgets by the Commission's departments. 
(5) It has to be stressed that the yearly expenditures are not identical to the yearly budgets 
of an aid scheme; only the sum of the budget and the sum of the expenditure over the 
whole period of operation of a given measure are identical. 
55 
For agriculture and fisheries the figures are those submitted by the Member 
States in accordance with the procedure emanating from the resolution of 
the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States during the 
306th Session of the Council on 20 October 1974, except for Spain, Italy 
and Luxembourg, where figures, at least partly, are based on long term 
extrapolations. This is due to the fact that complete data submitted by 
these Member States cover only the periods up to 1986, 1987 and 1986 
respectively. 
In addition, since the figures for Ireland are not available since 1989, the 
estimates are based on extrapolations of the 1988 figures. Finally, for 
France and Denmark, figures for 1992 had to be extrapolated. 
In the fisheries sector, the figures for 1989 and the following years result 
from extrapolation for France, Ireland, Italy and the Netherlands. For 
Germany and Spain, figures in real terms were only available since 1989,-
starting with 1990 extrapolation had to made. Figures for 1991 and 1992 
result from extrapolation in Belgium, Denmark, Greece, Portugal and the 
United Kingdom. 
As regards agriculture, with the exceptions mentioned above, the figures 
are taken from the inventory of agricultural expenditure supplied by the 
Member States. From the total amount of budgetary expenditure indicated 
in the inventory, the following have been excluded: research aid, land 
improvement (drainage), social security measures applicable to the entire 
sector, income tax concessions, regional selective financial assistance. 
The figures contain the following : grants, tax reliefs, aid financed by 
parafiscal charges, interest subsidies and a number of benefits in kind 
provided by the State (for example, training courses). 
As regards fisheries, loans and guarantees are not included where the aid 
element is unquantifiable. 
For coal the figures are those submitted by the Member States in 
accordance with Commission Decision Nos. 528/76/ECSC and 
2064/86/ECSC and summarized in the Commission's Annual 
Communication to the Council on aids in this sector(6). New capital 
injections which may constitute aid are not included in these figures. Public 
undertakings' coal-purchasing contracts (for example, for electricity 
generation) which might comprise an aid element where the price exceeds 
the world price have not been included. No aid figures for other forms of 
energy, except aids for energy saving and alternative (renewable) energy, 
(6) These figures are broken down into aid for current production and those not relating to 
current production (i.e. special social security measures for miners and aid to cover 
inherited liabilities). 
56 
have been included(7). A study is under way for aids to forms of energy 
other than coal, in particular for electricity, in the context of the internal 
energy market. 
For transport the figures are those submitted by the Member States in 
accordance with Regulation No 1107/70 and summarized annually in the 
Commission's submission to the Consultative Committee on Aids to 
Transport. These regulations cover particularly railways and navigable 
waterways. In addition, but shown separately, are the aids given for 
railways within the framework of Regulations Nos 1191/69 and 1192/69 for 
respectively the maintenance of public service obligations and the 
normalization of railways accounts due to special burdens placed on 
railways. 
With regard to other forms of transport, due to lack of information, the aid 
figures are incomplete and fragmentary and have not been included. No 
figures in particular have been given for aid to local transport. Possible 
figures on State aid in the aviation sector will be included as soon as a 
quantified result of the Commission's inquiry in this sector becomes 
available. Aid granted to ports against which the Article 93 EEC procedure 
were initiated (and subsequently closed), has been included. 
10.3. Industry 
In the case of aid to industry and the service sector, the figures have 
generally been taken from notifications under Article 93, received from the 
Member States. Furthermore, implementation reports, submitted to the 
Commission, national publications on the award of aid, national accounts 
relating to expenditure, draft budgets, inventories and other available 
studies have also been used. 
10.4. Steel 
The figures presented in the study have been compiled from 
communications submitted by Member States. The figures show the 
amount of aid paid to undertakings. 
10.5. Tax expenditure 
With regard to tax expenditure, the OECD concept was used as a starting 
point. 
"A tax expenditure is usually defined as a departure from the generally 
accepted or benchmark tax structure, which produces a favourable tax 
treatment of particular types of activities or groups of taxpayers". 
(7) Aid to promote alternative sources of energy have frequently been included under 
Economisation of Energy. For nuclear energy, see also point 11.4 of this annex. 
57 
Thus, for example, tax reliefs granted to certain development areas i.e. to 
only a part of the territory of the tax authority, are regarded as tax 
expenditures, whereas the rate structure is regarded as an integral part of 
the benchmark tax system. 
However, in some cases, such departures from the benchmark system are 
on the borderline between aid within the meaning of Article 92(1) EEC and 
general measures. Further work has to be carried out in order to elucidate 
this "grey area". The figures have been taken from various reports 
published by certain Member States (Germany, France, Belgium and the 
United Kingdom). In the light of the problems indicated, it is possible that 
the present Survey may not yet embrace all aid granted in the form of tax 
expenditure, notably in the case of countries which do not publish any 
report on the subject. 
10.6. Methods of assessing the aid element 
10.6.1. In order to analyze the different forms of aid on a fully comparable 
basis, it is necessary to reduce them to a common denominator - the 
grant element which they contain. To this end the methods currently 
employed by the Commission in its control of State Aids have been 
used. These methods are all official Commission policy and have 
been discussed at a technical level with the Member States. Most 
of the methods have been published and these publications will be 
referred to. 
10.6.2. The basic approach to evaluating the aid element is the common 
method of evaluation used in calculating the net grant equivalent of 
state interventions (for latest update see annex of the 
Communication of the Commission on regional aid schemes, OJ C 
31 of 3.2.1979; see also Resolution of the Council of 20.10.1971, 
OJ C 111 of 4.11.1971). 
