Steunmaatregelen van de Staten - Verenigd Koninkrijk

Steunmaatregel C 13/02 (ex N 27/02) - Vrijstelling van zegelrecht voor onroerend goed voor zakelijk gebruik in achterstandsgebieden

Uitnodiging overeenkomstig artikel 88, lid 2, van het EG-Verdrag opmerkingen te maken

(2002/C 102/14)

(Voor de EER relevante tekst)

De Commissie heeft het Verenigd Koninkrijk bij schrijven van 27 februari 2002, dat na deze samenvatting in de authentieke taal is weergegeven, in kennis gesteld van haar besluit tot inleiding van de procedure van artikel 88, lid 2, van het EG-Verdrag ten aanzien van de bovengenoemde steunmaatregel.

Belanghebbenden kunnen hun opmerkingen over de betrokken steunmaatregel ten aanzien waarvan de Commissie de procedure inleidt, maken door deze binnen één maand vanaf de datum van deze bekendmaking te zenden aan: Europese Commissie Directoraat-generaal Concurrentie

Griffie Overheidssteun

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

Deze opmerkingen zullen ter kennis van het Verenigd Koninkrijk worden gebracht. Een belanghebbende die opmerkingen maakt, kan, met opgave van redenen, schriftelijk verzoeken om vertrouwelijke behandeling van zijn identiteit.

SAMENVATTING

1. Bij schrijven van 21 december 2001, geregistreerd door de Commissie op 9 januari 2002, hebben de autoriteiten van het Verenigd Koninkrijk de steunmaatregel "Vrijstelling van zegelrecht voor onroerend goed voor zakelijk gebruik in achterstandsgebieden" aangemeld.

2. Beschrijving van de steunmaatregel

De aangemelde steun betreft de vrijstelling van het zegelrecht bij de overdracht van onroerend goed voor zakelijk gebruik dat zich bevindt in achterstandsgebieden. Dit zegelrecht is een belasting op documenten die verband houden met de verkoop en de verhuring aan een nieuwe huurder van onroerend goed. Bij de huidige belastingtarieven zou de waarde van de vrijstelling tussen 1 % en 4 % van de verkoopprijs van het onroerend goed bedragen en tussen 1 % en 24 % van de gemiddelde jaarlijkse huur in het geval van een nieuwe huurovereenkomst. De gebieden die uit hoofde van de maatregel voor de steun in aanmerking komen, worden geselecteerd op basis van een reeks indicatoren aan de hand van postcodes in verband met sociale en economische achterstand. Aldus zijn circa 2000 achterstandsgebieden geselecteerd die tezamen ongeveer 23 % van de Britse bevolking vertegenwoordigen. De regeling zou van toepassing zijn op alle ondernemingen, ongeacht hun omvang en ongeacht in welke tak van de economie zij actief zijn. De jaarlijkse kosten voor de begroting van de steunmaatregel worden geraamd op 98 miljoen EUR.

3. Kenmerken van staatssteun

Uit hoofde van de maatregel wordt steun verleend die met staatsmiddelen wordt bekostigd (in de vorm van een belastingvrijstelling) aan ondernemingen in welbepaalde streken (namelijk alleen in de aangewezen achterstandsgebieden). De vrijstelling vermindert de investeringskosten van ondernemingen die investeren in onroerend goed voor zakelijk gebruik in de voor steun in aanmerking komende streken en verleent deze ondernemingen aldus een voordeel in vergelijking met ondernemingen die investeren in andere gebieden. Aangezien de vrijstelling geldt voor alle overdrachten van percelen grond en gebouwen, is het onvermijdelijk dat dit voordeel ten goede komt aan ondernemingen die deelnemen aan het intracommunautaire handelsverkeer, of die actief zijn in een tak van de economie waarin sprake is van intercommunautair handelsverkeer. Voorts is er geen maximum vastgesteld voor het steunbedrag dat kan worden toegekend aan een begunstigde. Daarom moet worden geconcludeerd dat de vrijstelling kan leiden tot steun welke de mededinging in het intracommunautaire handelsverkeer ongunstig beïnvloedt.

Gelet op het voorgaande is de Commissie van oordeel dat de maatregel moet worden aangemerkt als staatssteun in de zin van artikel 87, lid 1, van het EG-Verdrag.

4. Overwegingen van procedurele aard

Het Verenigd Koninkrijk heeft voldaan aan de procedurevereisten van artikel 88, lid 3, van het EG-Verdrag door voornoemde steunmaatregel aan te melden alvorens deze ten uitvoer te leggen.

