2000/21/EC: Commission Decision of 28 July 1999 on state aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Brockhausen Holze GmbH (notified under document number C(1999) 2914) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the German text is authentic)

• Published date: 12 January 2000
• Date of Signature: 25 February 2000
• Subject Matter: aiuti degli Stati,concorrenza,ayudas concedidas por los Estados,competencia,aides accordées par les États,concurrence,Propiedad intelectual, industrial y comercial,Acuerdo de Asociación,relaciones exteriores
• Official Gazette Publication: Gazzetta ufficiale delle Comunità europee, L 7, 12 gennaio 2000,Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas, L 7, 12 de enero de 2000,Journal officiel des Communautés européennes, L 7, 12 janvier 2000,Diario Oficial de las Comunidades Europeas, L 103, 12 de abril de 2001

|

2000/21/EC: Commission Decision of 28 July 1999 on state aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Brockhausen Holze GmbH (notified under document number C(1999) 2914) (Text with EEA relevance) (Only the German text is authentic)

Official Journal L 007 , 12/01/2000 P. 0006 - 0013

COMMISSION DECISION

of 28 July 1999

on state aid granted by the Federal Republic of Germany to Brockhausen Holze GmbH

(notified under document number C(1999) 2914)

(Only the German text is authentic)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2000/21/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the first subparagraph of Article 88(2) thereof,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, and in particular Article 62(1)(a) thereof,

Having called on interested parties to submit their comments pursuant to the provisions cited above(1) and having regard to their comments,

Whereas:

1. PROCEDURE

(1) By a complaint dated 2 September 1996 (registered as received on 6 September 1996), the Commission was informed that the Land of Saxony had granted state aid to Brockhausen Holze GmbH (BHC), Chemnitz. In response to Commission requests for information dated 16 September 1996 and 22 November 1997, the German authorities sent formal replies on 15 October 1996 and 7 February 1997. On the basis of the information contained in the last of those letters, the aid was registered as non-notified aid on 8 April 1997. On 18 April 1997 BHC filed for insolvency (Gesamtvollstreckung: special insolvency procedure for firms in the new Länder). In letters dated 21 April, 12 June and 18 July 1997 the Commission asked the German authorities to notify the aid. In letters dated 26 June and l5 August 1997, the German authorities refused on the ground that notification no longer served any purpose because the firm had filed for insolvency.

(2) By letter dated 18 February 1998, the Commission informed Germany of its decision to initiate the procedure laid down in Article 88(2) of the EC Treaty. In addition, it formally requested Germany(2) to provide it, within one month of receiving the request, with all necessary documentation and information for assessing the compatibility of the aid already granted with Article 87 of the EC Treaty. Germany replied by letter dated 4 May.

(3) The Commission decision to initiate the procedure was published in the Official Journal of the European Communities(3). In its decision, the Commission invited all interested parties to submit their comments on the aid. On 9 June 1998 the Commission received a set of comments which it forwarded to the German authorities on 25 January 1999. After the deadline had been extended several times, Germany was given the opportunity to comment by 31 March 1999. It did not comply with this deadline. After receiving a reminder from the Commission, Germany finally submitted its comments on 11 May 1999.

2. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID

2.1 Grounds for initiating the procedure

(4) The aid to BHC came to the Commission's attention through a complaint lodged by an Austrian engineering works which alleged that the Land of Saxony had granted the firm aid amounting to DEM 4,7 million. In the complainant's opinion, the aid enabled the firm to increase its exports by reducing prices.

(5) By letter dated 15 October 1996, Germany confirmed that the firm had received a dormant equity holding of DEM 2,5 million from the Saxony Consolidation Fund (Konsolidierungsfonds)(4) and an 80 % deficiency guarantee (Ausfallbürgschaft) on a DEM 2,3 million loan provided under Saxony's Guarantee Directive(5).

(6) These aid measures presented the following difficulties.

(a) Aid scheme N 117/95 was approved on the basis of the undertaking given by Germany that there would be no combination of aid. However, the aid from the Consolidation Fund was granted in addition to the guarantee provided under scheme N 73/93, thereby infringing the prohibition on combining aid. The aid should therefore have been notified as ad hoc restructuring aid.

(b) Scheme N 73/93 allows guarantees to be provided to cover loans of DEM 5 million or more only.

(7) Germany was again asked to notify the aid formally and to provide all the necessary information for an assessment of its compatibility with the common market. The German authorities refused to do so in letters dated 26 June and 15 August 1997 on the grounds that:

(a) notification no longer served any purpose since the firm had filed for insolvency, and

(b) the aid measures were not to be seen as separate measures but as a single restructuring aid measure, with the result that there was no infringement of the prohibition on combining aid. Using both schemes had made it possible to reduce the overall intensity of the aid because a guarantee has a lesser aid intensity than a loan. In this way it had been possible to restrict the amount of aid to an absolute minimum and to comply more fully with the guidelines on state aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty(6).

(8) In order to secure a formal notification and to be able to assess the compatibility of the aid granted to the firm with the common market, the Commission decided to initiate the Article 88(2) procedure.

2.2 The recipient firm

(9) As at 31 December 1995 BHC had 243 employees and an annual turnover of DEM 32 million; no one firm falling outside the definition of a small or medium-sized enterprise (SME) owned 25 % or more of its capital. BHC was therefore an SME within the meaning of Commission Recommendation 96/280/EC of 3 April 1996 concerning the definition of small and medium-sized enterprises(7).

(10) BHC traded in the three areas of make-to-order casting (25 %), services (25 %) and replacement parts (50 %), producing mainly steel balls for the cement industry and linings for furnaces.

(11) The firm is located in Chemnitz and thus in a structurally weak area of Saxony.

2.3 History of the firm

(12) BHC succeeded Eisen- and Stahlgießerei Chemnitz GmbH (ESC GmbH), which was acquired at the beginning of 1992 from the Treuhandanstalt by PE GmbH. The privatisation was conducted according to an open, unconditional and transparent tendering procedure with the highest bidder acquiring the firm. In September 1992 the two firms created CPC GmbH, which was to operate an iron and steel foundry. In 1993 the Land of North Rhine-Westphalia produced a financing plan for CPC GmbH which had as a condition the establishment of a plant in North Rhine Westphalia. The CP Gießerei KG (CPG KG) was...