Obviously, the receipt of an aid may change the tax liability of some 
recipients. However, taking account of the allowances and 
reductions that can be claimed against profits tax and the losses 
made by certain companies, the effective rate of tax paid in general 
by companies is much lower than the theoretical maximum rate. 
Therefore it is considered that the results obtained without taking 
account of taxation are closer to reality than if the maximum 
theoretical rate had been employed. The common denominator is 
therefore grant equivalent and not net grant equivalent. It should be 
noted that the ranking of Member States (in terms of percentage of 
GDP, for example) is not affected by the exclusion of the influence 
of tax. 
58 
Method applied to different forms of aid 
10.6.3. Group A - grants, relief from social charges, etc. 
No calculations of the aid element are necessary because this group 
comprises all interventions which can be considered as constituting 
grants or grant equivalents. 
10.6.4. Group B - equity (including debt conversion) 
In line with established Commission policy, such interventions 
constitute aid when a private investor operating under normal market 
conditions would not have undertaken such an investment. See 
Commission communication 91/C 273/2 of 18.10.91 : Application of 
Articles 92 and 93 of the EEC Treaty and of Article 5 of Commission 
Directive 80/723/EEC to public undertakings in the manufacturing 
sector, O.J No C 273 of 18.10.1991, p. 2(8). This method is based" 
on calculating the benefit of the intervention to the recipient. 
As regards capital injections to State Holding companies, the overall 
performance of each company was examined and the aid element 
taken as the amounts required to cover recurring losses. 
10.6.5. Group C - soft loans and deferred tax provisions. 
In accordance with the common method of evaluation, benefits 
accorded to an enterprise over a period of time in the form of soft 
loans and deferred tax provisions are discounted back to the 
present. The discount rate is the "reference rate" which represents 
the rate at which companies can borrow under normal market 
conditions. The definition of the reference rate in each Member 
State has been formally adopted by the Commission (see point 14 
of the common method of evaluation). The aid element in a soft 
loan in any one year is, therefore, the difference between the 
reference rate and the rate at which the State accords the loan 
multiplied by the value of the loan. 
In the case of participatory loans and repayable advances, because 
of the unduly large number of individual cases, the actual net cost 
to the State was taken as an estimate of the aid element. The net 
cost was calculated as the difference between the rate of return 
effectively received by the state on these participatory loans and the 
reference rate. 
(8) See also "Application of Article 92 and 93 EEC to public authorities' holdings", Bulletin EC 
9-1984, further "The Measurement of the Aid Element of State Acquisitions of Company 
Capital" - IV/45/87 Evolution of Concentration and Competition Series, Collection : Working 
Papers 87. 
59 
10.6.6. Group D - amounts covered under guarantee schemes 
For loans awarded under exchange rate guarantee schemes, the aid 
element is calculated as though the loan were a soft loan in the 
currency which is guaranteed against exchange rate fluctuations. 
The aid element is the difference between the reference rate for the 
currency which is covered by the guarantee and the rate of interest 
at which the loan is given less any charge for the guarantee. This 
calculation is therefore based on calculating the benefit of the 
scheme to the recipient(9). For simple loan/export guarantee 
schemes it is normally impractical, because of the volume of cases, 
to look at every guarantee and decide what would be the price the 
recipients would normally have to pay for such a guarantee. 
Consequently, at the global level the net cost of such schemes to 
the Government (i.e. the difference between the cost of guarantees 
honoured by the state and any revenue from charges for the 
securities) was taken, except in large individual cases or for certain 
sectors where the value of the guarantee can be calculated on the 
basis of the value to the recipient(10). 
10.7. Although figures for loans or guarantees from publicly owned credit 
institutions are given when they are considered as constituting aid, there 
are greater difficulties in identifying and quantifying such interventions than 
for other forms of aid, because by their very nature they are less 
transparent. In order to avoid%any unwarranted discrimination with respect 
to the different treatment of aids in these areas, additional work as to 
identifying and quantifying such aid will have to be done. 
(9) Where this information is not available, the global losses to the Government are 
taken as an approximation of the aid element. 
(10) This has been the Commission's policy as regards guarantees in the steel and 
shipbuilding sectors and in individual rescue cases. 
60 
IV. Specific problems 
11. Research and Development (R & D) 
11.1. R&D schemes 
The figures include only extra-mural Government funding of R&D 
programmes for nationalized or private enterprises and they are classified 
under A1A(1V In view of the global nature of the sources used, it has not 
always been possible to exclude certain elements of public procurement 
from extra-mural expenditure (eg. R&D contracts). Because only direct 
funding of R&D has been included, it is considered that the figures for R&D 
have been underestimated (R&D contracts and Public Research (see 11.2-
and 11.3 below) have been omitted because of the inability to quantify the 
aid element in such interventions). 
11.2. R&D contracts 
Figures for research and development contracts have not been included in 
the figures, since the aid element is, at present, often unquantifiable. 
Furthermore, the sources do not permit research and development 
contracts intended specifically for military purpose to be isolated nor the 
impact on the market of such contracts to be evaluated (12). 
11.3. Public Research 
No figures are given for any aid element contained in the intramural funding 
of government or public research establishments or research carried out by 
institutes of higher education. This omission may be important for certain 
sectors where state or semi-state bodies carry out large scale R&D that 
may have commercial répercussions035. 
11.4. Nuclear energy 
Member States provide aid to the nuclear energy sector through the 
intermediary of their public undertakings or through the intermediary of R&D 
financing (mainly in the form of R&D contracts and public research). Only 
some of this direct financing could be included in the figures for R&D 
(2.1.1.). The figures on nuclear energy contained in R&D figures are 
(ii) 
(12) 
(13) Accelerated depreciation for R&D equipment is not considered as an aid. 