5. Beoordeling van de verenigbaarheid van de steunmaatregel

Het doel van de maatregel is de bevordering van de ontwikkeling/het herstel van de geografische gebieden met een achterstand in het Verenigd Koninkrijk door het verlenen van steun voor de overdracht van onroerend goed voor zakelijk gebruik. Steun voor achterstandsgebieden valt onder de richtsnoeren inzake (nationale) regionale steunmaatregelen (PB C 74 van 10.3.1998, blz. 9), hierna "richtsnoeren voor regionale steun", en onder de kaderregeling inzake overheidssteun voor ondernemingen in achtergestelde stadswijken (PB C 146 van 14.5.1997, blz. 6), hierna de "kaderregeling achtergestelde stadswijken". De Commissie heeft de maatregel derhalve onderzocht in het licht van deze richtsnoeren en kaderregeling. Op grond daarvan heeft de Commissie de volgende twijfels omtrent de verenigbaarheid van de maatregel met de gemeenschappelijke markt:

a) Een eerste punt dat twijfel oproept is het geografische bereik van de maatregel. Uit hoofde van de communautaire regels inzake staatssteun moet investeringssteun bestemd voor de ontwikkeling van achterstandsgebieden beperkt zijn tot hetzij de gebieden die voor regionale steun in aanmerking komen uit hoofde van artikel 87, lid 3, onder a) en c), gedefinieerd in overeenstemming met de bepalingen van punt 3 van de richtsnoeren voor regionale steun, hetzij tot achtergestelde stadswijken, gedefinieerd in overeenstemming met de bepalingen van punt IV van de kaderregeling achtergestelde stadswijken.

Op 17 augustus 2000 heeft de Commissie haar goedkeuring gehecht aan de Britse regionale-steunkaart (N 265/2000), waarin de gebieden zijn opgenomen die in de periode 2000-2006 in aanmerking komen voor regionale staatssteun. De vrijstelling van het zegelrecht zal van toepassing zijn op een lijst van gebieden die ongeveer 23 % van de Britse bevolking vertegenwoordigen. Uit door het Verenigd Koninkrijk verstrekte informatie blijkt dat tussen 40 % en 50 % van de gebieden die in aanmerking komen voor vrijstelling van het zegelrecht buiten de regionale steunkaart vallen. De kaderregeling achtergestelde stadswijken staat weliswaar relatief hoge niveaus van investeringssteun toe in achtergestelde stadswijken die buiten regionale steungebieden vallen, maar punt 8 van deze kaderregeling bepaalt dat het aandeel van de bevolking dat wordt bereikt door de steun, uit hoofde van de kaderregeling achtergestelde stadswijken niet hoger mag zijn dan ongeveer 1 % van de nationale bevolking. Het aandeel van de gebieden die in aanmerking komen voor vrijstelling van het zegelrecht en die niet tot de regionale steunkaart behoren is veel hoger dan 1 % van de Britse bevolking.

De Commissie betwijfelt dan ook of het geografische bereik van de vrijstelling van het zegelrecht verenigbaar is met de voornoemde kaderregeling. Zij vreest dat de goedkeuring van de maatregel, inclusief de lijst van "aangewezen achterstandsgebieden" in feite zou leiden tot een aanzienlijke uitbreiding van de Britse regionale-steunkaart. Dit zou vervolgens de concentratie van regionale steungebieden kunnen ondermijnen, hetgeen het voornaamste beginsel van het regionale steunbeleid van de Gemeenschap vormt(1).

b) Zowel uit hoofde van de richtsnoeren inzake regionale steun als uit hoofde van de kaderregeling achtergestelde stadswijken is investeringssteun beperkt tot "initiële investeringen". De Commissie betwijfelt of de verkoop van onroerend goed voor zakelijk gebruik en het aangaan van nieuwe huurcontracten voor dergelijk onroerend goed in alle omstandigheden kan worden beschouwd als een "initiële investering" zoals gedefinieerd in deze richtsnoeren.

c) Activa die opeenvolgende malen van eigenaar veranderen, komen telkens in aanmerking voor vrijstelling van het zegelrecht. Voorts sluit de steunmaatregel activa waarvoor in het verleden steun werd ontvangen bij de aankoop (uit hoofde van andere steunmaatregelen) niet uit. De Commissie betwijfelt of dit strookt met de richtsnoeren inzake regionale steunmaatregelen waarin is bepaald dat bij de aankoop van activa eventuele eerder in verband met de verwerving verleende steun in mindering moet worden gebracht.

