COMMISSION DECISION
of 25 January 2012
on the measure SA.14588 (C 20/09) implemented by Belgium in favour of De Post-La Poste (now bpost)
(notified under document C(2012) 178)
(Only the Dutch and French texts are authentic)
(Text with EEA relevance)
(2012/321/EU)
1.
PROCEDURE
1.1. COMMISSION DECISION OF 2003 ANNULLED BY THE COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE
1.2. COMPLAINT CONCERNING AID TO PRESS DISTRIBUTION
1.3. FOURTH MANAGEMENT CONTRACT (2005-2010)
1.4. DECISION TO INITIATE THE PROCEDURE
1.5. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE DECISION TO INITIATE THE PROCEDURE
1.6. COMMENTS BY THIRD PARTIES ON THE DECISION TO INITIATE THE PROCEDURE AND COMMENTS FROM THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE COMMENTS BY THIRD PARTIES
2.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE AID
2.1. LEGAL STATUS AND OPERATIONS OF DPLP
2.2. OVERVIEW OF THE RELEVANT PUBLIC MEASURES
2.2.1.
Public service missions during the period 1992-2010
2.2.1.1.
Public service obligations set out in the management contracts
2.2.2.
Public measures under investigation
2.2.2.1.
Pension relief
Figure 1
Employment regimes in DPLP
2.2.2.2.
Annual compensation for the cost of discharging public service obligations
Year |
Amount (EUR) |
1992(22) |
91 720 000 |
1993 |
351 327 000 |
1994 |
322 138 000 |
1995 |
368 308 000 |
1996 |
314 205 000 |
Year |
Amount (EUR) |
1997 |
208 934 000 |
1998 |
228 629 000 |
1999 |
213 788 000 |
2000 |
216 282 000 |
2001 |
224 269 000 |
2002 |
194 559 000 |
Year |
Amount (EUR) |
2003 |
175 554 000 |
2004 |
247 606 000 |
2005 |
254 825 000 |
Year |
Amount (EUR) |
2006 |
299 729 000 |
2007 |
306 396 000 |
2008 |
315 683 000 |
2009 |
321 244 000 |
2010 |
325 735 000 |
2.2.2.3.
Capital injections
2.2.2.4.
Tax exemptions
2.2.2.5.
Transfer of buildings
2.2.2.6.
State guarantee
3.
GROUNDS FOR INITIATING THE PROCEDURE IN 2009
4.
COMMENTS BY INTERESTED PARTIES
4.1. COMMENTS BY VFP AND PRODIPRESSE
4.2. COMMENTS BY THE ASSOCIATION BELGE DES EDITEURS DE JOURNAUX/BELGISCHE VERENIGING VAN DAGBLADUITGEVERS
4.3. COMMENTS BY DEUTSCHE POST AG AND DHL INTERNATIONAL
4.4. COMMENTS BY BELGISCHE DISTRIBUTIEDIENST NV/BELGIQUE DIFFUSION SA
5.
COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES
5.1. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE PENSION RELIEF
Figure 2
Evolution of DPLP’s statutory workforce
5.2. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE ANNUAL COMPENSATION FOR PUBLIC SERVICE COSTS
5.3. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE CAPITAL INJECTIONS
5.3.1.
Capital injections in 1997
5.3.2.
Capital injections in 2003 and 2006
5.4. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE TAX EXEMPTIONS
5.5. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE TRANSFER OF BUILDINGS
5.6. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE STATE GUARANTEE FOR LOANS
5.7. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON THE INTERESTED PARTIES’ COMMENTS
5.8. COMMENTS BY THE BELGIAN AUTHORITIES ON EXISTING AID
6.
ASSESSMENT
6.1. PRELIMINARY REMARKS ON DPLP’S COST ACCOUNTING SYSTEM
6.2. ASSESSMENT OF THE PENSION RELIEF
6.2.1.
Existence of aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU
6.2.1.1.
Advantage and selectivity
6.2.1.2.
State resources
6.2.1.3.
Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Member States
6.2.2.
Assessment of the compatibility of pension relief with the internal market within the meaning of Article 107(3)(c)
6.2.2.1.
Liberalisation of the postal sector as an objective of common interest
6.2.2.2.
Necessity of pension relief
Figure 3
Simulations of DPLP’s cash flow conducted by the Belgian authorities in 1996
6.2.2.3.