See Community framework for Research and Development Aids, OJ C 83 of 11.4.1986, 
point 9.2. 
See community framework for Research and Development Aid, point 9.1. 
61 
underestimated, since the R&D figures exclude R&D contracts and public 
research, the aid element of such measures being difficult to quantify. 
12. Transport in Luxembourg 
Transport figures are higher in Luxembourg relative to other Member 
States. This appears to be due in the main to particularly high payments 
for pensions of former railways employees. No further details are available. 
13. Tourism and Agri-foodstuff industries 
Due to a lack of information on these two sectors it is probable that the 
data included in the study are incomplete. 
14. Training and unemployment 
It is not always apparent whether certain fiscal or social security measures 
constitute aid or form a coherent and integral part of the fiscal or social 
security system. In addition, incentive schemes exist in different Member 
States to stimulate or facilitate general training or the employment of certain 
socially disadvantaged groups of workers. Insofar as such schemes are not 
industry-specific and are available across the whole economy and in fact 
genuinely constitute part of a general system of employment measures, 
they are not to be considered as State aids. Although a number of training 
and employment schemes have been treated by the Commission as state 
aids, not all Member State's measures in these fields have up to now been 
examined in detail. Therefore, in order to present figures that are 
comparable between Member States, no training and unemployment 
measures have been analyzed in the present report pending completion of 
this detailed examination. 
62 

ANNEX II 
STATISTICAL ANNEX 
The methodology used for the tables contained is explained in the technical 
annex. 
Table A1 State aid to the manufacturing sector. Annual amounts of aid 
element 1988 - 1992 in current prices and national currencies. 
Table A2 State aid to the manufacturing sector. Annual amounts of aid 
element 1988 - 1992 in current prices and ECU. 
Table A3 State aid to the new German Lander. 
. Annual averages 1990 - 1992 in ECU. 
Table A4 State aid to the manufacturing sector and Community Funds. 
Annual averages 1990 - 1992 per employee in ECU. 
Tables Total state aid in each Member State. 
A5/1-12 Annual averages of aid element 1990 -1992 in ECU. 
63 
Table A1 
State aid to the manufacturing sector in current prices 1988-1992 
in mio national currency 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
EUR 12 (ECU) 1988 
52024.45 
2874.12 
16268.65 
260499.93 
579726.74 
52026.48 
293.90 
14466.68 
1673.36 
2627.48 
31043.45 
2621.45 
37690.51 1989 
49097.40 
2895.14 
16680.26 
183218.43 
197682.64 
39112.85 
271.72 
10750.78 
2295.17 
2375.09 
146882.86 
2162.24 
30253.57 1990 
51748.83 
2521.35 
22384.67 
221903.74 
254435.55 
35304.92 
282.81 
23947.68 
2192.45 
2715.24 
132123.51 
2410.20 
42059.47 1991 
49104.19 
2716.67 
26269.86 
213410.97 
148014.82 
29046.19 
200.38 
17072.75 
2443.30 
1773.64 
51761.55 
1851.80 
35734.15 1992 
40560.70 
2673.34 
24708.73 
258585.02 
122946.98 
40131.89 
222.84 
17082.39 
2648.30 
1920.48 
73058.63 
1448.45 
35672.55 
64 
Table A2 
State aid to the manufacturing sector in current prices 1988-1992 
in mio ECU 
Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
United Kingdom 
EUR 12 (ECU) 1988 
1243.99 
361.46 
7842.58 
1554.52 
4213.10 
7393.87 
378.90 
9410.26 
38.53 
1125.37 
182.55 
3945.38 
37690.51 1989 
1131.78 
359.68 
8057.51 
1024.48 
1515.90 
5568.56 
349.78 
7117.51 
52.91 
1017.05 
847.01 
3211.39 
30253.57 1990 
1219.77 
320.93 
10908.13 
1101.74 
1967.55 
5106.18 
368.35 
15734.97 
51.68 
1174.34 
729.53 
3376.32 
42059.47 1991 
1162.97 
343.51 
12809.82 
947.58 
1152.14 
4165.32 
260.97 
11135.08 
57.87 
767.49 
289.80 
2641.61 
35734.15 1992 
975.14 
342.31 
12229.75 
1046.98 
927.81 
5859.69 
292.93 
10708.02 
63.67 
844.20 
418.20 
1963.85 
35672.55 
65 
Table A3 
German state aid to the new Lander - yearly average 1990-1992 
Grants 
Tax reduction 
Equity participations 
Soft loans 
Tax deferrals 
Guarantees 
TOTAL in Mio ECU 
2875.52 
391.80 
0.00 
714.97 
0.00 
866.37 
4848.66 in per cent 
59.31 
8.08 
0.00 
14.75 
0.00 
17.87 
100.00 in per cent of total 
aid 
24.00 
3.27 
0.00 
5.97 
0.00 " 
7.23 
40.46 
During the years of 1990 to 1992 aid totalling a yearly average of ECU 4.849 bn was 
granted to the new Lander. This volume represents 40.5% of all German aid to 
manufacturing. The increase of the overall volume of German aid resulting from granting 
aid to the new Lander has been partially compensated by a decrease of the aid to 
Berlin and to the Zonenrand. 
Most of the aid to the new Lander has the form of grants (59.3%), followed by 
guarantees (17.5%), interest subsidies (14.75) and tax deferrals (8.1%). 