d) Volgens het Verenigd Koninkrijk zal de steunintensiteit nooit hoger zijn dan 4 %. De Commissie betwijfelt echter of de Britse autoriteiten er in gevallen waarin de vrijstelling van zegelrecht wordt gecumuleerd met andere steun, op kunnen toezien dat het totale steunbedrag overeenstemt met de steunintensiteitsplafonds zoals vastgesteld in de regionale-steunkaart (of andere eventueel geldende plafonds).

e) Volgens de aanmelding is de steunmaatregel van toepassing op alle sectoren, met inbegrip van de sectoren waarvoor bijzondere regels van toepassing zijn (vervoer, ijzer- en staalindustrie, scheepsbouw, synthetische vezels, automobielindustrie, de productie, de verwerking en de afzet van landbouwproducten van bijlage I van het EG-Verdrag, visserij en steenkool). Het is onduidelijk hoe de Britse autoriteiten ervoor denken te zorgen dat wordt voldaan aan de bijzondere voorschriften die gelden terzake van de voornoemde sectoren.

f) De aangemelde steunmaatregel omvat geen enkele beperking met betrekking tot het type onderneming dat in aanmerking kan komen voor de vrijstelling van zegelrecht. De Commissie betwijfelt of dit strookt met de kaderregeling achtergestelde stadswijken, die de steun beperkt tot uitsluitend kleine ondernemingen en die verdere verplichtingen oplegt aan de begunstigden van dergelijke steun (namelijk dat de voornaamste economische activiteit wordt voortgezet en dat wordt geïnvesteerd in een gebied dat is aangewezen als een achtergestelde stadswijk, en dat ten minste 20 % van de nieuw te creëren arbeidsplaatsen wordt gereserveerd voor werknemers die woonachtig zijn in de achtergestelde stadswijk).

TEKST VAN DE BRIEF

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

I. PROCEDURE

1. By letter dated 21 December 2001, and registered by the Commission on 9 January 2002, the UK authorities notified a scheme exempting transfers of non-residential property in disadvantaged areas from stamp duty. A bilateral meeting between the UK authorities and the Commission was held on 5 February 2002 to clarify some points of the notification.

II. DESCRIPTION OF THE AID MEASURE

2. Aim of the measure

The aim of the measure is to contribute to the physical, economic and social regeneration of disadvantaged areas by means of reducing the cost of acquiring non-residential property in these areas. As such the scheme is part of the UK Government's 'Enterprise in disadvantaged communities' initiative.

3. The form and nature of the aid

The notified aid takes the form of an exemption from stamp duty on the transfer of non-residential property and on the creation of new leases for such property.

Stamp duties are taxes on documents. The main stamp duties levied in the UK at the present day are on sales and leases of land and buildings, and transfers of shares.

4. Eligible costs and aid intensity

Eligible costs comprise the consideration (i.e. purchase price) of the property (i.e. land and/or buildings) situated in the qualifying area, or the average annual rental for a new lease. Apportionment is required if the property is only partially situated in a qualifying area.

Stamp duty rates vary according to the purchase price of the property concerned and, in the case of leases, according to the average annual rental and the duration of the lease.

At present duty rates, the value of the exemption would be between 1 % and 4 % of the purchase price in the case of a purchase of a property and between 1 % and 24 % of the average annual rent in the case of a new lease.

5. Geographical coverage of the scheme

The stamp duty exemption would apply to sales and new leases of non-residential property located in 'designated disadvantaged areas' in the UK.

The eligible areas, which have average populations of 7000, are selected on the basis of the most recent values for indices of deprivation developed for each of the four nations of the United Kingdom (no suitable single measure of deprivation exists for the UK - so it was necessary to use the four different but comparable indices). In England, Wales and Northern Ireland the geographical units used for the analysis are the electoral wards or divisions. In Scotland the geographical units used are postcodes.

Some 2000 disadvantaged areas have been designated in the UK, covering 22 % of the total population in England, 18 % in Scotland, 47 % in Wales and 40 % in Northern Ireland. The present list of eligible areas has been set out in 'The Stamp Duty (Disadvantaged Areas) Regulations 2001' (Statutory Instruments 2001/3747). However, the UK indicated that the qualifying areas will be kept under review, but that changes of the list are likely to be infrequent.

6. Beneficiaries

The scheme applies to undertakings of any size and operating in any sector of the economy.