Proportionality of pension relief
Social security costs paid and incurred by DPLP |
Statutory personnel |
Contractual personnel |
DPLP contributions to the social security system, including 8,86 % for pension contributions |
[…] % |
[…] % |
Costs borne directly by DPLP |
[…] % |
[…] % |
Sickness and disability |
[…] % |
[…] % |
Family allowances |
[…] % |
— |
Compensation contribution (54) |
|
[…] % |
Structural reduction (55) |
|
[…] % |
Total EMPLOYER CONTRIBUTION |
[…] % |
[…] % |
EMPLOYEE CONTRIBUTIONS |
[…] % |
[…] % |
Employee contributions to the general social security system |
[…] % |
[…] % |
6.2.2.4.
Balancing test for pension relief
6.3. ASSESSMENT OF THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMPENSATION AND OTHER MEASURES
6.3.1.
Existence of aid within the meaning of Article 107(1) TFEU
6.3.1.1.
Advantage and selectivity
Figure 4
Ex-ante
profit projections for 2003-2007 by the Belgian authorities
Figure 5
Ex-ante
internal rate of return calculation by the Belgian authorities for the most likely scenario
Figure 6
Ex-post
profits 2003-2007
Figure 7
DPLP’s performance from 2006 to 2010
6.3.1.2.
Existence of State resources
6.3.1.3.
Distortion of competition and effect on trade between Member States
6.3.1.4.
Summary of aid measures
6.3.2.
Existing aid within the meaning of Article 108(1) TFEU
6.3.2.1.
Corporate tax and property tax exemptions
6.3.2.2.
Liberalisation of the postal market
6.3.2.3.
Ten-year limitation period
6.3.3.
Compatibility of SGEI compensation in the light of Article 106(2) TFEU
6.3.3.1.
Scope of the assessment based on the tasks entrusted in the management contracts
6.3.3.2.
Calculation of overcompensation
|
Total number of outlets Post offices (a) + points poste (b) |
|
|
||||
DPLP’s actual retail network (end 2009) |
1 401 = |
713 + |
688 |
||||
Hypothetical retail network in the absence of constraints imposed by the State (according to the Belgian authorities) |
[…] = |
[…] + |
[…] |
||||
Retail network obligation imposed by the State |
Minimum 1 300 |
Minimum 589 |
No obligation |
6.3.3.3.
Calculation of the amount of overcompensation
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
|
||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
|||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
(4,8 % return on sales) |
||
|
: |
+ |
[…] |
|
||
|
: |
+ |
62 000 |
(delayed SGEI compensation) |
||
|
: |
+ |
112 209 |
|
||
|
|
= |
[…] |
|
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
+ |
[…] |
(USO R profit above 4,8 % ROS) |
||
USO induced network costs |
: |
|
[…] |
|
||
Net cost of USO NR |
: |
|
[…] |
(USO NR is loss making) |
||
USO NR Reasonable profit |
: |
|
[…] |
(4,8 % return on sales) |
||
|
|
= |
[…] |
|
||
Surplus from excess profit from the reserved area reducing the SGEI net costs |
|
= |
[…] |
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
|
||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
(4,8 % return on sales) |
||
|
: |
+ |
1 286 461 |
|
||
|
|
+ |
[…] |
|||
|
|
= |
[…] |
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
+ |
[…] |
(USO R profit above 4,8 % ROS) |
||
USO induced network costs |
: |
|
[…] |
|
||
Net cost of USO NR |
: |
– |
[…] |
(USO NR is profit making) |
||
USO Reasonable profit |
: |
|
[…] |
(4,8 % return on sales) |
||
|
|
= |
[…] |
(no losses to be financed) |
||
Surplus from excess profit from the reserved area reducing the SGEI net costs |
|
= |
[…] |
|
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
|
||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
(4,8 % return on sales) |
||
|
: |
+ |
677 985 |
|
||
|
: |
+ |
[…] |
|
||
|
|
= |
[…] |
|
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
+ |
[…] |
(USO R profit above 7,4 % ROS) |
||
USO induced network costs |
: |
|
[…] |
|
||
Net cost of USO NR |
: |
|
[…] |
(USO NR is profit making) |
||
USO reasonable profit |
: |
|
[…] |
(7,4 % return on sales) |
||
|
|
= |
[…] |
(no losses to be financed) |
||
Surplus from excess profit from the reserved area reducing the SGEI net costs |
|
= |
[…] |
|
|
|
(thousand EUR) |
||||
|
: |
- |
[…] |
|
||
|
: |
– |
[…] |
(7,4 % return on sales) |
||
|
: |
+ |
1 568 787 |
|
||
|
: |
+ |
[…] |
|||
|
|
= |
[…] |
State guarantee |
(thousand EUR) |
||
State guarantee 2004: |
1 500 |
||
|
|