66 
Table A4 
Aid to manufacturing and Community Funds per employee 
Average 1990 - 1992 
4000 
3000 U 
z> o 
Ul o o o 2000 U 
1000 
EUR12 
B Aid to manuf. excl. regional aid • Regional aid 
m Regional Fund a Social Fund 
Community Funds are of vital importance for the achievement of the objective of 
cohesion. In the four poorer Member States contribution of the Regional and the Social 
Funds to total subsidies per employee, expressed as the sum of national aid to 
manufacturing and the transfer from the Regional and the Social Fund ranges between 
32% (Greece) and 61% (Ireland), while the Community average of this contribution 
reaches only 14%. 
67 
Table A5/1 BELGIUM 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
253.527 
1.233 
373.307 
63.407 
0.000 
173.174 
14.379 
0.000 
122.348 
0.000 
2248.565 
0.000 
14.267 
1374.129 
1059.532 
60.900 
791.100 
8.170 
166.984 
166.984 
0.000 
3043.617 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
340.187 
78.015 
0.000 
115.600 
0.000 
77.372 
3.960 
65.241 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.590 
0.590 
0.000 
340.777 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
12.507 
0.000 
0.000 
0.220 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
12.286 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
12.507 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
102.803 
3.285 
0.000 
4.792 
94.726 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
1.322 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
1.322 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
104.125 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
85.657 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
74.007 
0.000 
11.651 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
13.497 
13.497 
0.000 
99.154 TOTAL 
253.527 
1.233 
914.462 
144.706 
0.000 
293.786 
183.112 
77.372 
137.958 
77.527 
2249.887 
0.000 
14.267 
1374.129 
1059.532 
60.900 
791.100 
9.492 
181.071 
181.071 
0.0Û0 
3600.180 
Table A5/2 DENMARK 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
j 2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
188.336 
12.967 
173.584 
88.349 
25.687 
0.000 
18.389 
34.757 
0.000 
6.402 
615.740 
0.000 
79.567 
515.923 
331.047 
0.000 
0.000 
20.250 
5.948 
5.948 
0.000 
996.575 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
14.647 
14.647 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.0.00 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
14.647 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
13.584 
0.000 
0.000 
4.584 
5.818 
3.181 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
13.584 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
27.748 
0.000 
25.687 
0.000 
2.061 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.256 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.256 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
28.004 TOTAL 
188.336 
12.967 
229.563 
102.996 
51.373 
4.584 
26.269 
37.938 
0.000 
6.402 
615.996 
0.000 
79.567 
515.923 
331.047 
0.000 
0.000 
20.506 
5.948 
5.948 
0.000 
1052.810 
0 Table A5/3 GERMANY 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 - 1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
| 2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
i 2.1.1. Research and Development 
I 2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
I .2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
3.3. Regions under 92(2)c (Berlin/Zonenrand) 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
3460:504 
16.632 
1364.391 
956.188 
85.880 
145.472 
5.283 
110.008 
30.308 
31.251 
16151.678 
0.000 
204.689 
6357.271 
4652.837 
4525.633 
4514.399 
549.686 
3232.820 
484.579 
2697.485 
50.756 
24226.025 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
727.851 
105.602 
0.000 
94.805 
97.816 
110.930 
0.000 
318.698 
140.733 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
140.733 
3680.456 
145.903 
73.106 
3461.446 
4549.040 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
1.081 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
1.081 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
1.081 01A 
0.000 
0.000 
332.925 
12.899 
29.417 
187.417 
0.000 
1.682 
0.000 
101.511 
12.445 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
12.445 
640.191 
15.624 
621.865 
2.702 
985.561 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
24.439 
0.000 
0.000 
24.439 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
148.477 
0.000 
0.000 
148.477 
172.916 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
56.161 
0.000 
0.000 
14.725 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
41.436 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
866.219 
0.000 
866.219 
0.000 
922.380 TOTAL 
3460.504 
16.632 
2506.848 
1074.689 
115.297 
466.858 
103.099 
222.620 
30.308 
493.977 
16304.856 
0.000 
204.689 
6357.271 
4652.837 
4525.633 
4514.399 
702.864 
8568.162 
646.106 
4258.675 
3663.381 
30857.002 
GREECE 
Table A5/4 Total state aid - annual average 1990 - 1992 
in mio ECU 
\ SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191 /69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1 + 2 + 3) 
i 
i A1A 
2.660 
1.567 
285.994 
13.482 
0.108 
0.000 
38.545 
1.069 
0.000 
232.790 
218.622 
0.263 
3.267 
170.599 
4.247 
0.000 
0.000 
44.494 
231.178 
0.000 
231.178 
740.021 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
114.705 
0.000 
0.000 
8.059 
73.016 
0.000 
33.629 
0.000 
16.555 
2.239 
0:000 
0.000 
1.811 
0.000 
0.000 
14.316 
65.951 
0.000 
65.951 
197.211 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
118.345 
0.107 
0.518 
117.218 
0.488 
0.014 
0.000 
0.000 
0.029 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.029 
14.544 
0.000 
14.544 
132.919 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
136.778 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
43.357 
0.000 
0.000 
93.422 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
136.778 TOTAL 
2.660 
1.567 
655.822 
13.589 
0.626 
125.277 
155.406 
1.083 
33.629 
326.212 
235.207 
2.502 
3.267 
170.599 
6.058 
0.000 
0.000 
58.840 
311.673 
0.000 
311.673 
1206.929 
^J 
r^ Table A5/5 SPAIN 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
217.933 
73.700 
423.115 
101.996 
41.911 
83.752 
0.000 
32.868 
44.498 
118.090 
4163.445 
6.367 
160.800 
2257.367 
346.443 
543.300 
939.033 
256.578 
212.266 
34.267 
177.999 
5090.460 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
2.306 
0.000 
2.306 
2.306 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
7.753 
0.000 
0.000 
4.230 
0.000 
0.213 
2.346 
0.965 
19.838 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
19.838 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
27.591 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
200.619 
131.640 
0.191 
48.750 
10.799 
0.000 
0.000 
