VALSTS ATBALSTS – DĀNIJA

Valsts atbalsts SA.57991 (2021/C) (ex 2021/NN) – Dānija

Kompensācija Dānijas pastam Post Danmark par universālā pakalpojuma saistībām 2020. gadā

Valsts atbalsts SA.55918 (2020/FC) – Dānija

Iespējamais valsts atbalsts Post Danmark par universālā pakalpojuma saistībām 2020. gadā

Uzaicinājums iesniegt piezīmes saskaņā ar Līguma par Eiropas Savienības darbību 108. panta 2. punktu

(Dokuments attiecas uz EEZ)

(2021/C 469/02)

Ar 2021. gada 23. jūlija vēstuli, kas autentiskajā valodā pievienota šim kopsavilkumam, Komisija paziņoja Dānijai savu lēmumu sākt Līguma par Eiropas Savienības darbību 108. panta 2. punktā paredzēto procedūru attiecībā uz iepriekš minēto pasākumu.

Piezīmes par pasākumu, attiecībā uz kuru Komisija sāk procedūru, ieinteresētās personas var iesniegt viena mēneša laikā no šā kopsavilkuma un tam pievienotās vēstules publicēšanas dienas, nosūtot tās uz šādu adresi:

European Commission, Directorate-General Competition State Aid Greffe 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel BELGIQUE/BELGIË Fakss: + 32 2 296 12 42 Stateaidgreffe@ec.europa.eu

Šīs piezīmes tiks paziņotas Dānijai. Ieinteresētā persona, kas iesniedz piezīmes, var, norādot pieprasījuma iemeslus, rakstveidā pieprasīt, lai tās identitāte un/vai iesniegto piezīmju daļas netiktu atklātas.

PROCEDŪRA

Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S (turpmāk – “ITD”) – Dānijas transporta un loģistikas asociācija – 2019. gada 22. decembrī iesniedza sūdzību par valsts atbalstu, apgalvojot, ka kompensācija par universālā pasta pakalpojuma saistībām (turpmāk – “UPS”), kuru sniegšana uzticēta Post Danmark A/S, ir nesaderīgs valsts atbalsts.

Pēc iepriekšējas saziņas Dānijas iestādes 2021. gada 21. martā paziņoja par kompensāciju Post Danmark par universālā pakalpojuma saistībām 2020. gadā.

PASĀKUMA APRAKSTS

Pasākums attiecas uz kompensāciju 225 miljonu DKK (30 miljonu EUR) apmērā, kas izmaksājama Post Danmark par universālā pakalpojuma saistībām. Kompensācijas pamatā ir divas individuālas licences, kas tika parakstītas attiecīgi 2019. gada 20. decembrī un 2020. gada 25. jūnijā, satiksmes ministra dekrēts un nolīgums, kas noslēgts starp Post Danmark un Dānijas iestādēm.

Post Danmark (tā pašreizējā formā) tika dibināts 2009. gadā – pēc apvienošanās ar Zviedrijas pasta uzņēmumu Posten AB. Pēc apvienošanās tika izveidota pārvaldītājsabiedrība PostNord AB, kas kopīgi pieder Zviedrijai (60 % akciju) un Dānijai (40 % akciju). Balsstiesības ir sadalītas vienlīdzīgi.

Post Danmark darbojas Dānijas pasta tirgū un piedāvā dažādus pasta pakalpojumus, piemēram, vēstuļu un paku piegādi, eksprespiegādes, kurjerpasta pakalpojumus, digitālos pakalpojumus, kravu pārvadājumu pakalpojumus un pasta nodaļu tīkla darbību. Kopš Dānijas pasta tirgus liberalizācijas 2011. gadā Post Danmark darbojas pilnīgas konkurences apstākļos ar citiem pasta operatoriem saskaņā ar Pasta direktīvu. Kā universālā pakalpojuma sniedzējam Post Danmark pienākums ir nodrošināt piekļuvi visiem universāliem pasta pakalpojumiem, tostarp, piemēram, vēstuļu līdz 2 kg un paku līdz 20 kg piegādei par pieņemamām cenām visā Dānijas teritorijā un vismaz piecas dienas nedēļā.