7. Budget of the scheme

The annual budget cost of the scheme is estimated at up to GBP 60 million (around EUR 98 million). It is estimated that, each year, at least 1200 transfers will be exempted from stamp duty under the scheme.

8. Legal basis of the scheme

Primary legislation: Section 92 and Schedule 30 Finance Act 2001.

Secondary legislation:

- SI 3746/2001 (The Variation of Stamp Duties Regulations),

- SI 3747/2001 (The Stamp Duty (Disadvantaged Areas) Regulations),

- SI 3748/2001 (The Finance Act 2001, Section 92(8), (Specified Day) Order).

9. Duration of the scheme: 2002-2011.

III. ASSESSMENT OF THE AID MEASURE

10. In accordance with Article 6(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 659/1999 of 22 March 1999, the decision to initiate proceedings shall summarise the relevant issues of fact and law, shall include a preliminary assessment from the Commission as to the aid character of the proposed measure, and shall set out the doubts as to its compatibility with the common market.

11. Procedure

The UK authorities have complied with the procedural requirements of Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty by notifying the abovementioned aid scheme before putting it into effect.

12. The existence of aid

The Commission considers, at this stage of the procedure, that the measure constitutes State aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty, and this for the following reasons:

- State resources are involved because tax is foregone.

- The measure is selective because it is targeted upon particular geographical areas.

- The measure will reduce the investment costs for companies investing in non-residential assets in the eligible areas. It will therefore provide an advantage to such companies over other companies investing in other areas, and therefore not receiving the exemption.

- Because the exemption applies to all conveyances and transfers of estates and interests in land in the designated areas it will, among others, inevitably benefit undertakings which are engaged in inter-State trade, or in a business sector in which there is inter-State trade. Furthermore, the scheme does not provide that the limits laid down in Council Regulation (EC) No 69/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to de-minimis aid will be respected. Accordingly, the new exemption may give rise to aid which affects competition in inter-State trade.

13. Exemption grounds

(a) Article 87(2) of the EC Treaty lists certain types of aid that are compatible with the EC Treaty. In view of the nature and purpose of the aid, and the geographical coverage of the scheme, the Commission considers, at this stage of the analysis, that subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) are not applicable to the measure in question.

(b) Article 87(3) specifies other forms of aid, which may be regarded as compatible with the common market. In view of the nature and purpose of the aid measure and its geographical scope, the Commission considers, at this stage of the investigation, that the subparagraphs (a), (b), (d) and (e) of Article 87(3) are not applicable either.

(c) In the notification, the UK authorities appear to agree with the above analysis and suggest that the question is whether the aid measure is compatible with the common market on the basis that it will facilitate the development of certain economic areas and it will not adversely affect trading conditions to an extent contrary to the common interest (Article 87(3)(c) of the EC Treaty).

(d) The coverage of the notified measure is not limited to SMEs, nor to firms in difficulty, nor to any one of the following activities: R & D, environmental protection as defined in the Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection (OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 3), training, the creation or maintenance of employment. Therefore, the Commission considers, at this stage of the analysis, that the notified measure can not be declared compatible with the common market on the basis of its conformity with any of the following regulations, frameworks or guidelines:

- Commission Regulation (EC) No 70/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid to small and medium-sized enterprises (OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 33);

- Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty (OJ C 288, 9.10.1999, p. 2);

- Community framework for State aid for research and development (OJ C 45, 17.2.1996, p. 5);

- Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection (OJ C 37, 3.2.2001, p. 3);

- Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid (OJ L 10, 13.1.2001, p. 20);

- Guidelines on employment (OJ C 334, 12.12.1995, p. 4).

(e) The aim of the measure is to promote the development/regeneration of disadvantaged areas in the UK, which are geographically defined. Therefore, the Commission has examined the compatibility of the measure on the basis of the guidelines on national regional aid (OJ C 74, 10.3.1998, p. 9), hereinafter referred to as the 'regional aid guidelines' and the guidelines on State aid for undertakings in deprived urban areas (OJ C 146, 14.5.1997, p. 6), hereinafter referred to as the 'deprived urban area guidelines'. The results of this analysis are presented below.

