Ayudas estatales - Reino Unido

Ayuda C 12/03 (ex 778/02) - Exención de la tasa del cambio climático para el metano de las minas de carbón

Invitación a presentar observaciones, en aplicación del apartado 2 del artículo 88 del Tratado CE

(2003/C 69/05)

(Texto pertinente a efectos del EEE)

Por carta de 5 de febrero de 2003, reproducida en la versión lingüística auténtica en las páginas siguientes al presente resumen, la Comisión notificó al Reino Unido su decisión de incoar el procedimiento previsto en el apartado 2 del artículo 88 del Tratado CE en relación con la medida antes citada.

Las partes interesadas podrán presentar sus observaciones en un plazo de un mes a partir de la fecha de publicación del presente resumen y de la carta que figura a continuación, enviándolas a: Comisión Europea Dirección General de Competencia

Dirección G

B - 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel Fax (32-2) 296 12 42.

Dichas observaciones serán comunicadas al Reino Unido. La parte interesada que presente observaciones podrá solicitar por escrito, exponiendo los motivos de su solicitud, que su identidad sea tratada confidencialmente.

RESUMEN

1. Descripción

El 5 de diciembre de 2002, el Reino Unido notificó la exención de los proveedores de electricidad generada a partir del metano de minas de carbón (MMC) abandonadas de la tasa del cambio climático (TCC).

El MMC es un gas de efecto invernadero potente que se encuentra en la atmósfera. Actualmente, hay cuatro instalaciones de MMC que se utilizan para generar electricidad, con una capacidad de producción total de 35 MW.

El objetivo del sistema es incentivar al sector para que ponga en marcha otras instalaciones, aproximadamente unas cuarenta minas de carbón abandonadas, lo que permitiría aumentar la capacidad en 175 MW. Al no conocerse con exactitud el nivel de beneficio medioambiental que aportará el sistema, el Gobierno se propone revisar la exención en 2004-2005. No obstante, se ha notificado que el sistema tendrá una duración de diez años.

La ayuda se concede en forma de una exención fiscal con un importe fijo de 4,30 libras esterlinas (GBP) por MWh de electricidad generada a partir de MMC. Dado que, de las 40 instalaciones que previsiblemente se beneficiarán de la exención, no todas serán deficitarias en una medida comparable al nivel de las ayudas, la medida conllevará un gasto innecesario.

El sistema beneficiará directamente a los generadores/proveedores de electricidad derivada del MMC, pero es probable que la exención fiscal se comparta con la empresa encargada de extraer el gas. Actualmente existen tres empresas que extraen MMC para venderlo a los generadores de electricidad del Reino Unido. También hay tres productores de electricidad que trabajan con ellos.

2. Evaluación

2.1. Postura del Estado miembro

El Gobierno británico sostiene que, al igual que la Comisión decidió que la exención fiscal para la electricidad proveniente de fuentes renovables no constituía una ayuda estatal(1), esta medida se inscribe también en la lógica y la naturaleza del régimen fiscal. No obstante, aunque la exención constituyera una ayuda estatal, podría aprobarse en aplicación de la sección F, "Políticas, medidas e instrumentos destinados a reducir los gases de efecto invernadero", puntos 68-71, de las Directrices comunitarias sobre ayudas estatales en favor del medio ambiente.

2.2. Evaluación preliminar de la Comisión

2.2.1. Existencia de ayuda estatal

La medida favorecerá a los generadores de electricidad que utilizan el MMC como fuente de energía y, consecuentemente, es una medida selectiva. Las ventajas se conceden a través de fondos estatales dado que el Estado sufre una pérdida de ingresos fiscales. Los beneficiarios ejercen una actividad económica en mercados en los cuales se producen intercambios comerciales entre los Estados miembros. Por lo tanto, el sistema falsea o amenaza con falsear la competencia y podría afectar a los intercambios comerciales entre los Estados miembros.