9.240 
17.686 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
17.686 
2.356 
0.000 
2.356 
220.662 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
. 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
34.452 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
34.452 
0.000 
5.031 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
5.031 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
39.483 TOTAL 
217.933 
73.700 
665.939 
233.636 
42.101 
136.732 
10.799 
33.081 
81.296 
128.294 
4206.001 
6.367 
160.800 
2257.367 
346.443 
543.300 
939.033 
299.134 
216.929 
34.267 
182.662 
5380.502 
U Table A5/6 FRANCE 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
4151.476 
38.700 
809.667 
615.186 
22.168 
117.354 
4.542 
33.401 
16.582 
0.434 
9002.725 
0.000 
62.833 
5407.266 
3281.309 
172.800 
2880.266 
479.561 
194.454 
188.877 
5.577 
14197.023 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
1001.675 
611.852 
0.000 
389.822 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
14.943 
0.000 
0.0.00 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
14.943 
378.923 
145.603 
233.320 
1395.540 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
253.835 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
253.835 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
253.835 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
431.897 
147.392 
0.000 
50.138 
224.972 
0.000 
9.395 
0.000 
25.277 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
25.277 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
457.174 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
79.376 
0.434 
0.000 
9.158 
69.784 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
55.002 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
55.002 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
134.378 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
1256.285 
0.000 
0.000 
2.714 
1223.572 
0.000 
29.999 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
1256.285 TOTAL 
4151.476 
38.700 
3578.901 
1374.864 
22.168 
569.187 
1522.869 
33.401 
55.976 
0.434 
9351.782 
0.000 
62.833 
5407.266 
3281.309 
172.800 
2880.266 
828.617 
573.377 
334.480 
238.897 
17694.236 
Table A5/7 IRELAND 
Total state aid - annual avergae 1990 - 1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
120.199 
10.802 
41.779 
12.106 
0.000 
17.684 
11.987 
0.001 
0.000 
0.000 
126.347 
0.000 
0.000 
126.347 
68.336 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
165.519 
0.000 
165.519 
464.645 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
43.416 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
43.416 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
31.266 
0.000 
31.266 
74.682 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
15.866 
0.000 
15.866 
15.866 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000, 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
9.014 
0.000 
0.000 
2.649 
6.365 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.557 
0.000 
0.557 
9.571 TOTAL 
120.199 
10.802 
94.208 
12.106 
0.000 
20.333 
61.768 
0.001 
0.000 
0.000 
126.347 
0.000 
0.000 
126.347 
68.336 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
213.208 
0.000 
213.208 
564.764 
-U Table A5/8 ITALY 
Total state aid - annual average 1990-1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
3929.43 
109.37 
2755.09 
283.25 
6.45 
955.44 
438.35 
299.52 
210.60 
561.48 
9907.13 
633.33 
118.50 
8469.07 
2775.10 
0.00 
0.00 
686.22 
1858.19 
363.46 
1494.74 
18559.22 A2A 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
5451.17 
97.53 
5353.64 
5451.17 B1A 
0.00 
0.00 
542.71 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
542.71 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
136.50 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
136.50 
3.13 
3.13 
0.00 
682.35 C1A 
0.00 
0.00 
265.11 
108.90 
0.00 
80.44 
61.23 
0.00 
6.95 
7.59 
19.01 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
19.01 
56.19 
6.00 
50.18 
340.31 C2A 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 D1A 
0.00 
0.00 
0.15 
0.00 
0.00 
0.15 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.00 
0.70 
0.70 
0.00 
0.85 TOTAL 
3929.43 
109.37 
3563.07 
392.15 
6.45 
1036.04 
1042.29 
299.52 
217.56 
569.07 
10062.64 
633.33 
118.50 
8469.07 
2775.10 
0.00 
0.00 
841.74 
7369.38 
470.82 
6898.56 
25033.89 
<7^ Table A5/9 LUXEMBOURG 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
19.250 
0.000 
8.930 
4.297 
0.157 
4.375 
0.101 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
217.780 
0.000 
0.000 
217.685 
144.476 
0.000 
0.000 
0.095 
38.244 
38.244 
0.000 
284.203 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
2.983 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
2.983 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
2.983 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.168 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.168 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.168 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
7.273 
2.364 
0.000 
4.769 
0.128 
0.000 
0.012 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
7.273 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.046 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.046 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.046 TOTAL 
19.250 
0.000 
19.399 
6.661 
0.157 
9.144 
0.275 
0.000 
3.162 
0.000 
217.780 
0.000 
0.000 
217.685 
144.476 
0.000 
0.000 
0.095 
38.244 
38.244 
0.000 
294.673 
sJ 
-U Table A5/10 NETHERLANDS 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION 
1.1. Agriculture 
1.2. Fisheries 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
355.069 
2.200 
475.719 
235.008 
46.402 
30.687 
21.441 
117.063 
14.210 
10.907 
993.401 
0.000 
40.933 
896.499 
838.910 
0.000 
0.000 
55.969 
165.741 
165.741 
0.000 
1992.130 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
135.681 
0.000 
0.000 
124.105 
0.000 
11.576 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
135.681 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
6.291 
6.291 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
.0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
6.291 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.088 
0.000 
0.088 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.088 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
48.256 
0.000 
0.000 
32.934 
0.000 
0.000 
11.961 
3.361 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
48.256 TOTAL 
355.069 
2.200 
666.034 
241.298 
46.490 
187.726 
21.441 
128.639 
26.171 
14.268 
993.401 
0.000 
40.933 
896.499 
838.910 
0.000 
0.000 
55.969 
165.741 
165.741 
0.000 
2182.445 
Table A5/11 PORTUGAL 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
SECTORS/FUNCTION A1A A2A B1A C1A C2A D1A TOTAL 
1.1. 