14. Conformity with the regional aid guidelines

The stamp duty exemption is granted in relation to the transfer of non-residential property in disadvantaged areas. In its notification, the UK argues correctly that the notified scheme is therefore primarily focussed on investment. According to the regional aid guidelines, aid for investment in disadvantaged areas may be compatible with the common market, but only if certain conditions are satisfied. At this stage of the examination, the Commission has doubts whether the notified scheme respects the conditions set out in these guidelines:

(a) By letter No SG(2000) D/106293 of 17 August 2000, the Commission approved the UK regional aid map for the period 2000 to 2006 (N 265/2000). The map defines the areas eligible for national regional aid under the derogations of Article 87(3)(a) and (c) of the EC Treaty. The Article 87(3)(a) regions included in the map were defined on the basis of EU-wide criteria (NUTS level II regions with a GDP per capita in PPS lower than 75 % of the Community average). The Article 87(3)(c) areas were selected on the basis of geographical units and social and economic indicators, proposed by the UK authorities themselves. The stamp duty exemption will apply to transfers of non-residential property situated in so-called 'designated disadvantaged areas', which have been defined on the basis of different geographical units and indicators (see point 5 above). The result of this approach is that a number of areas eligible under the notified measure does not fall within the areas eligible for regional aid as defined in the present UK regional aid map. Information provided by the UK in the context of an examination of another State aid scheme (namely the Community development venture fund (N 606/2000)), suggests that the proportion of the disadvantaged areas falling outside the regional aid map is very significant(2).

The Commission therefore doubts whether the geographical coverage of the stamp duty exemption is compatible with the regional aid guidelines. It is concerned that the approval of the scheme, including the list of 'designated disadvantaged areas' would in effect lead to a significant widening of the UK regional aid map. In turn, this would undermine the concentration of regional aid areas, which is a leading principle of the Community's regional aid policy(3). In order to clarify this point, the Commission would also ask the UK authorities to provide clear information on the extent to which the two lists overlap.

(b) Point 4.1 of the regional aid guidelines provides that the object of regional aid is to secure either productive investment (initial investment) or job creation that is linked to investment. Point 4.11 specifies that also aid for job creation should be linked to the carrying out of initial investment. Initial investment is defined in point 4.4 of the guidelines as 'an investment in fixed capital relating to the setting-up of a new establishment, the extension of an existing establishment, or the starting-up of an activity involving a fundamental change in the product or production process of an existing establishment (through rationalisation, diversification or modernisation)'. The stamp duty exemption concerns the sale of non-residential property and the creation of new leases for such property. The Commission has doubts whether such transactions can in all circumstances be classified as initial investment as defined in the guidelines.

(c) The notification points out that any transaction can benefit only once from the stamp duty exemption. The implication of this is, however, that assets that are the object of successive transactions (e.g. successive transfers of ownership), would qualify for stamp duty exemption on each occasion. Furthermore, assets for whose acquisition aid has already been paid in the past (under other aid schemes) are not excluded from the scheme. In view of this, the Commission has doubts whether the scheme respects point 4.5 of the regional aid guidelines, which provides that in the event of a purchase, assets for whose acquisition aid has already been granted prior to the purchase should be deducted.

(d) Point 5.4 of the regional aid guidelines provides that regional aid schemes are approved by the Commission, subject to the aid intensity ceilings defined in the map. Point 4.18 specifies that the total amount of regional investment aid should respect the aid intensity ceilings set out in the regional aid map. Point 4.21 requires that, in cases where the aid under one scheme may be combined with aid under other schemes, the Member State must specify, for each scheme, the method by which it will ensure that the regional aid intensity ceilings will be complied with. In the notification, the UK argues that the intensity of the scheme will never exceed 4 %. It is unclear though how the UK arrives at that percentage. In addition, the UK does not exclude the possibility that aid under the notified scheme is cumulated with aid under other schemes. In fact, the notification explicitly mentions the possibility that aid under the scheme is cumulated with aid from certain risk capital measures. The Commission doubts whether, in cases where the stamp duty exemption is cumulated with other aid, the UK authorities will be able to ensure that the total amount of aid will respect the aid intensity ceilings established in the regional aid map. In this context, the Commission would ask the UK authorities to clarify the way in which the aid intensity will be calculated in cases involving the establishment of new leases. It would also ask the UK to clarify how it will ensure that cumulation rules are complied with.

(e) Point 2 of the regional aid guidelines provides that the granting of (regional) State aid in certain sectors (transport, steel, shipbuilding, synthetic fibres, motor vehicles, fisheries and coal) is subject to specific restrictions. The guidelines on national regional aid excludes specifically from its scope the production, processing and marketing of Annex I products. The guidelines on State aid for undertakings in deprived urban areas are without prejudice of other State aid rules. Therefore any aid granted to undertakings operating in the production, processing and marketing of Annex I products is to be assessed according to the Community guidelines for State aid in the agriculture sector. In addition, special rules apply to large investment projects. According to the notification, the scheme applies to all sectors. It is unclear though how the UK authorities will ensure that the aid granted under the notified scheme to companies engaged in the abovementioned sectors or to large investment projects will comply with the special rules applicable. The United Kingdom authorities are requested to provide necessary information to permit the assessment of the measure at issue under the State aid rules applicable to the agriculture sector.

