Gemi inşaa sektöründe teşvikler, sektöre ve yan sanayiye etkisi ve AB uygulamaları ile karşılaştırılması /
Yazar: OSMAN KAYA TURAN
Danışman: PROF. DR. ATEŞ ÖZGE
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Gemi İnşaat Mühendisliği Ana Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 1998
Konu: Gemi Mühendisliği = Marine Engineering
Dizin: Avrupa Birliği = European Union ; Gemi inşaatı endüstrisi = Shipbuilding industry ; Karşılaştırmalı analiz = Comparative analysis ; Teşvikler = Incentives

Özet:
ÖZET Bu çalışmanın amacı Türkiye ekonomisinde gemi inşaa sektörü ve genel bazda yatırım ve ihracat teşviklerinden oluşan sistemi dünya uygulamaları ve özellikle AB ülkeleri nezdinde dikkate alarak analiz etmek ve bazı yaklaşımlarla teşviklerin sektöre ve yan sanayiye etkilerini hesaplayarak, gemi inşaa sektörünün gelişimi üzerine gerek genel anlamda gerek de teşvik uygulamaları hususunda öneriler sunmak olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu çalışma, AB'deki tüm teşvik araçlarını içermemektedir. Avrupa Birliği'ndeki teşviklerin çeşitlilik ve tesbitindeki güçlüklerin Türk resmi ve özel kuruluşları için olduğu kadar tarafımın da araştırma kapasitesini aştığını belirtmek ve kabul etmek gerekir. Ayrıca Avrupa Birliği'nde bugün için genel mekanizmalar kapsamında var olmayan ancak yerel yönetimler marifetiyle belirli sektör ve kurumlara ihtiyaçların başgösterdiği esnada verilen teşvikler de mevcuttur. Bu bağlamda çalışma kapsamında ilk kademelerde; Teşvik ve koruma; nedenleri ve etkileri, Dünyada yeni korumacılık ve teşvik sistemleri, Türkiye'de teşvik sistemi, AB'nde gemi inşaa sektörünün göreceli durumu ve sektöre yapılan yardımlar, Türk gemi inşaa sektörü incelenmiştir. Sonrasında 7. Bölümde, tipik bir gemi yatırımının incelenmesi ve sübvansiyonlarla ilintilendirilmesi konulu bir çalışma yapılmıştır. Bugün AB 'de yapılan yardımın devlete olan maliyeti ilk gösterge sayılmaktadır. Yani ödenen bir meblağ bir ölçüt olarak prosedürün başlatılıp, başlatılmaması için başlangıç noktasıdır. Bu çalışmada bu yaklaşım baz alınarak, tipik bir gemi yatırımının vergi vs. yollarla devlete geri dönüş oranlarının hesaplanmasına çalışılmıştır. Bu sayede devletin bu yatırımı doğurmak için ne kadar bir miktarı gözden çıkarmasının akıllıca olacağının bulunması amaçlanmıştır. Son bölüm, tez genelinde belirtilenler dahilinde, teşvikler üzerine genel bir değerlenme yapmakta, yerli gemi inşaa sektörü ile yan sanayiinin gelişmesi ve rekabet edebilir konuma gelerek, bunun idame edilmesi için önerilerde bulunmaktadır. Önerilerin bir model dahilinde verilmesinde, tersanelerde verimliliği etkileyen hususlar baz olarak alınmıştır. Bu noktada, her sektörün kendine özgü bir yapışırım bulunduğu, sorunlarının çözümlerinin de yine sektöre özgü olduğu ve bu önerilerin herhangi bir şekilde uygulamaya geçirilmeden önce sektörle ilgili her kesimin görüşlerinin alınmasıyla ortak çözümler şeklinde ortaya çıkmasının gerekliliğini hatırlatmakta yarar bulunmaktadır. Ayrıca çözümler ileride yaşanabilecek gelişmelere de adapte olabilecek şekilde esnek olmalıdır. Bu nedenle, yapılan önerilerde bunlar dikkate alınarak, hazır reçeteler vermek yerine uygulanabilecek çeşitli alternatifler ele alınmaya çalışılmıştır.

Abstract:
SUMMARY STATE AIDS TO SHIPBUILDING IN TÜRKİYE, THE EFFECTS OF STATE ADDS ON THE SHD7BUTLDING AND SUBSHMARY INDUSTRD2S AND COMPARISON WITH EU'S PRACTICES In terms of competition policy, state aid is defined as government assistance which favours the production of certain goods and which confers upon the recipient an advantage over competitors. There are different types of state aid but it is most commonly given in the form of soft loans, grants, subsidies, export guarantees, indemnities against losses, or tax deferrals. Thus, in this respect, state aid represents the antithesis of the free-market The negative effects of state aid (leading to distortion of competition) can be summarised as follows: 1. State aid sustains unprofitable firms at the expense of efficient or innovatory firms; 2. State aid gives unjustified competitive advantages to one firm over its competitors; and 3. State aid can lead to a "subsidy race" with several countries or regions attempting to encourage investment by offering the most attractive package. EU policy is designed to protect the Single Market and to prevent state aid being granted to defend narrowly defined national interests (promoting "national champions" declining industries, or sectors of high unemployment) to the detriment of the Single Market However, there is another dimension to state aid. It is used by the EU as an instrument of economic development State aid paradoxically a barrier to free trade and the Single Market, and an essential part of EU economic strategy. It is widely recognised that, left to their own devices, market forces will prevent the attainment of certain national and EU objectives. While EU competition policy has the primary aim of removing obstacles to trade and protectionism, it is also influenced by the necessity to establish a balance between the needs of the Single Market and the need for social and economic cohesion. To this end various forms of state aid are actively encouraged. In particular, state aid in the following areas is fundamental to overall EU policy: 1. The development of Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs); 2. The establishment of research and development initiatives (R&D); 3. Assistance for underdeveloped regions; and XI4. Sectoral aid, covered by detailed guidelines for various industrial sectors (shipbuilding, automotive, transport etc.). Government expenditure on state aid in EU Member States is very high. The levels vary from country to country, from 1.7 % of government expenditure in Denmark and Holland to 4.8 % in Germany. In 1992 the average in the EU was 3.8 %. This represents 1.9 % of the GDP of the EU Member States, or ECU 704 per person employed. For the EU as a whole, the total figure reaches on average ECU 94 billion per year. To put this figure into perspective, expenditure on state aid per year in Member States is equivalent to more than the annual EU budget This is considered to be much too high by many observers. In recent years the European Commission has attempted to reduce the amount of state aid given in Member States on the basis that the needs of the Single Market were more important than the industrial policy of individual countries. However, there is evidence to suggest that the Commission is losing this particular battle and the trend is towards an increase in state aid payments. This upward trend has happened at a time when Member States are otherwise curbing public expenditure in order to satisfy the Maastricht criteria for inclusion in Economic and Monetary Union. In order to understand why this situation has come about, it is necessary to look in more detail at the function of state aid. State subsidies have long been employed as an instrument of economic regulation. Most commonly this instrument would be used to support an industry whose performance was unsatisfactory but whose national importance was such that further loss of production or contraction was deemed to be detrimental because it would cause higher unemployment, for example. The need to maintain such an industry would be greater where the industry was located in a remote or disadvantaged region. In such a case subsidies could be used to introduce new production methods (including new technology), offset certain costs, or develop new markets (at home or abroad). Current EU competition law does not forbid this form of state support, but it does regulate it very closely and it seeks to establish consistency of approach throughout the Member States. National industrial policies are still possible provided they conform to EU policy and do not disaiminate against industries from other Member States, or give an unfair advantage to national industries. The European Commission ensures that state aid conforms to EU policy and Member States must notify the Commission to ensure that proposed aid acceptable. It is inevitable that the adoption of EU competition policy will transform the Turkish business environment and the relationship between government and industry. From Türkiye' s perspectives the rules on state aid represent a change to current practices and a restriction on the freedom traditionally enjoyed by the government in distributing assistance through investment incentives and export subsidies. However, this does not mean that Türkiye should view the rules on state aid purely as xurestrictive measures. The introduction of EU state aid policy has also to be viewed from the perspective of the economic opportunities that it offers. State aid and Turkiye's industrial policy The EU's competition policy and rules on state aid will entail a new relationship between business and the state in Türkiye. The EU's policy on state aid has the following practical implications: Aid must be targeted to conform with the Single Market policy objectives of competitiveness and cohesion; 1. Export aid is not permissible; 2. Investment aid must be directed at;. R&D;. Regional development;. SMEs; and,. Improvement of quality and standards. 3. Aid to individual sector is strictly regulated; 4. Development and investment aid to "sensitive" sectors, e.g. textiles and synthetic fibres is not permitted; and,. Aid to increase capacity in "sensitive sectors" is not permitted. 5. Turkiye's previous state aid regime has been changed in the following ways;. Export aid (direct subsidies to exporters) is replaced by support for;. Market research;. Consultancy;. Establishment of distribution networks; and,. Participation in trade fairs.. Investment aid must be focused on;. R&D;. Regional development; and,. Development of SMEs. xui6. Türkiye' s domestic competition legislation must be brought into line with EU norms and the establishment of a competition board must be followed by effective monitoring of competition and reporting of aid awards to the European Commission. State aid and the future of Türkiye's industrial policy EU rules on competition will shape Türkiye's industrial policy, first by encouraging Turkish policy makers to conform to EU norms, and secondly by providing a framework through which Türkiye can improve her economic competitiveness. There are two aspects to likely impact of EU competition rules on Türkiye's industrial and economic policy. Namely, policies which Turkey must increasingly embrace, and policies which must be phased out. Specifically: 1. Türkiye must place a much stronger emphasis on;. Environment protection (previously ignored in state aid allocations);. R&D (currently underdeveloped in Türkiye);. SMEs (already relatively well supported in Türkiye); and,. Regional support (poorly developed be EU standards). 2. Türkiye must avoid;. Credit guarantees (the European Commission is likely to mount a major investigation into the EU-wide use of credit guarantees in the near future);. High levels of sectoral support (the European Commission is determined to minimise the amount of support given the specific sectors); and,. Support for the "sensitive" sectors, particularly textiles and synthetic fibres. Aid to shipbuilding in EU Existing state aid rules The seventh Directive maintains the policy established by the sixth directive, adopted in 1986 against a background of abnormally difficult market conditions, caused by a declining demand for ships and a rapid increase in shipbuilding capacities, particularly in the Far East, leading to a significant imbalance between supply and demand and depressed prices. The main aim of the directive has been: 1. To safeguard the Community shipbuilding industry by providing a defensive instrument against perceived unfair competition through injurious pricing below costs, thereby maintaining a sufficient level of Community shipbuilding activity in those market segments where the Community could remain competitive under normal market conditions, such as less labour-intensive, technologically complex xivspecialised ships; and to encourage the necessary structural adjustment of EC shipbuilding toward these directions; 2. To provide in accordance with the aims of the internal market, a level playing field so that intra-Community competition in shipbuilding is carried out on a fair, transparent and equitable basis. Under the Directive operating aid for shipbuilding and ship conversions, (but not ship repair) may be granted, up to a common maximum aid ceiling which reflects the difference between the costs of the most competitive Community yards and market prices of their main international competitors, with particular regard to those market segments in which Community shipbuilders remain relatively most competitive. In accordance with the principle of degressitivy established by the Directive, the ceiling, which was 28 % in 1987, has been progressively reduced to 9 % currently (4.5 % for smaller vessels and conversions). The only operating aids exempted from the ceiling are credit facilities complying with the 1981 OECD Understanding on Export Credits for Ships and aid granted as development assistance to developing countries. The Directive also lay down rules for investment aids within the framework of restructuring which must be linked to a restructuring plan which does not involve any increase in the yard's shipbuilding capacity or which must be directly linked to a corresponding irreversible reduction in capacity of other yards in the Member State concerned; aid for closures on condition that the resulting capacity reduction of a genuine and irreversible nature (with the facilities having to remain closed for not less than five years; and not being reopened within a further five years after the five years, i.e. for a total often years, without the Commission's prior approval); and aid for research and development In addition the directive imposes notification and reporting obligations on Member States in order that the Commission can monitor compliance with the rules. In the Commission's view the Directive has been generally effective and largely achieved it aims, enabling the Community broadly to maintain its world market share in recent years at around 20 %. However the industry is still in difficulty, with depressed prices for newbuildings and repairs world-wide. Despite the improvements made in recent years, many EU yards still lack competitiveness, in particular lagging behind their major Far East competitors in terms of productivity. The world shipbuilding market is likely to become even more competitive in the medium term with overall demand starting to soften in the next decade, and Japanese and Korean yards continuing to make further major improvements in their productivity. The main pillar of the current aid policy has been operating aid. Initially, through the progressive reduction in the aid ceiling, operating aid encouraged changes towards greater competitiveness. However the necessary impetus has not been sustained in more recent years as the level of the ceiling became static, coupled with the uncertainty over the OECD agreement Overall, the aid has served to cushion yards from the full rigours of the market. Operating aid also results in significant costs for most Member States, many of which face growing budgetary constraints. xvShipbuilding is the only sector of manufacturing industry, which systematically benefits from such aids and it is questionable whether the expenditure involved represents a cost-effective use of limited public resources. Furthermore given the extent to which competition is between EU yards the aid has tended to distort competition within the common market, particularly since there has been a wide variations in the actual levels of aid granted by the Member States, undermining the aim of establishing a level playing field. Against the background, state aid policy needs to be refocused to promote and underpin efforts to improve the competitiveness of the industry. This implies shifting away from operating aid to other forms of support, such as investment aid for innovation, better geared towards helping industry achieve the necessary changes and overcome its weaknesses. A new shipbuilding policy in EU The aim of the new policy towards shipbuilding is to improve industry's competitiveness and allow it to face the challenge of global competition without any further sector specific aid. In order to achieve this goal, industry, Commission and Member States have to make all possible efforts. 1. Industry has to overcome its structural disadvantages; 2. The Commission will direct its efforts within its industrial competitiveness policy to this end;. It will provide its best effort to make sure that industry enjoys a global level playing field;. It will particularly support efforts in research and development in shipbuilding;. It will support industrial co-operation;. It will help stimulate demand for EU yards. 3. Member States are asked to adopt and apply the new State aids policy. Key issues of the new regulation are:. No more operating aid can be made available to shipbuilding after 31.12.2000. One year before the abolition of operating aid the Commission will monitor the market in order to establish whether the EU shipbuilding industry is subject to anti-competitive practices by its competitors in the global market and will, if necessary, introduce appropriate measures.. For a period of five years, following the expiry of the Seventh Directive, special rules on aid for innovation will apply. After this period, this type of aid will be submitted to the same rules that apply to other sectors. xvi. Shipbuilding will be subject to the same rules as any other sector concerning aid for investment, rescue and restructuring, environment and research and development. Commission believes that, only with these combined efforts, the objective of making EU shipbuilding a globally competitive industrial sector and terminating the longstanding special aid regime can be achieved. A brief evaluation of state aids to shipbuilding sector in Türkiye The current aid scheme in Türkiye is merely so in appearance and it will be impossible to address to the problems of the shipbuilding industry within the framework of such an insufficient aid program. A number of methods, including the launch of an aid program providing long term, low interest credits, could be tried, with another option being the government offering assistance in finding foreign credit. In addition, the most favourable incentive in the shipbuilding and subsidiary industries is the establishment of a general stability in the sector. Stability and planning are required for production of shipbuilding and subsidiary industry products in Türkiye. A study on the financial structure a typical shipbuilding investment In the seventh chapter of the thesis, a study on the financial structure a typical shipbuilding investment is presented. Due to the heavy costs to governments, the effectiveness of incentives is a very controversial matter in economic arguments. Therefore, in this study, a containership investment without incentives is studied. After the calculations, it is found that; 1. % 23.832 of the total cost of the ship (the ship is ordered by a Turkish Shipowner and credit arrangements and letters of guarantee are not required), 2. % 28.806 of the Broker's price of the ship (the ship is ordered by a Turkish Broker for export, hence, a letter of guarantee is required), 3. % 29.777 of the Broker's price of the ship (the ship is ordered by a Turkish Broker for export, hence, credit arrangements and a letter of guarantee are required), returns to the government as taxes or in other ways (including VAT). Consequently, it is concluded that the Turkish shipyards could be supported with direct and/or indirect incentives up to the percentages mentioned above in this kind of investments by governments, without losses procured by the state. xvu?s* s a- !i es _ ^ "m s =3* 3 S O-.O s? J«8 s W « a h. U O £ Cd o o > a «s.5. «* 3 S. Si p tt. S a? 9 ?= Cd 3 a. S" 8 ö S o. a -1 - £. J 1 a» 3 0B H3 hi es >> 2* co a I- I S ?a e fa « o s C a H S e w et ta u XVU1Recommended areas to target in order to increase productivity There are a number of areas of improvement that should be targeted by the Turkish shipbuilding industry and governments. These are presented in Figure 1. In the last chapter, various recommendations on the target areas are introduced. It is expected that these recommendations provide a framework for the Turkish shipyards, subsidiary industries, governments and universities to set a course for international commercial competitiveness. These plans must be prepared and implemented in order to enable the industry to expand with high profitability and productivity in the course of a relatively short period of time. The Turkish shipbuilding, in order to revive and reach world class standards, will require more than temporary government initiatives. There is a need for radical restracturing and reorganisation of the industry as well as the government relations. The industry must become truly free to perform as a global industry and be provided with meaningful incentives and not temporary aid. This must be done in order for Türkiye to achieve world-wide competitiveness in commercial and naval shipbuilding and to claim its rightful place among the leading shipbuilders of the world. I would like to thank to Mr. Ansgar Held (EC), Mr. William Bray (EC) and other employees of European Commission and also Danny Scorpecci of OECD for their consistent and invaluable support. This thesis is particularly supported by I.T.U. Naval Architecture and Ocean Engineering Faculty, Research and Application Group. XIX