1.2. Agriculture 
Fisheries 248.122 
3.733 0.000 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 248.122 
3.733 
2.1. Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
2.1.1. Research and Development 
2.1.2. Environment 
2.1.3. SME 
2.1.4. Trade/Export 
2.1.5. Economisation of Energy 
2.1.6. General Investment 
2.1.9. Other Objectives 69.650 
13.365 
0.000 
5.042 
0.942 
6.952 
0.102 
43.247 40.251 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
37.245 
3.006 0.294 
0.294 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 0.564 
0.109 
0.000 
0.045 
0.133 
0.000 
0.277 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 48.323 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
48.323 
0.000 159.082 
13.767 
0.000 
5.087 
1.076 
6.952 
85.948 
46.253 
2.2. Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
2.2.1. Steel 
2.2.2. Shipbuilding 
2.2.3. Transports 
ofwhichRegl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
2.2.4.1. Coal: Aid to current production 
2.2.4.2. Coal: Other aids 
2.2.5. Other sectors 344.477 
10.379 
172.833 
100.036 
72.771 
4.967 
0.000 
56.261 1.709 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
1.709 0.641 
0.633 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.007 28.674 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
28.674 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 375.500 
11.013 
172.833 
100.036 
72.771 
4.967 
0.000 
86.652 
3. Regional Aids 
3.1. Regions under 92(3)c 
3.2. Regions under 92(3)a 48.081 
0.000 
48.081 1.412 
0.000 
1.412 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 0.102 
0.000 
0.102 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 0.000 
0.000 
0.000 49.595 
0.000 
49.595 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) 714.063 43.372 0.934 29.340 0.000 48.323 836.032 
TableA5/12 UNITED KINGDOM 
Total state aid - annual average 1990 -1992 
in mio ECU 
1.1. 
1.2. 
2.1. 
2.1.1. 
2.1.2. 
2.1.3. 
2.1.4. 
2.1.5. 
2.1.6. 
2.1.9. 
2.2. 
2.2.1. 
2.2.2. 
2.2.3. 
2.2.4.1. 
2.2.4.2. 
2.2.5. 
3. 
3.1. 
3.2. SECTORS/FUNCTION 
Agriculture 
Fisheries 
Industry/Serv.: Horizontal Objectives 
Research and Development 
Environment 
SME 
Trade/Export 
Economisation of Energy 
General Investment 
Other Objectives 
Industry/Services: Partie. Sectors 
Steel 
Shipbuilding 
Transports 
of which Regl. 1191/69 and 1192/69 
Coal: Aid to current production 
Coal: Other aids 
Other sectors 
Regional Aids 
Regions under 92(3)c 
Regions under 92(3)a 
TOTAL (1+2 + 3) A1A 
664.083 
19.829 
1020.377 
198.209 
33.371 
363.793 
407.885 
4.410 
5.899 
6.810 
2227.696 
0.000 
61.033 
1517.077 
1080.354 
0.000 
43.429 
606.157 
677.885 
477.352 
200.532 
4609.870 A2A 
0.000 
0.000 
82.252 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
82.252 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
67.514 
0.000 
67.514 
149.766 B1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.654 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.654 
2.872 
0.000 
2.872 
3.526 C1A 
0.000 
0.000 
0.044 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.044 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
38.533 
37.595 
0.939 
38.577 C2A 
0.000 
0.000 
74.583 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
74.583 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
74.583 D1A 
0.000 
0.000 
7.270 
0.000 
0.000 
29.006 
-21.736 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
0.000 
21.418 
21.418 
0.000 
28.688 TOTAL 
664.083 
19.829 
1184.526 
198.209 
33.371 
392.799 
386.149 
4.410 
162.733 
6.854 
2228.350 
0.000 
61.033 
1517.077 
1080.354 
0.000 
43.429 
606.810 
808.222 
536.365 
271.857 
4905.009 

ANNEX 111 
COMMUNITY FUNDS 
80 
I. Community funds 
The Community funds are as follows: 
EAGGF Guarantees 
The Common Agricultural Policy is a general system of market support based on 
external protection and internal intervention. As such, it is comparable to import 
quotas and customs tariffs, systems which bring about a transfer of resources 
between sectors, without the recourse to direct aid. Much of EAGGF Guarantee 
expenditure is concerned with a system of support of this type and therefore 
cannot be regarded as comparable to expenditure on aid. Moreover, the 
breakdown by Member State has little meaning in this case because the ultimate 
beneficiary may not be in the Member State where the expenditure took place. 
Around 35% of expenditure is in the form of price compensation aid granted to 
producers or processors. 
EAGGF Guidance 
The activities of the EAGGF Guidance Section are divided into direct measures 
and indirect measures. Direct measures may be considered as aid to public and 
private investors in respect of investment projects or programmes. In recent 
years direct measures have accounted for around half of the Guidance budget. 
Indirect measures on the other hand are carried out on the Community's initiative 
and with its financial help but they are executed by Member States. As a result 
the expenditure will have been covered in most cases under the heading of 
national aid. In general they can be considered as socio-structural measure (e.g. 
farmer's early retirement scheme) or remedial measures in favour of the less-
favoured regions or investment aid at the farm level. 
