6.4.2022
EN
Official Journal of the European Union
C 152/79
3.2.
The EESC appreciates the fact that the Commission first clarified what measures could be taken without prior notification on the basis of the current rules, while at the same time implementing a temporary and flexible regulatory framework, which has allowed unprecedented State aid to be granted within a simplified procedural framework. 3.3.
Under that legal framework, the Commission’s Directorate-General for Competition (DG COMP) authorised a remarkable number of national aid schemes in a very short time frame, as required by the pandemic emergency, demonstrating extraordinary operational capacity. 3.4.
The EESC believes that the Commission managed to strike a good compromise between the unprecedented urgent need to make State aid rules flexible and the simultaneous need to ensure a minimum base layer of regulation, as well as overall Commission oversight, both aimed at curbing excessive disparities in the internal market arising from Member States’ differing capacities to provide financial support to their national economies. 3.5.
The range of aid measures for businesses governed by the Temporary Framework — including direct grants, public guarantees for bank credit, subsidised loans and equity investments in companies — and the considerable generosity of the permitted aid ceilings, particularly following the Commission’s most recent corrective measure in January 2021, proved up to the task of dealing with the crisis and have constituted a leap forward in quality compared to the previous temporary framework adopted in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. 3.6.
With regard to the interaction between public intervention in the economy and State aid rules, the EESC stresses the importance that competition rules may assume when it comes to Member States using the EU funds made available to them and properly implementing the national recovery and resilience plans, without creating distortions. 3.7.
With regard to the interaction between the antitrust rules laid down in Article 101 TFEU and the pandemic crisis, the EESC welcomes the fact that the Commission swiftly adopted a communication encouraging cooperation projects between companies aimed at reducing the shortage of supply of essential products and services during the pandemic, adapting its traditional guidelines on horizontal cooperation agreements to the specific social, economic and health context that emerged in 2020. 3.8.
At the same time, the EESC deems particularly useful the implementing regulations approved by the Commission in April 2020 temporarily relaxing the scope of competition rules in the agricultural sectors most severely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
The regulations allowed farmers and inter-branch organisations to take temporary collective actions to stabilise certain agricultural sectors. 3.9.
The Report on Competition Policy 2020 also describes the Commission’s merger control activities, with 361 notified transactions and 352 decisions adopted, resulting in significant interventions in 18 cases.
This means that 76 % of all transactions notified in 2020 were authorised by means of a simplified procedure in ‘phase 1’, demonstrating that the procedural rules are working well, which is particularly helpful given the upturn in merger and acquisition activities globally, facilitated by the current high level of liquidity. 3.10.
Finally, the EESC considers it very significant that the European Competition Network (ECN), which seeks to coordinate the actions of the national competition authorities and DG COMP, was able to express a strong common position on the application of competition rules during the COVID-19 health crisis, with a view to preventing possible opportunistic and exploitative behaviour that would be particularly reprehensible and harmful in times of crisis.
4.
The digital transition and competition 4.1.
The digital transition and the development of the economy based on new information and communication technologies are bringing to the fore new and important issues from the point of view of competition.
For this reason, the EESC considers it important for the European institutions to intervene with suitable rules. 4.2.
The EESC has already commented on the three main legislative proposals adopted by the Commission proposing regulatory measures for the digital economy: on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on fair and contestable markets in the digital sector (Digital Markets Act) (1); on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on a single market for digital services (Digital Services Act) (2); and on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on European data governance (Data Governance Act) (3).
(1) (2) (3)
OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 64.
OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 70.
OJ C 286, 16.7.2021, p. 38.