PASĀKUMA NOVĒRTĒJUMS

Dānijas iestādes uzskata, ka pasākums ir atbalsts saskaņā ar LESD 107. panta 1. punktu un ir saderīgs ar LESD 106. panta 2. punktu, jo tas atbilst visām prasībām, kas noteiktas Komisijas paziņojumā “Eiropas Savienības nostādnes par valsts atbalstu, ko piešķir kā kompensāciju par sabiedrisko pakalpojumu sniegšanu” (1) (“Vispārējas tautsaimnieciskas nozīmes pakalpojumu (VTNP) nostādnes”).

Komisija arī uzskata, ka pasākums ir valsts atbalsts saskaņā ar LESD 107. panta 1. punktu, bet apšauba, vai ir izpildītas visas saderības prasības saskaņā ar VTNP nostādnēm.

Komisija ir provizoriski secinājusi, ka kompensācija par universālā pakalpojuma saistībām atbilst vairākiem VTNP nostādņu noteikumiem. Proti, Komisija uzskata, ka kompensācija tiek piešķirta reālam VTNP, ka pilnvarojuma aktā ir ietverti nepieciešamie elementi, ka ilgums ir pietiekami ierobežots laikā, ka attiecīgie publiskā iepirkuma noteikumi tiek ievēroti, ka Dānija ir ieviesusi pietiekamus stimulus, lai nodrošinātu UPS efektīvu sniegšanu, un ka pārredzamības prasības ir ievērotas.

Tomēr Komisijai ir šaubas par dažu citu VTNP nostādņu noteikumu ievērošanu:

— Komisijas 2006. gada 16. novembra Direktīvas 2006/111/EK par dalībvalstu un publisku uzņēmumu finansiālo attiecību pārredzamību, kā arī par dažu uzņēmumu finanšu pārredzamību (2) (VTNP nostādņu 18. punkts) ievērošanu. Patiesi, 2021. gada 15. janvārī Dānijas valsts revidents Rigsrevisionen publicēja ziņojumu, kurā tas pauda šaubas par Post Danmark pārskatu regulatīvo uzraudzību un ārējo revidentu veikto šo pārskatu apstiprināšanu. Dānija šo ziņojumu ir nosūtījusi Komisijai, un, kamēr Dānijas iestādes nav pienācīgi novērsušas Rigsrevisionen paustās šaubas, Komisija var tikai piekrist Rigsrevisionen šaubām. Tas ir īpaši svarīgi tāpēc, ka Dānija ir izmantojusi šos grāmatvedības datus kā ievaddatus, lai aprēķinātu neto izmaksas, kas Post Danmark rodas tai uzticēto universālā pakalpojuma saistību dēļ. Neto izmaksu aprēķins ir pamats tās kompensācijas noteikšanai, uz kuru Post Danmark ir tiesības.

— Novērsto neto izmaksu (NNI) metodikas piemērošana (PVTN nostādņu 25.–27. punkts): Saskaņā ar NNI metodiku Post Danmark jānosaka, kā Post Danmark būtu darbojies bez UPS saistībām (tā dēvētais hipotētiskais scenārijs). Komisijai ir šaubas par dažu minētajā hipotētiskajā scenārijā izdarīto pieņēmumu aplēsto ietekmi uz vēstuļu vai paku piegādes izmaksām.

Saskaņā ar Padomes Regulas (ES) 2015/1589 (3) 16. pantu visu nelikumīgo atbalstu var atgūt no saņēmēja.

VĒSTULES TEKSTS

(1) OV C 8, 11.1.2012., 15. lpp.

(2) OV L 318, 17.11.2006., 17. lpp.

(3) Padomes Regula (ES) 2015/1589 (2015. gada 13. jūlijs), ar ko nosaka sīki izstrādātus noteikumus Līguma par Eiropas Savienības darbību 108. panta piemērošanai (OV L 248, 24.9.2015., 9. lpp.).

(4) Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (OJ L 248, 24.9.2015, p. 9), ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/reg/2015/1589/oj

(5) Regulation No 1 determining the languages to be used by the European Economic Community (OJ 17, 6.10.1958, p. 385).

(6) Lov om Post Danmark, Nr 88 of 8 February 1995, https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/1995/88

(7) Lov om postvirksomhed, Nr 89 of 8 February 1995, https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/1995/89

(8) Lov om Post Danmark A/S, Nr 409 of 6 June 2002, https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2002/409

(9) See: https://www.cvc.com/media/press-releases/2009/02-02-2009-123603833

(10) The legal basis for the merger was in Denmark provided by: Lov om ændring af lov om Post Danmark A/S, LOV nr 542 of 17 June 2008, available at: https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=120348

(11) Commission Decision of 21 April 2009, Case No COMP/M.5152 — Posten AB / Post Danmark A/S. Notification of 26.2.2009 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation No 139/2004, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=2_M_5152.

(12) Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 1997 on common rules for the development of the internal market of Community postal services and the improvement of quality of service (OJ L 15, 21.1.1998, p. 14).

(13) See Postloven, LOV nr 1536 of 21 December 2010, available at: https://www.retsinformation.dk/Forms/R0710.aspx?id=135208. The law has been amended several times.

(14) Both licenses have as title ‘Midlertidig tilladelse til Post Danmark A/S’.

(15) Danish Transport and Construction Agency, Ny individuel tilladelse til Post Danmark A/S, 2 June 2016, available at: https://www.trafikstyrelsen.dk/da/Post/Lister/Publikationsliste

(16) Commission Decision SA.47707(2018/N) of 28 May 2018, State compensations granted to PostNord for the provision of the universal postal service — Denmark, available at: https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/case_details.cfm?proc_code=3_SA_47707

(17) Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021, ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission, Case T-561/18, ECLI:EU:T:2021:240.

(18) See: https://uk.rigsrevisionen.dk/about-us

(19) See: https://uk.rigsrevisionen.dk/our-work

(20) The report is available on the website of the Rigsrevisionen: Beretning om tilsynet med Post Danmarks regnskabspraksis, beretning nr. 10/2020, 15 January 2021, https://rigsrevisionen.dk/revisionssager-arkiv/2021/jan/beretning-om-tilsynet-med-post-danmarks-regnskabspraksis

(21) Communication from the Commission — European Union framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation (OJ C 8, 11.1.2012, p. 15).

(22) The decree is dated 19 August 2020 (nr 2020-6466) and was endorsed by the Financial Committee on 27 August 2020.

(23) Kontrakt vedrørende midlertidig kompensation til Post Danmark A/S for befordringspligten i Danmark, dated 25 June 2020.

(24) Claims unrelated to the USO compensation are not the subject of this Decision.

(25) Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021, ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission, Case T-561/18, ECLI:EU:T:2021:240, paragraph 86-93.

(26) The transformation plan is referred to as the new production model in Section 2.2 of the 2018 Decision.

(27) Referred to in the 2018 Decision.

(28) Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021, ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission, Case T-561/18, ECLI:EU:T:2021:240, paragraph 94.

(29) ITD explains that the vehicles financed by Post Danmark for the USO will only be used for the USO for 60 % of their capacity while the remaining (40 %) will be used for PostNord Logistics’ freight services, without Post Danmark billing PostNord Logistics for the use of the vehicles. In addition, Post Danmark’s employees would provide services for PostNord Logistics without remuneration, the customer service of PostNord Logistics would be carried out by Post Danmark without payment and Post Danmark would pay for IT (software and hardware) that is used by PostNord Logistics without remuneration.

(30) In this regard, ITD refers to Article 20 of Danish Law no. 1040 of 30 August 2017 (the Danish Postal Act), which provides that ‘[t]he company holding the Universal Service Obligation must issue stamps (with “Denmark” printed on them)’ and Article 15(4) of the same law which provides that ‘[t]he Transport Minister authorises the price of the stamps for letters weighing up to 50 grams’.

(31) ITD refers to a PostNord press release ‘Billigere pakker på posthuset fra 2019’ dated 28 September 2018 where it is stated ‘og derfor justerer vi priserne fra årsskiftet’.

(32) See recital (137) of the 2018 Decision.

(33) Commission Decision 2012/21/EU of 20 December 2011 on the application of Article 106(2) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to State aid in the form of public service compensation granted to certain undertakings entrusted with the operation of services of general economic interest, OJ L 7, 11.1.2012, p. 3, available at: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dec/2012/21(1)/oj

(34) This conclusion was later upheld by the General Court, see footnote 14.

(35) To further substantiate this, Denmark refers to the political agreement of 27 May 2010 on ensuring the universal service in a liberalised market, which was attached to the preliminary works of the Postal Act adopted on 21 December 2010 (LOV nr 1536 af 21/12/2010) and contains the following wording: ‘The designated Universal Service Provider… has an exclusive right and an obligation to issue stamps with “Denmark” printed on them’ (translation provided by Denmark). In Danish this reads as: ‘Den til enhver tid befordringspligtige virksomhed …, har eneret og forpligtelse til at udstede frimærker påtrykt ’Danmark’’. Only the obligation to issue stamps is mentioned in the wording of the Postal Act (and not the exclusive right). In addition, the license for Post Danmark to provide postal services mentions only an obligation to issue stamps.

(36) See Article 8 of Directive 97/67/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council. In addition, recital (20) of the same Directive states: ‘for reasons of public order and public security, Member States […] are entitled to appoint the entity or entities responsible for issuing postage stamps identifying the country of origin’.

(37) Denmark explains that the word used in Section 15(4) of the Postal Act is ‘godkender’, which rather translates as ‘approves’.

(38) The Commission considers that the architecture of the SGEI package would be rendered ineffective if it were to be considered that entrusting exactly the same service in two different consecutive periods (within the same year) suffices to define two separate SGEIs. The Commission recalls that, below the threshold of EUR 15 million, the SGEI Decision applies, with no notification obligation and lighter compatibility rules; over this threshold, the stricter requirements of the SGEI Framework must be respected.

(39) Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 12 December 1996, Compagnie nationale Air France v Commission of the European Communities, Case T-358/94, ECLI:EU:T:1996:194, paragraph 56.

(40) Judgment of the Court of 14 October 1987, Federal Republic of Germany v Commission of the European Communities, Case 248/84, ECLI:EU:C:1987:437, paragraph 17; Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 6 March 2002, Territorio Histórico de Álava — Diputación Foral de Álava (T-92/00), Ramondín, SA and Ramondín Cápsulas, SA (T-103/00) v Commission of the European Communities, joined Cases T-92/00 and T-103/00, ECLI:EU:T:2002:61, paragraph 57.

(41) Judgment of the Court of 12 September 2000, Pavel Pavlov and Others v Stichting Pensioenfonds Medische Specialisten, Joined Cases C-180/98 to C-184/98, ECLI:EU:C:2000:428, paragraph 74.

(42) Judgment of the Court of 23 April 1991, Klaus Höfner and Fritz Elser v Macrotron GmbH, Case C-41/90, ECLI:EU:C:1991:161, paragraph 21; Judgment of the Court of 12 September 2000, Pavel Pavlov and Others v Stichting Pensioenfonds Medische Specialisten, Joined Cases C-180/98 to C-184/98, ECLI:EU:C:2000:428, paragraph 74.

(43) Judgment of the Court of 16 June 1987, Commission of the European Communities v Italian Republic, Case 118/85, ECLI:EU:C:1987:283, paragraph 7.

(44) Judgment of the Court of 11 July 1996, Syndicat français de l'Express international (SFEI) and others v La Poste and others, Case C-39/94, ECLI:EU:C:1996:285, paragraph 60; Judgment of the Court of 29 April 1999, Kingdom of Spain v Commission of the European Communities, Case C-342/96, ECLI:EU:C:1999:210, paragraph 41.

(45) Judgment of the Court of 24 July 2003, Altmark Trans GmbH and Regierungspräsidium Magdeburg v Nahverkehrsgesellschaft Altmark GmbH, and Oberbundesanwalt beim Bundesverwaltungsgericht, Case, C-280/00, ECLI:EU:C:2003:415, paragraph 87 to 95.

(46) See cases Judgment of the Court of 4 June 2015, European Commission v MOL Magyar Olaj- és Gázipari Nyrt, C-15/14 P, ECLI:EU:C:2015:362, paragraph 60; Judgment of the Court of 30 June 2016, Kingdom of Belgium v European Commission, C-270/15 P, ECLI:EU:C:2016:489, paragraph 49; Judgment of the General Court of 13 December 2017, Hellenic Republic v European Commission, T-314/15, ECLI:EU:T:2017:903, paragraph 79.