15. Conformity with the deprived urban area guidelines

The deprived urban area guidelines make provision for the granting of aid for investment in deprived geographical areas, subject to specific conditions. At this stage of the examination, the Commission has doubts whether the notified scheme respects these conditions:

(a) Point 5 of the deprived urban area guidelines recognises that there can be a need for investment aid to deprived urban areas that are not included in the regional aid map. However, point 8 of the guidelines provides that the total population covered by such areas should not exceed 1 % of the national population (or, in circumstances justified by the Member State on the basis of objective socioeconomic data at a level slightly above this ceiling). Areas covered should be geographically identifiable and homogeneous; they should have a population of between around 10000 and 30000 and belong to cities or urban agglomerations with around 100000 inhabitants or more and have significantly worse socioeconomic statistics than both the national average and the average for the cities to which they belong. Also areas selected under the urban community initiative could be taken into account.

As was pointed out in point 14(a) above, a significant number of areas eligible under the notified measure probably falls outside the regional aid map. The number of people living in these areas is therefore likely to be far in excess of the 1 % ceiling set out in the deprived urban area guidelines. In addition, it is unclear to what extent the areas that qualify under the notified scheme and that are outside the regional aid map are satisfying the other eligibility criteria laid down in point 7 of the urban aid guidelines. The Commission therefore doubts whether the areas that qualify under the notified scheme and that are not included in the regional aid map are selected in conformity with the criteria laid down in paragraph 7 and 8 of the urban aid guidelines. It requests further clarification on the population coverage of the areas that qualify under the scheme and that are not eligible for regional aid and on the extent to which these areas satisfy the eligibility criteria laid down in point 7 of the deprived urban area guidelines.

(b) The notified scheme does not impose any restriction on the types of companies that could benefit from the stamp duty exemption. The Commission doubts whether this is in conformity with the deprived urban area guidelines. Point 10 of these guidelines restricts aid to small companies only, arguing that 'extending the benefits of the aid to large enterprises would have disproportionate effects in terms of distortion of competition and the negative impact on cohesion'. In addition point 12 of the guidelines imposes further restrictions (namely that the beneficiary must carry on its principle economic activity and invest in the area designated as a deprived urban area and that he must reserve at least 20 % of the new jobs created for persons having their domicile in a deprived area).

(c) The deprived urban area guidelines also provide that aid should be limited to initial investment projects and that the total amount of aid should be limited to 26 % nge of eligible investment costs (point 14 of the guidelines). The doubts expressed in points 14(b) and 14(e) therefore also apply in this case.

IV. DECISION

16. 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 scheme 'Stamp duty exemption for non-residential property in disadvantaged areas', within one month of the date of receipt of this letter.

17. 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 Regulation (EC) No 659/1999, which provides that all unlawful aid may be recovered from the recipients."

(1) In dit verband is bepaald in de richtsnoeren inzake regionale steunmaatregelen dat regionale steun "... slechts denkbaar [is] indien daarvan karig gebruik wordt gemaakt en die steunmaatregelen op de meest benadeelde gebieden worden geconcentreerd. Indien die steunmaatregelen zouden veralgemenen en regel zouden worden, zouden zij elk aansporend karakter verliezen en zouden de economische effecten ervan teniet worden gedaan. Tegelijkertijd zouden daarmee de regels van de markt worden vervalst en zou aan de doeltreffendheid van de communautaire economie in haar geheel, afbreuk worden gedaan.".

(2) By letter of 14 January 2002, the UK authorities analysed the degree of overlap between the 20 % most deprived wards and the Article 87(3)(a) and (c) areas in England. Their analysis concluded that only 57 % of these most deprived wards were also included in the regional aid map.

(3) In this context, the guidelines on national regional policy point out that regional aid '... is conceivable in the European Union only if it is used sparingly and remains concentrated on the most disadvantaged regions. If aid were to become generalised and, as it were, the norm, it would lose all its incentive quality and its economic impact would be nullified. At the same time, it would interfere with the normal interplay of market forces and reduce the efficacy of the Community economy as a whole'.