La Comisión duda de que la ventaja selectiva que concede la medida esté justificada por la lógica y la naturaleza del propio régimen fiscal. El impuesto se aplica debido a los efectos perjudiciales que el consumo de energía tiene sobre el cambio climático. Por tanto, está en la naturaleza del impuesto eximir el consumo de energía cuya producción no tiene efectos perjudiciales. Así ocurre, por ejemplo, en el caso de la electricidad generada a partir de fuentes renovables, dado que estas fuentes no contribuyen al CO2 de ciclo largo. La producción de electricidad a partir del MMC tiene, al igual que la producción de electricidad a partir de otras fuentes de energía fósiles, efectos perjudiciales y, por tanto, no tiene la misma naturaleza que la electricidad generada a partir de fuentes renovables. De hecho, la producción de electricidad de MMC no difiere, en lo que respecta a las emisiones de CO2, de la producción de electricidad generada a partir del gas natural. No obstante, es cierto que el uso de MMC para la producción de electricidad evita que el metano se propague en la atmósfera, dado que cuando éste no se utiliza se producen fugas. La opinión preliminar de la Comisión es que este hecho no altera la naturaleza de la ayuda en lo que respecta a la existencia de una ayuda estatal.

2.2.2. Compatibilidad de la ayuda con las normas sobre ayudas estatales

La ayuda no parece ser compatible con las Directrices comunitarias sobre ayudas estatales en favor del medio ambiente (en lo sucesivo, "las Directrices")(2).

La medida prevé una exención nueva y completa, durante diez años, de un impuesto medioambiental existente. Para tal exención, el punto 51.2 de las Directrices requiere que las excepciones en favor de las empresas beneficiarias sean necesarias como consecuencia de una modificación significativa de las condiciones económicas que coloque a las empresas en una situación competitiva especialmente difícil. No parece que se cumpla esta condición.

El MMC y la producción de electricidad a partir de MMC no son fuentes de energía renovables de conformidad con las Directrices y la Directiva 2001/77/CE del Parlamento Europeo y del Consejo, de 27 de septiembre de 2001, relativa a la promoción de la electricidad generada a partir de fuentes de energía renovables en el mercado interior de la electricidad(3). De todos modos, la Comisión considera que no se respetan las disposiciones de la sección E.3.3 de las Directrices.

El punto 51.3 de las Directrices permite que los Estados miembros puedan asimismo fomentar la puesta a punto de procesos de generación de electricidad a partir de energías tradicionales, como por ejemplo el gas, que permitan alcanzar una eficacia energética muy sensiblemente superior a la obtenida por los procesos tradicionales de producción. En tal supuesto, se puede aprobar una exención total de impuestos por un período de cinco años. La Comisión duda de que esta disposición pueda aplicarse en este caso. Además, la duración de diez años notificada supera la duración de cinco años permitida.

Las disposiciones relativas a la gestión de residuos y el ahorro de energía (puntos 42 a 46 de las Directrices) tampoco parecen cumplirse. La ayuda no es decreciente, no se limita a la estricta compensación de los costes de producción adicionales en relación con los precios de mercado del producto o servicio de que se trate, ni su duración máxima es de cinco años. También es cuestionable que la medida pretenda gestionar residuos o ahorrar energía.

La sección F de las Directrices, titulada "Políticas, medidas e instrumentos destinados a reducir los gases de efecto invernadero", se aplica a las ayudas estatales en el marco de políticas y medidas comunes coordinadas en el ámbito comunitario, incluyendo instrumentos económicos, así como instrumentos instituidos por el propio Protocolo de Kioto, concretamente los permisos negociables, la aplicación conjunta y el mecanismo para un desarrollo limpio. La Comisión tiene dudas de que esta sección sea aplicable en este caso.

El Reglamento (CE) n° 1407/2002 del Consejo, de 23 de julio de 2002, sobre las ayudas estatales a la industria del carbón(4) tampoco parece aplicable.