Social Fund 
The objectives of the Social Fund are to improve employment opportunities for 
young people (under the age of 25) and for other groups deemed worthy of 
support (long-term unemployed, the handicapped, migrant workers and other 
socially disadvantaged groups). The Fund therefore contributes in the financing 
of operations carried out by the public or private operators in the following areas: 
vocational training 
wage subsidies 
technical advice concerned with job creation. 
All applications for assistance are submitted through the Member States. 
81 
Money from the Social Fund is paid out on a horizontal and not on a sectoral 
basis, so an extrapolation corresponding to the concept of aid within the meaning 
of Article 92 of the Treaty is not possible. However, since Social Fund 
expenditure does not entirely correspond to the abovementioned aid concept, it 
is probable that the aid element is over estimated. 
Regional Fund 
The European Regional Debelopment Fund (ERDF) aims to reduce disparties 
within the Community by providing financial support to: 
regions whose development is lagging behind (Objective 1); 
regions in industrial decline (Objective 2); 
rural problem areas (Objective 5b). 
This support is focussed mainly on productive investment, infrastructure and 
SME development. 
As ERDF aid is generally paid out on a horizontal and not on a sectoral basis, 
identification of expenditure which corresponds to the concept of state aid within 
the meaning of Article 92 of the Treaty is not always possible. As an alternative, 
commitment figures relating to the following fields of intervention have been 
retained: 
"industry, services and crafts" for 1988; 
"increasing business competitiveness" and "rural development SME" for 
1989-92. 
The data obtained by using this approach only provide an idea of the scale of 
ERDF aid involved. 
Community research and development 
Community research activities are conducted essentially at three levels: 
(i) at the Joint Research Centre 
(ii) by research contract involving financial contributions from the contractor 
(iii) through coordination of research activities in the Member States. 
The figures contained in this report refer to (ii) above. Financing of the Joint 
Research Centre is considered outside the range of this survey, whereas the role 
of the Commission is limited to exchange of information. The Commission does 
not finance any of these programmes. 
82 
From category (ii), expenditure, only that part which is intended for large firms 
or SMEs has been taken into account, thereby leaving out amounts which, in any 
case, must be considered as outside the scope of this survey. 
Most of the Community projects and programs are administered by DG XII 
(Science, Research and Development) and DG XIII (Telecommunication, 
Information Market and Exploitation of Research). According to the Fourth 
Community Framework on R&D an amount of about 12 billion ECU from the EU 
budget will be spent on support for research during the period 1994 -1998. Most 
of the budget is going to universities, research centres and industry. A smaller 
part is spend in order to support the European Joint Research Centre and 
nuclear research. The maximum aid is usually 50% of the project costs. 
Preparatory, accompanying and support measures can be financed up to 100%. 
ECSC financial operations 
Financial assistance is provided by the ECSC in the form of loans and grants. 
The loans fall into three main categories: 
industrial loans 
conversion loans 
loans for workers' accommodation 
They are granted at market rates; as the financial institutions which distribute the 
loans are not profit-orientated, which could be advantageous to the recipient of 
the loan - but this advantage is not considered as aid for the purposes of the 
Treaties. The situation with regard to grants is different. Whilst interest subsidies 
(on loans) would normally be considered as constituting aid, other measures, 
notably payments of a social nature to former-steel and coal sector workers, are 
less likely to be considered as such. Further detailed examination will be 
necessary to produce a consistent evaluation of such measures. 
NCI loans (new Community instrument) 
The aim of NCI loans is to finance investment projects which contribute to 
greater convergence and integration of Member States' economic policies. A 
large part of the finance (approx. 60%) was used to finance projects in the field 
of energy, infrastructures, and development of small and medium-sized 
enterprises. Loans were also granted to restore infrastructure in Community 
areas affected by earthquakes. The loans are administered by the European 
Investment Bank on behalf of the Union. Interest rates are set at market rates, 
plus a margin to cover overheads for each currency. The only assessable 
economic benefit to the recipient could originate from the non-profit-orientated 
nature of the Bank. Such an advantage would be insignificant in the present 
context. 
83 
H. Statistical Data 
1. Table A sets out in global terms the financial intervention of the Union for the 
years 1988 to 1992. 
2. Table B show the other Community instruments in the form of loans granted for 
the years 1988 to 1992. 
3. Table C1 and C2 indicate, for the periods 1988-90 and 1990-92 respectively, the 
average annual volume of Community intervention emanating from the Structural 
Funds, together with that from DG XII, DG XIII and the ECSC. The expenditure 
is broken down by Member State: such a breakdown is not available, however, 
in the case of intervention by DG XIII and ECSC. 
4. It should be noted that a direct comparison between the volume of Community 
intervention shown here and the national aid described earlier in this paper (i.e. 
aid financed by national budgets) is misleading, since in many cases it is difficult, 
if not impossible, to determine the aid element contained in the Community 
intervention, which is not paid directly to firms like state aid. 
Solely national research contracts have not been included in this survey, and 
Community contracts have also been excluded. 
In the agricultural sector, making comparisons could result in erroneous 
conclusions being drawn owing to the fact that those who benefit from 
Community intervention are for the most part not firms. As regards comparison 
between the different Member States, the benefits of Community intervention are 
felt by all operators in the Union irrespective of where the expenditure (i.e. export 
refunds or intervention buying) took place. As to comparison between Community 
and national expenditure, expenditure by the Union is strongly influenced by the 
differences between fluctuating world prices and Community prices for 
agricultural products; which is not the case with most national expenditure. 
