The Issue of Liability for Expenditure of Public Funds From the Perspective of State Aid Regulation

• Autorzy: Piotr Podsiadło

Warianty tytułu

Zagadnienie odpowiedzialności za wydatkowanie funduszy publicznych z perspektywy regulacji pomocy państwa

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

From the economic point of view relating to State interventionism, it ought to be noted that State aid can be a justified action mainly because of social prosperity if the free competition market mechanism does not bring satisfactory results. The major criterion for providing State aid should be rationality, which is the highest determinant of the admissibility of using aid measures. The aim of the article is to analyse the conditions of admissibility of State aid in the European Union, taking into account the rules applicable to the obligation to notify and authorize State aid. Article 108 TFEU contains rules on the procedural aspects of State aid control and thus complements the substantive rules contained in Article 107 TFEU. Until the Treaty of Lisbon, Article 108 TFEU had never been amended. The procedure of State aid control constitutes a special procedure that deviates from the general procedures of monitoring the compliance with the European Union law. (original abstract)

Z ekonomicznego punktu widzenia w odniesieniu do interwencjonizmu państwowego należy zauważyć, że pomoc państwa może być działaniem uzasadnionym głównie ze względu na dobrobyt społeczny, jeżeli mechanizm wolnej konkurencji nie przyniesie zadowalających wyników. Głównym kryterium udzielania pomocy państwa powinna być racjonalność, która jest najwyższym wyznacznikiem dopuszczalności stosowania środków pomocy. Celem artykułu jest analiza warunków dopuszczalności pomocy państwa w Unii Europejskiej, z uwzględnieniem zasad mających zastosowanie do obowiązku zgłaszania i zatwierdzania pomocy państwa. Artykuł 108 TFUE zawiera przepisy dotyczące proceduralnych aspektów kontroli pomocy państwa i tym samym uzupełnia przepisy materialne zawarte w art. 107 TFUE. Do czasu traktatu lizbońskiego art. 108 TFUE nigdy nie został zmieniony. Procedura kontroli pomocy państwa stanowi specjalną procedurę, która odbiega od ogólnych procedur monitorowania zgodności z prawem Unii Europejskiej. (abstrakt oryginalny)

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Public aid; Competition policy; Economic rationality

PL

Pomoc publiczna; Polityka konkurencji; Racjonalność gospodarowania

• Czasopismo: Problemy Zarządzania
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: 17
• Numer: nr 3 (83) Evolution and Effectiveness of National and European Financial Management - Recommendations for the Future
• Strony: 119--136

Twórcy

autor

Piotr Podsiadło

• Cracow University of Economics, Poland

Bibliografia

• Arhold, C. (2003). Suspension orders in state aid cases - Is the court closing Pandora's box again?. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 1, 39-50.
• Bonhage, J. (2019). Previous state aid and subsequent financial assistance. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 18(1), 29-36.
• Brandtner, B., & Vidoni, D. (2018). State aid evaluation. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 17(4), 475-482.
• Bruc, É. (2018). Passing-on and recoverable unlawful state aid under European Union law. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 17(1), 54-65.
• Buyskes, P., Kekelekis, M., & Nicolaides, P. (2005). State aid policy in the European Community: A Guide for practitioners. Hague: Kluwer Law International, Hague.
• Cini, M., & McGowan, L. (1998) Competition policy in the European Union. New York: Macmillan.
• Commission Regulation (EC) No 1998/2006 of 15 December 2006 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty to de minimis aid, OJ L 379/5.
• Commission Regulation (EC) No 800/2008 of 6 August 2008 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the common market in application of Articles 87 and 88 of the Treaty (General Block Exemption Regulation), OJ L 214/3.
• Commission Regulation (EU) No 1407/2013 of 18 December 2013 on the application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to de minimis aid, OJ L 352/1.
• Commission Regulation (EU) No 651/2014 of 17 June 2014 declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty, OJ L 187/1.
• Council Regulation (EU) 2015/1589 of 13 July 2015 laying down detailed rules for the application of Article 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (codification), OJ L 248/9.
• D'Sa, R. M., & Drake, S. (2010). Financial penalties for failure to recover state aid and their relevance to state liability for breach of Union law. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 1, 33-46.
• Douma, S., & Kardachaki, A. (2016). The impact of European Union law on the possibilities of European Union Member States to adapt international tax rules to the business models of multinational enterprises. INTERTAX, 44(10), 746-754.
• European Commission. (2009). Case law of the European Court of Justice in the area of compensation claims related to infringement of European Union law by Member States. Brussels.
• Evans, A. (1997). European Community law of state aid (Oxford European Community Law Series). Oxford-New York: Oxford University Press.
• Galendi, J., & Ricardo, A. (2018). State aid and transfer pricing: The inherent flaw under a supranational reference system. INTERTAX, 46(12), 994-1010.
• Ismer, R., & Piotrowski, S. (2015). The selectivity of tax measures: A tale of two consistencies. INTERTAX, 43(10), 559-570.
• Jaros, K., & Ritter, N. (2004). Pleading legitimate expectations in the procedure for the recovery of state aid. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 4, 573-582.
• Judgement of the Court of 12 July 1973. Commission v Germany. Case 70-72, ECR 1973, p. 813, para 13.
• Judgment of the Court of 22 March 1977. Steinike & Weinlig v république fédérale d'Allemagne. Case 78-76.
• Judgement of the Court of 25 January 1979. A. Racke v Hauptzollamt Mainz. Case 98/78, ECR 1979, p. 69.
• Judgement of the Court of 21 May 1987. Albako Margarinefabrik Maria von der Linde GmbH & Co. KG v Bundesanstalt für landwirtschaftliche Marktordnung. Case 249/85, ECR 1987, p. 2345, para 17.
• Judgement of the Court of 7 June 1988. Commission v Greece. Case 63/87, ECR 1998, p. 2875.
• Judgement of the Court of 21 March 1990. Belgium v Commission. Case C-142/87, ECR 1990, p. I-959, para 66.
• Judgement of the Court of 21 March 1991. Italy v Commission. Case C-303/88, ECR 1991, p. I-1433.
• Judgement of the Court of 19 November 1991. Andrea Francovich i Danila Bonifaci and Others v Italy. Joined cases C-6/90 and C-9/90, ECR 1991, p. I-5357, para 35.
• Judgement of the Court of 21 November 1991. Fédération nationale du commerce extérieur des produits alimentaires and Syndicat national des négociants et transformateurs de saumon v France. Case C-354/90, ECR 1991, p. I-5505, para 13.
• Judgement of the Court of 9 March 1994. TWD Textilwerke Deggendorf GmbH v Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Case C-188/92, ECR 1994, p. I-833.
• Judgement of the Court of 4 April 1995. Commission v Italy. Case C-348/93, ECR 1995, p. I-673, paras 26-27.
• Judgement of the Court of 4 April 1995. Commission v Italy. Case C-350/93, ECR 1995, p. I-699, para 21.
• Judgement of the Court of 5 March 1996. Brasserie du Pêcheur SA v Bundesrepublik Deutschland and The Queen v Secretary of State for Transport, ex parte: Factortame Ltd and Others. Joined cases C-46/93 and C-48/93, ECR 1996, p. I-1029, para 80.
• Judgement of the Court of 11 July 1996. Syndicat français de l'Express international (SFEI) and Others v La Poste and Others. Case C-39/94, ECR 1996, p. I-3547.
• Judgement of the Court of 15 October 1996. IJssel-Vliet Combinatie BV v Minister van Economische Zaken. Case C-311/94, ECR 1996, p. I-5023, para 36.
• Judgement of the Court of 20 March 1997. Land Rheinland-Pfalz v Alcan Deutschland GmbH. Case C-24/95, ECR 1997, p. I-1591.
• Judgement of the Court of 24 September 2002. Falck SpA i Acciaierie di Bolzano SpA v Commission. Joined Cases C-74/00 P and C-75/00 P, ECR 2002, p. I-7869, paras 81-89.
• Judgement of the Court of 12 December 2002. Commission v Germany. Case C-209/00, ECR 2002, p. I-11695, para 31.
• Judgement of the Court of 29 April 2004. Italy v Commission. Case C-372/97, ECR 2004, p. I-3679.
• Judgement of the Court of 12 May 2005. Commission v Greece. Case C-415/03, ECR 2005, p. I-3875.
• Judgement of the Court of 21 July 2005. Administración del Estado v Xunta de Galicia. Case C-71/04, ECR 2005, p. I-7419.
• Judgement of the Court of 6 October 2005. Scott SA v Commission. Case C-276/03 P, ECR 2005, p. I-8437, para 34.
• Judgement of the Court of 27 October 2005. Nazairdis SAS, devenue Distribution Casino France SAS and others v Caisse nationale de l'organisation autonome d'assurance vieillesse des travailleurs non salariés des professions industrielles et commerciales (Organic). Joined cases C-266/04 to C-270/04, C-276/04 and C-321/04 to C-325/04, ECR 2005, p. I-9481, para 30.
• Judgement of the Court of 30 March 2006. Servizi Ausiliari Dottori Commercialisti Srl v Giuseppe Calafiori. Case C-451/03, ECR 2006, p. I-2941, para 71.
• Judgement of the Court of 5 October 2006. Transalpine Ölleitung in Österreich GmbH and Others v Finanzlandesdirektion für Tirol and Others. Case C-368/04, ECR 2006, p. I-9957.
• Judgement of the Court of 5 October 2006. Commission v France. Case C-232/05, ECR 2006, s. I-10071.
• Judgement of the Court of 20 September 2007. Commission v Spain. Case C-177/06, ECR 2007, p. I-7689, para 46.
• Judgement of the Court of 18 October 2007. Commission v France. Case C-441/06, ECR 2007, p. I-8887, para 16.
• Judgement of the Court of 12 February 2008. Centre d'exportation du livre français (CELF) and Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société internationale de diffusion et d'édition (SIDE). Case C-199/06, ECR 2008, p. I-469, paras 47-48.
• Judgement of the Court of 11 March 2010. Centre d'exportation du livre français (CELF) and Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société internationale de diffusion et d'édition (SIDE). Case C-1/09, ECR 2010, p. I-nyr.
• Judgement of the Court of 18 November 2010. NDSHT Nya Destination Stockholm Hotell & Teaterpaket AB v Commission. Case C-322/09 P, ECR 2010, p. I-nyr, para 50.
• Judgement of the Court of 24 March 2011. ISD Polska sp. z o.o. and Others v Commission. Case C-369/09 P, ECR 2011, p. I-nyr, para 71.
• Judgement of the Court of First Instance of 8 June 1995. Siemens SA v Commission. Case T-459/93, ECR 1995, p. II-1675, paras 82-85.
• Judgement of the Court of First Instance of 29 September 2000. Confederación Española de Transporte de Mercancías (CETM) v Commission. Case T-55/99, ECR 2000, p. II-3207, para 24.
• Judgement of the Court of First Instance of 12 September 2007. Italy (T-239/04) and Brandt Italia SpA (T-323/04) v Commission. Joined cases T-239/04 and T-323/04, ECR, p. II-3265, paras 86-89.
• Judgement of the Court of First Instance of 3 March 2010. Freistaat Sachsen (T-102/07), MB Immobilien Verwaltungs GmbH and MB System GmbH & Co. KG (T-120/07) v Commission. Joined cases T-102/07 and T-120/07, ECR 2010, p. II-nyr, para 63.
• Judgement of the Court of First Instance of 3 February 2011. Cantiere navale De Poli SpA v Commission. Case T-584/08, ECR 2011, p. II-nyr, para 34.
• Kośka, M. (2009). Co cesarskie cesarzowi... Zwrot pomocy państwa. In B. Kurcz (Ed.), Pomoc państwa. Wybrane zagadnienia. Warszawa: C.H. Beck.
• Luja, R. (2016). Just a notion of aid: How (not) to create a fiscal state aid doctrine. INTERTAX, 44(11), 788-790.
• Muñoz de Juan, M. (2018). Monitoring of state aid. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 17(4), 483-493.
• Nicolaides, P., & Bilal, S. (1999). An appraisal of the state aid rules of the European Community: Do they promote efficiency? Journal of World Trade, 33(2), 97-124.
• Nicolaides, P. (2002). Control of state aid in the EU: Compliance, sanctions and rational behaviour. World Competition, 25(3), 249-262.
• Nicolaides, P. (2003). Decentralised state aid control in an enlarged European Union: Feasible, necessary of both? World Competition, 26(2), 263-276
• Nicolaides, P. (2006). The economics of granting and controlling state aid. In L. Hancher, T. Ottervanger, & P. J. Slot (Eds.), EC state aid. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
• Nicolaides, P. (2018). Do member states grant state aid when they act as regulators? European State Aid Law Quarterly, 17(1), 2-18.
• Robins, N., & Geldof, H. (2018). Ex post assessment of the impact of state aid on competition. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 17(4), 494-508.
• Saryusz-Wolska, K., & Kośka, M. (2010). W poszukiwaniu utraconej skuteczności... Zasada natychmiastowego i skutecznego zwrotu pomocy państwa. In B. Kurcz (Ed.), Prawo i ekonomia konkurencji. Wybrane zagadnienia. Warszawa: LEX a Wolters Kluwer business.
• Segura, M., Olafsson, E., & Clayton, M. (2019). Brexit, the EEA and the EU state aid rules. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 18(1), 3-14.
• Sinnaeve, A. (1999). State aid control: Objectives and procedures. In N. Phedon, & B. Sanoussi (Eds.), Understanding state aid policy in the European Community. Perspectives on rules and practice. Hague: Kluwer Law International.
• Sinnaeve, A. (2005). What to expect from national courts in the fight against unlawful state aid?. European State Aid Law Quarterly, 4(1), p. 1.
• Tedoldi, A. (2007). Unlawful state aid: Protection by national courts. In A. Santa Maria (Ed.), Competition and state aid: An analysis of the EC practice (International Competition Law Series). Hague: Kluwer Law International.
• Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Consolidated Version 2016, OJ C 202/47.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.7172/1644-9584.83.7