WRITTEN QUESTION E-2104/01 by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) and Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Fishery structural measures and tax on collective earnings in Portugal.
Date: 2001-07-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Portugal, Structural Funds, aid for restructuring, basis of tax assessment, fishing fleet, tax system

14.2.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 40 E/185

How much was granted in subsidies in:

(a) 1999,

(b) 2000 and

(c) 2001?

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(25 September 2001)

The amount of support allocated within the Energie Programme to innovative oil and gas technology was
as follows:

(cid:129) 1999: € 11 million

(cid:129) 2000: € 36 million

As far as coal is concerned funding was allocated through the Energie Programme but also through the
European Steel and Coal Community Programme (ECSC) as follows:

1999

28

24

(€ million)

2000

25

14

ECSC

Energie

N.B. Data for 2001 is not yet available.

It should be noted that such amounts are not subsidies but financial support for the promotion of
innovative energy technology. In particular for the ECSC the financing originates from a fund created by a
levy on the coal and steel industry.

(2002/C 40 E/201)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2104/01

by Ilda Figueiredo (GUE/NGL) and
Arlindo Cunha (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Fishery structural measures and tax on collective earnings in Portugal

Under the successive Community support frameworks, Portuguese vessel owners, like their counterparts in
the other Member States, have received aids for the scrapping, immobilisation, refitting, modernisation and
construction of fishing vessels, the aim being to modernise the fishing fleets.

As is well known, under these joint funding arrangements the Member State concerned has to contribute
too. However, in the wake of a statement by the Association of Industrial Fishery Vessel Owners, the
Portuguese tax authorities have concluded that this financial aid should be liable to the tax on collective
earnings or IRC. This means that in reality the Portuguese state not only does not contribute: it actually
benefits financially in net terms from the total funding of the project.

Can the Commission state its position on this practice of the Portuguese tax authorities as regards the
Community support funds for the restructuring of fishing fleets?

Answer given by Mr Fischler on behalf of the Commission

(27 September 2001)

In their question the Honourable Members say that the Portuguese tax authorities levy corporation tax
(IRC) on financial aid granted under the Community support framework for the restructuring of the fishing
fleet. The fifth subparagraph of Article 32(1) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999

C 40 E/186

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

14.2.2002

laying down general provisions on the Structural Funds (1) makes it clear that no deduction, retention or
further specific charge can be made that would reduce contributions from the Funds, which must be paid
in full. That principle does not mean, however, that payments made by the Community cannot be included
in the tax base, since the tax is payable on the taxpayers(cid:146) income as a whole and not specifically or mainly
on the Community assistance.

(1) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.

(2002/C 40 E/202)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2105/01

by Paulo Casaca (PSE) to the Commission

(13 July 2001)

Subject: Collusion by airlines to curtail passengers(cid:146) rights

The Warsaw Convention (Articles 19 and 22) and, more recently, the Montreal Convention (Article 22(3)),
extend guarantees to passengers whose baggage is temporarily mislaid.

These guarantees, however, are not mentioned in Annex 1 to the communication to the European
Parliament and the Council (cid:145)Protection of air passengers in the European Union(cid:146) (1).

In the agreement concluded on 10 May 2001 in Lisbon by the Association of European Airlines, the
airlines concerned nonetheless undertake to provide sufficient assistance to meet the passenger(cid:146)s reasonable
short-term needs where baggage is temporarily mislaid.

On 18 June 2001, the baggage of the author of this question failed to arrive in Brussels on a TAP flight
from Ponta Delgada. The flight arrived at 11.30 a.m, and he was obliged to spend almost an hour at
Sabena(cid:146)s baggage claims desk. As he had to fly from Brussels to Vienna at 2 p.m. on 19 June, he asked
Sabena whether he could claim a contribution to the purchase of a new suitcase should his baggage not
arrive during the course of the day.

He was told by a Sabena employee that the company declined all responsibility and that it would take no
action until the baggage had officially been missing 24 hours.

This position on the part of a Sabena employee is in total contradiction with the responsibilities assumed
by both TAP and Sabena under the Warsaw and Montreal Conventions, and is also in breach of the
agreement signed by the European airlines one month previously.

Unfortunately, the author of this question has to report that attitudes of this type are all too frequent on
the part of the airlines.

What proposals does the Commission have for monitoring the implementation of agreements and
conventions, whether binding or voluntary, on the part of airlines?

(1) COM(2000) 365, 21 June 2000.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(6 September 2001)

In the Commission(cid:146)s view, neither the Warsaw Convention or the Montreal Convention covers the
temporary loss of baggage; they deal only with the liability of air carriers in the event of loss or material
damage. This is why the Commission,
in its communication on (cid:145)Protection of air passengers in the
European Union(cid:146) referred to by the Honourable Member, considers that steps should be taken to help
passengers who are suffering from delays in the delivery of their baggage.