WRITTEN QUESTION E-0002/02 by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Airport taxes at Athens airport.
Date: 2002-01-17
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Greece, competition, competitiveness, tax system

C 172 E/120

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

18.7.2002

(2002/C 172 E/123)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3708/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 January 2002)

Subject: Proposals which distort competition

In early November 2001, Swedish Minister of Finance Ringholm presented a proposal at his party’s
It was
congress aimed at cutting and scrapping payroll tax for municipalities and county councils.
proposed that payroll tax be reduced by 1 % in respect of all municipal undertakings during 2002 and that
it be waived in its entirety when new staff are recruited to work in municipal undertakings.

Private contractors criticised the proposal. If their contracts expire, it could be nearly 40 % cheaper for
municipalities to provide the services concerned themselves again.

Mr Ringholm’s proposal was criticised for distorting competition in the internal market. A Swedish expert
took the view, for instance, that the tax regime introduced would be discriminatory if the same services
were taxed differently according to who operates them.

The Finance Minister subsequently withdrew his proposal.

What view does the Commission take of the aforementioned proposal? Does it consider that such a
proposal may be implemented if the Swedish Riksdag so wishes, or does it distort competition in the
internal market?

Answer given by Mr Monti on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2002)

Article 87(1) of the EC Treaty provides that aid granted by a Member State or through State resources in
any form whatsoever which distorts or threatens to distort competition by favouring certain undertakings
or the production of certain goods shall,
in so far as it affects trade between Member States, be
incompatible with the common market.

The notion of State resources covers not only monies paid out by State bodies, but also income foregone
by the State through tax concessions. Tax concessions which are granted selectively only to certain types
of undertakings, and which are not justified by the nature and logic of the tax system, are liable to distort
competition and affect trade between Member States. Such measures must therefore be notified in advance
to the Commission, in accordance with Article 88(3) of the EC Treaty, and may be approved by the
Commission only if they qualify for one of the derogations from the principle of the incompatibility of aid
listed in Article 87(2) or 87(3).

(2002/C 172 E/124)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0002/02

by Alexandros Alavanos (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 January 2002)

Subject: Airport taxes at Athens airport

In my previous question, No E-0331/01 (1) of 13 February 2001, I raised the issue of a possible lack of
competitiveness at Eleftherios Venizelos airport, due to increased airport taxes.

On 20 December 2001, the Athens International Airport company decided to reduce aircraft landing and
parking fees by between 15 and 23 %. In order to make these reductions, the Athens airport management
has agreed to levy 90 % of the airport modernisation tax, instead of the 75 % it currently levies.

18.7.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 172 E/121

Can the Commission look into the nature of the subsidy resulting from the increase in the airport
modernisation tax?

What will the impact be on the modernisation of Greece’s remaining airports?

(1) OJ C 261 E, 18.9.2001, p. 93.

Answer given by Mrs de Palacio on behalf of the Commission

(26 February 2002)

Decisions on the construction, improvement or further development of airport infrastructure as well as the
allocation of public funds among airports of a Member State, fall under the responsibility of the authorities
of that Member State. The Commission may however examine the issue in view of possible distortions of
competition in case this is requested by the specific situation. As already indicated in reply to the previous
question mentioned by the Honourable Member, decisions on the level and structure of airport charges fall
under the responsibility of the local and national authorities concerned.

However, the general principles of Community law apply to measures in this field and require,
particular, that charges are set in a non-discriminatory manner.

in

On the basis of the available information, the Commission is not in the position to assess the implication
of the arrangements regarding the airport Eleftherios Venizelos for their possible distortive effect in
relation to other Greek airports. No complaint has been addressed to the Commission in this respect.
However, if the Commission would at any given time come to the conclusion that it would be necessary to
take up the issue with the Greek authorities, it will not hesitate to do so.

(2002/C 172 E/125)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0005/02

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(17 January 2002)

Subject: Interpretation of EC Regulation No 2037/2000 on substances that deplete the ozone layer

With regard to EC Regulation No 2037/2000 (1) ‘Substances that deplete the ozone layer’, the British
Minister for Environment, Michael Meacher MP, stated in the House of Commons on 11 December 2001
that the interpretation of the extraction of chlorofluorocarbons from cooling equipment and foam in
refrigerators was queried by the British Government to the Commission before October 2000, and that
they ‘did not receive an answer for 18 months, until June 2001’, therefore necessary action was not put in
place in the UK until this time.

Will the Commission state what,
regarding this matter from the time of its first drafting to its final approval?

in its view, communication took place with the UK Government

(1) OJ L 244, 29.9.2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(7 March 2002)

Regulation (EC) No 2037/00 of the Parliament and of the Council of 29 June 2000 on substances that
deplete the ozone Layer entered into force on 1 October 2000. Article 16(1) required controlled substances
such as chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) to be recovered for destruction from domestic refrigerators and