(47) Judgment of the Court of 17 September 1980, Philip Morris Holland BV v Commission of the European Communities, Case 730/79, ECLI:EU:C:1980:209, paragraph 11; Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 15 June 2000, Alzetta Mauro and others v Commission of the European Communities, joined cases T-298/97, T-312/97, T-313/97, T-315/97, T-600/97 to 607/97, T-1/98, T-3/98 to T-6/98 and T-23/98 ECLI:EU:T:2000:151, paragraph 80.

(48) Judgment of the Court of 17 September 1980, Philip Morris Holland BV v Commission of the European Communities, Case 730/79, ECLI:EU:C:1980:209, paragraphs 11 and 12; Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 30 April 1998, Het Vlaamse Gewest (Flemish Region) v Commission of the European Communities, Case T-214/95, ECLI:EU:T:1998:77, paragraphs 48-50.

(49) Communication from the Commission on the application of the European Union State aid rules to compensation granted for the provision of services of general economic interest (OJ C 8, 11.1.2012, p. 4).

(50) Article 3(1) of Directive 97/67/EC provides: ‘Member States shall ensure that users enjoy the right to a universal service involving the permanent provision of a postal service of specified quality at all points in their territory at affordable prices for all users.’

(51) Communication from the Commission: European Framework for State aid in the form of public service compensation (OJ C 8, 11.1.2012, p. 15).

(52) For example, in France (La Poste), Italy (Poste Italiane), Spain (Correos) and Greece (ELTA), the period of entrustment is up to 15 years.

(53) Commission Directive 2006/111/EC of 16 November 2006 on the transparency of financial relations between Member States and public undertakings as well as on financial transparency within certain undertakings.

(54) Judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) of 15 October 2020, První novinová společnost a.s., venant aux droits de Mediaservis s. r. o. v European Commission, Case T-316/18, ECLI:EU:T:2020:489, paragraph 198.

(55) Business to Consumer

(56) Business to Business

(57) Consumer to other

(58) Proclaim return receipt (postforkyndelse in Danish) are letters containing a writ or other document to be served on the recipient. Only the courts, public authorities other than the courts, and approved private boards of complaint or appeal can sent proclaim return receipt.

(59) Danish Value Added Tax Act, LBK nr 1021 of 26.9.2019 (link: https://www.retsinformation.dk/eli/lta/2019/1021).

(60) Assessment made by annalect (January 2020).

(61) Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC (OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243), ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/25/oj

(62) Danske Fragtmænd A/S's labour productivity is something of an outlier. This can be explained by the fact that Danske Fragtmænd A/S is a transport and logistics company, which transports goods and offers warehouse facilities to customers. Delivery costs and the average price of goods are significantly higher than delivery costs and average prices on letters and parcels.

(63) Cost of delivering one letter or one parcel.

(64) One could buy one or multiple codes online and write them on the envelope or print the code and stick it on the envelope.

(65) Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021, ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission, Case T-561/18, ECLI:EU:T:2021:240.

(66) This may be illustrated by the following simplified calculations. Assume the cost of delivery of parcels nationwide is 200 and the revenue is 150, such that it is a loss- making activity. Now assume that the cost of delivery in urban areas is 75 while the revenue is 100, such that parcel delivery in urban areas is actually profitable. By discontinuing the entire activity, Post Danmark’s NAC on this activity would be equal to the avoided costs (200) minus the foregone revenues (150) = 50. If Post Danmark were to discontinue only the non-urban delivery of parcels, its NAC for the activity would be equal to the avoided costs (200-75) minus the foregone revenues (150-100) = 125 – 50 = 75.

(67) Ibid, paragraph 123-124.

(68) Ibid, paragraph 138-159.

(69) Ibid, paragraph 155.

(70) Ibid, paragraph 148.

(71) See in this regard also recital (119)(e) where it is explained that Post Danmark would optimize these quality measurements in the absence of the USO.

(72) Recital (70).

(73) See recital (28) of the 2018 Decision.

(74) Paragraph 40 of the SGEI framework.

(75) Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021, ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission, Case T-561/18, ECLI:EU:T:2021:240, paragraph 164-165.

(76) See footnote 12.

(77) Judgment of the General Court of 5 May 2021, ITD, Brancheorganisation for den danske vejgodstransport A/S and Danske Fragtmænd A/S v European Commission, Case T-561/18, ECLI:EU:T:2021:240, paragraphs 170 and 172.

(78) Ibid, paragraph 176.