No obstante, la Comisión reconoce el beneficio medioambiental para la protección del clima que se puede derivar de esta medida, a pesar de que las Directrices no prevean ayudas en favor de tales medidas. Sin embargo, hoy por hoy, la Comisión duda de que la medida, tal y como está concebida, pueda provocar una compensación excesiva.

Por todas estas razones, en la actualidad, la Comisión duda de que la medida sea compatible con el artículo 87 del Tratado CE.

La cantidad de electricidad que se podría producir a partir del MMC en el Reino Unido no es desdeñable. La Comisión tiene en cuenta las posibilidades que ofrece la electricidad generada a partir de MMC no sólo en el Reino Unido sino también en el resto de los Estados miembros. La Comisión también toma en consideración que los Estados miembros están barajando la posibilidad de una exención facultativa de la ecotasa de electricidad generada a partir de MMC en el contexto del proyecto de Directiva sobre la imposición de los productos energéticos(5). Por estas razones, la Comisión desea dar a los terceros la posibilidad de presentar observaciones sobre la medida en cuestión.

CARTA

"The Commission wishes to inform the United Kingdom that, having examined the information supplied by your authorities on the measure referred to above, it has decided to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty.

1. Description of the measure

By letter of 5 December 2002, registered by the Secretariat General on the same day (SG(2002) A/11958), the United Kingdom notified the exemption from Climate Change Levy (CCL) charged to suppliers of electricity produced from Coal Mine Methane (CMM) from abandoned coal-mines.

The basic legislation for the CCL is contained in Schedule 6 to the Finance Act 2000. Section 126 of the Finance Act 2002 amends Schedule 6 to the Finance Act 2002 by inserting a new subparagraph (4A) after subparagraph (4) of paragraph 19 of Schedule 6 of the Finance Act 2000(6). It will exempt from CCL supplies of electricity generated from CMM from a day to be appointed by Treasury Order. The relevant secondary legislation (Regulations 46 to 51 of the CCL (General) Regulations 2001 - SI 2001/838) will include CMM within their scope.

CMM is a potent greenhouse gas, currently venting into the atmosphere. At present, there are four CMM extraction sites being utilised for electricity generation with a total generating capacity of 35 MW.

The aim of the scheme is to incentivise the industry to develop further installations at about 40 further sites of abandoned coal-mines, with around 175 MW added capacity. Because of the uncertainty over the exact level of the environmental benefit from the scheme, the Government intends to hold a review of the exemption in 2004/05. The scheme however is notified for a duration of ten years.

The minimum value of the exemption in its first year of operation will be around GBP 1 million. If the uptake of electricity generation plants fuelled by CMM occurs as planned, revenue foregone rises to GBP 6,3 million per annum.

The aid operates by giving a tax exemption equal to a flat rate of GBP 4,30 per MWh of electricity generation from CMM. As the estimated 40 plants incentivised by the exemption will not be all uneconomical up to point of the full support level, the measure will involve some dead-weight loss.

The scheme will directly benefit the generators/suppliers of electricity derived from CMM, but the tax exemption is likely to be shared with the company which extracts the gas. There are three companies who currently extract CMM to sell to electricity generators in the United Kingdom. These are Alkane Energy, StrataGas and Octagon Energy. The electricity generators working with them are Clarke Energy, Scottish and Southern Energy and Warwick Energy.

2. Assessment

2.1. The Member State's position

The United Kingdom Government argues that in the same way as the Commission decided that the tax exemption for electricity from renewable sources did not constitute State aid(7), also the current measure is in the logic and nature of the tax scheme. This for the following reason: There are two main ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions relating to a given level of non-domestic energy consumption. The first is to promote the use of technologies that do not contribute negatively to long-cycle greenhouse gas emissions, and this is the logic behind the exemption for certain renewable energy sources. The second is to promote the use of technologies which decrease the greenhouse gas emissions from given levels of production from other sources. Allowing CMM to escape into the atmosphere rather than harness and make use of it has a significant detrimental effect. By exempting CMM derived electricity from the CCL, significant greenhouse gas savings will be made. The environmental benefit in terms of carbon equivalent emissions avoided per kWh is as much as nine times greater than the carbon avoided from renewable sources when they are compared to what is currently considered to be the marginal fossil fuel energy source (Combined Cycle Gas Turbine). If however the exemption does constitute State aid, it could be approved under section F 'Policies, Measures and Instruments for Reducing Greenhouse Gases', points 68-71 of the Community Guidelines on State aid for environmental protection(8).