5. Further details of Community funds are given in the Technical Annex. 
84 
Table A 
ANNUAL COMMUNITY EXPENDITURE 
(1) payments 
(2) commitments 
(3) part corresponding approximately to the concept of aid within the meaning of Article 92 of the Treaty 
(4) part intended for large firms and SMEs In mio ECU 
EAGGF Guarantee 
EAGGF Guidance (1) 
SOCIAL FUND (2) 
REGIONAL FUND (2) (3) 
R&D(DGXII) (2) (4) 
R & D (DG XIII) (2) 
ECSC Grants 
Resettlement Art. 56.2(b) 
Steel social Art. 56.2(b) 
Coal social Art. 56.2(b) 
Research Art. 55 
Interest relief Art. 54/56 
TOTAL 1988 
25648.0 
1142.5 
2870.6 
291.7 
86.0 
420.2 
360.5 
34.0 
0.0 
73.5 
62.3 
30989.3 1989 
25705.5 
1349.3 
3523.9 
861.9 
61.3 
708.6 
183.9 
75.0 
9.2 
78.6 
60.7 
32617.9 1990 
26503.3 
1825.3 
3504.9 
962.0 
145.2 
657.2 
184.0 
45.2 
40.0 
93.9 
82.2 
34043.2 1991 
31824.8 
2051.0 
4788.8 
1263.1 
133.9 
539.4 
166.1 
20.0 
35.7 
128.1 
104.5 
40516.0 1992 
32005.4 
2774.4 
5894.1 
1485.0 
243.9 
911.7 
154.8 
46.2 
50.0 
120.2 
106.0 
42880.0 
85 
Table B 
OTHER COMMUNITY INSTRUMENTS (loans Issued) 
in mio ECU 
NCI loan (new loans issued) 
ECSC loans 1988 
• 357.0 
907.8 1989 
78.0 
700.1 1990 
24.0 
993.8 1991 
39.0 
1382.2 1992 
0.0 
1486.2 
SOURCES: Annual reports of the Court of Auditors, annual reports of the ECSC 
86 
Table C1 
COMMUNITY EXPENDITURE BY MEMBER STATE (1988-1990) 
in mio ECU 
.——— 
BELGIUM 
DENMARK 
GERMANY 
GREECE 
SPAIN 
FRANCE 
IRELAND 
ITALY 
LUXEMBOURG 
NETHERLANDS 
PORTUGAL 
UNITED KINGDOM 
TOTAL 
(*) It has not been possi EAGGF 
Guarantee 
766.6 
1114.5 
4498.2 
1652.8 
1967.0 
5150.9 
1299.0 
4250.2 
3.1 
3145.5 
166.8 
1943.3 
25957.9 
ble to effect a b EAGGF 
Guidance 
23.6 
16.5 
144.5 
194.0 
181.4 
277.2 
104.4 
239.3 
4.0 
14.3 
153.8 
85.0 
1438.0 
reakdown by Member SOCIAL 
FUND 
51.8 
34.3 
187.8 
288.1 
592.3 
392.2 
239.9 
543.0 
2.1 
78.7 
310.5 
578.6 
3299.6 
State REGIONAL 
FUND 
19.3 
6.6 
73.9 
36.5 
126.7 
55.2 
77.8 
153.9 
0.5 
4.3 
75.1 
75.5 
705.2 R&D 
DG XII 
3.8 
3.7 
24.0 
1.9 
6.0 
21.9 
1.4 
10.7 
0.4 
5.0 
1.3 
17.3 
97.4 R&D 
DG XIII* 
595.3 
595.3 ECSC 
GRANTS 
461.0 
461.0 TOTAL 
865.2 
1175.6 
4928.4 
2173.4 
2873.4 
5897.5 
1722.6 
5197.1 
10.1 
3247.8 
707.4 
2699.7 
595.3 
461.0 
32554.4 
87 
Table C2 
COMMUNITY EXPENDITURE BY MEMBER STATE (1990-1992) 
in mio ECU 
BELGIUM 
DENMARK 
GERMANY 
GREECE 
SPAIN 
FRANCE 
IRELAND 
ITALY 
LUXEMBOURG 
NETHERLANDS 
PORTUGAL 
UNITED KINGDOM 
TOTAL 
(*) It has not been possi EAGGF 
Guarantee 
1227.0 
1161.2 
4811.4 
2119.8 
2990.4 
6130.0 
1604.5 
4839.3 
3.0 
2628.9 
317.5 
2277.7 
30110.7 
ble to effect a b EAGGF 
Guidance 
23.5 
18.5 
202.1 
281.3 
450.4 
418.7 
160.9 
277.1 
6.0 
16.0 
265.5 
96.9 
2216.9 
reakdown by Member SOCIAL 
FUND 
129.8 
42.9 
537.1 
395.7 
867.8 
590.3 
347.7 
522.4 
2.9 
109.7 
448.1 
.733.4 
4727.8 
State REGIONAL 
FUND 
36.7 
12.5 
101.0 
82.5 
216.8 
123.6 
128.8 
262.5 
3.9 
12.1 
193.4 
62.9 
1236.8 R&D 
DGXII 
6.0 
9.1 
43.0 
3.6 
10.5 
36.8 
3.0 
22.2 
0.5 
8.6 
2.8 
28.2 
174.3 R&D 
DG XIII* 
702.8 
702.8 ECSC 
GRANTS* 
459.0 
459.0 TOTAL 
1422.9 
1244.2 
5694.6 
2883.0 
4535.9 
7299.4 
2244.9 
5923.5 
16.3 
2775.3 
1227.3 
3199.1 
702.8 
459.0 
39628.2 
88 
ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(95) 365 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 10 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-95-388-EN-C 
ISBN 92-77-91909-4 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg