INHALT

Commission Decision (EU) 2025/440 of 8 July 2024 on the measures SA.32014, SA.32015, SA.32016 (2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Italy and the Region of Campania for Caremar and its acquirer SNAV/Rifim (notified under document C(2024) 4656)

COMMISSION DECISION (EU) 2025/440
of 8 July 2024
on the measures SA.32014, SA.32015, SA.32016 (2011/C) (ex 2011/NN) implemented by Italy and the Region of Campania for Caremar and its acquirer SNAV/Rifim
(notified under document C(2024) 4656)
(Only the English text is authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
1.
PROCEDURE
2.
BACKGROUND
3.
MEASURES SUBJECT TO THE FORMAL INVESTIGATION
3.1.
The organisation of Caremar’s maritime transport services from 1 January 2009 to 31 July 2012
3.1.1.
The PSO
3.1.2.
The compensation
3.1.2.1.
Compensation granted from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2009
3.1.2.2.
Compensation granted from 1 January 2010 to 31 July 2012
3.2.
The privatisation of Caremar
3.3.
The new public service contract
3.3.1.
The PSO
3.3.2.
The compensation
3.4.
The berthing priority
3.5.
The measures laid down by Law 163/2010
4.
INFRINGEMENT PROCEDURE No 2007/4609
5.
GROUNDS FOR INITIATING AND EXTENDING THE PROCEDURE
5.1.
The compensation for the provision of maritime transport services from 1 January 2009 to 31 July 2012
5.1.1.
Existence of aid
5.1.2.
Compatibility
5.2.
The privatisation of Caremar
5.3.
The new public service contract
5.3.1.
Existence of aid
5.3.2.
Compatibility
5.4.
The berthing priority
5.5.
The measures laid down by Law 163/2010
6.
COMMENTS FROM CAREMAR
6.1.
On the PSO and the competitive environment
6.2.
On the compliance of the prolongation of the Initial Convention with the Altmark criteria
6.3.
On the compliance of the prolongation of the Initial Convention with Article 106(2) TFEU
6.4.
On the berthing priority
6.5.
On the measures laid down by Law 163/2010
7.
COMMENTS FROM CAREMAR’S COMPETITORS
7.1.
Comments from Medmar
7.1.1.
On the PSO and the competitive environment
7.1.2.
On the berthing priority
7.1.3.
On the measures laid down by Law 163/2010
7.2.
Comments from SNAV and ACAP
7.3.
Comments from GNV
7.4.
Comments from Alilauro
7.5.
Comments from NLG
7.6.
Comments from Marworld
8.
COMMENTS FROM ITALY
8.1.
On the PSO and the competitive environment
8.2.
On the privatisation of Caremar
8.3.
On the compliance of the new public service contract with the Altmark criteria
8.4.
On the 6,5 % risk premium laid down in Deliberation 111/2007 as of 2010 and the 10,55 % applied for the new public service contract
8.5.
On the compliance of the new public service contract with the 2011 SGEI Framework
8.6.
On the berthing priority and the measures laid down by Law 163/2010
9.
ASSESSMENT
9.1.
Existence of aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU
9.1.1.
The public service compensation and the berthing priority granted to Caremar from 1 January 2009 until 31 July 2012, under the prolonged Initial Convention
9.1.1.1.
State resources
9.1.1.2.
Selectivity
9.1.1.3.
Economic advantage
9.1.1.4.
Effect on competition and trade
9.1.1.5.
Conclusion
9.1.1.6.
New or existing aid
9.1.2.
The award of the new public service contract bundled with Caremar’s privatisation
9.1.2.1.
Altmark 1
9.1.2.2.
Altmark 2
9.1.2.3.
Altmark 3
9.1.2.4.
Altmark 4
9.1.2.5.
Conclusion
9.1.3.
The measures laid down by Law 163/2010
9.1.3.1.
Possible use of funds to upgrade ships for liquidity purposes
9.1.3.2.
Fiscal exemptions related to the privatisation process
9.1.3.3.
Possibility of using FAS resources to meet liquidity needs
9.1.4.
Conclusion on the existence of aid
9.2.
Lawfulness of aid
9.3.
Compatibility of the aid
9.3.1.
Genuine SGEI
9.3.2.
Need for an entrustment act specifying the PSO and the methods of calculating compensation
9.3.3.
Duration of the period of entrustment
9.3.4.
Compliance with Directive 2006/111/EC
9.3.5.
Amount of compensation
9.3.6.
The berthing priority
9.3.7.
Conclusion on the compatibility
10.
CONCLUSION
Article 1
Article 2
Article 3
Article 4
Article 5
Article 6