2.2. The Commission's preliminary assessment

2.2.1. The existence of State aid

The CCL on electricity is charged to suppliers of electricity. The measure exempts from the levy electricity from CMM. It is assumed that most if not the whole tax exemption is passed on to the electricity generators using CMM as input by the suppliers through higher purchase prices(9). These generators, which represent a specific category of undertakings are therefore granted an advantage. The advantage is granted through state resources as the State suffers a loss of tax revenues. The recipients exercise an economic activity on markets on which there is trade between Member States. The scheme thereby distorts or threatens to distort competition and could affect trade between Member States.

The Commission does not think at this stage that the selective advantage which the measure grants, is justified by the logic and nature of the tax system itself. The United Kingdom argues that an exemption for technologies which decrease the greenhouse gas emissions from given levels of production from other sources is in the nature of a climate change tax system.

The Commission considers the following. The tax is due because of the harmful effect of the use of energy on climate change. It is therefore in the nature of the tax to exempt the use of energy which production has no harmful effect. This is the case e.g. for electricity from renewable sources, as these sources do not contribute to long-cycle CO2. Electricity production from CMM has, like electricity production from other fossil sources, harmful effects and is therefore of a different nature than electricity from renewable sources. In fact, electricity production from CMM is not different in terms of CO2 emissions than electricity production from natural gas. It would therefore be in the nature and logic of the tax system to tax electricity produced from CCM. However, it is true that the use of CMM for electricity production avoids CMM released in the atmosphere as the unused CMM is leaking. The Commission is therefore of the preliminary opinion that this does not alter the nature of the support in terms of State aid. The Commission considers that the overall effect on greenhouse gasemissions should be taken into account when assessing the compatibility of the measure with State aid rules.

In conclusion, the Commission thinks at this stage that the tax exemption involves State aid to electricity generators using CMM (see also footnote 4). Such an aid which is not linked to investment is operating aid.

2.2.2. Compatibility of the aid with State aid rules

The Commission at this stage has doubts that the aid is compatible with the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection (thereafter the guidelines).

2.2.2.1. The measure envisages a full exemption from an existing environmental tax for a duration of 10 years. Point 51.2 of the guidelines allows tax exemptions from an existing environmental tax for 10 years if the following two conditions are fulfilled at the same time:

- the tax in question must have an appreciable positive impact in terms of environmental protection and

- the derogations for the firms concerned must have been decided on when the tax was adopted or must have become necessary as a result of a significant change in economic conditions that placed the firms in a particularly difficult competitive situation.

The exemption in question is newly introduced and the United Kingdom has not demonstrated a significant change in economic conditions in the abovementioned sense. Therefore the Commission has doubts that the measure complies with point 51.2 of the guidelines.

2.2.2.2. CMM and electricity production from CMM are not renewable energy sources within the meaning of the environmental guidelines and Directive 2001/77/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 September 2001 on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market(10). In any case, the United Kingdom has not invoked compatibility with the relevant provisions in section E.3.3 of the guidelines related to renewable energy sources and the Commission has doubts that these provisions are respected.

2.2.2.3. Under point 51.3 of the guidelines Member States may also encourage the development of processes for producing electric power from conventional energy sources such as gas that have an energy efficiency very much higher than the energy efficiency obtained with conventional production processes. In such cases, given the importance of such techniques for environmental protection and provided that the primary energy used reduces significantly the negative effects in terms of environmental protection, a total exemption may be approved for a period of five years where aid is non-degressive. The Commission doubts that this provision is applicable in the present case as it is primarily targeted at supporting particularly efficient generating techniques rather than the use of certain input fuels. In any case, the notified duration of 10 years exceeds the duration of five years permitted under point 51.3 of the guidelines. The conditions of point 51.1 which could allow a ten year duration under point 51.3 do not seem either to be met.

2.2.2.4. The provisions related to waste management and energy saving (points 42 to 46 of the guidelines) do also not seem to be fulfilled. The aid is not degressive, it is not strictly limited to compensating for extra production costs by comparison with the market prices of the relevant product or service, and the aid is not limited to five years. Furthermore it is questionable if the measure could be considered as aiming at managing waste or saving energy.

2.2.2.5. The United Kingdom invoked the application of Section F of the guidelines 'Policies, Measures and Instruments for reducing Greenhouse Gases'. This section is applicable to State aid potentially involved in common and coordinated policies and measures, including economic instruments, and also by means of the instruments established by the Kyoto Protocol itself, namely international emissions trading, joint implementation and the clean development mechanism. The Commission doubts that this section is applicable in the present case.

Equally, Council Regulation (EC) No 1407/2002 of 23 July 2002 on State aid to the coal industry(11) does not seem applicable.

Finally, no other legal text based on Article 87(2) or (3) appears to be relevant.

However, climate protection is a Community objective. The Commission recognises the environmental benefit for climate protection that can result from the measure, even if support for such a measure has not been envisaged by the environmental aid guidelines. The Commission at the current stage though has doubts that the design of the measure may lead to overcompensation.

For all these reasons, the Commission at the current stage has doubts that the measure is compatible with Article 87 of the EC Treaty.

The quantity of electricity which could be produced from CMM in the United Kingdom is not negligible. The Commission considers the potential for electricity generation from CMM not only in the United Kingdom but also in other Member States. The Commission also considers that Member States are currently discussing the possibility for a facultative exemption from energy taxation of electricity produced from CMM in the context of the draft directive for the taxation of energy products(12). For these reasons, the Commission wants to give third parties the possibility to comment on the measure.

In the light of the foregoing considerations, the Commission, acting under the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty, requests the United Kingdom to submit its comments and to provide all such information as may help to assess the aid/measure, within one month of the date of receipt of this letter. In particular information should be provided as may help to assess if the aid may be compatible directly with Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty.

The Commission wishes to remind the United Kingdom that Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty has suspensory effect, and would draw your attention to Article 14 of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, which provides that all unlawful aid may be recovered from the recipient."

(1) Decisión de la Comisión relativa a la ayuda estatal C 18/01 (ex N 123/2000), publicada en el DO C 185 de 30.6.2001, p. 22.

(2) DO C 37 de 3.2.2001, p. 3.

(3) DO L 283 de 27.10.2001, p. 33.

(4) DO L 205 de 2.8.2002, p. 1.

(5) Fisc 311 Rev 1 ADD de 9.12.2002.

(6) The new subparagraph (4) provides for CMM to be regarded as a renewable source in the context of the CCL, in order to allow electricity derived from it to benefit from the same exemption as renewable sources. However, the United Kingdom authorities explained that this drafting serves administrative simplicity and clarity and should not be taken to imply that the Government in fact considers CMM to be a renewable source of energy.

(7) Commission decision on State aid C 18/01 (ex N 123/2000), published in OJ C 185, 30.6.2001, p. 22.

(8) OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 3.

(9) It cannot be excluded that suppliers do not pass on the entire benefit of the exemption and keep a small part of it through their price negotiations with electricity generators using CMM. This is nevertheless supposed to be minimal. In all previous cases concerning exemptions or reductions from eco-taxes on electricity charged to suppliers, the Commission has considered that the real beneficiaries of the aid are the producers of electricity.

(10) OJ L 283, 27.10.2001, p. 33.

(11) OJ L 205 of 2.8.2002, p. 1.

(12) Fisc 311 Rev 1 ADD of 9.12.2002.